Rus News Journal

Genplanovaja resignation

Alexander Kuzmin, 16 years were the main architect of Moscow, has retired. About why its urbanistic undertakings have appeared basically non-realised, special correspondent ID " tells; " Grigory Revzin.
Having learnt about Alexander Kuzmin`s resignation, I have tested sincere pleasure. Not for Moscow, and for it. It seemed to me, this work will finish it. And it is worthy, remarkable even the person. 16 years it was the main architect of Moscow, from them 14 at Jurii Mihajloviche, and, possibly, in the history it remains as luzhkovsky the main architect. But it is a case of absurdity of life it is difficult to imagine the person farther from luzhkovskih of an architectural delicacy, than Alexander Kuzmin.

in 1998 it has founded the award of a name of Alexey Elbrusovicha Gutnova and since then once a year repeated: " We only start on - to master today to the present ideas of Gutnova ". In 1985 under the direction of Gutnova the concept of perspective development of Moscow has been developed. It was the beginning of work on the new general plan, in 1986 Gutnov has died and has left this inheritance to Kuzmin.

the professional program of the Moscow urbanists consisted in Luzhkov Gutnovym`s correction. Thus Luzhkov, the visible expert of bureaucratic capitalism, and Gutnov, the theorist of the Soviet city of the future, had so a little the general among themselves that all gutnovskoe the direction should be opposition to the Moscow realities. It was the opposition internal, primerskaja. The opposition, whose program basically was only in corresponding to representations about decency in a trade. But the professional sight did not coincide with mayor intentsijami, and decency preservation in a position of managers of one of divisions luzhkovskogo a building complex appeared problematic.

How much I can understand, Alexey Gutnov has made some basic opening which put it in a short number of the main town-planners of the XX-th century. He has understood a city as dynamic system. It is natural to the sociologist, the economist, the politician, the historian but for the architect it is improbable, and I cannot name analogies to such approach. That means dynamic system? Whence there is dynamics? From life of people. But people do not give in to designing, they respond to the project. You build something, they something do in the answer, but not absolutely that you have conceived. If you consider that build dynamic object should think up the project which provides answers to it, and unpredictable. Gutnov saw certain n - measured model of a city in which we could foretell that will be at a redirection of transport streams that at change of altitude of building that at increase in incomes of townspeople. And it is not literally to describe that will be, and to foretell probabilities, proceeding from the multifactorial analysis. Philosophically it is a question of freedom designing.

for the person observing business from the party, it partly a tragicomedy. Before the beginning of Post-Soviet reconstruction of Moscow, time of prompt degradation of social, economic, scientific institutes, at sharp reduction of resources and extreme primitivizatsii economic relations we had a genius who has jumped on such heights where nobody has reached till now not in Russia, and in the world. And it is fine it has simply died. No, it has left after itself(himself) group of adherents which tried to introduce its remarkable ideas, co-operating with Yury Mihajlovichem Luzhkov.

Alexander Kuzmin`s program which it has started to realise after victory on elections of the main architect of Moscow in 1996, was reduced to three essential points. The first both main Acceptance of the new general layout developed on the basis of ideas of Gutnova. The ideal here thought a situation when for each site of building the plug of possibilities, the regulations operating by a principle " would be defined; everything is authorised that is not forbidden ".

From this there was nothing. The general plan which was offered by Alexander Kuzmin, and have not confirmed, it is formal from - for the conflict between Yury Luzhkov and the federal authorities. But here I always thought: and why Yury Luzhkov has not achieved this statement? Nevertheless it managed much more serious projects, such as, say, the statement of a special order of privatisation in Moscow, it during the board successfully tidied up to itself(himself) both federal monuments, and federal territories, and basically, I believe, the political weight quite would suffice it to neutralise federal officials confronting it. I think, on this question the assumption will be the natural answer that this general layout was not so necessary to Luzhkov.

the general plan has been based on idea that the city authorities do not know, who and that will want to build in a city, building this free business. They operate territory, for all of them are equal, not important who will build this or that house who will own it. A power problem in other to define, what this house cannot be, what frameworks of unpredictability. From the point of view of urbanistics as sciences it there was a correct approach. And from the point of view of a real Moscow situation it there was an absurdity. The authorities fine knew, who will build, they very much were interested, who will own buildings, it on a broader scale was their business. The general plan entered restrictions and regulations, as though without knowing, for whom, but Luzhkov - that knew. In a real situation of the Moscow town-planning the general layout appeared a bridle for Luzhkov. Well and what for to it was to punch the statement of this bridle? Using rare incompetence of the federal authorities which have not thought that the general plan will limit first of all Yury Mihajlovicha, it has presented business so that it - that two hands for the general plan, but here do not allow to it to confirm it as the law. And itself has had an opportunity to live on a broader scale without any law regulating a development of the city, moreover and to complain that in it the federal authorities are guilty.

the second point of the program of Kuzmin expansion of the list of architects building in Moscow. To the Soviet architectural generals who have made a court circle luzhkovskoj of architecture, he wanted to add the privately practicing masters who have been put forward in 90 - e years. It is unique point of its program which managed to be executed. That in Moscow in 2000 - e began to build Andreys, Alexander Asadov`s Paul, Michael Belov, Alexey Bavykin, Andrey Bokov, Yury Grigoryan, Sergey Kiselyov, Boris Levjant, Nikolay Lyzlov, Vladimir Plotkin, Alexander Skokan, Sergey Skuratov, Sergey Tkachenko, Michael Hazanov, Ilya Utkin, Phillips, Vladimir Judintsev`s Michael, it is Alexander Kuzmin`s merit. I think, they should it be grateful, and as the architectural critic rejoicing for their successes, I will thank him from their name. However, means of an embodiment of this program Alexander Kuzmin (an idealist, between us speaking) saw fair architectural competitions, and this invention at it has completely failed.

at last, the idea professionally to respond to initiatives of the city power was the third point of its program. And each time when it introduced that " the Moscow style " completed Gostini dvor tried to take down TSDH took down " Voentorg " broke " The children`s world " built City, all like understood that it at all it, and became all the same intolerable bitterly from that, than the worthy professional position can turn back. Because everything that Luzhkov did, as a result became under the direction of Alexander Kuzmin. I personally consider that without this management and participation all would be even worse, but the similar point of view never divided neither critics, nor the majority of architects.

I think that Kuzmin has come to a conclusion about the impracticability tsivilizatorskoj programs approximately by 2004 there was an unprecedented wave snosov, the main developer of Moscow became " Inteko " other developer firms were anyhow gave under protection of the Moscow officials, Luzhkov besides Baturinoj had still Shalva Chigirinsky, at Vladimir Resin " Donstroj " then " Miraks " The program was included into the direct contradiction with all other system of the Moscow building complex. I, fairly to tell, I believe that by 2004 of possibility of professional dialogue between gutnovskimi pupils and the Moscow authorities have appeared completely are settled, and Alexander Kuzmin should leave during that moment. It was demanded by professional reasons, it was wanted obviously by Yury Luzhkov both the approached developers then its leaving seemed business solved, and news agencies started custom-made news about resignation nearly once a week. But Kuzmin has not left, he has concluded the new contract with Luzhkov.

from this point on activity of Moskomarhitektury loses own ideology and passes to positions of administrative service of bureaucratic processes of the coordination of projects. It is the big work which is not representing art, architectural and historical interest. For me it is strange that Kuzmin on it has agreed, but here it is necessary to understand that it never was the basic reformer. Its urbanistic credo this creation of civilised game rules, but rules happen two sorts. One are aimed at that game was such as today, but more decent without traumas, infringements, conflicts. Others on changing game, to make so that as a result of actions by these rules we have come into other fortune of a game field and new structure of participants. Kuzmin always remained the adherent of rules of the first sort. It did not set as the purpose essentially to change a situation in a city, he tried to make it more decently. It has received in management the market with the armed gangsters in jumpsuits and 16 years worked over that they have changed clothes and resolved conflicts not on arrows, and in courts. Has partly achieved. The maintenance of their business and even who they such it not so interested It was not the bribe taker, and for urbanistics, whose money, not an essence important.

but business by the nature tavtologichen, after all the project realised under the known scheme, wins on risks in comparison with any non-standard. So if someone has constructed habitation of a class a premium on the Kutuzovsky prospectus, and it has brought in the income business aspires to construct again there habitation of the same class, and more time to construct, and more. In Kapotnya someone has constructed warehouses, and it is successful, and there have again constructed warehouses, and again. On a question: " you meaningly do so that at you the western part of a city this elite habitation, and the east a depressive zone? " town-planners, certainly, will respond: " In nowise! " but the result is that. The elite area becomes even more elite, depressive even more depressive, business even more business, and sleeping even more sleeping. The department store turns to a trading complex, a trading complex in a trading city, and there already neither to pass, nor to drive. All contradictions in a city only collect and amplify, as in them is put more and more money. Moscow was at a deadlock formally under the direction of Kuzmin and for this reason I so am glad that it has left. It was visible that it it is terrible muchit, and make it could not anything.

since 2004 professional Kuzmin`s competence start to be used in the decorative purposes. Here one episode memorable by all. Approach of the Moscow authorities to a city has started to call reaction, irritation of inhabitants, it the party " has decided to use; the Apple ". The leader of fraction of that time in Moscow City Council Sergey Mitrokhin did not possess, alas, the competence of the urbanist, is not clear from what sources it has gathered idea of struggle against dot building, but he struggled persistently. Basically the idea goes back to 60 - m to years when the Soviet town-planners tried to serve ideologically activity arising industrial strojkompleksa which was not able to build separate buildings in the developed city environment, and aspired to take down and construct all new area on a new place instead of dot building complex development of area pjatietazhkami and devjatietazhkami was offered. It is amazing that such dense idea could emerge on a surface after all ideas of Gutnova, but it has appeared a basis of oppositional ideology. I believe, it is clear enough demonstration of the general degradation of urbanistic thought alternatives kuzminskomu to the general plan appeared intellectually on an order more helpless, than he. It was necessary to plant only with hands It was impossible to support opposition from - for it osharashivajushchej an intellectual inconsistency, it was impossible to open this inconsistency from - for unbounded cynicism of managers luzhkovskogo bjurnesa.

Kuzmin - the professional should ridicule simply these people and send them for a school desk for reception of initial data on modern urbanistics. But Kuzmin - the official of it could not make Luzhkov has sent it to beat off. He has tried to respond professionally and to this order has generated the commission on consideration of dot building. And even has reached in it of the certain successes especially appreciable with the beginning of crisis of 2008. For ten years before Kuzmin acted as head of the strongest in Russia town-planning school. It has not changed. But the situation has turned so that actually its work has lost sense. The real maintenance in this big work on revealing tochechnosti on a map of the city was a zero.

So happens that business or the power cannot collect the command which would appear to embody idea in a status. But on transition from the Soviet society in Post-Soviet we come up against often a return situation. From Soviet period there were commands with superfluous qualification, they during two tens years tried as - to embody that the programs, but the real maintenance of economic and political processes was too simple, is too reduced to elementary problems of accumulation of the capital that they could survive. I think, in the Moscow town-planning there was it. Yury Mihajlovich Luzhkov had unique shots of town-planners. But to use their services it has not managed. And after it have turned out, the question of resignation of Alexander Kuzmin was time business. This generation did not manage to realise the chance. And it is unboundedly sad.