Joyeux Noel

Have a good one all, don't drink too much. Or at least not unless I'm there.

And well done Andy Marshall,  Twitter @fotofacade,

http://fotofacade.com/

just got SPAB News (Cornerstone) with your magical photos on the cover and inside, and I agree that Holy Trinity Church in York is a gem:

http://www.visitchurches.org.uk/

also for the pics and article re Hopwood Hall, listed at II* and  on the SAVE Buildings at Risk Register

http://www.savebritainsheritage.org/:

Hopwood Hall is a largely 17th and 18th century building with parts of an early 16th century timber framed structure incorporated. Built of brick with a stone slate roof, on a quadrangular plan, the hall has a symmetrical gate-house with access to the courtyard. On the rest of the two storey building, there are interesting details such as transom and oriel windows, the latter with a castellated parapet above, decorated with two coats of arms. Many of the interior features originated in Victorian remodelling. To the west there are additions including one of the 20th century. The condition of the Hall is poor, mainly due to lack of maintenance, and there is some dry rot.

The most recent use of Hopwood Hall has been for educational purposes, as part of the neighbouring college. However, in the more distant past, it is believed that Hopwood housed Byron whilst he worked on "Childe Harold". Now, however, it has been vacant for five years, while plans for new uses have been explored but never implemented. Currently, the council and the Cygnet Trust are working together to ensure that the building is weather-tight, safe and secure. It is also hoped that a new use will be found soon; the greatest possibility so far is of a conversion with enabling development, but other ideas would be welcome!

There is very little to report from the Hall on a year by year basis - but there is no doubt that deterioration of this fine building which has some outstanding interiors, is steady. The threat of further vandalism is a constant and the council who own the building are not doing sufficient to protect the hall. Although not being marketed, we would still encourage any party interested in the reuse and restoration of the building, to contact Rochdale Council, as an offer just might be accepted.
Hopwood Hall is located between Rochdale and Middleton.

(Further details from SAVE)

And very good stuff also from Gareth Hughes, his review of Pevsner Wales: Gwynedd, and a useful and informative article by Clem Cecil and Yelena Minchyonok  about what is currently happening in St Petersburg, especially the protests against the RMJM Gazprom Tower, of which I have written a great deal in this blog (further updates to come).  All publicity regarding that fiasco is good.

Excellent news that Edinburgh World Heritage has won the Sustainable Social Housing Refurbishment Project Award 2009 for Gilmour's Close:

http://www.ewht.org.uk/Gilmours-Close-.aspx

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/story.aspx?storycode=6507066

Historic buildings can be adapted for the 21st century, and surely that's good for the planet?

Here's the entry and a picture in the wider context of the World Heritage Site from Britain's Best Buildings:

http://www.bestbuildings.co.uk/housing/caste-trades-hostel/

And also splendid that AJ had nice things to say about the Malcolm Fraser Architects Scottish Ballet building in Glasgow. It's not all bad, isn't this modern stuff... I like the industrial aesthetic.

http://www.malcolmfraser.co.uk/projects/?contentID=248

http://www.corrugated-iron-club.info/

And I note that Malcolm Fraser is now officially HOT (at no 42):

http://www.list.co.uk/article/22676-the-hot-100-2009/

42 Malcolm Fraser


Accoladed architect

This year Fraser’s practice completed a versatile new base for Scottish Ballet at the Tramway in Glasgow, as well as working on commissions from a field station in Glen Nevis to a sensitive yet forward-thinking plan for the redevelopment of Stromness Pierhead. As the newly appointed Edinburgh University Geddes Professorial Fellow he is leading public and academic debates about how to integrate modern architecture and city planning with heritage concerns. (LE)


N x

Those who 'really don't give a fuck'*... and those who do...

An 'iconic' building, inspired by...

A great deal of blogging news to catch up on, dear readers, but here's a start.

First, a  history, which is required reading, so NO SHIRKING this part:

Anti-Viruses and Underground Monuments: Resisting Catastrophic Urbanism in Saint Petersburg

 10 January, 2008

By Dmitry Vorobyev & Thomas Campbell

Saint Petersburg is besieged by elite-backed architectural mega-projects and micro-interventions. Dmitry Vorobyev and Thomas Campbell describe the dominant strains of 'renovation' and the popular resistance to them arguing that, in St. Petersburg, class conflict takes the form of opposed visions of urban renewal and historic preservation...

Continued here:

http://www.metamute.org/en/Anti-Viruses-And-Underground-Monuments

Here's another little something which should be read, although maybe all who read may not agree it's thought-provoking stuff:

The Architect as Totalitarian

Theodore Dalrymple

Le Corbusier’s baleful influence

Le Corbusier was to architecture what Pol Pot was to social reform. In one sense, he had less excuse for his activities than Pol Pot: for unlike the Cambodian, he possessed great talent, even genius. Unfortunately, he turned his gifts to destructive ends, and it is no coincidence that he willingly served both Stalin and Vichy. Like Pol Pot, he wanted to start from Year Zero: before me, nothing; after me, everything.


http://www.city-journal.org/2009/19_4_otbie-le-corbusier.html

and a quote (this is getting to be a bad habit, see previous posts, but hey, I agree with him here, as actually I think he does give a fuck):

...we have to find a way forward between the anodyne and the hubristic...

http://news.scotsman.com/edinburghplanningissues/After-the-collapse-of-the.5776303.jp

Malcolm Fraser, brand spanky newly appointed Geddes Honorary Professorial Fellow at Edinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, and ' leading Scottish architect' (despite being a Stirling finalist, MF seems doomed to be forever so described, usually in the Scotsman, a sort of  latter day Carr of York, who did excellent work elsewhere too, but I digress as ever) writing about Richard Murphy's Haymarket Tower, planned to dominate / be a bold addition to, depending on which side of heritage zealotry you are on, the World Heritage Site skyline of Edinburgh. This 'leaf shaped' 17 storey tower was  refused, greatly to Mr Murphy's much-publicised disgust:

'Terrified and timid' policy attacked by top architect

http://news.scotsman.com/edinburghplanningissues/39Terrified-and-timid39-policy-attacked.5780449.jp

by the Minister earlier last month following a planning inquiry, and a great deal of local opposition. It was, really, 'fuck you' architecture.

Thanks to the SOOT campaigners blog, I repeat this here:

Apart from building my own house, my ambition in Edinburgh is to build one big public building before I die" Richard Murphy

For those interested in that sort of thing, you can read the docs and final report here:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/planning/decisions-appeals/decisions-appeals/Proposals/NA-EDB-026

and fascinating it all is too.

However, Malcolm Fraser's is a quote which really needs to be considered in other contexts.

Recently  an e-mail pinged into my inbox from St Petersburg, bearing the latest news on the RMJM Gazprom (Okhta) Tower, which is already causing destruction of important archaeology and encountering a great deal of heroic opposition. I have posted a number of times about this, and so won't repeat it all here, simply to point to past posts, describing the violence inflicted on protestors by hired thugs, the manipulation of law and public policy and the apparent unwillingness of RMJM's Tony Kettle to engage with any issues other than the ones which will bring about the desired result for his architecture firm.

The status of St Petersburg as a World Heritage Site is at risk, and there is no doubting UNESCO's deep concern. However, as with Liverpool, Bath and Edinburgh in the UK, and of course Dresden, whose Elbe Valley was struck off the World Heritage list this summer over the building of a particularly brutal bridge and the unwillingness of those responsible to consider any compromise, those who put  such status at risk, or bring worries that such status isn't high on the priorities of those who should care more,  appear unable to consider that there are always alternatives. Short termism and large egos, blinkered city officials aided by elected representatives with motives which at times seem far removed from the real needs of World Heritage cities and their residents, the desire for fat profits... and Philistinism... all are part, and more besides, of the root of the difficulties. Yes, it's complex, each city will tell you they have to move on, silly phrases about 'setting in aspic' and 'economic development' will be spouted,  and those who try to urge caution and work for a better solution are always derided as wishing to hold back 'progress'.

This morning I re-read Owen Hatherley's blog post (see right hand blogs column, and his related article in Building Design) and I quote part of it:

http://nastybrutalistandshort.blogspot.com/2009/11/managerial-icons.html#links

Patrick Lynch said some really very interesting things... and the sharpest of these, which was too long-winded an argument to shoe-horn into my round-up, bears repeating. That is: one of the central appeals of the *****ICONIC***** building to their clients is a sort of reflected glory, wherein the CEO or Manager thinks 'wow, Zaha or Santiago *really don't give a fuck, they treat their workers abominably, they don't let anyone get in the way of the realisation of their ideas, they stomp around in firm conviction of their own genius - just like me...'

http://nastybrutalistandshort.blogspot.com/2009/11/managerial-icons.html

Thanks Owen, it's about the gist of what I want to say, but so much easier to nick your words. I quote also your comment from your blog on this subect of September 3rd:

 Gazprom's Okhta Tower, a tossed-off glass excrescence designed by RMJM...

and also this illuminating piece from the Comments section:

Anonymous said...

I was quite close to (a few desks away from) this project as it was being designed - the main (nay, the only) idea that went into it was a slight twist to the tower. Why? Not in reference to the dialectical torsion of Tatlin's tower, oh no, but merely because they'd seen some twisted towers in the latest Blueprint or whatever and thought that they looked pretty snazzy, so might as well rip em off...

In a month when a new building proposed  for Sheffield Hallam University (architects: Bond Bryan) is shown covered in cutlery and with a vague gesture on top towards the trad factory 'saw-tooth' roof as an in yer face, over the top reference to one of the industries which made the city prosper, lest we forget,

(Student wit in years to come:

"Excuse me, but can you give me directions to the library?"

'"Of course, you pass the fork n knife n spoon building..."  OK , an oldie but still a goodie...)

and in a year where we have seen the completion of Pelli's lumpen Liverpool Gone West, apparently shaped like a ship to 'reflect' Liverpool's past maritime status:

then little would surprise regarding the 'inspiration' cited by some architects to justify paying the mortgage. However, if the quote above is true, then the twisted Okhta spire rising out of a blob of collapsed blancmange can be credited with even less intellectual rigour applied to its design than those two gems I cite. So, why?  Is it just ego and 'fuck you' architecture?

The  latest from St Petersburg sounds a little more encouraging:

Here's our reposting of the new story by Sergey Chernov from The St. Petersburg Times about the crazy debate between Okhta Center advocates and opponents aired on Channel One's "Judge for Yourself" program. The advocates... included RMJM architect Filipp Nikandrov and Okhta Center deputy director Vladimir Gronsky. There really does seem to be a (positive) shift going on: more and more high officials coming out against the project and more opposition from establishment cultural figures, including the host of this program.

We've enhanced Sergey's article with the video of the program (which, alas, I gather you won't be able to understand), video of the beatings at the Sept. 1 public hearing, and lots of links...

Here's the beginning, do read the rest, follow the links:

The St. Petersburg Times


November 20, 2009

TV Campaign Against Gazprom Tower Mounts

By Sergey Chernov

The controversial Gazprom Tower found itself under harsh attack last week on Russia’s main state television, Channel One, for the third time in the past four weeks — and its supporters struggled to offer any good reason to back the 403-meter-tall skyscraper in close proximity to the city center.


First slammed by the Kremlin-controlled channel in its primetime weekly news roundup on Oct. 18, the Okhta Center, as the building is officially known, was derided in the comedy show “Prozhektorperiskhilton” (Paris Hilton’s Spotlight) a week later, and last week became the subject of “Sudite Sami” (Judge for Yourself), a political talk show hosted by Maxim Shevchenko.

This time Okhta Center representatives — communications director Vladimir Gronsky and the project’s chief architect Filipp Nikandrov of the British firm RMJM — were given a chance to present their case for the skyscraper, which is planned to house state energy giant Gazprom’s headquarters and was described by Bloomberg News critic Colin Amery as “just another global corporate monolith — banal, dull and inappropriate.”


The unsuspecting Okhta Center team, which enjoys full administrative support in St. Petersburg, arrived at the studio to discover that the show was to be called “The Tower Against the City.” They were then refused the opportunity to show their presentation of the project, and were instead confronted with a barrage of questions — including ones they had ignored or mocked during the heavily policed public hearings held in St. Petersburg. With no backing from City Hall, OMON special-task police or menacing individuals scattered around the room pushing and kicking opponents, as there were at the public hearings, the Okhta Center’s representatives appeared helpless and confused...

Read on:

http://chtodelat.wordpress.com/2009/11/19/gazprom-tower-fools-rush-in/

...Summing up the debates, Valery Fadeyev, editor of Expert magazine, said that the planned tower should be thoroughly discussed on a national level.


“We should return to the first phase of this project,” he said.

“The project has now gone outside of St. Petersburg. This problem has become national.”

I'd say it was a little more than that. I would suggest this, as a World Heritage Site, concerns us all.

There's more to say, other links to add, but I think I'll today press 'PUBLISH POST' and please, readers, consider this as a draft.

I'll return later, I hope you do also.

Nem

From Russia, with love... Part 1

Click to enlarge - further details and PDF download of the publication see bottom of blog post

OK, nothing much I can say about this as what can I add?  This postcard from Moscow is  brought to you via MAPS, the Moscow Architecture Preservation Society.

About MAPS

The Moscow Architecture Preservation Society (MAPS) was set up in May 2004 following the demolition of two major Moscow landmarks: the Moskva Hotel, Voyentorg department store and the fire in the Manezh.


The initiative group of MAPS consists of young architects, historians, heritage managers and journalists from different countries. We work in close cooperation with preservationists, architects and historians within Russia and abroad to raise awareness about the present destruction of the city's historical buildings. Through these contacts, we are working to give Russian preservationists and Muscovites a greater international voice. We invite international experts to advise on more sustainable approaches to the historic built environment.


MAPS believes that every effort should be made to preserve certain buildings. Through such work MAPS hopes to convince the Moscow Government, developers and architects that the unchecked demolition of old Moscow is not in the city’s long-term interest.

Queries: Kevin O'Flynn oflynn@imedia.ru, 8916 173 2536

Edmund Harris e.harris@imedia.ru, 8916 524 5722

Clementine Cecil clem@maps-moscow.com, +447968003595

Marina Khrustaleva marina@maps-moscow.com, 8903 612 4686


03.11.2009

Greetings from Moscow Postcard - ARKHNADZOR


Happy is he who has the courage to defend what he loves

Yuri Bocharov


Letter to President D. A. Medvedev of the Russian Federation

On the restoration of the rights of federal authorities and liquidation of the Mayor’s Office monopoly on the development of Russia’s capital


Dear Mr. President!

This letter is being sent in connection with the preparation of your annual State of the Federation address to the Federal Assembly. The main goal of this letter is to draw attention to the need of the Russian government to take control over the development of the federal capital. All capitals in the world develop under the control of presidents or heads of government. The exception to that rule has been Moscow for the last fifteen years.

A unified General Plan of development for Moscow and Moscow Oblast through 2010 was passed in 1992. After the Supreme Soviet RSFSR passed (1993) the law “On the status of the capital of the Russian Federation,” the Moscow government rejected the strategy of a holistic development of the capital region and started elaborating its own General Plan to 2020, the realization of which has led to serious negative phenomena. The law did not establish the powers of the federal authorities in the capital. This reflected the political confrontation of the legislative and executive branches in that period, which ended with the shelling of the White House. The Moscow City Duma was too hasty in approving the inventory of municipal property (approximately 7,000 major sites) and turned over the property to be managed by the Mayor’s Office. The land and the lion’s share of real estate that had belonged to the USSR government, Union republics, and the COMECON ended up in the monopoly management of the Moscow Mayor’s Office.

The centrifugal development of the city was replaced by a centripetal one, focused on maximal profit from building on the most liquid lands in the central zone around the Kremlin. The Soviet slogan “Proletarians of the world unite around Moscow” was changed to a new one: “Investors of the world get rich in Moscow.” Close to 9 percent of the country’s population was concentrated in the capital, i.e., on 0.0006 percent of the country’s territory. While the national population is reduced by 0.9 million people annually, the capital’s population is growing by 150,000-180,000 people a year. No federal capital in the world has such population density. This evinces the fact that the zone of settlement for Russians has been compressed.

Moscow’s territorial resources are exhausted, but the population density is 5-8 times higher than in London, Paris, Washington and other capitals of democratic states. Nothing can be built in Moscow without taking down residential housing, sports complexes, industrial enterprises, or destroying green areas. The General Plan to 2020 was not coordinated with the Russian government. It calls for increasing housing by 25 percent and razing totally acceptable 5-story houses with an area of 12 million sq meters. (The 5-story houses are usually replaced by 20-25-story buildings, which doubles or triples the population density, significantly decreases living conditions, and blocks traffic.) The draft General Plan to 2025 calls for increasing housing by 60 percent and for that purpose razing 7,500 residential buildings with a total area of 22 million sq m; that means the forced removal of more than one million residents. In order to get land for construction, the Mayor’s Office in the last fifteen years has razed around 500 buildings that determine the image of Moscow as a historical city.

No other world capital has been subjected to such destruction. If Russia’s cities follow the example of the capital and start tearing down their 5- 9- and 12-story residential buildings, 18 – 20 million people will have to be resettled and two cities the size of Moscow built. In order to put up commercial buildings, the Mayor’s Office is using public areas and sanitation conservation zones of enterprises. In violation of the Presidential Decree of 24.08.1995, No. 873 “On the reconstruction of the Frunze Central Airport,” an elite residential region was created around the zone of the former runway. The conservation zone around the Kremlin is being built up uncontrollably. Moscow’s population density is outrageously over the limit, since local norms (MGSN-01-99) permit the construction of residential housing with a density of 1.5-2 thousand people per hectare of residential area, which is three times the limit in other capitals. The increase in population density and stories of buildings are leading to stress, the increase in mental illness and suicides. According to data in Foreign Policy Magazine, Moscow is in the top five capitals with the highest crime rates. The volume of construction rubbish is 5 million tons annually. In the international ratings of the Mercer Human Resources Consulting, Moscow is in 171th place in quality of life. And in 200th place for diseases of the endocrine system and oncology.

The law “On the status of cities of federal significance” has not been elaborated over 15 years. The proposals from the Federal Assembly and the Administrative Affairs Office of the President for a preserve zone for a new Parliamentary Center, sent to the Moscow Administration on 19.11.1998 (No UDI-3986) have yet to be realized. Some parcels of land (from 4 to 100 hectares), proposed previously for the Parliamentary Center, are now being built up by investors close to the Mayor’s Office. A number of Representatives of Federation subjects are still housed in apartments, and eight Representatives do not even have addresses in the capital. At the same time, the Moscow Administration managed to find territory for the Moscow City Duma and the Mayor’s Office and even ran an international competition for the buildings.

While the General Plan to 2020 gave the area of federal land in Moscow as 14 percent of all the territories (13,954.7 hectares, Moscow Land Committee Report, 1999), the project of the new General Plan to 2025 (vol. 4, p. 42) lists that the share of territory containing objects fulfilling capital functions is only 0.3 percent of the total territory of the city. Gosstroi RF drew the attention of the General Procurator’s Office (No. NM-1567 on 27.03.02, and others) to the illegal transfer of federal lands and objects to the property of a Federation subject, but without result.

There is no plan to solve the transportation issues of the capital. Close to 80 percent of Moscow roads have exhausted their flow capacity. On work days around 650 traffic jams form in the capital’s streets, holding up more than 400,000 cars. Up to 500,000 cars commute to the capital from the region, and the traffic jams stretch for 10-18 km. The annual time lost on commuting is estimated at 600 billion rubles. But the Mayor’s Office does not care about transportation problems, it wants to obtain the greatest investments. Therefore they are building hyper-expensive and practically useless two-level car tunnels under the metropolitan lines at a depth of 30-40 m! The land reserved by the General Plan for 1971 for four high-speed highways (“chords,” or spans) have been sold off or rented by the Mayor’s Office for investment construction. In cities in Australia, the US, and Canada roads and parking lots take up 30-35 percent of a city’s total area, in Western Europe, it is 20-25 percent, in Asia, 10-12 percent, and in Moscow, it is 8 percent. Yet Moscow is continuing to increase the density and number of stories of buildings, and is not taking into account the decision of the Supreme Court of the RF on limiting the operator of Moscow’s norms for insolation.

The area of the forest and park conservation belt is absolutely inadequate (the ratio of Moscow’s area and the belt is 1:1.6. For comparison, in Minsk, it is 1:11, in Tokyo, 1:4, in New York, 1:15). There are frequent incidents of building on the shores of water reservoirs and other unique territories. By 2015 the forest and park conservation belt of Moscow will be practically gone, since 75-80 percent is already reserved for construction by investors from Moscow and Moscow oblast. For the last 15 years the two subjects of the Federation have been struggling over land, airports, and resort zones. A letter from the oblast administration No 2-11863 dated 01.08.2008 lists 22 territories, illegally intended by the Moscow General Plan to be included in the capital’s territory. The remains of the forest and park belt are under additional threat in connection with the Moscow government’s resolution No 313-PP on the construction of six major garbage incinerators, whose environmental damage is enormous.

Mr. President! When you were First Deputy Prime Minister, you ordered the Ministry of Regional Development to participate in the elaboration of the capital’s General Plan in the development of capital functions on 03.02.2006, and then on 02.04.2007 (No DM-P9-1880) charged that ministry with responsibility for the issue. However, the Ministry of Regional Development has not written a Technical Task and has not sent the draft General Plan for approval of the State Non-Ministerial Analysis of Glavgosekspertiza of Russia. The administration of the Ministry of Regional Development has been studying the draft plan for 14 months. This, when the rule states that if the Moscow City Duma does not get a conclusion in under 3 months, the project is considered coordinated, with all the concomitant consequences! (par. 3 of the Resolution on coordination of schemas for territorial planning for subjects of the RF, dated 24.03.2007, No 178).

The General Plan lacks a section of security for zones with government objects, foreign embassies, and Representatives of the RF. Security has become an important issue after the murder of the Governor of Magadan Oblast at the entrance of his Representative office on Novy Arbat, 19. The materials in part 4 of the General Plan to 2025 have no indices on the territorial development of capital functions. The Ministry of Regional Development sent the materials to agencies of the executive branch, forgetting about legislative and judicial branches.

The Moscow public and the expert community protest against the General Plan to 2025. The project was studied by the Commission on Regional Development of the Public Chamber, the nongovernmental movements Moskovsky Sovet, Zhilishchnaya Solidarnost, the Committee for Defense of Citizens’ Rights, and the Ecological Union. They note that the General Plan does not reflect the interests of the residents of the capital but the commercial interests of the Mayor’s Office and the investors close to it.
In view of the danger of losing control over the capital region with a population of around 16 million people and deteriorating sanitary, ecological, and transport situations, it is reasonable to:

1. Propose to the Government of the Russian Federation to develop and send to the Federal Assembly laws “On the status of the capital of Russia” and “On the status of cities of federal significance,” which will give the leading role to the Federal Government in developing the political and historical centers of the capital.

2. Preserve through legislation a large federal zone in Moscow that corresponds to the structure of power in a presidential republic, taking control of the Conservation Zone of the Kremlin complex and create a large reserve territory for the new Parliamentary Center of the Russian Federation.

3. Charge the Ministry of Regional Development to elaborate an Ad Hoc Federal Program “Development of a United Engineering and Transportation Infrastructure for the Moscow Region to 2025” and assure it coordinates legislative and normative support bearing in mind the legal documentation of the Russian Federation, Moscow, and Moscow Oblast.

4. Charge the Ministry of Justice to check whether the resolution of the government of Moscow on elaborating the General Plan and other city-building documentation related to the capital’s development are in accordance with federal legislation.


Biographical information:
Bocharov Yuri Petrovich is a major Russian urbanism scholar, a member of the “world laboratory” of Urban and Transportation Planning.

His circle of scholarly interests over the years included theory and history of architecture, town building and land use; the history and methodology of urban and transportation planning; the theory of settlement; the evaluation of social, demographic, and economic factors in planning large cities; zoning of industrial regions and complexes.

In his youth, he got three higher degrees in architecture, construction, and transportation.

He is a Doctor of Architecture, an academician of the Russian Academy of Architecture and Construction Sciences (RAASN), a professor at the Institute of Communal Economy and Construction, chief scientist at the Central Scientific Research Institute of Town Building, a member of numerous foreign academies of architecture and urbanism, an advisor of the Social-Economic Foundation (New York, USA), a member of the international board of Town Planning Review (Liverpool, UK). He is the author of general plans for many major cities in the USSR; from the 1970s to the present he consults on the elaboration of master plans for cities and urbanized territories in various countries.

He was head of the Institute of the Theory of Architecture and was president of the All-Union Society of Urbanists.

He is author and co-author of about 360 works, some published aboard (Great Britain, US, Germany, Switzerland, Chile, and Japan, among others)
His works include monographs that were very popular:
“Organization of Pedestrian Traffic and Transport in Microregions” (1960);
“Planning Structure of the Modern City” (1972);
“The City and Production” (1980);
“Architecture of the USSR: 1917-87” (1987);
“Production and Spatial Organization of Towns” (1988);
“History of Land Use in Russia” (in English, New York, 1995).

******************************************************

A  plug here for the latest version of MAPS and SAVE Europe's Heritage joint publication, Moscow Heritage at Crisis Point, revised, updated and expanded edition of the original 2007 publication, of which more information on the authors and the publication can be found at this past blog:

http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/09/another-huge-erection.html

Here, for the impecunious, is a free download as a PDF, although I do recommend the book. Warning - large file:

http://www.maps-moscow.com/userdata/e_MAPS.pdf

There's also included a chapter on St Petersburg.

Press reaction:

http://maps-moscow.com/index.php?chapter_id=151&data_id=148&do=view_single


Nem

GAZPROM, RMJM Okhta Tower, St Petersburg World Heritage Site: more sad news

The bulldozers have been at work in St Petersburg  doing, it seems, some 'archaeological investigation' :

http://chtodelat.wordpress.com/2009/10/18/the-bulldozer-exhibition-saint-petersburg/


This is no longer a metaphor. What which was awaited for, feared but not believed finally happened - the bulldozers of Gazprom assaulted the ruins of Nyenskans (XVII century) and Landskrona (1300) fortresses. They broke into one of the bastions, leaving a 50 square meters pit where an 1.6 meter ancient earthen wall stood. A hole large enough for an armored regiment to break in. A part of Landskrona moat was destroyed as well.

This is our first unrecoverable loss.



http://www.indymedia.org/en/2009/10/930144.shtml


For now, the bulldozers are stopped. The only assistance we need is spreading of information. But we need it a lot - this can repeat at any time.

Please, please look at this, please, please let the world know what is being destroyed

http://vveshka.livejournal.com/25762.html

For past posts please do a site search via the search link in the right column 'Gazprom'.

Also please read this, sent to me by the Editor. It's a very full account of what is happening, and why it shouldn't be.


http://chtodelat.wordpress.com/2009/10/16/saint-petersburg-versus-gazputinburg/

Previously


http://chtodelat.wordpress.com/2009/10/08/the-end-of-saint-petersburg-or-the-beauties-of-kettling/


Nem

Another blog on the subject http://meganinpiter.blogspot.com/ Urban activism in St Petersburg

St Petersburg WHS, Gazprom, Okhta Centre, BD - and JG

An update on the recent two blogs

http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/09/another-huge-erection.html

http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/09/cock-up-or-conspiracy-gazprom-rmjm-and.html

Respected architecture critic Jonathan Glancey (above) has written in this week's Building Design of the violent clashes in St Petersburg, although without really apportioning the blame to those responsible (not, as far as I can see, the protestors but the thugs hired to prevent lawful protest).

Here's a link to further reporting and pictures on this (update Sept 13th)

http://www.reclaiming-spaces.org/news/

http://nastybrutalistandshort.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post.html
(Interesting comments on that one - although to read the only full version of the truncated comments quoted left on t'internet you have to read them in a blog not too far from this one!)

It is intriguing to see how passionate St Petersburg’s residents are over the Gazprom tower proposals

But we don’t do violence

11 September 2009

‘Violence at Gazprom tower meeting” blared a headline in last week’s BD. The occasion was a meeting in St Petersburg at which Gazprom and RMJM were lobbying to change a local zoning law keeping buildings to a maximum height of 48m. This led to a newsworthy clash between protesters, police and security guards.

How often do people actually come to blows over buildings in peacetime? Protest is certainly not uncommon, and yet even the threat, and then the sorry reality, of the destruction of New York’s Pennsylvania and London’s Euston stations, witnessed no violence I am aware of. Equally, many people around the world have been offended in recent decades by heavy-handed office buildings, bombastic hotels and any number of crass residential and retail developments. But although angry, they have kept their fists uncoiled and their powder dry....

Read more: http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=427&storycode=3148395&channel=427&c=1

But there’s been nothing quite like the Gazprom clash. When big business is threatened, it can and will fight hard, especially when supported by government.

Violence can rarely be condoned, but it is intriguing to see how passionate people living in St Petersburg are about their city. British architects might find this uncomfortable, but they can rest assured such passions are unlikely to spill over into violence in our own less demonstrative country.

Well, no, Mr G, violence cannot in this case be condoned at all; it seems, however, that peaceful protest is being stifled by the use of such violence

In this country we do tend to use the law and public pressure, but let's face it, it's up to small but determined organisations (see yesterday's blog on a SAVE legal victory) and individuals banding together in a common cause (see the linked blogs column for a representative sample) to carry the huge burden of protest at the never-ending threats to our historic environment.

Maybe we should get more militant.

I wonder what would happen if we did? Would riot police be sent in?

http://www.sapling.info/newsletter/200512_agnes.shtml

December 2005

Lambeth Borough Council is threatening the imminent demolition of twenty-two Victorian houses on St. Agnes Place, Vauxhall, London SE11, SAVE Britain's Heritage has told Sapling.

According to SAVE, this is a precise repeat of Lambeth's actions on 20th January 1977, when it purposely damaged eleven of the 26 houses on St Agnes Place it then hoped to demolish, with the aim of putting them beyond repair.

Adam Wilkinson, Secretary of SAVE, told Sapling.info: "Lambeth, which owns the houses, forcefully evicted squatters from the site earlier this week, apparently resulting in one hospitalisation. The squatters had been there for thirty years, and the buildings are consequently in reasonable condition - wind and weather tight and structurally sound. Lambeth is currently seeking approval - from itself - of the demolition of 52 - 74 and 75 - 91 St Agnes Place.

Lambeth's intention is to create a clear site. This site will then be handed over to a housing association. However there are no plans in place for any replacements.

Lambeth's draft Unitary Development Plan specifically seeks the retention of these buildings. (Policy MD069).

"SAVE Britain's Heritage strongly opposes the proposed demolition of these buildings. They are perfectly decent historic buildings in good condition, eminently and easily capable of conversion into a range of accommodation, as might be required by the housing association."It's a return to the bad old days. What does Lambeth think it is doing, giving itself permission to demolish a set of perfectly good historic buildings that is has identified as worth retaining, and destroying a community in the process."There are literally hundreds of examples of where these sorts of much loved historic buildings have been reused. For example, in 1975 Shepherdess Walk in Hackney was saved from demolition and restored by a housing association. The days of this sort of thing are unnecessary. Demolition is completely unnecessary."

Lambeth's earlier controversial attempt at eviction and demolition in 1977 was chronicled in "Our Vanishing Heritage" by SAVE's President Marcus Binney. After 200 police had been called in to protect a large mobile crane progressing down the street wielding a ball and chain, smashing in the fronts of houses one by one, Commander Patrick Flynn of the Metropolitan Police said "I don't want to be involved in anything like this again. We are not street politicians."

Pic credit: SAVE 1977

http://www.schnews.co.uk/archive/news523.htm

FALLEN SAINTS (December 2005)

On Tuesday, St Agnes Place, Kennington - the oldest squatted street in London - was evicted by bailiffs and hundreds of riot police. On Wednesday the area including the park was still cordoned off, and it is believed demolition was taking place. Supporters turned up, but there was very little they could do due to the sheer scale of the police operation. A wake for the death of St Agnes Street was held at Lambeth Town Hall in the afternoon. The eviction took a full twelve hours with the last few remaining residents brutally beaten by the cops, resulting in one losing consciousness and being taken away by ambulance.

Police also evicted the Pirate TV bus, despite being unable to find anything wrong with the paperwork or the bus, except that it couldn’t start. The cops instructed it be towed away but luckily the boys from the recovery firm managed to get it going and save it from the police compound.

Not content with evicting a whole street, police and bailiffs then evicted a squat in nearby Bolton Crescent, despite the fact the court case for the eviction was not due to be held till 16th December, making the eviction illegal: nice to see the boys in blue upholding the law.

There was predictably little mainstream coverage of the eviction, and the journos around were “embedded” with the police, and only shown what the police chose to show. The eviction marks the ends of the thirty year old vibrant community and leaves 150 people homeless with winter already here. It will instead be replaced by a soulless estate and a sports centre. It is reckoned that “unpaid rent” on the properties amounted to £4m over the years and that, according to Lambeth Council, they were “paying nothing to the community” - as if paying rent for your home to some landlord was more important than actually being a thriving community not based on capitalist exploitation.

Pic credit: SAVE

St Agnes' Place Lambeth, prior to demolition in 2006

A short account and pictures of the police presence, 1977 and 2005, appeared in the SAVE News

http://www.savebritainsheritage.org/docs/articles/News%201%202006.pdf


St Agnes' Place, London In January 1977 a large mobile crane swinging a ball and chain made its way down St Agnes' Place, Lambeth, smashing in the fronts of the houses one after another with the simple aim of damaging as many buildings as possible to the point that they were beyond repair. The owner of the buildings, Lambeth Council, knew an injunction was coming and moved the crane in at dawn, along with two hundred police officers. Eleven of the twenty-six houses were damaged before the injunction was granted.

Fast forward just under nineteen years. The remaining houses had been squatted for many years by a Rastafarian community, which had by and large settled and been left to its own devices by the local authority. And then it happens all over again. The bailiffs move in, attempt to kick out the residents (with the police officers in riot gear there to ensure a peaceful eviction), and the wreckers move in.

Pic credit: SAVE December 2005

The buildings, perfectly decent Victorian terraced houses, typical of the area, were still owned by Lambeth. They were not in a conservation area, nor were they listed.

SAVE moved to take legal action against the demolition, only to find that the local authority had just about managed to paper over the gaps in its case as a result of an aborted action by one of the local residents. As ever, had we known a little earlier, more could have been done to stop this act of wanton vandalism by the local authority. With London's buoyant housing market the buildings could easily have been economically repaired and reused. It appears that councillors and certain officers had long regarded the area something of a running sore and were keen to tidy it up –through demolition.

The local authority put forward no plan for the site post demolition, just some vague ideas about a community facility. Judge, jury and executioner: the sooner that demolition is regarded as a form of development,thereby requiring planning permission, the better.

Handsome buildings, which could have been retained, now gone. People made homeless, and violence against those evicted, by the police. Hmmmm. We don't do violence here though, not according to Mr Glancey.

Nem

PS The picture credits: although the police pics came from the SAVE news linked to, I gather that the older one was first published in the local press and the later one came from a local resident. I apologise if I have breached anyone's copyright.

Cock-up or conspiracy? Gazprom, RMJM and the AJ

The proposed Gazprom Okhta Centre, St Petersburg World Heritage Site, RMJM architects http://www.ameinfo.com/154584.html

An update on last Wednesday's blog about the major threat to St Petersburg's World Heritage Site (and thank you for the kind comment from a St Petersburg resident, see below blog post).
http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/09/another-huge-erection.html

The following was posted in the comments section under the article in the Architects' Journal, in response to the very inaccurate and apologist 'justification' by RMJM's Tony Kettle. Then it was removed from the site, without explanation.
It has since been reposted and at the moment remains on view, but in case it vanishes again (censorship by the AJ, at the behest of - who exactly?) I repost it here.

(UPDATE Wednesday - the News Editor of the AJ has explained that the post contains comments which could be construed as libel. As the publisher of such comments, the AJ of course could be legally liable to any comeback from Mr Kettle and RMJM. He has now truncated the comments section under one story with an explanation.  I repost comments here in full without any endorsement as to their veracity; if RMJM wishes to sue me then that's up to them, but they won't get much as I'm skint, and they'd look even more silly than they do now. Just thought I'd clear than one up. Also, Mr Kettle, the 'bad buildings' you claim were being removed for the Caltongate development are in fact listed. One handsome listed building, which was in use until the occupants were decanted, to be demolished, another to be a tacky facade scheme, alongside tenements built as 'model housing' for the poor. Those were to be the front of a 'five star' hotel on the Royal Mile. Pictures, and so much more, here: http://www.eh8.org.uk/ . That one has hopefully all gone tits up, with the developer going bust. I remain disgusted, as do many, at what is happening in St Petersburg, and the wilful campaign to spoil a World Heritage Site. No doubt many other developers and architects will be watching this one with interest; they don't really seem to understand the whole rationale of World Heritage Sites. Or possibly they do, but don't care. Ego and greed prevail. )

Mr. Kettle is trying to put a good face on a very, very bad game, just like his employers at Gazprom and their bought-and-paid supporters in the Petersburg administration. In this article he plays fast and loose with the facts and with the character of the city where he plans to plop down his 400-meter-high monstrosity. In what sense does the planned skyscraper 'sit' 6km from the historic centre'? The distance between the skyscraper and Rastrelli's Smolny Cathedral is certainly not 6km. In fact, Mr. Kettle's tower would be directly opposite the cathedral across the Neva River (and thus crush it). This is not to mention the fact that the 'special buildings' he mentions are nowhere near 400m high, and what 'dominance' they do exert on the horizontal Petersburg skyline is achieved with thin, elegant spires, not huge masses of steel and glass, as will be the case with his building. While the TV tower is higher than these other 'special buildings', it is in fact located at a great distance from whatever point in the historic centre that you would care to call the 'historic centre'. Visibility studies have shown, however, that Mr. Kettle's tower would be clearly visible from any number of such points and would thus rudely violate the current skyline, which like the ensembles of buildings themselves is an explicit part of the World Heritage Site that the city and the Russian Federation have obliged themselves to protect and preserve.

What is more disturbing is that from the very start this project has been accompanied by the lies and machinations of Mr. Kettle's firm, Gazprom, and the Petersburg administration. In addition to its World Heritage Status, the city's architectural heritage is supposedly protected by any number of local and federal laws which themselves should have been sufficient to prevent even the consideration of such a ruinous, violent project. Instead, as current practice shows, developers and bureaucrats have been happily bypassing all these laws, demolishing ordinary buildings and listed monuments in their drive to make quick profits. Without exception, everything that has been erected in their place is miserable junk from any normal architectural viewpoint, even from a viewpoint more tolerant of modernism and postmodernism than is usually the case amongst Petersburgers weened on neoclassicism and art nouveau.

Let's forget for a second about the murky story of how Mr. Kettle's firm was awarded the contract in the first place. He will tell you about a juried competition with 'public input' or something of the sort, forgetting, I imagine, to mention that three members of the jury, including Sir Norman Foster, found the situation so scandalous that they resigned. Let's pretend, instead, that RMJM won the contract 'fair and square'. What has happened since that beautiful day for all humanity, especially its Russian branch? The city administration and Gazprom have been doing somersaults in an effort to bypass existing laws on historic preservation and new construction, including the newly minted Regulations on Land Use and Development which clearly stipulate a maximum height of 100m for new construction at the site in question. Worse yet, they have engaged in a vigorous and expensive campaign of obfuscation which has involved, among other things, paying off local celebrities to express their 'support' for the project, misinforming the public about its legal aspects and the city's World Heritage status, commissioning 'opinion polls' that have been shown to have been faked and ordering visibility studies whose alleged result is that the tower wouldn't be visible from anywhere (hence no one should worry). But why build a skyscraper that no one will be able to see?

The worst aspect of their campaign, however, has been their mockery of the public hearings on the project and public concerns in general. In at least two instances, hearings were held without timely and clear notification of the public, amongst other procedural violations. That is just the icing on the cake, however. During last summer's hearing (the second of three such events) the organizers paid several hundred 'extras' 400 rubles or so (approx. 8 pounds) to come to the hall where the hearing was held and express their 'support' for Mr. Kettle's future masterpiece. Disturbed by these 'irregularities', a group of local activists and concerned citizens tried to shut the hearing down. They were eventually forcibly dragged from the presidium by riot police (OMON) and several of them were arrested. As this was happening, the Gazprom/Okhta Centre official chairing the event urged the skyscraper's 'supporters' to cheer on these police thugs as they performed their necessary work. When the hearing was over, these pseudo-citizens dashed out of the hall to a spot nearby where they had been promised they would get their well-earned pay. Unfortunately, journalists were wise to this and also on the spot, so the supporters' minders had to quickly arrange to pay them the following day at another location. Although these shenanigans were well documented in the local press, none of the people responsible for this abomination faced legal consequences or criminal charges.

This brings us to the hearing held just the other day, September 1, whose stated topic was Okhta Centre's petition to be granted an exception to the 100-meter-high zoning rule I've already mentioned. Let's start with the fact that, once again, timely notification of the hearing did not happen. Worse, the hearing was scheduled for 9am on September 1. September 1 is called the 'Day of Knowledge' in Russia and is practically considered sacred; it is the first day of the school year, a day on which parents accompany their children to the ceremonial openings at their schools. The hearing's organizers knew this, of course, and thus hoped to keep away some number of activists and citizens who might otherwise have attended. I also think that they hoped that the extensive press coverage usually garnered by the Day of Knowledge would overshadow any negative coverage of the hearing.

The citizens and activists who did make it to the hearing faced a police cordon around the building where it was held and three (yes, three!) security checks before they could get inside. What is this if not intimidation? That would have been enough. It gets worse, however. During the hearing itself, several people who protested too loudly (by shouting and unfurling protest banners or placards) were pounced upon by thugs (euphemistically described as 'Gazprom security guards' in some English-language media accounts I've read) and dragged out of the hall, where they were beaten, kicked, and dispatched to a nearby police precinct. One of these protesters arrived there so bloodied that the police immediately sent him to hospital.

Now that these pseudo-democratic rituals have been observed, Mr. Kettle's employers can happily submit their height-regulations waiver to the proper commission and, I fear, expect quick approval followed by the local governor's signature. So much for public input.

I've described all this in such detail because it goes to Mr. Kettle's strange argument about the 'rebirth of Russia'. He doesn't elaborate on this point, except to say that it has something to do with the wealth acquired from the export and sale of energy resources. In fact what we have witnessed over the past ten years is the rebirth of the Russian police state. Whereas in the past this police regime defended the absolute rule of an imperialist monarchy and then, later, a totalitarian bureaucracy, now it has been called upon to defend the economic, financial and political monopoly secured over the past fifteen or so years by a tiny elite of oligarchs and security forces officers. I don't need here to go into the details of this group's rise to power, which involves staggering crime, rampant corruption, the destruction of civil liberties, flagrant violation of human rights and the intimidation of the free press. All these things are all too well documented in the English-language media, to which I refer curious readers.

So this is the 'rebirth' that Mr. Kettle has elected to participate in. Its expression in the architectural realm, especially (but not only) in Moscow and Petersburg, has been the wide-scale destruction of the architectural legacy, a catastrophe which has been unleashed to satisfy a real estate and new construction speculative boom fuelled by oil and gas revenues. Instead of investing in badly needed infrastructural improvements and strengthening civil society in the process, the new elite has been cashing in its newfound wealth and power to make even more money, in defiance of democratic norms and public needs. When it comes to Petersburg and the planned Gazprom tower, however, there is an added symbolic dimension. The skyscraper is meant to show that this heedless violent, criminal squandering of Russia's future has 'conquered' all other possible outcomes and all other visions for the country. While the city's social and political history has not been untroubled, to say the least, the building of the skyscraper would signal the triumph of this new 'petrocracy' and the end of Saint Petersburg, which after all was a utopian project. Mr. Kettle's project, on the contrary, will be an emblem of the dystopia the country has again sunk into.

In a better Russia, the competence and ingenuity of architects like Mr. Kettle would be used to build schools, theaters, hospitals, kindergartens, low-cost estate housing and other public buildings and spaces that would promote architectural innovation while not demolishing Petersburg's outstanding, absolutely unique heritage. This project would not only involve popular participation, it would be generated by ordinary people themselves, who would democratically allocate the country's common resources to make improvements to their own living, working, educational and cultural conditions.

This, alas, is not the case, and Mr. Kettle's Okhta Centre project is a gargantuan barometer that shows how much this is not the case. That is why I call on architects, journalists, activists and ordinary people in Britain and Scotland to shed what light they can on this project and pressure Mr. Kettle and RMJM to end their involvement in this crime against the people of Saint Petersburg, Russia and the world.

A Concerned Resident of Saint Petersburg
One response to that:

I join my voice to the first comment which is quite just, both in its architectural and its social diagnosis. The fact that an ambitious architect and designer renders himself totally, his hands and his ethics, for the service of an agressively antidemocratic and misantrope corporation, puts in doubt every his word. If the "special" in the city is measured uniquely with the beloved by the actual Russian governors "vertical" and "hierarchy", if smashing the visual equilibrium of the XVIII and XIX-century styled Petersburg center symbolises "Russia's rebirth", then Gazprom itself should be considered as the the world's salvator and king, as it pretends to be. A really popular and representative movement of Petersburg residents who pronounce aganst this scaring project is a strong reason to reconsider either the investors plans or Mr. Kettle ambitions. It's no good fame to remain in eternity as a city smasher, isn't i it? But beside the personal and corporate motivation of the project supporters, I'd like to invite to discuss publicly the professional and ethic position of RMJM and of Mr. Kettle in this dramatic collision.

Roorty Alex


Original articles:

http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/police-and-protesters-clash-over-rmjms-gazprom-tower/5207421.article#


http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/news-analysis/russias-rebirth-requires-a-unique-building-design/5204743.article


A further comment:

5-Sep-2009 7:45 pm

Live footage of 'security guards' 'detaining' a 'protester' at the 'public hearing' on the Okhta Centre in Petersburg on September 1:

http://rutube.ru/tracks/2319366.html?v=a4c59fcfd7270902dba75fc20f1895a6




The crowd is chanting 'Shame!'

I wonder: is this what public hearings in Scotland look like? (RMJM is a Scottish firm)

When the tower gets built and UNESCO strikes Petersburg off the World Heritage list, at least these people will be able to console themselves with the thought that they put up a fight.


And:

5-Sep-2009 5:20 pm

'People everywhere in the world, for whom this site is protected by its World Heritage inscription, should be protesting. RMJM should be boycotted.'
Indeed. Any ideas about how to organize such a protest and boycott?

It's quite clear to me that because of the Okhta Centre project and the other ways that the Petersburg administration and the Russian government are flagrantly failing to meet their World Heritage obligations, that Petersburg will be delisted. What's worse, I think that there are certain government officials who actually want this to happen. First, it will untie their hands to do whatever they like (which is pretty much what they're doing anyway). Second, it would allow them to score some cheap propaganda points. They would say (in fact, they've already said as much) that 'the west' (in the guise of UNESCO) is simply trying to meddle in Russia's internal affairs and impede the country's 'development'.

Are there any good studies or articles about RMJM's 'bad' practices in other instances? What went on with the Scottish Parliament building?

Alternately, does anyone know of cases (successful or not) of international mobilizations against the destruction of World Heritage Sites? What methods were used?

Keep in mind, in the present instance, that our foes employ dirty tricks. At the last two public hearings on Okhta Centre, the 'supporters' of the project used riot police and 'security guards' (hired thugs) against activists and opponents of the project. The use of hundreds of paid 'extras' ('supporters') at the second hearing was well documented by such local media outlets as Moi Raion newspaper and the ZAKS.RU Internet news site. In the run-up to the last hearing, ZAKS.RU also infiltrated and documented a 'rehearsal' for extras led by an Okhta Centre official.

I think this, and not only the dubious merits of the project itself and its effects on a World Heritage Site, should reflect badly on the all the parties to this outrage -- the architects, the building contractor, the city administration, and the national government. But how do we turn our outrage into something more effective?


And that question is at the heart of the matter, really. As these people have no shame, how can they be shamed?

I wonder what Robert Matthew (the RM of RMJM) would have made of it all.

http://www.scottisharchitecture.com/article/view/The+Life+and+Times+of+Robert+Matthew

From the late 1960s, he was also faced with the need to respond to the growing crises of Modernist architecture and the planned economy. Where some ‘great men’ of his generation, such as Holford or Spence, sank into relatively quiescent retirement, Matthew blazed up into a final burst of frenzied self-renewal, refocusing his efforts back home in Scotland, where he returned to his family architectural ‘roots’ in conservation by leading the drive to ‘save’ the classical Edinburgh New Town, and at the same time launching into a final ‘crusade’ of global environmentalism.

Nem

Read also:

http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/09/st-petersburg-whs-gazprom-okhta-centre.html

http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/09/another-huge-erection.html

http://www.reclaiming-spaces.org/events/archives/272

http://independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/2009/09/rmjms-gazprom-tower-in-st-petersburg.html

Another huge erection!

One yesterday, another today! What a busy week for the Republic!

Today's priapic pest is the threat to the St Petersburg World Heritage Site, the RMJM 'Gazprom' Tower. Like Dresden before it, which this summer had its World Heritage Site status removed, this is currently on the World Heritage In Danger list:

http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/06/dresden-stripped-of-world-heritage-site.html ,

Sadly, those responsible for these atrocities don't care, they can run away with the cash and that's all that counts. UNESCO is in the horns (sorry, must stop the puns) of a dilemma; does it allow development which will ultimately destroy that which should be protected, the Outstanding Universal Value of individual sites, thus allowing that to set a precedent for more, or does it use the ultimate sanction, and remove sites from inscription, and allow the site to be destroyed anyhow?

Personally I think we should be sending in a gunboat, but the World Heritage Committee hasn't that option.

Well peeps, I like the cut of the jibs of those in the city who aren't taking this lying down.

As the report in AJ says:

http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/police-and-protesters-clash-over-rmjms-gazprom-tower/5207421.article#

Police and protesters clash over RMJM's Gazprom tower
1 September, 2009 By Richard Waite

Attempts by Russian energy giant Gazprom to build a 394m-tall UK-designed skyscraper in St Petersburg are being fought every inch of the way by protesters in the city

St. Petersburg residents on Tuesday (01.09.09) clashed with police and OAO Gazprom security guards during a public hearing over the plan to erect the tallest skyscraper in Europe. Around 12 people who attended Tuesday’s meeting were removed, as calls of ‘shame on Gazprom’ rung in the air.

The Okhta Center is the work of Scottish architects RMJM and is intended to house the headquarters of Gazprom Neft, a Gazprom subsidiary.

The Okhta Public and Business Centre, the Gazprom company heading the development, says it is an ‘architectural gem’ (Well, they would, wouldn't they?) that will give the city a modern look. However, the UN’s educational, scientific and cultural organisation claims that the centre, also known as the Gazprom Tower, would defile the city’s historic skyline.

See for yourself here:

http://www.ohta-center.ru/en/video/

and here:

http://www.ohta-center.ru/en/gallery/

But protesters filed a lawsuit asking the court to cancel the public hearing because it would be ‘illegal’ and that the towers would be sited too close to the 18th century Smolny Cathedral. It is not the first time objectors have run into trouble with the police over the proposed 67-storey skyscraper. In January last year ‘two activists’ were arrested after 300 protesters started a rally on the site earmarked for the tower.

http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/two-arrested-in-protest-against-rmjms-gazprom-tower/477443.article

(Interesting read, that... was Bandarin telling porkies? Or is Kettle speaking with forked tongue?)

Meanwhile, Unesco’s World Heritage Committee has expressed ‘grave concern’ about the building and has asked that the project be suspended.

Responding to the news, RMJM released this statement: ‘The City of St Petersburg is reviewing its rules and regulations for tall buildings.
‘This City Council Meeting was the first step towards amending its planning restrictions to allow for buildings which are over 100m in height. RMJM is assisting the City Council in going through the due process in support of the proposed amendment.’ (In other words, we are moving the goalposts in order to get this monster built, and pave the way for others. It's ££££££ speaking!)

Click here to read RMJM’s group design director Tony Kettle’s justification for the proposed skyscraper :

http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/news-analysis/russias-rebirth-requires-a-unique-building-design/5204743.article

Hmmm. Wrong about so much, yet trust me I'm an architect?

Building Design runs the story also:

Clashes over RMJM's Gazprom tower
2 September, 2009
By Anna Winston

A public meeting to discuss RMJM’s proposal for a 400m tower in St Petersburg descended into violence on Tuesday, with protesters being forcibly removed by security guards working for the developer, Russian gas giant Gazprom.

The St Petersburg meeting is part of RMJM and Gazprom’s quest to change the city’s zoning laws which do not allow buildings taller than 48m.

The clash between police, guards and protesters prompted chants of “shame on Gazprom”, according to a Bloomberg report. One protest or, Gennady Turetsky, said: “You’re creating an atmosphere of civil war here in St. Petersburg. Look at all these security measures, all the people being taken away.”

Last week, UNESCO issued a new warning that St Petersburg could face losing its world heritage status if the tower, officially called the Okhta Centre Tower but known as the Gazprom Tower, goes ahead.

In a statement published on its website, UNESCO repeated earlier concerns for the future of the entire heritage site but singled out the tower for additional comment.

“The World Heritage Committee expresses its grave concern that the proposed Okhta Centre Tower could affect the Outstanding Universal Value of the property,” it said.

UNESCO has requested that all work be suspended on the project and that the design be modified.

In a statement, RMJM said: "The City of St Petersburg is reviewing its rules and regulations for tall buildings. This City Council Meeting was the first step towards amending its planning restrictions to allow for buildings which are over 100m in height. RMJM is assisting the City Council in going through the due process in support of the proposal for amendment."

The tower, which is to be the headquarters for Gazprom and will include a concert hall, museum, hotel and business centre, has attracted controversy since RMJM won the commission in 2006.

RMJM beat Jean Nouvel, Massimiliano Fuksas, Rem Koolhaas and Daniel Libeksind in a surprise victory after an international competition which saw star judges Norman Foster, Rafel Vinoly and Kisho Kurokawa walk off the jury.

In 2007, St Petersburg residents and preservationists staged a protest against RMJM’s proposed design. And earlier this year the St Petersburg city government, which had committed to financing 49% of the scheme, announced it would no longer contribute to the project which could cost up to $3 billion. Gazprom has now pledged to fund the entire project itself.
Read more:

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3147816&origin=BDdaily

Strong words from UNESCO (really, this is as bad as it gets):

33COM 7B.118 - Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments (Russian Federation) (C 540)
Decision Text

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-08/33.COM/7B.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 32COM 7B.105, adopted at its 32nd session (Quebec City, 2008),

3. Regrets that the State Party did not provide a state of conservation report, or a draft Statement of Outstanding Universal Value;

4. Notes with concern, that the maps provided by the State Party define boundaries that include a significantly smaller area than that inscribed, and encourages the State Party to submit formally a significant boundary modification (according to Paragraph 165 of the Operational Guidelines) to allow the Committee to consider this issue;

5. Also notes with concern that the buffer zone proposed does not extend to encompass the landscape setting of the property and in particular the panorama along the Neva River, and requests the State Party to reconsider this buffer zone and submit it formally to the World Heritage Centre;

6. Reiterates its request to the State Party to develop, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS, a draft Statement of Outstanding Universal Value, for examination by the World Heritage Committee;

7. Expresses again its grave concern that the proposed "Ohkta Centre Tower" could affect the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, and requests the State Party to suspend work on this project and submit modified designs, in accordance with federal legislation and accompanied by an independent environmental impact assessment;

8. Also expresses its grave concern about the continuous lack of a leading management system and defined mechanisms of coordination for the management of the property;

9. Also requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to the Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments to assess the state of conservation of the property;

10. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2010, a state of conservation report for the property that addresses the above points for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session in 2010, with a view to consider, in the absence of substantial progress, to inscribe the Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and related Groups of Monuments (Russian Federation) on the List of the World Heritage in Danger at its 34th session 2010.

This, and all associated documents, can be read here:

http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/1910

http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/540/

Russian Federation
Date of Inscription: 1990Criteria: (i)(ii)(iv)(vi)St. Petersburg regionN59 57 00 E30 19 06Ref: 540

Brief Description

The 'Venice of the North', with its numerous canals and more than 400 bridges, is the result of a vast urban project begun in 1703 under Peter the Great. Later known as Leningrad (in the former USSR), the city is closely associated with the October Revolution. Its architectural heritage reconciles the very different Baroque and pure neoclassical styles, as can be seen in the Admiralty, the Winter Palace, the Marble Palace and the Hermitage.

Lest we forget: World Heritage Site Status is not thrust opon places, it is applied for and has to be justified by the countries concerned, which agree to protect, for all of humanity, the Outstanding Universal Value of the site.

That doesn't mean no development in urban centres, but it does mean that any development should protect the OUV, the authenticity and integrity of a site, and that policies and plans should be in place to protect and conserve.

And what's the problem? Greed really. No matter how many fine words it's all dressed up in, no matter how many weasel words are spoken, it's just plain unadulterated greed.

The second joint publication by SAVE Europe's Heritage and the Moscow Architectural Preservation Society, while mainly about Moscow, has a chapter on the dire things happening to St Petersburg's historic architecture also:

http://www.metropolismag.com/pov/20090723/russias-architecture-in-jeopardy

(click to enlarge)

The study also includes a chapter on St. Petersburg, where more than one hundred buildings have been destroyed over the last six years, even as many were on official state "protected" lists.

An informative article here by one of the authors:

Edmund Harris is a trustee of the Moscow Architectural Preservation Society (MAPS) and editor of the new, revised edition of "Moscow Heritage At Crisis Point," a joint report by MAPS and SAVE Britain's Heritage on the crisis facing the historic heritage of Moscow and St Petersburg. The views expressed in this commentary are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of RFE/RL

http://www.rferl.org/content/The_Death_Of_St_Petersburg/1797348.html

...Gazprom's plans to build the 396-meter Okhta Center opposite St Petersburg's Smolny Convent produced more column inches in the press than any other construction project. But while that effort is currently hamstrung by financial constraints, work has continued on numerous other destructive and insensitive schemes. The panorama of the headland of Vasilyevsky Island -- with its 19th-century rostral columns and stock exchange, and the elegant 18th-century Kunstkamera -- has already been blighted by the Oil and Commodities Exchange (67 meters) and the Finansist residential tower (65 meters) that now rear up in the background. And that is not the only part of Petersburg's skyline to have been wrecked...

There is a great deal more information and pictures here:

http://maps-moscow.com/index.php?chapter_id=204&data_id=238&do=view_single

Here is a direct link to the 2009 updated, expanded edition, of Moscow Heritage at Crisis Point, including the St Petersburg chapter, online as a PDF:

http://www.maps-moscow.com/userdata/e_MAPS.pdf (warning large file, takes a while to download)

The print verson will be available soon from :

http://www.savebritainsheritage.org/publications/publications_forthcoming.php

Moscow Heritage at Crisis Report - 2nd Edition (2009)£18.00 (£18.00 Friends Price)
Following up from the 2007 report this new edition brings our attention back to the continued threat to Moscow’s architectural heritage. This latest bilingual report from SAVE Europe’s Heritage and MAPS (Moscow Architectural Preservation Society), with support from DoCoMoMo International, lists the latest loses, the current threats and proposals to help protect Moscow’s historic buildings. This new edition, which displays 200 pictures across 128 pages, also includes information about threats to St Petersburg.

This has been launched in Russia but will not be launched in Britain until late September - copies will be available to order from the SAVE office in October. We ask for a voluntary donation of £18

INFORMATION ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Edmund Harris is a Cambridge-trained Russianist who has been a Moscow resident since 2003. He is a trustee of MAPS and was involved in setting up the organisation in 2004 with Clementine Cecil and Kevin O'Flynn.

Clementine Cecil is a journalist and campaigner for the preservation of built heritage. She lived in Moscow from 2001 to 2005. Cecil is a co-founder and trustee of MAPS. She is also involved in a project to conserve churches in Tver region with the Paul Khlebnikov Foundation.

Anna Bronovitskaya is an architectural historian, associate professor at the Moscow Architecture Institute, and an editor of 'Project Russia' and 'Project International' magazines.

Other authors of the report include specialists such as Marcus Binney, President and founder of SAVE (UK);

Adam Wilkinson, former secretary of SAVE and now Director of Edinburgh World Heritage Site (UK);

Calder Loth, Senior Architectural Historian of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (USA);

Nataliya Dushkina, Professor of City Planning at the Moscow Architecture Institute;

Nataliya Bronovitskaya, art historian;

Nataliya Samover, historian and journalist;

Elena Minchyonok, Saint-Petersburg journalist, and writer;

Moscow historian Rustam Rakhmatullin.

So get that order in now!

Nem

UPDATE

See comments, and here's that link from St Petersburg live:

http://www.metamute.org/en/Anti-Viruses-And-Underground-Monuments

Thought provoking reading.

See also blogs:

http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/09/st-petersburg-whs-gazprom-okhta-centre.html

http://nemesisrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/09/cock-up-or-conspiracy-gazprom-rmjm-and.html

http://independentrepublicofthecanongate.blogspot.com/2009/09/rmjms-gazprom-tower-in-st-petersburg.html

http://www.reclaiming-spaces.org/news/ (Pictures also)