Dec 3 Melnikov House opens to the public. History of events.

Russian and English translations of the article “A Mosca nasce il Museo Melnikov. Sfrattando l’erede da casa sua” published in Artribune on November 6, 2014.

Text: Anna Kostina
Photos: Natalia Melikova

3 декабря Дом Мельникова открывается для посещения. История события.

Melnikov House - August 13, 2014

13 августа 2014

“Константин Мельников” – эта надпись и по сей день украшает фактически единственный в своём роде частный дом, построенный в советское время. Здание революционной, для своей эпохи, формы. Два находящих друг на друга цилиндра дают в плане округлую восьмёрку, 57 шестигранных окна и огромная стеклянная витрина центрального фасада. В период постройки своего дома в 1927-1929г.г., Мельников был в фаворе у Сталина, но это длилось не долго. Вскоре его обвинили в формализме. Остаток жизни он прожил фактически без работы. После смерти архитектор оставил дом своим детям: Виктору и Людмиле, каждому по цилиндру, разрушив таким образом единство и неповторимость концепции. Мельников не мог предвидеть, что сначала они, а затем и внучки – Екатерина и Елена – начнут оспаривать его наследство в московском суде.

Екатерина, дочь Виктора, жила в этом доме и хранила наследие отца и деда последние 18 лет. Она содержала дом на свою мизерную пенсию, била тревогу, когда рядом началось строительство нового супермаркета. Участок, как и фундамент, серьёзно просел, и образовались огромные трещины как внутри, так и на фасадах дома. Самое важное из всех творений Мельникова, едва ли не единственное, сохранившееся в оригинальном виде, находится в плачевном состоянии. Здание требует скорейшей реконструкции, которая постоянно откладывается по причине неразрешенного правового конфликта.

Фонд “Русский Авангард”, принадлежащий бывшему сенатору Сергею Гордееву, в прошлом приобрёл половину дома у наследников Людмилы Мельниковой и позднее передал её МУАР. В 2011, по прошествии слушаний и судебных разбирательств (обсуждению подвергалось завещание Виктора), другая четверть имущества перешла в собственность Государства, которое в свою очередь передало его под патронаж Московского Музея Архитектуры (МУАР). Екатерина, как исполнительница воли отца и владелица 1/8 части имущества, по-прежнему проживала в доме. Поначалу она надеялась, что с помощью Музея Архитектуры ей удастся реализовать мечту своего отца – “Музей Отца и Сына”, посвящённый работам Мельниковых: Константина – архитектора и Виктора – художника. Конечно, прежде всего необходимо было привести в порядок участок и реставрировать здание.

ВТОРЖЕНИЕ В ДОМ НАСЛЕДНИЦЫ

К сожалению, договорённость с МУАР так и не была достигнута, и руководство музея перешло в атаку. 13 августа, воспользовавшись отсутствием Екатерины, охранники, нанятые МУАР, взломали входную дверь и проникли в дом с целью инвентаризации предметов искусства. Последующие три месяца внучка Константина Мельникова жила под охраной. Екатерину не пускали на верхние этажи, чтобы она не мешала процессу насильной “музеефикации”. Деньги, отложенные ею на ремонт дома, исчезли.

“Ужасная ситуация, – обвиняет Екатерина. Дом, в котором я выросла, был захвачен. Охранники пользовались кухней, что-то готовили, разливя воду на пол, складывали мусор. Поселились там только затем, чтобы запретить мне подниматься на второй этаж”. Она не могла принимать даже родственников, изредка пропускали лишь врачей. Здание охранялось специально обученными собаками, готовыми наброситься в любой момент. 17 октября вышло распоряжение о выселении. Екатерину (75 лет) просто выгнали из дома.

Ей даже не дали возможности собрать личные вещи. Со слов Екатерины Каринской, ей передали через забор лыжный костюм, два одеяла и туфли. В момент интервью она находилась в квартире дочери. “Я осталась без одежды, без дома и без денег” – повторяет она. “Сложно отказаться. Если б не привязанность к национальному достоянию, я бы прожила жизнь иначе”.

Открытое письмо в поддержку Екатерины и ответ Музея

В поддержку Екатерины и в качестве обвинения в жёстком обращении, появилось общественное письмо, адресатом которого был Министр Культуры и Советник президента по делам культуры. “Мы, члены профессионального культурного сообщества России, искусствоведы и историки архитектуры, считаем несовместимым со статусом и миссией учреждения культуры действия Музея архитектуры им.А.В.Щусева…Считаем что на базе Дома Мельникова должен открыться государственный музей согласно завещанию В.К. Мельникова, однако вне всякого сомнения, ни один музей не может создаваться на основании сомнительных в правовом отношении действий, прямого насилия, а так же спешки. В планах Музея Архитектуры им.А.В. Щусева значится скорейшее открытие дома для посетителей ( в ноябре 2014г.), хотя это нельзя делать до проведения научной реставрации. Без реставрации дом может погибнуть в короткие сроки; такая позиция ГМА им.Щусева противоречит основной цели создания Музея Мельниковых – сохранению уникального здания”.

Ответ директора МУАР, Ирины Коробиной не замедлил себя ждать: “В отношении сотрудников ЧОПа, так взволновавших всех, то любая государственная собственность должна охраняться – либо полицией, либо ЧОПами…В 2011г. в присутствии замминистра культуры Андрея Евгеньевича Бусыгина Екатерина Викторовна клялась, что если Росимущество подпишет мировое соглашение, она покинет дом и позволит там создать музей. Два года было потрачено на разработку проекта мирового соглашения – был подготовлен безупречный документ, исключающий малейшие риски…И вот когда всё было готово, мировое соглашение было подписано серьезными государственными учреждениями – Минэкономразвития, Росимуществом, одобрено Минкультуры, “исполнительница завещания” его отвергла, несмотря на клятвенное завещание”.

Сотрудники музея теперь уже наверняка закончили инвентаризацию, составив опись около 5 000 предметов, принадлежащих Константину и Виктору. В первых числах декабря 2014г. Дом музей откроется для посетителей. Запись возможна по предварительной записи (по 5-7 человек в день). Казалось бы, мечта Мельникова близка к реальности, но какой ценой?

Melnikov House - August 13, 2014
August 13, 2014
Melnikov House - August 13, 2014
August 13, 2014
Melnikov House - August 13, 2014
August 13, 2014
Melnikov House - August 29, 2014
August 29, 2014
Melnikov House - August 29, 2014
August 29, 2014
Melnikov House - October 17, 2014
October 17, 2014

December 3 Melnikov House opens to the public. History of events.

“Konstantin Melnikov” – this inscription to this day adorns the practically one of a kind private house built in Soviet times. The building is revolutionary for its time and form. Two joined cylinders give a layout of a rounded figure eight, 57 hexagonal windows, and huge glass windows for the central facade. During the construction of his house in 1927-1929, Melnikov was in favor with Stalin, but it did not last long. Soon after he was accused of formalism. The rest of his life he lived with virtually no work. After the death of the architect the house was left to his children: Viktor and Ludmila, a cylinder for each, thus destroying the unity and uniqueness of the concept. Melnikov could not foresee that first they, and then also his grandchildren – Ekaterina and Elena – will challenge his inheritance in Moscow court.

Ekaterina, Viktor’s daughter, lived in this house and guarded the legacy of her father and grandfather for the last 18 years. She maintained the house on a meager pension, and sounded the alarm when the construction of a new multifunctional center began. The plot of land, as well as the foundations, have seriously subsided, and formed huge cracks both inside and on the facades of the house. The most important of all Melnikov’s works, perhaps the only one preserved in its original form, is in a lamentable condition. The building requires a restoration as soon as possible, which has been constantly postponed due to unresolved legal conflict.

The Russian Avant-Garde Foundation, owned by the former senator Sergey Gordeev, had bought half of the house from the heirs of Ludmila Melnikova and later gave it to the Museum of Architecture. In 2011, after hearings and trials (discussion subject to Viktor’s will), another quarter of the estate was taken over by the State, which in turn passed it to the patronage of the Moscow Museum of Architecture (MUAR). Ekaterina as executor of the will of her father and the owner of 1/8 of the property still lived in the house. At first, she had hoped that with the help of the Museum of Architecture she would be able to realize the dream of her father – “Museum of Father and Son”, dedicated to the works of the Melnikovs: Konstanin – the architect, and Viktor – the artist. Certainly, first of all it was necessary to put the territory in order and restore the building.

INVASION OF THE HEIRESS’S HOME

Unfortunately, agreement with MUAR had not been achieved, and management of the museum crossed over to the attack. On August 13, taking advantage of Ekaterina’s absence, security guards employed by MUAR, broke the door and entered the house with the purpose of making an inventory of the art works. For the next three months the granddaughter of Konstantin Melnikov lived under guard. Ekaterina was not allowed on the upper floors, so that she would not interfere with the process of forced “museumification.” Money that she had set aside to repair the house disappeared.

“A terrible situation,” denounces Ekaterina. “The house in which I grew up was seized. The security guards used the kitchen and prepared food there all the while spilling water on the floor, and accumulated garbage. They took up residence there only to prohibit me from going up to the second floor.” She could not even receive relatives as guests, only doctors were occasionally allowed in. The building was guarded by specially trained dogs, ready to pounce at any moment. On October 17 a decree of eviction was issued. Ekaterina (75 years old) was simply kicked out of the house.

She was not even given an opportunity to collect her personal belongings. From the words of Ekaterina Karinskaya, over the fence she was handed a ski suit, two blankets, and shoes. At the time of the interview, she was in her daughter’s apartment. “I was left with no clothes, no home, and no money,” she repeated. “It’s hard to refuse. If it were not attached to national heritage, I would have lived life differently.”

An open letter in support of Ekaterina and the Museum’s answer

A public letter in support of Ekaterina and with accusations of heavy-handed treatment was addressed to the Minister of Culture and to the Advisor to the President on Cultural Affairs. “We, the members of the professional architectural and museum community in Russia, art and architectural historians, consider the activities of the Schusev Museum of Architecture incompatible with the status and mission of cultural institutions… We believe that based on the Melnikov House a state museum should open according to V.K. Melnikov’s will, however, without a doubt, no museum can be established on the basis of legally dubious actions, direct force, as well as haste. The plans of the Schusev State Museum of Architecture include the speedy opening of the house to visitors (in November 2014), although this cannot be done until a scientific restoration is carried out. Without restoration the house can be lost in a short time; such a position of the Schusev State Museum of Architecture is contrary to the main purpose of the Melnikovs Museum – the preservation of a unique building.”

The response of MUAR’s director, Irina Korobina did not take long: “With respect to the private security employees that alarmed so many, it’s that any state property should be protected – either by the police or by private security guards … In 2011 in the presence of Deputy Culture Minister Andrei Busygin, Ekaterina swore that if the Federal Property Management Agency will sign the settlement agreement, she will leave the house and allow a museum to be created there. Two years were spent on drafting a settlement agreement – a scrupulous document was prepared, excluding the slightest risk … And when all was ready, the settlement agreement was signed by major government agencies – Ministry of Economic Development, Federal Property Management Agency, approved by the Ministry of Culture, “the executor of the will” rejected it, despite the sworn promise made.”

Museum staff have now certainly finished the inventory, having made an inventory of approximately 5,000 objects belonging to Konstantin and Viktor. In early December 2014 the Museum House will open to the public. Registration is possible by appointment (5-7 people per day). It would seem that Melnikov’s dream is close to becoming a reality, but at what cost?

Melnikov House  April 26, 2013

Posted in Words | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

MELNIKOV HOUSE: OPEN LETTER

Melnikov House Дом Мельникова

Below is a translation of the open letter which was originally published on Colta.ru

The letter can be signed on Facebook in the open group,
ДОМ МЕЛЬНИКОВА: ОТКРЫТОЕ ПИСЬМО

Translation of the group description:
“MELNIKOV HOUSE: OPEN LETTER
Dear colleagues and friends, the situation with the Melnikov House, when a state cultural institution has slipped to trivial criminality seems unthinkable, yet it is a reality!
This group has been created with the single purpose to create an interactive tool so that people who are outraged by what has happened, had the opportunity to put their signature to this open letter. It’s enough to write your name and somehow present oneself here.”

To sign the letter, on https://www.facebook.com/groups/1472391213031745/ fill in the “write post” box with:
first name, last name, profession

………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation
V.R. Medinsky

Advisor to the President of the Russian Federation on Culture
V.I. Tolstoy

Moscow, September 15, 2014

Dear Vladimir Rostislavovich,
Dear Vladimir Ilyich,

We, the members of the professional architectural and museum community in Russia, art and architectural historians, consider the activities of the Schusev Museum of Architecture incompatible with the status and mission of cultural institutions, whose employees on August 13, 2014 seized the house-studio of the world famous Russian architect Konstantin Melnikov, an architectural monument of federal significance. Without waiting for the final execution of a court decision on the full transfer of the house to state property in order to create on its basis a branch of the Museum of Architecture, withdrawing the house out of the housing stock, resolving the conflict with the heirs of the architect, the museum staff entered the house, using the absence of the legally residing there E.V. Karinskaya – granddaughter of the great architect, executor of V.K. Melnikov’s will, thus violating the principle of inviolability of the house. Further actions of the Museum of Architecture – changing the locks on the house, installing round-the-clock security at the house (by a private security company) with dogs, regular rounds of the premises, a ban on visits to E.V. Karinskaya by her family, and restricted access to her even by doctors, the forced inventory of memorial items interspersed with personal belongings – we consider unacceptable.

We believe that based on the Melnikov House a state museum should open according to V.K. Melnikov’s will, however, without a doubt, no museum can be established on the basis of legally dubious actions, direct force, as well as haste. The plans of the Schusev State Museum of Architecture include the speedy opening of the house to visitors (in November 2014), although this cannot be done until a scientific restoration is carried out. Without restoration the house can be lost in a short time; such a position of the Schusev State Museum of Architecture is contrary to the main purpose of the Melnikovs Museum – the preservation of a unique building.

Due to the fact that the Schusev Museum of Architecture now is incurring a serious loss of reputation and thereby destroying the reputation of the future Museum of K.S. and V.K. Melnikov, as well as due to the fact that the management of the museum has been incompetent in reaching a peaceful end to the complex inheritance case and carrying out negotiations (for which much had been done in previous years by the former director of the Museum of Architecture D.A. Sarkisyan and the architectural community), we consider it imperative as soon as possible to:

1) Suspend any activities in the Melnikov House, except for urgent measures for the conservation of the monument; remove the private security. Evaluate from a legal point of view the actions of the Schusev Museum of Architecture and all parties of the conflict, and make appropriate staffing decisions.

2) Assemble a conciliation commission with the participation of lawyers representing the parties of the conflict and museum experts to work out a compromise plan for a phased creation of the Museum of K.S. and V.K. Melnikov.

3) Create an Expert Council, which should include experts on twentieth century architecture, restorers, museum experts and designers, who will evaluate the concept of the museum and will be able to make adjustments to it based on the recent developments.

The Melnikov House is a world heritage site; the entire architectural community currently is observing the situation around the monument with alarm and amazement. We ask you to see to the peaceful settlement of the conflict, thus preserving the cultural heritage of the country and the reputation of the cultural and architectural community in Russia.

Sincerely,

Eugene Asse, architect, artist, rector of the architecture school MARSH

Andrei Batalov, Doctor of Arts, Professor, Honored Artist of Russia, member of the Presidium of the Scientific and Methodological Council for Cultural Heritage at the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation

Alexander Brodsky, architect, artist

Anna Bronovitskaya, Ph.D., associate professor of the Moscow Architectural Institute, a member of the section on the legacy of the Soviet period, the Federal Scientific and Methodological Council on heritage

Nikolai Vasilev, art historian, general secretary of Docomomo Russia

Eugene Hershkowitz, art historian, journalist

Yuri Grigoryan, architect

Maria Gulida architect

Alexandra Danilova, art historian, curator, deputy director of the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts department of 19-20th century art

Natalia Dushkina, professor of the Moscow Architectural Institute, a founding member of ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on 20th Century Heritage

Valentin Dyakonov, critic, curator, Kommersant columnist

Egor Egorychev, architect

Yulia Zinkevich, General Director of «Правила общения»

Anastasia Izmakova, architect

Olga Kazakova, PhD, Senior Researcher at the Scientific-Research Institute of the Theory and History of Architecture and Urban Planning

Oleg Karlson, architect at “ASB Karlson and K”

Anna Karneeva, architect

Maria Kachalova, architect

Evgeniya Kikodze, art historian, curator of the Museum of Moscow

Natalia Kopelyanskaya, museologist, expert at “Museums Solutions” creative team

Olga Kosyreva, design critic, co-founder of Design lecture

Maria Kravtsov, art historian

Victoria Kudryavtseva, architect

Fedor Lavrentiev, director

Olga Lebedeva, leading architect at Wowhaus

Irina Mak, art critic, journalist

Lyudmila Malkis, creative director of ARCHiPEOPLE, General Director of “Communicative Bureau Malkis”

Anastasia Maslova, architect

Anna Medleva, architect, member of the Union of Architects of Russia, laureate and winner of Russian and international competitions

Natalia Melikova, photographer, author of The Constructivist Project

Mikhail Molochnikov, artist

Anna Muravina, decorator, design bureau MUGU Interiors, executive director of AID (Association of Interior Decorators)

Sergei Nikitin, Assistant Professor, Department of Cultural Studies, National Research University – Higher School of Economics, Head of Moskultprog

Elena Olshanskaya, filmmaker, journalist

Igor Palmin, photographer

Yuri Palmin, architectural photographer, teacher at MARSH and the British Higher School of Design

Maria Panova, architect

Boris Pasternak, certified expert of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, Deputy Chairman of the Scientific and Methodological Council for Cultural Heritage at the Department of Cultural Heritage of Moscow, the chief architect of the Center for Urban Research

Alexey Petukhov, art critic, senior fellow at the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts

Maria Podyapolskaya, architectural historian, tour guide

Anna Proshkuratova, architect

Grigory Revzin, art historian, architecture critic, professor at the Higher School of Urbanism at National Research University – Higher School of Economics

Anna Rodionova, architect

Evgeny Romanov, architect

Tatiana Romanova, architect

Denis Romodin, local historian, secretary of the Moscow branch of Docomomo Russia

Edward Rusenko, Wowhaus, artist

Natalia Samover, historian

Vladimir Sedov, Doctor of Arts, Professor, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Alexandra Selivanova, Senior Researcher at the Scientific-Research Institute of the Theory and History of Architecture and Urban Planning, curator of the Museum of Moscow Lectures

Evgeniya Sidorova, architect

Tatiana Skibo, architect

Olga Soldatov, architect, artist, designer

Evgenia Stakhanova, cultural specialist, co-author of Discover Moscow

Yulia Tarabarina, art historian, journalist

Nikita Tokarev, member of the Union of Moscow Architects, Director of MARSH

Natalia Tolstaya, senior fellow at the Moscow Center of Museum Development, member of the Presidium of ICOM Russia

Natalia Troskina, art historian, member of the Moscow branch of ICOMOS

Maria Troshina, art historian, editor in chief of Project International

Valentina Fedotova, architect-restorer

Bella Filatova, architect

Olga Khokhlova, architect

Marina Khrustaleva, architectural historian, member of the Coordinating Council of the Public Movement Archnadzor

Alexandra Chertkova, architect

Tatiana Efrussi, art historian, researcher at the Museum of the Moscow Architectural Institute

Alexander Yakut, artist, curator, gallery owner, architect

Marina Yarmarkina, architect

Posted in news, Under Threat, Words | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ДОМ МЕЛЬНИКОВА: ОТКРЫТОЕ ПИСЬМО

Melnikov House Дом Мельникова

«С тревогой и изумлением»
ДОМ МЕЛЬНИКОВА: ОТКРЫТОЕ ПИСЬМО

Letter originally published on Colta.ru

можно подписать письмо ЗДЕСЬ

Министру культуры Российской Федерации
В.Р. Мединскому
Советнику президента РФ по культуре
В.И. Толстому
Москва, 15 сентября 2014 г.
Уважаемый Владимир Ростиславович!
Уважаемый Владимир Ильич!
Мы, члены профессионального архитектурного и музейного сообщества России, искусствоведы и историки архитектуры, считаем несовместимыми со статусом и миссией учреждения культуры действия Музея архитектуры им. А.В. Щусева, сотрудники которого 13 августа 2014 года вторглись в дом-мастерскую всемирно известного русского архитектора Константина Мельникова, памятник архитектуры федерального значения. Не дожидаясь окончательного исполнения судебного решения о полном переходе дома в собственность государства для создания на его базе филиала Музея архитектуры, вывода дома из жилфонда, разрешения конфликтной ситуации с наследниками архитектора, сотрудники музея проникли в дом, воспользовавшись отсутствием законно проживающей там Е.В. Каринской — внучки великого архитектора, исполнительницы завещания В.К. Мельникова, тем самым нарушив принцип неприкосновенности жилища. Дальнейшие действия Музея архитектуры — смену замков на доме, установку круглосуточной охраны дома ЧОО (частной охранной организацией) с собаками, регулярные обходы помещений, запрет на посещение Е.В. Каринской родными и ограничение доступа к ней даже врачей, принудительное проведение описи мемориальных предметов вперемешку с личными вещами — мы считаем недопустимыми.
Считаем, что на базе Дома Мельникова должен открыться государственный музей согласно завещанию В.К. Мельникова, однако, вне всякого сомнения, ни один музей не может создаваться на основании сомнительных в правовом отношении действий, прямого насилия, а также спешки. В планах Музея архитектуры им. А.В. Щусева значится скорейшее открытие дома для посетителей (в ноябре 2014 г.), хотя это нельзя делать до проведения научной реставрации. Без реставрации дом может погибнуть в короткие сроки; такая позиция ГМА им. Щусева противоречит основной цели создания Музея Мельниковых — сохранению уникального здания.
Вследствие того что Музей архитектуры им. А.В. Щусева несет сейчас серьезные репутационные потери и тем самым уничтожает репутацию будущего Музея К.С. и В.К. Мельниковых, а также из-за того, что руководство музея оказалось неспособным к мирному завершению сложного наследственного дела и ведению переговоров (для чего было многое сделано в предыдущие годы прежним директором Музея архитектуры Д.А. Саркисяном и архитектурным сообществом), считаем необходимым в кратчайшие сроки:
1) Приостановить любые действия в Доме Мельникова, за исключением неотложных мер по консервации памятника; убрать ЧОО. Оценить с правовой точки зрения действия Музея архитектуры им. А.В. Щусева и всех участников конфликта, вынести соответствующие кадровые решения.
2) Собрать согласительную комиссию с участием юристов, представляющих стороны конфликта, и музейных экспертов для выработки компромиссного поэтапного плана создания Музея К.С. и В.К. Мельниковых.
3) Создать Экспертный совет, куда должны войти специалисты по архитектуре ХХ века, реставраторы, музейные эксперты и проектировщики, которые оценят концепцию музея и смогут внести в нее коррективы исходя из сложившейся ситуации.
Дом Мельникова — всемирное достояние; за ситуацией вокруг памятника с тревогой и изумлением сейчас наблюдает все архитектурное сообщество. Просим вас проследить за мирным урегулированием конфликта, сохранив тем самым культурное наследие страны и репутацию учреждений культуры и архитектурного сообщества в России.
С уважением,
Евгений Асс, архитектор, художник, ректор архитектурной школы МАРШ
Андрей Баталов, доктор искусствоведения, профессор, заслуженный деятель искусств РФ, член президиума научно-методического совета по культурному наследию при Министерстве культуры РФ
Александр Бродский, архитектор, художник
Анна Броновицкая, кандидат искусствоведения, доцент МАРХИ, член секции по наследию советского периода Федерального научно-методического совета по наследию
Николай Васильев, искусствовед, генеральный секретарь Docomomo-Россия
Евгения Гершкович, искусствовед, журналист
Юрий Григорян, архитектор
Мария Гулида, архитектор
Александра Данилова, искусствовед, куратор, заместитель заведующего отделом искусства XIX—XX веков ГМИИ имени А.С. Пушкина
Наталья Душкина, профессор МАРХИ, член-основатель Международного научного комитета ICOMOS по наследию ХХ века
Валентин Дьяконов, критик, куратор, обозреватель ИД «Коммерсантъ»
Егор Егорычев, архитектор
Юлия Зинкевич, генеральный директор агентства «Правила общения»
Анастасия Измакова, архитектор
Ольга Казакова, кандидат искусствоведения, старший научный сотрудник НИИ теории и истории архитектуры и градостроительства
Олег Карлсон, архитектор «АСБ Карлсон и К»
Анна Карнеева, архитектор
Мария Качалова, архитектор
Евгения Кикодзе, искусствовед, куратор Музея Москвы
Наталья Копелянская, музеолог, эксперт творческой группы «Музейные решения»
Ольга Косырева, дизайн-критик, сооснователь Дизайн-лектория
Мария Кравцова, историк искусства
Виктория Кудрявцева, архитектор
Федор Лаврентьев, режиссер
Ольга Лебедева, ведущий архитектор «Ваухауса»;
Ирина Мак, искусствовед, журналист
Людмила Малкис, творческий директор ARCHiPEOPLE, генеральный директор ООО «Коммуникативное бюро Малкис»
Анастасия Маслова, архитектор
Анна Медлева, архитектор, член Союза архитекторов России, лауреат и дипломант российских и международных конкурсов
Наталья Меликова, фотограф, автор проекта The Constructivist Project
Михаил Молочников, художник
Анна Муравина, декоратор, дизайн-бюро MUGU Interiors, исполнительный директор ОДИ (Объединения декораторов интерьера)
Сергей Никитин, доцент факультета культурологии НИУ ВШЭ, руководитель Москультпрога
Елена Ольшанская, кинематографист, журналист
Игорь Пальмин, фотограф
Юрий Пальмин, архитектурный фотограф, преподаватель МАРШ и Британской высшей школы дизайна
Мария Панова, архитектор
Борис Пастернак, аттестованный эксперт Министерства культуры РФ, заместитель председателя научно-методического совета по культурному наследию при Мосгорнаследии, главный архитектор Центра градостроительных исследований
Алексей Петухов, искусствовед, старший научный сотрудник ГМИИ им. А.С. Пушкина
Мария Подъяпольская, историк архитектуры, экскурсовод
Анна Прошкуратова, архитектор
Григорий Ревзин, искусствовед, архитектурный критик, профессор Высшей школы урбанистики НИУ ВШЭ
Анна Родионова, архитектор
Евгений Романов, архитектор
Татьяна Романова, архитектор
Денис Ромодин, краевед, секретарь Московского отделения Docomomo-Россия
Эдуард Русенко, ГАП ООО «Ваухаус», художник
Наталья Самовер, историк
Владимир Седов, доктор искусствоведения, профессор, член-корреспондент РАН
Александра Селиванова, с.н.с. НИИ теории и истории архитектуры и градостроительства, куратор Лектория Музея Москвы
Евгения Сидорова, архитектор
Татьяна Скибо, архитектор
Ольга Солдатова, архитектор, художник, дизайнер
Евгения Стаханова, культуролог, соавтор проекта «Узнай Москву»
Юлия Тарабарина, историк искусства, журналист
Никита Токарев, член правления Союза московских архитекторов, директор МАРШ
Наталья Толстая, старший научный сотрудник Московского центра музейного развития, член президиума ICOM России
Наталья Троскина, искусствовед, член Московского отделения ICOMOS
Мария Трошина, искусствовед, главный редактор журнала «Проект International»
Валентина Федотова, архитектор-реставратор
Белла Филатова, архитектор
Ольга Хохлова, архитектор
Марина Хрусталева, историк архитектуры, член координационного совета Общественного движения «Архнадзор»
Александра Черткова, архитектор
Татьяна Эфрусси, искусствовед, научный сотрудник Музея МАРХИ
Александр Якут, художник, куратор, галерист, архитектор
Марина Ярмаркина, архитектор
Posted in news, Under Threat, Words | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Modernist: House-studio of Konstantin Melnikov

Published in THE MODERNIST #11: DOMESTIC, July 2014

melnikovhouse_themodernist

House-studio of Konstantin Melnikov,
1927-1929

Natalia Melikova

On a small side street in the busy centre of Moscow, stands a peculiar looking white cylindrical house. Adding to its unusual appearance are numerous hexagonal windows making the house look like a round honeycomb. On the front facade the inscription reads, “Konstantin Melnikov – architect.” It would be fitting to add, “family man”.

Melnikov House The Modernist Magazine, #11 - Domestic

In 1917, when Konstantin Melnikov received his diploma in architecture, he was already married with two children. The international success of his Soviet pavilion at the Paris Exposition of Modern Decorative and Industrial Art in 1925 put him in good favor back home in Moscow. Long hoping to build his own dwelling that combines his two passions, architecture and family, he was given a plot of land to realize his dream, and began the construction of his house-studio at 10 Krivoarbatsky Lane in 1927.

Family atmosphere particularly promoted the work of Konstantin, stimulating creativity. Therefore, it was decided to build not just a house, but a house-studio.

In designing his home, Konstantin was the client and customer, and was able to design the house exactly as he wanted. The construction of the house was very much an experiment in both ideology and design; every detail of the house was thought out and designed with purpose, incorporating Melnikov’s outlook on life.

The house is in the shape of two interlocking cylinders, with a front glass facade and over 60 hexagonal windows covering the remaining volume. The ground floor contains all the essentials of everyday living: it begins with the entryway corridor, and then going left to right, the dining room, kitchen, bathroom, two children’s rooms, a dressing room and a study for his wife.

Going up to the second floor, the living room is on the left and the family bedroom on the right. The 50 square meters’ worth of living room has ceilings of 4.85 meters high, and the large floor-to-ceiling window that makes up the front facade provides ample light for this spacious area.

Melnikov was a firm believer in the importance of sleep, so particular attention was paid to the space he created for where his family would rest. Everything in the bedroom is “soft” – the light from a row of hexagonal windows, the comforting honey-yellow color of the walls and ceiling, the rounded corners of the walls and window openings. The result makes for an ideal environment for sleep.

Melnikov House The Modernist Magazine, #11 - Domestic

Leaving the family portion of the house by going further up the spiral staircase to the third floor, the place of work is located. Also 50 square meters like the living room, the studio feels even more spacious due to the airy atmosphere created by the 38 hexagonal windows that are arranged from floor to ceiling. Melnikov worked in this area and later so did his son Viktor, who was a painter. From a small mezzanine balcony, there is access to the roof terrace, used for enjoying some tea or sunbathing in the summer.

The Melnikov House is striking in its space-volume composition, the many new plastic and color decisions of the interior, layout, design, functional discoveries and inventions and in its dissimilarity from any other building in the world. But, oddly enough, it is very cozy and comfortable. The house has a unique atmosphere and energy. Paintings by Konstantin and Viktor, father and son, architect and artist, still hang on the walls. And it feels as if the house still “breathes” art.

Since 1929 when the house was completed, it has attracted much attention and continues to draw curious visitors to its doorstep. To this day, the Melnikov House remains a family home. Konstantin Melnikov’s granddaughter, Ekaterina Karinskaya, currently lives there, fighting to ensure that the house is taken care of and becomes a proper museum as was wished by her family.

Melnikov House The Modernist Magazine, #11 - Domestic

Used as reference for this article: Egorychev, Egor. (2013). The Melnikov’s House: Konstantin and Viktor, Moskva Kotory Net.
Photos © Natalia Melikova

Reproduced from the printed version in

THE MODERNIST #11: DOMESTIC

Posted in Photos, Words | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jean-Louis Cohen Comments on Narkomfin

Jean-Louis Cohen comments on the current situation surrounding the Narkomfin building

Жан-Луи Коэн комментирует текущую ситуацию вокруг дома Наркомфина

IMAG0715
See photos of the renovation works going on inside the Narkomfin building in the past several months HERE.

Posted in Under Threat, Videos | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Narkomfin’s new life

(Translation from original article in Афиша-Город + photos/comments by Natalia Melikova in response)

“Guys, relax, you will not control us”: Narkomfin’s new life

Apartments in the Narkomfin building will be bought by friends of the owner, instead of preparing borscht will need to go to Coffeemania, and better to rebuild Shukhov Tower in New Moscow: “Gorod” talked with Alexander Senatorov, head of Kopernik, about the future of monument buildings.

IMG_2248

Narkomfin is well on the way to its “new life”… – photo: April 11, 2014

In 2007, when you were involved with the Narkomfin building, then you wanted to do a boutique hotel, and now what will be there?

In the new concept we are keeping the function of Mosei Ginzburg’s original design. The residential block will remain residential, private apartments will be there. The communal block will remain as a public space: there, where the dining room was — will be a restaurant; where the kindergarten was planned — will be a children’s play center. And of course, we will return the original appearance to the building, which it lost because the first floor was built up. In addition, practical people attached garages and an upper floor to the communal block, and the joined windows they divided into normal windows — well, so that they opened. Plus the façade was badly damaged, which was made of the so-called kamyshit (cane fiber) — the last syllable of the word, “shit,” best describes this material.

One can say that kamyshit (cane fiber) was innovative for its time, but not a durable material.

Well, how to explain to you in a literary way? Eighty years ago out of shit they tried to sculpt something. We don’t have any delusions that we will be able to a large extent restore the facade out of the original material. But in terms of the exterior, the new facade will look like the same. In reference to heritage discourse – the one who does not sacrifice the small things, loses everything. The key value of the building is in its unique layout designs – this we will keep. But kamyshit will become history.

In 2007, your team of experts, including the architect Ginzburg’s grandson, prepared a restoration project. It was approved by Mosgornaslediya. Why did you decide to change the design and bring in another architect?

We rejected the idea of doing a boutique hotel because it is not very convenient to do it here. These apartments are good for living, but absurd as hotel rooms. Such large apartment would have cost about $1500-2000 a day for the hotel to be profitable. Nobody will pay that kind of money — not to mention the fact that we do not comply with any standards for people with disabilities, simply in each apartment there are stairs. Since we started this project, we went through a crisis, we went through a period of fruitful cooperation with the red banner Alfa-Bank (Senatorov was in litigation with the bank for several years. — editor’s note) — so we have had enough time to understand ourselves, the building, and what is worth doing here.

The current architect of the project is Nikolai Pereslegin, Advisor to the Head of Mosgornaslediya. That is, the contractor and controlling body are closely related. Will there be, as demanded by activists and historians of architecture, any independent monitoring expert committee?

The most important regulators of this project — it is our common sense and conscience. There should be one person who makes the decisions. That will be me.

(article from April 15, 2014:
Nikolai Pereslegin on saving the Narkomfin building / Николай Переслегин о спасении здания Наркомфина

“I became aware of the work currently being carried out at Narkomfin. I am fundamentally opposed. It is illegal. As far as I know, the work being carried out has already been stopped by an inspection by Mosgornaslediye.

It is my deep conviction that the potential restoration project should be as much as possible open, and public. It is very important to involve in the process of restoration, both professionals and the public. After all, Narkomfin is more than just a building. It is an icon of its time, a whole world for many people. Strange that this is not remembered.”
)

It is wonderful when there is good will and conscience. But even better when there is a system that can regulate itself.

In our country, there is no system. Institutionalism — this is not about our country. And what is the fright here that during the restoration of Narkomfin we need to build some kind of system that, you know, would protect this great monument from the investor, who already has invested in it many years of his life, and several million dollars of his money? A couple of months ago we met with this concerned public. People came, in varying degrees of aggression, asked questions and got answers to all of them. I showed them the concept and described everything in detail. But they have already embarked on a warpath, and some time later sent a letter with the question: “How are we going to control you?” Guys, relax, you will not control us in any way. And without your public control we have rather formal procedures with Mosgornaslediya. No one in our country has experience with the restoration of constructivism. And in the world, those who made this era are only maybe a couple of people. The basis of success is my common sense and my experience. I built a lot in Moscow. I understand how to solve problems that no one has yet solved.

05.05.2014_ДКН-16-29-357_4-3_Ожерельев_М.В

Part of the “formal procedures” with Mosgornasledie – a letter from May 5, 2014 saying:
“Design documentation for review and approval has not been received by Mosgornaslediye, the permission to undertake works and any conclusions about the acceptability of the conversion of the interior and [or] nonresidential redevelopments has not been issued.”

From The Moscow Times article on April 13, 2014,
Constructivist Utopia Narkomfin Endangered by Renovation Project

“Senatorov says that he will welcome any outside help with the project, but eventually, all must go ahead as planned. ‘I am ready to accept any help if they want to help us,’ he said. ‘If you want to help us with advice, with money, with work, everything — everyone who wants to help, help! But we are owners, and we have to do the restoration. We can’t wait to see whether somebody will help us but if somebody wants to help us we are willing to accept it,’ said Senatorov.”

Preservationists complain that already old radiators have been illegally removed and windows are being changed to glazing (стеклопакеты).

I especially like this claim: “Ah! You are sawing off radiators!” So what? Well it’s a radiator. Let’s without fanfare and without this squeaking: “There’s no beer!” It can be said calmer — simply, there’s no beer. What is the value of engineering equipment, which represents old stinking sewer pipes? We need to preserve the layout. As a result of the restoration we will be able to keep most of the materials. Old pipes have no value.

Narkomfin_original_radiators

“Old pipes with no value” – archival photo

And what about the windows?

Everyone already has come to photograph our new windows to post it on social networks, and to raise a tantrum. Well hello, guys, I did say at the meeting that this is a temporary solution. The result will be double glazing as before, but one of the layers will be glazing (стеклопакет). On the outside everything will look like as it did before, but in function we will get a quality noiseless glazing.

Narkomfin, new windows, west facade

New windows – western facade

Narkomfin original windows

Original windows intact – April 2014

For expensive housing an elevator is needed. And there were only two stairwells. You are not allowed to change the layout. What will you do about this?

We will carefully incorporate the elevators into the stairwells. This is the only change of layout that we are going forward with. Currently there is an ugly elevator adjoined to the far stairwell — we will remove it. But we cannot do without any elevator.

Narkomfin stairwell with elevator

March 17, 2014

Narkomfin stairwell with elevator

April 1, 2014

In reality, Narkomfin is a residential project. It is a Soviet utopian experiment on people, who were to live in cells with minimal household functions. From the point of view of modern man, a disturbing experiment. How can we reconcile our understanding of individual comfort with a careful restoration? How can a 30s dormitory be converted into luxury?

You know, perceptions change: what seems to be comfortable today will cease to be comfortable tomorrow. And then at some point, everything turns back — this is a cyclical process. And surprisingly, the housing that was invented in the 30s under the inhuman arrangement of society and daily life, today uncomfortable housing is becoming very practical. Ginzburg saw it the same way — they are all communists, they have a common table, laundry, in the morning they are supposed to go into these long corridors and do exercises there, and then go together to the cafeteria. But this was his idea of how life should be constructed, and in Soviet times it was uncomfortable. And people lived in these apartments without much pleasure. But today, the level of the development of services has reached such a state that to live in this format suddenly has become comfortable. Today this building more than meets the current ways of society. These city apartments present a small, but very hip in its architecture, two-level space. Ideal for one or two people. There are all services here — parking, restaurant, laundry and a recreation area on the roof. Yes, there is a small kitchen. Well, why does modern man need a big one — to boil a kettle and reheat pizza? In the communal block we will build a restaurant, presumably we will invite our friendly Coffeemania. Step out to eat or order home delivery. What else is needed? To cook borscht, to use a frying pan? Well it’s clear, the one who wants to cook borscht, will not get an apartment here.

And who are the people who will get [an apartment]?

Here there will be 42 apartments. Sales will be closed — a determined set of people on a list will be offered to buy them. Six months ago we moved here, and I have already brought various friends here. And many people come and say, “Awesome! Leave me one.” There are enough people like these, I have a large circle of friends. We do not have the idea to sell it more expensively, it is more important for us to restore the idea of communal housing in the modern sense. It will be a home for a determined set of people, pleasant to us.

What will happen to the roof?

Ginzburg originally planned to build a house with a flat roof. But after the project was already completed, the People’s Commissar of Finance Milutin said: “Where will I live?” Ginzburg threw up his hands in the air, and Milutin gestured: “Build it!” Besides, he was fond of architecture, which was at that time a quite fashionable pastime. So he himself designed the penthouse — a kind of button on the roof. With the Commissar one cannot really argue, so in front of it Ginzburg designed five more small one room apartments on the roof — to visually smooth out this bump. Out of these, we will create a mini-hotel with five rooms. We are thinking about organizing some kind of social life, about bringing in different interesting lecturers, to conduct exhibitions on the rooftop. Therefore, a hotel will come in handy, so that our guests could always stay there.

IMG_2308

IMG_2219

PHOTOS from April 11, 2014 of the roof and penthouse renovation

How much you have spent and how much more will you spend on this story? And how much will you potentially earn?

We have already spent about $18 million and plan to spend another $10-12 million plan to purchase the remaining areas and on restoration. We will sell the apartments and all public spaces will remain in our property to rent out for different services. This will be enough to make back everything.

View the apartments & prices: http://www.adwill.ru/offers/moskva/novinskiy-bulvar-25-str-1

Narkomfin, K apt renovation

one of the larger K apartments undergoing renovation – photo: April 22, 2014

Do you still need to buy up a lot?

In the building there are four apartments left with former tenants. Plus 1,300 meters belong to Moscow. Actually, out of it more than half needs to be destroyed — this is the illegally added on first floor and all sorts of additions in the utility block. If Moscow had removed all that is subject to demolition, then in fact, nothing would be left to it in the building. But it will not do this for anything. Can you imagine the official, who was entrusted with 1,300 meters in the building, and he went and destroyed half? Well he’s the enemy, and he should be shot. So we will buy up a lot and then break it — we are private owners, we can allow ourselves to do this.

What is the timeframe?

Timeframe depends on how quickly we will go through all the stages of negotiating the new concept. We hope to go through this procedure within a year and a half. And for the work itself much time is not needed — a year is enough.

How do you feel about what is going on with the monuments of constructivism in Moscow? For example, what do you think about the Shukhov Tower?

The Melnikova Research and Design Institute of Metal Construction, the former “Shukhov Workshop” — belongs to us. This is the main expert in the matter of what you can do with the tower. And anything can be done — it all depends on political will. We do not have established conceptions in our culture of what is actually valuable in architectural monuments. There is, for example, the Dutch system of preservation — they preserve all the materials and structures. But the British have a more pragmatic and utilitarian view of life. To them, it is the human idea and the design that is valuable: “A man thought up that this looked like this and stands like this? Very well then, let’s demolish all this trash and with new technologies we will build it in the same way.” We haven’t yet defined what to regard as valuable — we jump from one extreme to another.

And what do you personally think it’s worth doing with the tower?

Personally I like most of all the concept that we came up with. It may sound harsh and unpleasant. But in the current state of the tower to preserve it in the same place is impossible. The Ministry of Communications does not need it there. Now begins the endless correspondence — the Ministry of Culture will write: “Restore it!” And the Ministry of Communications will respond: “We have no money”; — “Restore it!”, “We have no money,” … And like this it will crash down. Metal rivets are already flying from it. At the same time the lowest estimates to restore it at the same place are 400 million rubles. And to build a new, exactly identical one — 80 million. Feel the difference.

Well, in addition to the high cost there are such aspects as authenticity and the memory of the place.

These things have value, but not for the Shukhov Tower, because it is a symbol of engineering. This is not architecture. I understand — the Eiffel Tower, Champ de Mars, where all stroll. And what is here? It is not even visible from most places. It can be relocated to any other place. As for authenticity, in its present state with the restoration in place, for 400 million rubles under the most optimistic estimates 25% of the materials can be kept. And what kind of historical authenticity can one say about this? We propose a radical design, a bit rowdy. After all the initial project of the Shukhov Tower was supposed to be much higher — 350 meters high, that is the highest at that time. But during the Civil War it worked out to make it only 148 meters. And that’s what we are proposing: we cut it down, all the old, authentic material melted, add to it new metal, and then from this mixture in a new location build a tower in its initial 350-meter form. In this case its function of a transmitter is returned to it. I would have it built in New Moscow so that the tower became an attraction and a symbol — a combination of old and new. In the end, something is lost, but something is found. Well, this old tower is lost at its former place — on the plus side a new, even better one appears — a tall, beautiful tower, which had never been built before.

Shukhov Tower

“a new tower is better than this (^above pictured) old one”

There is a feeling that monuments of constructivism here are particularly unlucky. They are adored by foreign art historians and architects, but here they are in a wildly derelict state and not appreciated. Home come?

Because in the 1930s they experimented and built out of shit. And current statesmen do not understand the charms of these strange angular shapes. And the fact that out of this emerged all of modern and functional design, such as Ikea — that they do not care about: “And where are the soft sofas, where’s the gold plating?” This judgment call is associated with the level of education and culture. I have a funny story about a real monument of architecture, which is seen out of our window — Novinsky Passage. At the opening ceremony Mayor Luzhkov in his flashy style commented on the neighborhood: “What a joy that in our city such wonderful, new shopping centers are appearing — not such junk” — pointing in the direction of Narkomfin. Because — well, that building is old, not a palace, who needs it? Neither lions nor reliefs for you. Minimalism — this is generally a philosophy that is quite difficult to understand.

Already eight years that you have been involved with this building. Have you regretted that you got involved in this story?

Of course I regretted, and not once. At some point you think: “Dang, I have put in there so much money, and it would have come in so handy now.” But the money is gone, and so there’s nothing to regret — moving on. I just love this house. It has a fantastic force of energy.

………………………………………………………………
Check out the response to this interview:

“To treat Narkomfin as his own dacha is presumptuous”: response to Senatorov

The interview with Alexander Senatorov about the future of Narkomfin caused a strong reaction in the professional community. Former representative of the Narkomfin Foundation and chief editor of Moscow Heritage, Yana Mirontseva told Gorod what the “concerned public” wants from Senatorov.

(Full translation of the response in progress)
………………………………………………………………
RECENT ARTICLES ABOUT NARKOMFIN:

1.07.2014
«Зарядочка — а потом в столовую»
Глава группы «Коперник» Александр Сенаторов — о том, кто и как будет жить в Доме Наркомфина после реставрации

20.06.2014
Восстановление дома Наркомфина начнется в обозримом будущем

29.05.2014
Дом Наркомфина — варварское освоение вместо реставрации

12.05.2014
Дому Наркомфина требуется полноценная реставрация, а не косметический ремонт

23.04.2014
Police Halt ‘Illegal’ Renovations in Narkomfin

18.04.2014
Ремонтные работы в доме Наркомфина продолжаются несмотря на заявление о том, что они остановлены

17.04.2014
Власти Москвы пресекли незаконные строительные работы в Доме Наркомфина

15.04.2014
Николай Переслегин о спасении здания Наркомфина

14.04.2014
В доме Наркомфина продолжается незаконный и разрушительный ремонт

13.04.2014
Constructivist Utopia Narkomfin Endangered by Renovation Project

31.03.2014
Александр Сенаторов вернулся в конструктивизм
“Коперник” обновил проект восстановления дома Наркомфина

->Collection of news articles about Narkomfin starting from 2000

Posted in Photos, Under Threat, Words | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Melnikov House & Construction Site

Melnikov House - bedroom2014
^Bedroom inside the Melnikov House, photographed May 15, 2014.

Arbat 39-41 construction site<br />
June 5, 2014
^Construction site of a multi-functional complex at Arbat 39-41, photographed June 5, 2014.

What’s the big deal about the neighboring construction site some 30 meters away from the Melnikov House? Read about it here:

In May 2013, the Shchusev State Museum of Architecture wrote to Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin:

Currently on the site at the address: Moscow, Arbat St., 39, bldgs 1 and 2, and 41, bldgs 1 and 2, the preparatory works are in progress to start excavation work on the pit for underground parking. The construction of this multi-functional complex are the following organizations:
Customer JSC “Trust OIL” (tel: 8-495-730-35-25);
Project Organization, LLC “Senab Project” (tel. 8-495-650-20-29);
Technical Customer “SKT PRAM” (tel: 8-499-255-33-65);
General Contractor Company “StroyMontazhTsentr-2000″ (tel. 8-495-995-51-54).

Given the existence of shifting karst-suffusion of soil in the plot where the Melnikov House is located, it is necessary to take urgent action to preserve the cultural heritage of the “House and Studio of architect K. S. Melnikov,” whose condition in recent months has deteriorated sharply.

In order to save a unique monument of history and culture ‘House and Studio of architect K. S. Melnikov’ we ask you, dear Sergei Semenovich, to immediately stop all construction work in the area of the protected zone of the Melnikov House and to create an independent group of experts to determine the current state of the monument and assess the negative impact of the work in the area of the protected zone on the house.

Read the letter in its entirety here.

As the photo from June 5 shows, a year after the appeal to the Moscow Mayor,
CONSTRUCTION HAS NOT STOPPED.

For comparison, here’s what the construction site looked like in July 2013:

WHY are the karsts that were found to be dangerous to the Melnikov House in the 2006 geophysical survey conducted by Education and Science Ministry of the Russian Federation, Moscow State Construction University, which can be read in its entirety here, no longer a threat?

24. Due to the design solution for the building surveyed never providing for its functioning at possible emergency loads in the high geological risk area, any construction in the vicinity of the building surveyed, including the construction in the plot adjoining the site from the Arbat Street side of the multipurpose shopping mall planned by Trust-oil Company can provoke intensification of the soil settlement and the surface caving which will be an unfavorable and inadmissible factor for Architect Melnikov’s house preservation. In addition, it should be noted that the construction of the multipurpose shopping mall with extensive underground structures is planned for the karst-prone area where the Carboniferous age primary deposits subside sharply. Development of subterranean spaces in such areas is inadmissible due to hazard of subterranean slides occurring in the overlying mass of water-saturated sand Quaternary deposits.
(last item listed in the findings of the 2006 geophysical survey)

More about the fight for the Melnikov House here.

Posted in Photos, Under Threat, Videos, Words | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

PHOTOS: Shukhov Tower Rally

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_01
PHOTOS from The Constructivist Project on Instagram

29.05.2014 “On Presnya a rally was held in defense of the 100-year-old Shukhov radio tower
Young Muscovites demand to save a masterpiece of the Russian avant-garde for the capital”

http://www.mk.ru/moscow/2014/05/29/na-presne-proshel-miting-v-zashhitu-100letnejj-shuhovskojj-radiobashni.html

29.05.2014 “Rally in defense of the Shukhov Tower”
http://yopolis.ru/post/37551

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_02

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_03

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_04

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_05

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_06

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_07

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_08

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_09

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_10

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_11

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_12

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_13

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_14

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_15

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_16

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_17

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_18

Shukhov_Tower_Rally_19

Posted in Events, Photos, Under Threat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Shukhov Tower – May 29 RALLY

may29_shukhovtower_rally
(photo from the rally’s Facebook event)

Архнадзор – Шуховская башня: открытое письмо Д.Медведеву
(Archnadzor – Shukhov Tower: open letter to D. Medvedev)

28.05.2014 “Архнадзор” попросил Медведева запретить демонтаж и перенос Шуховской башни
http://www.interfax.ru/moscow/378363

28.05.2014 В Москве пройдет митинг в защиту Шуховской башни
http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=1627587&cid=7

28.05.2014 «Архнадзор» просит Медведева защитить Шуховскую башню от сноса
http://www.vedomosti.ru/realty/news/27066981/arhnadzor-prosit-medvedeva-zaschitit-shuhovskuyu-bashnyu-ot

27.05.2014 Митинг в защиту Шуховской башни
http://moscowarch.ru/news/miting-v-zashhitu-shuhovskoy-bashni

23.05.2014 Шаболовская башня в шаге от уничтожения, митинг в ее защиту – 29 мая
http://archi.ru/russia/55154/shabolovskaya-bashnya-v-shage-ot-unichtozheniya

Posted in Events, news, Under Threat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Дом Наркомфина – ответ от ДКН

05.05.2014_ДКН-16-29-357_4-3_Ожерельев_М.В

Posted in news, Photos, Under Threat, Words | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment