Perm, From Ideology to Typology

PermFROM IDEOLOGY TO REALITY

Under the supervision of:

Professor Kees Christiaanse, ETH ZrichProfessor Jacques Lvy, EPF LausanneProfessor Jacques Lucan, EPF LausanneProfessor Laurent Stalder, ETH ZrichBatrice Ferrari, EPF LausanneChristian Salewski, ETH Zrich

ETH Zrich / EPF Lausanne

January 2009

THEORETICAL PART OF THE MASTER IN ARCHITECTURE

Oscar BusonGuillaume de Morsier

090108_PERM COMPLETE.indd 3 09/01/2009 12:01:33

44


55

AcknowledgementsIntroduction

1. Situation Perm 1.1 Society 1.2 Economy

2. Planned Perm 2.1 Actors 2.2 Property 2.3 Policies 2.4 Microrayon 2.5 Housing

3. Generic Perm 3.1 From Traditional to City Centre 3.2 Constructivism 3.3 Socialist Realism 3.4. Khruschovkas 3.5 Improved Floor Plans 3.6 Reczcling

4. Specifi c Perm 4.1 Perm Multilayer 4.2 Collision Strips 4.3 Typology

5. Strategy 5.1 Strip Strategy 5.2 Islands

Bibliography

79

131523

293137414753

57597179 95

105115

129131147171

173175183

189

Contents


66


77

We would like to thank a number of people who supported us in a professional as in a human way during these six months of research.

Professor Kees Christiaanse for allowing us to realise a work that we expected so much. Masha Pidodnia, Olaf Gerson, Konstantin Kasstrianakis, and all the Team of KCAP for their help during our times spent in Rotterdam. Konstantin Kursilev and the team of Perm 2020 for their help during our stay in Perm. Tatiana Gulyaeva, Nadia Poponina, Swetlana Emeljanova Natalia Orisovia, Angelika Kazanbaeva and Stanislas Mekhonoshin for making our Russian experience more easy and friendly. Th e professors of the Perm State University and their students who invited us in their classes to talk about their city. Sergei Shamarin for welcoming us in his offi ce. And Carla Smyth who almost collapsed in the task of making our words more understandables.


88


99

Perm is a Russian city that was designed as every other Russian city. From its foundation, three centuries ago, until today, the city has been centrally planned in order to match the ambitious objectives of this powerful country. Walking through Perm is a journey into a catalogue of Russian architecture; from the fi rst standardized wooden houses built under Peter I to the massive panel housing buildings of the Brezhnev era. Th e whole city speckled with typical landmarks, such as a neo-classical opera house, a theatre, some palaces of culture and several churches. A few urban typologies dominate the city, each of them refl ecting the ideology of their time and manifesting the idea of generic. Fascinated by these pervasive typologies being the frame of the city, and at the same time the collapsing shelters of the whole Russian population, we started our research on the characteristics and the foundation of these urban concepts. Apparently very simple, these principles show their limits in Perm, where parts of the city cannot be claimed as belonging to a particular generic typology. Th ese failures of the system, located in key places, reveal another part of Perm. Left over, invisible to the travellers they are characteristic of the city. Noticing at the same time the precarious nature of these places, as well as their potential at a city scale, we have chosen to focus our research precisely on these areas. From the perestroika until now, the Russian population has undergone radical change. Privatisation and the market economy are the most important, having polarised consequences. On one hand, society has rapidly shift ed from a socialist system to a capitalist one, whilst parts of the system, especially urban planning and the building industry, remain in quasi perfect continuity with the pre-perestroika times. Th e project will try to give a rational answer to Perms actual needs, and fi ll the gap left by inadequate provision.

Introduction


1010

URBAN FABRIC

INDUSTRIES

Lukoil

weapon destruction

chemistry

chemistry

paperweaponmachines

fertilisers

wires

aircraftrocket

wires

automatics

militarymachine

panel housing

CentreParkovy

Balatovo

Danilikha

Khrokalheva

Motovilika

Gaiva

AkulovaNalimisha

Vishka

Levsino

Kamsky

Frunze

Golovanovo

Zaozere

Lijadi

Zakamsk

Kurija

GorkySadovi

JubilejniVladimirsky

INDUSTRIES AND SATELLITES WITHIN THE PERM TERRITORY, SCALE 1:200000


1111

URBAN FABRIC

INDUSTRIES

Gorki p.Sadovi

Gorki

Gorki

Balatovo

Parkovi

komsom

olsky avenuesibirskaya

kom. prom

.

Yegoshikha

Danilikha

kommunisti

scheskaya

lenina

lenina

uralsk

aya

lebed

eva

operacity gallery

Ural v.g.

Meshkov

Motovilika

Engine factory

Engine factory

Sputnik

Lukoil

Motovilika

Holy Trinity

Razguliay

Khrokalheva

Jeleznodoroshnij

Vladimirsky.

Molotovs centre

esplanade

Kama

Kama

INDUSTRIES AND SATELLITES WITHIN AND AROUND THE CITY CENTRE, SCALE 1:100000


1212


1313

1. Situation Perm


14

SamaraTolyatti

MoscowYaroslavl

Nizhny Novgorod

St. Petersburg

PermYekaterinburg

Novosibirsk

Barnaul

KrasnoyarskOmsk

Kazan

Chelyabinsk

Rostov SaratovUlyanovsk Izhevsk

VolgogradKraznodar

Voronez

Ufa

Vladivostok

Khabarovsk

Irkutsk

SamaraTolyatti

MoscowYaroslavl

Nizhny Novgorod

St. Petersburg

PermYekaterinburg

Novosibirsk

Barnaul

KrasnoyarskOmsk

Kazan

Chelyabinsk


VolgogradKraznodar

Voronez

Ufa

Vladivostok

Khabarovsk

Irkutsk

SamaraTolyatti

MoscowYaroslavl

Nizhny Novgorod

St. Petersburg

PermYekaterinburg

Novosibirsk

Barnaul

KrasnoyarskOmsk

Kazan

Chelyabinsk


VolgogradKraznodar

Voronez

Ufa

Vladivostok

Khabarovsk

Irkutsk

ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

POPULATION OF THE 25 BIGGEST RUSSIAN CITIES. SOURCE: RUSSIA STATS 2006.

DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS OF THE 25 BIGGEST RUSSIAN CITIES BETWEEN 1989 AND 2006. SOURCE: RUSSIA STATS.

GROWTH

SHRINKING

1 MIO. INHABITANTS

OKRUGS

REPUBLICS

KRAIS

OBLASTS


1515

1.1 Society

POPULATIONPerms population was 1,001,653 in 2002 (last census) and is currently approximately 990,000. Among other Russian cities, Perm, in term of population can be situated in the 3rd row of Russian cities, behind the two metropolises, Moscow and St. Petersburg, and the regional centers such as Nizhniy Novgorod, Yekaterinburg or Novosibirsk. Th e demographic situation of the Perm region is characterized by a constant decrease of population. From the last census of the Soviet Union in 1989 until 2006, the population decreased by 10%. Th is trend is comparable to the Russian average. Since 2005, the growth ratio is still negative but stabilized at a level of -7.1%. Th is population decrease is mainly due to an high death rate and a relatively short live expectancy. In the Perm region, the average life expectancy of men is 56 years, and for women 72 years. In Russia those averages are 59 and 73 years respectively.CITY BIRTHDAY, VIEW OF THE

ESPLANADE, MAY 2008


16

TRANSITIONIn the 1990s Russias economy changed into a market system. Th is has had strong repercussions on society and the development of cities. Th e privatization taking place in 1991 and the lack of job opportunities lead to an increased social polarization. Th is is recognizable by phenomena such as suburbanization, gentrifi cation and homelessness (Andrusz, 2004). In Perm, the decade following the collapse of the iron curtain is marked by the decline of industry. Defense is not a priority anymore in Russia and the military industry, former major source of income of the city is partly privatized and forced to reduce its production. Th e eff ective production of the industry remains a mystery in Perm were citizen oft en dont know what is being manufactured behind walls and fences surrounding the omnipresent factories. To face the crisis, former employees have to fi nd new activities. Th e service sector, almost absent in the soviet city, is the principal being developed. Th is shift in peoples professional activities has spatial repercussions. Housing was planned and organized by industry in order to host the workers and their families. Housing settlements were thus almost always related to one particular industry and located close to it. Now, housing and industry have been privatized and people are no longer located close to their workplace anymore. Society is becoming more mobile and a spatial polarization is also recognizable. A large part of the population commutes every day to the city centre where a major part of their activities such as work, leisure or shopping is concentrated. A small but continually growing part of the population is taking advantage of this privatization. Oft en at the head of infl uent enterprises, this elite has an economic power, but also a political control. At the same time, the number of homeless people is also growing. Rejected in the city outskirts, they are living in abandoned houses or between central heating pipes. An signifi cant number of orphans are also living in the streets, abandoned by their parents and the alcoholism is said to be the major reason. Criminality also remains a problem in Perm where theft s are oft en organized by adults and undertaken by adolescents. Drug consumption is also growing. In isolated parts of the city, syringes can be found everywhere on the streets. Th ey mainly served for injection of barbituric, apparently the most widespread drug. Around drug stores, broken bottles of cheap medical alcohol at ninety percent can also be found in a great number and serve as extreme alcohol consumption.

1800

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

1000000

1100000

1850 1900 1950 2000

DEMOGRAPHIC EVOLUTION OF PERM.


1717


18

TRANSPORTS In Perm, the amount of cars has increased 2,2 times within the last ten years (Perm Administration, 2008). Th is is now the major means of transportation, enabling an signifi cant part of the population to commute from dormitory areas to work in the centre or to leave the noisy and stressful city centre for more spacious and aff ordable fl ats in the city satellites or for cottages with garden in the outskirts, sometimes located in gated communities. Th e car is oft en a need due to the dispersed location of living areas, but it is also a new symbol of social success. As the housing off er and diversity is very poor, the car has become a tool of representation. Th e Porsche Cayenne, the Hummer and the Range Rover have replaced the formerly omnipresent Lada. Public transport is therefore losing its importance, even if still very cheap (one token cost between 9 and 10 rubles). Between 2004 and 2008 the number of passengers per year transported by trams and trolleys has shift ed from 123 million to 6o millions. Th e buses were privatized in 2005 and now more than 110 companies share the market. Only electric transport as trams and trolleys remain property of the city. Th ese companies are buying second hand buses in Europe, mainly in Germany or Switzerland, and it is common to see buses in the street with a route destination like Festplatz or Hauptbahnhof.

GERMAN BUSES OWNED BY PRIVATE TRANSPORT COMPANIES.

UBIQUITOUS ALL TERRAIN CAR.


19

LEISURE AND SHOPPINGBrand new shopping malls are selling goods at equivalent prices to European ones and are thus still reserved to small part of the population. Th ey are located in the city centre, and replace the outdated palaces of culture and open air markets. Th ere, video games salons and fast food restaurants replace workers clubs and the canteen, formerly located between the industry and the housing settlements. Th e shopping malls, oft en open 24/24, provide a wide range of activities, such as shopping, sports, cinemas, night clubs, restaurants and so on. Th ey are housing an increasing range of activities in one place, aseptic and climatised, in rupture with the oft en harsh outdoor environment. Th ey are the place were the youth spends their free time, open air markets and streets being too dirty and cold (PSU, 2008). At the same time, in the old city centre, streets are starting to be gentrifi ed. Cafs and restaurants with thematic interiors, cosy atmospheres and cosmopolitan menus as well as fashion stores from Paris, Milan or London are opening. One of the students favourite places to go is the newly opened caf Coff y Citi, designed in Moroccan style, off ering shishas and latte macchiatos where Fashion TV is diff used on wide screen. Western lifestyle is becoming the reference for a percentage of the population, but the very expensive prices make this reserved to an elite. Goods are still for a large percentage bought at the market were prices are cheaper. Th e biggest one is the central market. Everything can be found there, but it has the reputation of being dangerous and hosting mafi a and is thus not appreciated at all. Th e new malls are seen as the best alternative and even if still not aff ordable are more than welcomed by the population. Th is success gives them the position of pioneers in the citys development. Where they are planned, land becomes attractive, investors start planning procedures in order to buy and price of the land increases.

AVERAGE WAGECHARGES IN A CENTRAL FLAT BIER IN CLUB VETTER HAIR DRESSER CHARGES IN A COTTAGEBIER IN BAR COFFEE CITY OPERA, BALLETKG APPLES IN VIVATSOUP IN NORMAL RESTAURANTBIER IN VIVATCIGARRETSTRAM TICKETBUS TICKET

13000 RUB3000 RUB

500 RUB400 RUB300 RUB150 RUB150 RUB

80 RUB40 RUB40 RUB40 RUB10 RUB

9 RUB


2020


21

JOBSSince the 1998 crisis, the Russian economy has grown dramatically. Th e average GDP growth was about 10%. Wages increased as well, but not at a suffi cient rate to satisfy the needs of the households. Other sources from the State, from home production or from the informal sector, started to contribute an important percentage to household incomes. It is now very common in Russia to combine jobs with independent activities, especially in the service sector (leisure, retail, real estate) and this explains the increasing diff erence between wages and income. In Perm the process took place later than in the rest of the Country but has now reached the national average. Almost 50% of household incomes are now made of sources other than wages (Th e World Bank, 2004).

Monthly income per capita cash

Average wages1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

2000

20.7

12.4

2002 2004 2006

WAGES AND INCOMES EVOLUTION. SOURCE: PERM ADMINISTRATION.

Th ou

sand

of r

uble

s


22

SamaraTolyatti

MoscowYaroslavl

Nizhny Novgorod

St. Petersburg

PermYekaterinburg

Novosibirsk

Barnaul

KrasnoyarskOmsk

Kazan

Chelyabinsk


VolgogradKraznodar

Voronez

Ufa

Vladivostok

Khabarovsk

Irkutsk

SamaraTolyatti

MoscowYaroslavl

Nizhny Novgorod

St. Petersburg

PermYekaterinburg

Novosibirsk

Barnaul

KrasnoyarskOmsk

Kazan

Chelyabinsk


VolgogradKraznodar

Voronez

Ufa

Vladivostok

Khabarovsk

Irkutsk

Caspian See

Black See

White SeeBaltic See

Surgut

Norilsk

Sochi

Nizhnevarlovsk

MoscowFrankfurt

DushanbeBakuYerevan

Yaroslavl

Nizhny Novgorod

St. Petersburg

PermYekaterinburg

NovosibirskKrasnoyarskOmsk

RostovKraznodar

Vladivostok

Khabarovsk

Irkutsk

FOUNDATION OF MAJOR RUSSIAN CITIES

LARGEST CITIES CLOSED DURING THE SOVIET TIMES.

PERM CONNECTIONS BY RAIL, WATER AND AIR.

XVIII

RAIL

BEFORE XVII

WATER

XIX

CLOSED CITIES

XVII

AIR


2323

1.2 Economy

Perm, the main city of the region and administrative centre has an economy based on industry. Its strategic location, close to natural resources of the Ural and to major transportation roads, has always remained the major reason for its development. Its proximity to the Kama River, a tributary of the Volga make it connected to the resources of the region but also to the White Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea for export purposes. Th e Trans-Siberian railway line also links the city to Moscow and St. Petersburg on the West, and Siberia and China on the East.WALLPAINTING IN URALSKAYA STREET

SHOWING URALS NATURAL RESSOURCES


24

Krasnovishersk

Solikamsk

Usolie

AleksanrovskKizel

Gubakha

Gremyachinsk

GornozavodsChusovoy

Lysva

DobryankaIlyinsky

Karagay

Krasnokamsk

Nytva

Okhansk

Osa

B.Sosnova

Ocher

Vereshagino

Siva

YusvaKudymar

Kungur

KishertSuskun

Uinskoe

OktyabrskyChernushka

ElovoBarda

Kueda

Chaikovsky

Kochevo

Kosa

Gainy

Perm

Cherdyn

Beresniki

URAL INDUSTRIALISATIONTh e Ural basin has been exploited since the end of the XVI century for its resources in minerals. About fi ft y elements of the Mendeleyev table could be found in the Ural Mountains (Pavel, 2001) . Th e fi rst important industrial developments took place under Peter I, in the XVIII century, when the region was annexed and new industrial cities were built. Perm was founded in 1723. Copper and steel smelters were installed along the Kama River. In 1863, they were replaced by a canon factory. By the end of the XIX century, the plant was extended and its name changed to JS Company Motovilikhinskiye Zavody which is now still producing military equipment (State Archives of Perm Region, 1998). Moreover, Perm at that time was connected to Yekaterinburg and Nizhny Tagil through the fi rst mining road railway in the Ural. Th is central position played a big role in the development of the city.

PERM KRAI, TRANSPORT SYSTEM

RAIL

REGIONAL RAIL

ROADS

AIR


25

WAR INDUSTRYTh e second industrial development of the Ural basin took place during the Stalin era and was the result of the fi rst fi ve-year plan (1928-1932), while the existing industrial sites were developed and new ones were planned. In the Perm region, industry was mainly specialised in machines and mineral transformation. Th is growth called for a very large number of workers, mainly coming from the Ural region. A part of specialized workforces came from Moscow or even from Western countries. At the beginning of the fi ve-year plan, these were 42000 working in Ural industries, and fi ve years later 305000 (Pavel, 2001). Gulags were established at that time in the Perm region as well as in Siberia. Th ey played a key role in the industrialisation of these two regions. Prisoners were brought there and were the main workforce in the colonization of these territories. 1941, during the invasion of the German army, an signifi cant percentage of industry from the Western part of USSR was moved to the Ural region in order to ensure a continuous production of defense

VIEW FROM THE VILLAGE OF GORKI OF THE PLANTS ON THE KAMA RIVER AND PERM, 1910, PROKUDIN-GORSKY

ORIGINAL COLLAGE FOR THE ENGINE FACTORY IN PERM, 1950S


26

material. One half of the displaced industries (about 700) were re-housed in the Ural region. Th e Ural region took thus a fundamental role in the war. About 40% of the weapons sent to the front were manufactured there. Th is strategic importance leads to the closing of an important number of cities having a key role for the war. Perm was one of them, having a restrained access and remaining erased of the maps from the war until the perestroika. Directly aft er the war, the region of Perm benefi ted from the discovery of important resources of oil and gas. At the same time, the extraction of minerals and the military industries continued to be developed to reach a climax of production in the (Pavel, 2001).

GLOBAL AND LOCAL INDUSTRYAft er the collapse of the Soviet Union, the defense industry was reduced to a minimum. In Perm, the main industrial sites remained active but with very low production. A signifi cant number of employees were still working there, more assuming a presence than an active role. In

Krasnovishersk

Solikamsk

Usolie

AleksanrovskKizel

Gubakha

Gremyachinsk

GornozavodsChusovoy

Lysva

DobryankaIlyinsky

Karagay

Krasnokamsk

Nytva

Okhansk

Osa

B.Sosnova

Ocher

Vereshagino

Siva

YusvaKudymar

Kungur

KishertSuskun

Uinskoe


ElovoBarda

Kueda

Chaikovsky

Kochevo

Kosa

Gainy

Perm

Cherdyn

Beresniki

PERM KRAI, MAP OF GULAGS

GULAG WORKERS WORKING IN THE FOREST.

GULAG WORKERS CUTTING TREES.

GULAGS

150More than Gulags in the Perm region with about 150000 prisoners representing about one-third of the workig population.


27

order to become more competitive a small part of the formerly State owned companies were divided in smaller structures which are currently undergoing signifi cant growth (Kastrissianakis, 2008). Nowadays, oil and gas resources remain the chief source of income for the city, followed by the chemical and petrochemical industry. Th e defense industry is now losing its importance except in specifi c fi elds as the engine industry. At the same time, a new type of company is appearing in the region. Th ese are called small innovative businesses and operate between research and industry, mostly in the fi eld of polymers and composite materials. Th ese start-ups are quickly emerging while former state industries are shrinking, leaving soon important industrial voids within the city core (Perm Region, 2005).

Krasnovishersk

Solikamsk

Usolie

AleksanrovskKizel

Gubakha

Gremyachinsk

GornozavodsChusovoy

Lysva

DobryankaIlyinsky

Karagay

Krasnokamsk

Nytva

Okhansk

Osa

B.Sosnova

Ocher

Vereshagino

Siva

YusvaKudymar

Kungur

KishertSuskun

Uinskoe


ElovoBarda

Kueda

Chaikovsky

Kochevo

Kosa

Gainy

Perm

Cherdyn

Beresniki

PERM KRAI, NUMBER OF INHABITANTS

100000 INHABITANTS


2828


2929

2.Planned Perm

Aft er the Perestroika, the privatization of the land forced the government to set up legislations. Th ey were created in all the fi elds except for planning. Between 1992 and 1998, this lack of legal framework resulted in a very chaotic development were personal interests took the priority over public interest. Th e building policies remained the same and the developments took place in a quasi perfect continuity with the soviet times. Today, the city is much more independant and has the possibility to intervene in its development but at the same time, always bigger part of planning are left to private investors. In the last decade, the non planned has successed to the hyper planned, ironically in an almost perfect continuity.


30


3131

2.1 Actors

HISTORICAL BACKGROUNDDuring the Russian Empire, the important extension of territory asked for a great number of specialists. Th us Western architects, engineers and planners were called to take part in the construction of the empire. Th ey brought their knowledge and experience taking important positions. Th e planning system was at that time highly centralized and the plans for all new cities were drawn in Moscow and then in St Petersburg, mostly by architects who went to European architecture schools or even by Western architects themselves. Peter I introduced a set of rules for the city development and St Petersburg was built following those, as an example for the construction of every new Russian cities (Engel, 2006). Th e construction of Perm is a perfect illustration of this scheme. Founded at the end of the reign of Peter I, in 1723, the plans were done in St Petersburg under the supervision of the Tsar and applied in Perm by local architects controlled by a German Governor (Perm City Archives, 2008). Aft er the revolution, architects in Moscow had to face the challenge

GEORG WILHELM DE GENNIN (1676 - 1750), RUSSIAN MILITARY AND GERMAN ENGINEER. SPECIALIST IN THE FIELD OF MINING AND METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY, HE FOUNDED PERM IN 1723.

VIEW FROM KOMSOMOLSKY PROSPEKT, PERM, XIX CENTURY


32

of how to plan the city for the new socialist society. Th is socialist city had to break with the image of the western capitalist city, highly industrialized, unhealthy and dense. Th e exchange remained at that time very important between Soviet architects and Western architects. Th e architects of the Bauhaus working in Russia represent an example of East-West exchange. Th ey were especially involved in the movement and played an important role in the debate of that time. Among them were Mart Stam, Ernst May, Hannes Meyer, Le Corbusier and Walter Gropius, which saw in the Soviet Union the possibility to realize their utopian ideas (Engel, 2006).

HANNES MEYER (18891954), SWISS ARCHITECT, SECOND DIRECTOR OF THE BAUHAUS FROM 1928 TO 1930. HE WORKED AS CHIEF ARCHITECT IN THE PLANNING OFFICE GOSGRAZHANSTROY IN MOSCOW, RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PLANNING OF NEW INDUSTRIAL CITIES.

CARL F. MODERAH (1747 - 1819), MILITARY ENGINEER AND STATESMAN OF GERMAN ORIGIN, PERMIAN GOVERNOR IN 1796 - 1811.


3333

FEDERAL ACTORSTh e new political system was based on a centralized planning established in Moscow. An important number of offi ces and institutes were created to organize the planning of the whole territory. Th eir roles and relationships were complex and remain quite unclear. Th e central planning done from Moscow had to reach the smaller scale in the most direct way. Th us, planning offi ces were created in diff erent parts of the Soviet Union but still referring to Moscow for the major decisions. Th e following ones were some of the most important for the development of cities: GOSPLAN, the central offi ce for economic planning, was responsible for the planning of the economy and had a control over the other ministries. It had the responsibility for the defi nition of the fi ve years plans but their detailed management was left to the other ministries. GIPROGOR, the offi ce for town planning, was responsible for the defi nition of most of the general plans. Th ose documents were following and refl ecting the directions given by the fi ve-year plans established by GOSPLAN. LenZNIIEP and LenNIIP were two sub-offi ces of GIPROGOR located in Leningrad and Novosibirsk playing an intermediate role. GOSSTROY, the state committee for construction, and GOSGRAZHANSTROY, the Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, were responsible for the entire town planning and architectural process. All building applications and town planning plans from the USSR had to be submitted there (Engel, 2006). STANDARDGORPROJEKT, the offi ce for the planning of the industrial cities was responsible for the development of new industrial areas. During the fi rst fi ve years plan period (1928-1932) this offi ce was commissioned to develop the industry in the Perm region.

LOCAL ACTORSIn Perm industry was the main sector developed during the soviet times. Its status in term of planning was diff erent from other cities in the sense that it was more autonomous. Industries were responsible for providing housing for its workers and thus were also responsible for their planning, construction and maintenance. Th e development of the settlements followed industrial development. Industries had to reach the objectives of the fi ve years plans defi ned by GOSPLAN. In order to do this they planned workers settlements according to their needs, following the policies set up by offi ces such as GIPROGOR or STANDARDGORPROJEKT, and submitting planning permissions to GOSSTROY. Th e developments coming from the needs of the industries, at a local level, lead to a more chaotic development of the city, not being directly planned from Moscow as other cities were.


3434

ADAPTATIONSTh e responsibilities of those offi ces changed a lot during their existence and some are still in activity. GIPROGOR has been privatized and GOSSTROY remained active until 2008 when its functions were transferred to the Ministry of Regional Development of the Russian Federation. Even if the planning system in Russia has undergone several radical political changes, the administrative structure has always remained almost the same, even in the post-perestroika period. Current planning in Russia is still based on this system and is very diffi cult to adapt to the new economic forces now in place. Th e municipalities now have the responsibility for the most signifi cant percentage of decisions relating to planning, while federal and regional levels issue guidelines. Th is transfer of responsibilities and the resulting vagueness are now the major problem that administrations have to face in setting up clear planning policies.

PRESENT In 1998, an overall framework was established for planning in Russia. But this framework is more an update of the former system of planning than a reform and cannot deal with the strength of the new system. Th e General Plan (GENPLAN) introduced during the soviet times still remains the most important document for city development. It is established at a local level under federal and regional guidance. Every city in Russia is required to have its own GENPLAN which has a life span of 20 to 30 years (Golubchikov, 2004). As very few cities had one at the end of the 90s, a resolution was taken by the government that every city should defi ne its plan for the horizon 2020 2030. Instead of having a strong policy on planning, the system is still based on a system of development control. Th ere is a very complex system of control for building permission. In practice, it means that prior to making an application for building permission, a developer has to obtain technical approvals proving that the project is well detailed and organized. Th e number of approvals to be obtained by a developer vary from 50 to 250 depending on particular regions, the numbers of organizations to be consulted is more than 40 and the number of invoices is more than 70 (Golubchikov, 2004) . Th e complexity of this system and its time consumption for an indefi nite result explain the omnipresence of big developers companies entertaining tight relationships with authorities. In Perm, the post-soviet planning started in 1992, but the directions taken by the plans were mainly based on the inherited principles of soviet planning. Th us, in 2008, a new structure was set up called Perm2020, commissioned to manage the planning of the city for the horizon 2020.

In Russia, the benefi ciary margin of investors on the price per square meter sold can reach 60% while in Switzerland the margin is around 7%.


3535

KIRIL PISAREV IS PRESIDENT OF PIK GROUP, THE FIRST HIGH-VOLUME HOUSING BUILDER IN RUSSIA. HE FOUNDED PIK IN 1991 AND IS NOW RANKED 160TH WORLD BILLIONAIRE BY FORBES.


3636

SERFDOM, ABOLSISHED IN RUSSIA IN 1861.

NATIONALISATION OF THE LAND FOLLOWING THE 1917 REVOLUTION.

COLLECTIVE PROPERTY, VILLAGES COMMUNE

1991, PRIVATISATION OF THE HOUSING STOCK.

INDIVIDUALISATION OF THE PROPERTY DURING THE 1917 REVOLUTION.

ONGOING PROCESS OF PRIVATISATION OF THE LAND.


37

2.2 Property

FROM SERFDOM TO INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIPTh e State already had a great control over property during Imperial times and could easily confi scate or destroy it as he wanted. Th is strong policy, mainly applied in the cities enabled the expansion of the Empire. 1861, the tsar Alexander II started an important liberal reform in order to put an end to the feudal system on which the society was still based. Th is had an signifi cant impact on land ownership. At that time the biggest part of the society was still composed of peasants either living on state lands or living on private lands. Th e abolition of serfdom freed them from their landlord and gave them access to land. Th e land was collectively owned by villages commune, responsible for the distribution of the land. Aft er the revolution of 1905, a decree enabled every peasant household to claim individual ownership of its land allotments. But the diffi culties to apply this decree, in the reality, gave access to land ownership only to 20% of the peasants. In 1917, the majority of the peasants taking part to the revolution seized property from the landowners.

RUSSIAN PAESANTS, PROKUDIN-GORSKY


38

NATIONALISATIONIn 1918, following the Marxist idea that land has no inherent value, private property was placed under state control. Th e Bolsheviks nationalized the industries, the banks and the housing stock, and by 1922, the government had taken over 40% of the living space in urban areas, leaving in private hands small structures as wooden houses and dachas (Matthews, M. 1976) . Th e proportion of state owned property reached 78% in 1989. Th e rents were fi xed in Russia between 1927 and 1992 at 0.132 rubles per sqm of living space, although by 1990, the operation and maintenance costs reached an average of 15 rubles per sqm. Th erefore, during the Soviet Union housing sector was always fi nanced by the transfer of funds from other sectors such as industry. In 1989, Russian households devoted only 2.4% of their income to total housing payment (rents plus utilities) but over 3% to liquors and cigarettes (Renaud, 1995a).

PRIVATISATION A law on the privatization of housing was passed in July 1991. It established the right of a registered tenant occupying a state unit to become its owner with fully guaranteed property rights. Moscow and St Petersburg were quite fast in this process, especially because of their special autonomous status while other Russian cities had to deal with a much more complicated administrative structure and a lack of fi nancial resources. Following this, the building industry was privatized in 1993 under the law of enterprise privatization. Th e ownership and control was in most cases transferred from ministerial authorities to managers (Renaud, 1995b). In terms of landownership, a law was already passed in 1990. Diff erent types of property were defi ned as single family houses or agricultural land. Th e urban property rights remained quite vague until 1993 when a law was adopted recognising the full right to private land for any use (Renaud, 1995b). But the acquisition of land remaining in state ownership remained a complex process, especially for investors buying land for development. In order to facilitate the process, the land had to be transferred from the state and the regional ownership to the

0.132 rubles were the fi xed rents in USSR per square meters of living space.

INHABITANT OF A MICRORAYON MAINTENING A HOUSE FOR CHILDREN ON A PLAYGROUND.


39

municipalities. In Perm this process only started in 2002 and is very slow due to unclear laws for land transactions. Added to this, the diffi culty in accessing land ownership is increased by the facts that a major part of the land potentially free for development is already in the hands of a restrained circle of companies, who failed in the process of acquisition and then block the subsequent procedures. Possible sites for developers within the city are mostly land occupied by dilapidated housing, and acquiring these sites is complicated because of the property rights and the problems of relocating inhabitants (Butler & Khakhalin, 2003). Th ese are the main reasons that lead investors to negotiate plots of land located in the outskirts or in the city satellites, freed from all the constraints of the city centre. Nowadays, the city of Perm has started a new process for the distribution of landownership amongst individuals. In the already built-up areas, owners are now acquiring abstract parts of their plot. Th is process, aiming to open the land market up to individuals presents the disadvantage to increase the complexity of the acquisition process. Th e land acquisition will not longer be negotiated with the municipality, but directly with the owners of the plot. Individuals, now becoming landowners have the possibility to take an important role in the planning process. But the unclear defi nition of most of the spaces surrounding the buildings make their appropriation by the collective consciousness diffi cult. Th e clear concept of public-private separation doesnt exist in the exteriors, the apartment, reduced to the minimum being until now the only private space. Within the Stalinist blocks or around Khrushovkas, semi-public spaces are being used, sometimes appropriated or even enclosed by inhabitants, but their legal relationship to them remained always unclear. Today, limits of property are being defi ned by the city administration but it doesnt seem that this can radically change the culture of appropriation and collectivity shared around those spaces. Something has to be proposed beyond the abstract allotments of land taking place.

SPONTANEOUS APPROPRIATION OF LAND AROUND A KHRUSHCHOVKA.


40

TRADITIONAL TYPOLOGY

URBAN AREAS

FORESTS

NEO-CLASSICAL TYPOLOGY

INDUSTRIES

REVOLUTIONARY TYPOLOGY

STALINIST BARAKS TYPOLOGY

STALINIST HOUSES TYPOLOGY

KHRUSHCHOVKAS TYPOLOGY

IMPROVED FLOOR PLANS TYPOLOGY

COMPOSITE TYPOLOGY

BUILDING TYPOLOGIES WITHIN THE PERM TERRITORY.

RIVERS AND FORESTS.


4141

2.3 Policies

RUSSIAN COLONISATIONTh e resolutions taken by the planning offi ces during the Russian Empire and the Soviet regime were quite similar in the sense that in both systems they were taken in order to improve their territorial expansion. During Imperial times there were strict norms for town planning and State institutions had to agree on every building and development plan (French, 1995). Th us the State had a strong infl uence on the development of cities. Th ere was a constant need for new buildings due to the Empire expansion and to the destructions caused by fi res. Th is begged an improvement of construction techniques in order to build faster. Th e prefabrication of wooden housings was improved, new techniques were introduced and the size of the buildings limited. Under Katherine II, the government went further with the idea of prefabrication with the defi nition of standards for residential and public building types (Engel 2006).

CONSTRUCTION OF KHRUSHCHOVKAS.


42

REVOLUTIONARY IDEOLOGIESAft er the Revolution, architects of planning offi ces had to face the challenge of formalising the ideas of the revolution. In order to stay economical, they concentrated their eff orts on public buildings, supposed to act as social condensers (Kopp, 1967). In 1928, architects and planners had to defi ne the way how cities should be spatially developed. Th is lead to an important debate in Moscow with the Desurbanists in opposition to the Urbanists. Th e Desurbanists were following the concept of the green city, infl uenced by the garden city of Ebenezer Howard. Th ey wanted to implement the Marxist concept of dissolution between town and country, leading to a dispersed distribution of the population over the country. Among them were Moissej J. Ginzburg and Ernst May. Ginzburgs motto was: not green in the city, but the city in green plantations. (Andrusz, 1987) Th e Urbanists were diff ering with the latter in the sense that they were promoting a system of self-suffi cient industrial centers. Among

KOMSOMOLSKY PROSPECT, PERM.

NIEVSKY PROSPECT, ST. PETERSBURG.


43

them were the Vesnin brothers, Ilya Golosov and the economist Leonid Sabsovich. Th ey were for the idea of a clear functional separation of the residential, work and leisure areas. Th e Scheme of Nicolaj Milyutin for Magnitogorsk illustrates particularly this idea. Th e diff erent functions are separated in diff erent functional strips. But the importance of the green promoted by the desurbanist group was also integrated in this scheme providing buff er zones between residential and industrial areas (Engel, 2007). Most of the schemes were not realized because of the drastic political changes taking place in the 1930s but they infl uenced urban developments taking place thirty years later.

EBENEZER HOWARDS GARDEN CITY, 1902.


4444

SOCIALIST REALISMIn 1934, Stalin declared Socialist Realism a state policy. Artists had to follow this new imposed movement and Architects and planners also had to adapt their methods, from a modernist to an academic model. Th e following repressions organized by Stalin, the purges, touched a great number of them, facing the impossibility of a return to an academic system. It was already the end of the constructivist movement and the ideas of the 1920s were mostly unrealized. Neo-classical projects had to be built following classical rules of urban design. In order to develop cities in accordance to the Socialist realism movement, Stalin set up new policies. -New developments had to proceed by whole ensembles. -City block size had to be increased from 1-2 ha, to 9-15 ha. -New developments should be limited in density to 400 persons per ha. -Buildings should be at least 6 stories high and 7-10-14 story on fi rst rate streets. -Embankments are fi rst-rate streets, only zoned for fi rst-rate housing and offi ces. Th ese strict rules were established for the masterplan of Moscow in 1935 and had to take as example for the planning of cities such as Perm. Palaces for the workers had to be built in order to give them high standard of living. Th eir construction was very expensive and the state couldnt provide enough houses in cities such as Perm that had to be quickly developed. Th is need was thus compensated by a large amount of temporary wooden buildings, the barracks, were provided in order to host the citizens. Th e better houses were given to the best workers while others were packed in barracks. A new elite appeared, living in the new palaces, located were the urban plans were realized. In Perm, two major parts of Stalinist extension are recognisable within the city centre, the extension of Komsomolsky prospect and the new settlement of Motovilika. Th e objectives of quality were so high that these houses remain the best ones within the city. At the same time new industrial city satellites were created around the city. Th eir centre is composed by Stalinist town houses smaller than the worker palaces but also providing high living standards.

1949, MOSCOW, ZEMLYANOY VAL, 46-48 BY YEVGENY RYBITSKY.

1950S, STALINIST PALACE IN THE LENINA STREET

1936-1941, MOSCOW, YAUZSKY BOULEVARD, 2, BY ILYA GOLOSOV.


4545

MASS CONSTRUCTIONWhen Khrushchev became the head of the Soviet Union in 1953 he declared a period of destalinisation, replacing a major part of the inherited Stalinist administration. Th e ideology radically shift ed from the neo-classical esthetics to pure functionalism. Khrushchevs aim, stated in his secret speech in 1956, was to provide as much housing as possible in the shortest time. It was only then that urban utopian thoughts reoriented themselves towards the ideas of the 1920s (Dolgy, 1971). In 1960 at a town planning conference, it was agreed that new town planning plans should follow the idea of economic viability. Simplicity, severity of form and economy of solutions had to be the main principles of Soviet architecture. Prefabrication was seen as an important characteristic of Soviet architecture, avoiding any form of individuality in urban landscapes (Belousov, 1977). Between 1960 and 1975, two-thirds of the Russian population was housed in prefabricated buildings (Bater, 1980). Th e apartment units were built at some distance from the factory which allocated apartments and managed these properties. Under Brezhnev, construction techniques were slightly improved and cities expanded following the same principles. But the monotony and uniformity of cities resulting from this type of planning lead Brezhnev to declare in his speech to the Baumann constituency in Moscow the 14 June 1977: Our architects can and must put an end to the uniformity of construction and the lack of expression of architectural solutions (Belousov, 1977). Th is was the beginning of a new era of buildings, taller, still prefabricated, set up following the rules of the microrayon, but trying to avoid the former rules of orthogonality in order to break the monotony of the urban landscapes. Th e new types of housing series were called Improved Floor Plans. Th ose principles formalized the concept of the microrayon guided the construction of Russian cities from the 1970s until today. Th ey were the result of constant research supposed to structure the social ideal of the city of workers.

Vitaly Pavlovich Lagutenko (19041967), soviet architect engineer, developed the fi rst designs of low/cost concrete prefabricated housings under Khrushchev.


46


4747

2.4 Microrayon

Th e microrayon is the basic unit structuring every residential area in Russia from the 1960s until today. Th e principles were applied for the fi rst time during the Khrushchev era in order to plan large pieces of cities in a fast and effi cient way. Th is concept, based on optimal numbers of population and layering of activities was already debated in the 1920s in Moscow by the architects responsible for the planning of new cities. Th ey had the responsibility to plan the new socialist city, refl ecting the ideologies of that time. Th e research made by architects in Europe to fi nd a solution to the problems encountered in the industrial cities had an important infl uence in Moscow. Ebenezer Howard and his garden city can be seen as the premises of this concept.

PLAN FOR A RESIDENTIAL AREA IN ZAKAMSK, 1970s.

MICRORAYON IN THE TRADITIONAL AREA OF TIMBER HOUSING IN VISIM


48

MICRORAYON IN ST. PETERSBURG

MICRORAYON IN MOSCOW

MICRORAYON IN NOVOSIBIRSK


4949

RULESA microrayon (or micro-district) is designed for a population from 10000 to 12000 persons, and in area from 30 to 50 ha. Besides dwelling units, facilities are provided on a daily basis. Th ose are stores, laundries, cleaning and repair shops, schools, kindergartens, restaurants, and recreational areas. Th ese services have to be situated in a radius of 150 to 300m. Th e profi tability of the projects called for the construction of about 100000 sqm of housing fl oor area. Th e residential district is a unit of population of 30000 to 50000 made by the aggregation of several microrayons. At this level, a wider set of services is provided to the inhabitants within a service radius of 1000 to 1200 m. Th ose are shopping centres, medical facilities, cultural centre, higher schools, administrations, and parks. An aggregation of residential districts of 100000 to 300000 creates a third level called urban district. In large cities, a fourth level of 800000 to 1000000 people is called urban zone. At the highest level are found facilities needed on a weekly or monthly basis as public and administrative buildings, medical centre, transport terminals, and higher educational and research institutes (Reiner & Wilson, 1979).

STREETSTh e street networks are planned following the same hierarchy. Th e streets are divided in residential streets, main streets, rayonal boulevards and boulevards of urban signifi cance (Smoljar, 1973). Boulevards connect the diff erent parts of the city such as the residential areas, industry, public centres and important transports hubs. Th ey are very wide, oft en 40 to 50 meters, in order to support manifestations and demonstrations and to demonstrate political power (Engel, 2007). Th e main streets and residential streets link diff erent groups of buildings. As it was planned that no traffi c should cross the residential areas, those streets are connected to cul-de-sacs leading to the buildings. Pedestrian paths are another system superimposed on the street system, linking diff erent buildings of a microrayon but also linking diff erent microrayons together.

PUBLIC SPACESPublic spaces are also designed following the same rules. New standards were set up for green spaces. It was stated that 24 sq m of urban green area should be provided for every inhabitant and by the 1970s, this number should reach 40 to 50 sq m. Th is large amount of green was provided to improve the microclimate, noise insulation and act as creative and social element. Th e parks, major public spaces, of a size of 6 ha, were to be provided within a maximum distance of 800m of every apartment. It was to be the social centre of every microrayon (Engel, 2006). Within a microrayon, smaller public spaces had to be provided between the buildings, at a maximum distance of 150-200 m. Th ere a small park with a playground can be found, separated from the paths to make it more private. Th ey are intimate spaces, shared by the inhabitants of the surrounding buildings. Th e very small housing surface given to the inhabitants was compensated by signifi cant number of places for socialising that were and remain functional because of this same reason. Mainly because of budgetary problems and also because of a lack

50 square meters was the surface of green area per inhabitant that planners wanted to provide.


50


51

of knowledge of the places, most of the plans were never fi nished. Th e fi rst priority was given to housing, and oft en programs such as communal facilities or open spaces were simply not realized. As the land didnt belong to anyone, outdoor spaces were colonized by unplanned structures such as garages, auto-boxes or small storage. From 1991, privatization gave rise to the possibility of compensating the lack for services by the transformation of fl ats or basements in commercial surfaces. A large number of Kiosks providing a wide range of services were also built on the corners of important streets or close to public transport stations.

TODAYNowadays, even if the funding of most of the projects has become private and the property system is changed, the microrayon remains the basis for the planning. Th e Russian Construction Standards and Regulation (SNiP) 2.07.01-89 last time updated in 1989 contain the rules that still have to be followed in order to design a residential area. Th us, developers are now in charge of the planning of new housing units, but also of the social facilities and the street networks within residential areas. Th ey have become the major actors of the cities development.

PARKOVYS MICRORAYON IN PERM


5252


5353

2.5 Housing

In Perm, like in the whole of Russia, the retreat of the State from housing provision has resulted in a decrease in the availability of public housing services. At the same time privatisation has resulted in many new homeowners who cannot aff ord the maintenance of their apartments oft en already in bad conditions. During the decade following the perestroika, almost no new buildings were built. Th e city was not investing anymore and no investors were interested in developing in cities such as Perm. All the investments remained concentrated in Moscow and St. Petersburg. But aft er the crisis of 1998, the economy started to grow and cities like Perm became interesting for Russians as well as for foreign investors. Th is resulted in an important number of new developments sprawled over the city, in places where land could be acquired. Th ese ambitious projects are unfortunately oft en too luxurious and not located in attractive areas. Th ey do not answer the market demand and oft en remain empty even though housing demand is increasing.

LEFT : PROJECT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL AREA BAKHAREVKA IN PERM.

FUNNY FACADE OF IMPROVED FLOOR PLANS IN PERM


5454

LIVING SPACE AREAIn Perm there is an average living space area of about 20 sqm per persons. Th is is about 2/3 of the European average. Th e resulting living conditions are problematic and ask for a quick increase of living space. Th e apartments provided until now unfortunately do not fi ll this gap. Th ey are the result of ambitious projects off ering expensive fl ats, unaff ordable for the majority of the population, which then remains empty.

DEVELOPMENT PROJECTSIn the city outskirts, large pieces of land are now being planned. And at the same time, new infrastructure such as ring roads and bridges are being built by the city to support these projects. Th eir location, far away from the city centre is mainly the result of the impossibility of access to land within the city centre and the economic advantage of building a lot in one location. Th ese projects have the potential to noticeably increase the living

Aus

tria

Bel

gium

Cze

chia

Den

mar

k

Est

onia

Finl

and

Fran

ce

Ger

man

y

Gre

ece

Hun

gary

Hun

gary

Rus

sia

Per

m

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Irela

nd

Italy

Latv

ia

Lith

uani

a

Luxe

mbu

rg

Mal

ta

Net

herla

nd

Pol

and

Por

tuga

l

Rom

ania

Slo

veni

a

Slo

vaki

a

Spa

in

Sw

eden

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

[m2]

p p p

average: 28 sqm/pers.

Perm: 19.6 sqm/pers.

CentreParkovy

Balatovo

Danilikha

Khrokalheva

Motovilika

Gaiva

AkulovaNalimisha

Vishka

Levsino

Kamsky

Frunze

Golovanovo

Zaozere

Lijadi

Zakamsk

Kurija

GorkySadovi

JubilejniVladimirsky

50000 INHABITANTS

POPULATION WITHIN THE DIFFERENT CITY PARTS AND CITY SATELLITES, SCALE 1 : 350000

AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL SPACE PER PERSONS IN EUROPE.SOURCE: OMA, 2006.

14000000square meters of gross fl oor area planned around Perm.


55

area of the city. Nevertheless, they seem hardly feasible if we consider the pressure of such projects, with infrastructure already saturated. Moreover, the existing city fabric has a very low average density (FAR ~1) and about one fourth of it is composed of buildings which will soon need to be replaced. Th e consequence could be a massive migration of citizen in the city outskirts, leaving an empty ring between the sustainable city centre and the new residential areas. Nevertheless, this process that seemed inexorable was suddenly interrupted. Since September 2008, the projects are on-hold, a consequence of the international economic crisis.

NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

NEW DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN THE PERM TERRITORY, SCALE 1 : 350000

RESIDENTIAL AREA IVA I.


5656


5757

3. Generic Perm

As with the main cities in Russia, Perm is readable in seven typologies, either applied in a generic or in a composite form. Some of the generic ones are characterized by the current regeneration process of studies of refurbishment, especially in Moscow and in St. Petersburg. Due to the generic way they have been used in all the Russian cities, the strategies of renewal designed for the capitals are almost completely applicable to Perm, too.


5858


5959

3.1 From traditional to city centre

Th e typology of the centre of Perm results from the densifi cation and urbanization of the traditional one. Originally, their buildings were very diff erent, respectively composed by timber housing and brick buildings. However these typologies are defi ned by a common rectangular grid system, providing a durable instance of control. Th is enables the renewal of the building stock, keeping the urban connection and retaining the clear defi nition of public spaces.

LEFT: STREET NETWORK,AROUND 1918

PERM CENTRE AROUND 1920


60

PERMS RETICULAR GRID Perm is not a Russian city composed by an enclosed Kremlin and its surrounding agglomeration. Originally it is a European city. Its foundation is related to the policy of Russian Europeanization and particularly the colonization of the Ural. Close to the former village of Yegoshika, today called Razguliay, is applied in the early XVIII century a neo-classical grid of reticular streets on a plateau about 30 meters above the Kama River. In continuity with the original grid, in1781 the city extended above the Gorki Park. Th e main streets lead straight up to the Komsomolsky cross-street, called Wide Lane, drawn from there towards the Kama stream. (Mozel, 1864) Th e city was at that time articulated around three squares representative of the religious and political, the commercial and the cultural orders. Th ese correspond today to the area around the Holy Trinity Cathedral, the Ural volunteers public garden and fi nally to the Opera square. Th e fi rst commercial street was situated in the West part of the city, along the current Kommunistischeskaya Street, which burnt down in 1842: Th e fi re devastated the best and the main part of Perm. All the oldest houses in Petropavlovskaya Square and Street were destroyed those were memorials from the governors general times: a spacious palace or the former house of the governor-general, the governors and the vice-governors houses, the Duma, the guardhouse, etc (Dimirtiyev, 1889). It is not unusual at this period that cities were completely burnt in Russia: at this time the main building material was still timber. Aft er the fi re of 1842, the main activities move to the east part of Perm. Th e spaces of social life changed depending on the season. Th e summer life is on the bank of the Kama River and in the winter the pulse of the city moves into the Sibirskaya Street, which is compared to a miniature of the Nevsky Avenue. Th ere and nearby the towns institutions and the best stores of the city are situated (Verkholantsev, 1913).

PERM HISTORICAL MAP, 1898

Th e original streets correspond today to the streets Ordzhonikidze, Sovetskaya, Kommunistischeskaya, Lenina, Kirova, Bolshevistskaya, Lunacharskogo and Pushkina.

PERM HISTORICAL MAP, 1898, DETAIL OF THE MARKET

PERM HISTORICAL MAP, 1898, DETAIL OF THE OPERA SQUARE

PERM HISTORICAL MAP, 1898, DETAIL OF THE HOLY TRINITY CATHEDRAL


61


62

PLOTS IN THE INNER CITYDue to the traditional model of ownership, old Perm is defi ned by blocks, which inside are private and the outside public. However, the large size of the plots and the sparse distribution of the surrounding buildings, in 1917 allow a radical redefi nition of these spaces. Soon aft er the Red Revolution, the private courtyards became public. Th resholds were dissolved coming to signify free access and in some case an extension of the public street (Staub 2005). Th e various delimitations between public and private space remained important aft er the end of the soviet era. Th is is illustrated by new towers or signifi cant buildings which are built in the courtyards, which were originally in private realm. Th e abolition of private space under the soviets was one of the main factors in opening up the structure of urban plots which eventually lead to their complete dissolution.

PERM HISTORICAL MAP, 1898, DETAIL OF THE PLOT DIVISION

AERIAL VIEW OF PERM, CITY CENTRE, 2008

LENINA STREET.


63

URBAN SITUATION PLOT DIVISION PUBLIC ENTRANCES TO THE BLOCK

THRESHOLDS

UNPLANNED PATHS PLANNED PUBLIC SPACES

PRIVATE SPACE BABUSHKAS SETTLEMENTS

MAIN BUILDINGS PRIVATE ACCESS TO THE BUILDING

UNPLANNED ELEMENTS HOUSING

COMMON FACILITIES COMMERCIAL ONGOING DEVELOPMENTS URBAN DATCHA

AXONOMETRIC VIEW OF A TYPICAL BLOCK IN THE CENTRE


64

INSIDE SITUATION OF A CENTRAL BLOCK

STREET IN THE CENTRE

TIMBER HOUSING AND NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE CENTRE


65

CURRENT STATE OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING FABRICTh e popular belief that it is healthiest to live in timber housing explains why wood was the principal construction material in Russia for a sustained period. However, as with European cities of the XIX century, Perm centre is composed of civic, religious and cultural stone or brick monuments, which were important symbols of the city such as the Opera house, the cathedral or the Meshkovs palace. A signifi cant number of these stone and brick buildings have survived the last century and in part been renovated. Some religious buildings have reassumed their original functions and splendor. On the contrary, timber housing have mostly been removed in the centre and replaced by taller buildings, considerably changing the city shape.

CURRENT BRICK BUILDING


66

MOTOVILIKA WORKER SETTLEMENTIn the XIX century in Perm the commercial, political and cultural life and its plants were concentrated along the Kama. Th e main industry was the former copper foundry of Motovilika, which is about 3.5 km above Perm (State Archives of the city of Perm Region, 1998). Until 1921 there were no bridges crossing the Yegoshikha valley and the two settlements were relatively isolated. It was not only a physical separation, the two areas were socially and typologically diff erent. Motovilikha was the site of the fi rst socialist insurrection, being the ideal place for the political propaganda of the early 1900s. Across the plant timber housing is laid out respectively on four plateaus. As with Perm, the streets are arranged in a rectangular grid adapted to the topography.

TRADITIONAL PLOT Th e plot typology in Motovilika corresponds to the tradition of the Perm region. Th is mainly composed of detached timber housing around a subdivided courtyard. Th e size of the plots is conceived so as to be big enough for gardens, allowing the production of vegetables compensating the lack of agricultural resources around the city. Every household has a private garden separated from the others by wooden walls, allowing for more private activities such as housing facilities. Th e elimination of the private property failed to have the same eff ect as in the centre of Perm, and the spatial qualities remain the same as in the time of their construction.

AERIAL VIEW OF A TYPICAL TRADITIONAL BLOCK


67


THRESHOLDS






AXONOMETRIC VIEW OF A TYPICAL TRADITIONAL BLOCK


68

ADAPTATION OF A TRADITIONAL TIMBER HOUSE IN VISIM

OVERVIEW OF THE STREET WITHOUT NAME IN THE TRADITIONAL SETTLEMENT AROUND THE MOTOVILIKA PLANT

TRADITIONAL TIMBER HOUSE IN VISIM


69

TIMBER HOUSINGTimber, as the traditional construction material, gave rise to only one typology, which continued to be built before, during and aft er the Soviet Times. Th e small size of the houses makes their integration in various topographical conditions easy. Now as before, timber houses are almost unique as an alternative to collective ones. Today most of the timber settlements suff er of a lack of infrastructure, public transports, water and hygiene. Some of them are in very bad condition or abandoned. But as timber housing is gradually removed from the city centre, they represent the sole individual alternative of living far from noise and pollution. Some of them have been replaced by luxury enclosed cottages, sometime composing the living units for gated communities. Moreover, some of these decorated timber houses are representative of traditional Russian culture and deserve to be kept and refurbished.

CURRENT TIMBER HOUSING AND COTTAGES


70


71

3.2 Constructivism

Th e 1920s, was a time of political instability which had an unusual urban development. Th us this typology is not the most common, in Perm as in Russia, but it represents an essential step in urban thinking, between traditional and soviet thought. Th e failure of soviet urbanism in its last 50 years and the relatively new trend of post-modernism, give to this typology a tremendous importance. In Perm, this time of intellectual and international euphoria produced a number of buildings. According to modern ideology, these are composed of simple forms without applied decorations and constructed in revolutionary materials. Th ey are taller than the traditional typologies and fi t on bigger lots with stronger urban character. Th e buildings perch within the neo-classical urban structure of the city centre with perfect urban continuity. Nowadays these constructivist buildings need to be restored but as they continue to function, their survival in the short term is assured.

LEFT: STREET NETWORK DEVELOPMENT DURING CONSTRUCTIVIST TIMES

Th e remaining constructivist buildings in the city centre are: the Dom Chekistov in the Sibirskaja 30 (1932), the Hotel Central in the Sibirskaja 9 (Architect. F. E. Morogov, 1930-1933), Gorsovet House in the Bolshevistskaja 51, the Rechnoy Vokzal (1932) in the Ordgenikidze 13 and the Technikum in the Ostrovskogo 60, the Post offi ce in the Lenina 26.

GORSOVET HOUSE, BOLSHEVISTSKAJA 51


72

TECHNIKUM IN THE OSTROVSKOGO 60

DOM CHEKISTOV IN THE SIBIRSKAJA 30 (1932)

GORSOVET HOUSE, BOLSHEVISTSKAJA 51


73

MOLOTOVDuring the 1920s, Motovilika was developed further to refl ect new revolutionary urban ideals. On the third of November 1927 the worker camp of Motovilika and Perm were merged to form one city. In 1931 Motovilika received the name of Molotov. In 1940, Perm became known as Molotov, loosing its name until 1957. A project of Hannes Meyer for Sozgorod na Gorkach was an attempt to develop this area again in 1932, to connect Molotov to Perm. Th e plans are conceived with several housing quarters surrounded by culture, schooling and green belts, predominantly placed around the borders of the plateaus. Th e living sector is stretched from the North to the South, along a single main traffi c axis, which connects a cultural, an administrative and a commercial centre. Th is constructivist settlement, also called District camp (Semyrannikov, 2006) conformed to the new social ideals, where the main living spaces are not within the private apartments anymore, as in the capitalist bourgeois society, but in the material, spiritual and cultural places of production(Hannes Meyer, 1936). Hence a group of buildings is placed between the housing buildings and the plant, creating the social centre or social condenser laid out in a programmatic strip of common services. Th e centre of Molotov is composed by four concrete buildings: the industrial kitchen Fabrika-Kuhnja in Uralskaja 85 (I. Golosov), the House of Technika in Uralskaja 78 (H. Meyer, A. Urban), the school of Lebedeva 78 and the administrative building of Ziolkovskogo 15. Other brick buildings with constructivist forms are the Diom Svjazi in Uralskaja 36 and the clinics in Lebedeva 11 and Gracheva 12.

Im Gegensatz zur brgerlichen Ideologie, die die Wohnung zum Lebenszentrum erklrt, werden weiterhin fr den Sowjetbrger die Lebenszentren ausserhalb der Wohnung an den materiellen oder geistig-kulturellen Produktionsstellen, im Betrieb, im Klub, in der Schule usw. dominieren. (Hannes Meyer, Ttigkeiten an der Architekturakademie)

HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE HOUSE OF TECHNIKA IN URALSKAJA 78


74

Th e social condensers placed outside the living blocks, forms a hub with a similar relationship to the housing as before. No public program is located inside the blocks. Th e uniqueness of these buildings lies in the fact that public program is partially able to replace some private ones. Commercial and religious buildings are no longer considered. Constructivist buildings have to integrate these new programs, their language expressing the new society. A great example is the Fabrika-Kuhnja, built to provide 30.000 dishes a day for workers and their families and to release the woman from the kitchen slavery.

REVOLUTIONNARY THRESHOLDS Nearby the facility buildings are located 20 housing slabs, with the same footprint (length about 50 meters, width about 11m) assembled around green opene courtyards. Th e entrances are located inside the block, creating a new type of space open to public, but mainly used by the inhabitants. Th is feature breaks with the traditional placement of private entrances on the street, redefi ning the nature of courtyards in semi-public spaces. Th e thresholds between the public realm and private sphere are not defi ned elements such as fences, doors or porches, but became fl exible spaces, able to be either privatized or opened to the public. Th is new characteristic remained and developed during the following typologies of the Soviet era.

DISTRICT CAMP, WORKER SETTLEMENT, SEMI-PUBLIC COURTYARD


75


THRESHOLDS






AXONOMETRIC VIEW OF A CONSTRUCTIVIST BLOCK AND SOCIAL CONDENSERS


76

WORKER SETTLEMENT

HOUSE OF TECHNIKA IN URALSKAJA 78

THE INDUSTRIAL KITCHEN FABRIKA-KUHNJA IN URALSKAJA 85.


77

HOUSINGTh e lack of spontaneous appropriation of the courtyard highlights a diff erence from other typologies. Th is arrangement avoids private external spaces, but still provides a diverse and generous housing surface with the necessary facilities. Seven buildings are constructed in reinforced concrete and two of them are covered with Stalinists decorations. Th eir layout seems to be similar. Th eir bi-oriented apartments are spacious with entrance hall, kitchen, toilets and big rooms, the smallest being about 15 squares meters. Th e ceiling height is about three meters. Th ese buildings are built in in-situ concrete composed of big pebbles or bricks pieces and reinforced by steel cables. Th e repetition of the same elements on the faade shows the possibilities of using of standard cladding. Th e variety of openings is ensured by a composition made with the same model of window. Th e aim of this constructivist model is to increase the quality of the housing and the fl oor plans while decreasing the costs. Th e rationalization in construction techniques derives from improving spatial quality of the dwellings, providing an equal distribution of space and light. Standardization, used massively from the 1960s, will neglect these qualities in order to satisfy economic demands of time and money.

CURRENT TIMBER HOUSING AND COTTAGES


78


7979

3.3 Socialist Realism

Aft er two decades of political instability in the post revolutionary years, a socialist society had to be established. Th e period going from 1938 to 1957 is a time of calm. In order to express the communist ideals, Perm was designed along fi xed lines refl ecting the new order of Socialist Realism.

LEFT : STREET NETWORK DEVELOPMENT DURING TIMES OF SOCIALIST REALISM

PERM MASTERPLAN, (1940), VIEW OF THE CITY GALLERY)


80

PERM MASTERPLAN, (1940), VIEW FROM A VALLEY

PERM MASTERPLAN, (1940), VIEW OF THE NEW MOTOVILIKA

PERM MASTERPLAN, (1940), VIEW OF PERM CITY BLOCKS


81

URBAN IDEOLOGYA new plan for Perm was drawn up in 1940, showing a revival of interests in the old city centre. Th is precise master plan is based on neo-classical rules in continuity with the urban structure of Perms city centre. Two more centres were planned, one within the old city centre and a second one in Motovilika. Th e two cities then became one, called Molotov. Th e industrial settlements were connected together with impressive bridges, forming a new network serving the secondary centres. Th e urban strategy combines a geometrical structure of massive open blocks sliced through geometrical valleys. Th e size of the city block is kept or doubled, the rivers are canalised and the valleys arranged in gorgeous parks. A scaled neo-classical grid structure was designed with exploded blocks, lanes and avenues connecting monumental squares and parks. Th e streets were wide and straight, full of fountains, statues and geometrical greenery. In the utopians views of 1940 the small villages of timber housing no longer appear nor the industries. Instead of these new palaces are foreseen, where an equal society meets and lives. Order reigns. Th e only remaining sign of old Perm is the Opera house, the Perm cathedral) and the Komsomolsky Prospect. Some quarters are handled more precisely as with the connection between Molotov and Perm, and the blocks around the Esplanade and Razguliay.

PERM MASTERPLAN, (1940)

PERM MASTERPLAN, (1940), PLAN OF THE NEW MOTOVILIKA

PERM MASTERPLAN, (1940), PLAN OF THE MARKET

PERM MASTERPLAN, (1940), PLAN OF THE NEW RAZGULIAY


82

PERMER REALITYTh e plans of 1940 seem to ignore an essential element of Perm: the implantation of industries. Every satellite around Perm and the quarters of the city centre are attached to an industry (Shamarin 2008). It is necessary to distinguish two types of urban developments started during the Socialist Realism and emphasized during the Soviet era: the developments in continuity with the city and the new satellites. Th e fi rst ones are made in continuity with the original structure, as for example Komsomolsky Prospect. Th is large green axis is leading to the Engine Factory founded in 1931. Th e plots neighboring plots are of much bigger size. Along Lenina Street, around the Esplanade, Massive Stalinits palaces increase about six times the size of the former plots, creating a new hierarchy of streets, either outside or inside of these mega-blocks based on the principles of the Muscovite Kwartal.

KOMSOMOLSKI PROSPEKT, THE WORKER PALACES IN THE FRONTAL BLOCKS, BEHIND TOWN HOUSES


83

Th e second type of developments has to be related to the foundation of new industrial satellites started in the 1940s. Th eir urban structure is conceived independently, connected with the other centres by only one or few roads. Th e closer city satellites have been now joined by the city core extension but they remain anyway oft en disconnected from the other city parts. Th eir integration is the consequence of the city growth and not of a project of connection. Th erefore, settlements such as Khrokalehva, Sheleznodoroshnij or Vladimirsky have become kind of ghettos, with the paradox of being isolated from a city in which they are. Th e diff erentiation between connected urban extension and foundation of new satellites is related to two diff erent building typologies, respectively the worker palaces and the town houses, either small palaces or komunalkas.

TOWN HOUSES OF THE WORKER SETTLEMET ON MIRA STREET IN BALATOVO.

BRICK BARRACKS OF KHROKALEHVA


84

BLOCKS OF WORKER PALACESCalled the workers palaces of Stalin, this typology is built almost exactly following the axonometric views of 1940, manifesting the idea of integration within the existing city. Th e blocks of worker palaces are composed by residential buildings around a semi-public space and public services within the block, being the fi rst attempt to provide inside of a block all the public services needed for its inhabitants. Th resholds such as porches are oft en well defi ned, enclosing the internal space. Th e size of the blocks is on the one hand too small to contain enough programs in order to become self suffi cient in term of programs and facilities. On the other hand the space is too big to create an intimate atmosphere. From one window is not possible to see the other side of the block, which actually increase the feeling of loneliness and anonymity and restrain social exchanges between the neighbors. Moreover the bigger size constrains people from the surrounding to cross it, making it even more public. Th e clearly defi ned space of the courtyard comparable to a park, as well as the big size of the fl ats, avoid spontaneous appropriations of the ground.

VIEW OF A STALINIST COURTYARD

VIEW FROM A STALINIST COURTYARD


85


THRESHOLDS






AXONOMETRIC VIEW OF A TYPICAL STALINIST BLOCK


86

STALINIST PALACES IN COMSOMOLSKY PROSPEKT

STALINIST PALACES IN COMSOMOLSKY PROSPEKT

STALINIST PALACES IN COMSOMOLSKY PROSPEKT, COURTYARD


87

WORKER PALACESTh e buildings are conventionally built brick-on-brick; the apartments are spacious and the ceilings are high. All the facilities are included like the central heating system, the central garbage shaft s or the central ventilation. A centrally planned economy meant a centrally planned society (Staub, 2005). Th e historicist decorations on the faade are also fairly appreciated. Contrariwise to the barracks, people boast to live in Stalinist buildings. In the past the heads of the society or the intelligentsia lived there and the fl ats apparently still belong to their families. Most of the times Stalinist housings are situated in central areas and their ground fl oors have oft en been transformed aft er the perestroika in order to receive commercial or offi ce programs.

CURRENT STALINIST PALACES


88

SATELLITES BLOCKSTh e new satellites within and around Perm shared a common urban layout. Housing buildings are distributed around a semi-public courtyard and their dimensions are reduced in comparison to the Stalinist palaces, decreasing the density and the urban character. School and common services are located outside of the blocks, increasing the possibility of privatisation of the inner spaces. Generally the entrances are located in the courtyard, but there are several exceptions. It is usual to fi nd housing buildings in the middle of the blocks, provoking a complex system of spontaneous paths. Around houses such as Komunalkas, where the living space is reduced to the minimum, the necessity of private storages leads to an extensive occupation of the surrounding spaces with small structures made of wood or metal, used as storages. Th e housing buildings are there of two diff erent types, the town houses, being the a reduced declination of the palace, and the barrack, a temporary wooden building being the result of the impossibility to built enough houses for the large amount of workers.

TOWN HOUSES


89


THRESHOLDS






AXONOMETRIC VIEW OF A TYPICAL BLOCK OF STALINIST TOWN HOUSES


90

TOWN HOUSESTown houses resemble to Stalinist palaces. Th e fl oor plans are not organised in komunalkas, but as individual dwellings. Th e rooms are big, the ceilings high, all facilities are included and the facades are well decorated. Th is former housing is successful, spacious and comfortable. Th ey were built by Germans, sometimes by prisoners of the WWII (Semyrannikov, 2006). All town houses have almost two or three levels, sometimes four.

KOMUNALKASKomunalkas are living units where the private sphere is reduced to one single room for each family, while facilities are shared communal. Traditionally, four families share a common kitchen, telephone, and when existing, common toilets. Th e worst ones are timber houses, in which conditions are very bad. Th is construction is extremely light; there is no running water or facilities. Th e courtyards are impossible to maintain and they are always covered in mud. In the Permer and Russian

CURRENT BRICK AND TIMBER BARRACKS


91

culture it is far from an honor to live in barracks like these. Since Stalins time the cult of the work enabled skilled workers to get a good house in a short time; the bad ones went to barracks. Peoples leaving here are oft en reputed to the bad families of lazy drunks. Komunalkas in timber or in brick are less sustainable, with a particularly short life span. Stalinists worker palaces represent one of the most durable urban typologies. Th eir integration in the urban network, the good quality of the buildings and their social environments are essential elements in insuring their future. More problematic is the future of the komunalkas. Th eir destiny is a tabula rasa leaving the ground free for speculative projects adding problems in terms of social integrations and urban connection. It is essential to understand which are their intrinsic qualities and their relationship with the surrounding environment. Th e strategy of renewal could be similar to the khrushovkas being one of the most problematic.

COURTYARD OF BARRACKS IN ZAKAMSK

BARRACKS OF JELEZNODOROSHNIJ


92

TOWN HOUSES IN LEVSINO

TOWN HOUSE IN BALATOVO

TOWN HOUSE IN GAIVA


93

BARRACK IN JELEZNODOROSHNIJ

BARRACK IN JELEZNODOROSHNIJ S.O.S. DESTROY BARRACKS!

BARRACK IN JELEZNODOROSHNIJ


94


95

3.4 Khrushchovkas

Th e end of the Socialist Realism dates from 1955, with Khrushchevs decree on the liquidation of excess. Expensive Stalinist buildings and individual projects were slow and not scalable to the needs of overcrowded cities. In January 1950 at an architect convention supervised by Khrushchev, new low-c

Documents

Perm, From Ideology to Typology