THE REUSE OF THE NEGLECTED AREAS AND THE REBIRTH OF THE CITY CASE STUDY: THE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX AMO-ZIL MOSCOW, RUSSIA, 2013 Fabrizio Furiassi
YTAA Young Talent Architecture Award Fundaciรณ Mies van der Rohe Shortlist
Introduction
The reuse of the neglected areas and the rebirth of the city. Case study: the industrial complex AMO-ZIL in Moscow, Russia.
Abstract This project is focused on the recognition and re-qualification of the neglected areas of Moscow: industrial plants, military zones, transportation hubs, and other areas that although representing historical sites of economic and cultural production in the city are currently in a state of abandon. There is something paradoxical about the development of Moscow. The construction activity outside the city's borders has long overtaken that within the city itself, while hectares of territory within the existing urban fabric are left to their own devices. The recent annexation of a huge portion of land on the south-west of Moscow represents the urgency to change the shape of a city that, due to rising levels of population, traffic and pollution, is close to collapse. The simple addition of land is not sufficient to secure a sustainable development for the metropolis though, it is necessary to turn away the attention from the city’s borders and to redirect it towards the inside: annexations of new territories in the past of Moscow caused the disruption of the green belt, without benefits for the residents. This story might repeat today with the new extension of the municipality. The main goal of this action is to reduce the population’s density, but despite the good intentions, it is not certain that this kind of urban strategy will reach its aims whil is highly probable that it will cause the damaging of an optimal ecology situation in the south-west of the capital. The extension of the territory 1
envisages the creation of a new center at 35 km of distance from the Kremlin, and the relocation there of part of the administration. The decision is rather ambiguous, both because seems to be an utopian plan to resolve all the problems with a huge single action and because such a procedure have not proven a universal and effective way of solving issues of a large city. Therefore, there are no guarantees about the reliability of such a project. Indeed, to create a new centre at 35 kilometers of distance from the Kremlin will be difficult, expensive, and will include the risk to freeze the state-machine with repercussion on politics and economy. Furthermore, the most probable scenario in the capital is that some historical agencies, such as FSB (KGB) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, just to name a few, will refuse to relocate their activities in an unattractive place outside the city moving there only a part of their office. Decentralization is certainly the right way for the core to lose density, but the current measures are likely to bring advantages more to the real estate developers than to the city and its residents. Above all, the city needs interstitial interventions in order to sanitize, complete and re-connect its fragmented parts. As a matter of fact, the city lacks primary infrastructures, roads, pedestrian sidewalks, bike paths, parking slots, and its public transportation system fails to cover its territory in a satisfactory manner. The subway is not sufficiently branched and integrated with other means of transportation and with the river, which could play a more significant role. As a consequence, several areas are excluded from the network and millions of people are forced to use
private vehicles with serious impact on mobility. Morevoer, in many cases, even if the underground is accessible, car owners still prefer to be stuck in traffic in the comfort of their own cars than to be squeezed into the overcrowded underground. A phenomenon reinforced by the very cheap price of fuels, and by the fact that in several areas cars are still faster than public transportation. The fact is more evident within the many mono-functional areas present in the territory. In these regards, the lack of infrastructures generated real cut-off zones: areas served by only one road that is usually clogged in the rush hours. Among the mono-functional areas there are not only housing developments, but thousands of hectares of underused industrial land. In the Nineties, Moscow’s authorities planned to reorganize them but the program did not grow rapidly as expected. Today, it seems like several places have been forgotten in the plan for the city developments. The authorities need to overcome the amnesia starting to consider their potential for future developments. This issue is crucial also because most of them are seriously polluted by years of industrial use. Air, water, and soil within and beyond those sites need to be sanitized at the convenience of the entire capital.
privates, not very interested in investments for the improvement of the public sphere. In a certain extent, slowing down the redevelopment of such areas is helping the developers to do businesses building on new land at cheap prices pushing the authorities to change the zoning allowing new constrctions on land previously planned for other activities. A more reasonable strategy for the sustainable growth of Moscow would be improving the existing territory and infrastructure rather than building up on new land from the scretch. Moreover, several areas rich in history deserve to be preserved. This projec hinges on the identification of the areas that while abandoned have also the potential to play a new role in the regeneration of the city at large. Those areas match the following points: state of abandon, to be inaccessible and, incredible as it may seem, bad ecology. There are many sites with these parameters both near the centre and in the periphery. Upgrading infrastructures, preserving and sanitizing the existing urban fabric should be the priority for the city government. The AMO-ZIL plant, for its history, dimension and location, was the ideal case study to test a strategy creating new value through forms of urban development which are alternative to the current planning.
Therefore, it is fundamental for Moscow to implement a process of recovery starting from these areas. Nevertheless, one of the problems related to their transformation is that many of them are in the hands of 2
Board I
Board II
N
Expansion of Moscow
N
Land use
Annexation of new territories at south-west
Territory
0
0
20 Km
5 Km
Legend
Surface (without new territories)
XXI century - New territories 1963-2000 - Extension beyond the highway 1962 - Highway ring 1935 - First Masterplan of Moscow XIX century - Rail ring XVIII century - Kamer-Kolezhskyi Val XVII century - Garden ring XVI century - Boulevard ring XV century - First stone of Kremlin
2.550 Km² Population
12.325.387 Density
4.811.78 People/Km²
0
Urban form
Population growth
50
Legend Residential Industrial Public Natural Industrial - Residential Industrial - Public Industrial - Natural Public - Residential Natural - Residential Natural - Public River - Resevoir Natural - Public - Residential Natural - Public - Industrial Industrial - Public - Residental Industrial - Natural - Residential Districts
13 12 11 10 Core
9
100 Km
Diaphragm
8 0
3
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
Fingers
4
Board III
Board IV
N
Infrastructures
N
The connection of the AMO-ZIL plant and the main spots of the city 0
0
5 Km
5 Km
Koptevo Spartak Stadium Crocus Expo
Parco Serebryaniy Bor
Savelovskaya
Voykobskaya
Vladikino
Yarolovskaya
UniversitĂ Statale di Agricoltura di Mosca
Hodinka Novopeschanaya Horoshevo
Botanichesky Sad
Mercato Saviolovskij Stadio Dynamo
Presnyal
Krylatskoye Sports Complex
Ippodromo
Cinema 35mm Arma
Parlament
International business center
Troika Centre
Otkritoe Shosse Lokomotiv Stadium/Cherkizovo
Sokol Park
Vinzavod Kremlin Artplay
Izmaylovsky Park Lefortovo Park Shosse Entuziastov
Pryahino Shopping Mall Gorod Ryazanskaya Gorky Park Novohohlovskaya Convent Novodevichy Stadio Luzhniki Volgogradskaya Ploshad Gagarina Dubrovka Moscow State University Autozavodskaya Vorobyovy Gory Sevastopolovskaya Nagatino Park Christ the Savior Cathedral
Kolomenskoye
Legend Metro station Metro line Rail station Rail line Main road hubs First level roads Second level roads River - Resevoir Districts
5
Legend Main spots on the railway Railway for transportation of good Main spots on the highway Highway Main spots on the river River connection AMO-ZIL industrial plant River - Resevoir Districts
6
Board V
Board VI
N
Neglected areas
N
Pollution
0
0
5 Km
5 Km
Legend Legend Neglected areas Transformation started or planned River - Resevoir Districts
7
Non-polluted Lowly polluted Averagely polluted Extremely polluted Polluted by sulphates River - Resevoir Distretti
8
Board VII
Board VIII
N
Development scenario at the metropolitan scale
New potential centralities 0
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +
0
The New Moscow
5 Km
+
5 Km
Legend
Legend New potential centralities AMO-ZIL plant Infrasructures Averagely polluted Extremely polluted Transformation started or planned Pollution by solphates River - Resevoir Neglected areas Districts
9
N
Neglected areas (to be reactivated) Green connections Existing Infrastructure The river as a new metropolitan infrastructure Improvment of the rail infrastructure New highway ring
Strategies - Reuse of neglected areas - Transformation of mono-functional areas to mixed use - Preservation of architectural and environmental heritage - Improvement of infrastructures and urban reconnection - Riconnection of the green areas - Remediation of contamined territories
10
Board IX
Board X
AMO-ZIL industrial complex and surrounding areas
Uso suolo Land use anddel infrasructures
AMO-ZIL industrial complex and surrounding areas
N
Natural fabric and soil pollution
N
0
0
2 Km
2 Km
Legend
AMO-ZIL area Old city Urban centrality Indusrial area Stalinist Housing Microrayon Housing 1920-1930 Single family husing Garages River Planned road links Railway (for passengers by 2016) Station - Metro/Railway Lines - Metro/Railway Highway
11
Legenda AMO-ZIL area Streets and green spaces Green in residential areas Parks Forest and residual green Average pollution of soil High pollution of soil
12
Board XI
Board XII
AMO-ZIL industrial complex Chronology of the construction and preservation strategy
AMO-ZIL industrial complex N
Re-connection with the context and urban mobiility strategy
0
N 0 Highway
Entrance
Entrance Entrance
0,5 Km Parking
Entrance
Boulevard (historical path)
0,5 Km
New road shortcut
Park
Bus Station Parking
Rail bridge
Rail station
Legend
Buildings 1916-1933 Buildings 1934-1941 Buildings 1951-1970 Buildings 1971-1991 Later buildings Valuable buildings (to be preserved) AMO-ZIL territory Highway Railway Entrances Historical paths Area for industrial use (Moscow 2025)
iver
Moskva R
13
Preservation of the industrial activity Pedesrian bridge
Legend
First level roads Second level roads Railway Railway station Bus station Parking Pedestrian and cycle paths Transportation on the river Area with prevalence of green
Linear park
Platform on the river New road shortcut
iver
Moskva R
14
Board XIII
Board XIV
AMO-ZIL industrial complex
Scenario of reuse of the AMO-ZIL industrial complex
Navigation map
Reuse of the AMO-ZIL industrial complex
Masterplan
N 0
Icon of the XX century production in Russia, the AMO-ZIL plant was the place where vehicles of all kinds, from the most common cars to the military vehicles and the armored cars supplied to the officials of the Russian government, were produced. Founded in 1916, the ZIL car factory, is located at 5 km from the Kremlin in an area tangential on one side to the Third Ring highway of Moscow and on the other side to the Moskva River, while is literally cut in two parts by the railway that used to connect the industrial areas of the city for the transportation of goods. Since its foundation the buildings within the factory have increased considerably. Some of them have undergone various transformations according to the contingent situation: they have been cut, extended or merged with others. Today most of them are in a state of complete abandonment, while the surrounding environment is severely polluted by a century of industrial activity. The problems that affect the area are the lack of connections with the context and the reduced accessibility, the lack of a mixed use program, the architectural and environmental decay, and the existence of natural and artificial barriers that do not allow an efficient mobility both inside and towards the outside.
V
1 2
V
V
V
3 4 5 6 7 8
V V
V
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
V
V V
V
V
V
V
19
20
V
The scenario of reuse includes the improvement of the infrastructures and a new accessibility for a sustainable mobility, the preservation of the buildings considered significant, the introduction of a new variety of functions able to create complexity and competitiveness, the environmental regeneration, and the conversion of architectural and natural barriers into links in order to reconnect the fragmented urban fabric.
0,5 Km
9
V
V
ver
Moskva Ri
1.Modeling workshop 2-13.Main factory lane 3.Old body workshop 4.New body workshop 5-9.Malleable casting foundry 6-8-20.Press workshop 7.Motor workshop 10-11-14.Gray iron casting foundry 12.Assemblage workshop 15.Calibration workshop 16.Standard components workshop 17-18.Maintenance and repair workshop 19. Abrasive workshop
Photographic reportage
1
2
6
7
3
8
4
5
9
10
Legend
Highway Railway (for passengers by 2016) Preserved buildings Preserved building for industrial use New buildings Green
15
11
12
13
16
17
18
14
19
15
iver
Moskva R
20
16
Board XV
Scenario of reuse of the AMO-ZIL industrial complex Functional program
Legend Highway Railway (for passengers by 2016) Housing Commerce Offices Productive / Industrial Cultural / Museum Innovation / Start up Education / Campus Institutional Sport / Entertainment Infrastructural Hospitality / Hotel Services Hospital Science / Research Public green / Park River
Built surface 3.220.000 sqm Housing 1.065.000 sqm Commerce 95.000 sqm Office 275.000 sqm Productive 345.000 sqm Cultural 5.500 sqm Innovation 2.500 sqm Sport 25.000 sqm Infrastructures 65.600 sqm Hotel 55.000 sqm Services 30.000 mq Hospital 65.500 sqm Public green 12.500 sqm
22,1% 33,1%
Mo
skv
2,1% 1% 1,9% 2% 0,8%
aR
iver
3%
11,7% 1,3%
17
2%
8,5% 10,7%
18 Totale costruito 3.220.000 mq