Luba Russkikh by Luba

LUBA RUSSKIKH architecture portfolio

2014

CV Personal details: Luba Russkikh date of birth: 09.01.1989, Tchaikovsky, Perm region email: luba.russkikh@gmail.com tel: +7 915 1962169

Saint-Petersburg Moscow

Perm Tchaikovsky

Education: 2014 Strelka Institute for Architecture, Media and Design, Moscow 2012 Saint-Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Saint-Petersburg|specialist degree in architecture| graduated with distinction 2011 Saint-Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Saint-Petersburg| bachelor degree Work experience: 2012-2013 ludi architects, Saint-Petersburg, architect 2012 A.Len, Saint-Petersburg, architecture technician 2007 LenNIIProekt, Saint-Petersburg, architecture technician Skills: AutoCAD, Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, 3dMax, Rhinoceros Languages: Russian English

DCBD: de-centralized business districts final project, Strelka Institute, Studio Offices, Moscow, 2014

OFFICES

50% of all A and B grade offices in Moscow are located in 5 km distance from the city centre. Due to high rental rates and prohibition of new construction in the centre, zones for new office development moved to outskirts. And now, according to Jones Lang LaSalle report, among all office premises business parks have the lowest vacancy rate and are becoming more attractive for tenants. Very often they are developed on the territories in the West, near MKAD (the biggest Ring Road), beyond the city border and on the empty areas of Big Moscow. Meanwhile the most populated areas are located in the East, South and North. They have a diverse population with different levels of income and education, public transport accessibility, vast empty spaces inherited from Soviet planning traditions and regulations, but no suitable spaces for modern offices. What if we could merge advantages of business parks and microrayons and create new type of work environment beneficial both for companies and employees?

50%

MICRORAYONS

~90%

OF ALL A ABD B GRADE OFFICES ARE LOCATED IN 5 KM DISTANCE FROM THE CENTER (INSIDE THE THIRD TRANSPORT RING)

94% OF POPULATION LIVE OUSIDE THE THIRD TRANSPORT RING

NEW TREND IN OFFICE DEVELOPMENT — TO BUILD IN THE OUSKIRTS, BECAUSE OF LAND COST AND BAN TO CONSTRUCT IN THE CENTRE

DESIGNED FOR DIFFERENT ECONOMIC SITUATION MICRORAYONS ALMOST DON’T HAVE OFFICE SPACES

VERY OFTEN DEVELOPING TERRITORIES ARE REMOTED FROM PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, WHICH CREATES CONSTANT LACK OF PARKING AND DESOLATED ENVIRONMENT

EXISTING BUILDING MASS IN MICRORAYONS IS NOT SUITABLE FOR MODERN OFFICES: PEOPLE WORK IN BASEMENTS AND VANS

OFFICE

COWORKING

PARKING

CAFE

OPEN AIR OFFICE

i RECREATION PLAYGROUND

INFO POINT

BOOK CROSSING

SKATEPARK

BIKE POINT

ii ii

GARDEN

WALKING

$ $$$

$ $$

i RECREATION

i i SERVICES

OPEN AIR OFFICE

COFFEE SHOP

SERVICES

CAFE

$ $

OF ALL MOSCOW TERRITORY ARE MICRORAYONS

INFO POINT

Shipilovskaya

COFFEE SHOP i

BOOK CROSSING

GARDEN

BIKE POINT

$$ $

Otradnoe

ALTUFIEVO

NEW

BENEFITS OF BUSINESS PARKS

OTRADNOE

+ ++

Locations for To find locations for new office development we need office evelopment territories where simultaneously there are three factors: good public transport accessibility 1. good public transport accessibility, high population density existing offices 2. high density of population to decrease commuting and 3. lack of existing offices.

BENEFITS OF MICRORAYONS

$ $ NEW NEW

LOW RENTAL RATES NEW

NEW CONSTRUCTION A LOT OF PARKING LOTS

$ NEW

EFFICIENT TRAFFIC CONNECTION CONCENTRATION OF COMPANIES

PERVOMAYSKAYA

EMPTY SPACES CONNECTION WITH PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORK DIVERSE POPULATION

PEROVO

RUSSIA GDP AND NEW OFFICE CONSTRUCTION AFTER 2012: EXPECTED VOLUME* RUSSIA GDP

$2T

MARIINO

NEW OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, MOSCOW

$1T

CHERTANOVSKAYA

500 000 m2 2000

2008

2012

EACH YEAR

SHIPILOVSKAYA

*according to Cushman & Wakefield

OFFICE

TO MERGE ADVANTAGES OF BUSINESS PARKS AND MICRORAYONS

COWORKING

PARKING

CAFE

OPEN AIR OFFICE

i RECREATION BOOK CROSSING

in order to COMMUTE LESS CREATE DIVERSE ENVIRONMENT IN MICRORAYONS WORK MORE PRODUCTIVELY

i SERVICES

SKATEPARK

ii i

BIKE POINT VIEW POINT

$ $$

Altufievo

According to experts’ estimations at least 500 000 square meters of office spaces will be built in next several years. Though comparing with construction volumes before crisis of 2008 it’s three times less, it’s still quite a lot. For example, almost two towers in Moscow CBD or 7 business parks like Krylatsky Hills. To distribute estimated amount of new construction (500 000 m2) and keep efficient concentration of companies (about 60-70 000 m2) we need to find 7 the most suitable locations. According to the map with before mentioned three layers, zones suitable for future development were chosen. All seven locations are marked with one kilometer radius from the nearest metro station (they are Altufievo, Otradnoe, Pervomayskaya, Perovo, Mariino, Shipilovskaya, Chertanovskaya). Development of new offices in microrayons not only will create new jobs providing opportunity to work near home and decrease commuting, but also will improve quality of urban environment for inhabitants of this territories establishing new functions, and foster knowledge workers productivity because it is considered that urban environment is the best condition for producing new ideas.

EXHIBITION STAND collaborator: Jurijs Kostirko Office Next Moscow Conference, Studio Offices, Strelka Institute, 2014 The goal was to present 7 Strelka studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; researches on the conference in Gostiny Dvor, Moscow. One of the project was a movie and the site was an atrium full of light, so we decided to construct a box, providing protection from light for screening, and put the TV inside. Visitors could enter the box from two sides. On the exterior surfaces we put general information to get attention: statements from all researches presenting our works, timeline showing the office development, and also all our projects on separate panels.

movie inside the box office development timeline statements from all researches

RELOCATE STRELKA

Gate one FIND POSSIBLE LOCATIONS

Stage II underdeveloped areas surrounded by multiple high-density zones To conduct the research of 6 selected areas by questioning To identify areas with a future potential for the development.

Stage

—

Index of density city activity

Gate three

—

3,84

Kievskaya

3,47

Belorusskaya

—

Metro station

—

Kurskaya

3,47

- hotels

Toindustrial move tozones the within the Ring Road To separate Moscow urban districts and into the similar sectors bordered by regional roads. final location To identify areas with a future potential for the development. — 3

To conduct the research of 6 selected areas by questioning — 2 experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

3,66 0

Score INDEX

—

City scale attraction point

—

Metro station

—

AREA

Pleasingness to be there — Frequency of your visits — Area investment attractiveness — Area symbolism and image —

- shops

Transport accessibility — 0

AREA

Kurskaya

3,33

Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

2,88

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

2,56

Vorobyevy Gory

3,84

m. Belorusskaya

four

— Frequency of your visits

Stage V To move to the — Area attractiveness Experts' questionnaire final location

Kievskaya

— Area symbolism and image

Pleasingness to be there — — Transport accessibility

Area symbolism and image — Transport accessibility — 0

1,0

I Experts'Stage questionnaire

To separate Moscow urban districts and industrial zones within the Ring Road —sectors Frequency ofregional your roads. visits into the similar bordered by

2,0

4,0

Gate four

—

To conduct the research of 6 selected areas by questioning — 2 experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

—

Metro 1,0 station2,0

3,08

Pleasingness to be there —

2,92

Frequency of your visits —

- cafes and restaurants

Area symbolism and image —

- shops

3,50

Transport accessibility — 0

AREA

Stage V To move to the final location

2,88 2,56 3,84

Kievskaya

3,47

Belorusskaya

— Transport accessibility

Spark Refrigeration Plant Engineering Building

Kurskaya

index of existing activities 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city scale attraction points

To identify areas with a future potential for the development.

Stage II m. Belorusskaya

Kievskaya

— Area symbolism To conduct the research of 6 selectedand areas image by questioning experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

Gate two

m. Vorobyevy Gory

Experts' questionnaire Gate three 7 Frequency of your visits —

Frequency of your visits —

3,67

Frequency of your visits —

3,25

Area investment attractiveness —

3,89

Area investment attractiveness —

4,33

Area symbolism and image —

3,83

Area symbolism and image —

3,83

Transport accessibility —

3,42

Transport accessibility —

3,64

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

1,0

2,0

m. Kurskaya

m. Belorusskaya

3,0

4,0

City scale attraction point

—

Transport accessibility — Stage II

To conduct the research of 6 selected areas by questioning — 2 experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

—

- cafes and restaurants - shops

—

Metro 1,0station2,0

-3,0 hotels

4,0

3,67

Frequency of your visits —

3,89

Area investment attractiveness —

3,83

Area symbolism and image —

3,42

Transport accessibility —

AREA

Kurskaya

m. Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st) Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st) m. Kievskaya four

— Frequency of your visits

Stage V To move to the — Area attractiveness questionnaire finalExperts' location

3,84 3,47

Experts' questionnaire — Area symbolism and image

Pleasingness to be there — — Transport accessibility Pleasingness to be there — Frequency of your visits — Frequency of your visits — Area investment attractiveness — Area investment attractiveness — Area symbolism and image — Area symbolism and image — Transport accessibility — Transport accessibility —

5,0

Experts' questionnaire

Belorusskaya 0

1,0 1,0

2,0 2,0

3,0 3,0

4,0 4,0

Kurskaya

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

— Frequency of your visits

Vorobyevy Gory

— Area attractiveness — Area symbolism and image m. Tulskaya

Kievskaya

(Kholodilny side-st)

m. Tulskaya

m. Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st) Belorusskaya

Pleasingness to be there —

Pleasingness to be there — 3,08

Pleasingness to be there —

3,50

Pleasingness to be there — 3,08

Pleasingness to be there —4,17

Pleasingness to be there — 1,83

Frequency of your visits —

Frequency of your visits — 2,92

Frequency of your visits —

3,67

Frequency of your visits — 2,83

Frequency of your visits — 3,25

Frequency of your visits — 2,17

Experts' questionnaire

Temporary programme

4,25— Area investment attractiveness

Area investment attractiveness3,89 —

4,80— Area investment attractiveness

Area investment attractiveness 4,33 —

3,29— Area investment attractiveness

3,58 Area symbolism and image —

Area symbolism and image — 3,83

3,08 Area symbolism and image —

Area symbolism and image3,83 —

2,42 Area symbolism and image —

Transport accessibility —

Transport accessibility — 3,64

Transport accessibility —

JCS Tupolev

2,0

3,0

location 5

4,0

3,50

5,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

3,42 5,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

2,83

5,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

Transport accessibility —

1,0

Gate one

3,11

3,00 2,67 3,17

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

Kievskaya

Experts' questionnaire

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

Pleasingness to be there —

1,83

Frequency of your visits —

2,17

4,80

Area investment attractiveness —

3,08

Area symbolism and image —

2,83

Transport accessibility —

3,29 2,42 3,08

5,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

3,00

Kievskaya

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

4,22

3,11

3,00

Tulskaya m. Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st) (Kholodilny side-st) - only functional analysis

Vorobyevy Gory

Kievskaya

3,0

4,0

Experts' questionnaire

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

Pleasingness to be there —

2,75

3,25

Frequency of your visits —

2,83

4,33

Area investment attractiveness —

3,83

Area symbolism and image —

3,64

Transport accessibility —

5,0

3,00 2,67 3,17

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

3,11

3,00

Vorobyevy Gory

—

Kievskaya

3,0 5

—

Average

Tulskaya2,83 (Kholodilny side-st) 4,80

—

2,17

Area symbolism and image — Transport accessibility —

4,225,0

3,11

3,00

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

Industrial zone

Metro station

3,29 2,42 3,08 0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st) - only functional analysis

Number of... - education facilities Kurskaya Vorobyevy - cultural objects Gory

- cafes and restaurants

Kievskaya

- cafes and restaurants

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

- shops

- hotels

3,00

1,83

Area investment attractiveness —

Number of...Score 0

Pleasingness to be there — Frequency of your visits —

2,83

— Railroads

m. Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

Experts' questionnaire

3,08 City scale attraction point

—

3,67 4,0

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st) - only functional analysis

2,67 3,17

Gate three

selected by experts.

2,83

Gate two

III

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

1,0 Stage IV 2,0 Stage 3,0 To select buildings according to our IV

2,75

3,00

Gate three

4,0

INDEX

AREA

5,0

location 3 To test 3 locations within a short period (e.g. summer program)

Before

Gate four

To move to the final location

m. Kievskaya

m. Kurskaya

m. Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

Experts' questionnaire

Pleasingness to be there —

3,08

Pleasingness to be there —

3,08

Pleasingness to be there —

Frequency of your visits —

2,92

Frequency of your visits —

2,83

Frequency of your visits —

Area investment attractiveness —

4,25

Area investment attractiveness —

4,80

Area investment attractiveness —

Area symbolism and image —

3,58

Area symbolism and image —

3,08

Area symbolism and image —

3,50

Transport accessibility —

2,83

Kurskaya

3,33

Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

2,88

2,17

3,29 Experts' questionnaire Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st) Kurskaya

— Frequency of your visits — Area attractiveness

— Pleasingness to be there

Transport accessibility —

— Area symbolism and image

— Frequency of your visits

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

— Transport accessibility 1,0 2,0 3,0

4,0

— Area attractiveness

— Area symbolism and image — Transport accessibility

2,42 Vorobyevy Gory Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st) Kievskaya 3,08

Belorusskaya

5,0

Score Kievskaya

3,11

3,00 Average

3,67 5

3 — Pedestrian accessibility accessibility 2 — Recreation (rivers, parks) — Potential of the territory 2,56 — Ecology 1 — Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) — Area openness 3,84— Security Score 0 — City scale attraction points nearby — Potential of the territory 3,47 Kurskaya Vorobyevy Kievskaya Gory — Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) 3,66 — Security

— Area openness

4,22

4 Team evaluation

— Transport 2,88— City scale attraction points nearby

Belorusskaya

Score

After

— Recreation (rivers, parks)

3,33— Ecology

3,84

3,66

Vorobyevy Gory

3,67 5

— Pedestrian accessibility Average— Transport accessibility

2,56

3,47

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

Average

Team evaluation

Average

1,83

Experts' questionnaire — Pleasingness to be there

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analy4,22 3,11 sis, experts and team evaluation

3,00

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st) - only functional analysis

Tulskaya (Kholodilny 1 side-st)

Score 0

Kurskaya

3,29 2,42 3,08

Frequency of your visits —

Transport accessibility —

- cultural objects

2,83

Stage

5,0

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

- education facilities

2,75 Gate one

To identify areas with a future potential for the development.

4,0

m. Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

3,64

2,0 —

III

3,0

Area investment attractiveness —

—

Stage

2,0

Pleasingness to be there —

Area symbolism and image —

3,08 Kurskaya

Team evaluation

Stage

1,0

Experts' questionnaire

3,83

Vorobyevy Gory

Index of density city activity

conduct the research selected areas by questioning To conduct theTo research of 6 selected areasofby6questioning expertsfields from(ESPAC different fields (ESPAC Approach). experts from different Approach). Gate two

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st) - only functional analysis

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

Transport accessibility —

Stage V To move to the Stage final location

Transport accessibility —

CHOOSE THE LOCATION FOR THE NEXT 5 YEARS

2,83

requirements. To select buildings according to our To test 3 locations within a short requirements. period (e.g. summer program) Gate four

Experts' questionnaire

After

Transport accessibility —

5,0

Score 0

Area symbolism and image —

3,08

5,0

3,50

4,22

Area investment attractiveness —

To identify areas with a future potential for the development.

Area investment attractiveness —

2,17

Area symbolism and image —

To add the adjusting coefficients that take into account the influence of city scale Strelka programme. attraction points in the accordance with their importance for the development of Strelka programme. To separate Moscow urban districts and industrial zones within the Ring Road into the similar sectors borderedzones by regional roads. To separate Moscow urban districts and industrial within the Ring Road into the similar sectors bordered by regional roads.

Area symbolism and image —

1,83

Area investment attractiveness —

attraction points in the accordance with their importance for the development of

Experts' questionnaire

m. Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

Tulskaya m. Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st) (Kholodilny side-st) - only functional analysis

Vorobyevy Gory

5,0 5,0

Frequency of your visits —

4,22

3,11

4,0 4,0

3,08

Tulskaya 4,33 (Kholodilny side-st)

4,0

3,0 3,0

Experts' questionnaire

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

3,0

2,0 2,0

4,80

m. Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

Experts' questionnaire

4,0

1,0 1,0

2,83

To select parameters which define environment in terms of the variety of functions that are theStrelka. adjusting coefficients that take into account the influence of city scale 4important for5To theadd future

0 0

Area symbolism and image —

2,0

important for the future Strelka.

5,0 5,0

Area investment attractiveness —

— Pedestrian accessibility — Transport accessibility 2,88 — Recreation (rivers, parks) — 3 2,56 — Ecology — Area openness — 2 3,84 — City scale attraction points nearby — Potential of the territory 3,47 (Lyusinovskaya st) Stage I — Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) 3,66 To select parameters which of the variety of functions that are — Security I environment in terms Stagedefine

Score

Experts' questionnaire

1,0

Frequency of your visits —

Average

5,0 5,0

3,67

3,33

Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

— Pleasingness to be there

Score

4,0 4,0

Average

— Ecology — Area openness — City scale attraction points nearby — Potential of the territory Experts' questionnaire — Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) — Security Pleasingness to be there —

2,753,66 3,08 5 2,83 2,92 3,00 4,25 2,67 3,58 3,17 3,50

3,0 3,0

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st) - only functional analysis

3,67

— Transport accessibility m. Kurskaya — Recreation (rivers, parks)

2,56

Kievskaya

2,0 2,0

2,75 1,83 2,83 2,17 3,00 3,29 2,67 2,42 3,17 3,08

Frequency of your visits —

— Pedestrian accessibility

2,88

Vorobyevy Gory

1,0 1,0

Average

3,33

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

0 0

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

Team evaluation

Average

IV Experts' questionnaire

To test 3 locations within a short Pleasingness period (e.g. — summer program) to be there Gate

Experts' questionnaire

m. Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st) m. Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

Pleasingness to be there — Pleasingness to be there — Frequency of your visits — Frequency of your visits — Area investment attractiveness — Area investment attractiveness — Area symbolism and image — Area symbolism and image — Transport accessibility — Transport accessibility —

3,58

4,17

5,0

Stage

To select buildings according to our requirements.

Kievskaya

Kurskaya

Pleasingness to be there —

INDEX

5,0

Experts' questionnaire Experts' questionnaire

4,17 3,08 3,25 2,83 4,33 4,80 3,83 3,08 3,64 2,83

3,00

Average

4,22

Experts' questionnaire

3,50

III Gate three

4,0

4,25

Score 0

AREA

Gate two

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

m. Vorobyevy Gory

Experts' questionnaire

- cultural objects

Gate one — Railroads

—

- education facilities

Industrial zone

Area symbolism and image —

To identify areas with a future potential for the development. — 3

Number of...

Area investment attractiveness —

Toindustrial move tozones the within the Ring Road To separate Moscow urban districts and into the similar sectors bordered by regional roads. final location

4,17

INDEX Score

Stage IV Stage I Pleasingness to be there —

To add the adjusting coefficients that take into account the influence of city scale attraction points in the accordance with their importance for the development of Stage V Strelka programme. — 6 —

Pleasingness to be there —

3,66

III

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

Stage

3,47

- hotels

Belorusskaya

— Transport accessibility Stage

3,84

- shops

3,17

3,0

2,92

2,56

2,67

2,0

Pleasingness to be there —

— Pedestrian accessibility — Transport accessibility — Recreation (rivers, parks) — Ecology — Area openness — City scale attraction points nearby m. Vorobyevy Gory of the territory — Potential — Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) — Security

2,88

- cafes and restaurants

Gate one Vorobyevy Gory

— Area attractiveness

To select buildings according to our requirements. To select parameters which define environment in terms of the variety of functions that are — — To test 3 locations within a short important for the future Strelka. period (e.g. summer program) Gate four

3,50

1,0

3,67

Team evaluation

3,33

3,00

1,0

3,08

Kurskaya

Number of...

2,83

Average

Score 0

- cultural objects

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

To separate Moscow urban districts and industrial zones within the Ring Road Frequency yourroads. visits into the similar— sectors bordered byof regional

5,0

Experts' questionnaire

5,0

3,11

3,0

2,0

- education facilities

Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

To add the adjusting coefficients that take into account the influence of city scale attraction points in— thePleasingness accordance with their toimportance be therefor the development of Strelka programme.

Pleasingness to be there —

1,0

Pedestrian accessibility Transport accessibility Recreation (rivers, parks) Ecology Area openness City scale attraction points nearby Potential of the territory Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) Security

Average Stage

Experts' questionnaire

To select parameters which define environment in terms of the variety of functions that are important for the future Strelka.

m. Kievskaya

Temporary programme

— — — — — — — — —

3,66 0

4,0

Vorobyevy Gory

2,0

Score

m. Vorobyevy Gory

1,0

3,33

Vorobyevy Gory

— Area symbolism and image

Experts' questionnaire

Team evaluation

Average

Kurskaya Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st) Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

four

— Frequency of your visits

4,0

2,75

Pleasingness to be there —

3,25

1,0

5,0

INDEX

Gate three

IV Experts' questionnaire

Stage V To move to the — Area attractiveness final location

3,0

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

2,83

Area investment attractiveness —

3,58

Stage

To test 3 locations within a short Pleasingness period (e.g. — summer program) to be there Gate

Kievskaya

3,08

4,25

III

To select buildings according to our requirements.

3,0

Tulskaya (Kholodilny m. Kurskaya side-st) - only functional analysis

Vorobyevy Gory

Kurskaya

Gate two

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

Kurskaya

Experts' questionnaire

- cultural objects

4,0

3,00

Score 0

AREA

- hotels 3,0

3,11

3,47

5,0 4,22 5,0

— Pedestrian accessibility — Transport accessibility — Recreation (rivers, parks) — Ecology — Area openness — City scale attraction points nearby — Potential of the territory m. Kurskaya — Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) — Security

3,84

2,0

m. Vorobyevy Gory m. Kurskaya

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

Score 0

0 Team evaluation

2,56

- education facilities

Industrial zone

Gate one — Railroads

Transport accessibility —

2,88

Number of...

City scale attraction point

—

Area investment attractiveness — 4 Area symbolism and image — —

3,42

3,66

Stage I Pleasingness to tobe To select buildings according our there —

Frequency of your visits — period (e.g. summer program)

Transport accessibility — Stage II

Area symbolism and image —

3,33

INDEX Score

Area investment attractiveness —

- hotels

Average

4,17

— Security

Frequency of your visits —

Average

four To add the adjusting coefficients that take into account the influence ofGate city scale attraction points in the accordance with their importance for the development of Stage V Strelka programme. — 6 —

3,83

- shops

requirements. To select parameters which define environment in terms of the variety of functions that are — 7 — 5 To test 3 locations within a short important for the future Strelka.

— Spacialto attractiveness Pleasingness be there — (buildings, yard)

3,89

5,0

1,0

Tulskaya Experts' questionnaire Experts' questionnaire (Kholodilny side-st) - only Pleasingness to be there — functional analysisPleasingness to be there — Frequency of your visits — Frequency of your visits — Area investment attractiveness — Area investment attractiveness — Area symbolism and image — Area symbolism and image — Transport accessibility — Transport accessibility —

4,22

3,67 5

Belorusskaya

Gate three Experts' questionnaire

Stage

3,67

- cafes and restaurants

Kievskaya Gate two

m. Kurskaya

III

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

Stage

Pleasingness to be there —

Average 5

— Potential of the territory

3,66

- education facilities

Gate one Vorobyevy Gory

Stage II m. Kievskaya

— Transport accessibility

— Recreation (rivers, parks) — Ecology — Area openness

- cultural objects

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

— Area attractiveness — Area symbolism and image To conduct the research of 6 selected areas by questioning experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

— Pedestrian accessibility m. Vorobyevy Gory — Transport accessibility

Number of...

Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

To identify areas with a future potential for the development.

3,0

Kurskaya

To select parameters which define environment in terms of the variety of functions that are important for the future Strelka. To add the adjusting coefficients that take into account the influence of city scale attraction points — in the accordance with their importance Pleasingness to be there for the development of Strelka programme.

Score

Area investment attractiveness —

Transport accessibility —

3,50 3,08 3,67 Tulskaya2,92 (Kholodilny 3,89 side-st)4,25 3,83 3,58 3,42 3,50

Kievskaya

3,0 4,0 3,0 5 3,674,0

2,0

— Cityquestionnaire scale attraction points nearby Experts'

3,47

3,50

Belorusskaya

Frequency of your visits —

To test 3 locations within a short 4 period (e.g. summer 5 program)

Team evaluation

Average

IV Experts' questionnaire

Stage

To test 3 locations within a short Pleasingness period (e.g. — summer program) to be there Gate

Stage

1,0

III

To select buildings according to our requirements.

Area symbolism and image —

3,64

3,08

- cafes and restaurants

INDEX

Area investment attractiveness —

3,83

3,00

Kurskaya

- hotels

Gate three

Frequency of your visits —

4,33

Transport accessibility —

Score 0

- cultural objects

Gate one — Railroads

—

3,25

Area symbolism and image —

3,42

5,0

3,11

Vorobyevy Gory

2,0 2,0

Experts' questionnaire

- education facilities

Industrial zone

Score 0

Number of...

Gate two

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

— Railroads

whilst Strelka is functioning at the existing location, it has a unique chance to test several chosen locations through a temporary summer programme, in order to assess risk, seek feedback, and check the potential.

3,84

- shops

Kievskaya

4,17

Frequency of your visits —

Area investment attractiveness —

3,83

m. Vorobyevy Gory & m. Kurskaya functional analysis, experts and team evaluation

— Pedestrian accessibility — Transport accessibility — Recreation (rivers, parks) — Ecology — Area openness — City scale attraction points nearby — Potential of the territory m. Kievskaya — Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) — Security

Stage

Index of density city activity

2,56

4,0

4,22

1,0 1,0

2,88

- cultural objects

3,0

Kurskaya

Team evaluation 0

3,33

- education facilities

Belorusskaya

Gate three

3,67

Frequency of your visits — Frequency of your visits — Area investment attractiveness — Area investment attractiveness — Area symbolism and image — Area symbolism and image — Transport accessibility — Transport accessibility —

- cafes and restaurants

Vorobyevy Gory

Gate one

Gate two

m. Kievskaya

Experts' questionnaire

Before

Number of...

(Kholodilny side-st)

III

m. Belorusskaya

TEST WITH A TEMPORARY PROGRAMME

Average

Experts'Stage questionnaire I

3 To select buildings according to our 2 requirements.

Industrial zone

Metro station

Gate three

— Transport accessibility

—

To select parameters which define environment in terms of the variety of functions that are important for the future Strelka.

Stage

2,0

— Ecology — Area openness — City scale attraction points nearby Experts' questionnaire — Potential of the territory Experts' questionnaire — Spacial attractiveness (buildings, yard) Pleasingness to be there — — Security Pleasingness to be there —

3,66 0

Stage

1,0

— Pedestrian accessibility

— Transport accessibility m. Belorusskaya m. — Kievskaya Recreation (rivers, parks)

Score

Index of density city activity

—

2,56

— Transport accessibility

Index of density city activity

City scale attraction point

—

2,88

— Area symbolism and image

Stage

—

3,33

Vorobyevy Gory

Pleasingness to be there —

3,89

Average

Team evaluation

Kurskaya Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st) Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

four

— Frequency of your visits

Stage II and image — Area symbolism

—

AREA

Average

IV Experts' questionnaire

Stage V To move to the — Area attractiveness final location

Stage

- hotels

Stage

To test 3 locations within a short Pleasingness period (e.g. — summer program) to be there Gate

— Transport accessibility

—

Transport accessibility —

INDEX

— Area attractiveness

Stage1

Area symbolism and image —

III

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

To identify areas with a future potential for the development.

City scale attraction point

—

Metro station

—

Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

—

- cafes and restaurants - shops

Experts' questionnaire

3,67

3,50

Area investment attractiveness —

- cultural objects

Gate two

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

—

Stage

—

To conduct the research of 6 selected areas by questioning experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

—

To conduct the research of 6 selected areas by questioning — 2 experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

Frequency of your visits —

- education facilities

Industrial zone

—

Gate one — Railroads

—

— Frequency visits To separate Moscow urban districtsof andyour industrial zones within the Ring Road into the similar sectors bordered by regional roads.

the requirement was to find an existing 4 building with space6 suitable for public Industrial zone and educational programme — Railroads 3 1

To identify areas with a future potential for the development. — 3

m. Tulskaya (Lyusinovskaya st)

Experts' questionnaire

Pleasingness to be there —

Number of...

City scale attraction point

Toindustrial move tozones the within the Ring Road To separate Moscow urban districts and into the similar sectors bordered by regional roads. final location

To add the adjusting that take to intobe account the influence of city scale —coefficients Pleasingness there attraction points in the accordance with their importance for the development of Strelka programme. Tulskaya

evaluationIndex of of5 density chosen locations city activity according to the brief

—

III

m. Vorobyevy Gory

Experts' questionnaire

AREA

—

period (e.g. summer program)

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

team’ evaluation

requirements. To select parameters which define environment in terms of the variety of functions that are — 7 — 5 To test 3 locations within a short important for the future Strelka.

To select buildings according to our requirements.

INDEX

Gate three

Stage

To select buildings according to our

Stage

m. Belorusskaya

- hotels Gate two

m. Belorusskaya

III

Stage

experts from different field evaluated 5 shosen locations

—

- cafes and restaurants - shops

Team evaluation of 4 most preferable areas selected by experts.

Stage

Strelka transforms urban landscapes. Since Strelka moved in, Red October has been transformed from an industrial warehouse zone, to a culturally vibrant public space that has transformed hundreds of citizens into urban makers. After 5 years, Strelka is ready for a new Red October, a new combination of makers and landscapes. As an intensive urban regenerator which sets an aim to change the city, Strelka should continuously identify and investigate high-potential but underdeveloped urban pockets, moving or expanding every five years to new sites in order to change multiple landscapes. This will deepen its urban development expertise while multiplying its development impact, as new locations rapidly realize their latent value, attract people and transform their local environment. Strelka will be able to establish a social and spatial ecosystem, that will continue to work even after Strelka relocates again.

Number of...

- education facilities

Gate one

To conduct the research of 6 selected areas by questioning experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

Stage

Gate two - cultural objects

To separate Moscow urban districts and industrial zones within the Ring Road into the similar sectors bordered by regional roads.

experts’ analysis

—

Stage

To select parameters which define environment in terms of the variety of functions that are important for the future Strelka. To add the adjusting coefficients that take into account the influence of city scale attraction points in the accordance with their importance for the development of Strelka programme.

educations facilities, cultural objects, cafes & restaurants, shops, hotels

building criteria—

experts from different fields (ESPAC Approach).

index of existing activities

collaborators: Danila Gavrish, Albina Nurgaleeva, Anna Maikova, Pavel Ilyichev Strelka students competition, Moscow, 2014

Vorobyevy Gory

Kievskaya

Tulskaya (Kholodilny side-st)

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

UNIVERSITY CAMPUS diploma project, Saint-Petersburg, 2012 The site is Novo-Admiralteyski Island in histortical part of Sain-Petersburg. From 1800 up to this day whole territory of island has been occupied by shipyards and closed for visitors. Now due to reorganization of factory and city government programm to remove industry from city center it is planned to use it as a campus for Saint-Petersburg State University. The University includes 25 faculties which are placed in different parts of Saint-Petersburg and in Petergof (town in 25 km from the city). 16 hectares of land in close proximity to different faculties of the SPb city center creates new possibility for university development. University are spread around the Present-day science is multidisciplinary: very often new city and in the suburb discoveries are made between disciplines and new disciplines emerge. So new territory for University could be a place where all faculties would be represented, with research center, places for workshops and short-term researches, library, laboratories, dormitories for temporary residence. In the distance of 15 minutes walk from the island many public buildings are placed, there are a construction of new metro station, stops of local ground and water transport. Proximity to the water and historical center creates spectacular views and recreational potential. On the island history and culture experts identified 8 heritage buildings of 19 century which have to be preserved. 3 of them have facades with exposed brick, 4 are plastered and one is a warehouse, constructed from metal, which is rusty now. Ecological research shows that because of industrial usage soil is highly contaminated with heavy metals.

index of pollution dangerous very dangerous extremely dangerous

the site is the oldest shipyard the territtory is one of the most in Russia and has historical contaminated in the city due to monuments ships manufacturing

metro stations 15 min walk distance public buildings green zones

recreational potential and views to the historical transport accessibility of the monuments nearby and the bay territory

To reduce footprint only main public functions were left on the ground level. This blocks create support for entire structure and animate the territory beneath the building. To maintain industrial character of the island and create visual connection with adjacent metal warehouse building is covered with perforated corten steel. the first floor

ground floor

There are 3 solutions to solve problem of contaminated soil: 1. to cover contaminated soil with concrete slab; 2. to extract all contaminated soil and replace it by clean one; 3. to use special sort of plants, which can remove contamination. First two solutions are expensive but give quick result, the last one is called phytoremediation and offers gradual changes which provide stable effect. To apply this method one should reduce building footprint as much as possible and use ground for plants. So there is an opportunity to create a park with recreational function for citizens, open views to water and clean the contaminated ground at the same time, furthermore in Saint-Peterburg there is no riverfront with recreational function. section

It is known that interaction between people enhance their ability to produce new ideas. At the same time people need private space to concentrate on their work. Program is divided into 4 groups: 1. public functions which play role of atAtractors are placed on the ground floor or directly connected with ground paths (library, cafe, fablab, lecture hall). All people have access to this places so they become main points of interaction not only between people who work in the building but also with people from outside; 2. private places (work spaces, laboratories) are disposed on the paths from public functions; 3. communication zones (corridors, elevators, stairs); 4. zones for temporary projects and workshops. This places creating possibility for collaboration are arranged between places with public functions and work spaces.

MUSEUM EXPOSITION revolution through peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lives collaborators: Luba Leontieva, Dina Budtova re-exposition for Kirov Museum, Saint-Petersburg, ludi architects 2012

no one could havemore than average person, all extra things were taken away :: the

opposite walls represent an interior of rich house before and after the revolution

As a representation of changes was choosen an noblemenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; house interior. On the opposite sides of the room two pictures of the same interior are placed. The first one shows a pre-revolutionary stage, the second one reflects the ruin of social structure and the policy of new government. Nobody could have more than avarage person. All property including clothes and pieces of furniture above average amount was withdrawn, everyone could write a request to get it. So while on the first wall real photo of pre-revolutionary interior is shown, at the second wall we used the same picture but removed most of furniture. At both walls there are boxes which help to introduce the stage of interior. Several artifacts such as typewriter and musical instruments are placed on the first wall. On the second wall we combined written requests and another photos of interiors so that requests are put on the places of furniture on the photo and visitor can rotate it making the room unfurnished.

AFTER

The idea was to show all events during this difficult time through life of ordinary people avoiding linear scenario in exposition. To provide the visitor a chance to choose what he wants to learn structure of several objects was selected. The route is defined by visitors, only two main stages are remain: before and after revolution.

BEFORE

It is the first hall of exposition which has a goal to tell about the time before and after the revolution of 1917, during civil war and changes accompanied them.

to take advantages of revolution it was crucial to belong to the class which actually produce goods: workers or peasants

historical items real existing fireplace

:: columns represent different social classes and changes in

their statuses after revolution

MUSEUM EXPOSITION childhood: two sides of growing-up educational system

school (=all ideological institutions for children) became compulsory and free

ideological propaganda pre-revolution and Soviet systems of education schemes

a class with real tests from Soviet educational programme of 20â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s educational

system

and

ideological

propaganda became parallel :: the root is designed to show all stages of

growning up from a birth to university

collaborators: Luba Leontieva, Dina Budtova re-exposition for Kirov Museum, Saint-Petersburg, ludi architects 2012

S oviet government proclaimed free and compulsory school education. Unlike many different types of schools in Russian Empire all Soviet schools had unified program and provide direct way to higher education. This fact displayed on a diagram, where on the left pre-revolutionary system of education is placed and on the right - Soviet one. Visitor can not only compare completely different systems but interact with diagram by pressing one of the image placed near the diagram and seeing what kind of school it refers. One of the important characteristic of Soviet educational system is its continuity and parallel ideological propaganda. Thats why we used corridor where visitor pass every stage of a child from birth to leaving school surrounded an educational institution from one hand and communist organizations kindergartens set free mothers from the other one. To keep women as a factory worker for work and educated kids in government creates kindergartens where children get not communist ideology from the only care and food but acquire basic ideological information. early age During school education children de facto have to be members all pregnant women were given basic medical treatment of communist organisations - become â&#x20AC;&#x153;October Childrensâ&#x20AC;?, Young Pioneers and Komsomol members. and information how to care about a baby Corridor forms sort of box where classroom is placed. Walls are covered with children photos which create an effect of their presence. There is one historical desk and real school accessories on it. Another desks filled with paper tasks and exercises devoted to paedology - new science designed to find out aptitudes in children. Also this classroom can be used as a small lecture hall.

MUSEUM EXPOSITION the city: changes real and declared collaborators: Luba Leontieva, Dina Budtova re-exposition for Kirov Museum, Saint-Petersburg, ludi architects, 2012

Two major ideas about changes in Leningrad after the revolution of 1917 can be defined. First of all, it is a dream about the future socialistic organization of life. It was so strong, radical and all-embracing that intended to reorganize absolutely all spheres and levels of people’s lives. The second idea includes practical activities to improve life of new hegemon. By renaming streets, squares and city itself, by opening former palaces and residences for public, by taking away property from rich people, by construction of new housing and necessary facilities capital of Russian Empire was turned over to workers. Though radical contemplations about future socialistic life were named opportunistic fantasies in 30s, they were extremely important and influential for changes which were made. They infected with an enthusiasm almost everyone despite of initial conditions of life. So we want to show two sides of life during first years of Soviet reign: dream and real life, connected by one physical space. When visitor comes to the hall he finds on the floor a map of Leningrad as it was in 1934, with changes happened after the revolution. On the walls adical phrases describe future life. Some places on the map have connections with buttons on the walls revealing additional information about the subject in the real life. So, a visitor can grasp the idea of changes driven by huge speculative impulse, plunge himself in world of real life objects and sounds, and estimate the huge difference between the dream and the real life.

1896: the first screening in Russia

one room is a ‘cinema’ with documentaries from the beggining of 20th century ::

20’s: streets were renamed, new nousing construction for workers began :: changes reflected on the map 20’s: public transport was introduced

5,5 sq.m. - average dwelling area for a person in Petrograd

:: routes of the first public transport network

in Petrograd are drawn on the floor

:: the room about this size is filled with

historical items and represent worker’ dwelling beggining of the 20th c.: the time of a great socialistic dream

walls represent two layers: the dream about ideal city and real changes; first a visitor can see only quotes about perfect future, and then can explore real changes using buttons ::

SUMMER PAVILION screen bar

exhibition space

collaborators: Luba Leontieva, Dina Budtova competition for Garage Center, Moscow, short list ludi architects, 2012 Designed for Garage Center for Contemporary Culture and Absolut Art Bureau competition, temporary pavilion emphasizes the idea of bar so the bottom level of exhibition space inside the pavilion is on the same height as bar outside. Pavilion is placed along the walking route so that one can walk through it to existing Garage Center pavilion in Gorky Park. Lightweight framework structure 40 meters long supports roof and fabric walls which can be removed for events demanding big open space. During the day fabric transparency creates the atmosphere with soft light inside. At night it gives an idea about event inside and can be used for video projections. Night illumination accentuates the horizontal line of the bar. The only solid wall contains a utility room inside and provide protection from wind which principally blows from North-West. It also plays a role of screen for lectures and bar showcase with bottles placed from ground level to the top.

WOODEN LAMP collaborators: Luba Leontieva, Dina Budtova Eco-Design 2013 Exhibition, Helsinki, first prize ludi architects, 2013 Lamp designed for Eco-Design Exhibition is based on the idea of furniture multifunctionality needed in modern interior. We conceive an object which perform not only in decorative way but can be changed to meet usersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs. Also we wanted to create an object which emphasizes the beauty of wood so our design utilizes transparency and rich texture of thin sheet of wood. Lamp consists of 5 elements which are made from ecological materials - veneer, wooden frame, LED light and steel rod. Each element 80 cm long and 5 cm height connected with the upper one so one can pull the lowest to open the whole structure. Natural Aand simple materials and plain form make the lamp easy to produce and compatible with a range of interiors. Lamp can be used as a night light and source of direct light. LED lights are placed between sheets of veneer and create dim light when elements are closed and bright illumination when elements are rotated so one can regulate the intensity of light and create different atmosphere in the room simply by turning elements.

LUBA RUSSKIKH luba.russkikh@gmail.com