Urban Agenda 2014

№3 / SPRING 2014

Workbook

№3 / SPRING 2014

Cult of the Centre versus Cult of the Periphery Moscow’s first urban research shows how to change the course of development of periphery Moscow, Beijing, Sao Paulo, Jakarta and the others — do common problems have common solutions?

Transport, investments, taxes, municipal management, social and cultural infrastructure and other reforms in the capital: achievements and impediments What Moscow Wants: 2000 ideas to improve life in the city from its residents

MOSCOW: success beyond the centre The Third Moscow Urban Forum has brought Moscow’s periphery into the limelight, especially its part between the Third Ring Road and the Moscow Automobile Ring Road. Over the past 20 years, the historical and administrative centre of Moscow has attracted a lot of attention and investment, as well as human, financial and social capital. “Cult of the centre” in the city’s development has led to a number of predicaments: imbalanced distribution of population and available jobs, gap in quality of urban environment of different parts of the city, traffic congestions.

Will the “cult of the periphery” fix these problems? For that we need to recognize the outskirts of the city as its equal part, rather than an appendage to the centre.

publisher

The Non-profit Organization Moscow Urban Forum 22 Voznesensky Pereulok Moscow, 125009 +7 495 650 50 44 www.mosurbanforum.ru general director

Olga Papadina editor-in-chief

Alexander Ostrogorsky written by

Glaphira Parinos, Alexander Simonov Alexander Suvalko Alexandra Talaver, Maria Fadeeva, Alexander Shamsha, Alexey Shchukin project coordinators

Svetlana Belkina Alina Ryaboshapka marketing and development director

Alexandra Lavrova Alexandra.Lavrova@ mosurbanforum.ru head of delegate management departament

Natalia Mamaeva natalya_mamaeva@ mosurbanforum.ru Published based on the materials of the Third Moscow Urban Forum held on 5–6 December, 2013 afisha atelier

Afisha Company LLC atelier.afisha.ru Natalia Stulova, Anastasia Ukhina, Tatiana Knyazeva, Evgenia Nikolaeva, Alexey Novikov, Natalia Heritage, Mila Subotic printing

ABT Group Circulation: 500 copies The magazine is registered by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Press, Broadcasting and Mass Communications Registration certificate PI No. FS77-53488 from 04.04.2013

04 Archaeology of the Periphery

The Global Agenda

significance for success beyond the centre

10 Balanced development of a modern megacity — opportunity or necessity?

40 Coordinated motion: global standards of transport infrastructure planning for Moscow

12 Models of urban development for modern agglomerations

44 Entrepreneurship and the city: the scope of interaction

14 Smart Megacities: technology, data and social communication

46 Centres outside the centre: Moscow’s potential as a polycentric megacity

16 Self-realised citizens: how can they be encouraged to actively participate in the city’s affairs?

48 Cultural norms: Soviet recreation and education infrastructure under new conditions

18 Improving the quality of the urban environment and social standards

50 The authorities and citizens: from alienation to cooperation. Practice in Moscow

20 Investment attractiveness of a city 22 Development and implementation of an effective housing policy

52 The appropriateness of modernity: the architectural process through the eyes of business

24 Human capital for the city: the balance of local and external resources

54 Panel Moscow: limitations and development potential

26 City strategy: what factors need to be considered?

56 City, suburbs or countryside: model for development of new areas of Moscow

28 Local landmarks: a source of identity and resource for development of outer areas

60 Development on a megacity scale: change of paradigm

30 From Moscow to Sao Paulo: similarities and differences between cities in rapidly developing countries 32 Ecology of a megacity: transition to integrated strategies 34 Creation of new centres of attraction: approaches and projects that have changed cities

The Moscow Agenda

36 Moscow reforms: implementation experience, assessment of results and

62 Life beyond the centre: diagnosis and prognosis 64 Tax instruments for urban development 66 Design of public spaces 68 Key approaches to Moscow’s territorial development

70 The Festival Day 74 What Moscow Wants 80 About the Forum

1

Intro

Dear Partners, Colleagues and Friends, The number of people around the world, who choose to live and pursue their potential and talents in megacities, is growing. Big cities have become extremely big. Urban agglomerations occupy vast territories. Economic, political and cultural weight of the world’s largest cities is not only comparable with the influence of some countries, but sometimes exceeds it.

2

Moscow is one of such cities. Similar to many ­other major cities, most part of Moscow’s territory is a periphery — standard residential complexes, many of which for various historical, structural and logistical reasons were deprived of certain elements of a full-fledged urban environment.

Elimination of imbalances in the development of peripheral areas can significantly accelerate the development of the city. On the other hand, if left unattended it can bereave a city of many possibilities.

It is no coincidence that the topic of «Megacities: development beyond the centre» has become key subject of discussion at the Third Moscow Urban Forum. A special research, prepared for the Forum, shows that outskirts of different cities around the world have common problems. Needless to say, in Paris and Mumbai, Johannesburg and Chicago, the periphery looks different. At the same time, a list of issues faced by peripheral areas in all of these cities will look very similar: lack

3 moscow urban forum

of comfortable and fast transport connections to the centre and links between these areas, deficit of jobs and essential services, lack of opportunities for residents to engage in life of their city, and, in some cases, their reluctance to do so.

Discussions about the future of Moscow’s periphery are, in fact, discussions about the future of the entire city. This is because the four-fifths of Muscovites live outside the centre. Over the past hundred years, after a few radically different stages of development, Moscow has grown ten-fold. But issues connected to development of the periphery have always been and remain one of the most important aspects of its urban planning.

The Moscow City Government has its own solutions to these issues. Above all, it is consistent policy aimed at sustainable development of the entire territory of Moscow.

After the revision of previous decisions, we revoked construction projects of 25 million square meters of real estate, which were essentially infill constructions and would have had negative impact on the urban environment.

On the other hand, we encourage new clusters of economic and social activity outside the historic centre, especially in Kommunarka, Rumyantsevo and other areas of the New Moscow.

It was decided to start renovation of the former industrial zones near the Moscow Little Ring Railway, including the vast territory of ZIL car factory on 378 hectares of Moscow’s land.

In the peripheral areas with existing residential neighbourhoods priority is given to the construction of additional schools, kindergartens, polyclinics, shops and other amenities essential to the local residents.

Moscow has launched one of the world’s largest programmes of public transport development.

It involves construction of dozens of kilometres of new roads and underground and railway lines, major road interchanges and transit hubs.

Through these projects, Moscow confirms its status as one of the most attractive areas of investment opportunities in Europe. We build more than 8 million square meters of real estate per year, which exceeds the pre-crisis level. By the end of 2013 investments in the economy of the city amounted to over 40 billion US Dollars; most of them are private investments.

But the most important part of our programme of Moscow’s development is humanitarian and urban aspects of the programme.

By improving transport system and developing the city’s periphery, as well as forming new centres of social and business activity outside of the city centre, we solve not only the problem of exhausting traffic jams, but, what is more important, we will be able to provide different parts of Moscow with the same level of quality of life and prevent development of any tight-knit urban enclaves.

Principle of equality determines objectives of other Moscow’s development programmes as well, including programmes aimed to improve quality of school education and medical care, improvement of public space, and modern systems of public service delivery. The same objective influences single regulations for cleaning streets and courtyards, a unified approach to safety measures and uniform standards of funding of all of the city’s principal organizations.

We discuss all our projects with residents and experts. In this sense, the Moscow Urban Forum has become an essential part of communication between government officials, experts and business. This year, the conversation was joined by city’s residents through crowd-sourcing project «What Moscow Wants» and events of the Festival day of the Forum.

Over the past years, the Forum has established itself as one of the world’s leading discussion platforms, as a centre of gravity for the world’s best intellectuals; in practice, Moscow has become an equal member of the international dialogue, bringing its ideas to the world of urban planning.

I want to thank all those who are driven by a genuine interest in Moscow — your ideas enrich our city.

In December 2014 we will meet again — the Moscow Urban Forum once again will open its doors to practitioners and theorists, city officials, professionals and active Muscovites. New projects will be presented to the community of experts.

Moscow will take new steps on its way to become a more comfortable global city.

Sergei Sobyanin, Mayor of Moscow

3

Archaeology of the Periphery

Archaeology of the Periphery

“Archaeology of the periphery” is a research commissioned by the Third Moscow Urban Forum and supervised by Yuri Grigoryan, Head of the Project Meganom architectural bureau, director of educational programme of the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture, and Design. It is the first comprehensive inter-disciplinary urban research of the postSoviet era. The research is dedicated to a highly complex subject — the outer areas of major cities and of Moscow above all.

“Archaeology of the periphery” is published in both Russian and English languages, and has been posted on the website of the Forum.

4

Research of such a complex object as city, its spatial, social, economic, and cultural aspects, requires special methodology for collecting and analyzing data, in which different disciplines can mutually enrich each other resulting in a broader picture. Research of Moscow’s periphery was conducted using methodology developed at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design. It was named SPACE (D) — from the first letters of the areas of research: society (S), politics (P), architecture and urban planning (A), culture (C), economics (E) and big data (D). Each discipline was supervised by leading Russian experts.

Yuri Grigoryan, an architect, Head of the Project Meganom architectural bureau, director of educational programme of the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture, and Design, became curator of the whole project and the “Architecture” section. Alexei Levinson, sociologist, Head of the Social and Cultural Research Department at LevadaCenter, supervised the “Society” section. The “Politics’ section was supervised by Alexei Muratov, architecture journalist, co-founder of Project Russia magazine and Olga Vendina, social geographer and Lead Researcher at the Laboratory of Geopolitical Research of the Institute of Geography, Russian Academy. The “Culture” section was supervised by Grigory Revzin, a jour-

nalist and architectural critic. The “Economy” and “Data” sections were supervised by Alexei Novikov, Managing Director of Thomson Reuters for Russia and CIS. The first two disciplines — “Architecture” and “Culture” — form retrospective group of disciplines. They are more closely allied to traditional urban planning and view a territory as a system of physical artefacts and usage scenarios. “Society” and “Data” are introspective disciplines (analysingat present). The “Society” section studies local identity, social stratification, interests and aspirations of Muscovites using traditional sociological methods.

The “ Data” section analyzed mass data received from the mobile operator and of the social networks and identified trends in urban mobility, the digital presence of Moscow’s periphery. Finally, “Economics’ and “Politics’ sections — “prospective” group of disciplines — attempt to foresee the future of the city and predict which of the possible scenarios of its development would be the most or least promising.

Yuri Grigoryan, an architect, curator of the research, Head of the Project Meganom architectural bureau, director of educational programme of the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture, and Design.

3 moscow urban forum

By looking at Moscow’s periphery save for the centre, many new facts come to light — facts that are usually overshadowed by the centre. For example, how open and accessible this area is for its residents.

Closed territories Limited access Temporary restrictions Open territories Territories with no defined borders

The focus on periphery is crucial for Moscow and Russian audience and stands out in the international context. Moscow is one of the best examples of concentric development. During the twentieth century its borders gradually moved away from the historic core. Its boundary during the twentieth century gradually moved away from the historic core, adding new territories and creating an encircling hierarchy of spaces from city neighbourhoods and suburbs to the district centres of adjacent areas. Super centralization of the radial structure of Moscow, the explosive growth in the twentieth century, the small size of the historic centre with its great significance for the city and the country — this is what makes it relevant and

necessary to explore the potential of this development beyond the centre. It is important to mention, that for us development of a territory in no case equals new construction.

As the centre sets a certain quality of life and serves as a benchmark for the entire city, the high “gravitation” of the centre makes the signs of urban life invisible on the outskirts. Different optics are required in order to work with the noncentral urban space.

The tactic of “taking out” the centre and “sharpe­ ning the focus’ on the peripheral territory will reveal what has been obscured and help identify the processes that take place, study potential, support or control the current forces at play.

5

Archaeology of the Periphery

WHAT IS THE MAIN SOURCE OF INCOME OF YOUR FAMILY?

FOR WHAT REASONS DO YOU USUALLY TRAVEL TO DISTRICTS ADJACENT TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE MOSCOW AUTOMOBILE RING ROAD AND THE IMMEDIATE SUBURBS?

6

3

Periphery survey

1

Architecture

Analysis of the existing spatial structure of the city and its individual parts has resulted in a number of significant findings. It emerged, for example, that Moscow’s periphery can be considered as an open space. It is largely (73.4 per cent of its territory) available for citizens in the day time.

This means that currently isolated areas of the city, life of which is prevailed by centripetal tendency, can change. There are resources to increase their horizontal connectivity and integration awareness. Russian experts together with specialists from Mobility in Chain group analyzed the public transport accessibility levels. Mapping population density over the levels of accessibility to the public transport has shown that public transport system is not within pedestrian distance for the majority of the city’s residents; for them it is not so easy to get to the underground stations, bus stops, etc. Moreover, performance analysis of the current transport development programme has shown that radical improvements in public transport accessibility cannot be expected.

6

Culture

13

Extensive analyses of availability of various services in the periphery of Moscow and its visualization (more than one hundred of essential services analysed), has shown that once well planted social modernist system of distribution of amenities does not meet the needs of today’s life. The principal of heat transfer over a surface was used and resulted in series of “heat maps”, which allowed to identify the concentration of various services. This has shown that present-day centres do not overlap with old centres at all. In fact, according to Grigory Revzin, curator of the section, in Moscow, within old spatial structure “metacities’ have sprung up — each with a population of a million people. Meta-cities closely follow logic typical in the history of city formation and grow at the point of concentration of urban life, but if once it was the crossroads of trade routes, today it is confluence of major city highways.

48

32

Wage/salary of members of the family

Pension/pension of a family member

Data analysis of sociological survey shows that the “periphery” of Moscow has not changed

3 moscow urban forum

We can afford anything we want We can buy a car, but we cannot say that we are not low on money

We can purchase some expensive items, such as a TV set or refrigerator, but we cannot buy a car

9

3

Income from entrepreneurial activity

2

Other

1

Payment for completed projects/private practice

To my country house

HAVE YOU VISITED CULTURAL ESTABLISHMENT (CINEMA, CONCERTS, THEATRES, MUSEUMS, ETC.) IN THE LAST 12 MONTH, IF SO, IN WHICH DISTRICTS OF THE CITY? Whole of Moscow

1

37

Within my district

5

22

I haven’t visited cultural establishments in the last 12 month

Outside Moscow

37

We have enough money for food and clothes, but the purchase of more expensive items, such as a TV set or refrigerator, causes problems

To work, study

40

1

22

I find it difficult to answer

For purchases, groceries

In the centre of Moscow

29

8

49

31

In other districts (except for the centre of Moscow)

49

I do not go beyond the Moscow Automobile Ring Road

IF YOU HAVE THREE OR MORE HOURS OF FREE TIME, WHERE DO YOU USUALLY SPEND IT?

33

9 For walk (on foot, by bicycle, skis, etc.)

54

46 In my district

At home

4 Other

5

Society

Income from renting out an apartment or other family property

77

WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF INCOME OF YOUR FAMILY

Outskirts of the world’s major cities can even look the same. For example, in Moscow and Calcutta

Income from self-employment (tutoring, repairs, cleaning, private cabbing, etc.)

1

We have enough money for food, but not enough for clothes

We do not even have enough money for food

14 4 0,5

14

In another district (not in the centre)

In the countryside

14

In the centre of Moscow

3

Outside the city, not far from the Moscow Automobile Ring Road

5

3

I find it difficult to answer

I find it difficult to answer

7

Archaeology of the Periphery

a lot since 1960–1980, as opposed to the ­general image of dynamic and fast evolving city. The most active, in terms of physical, cultural and ­social aspects of life, groups are representatives of avant-garde artistic subcultures, Muscovites, who use to be called “representatives of the creative class”, Russian emigrants, who permanently live abroad, but are involved in intellectual and political life of the city, as well as visitors, who come to Moscow looking for employment.

Analysis of daily movements of Muscovites (the yellow lines on the map) helps to understand the magnitude of the Moscow agglomeration. Data was provided by the MegaFon mobile operator.

Data

In this research, for the first time ever in Russia, geospatial services of a mobile operator were used to analyse patterns of urban mobility. They have been provided specially for this research by MegaFon, a mobile operator used by a third of all mobile network subscribers in Moscow.

It was found that more than two-thirds of all Moscow’s residents every morning stay at home or in the immediate vicinity of their place of residence.

In the peripheral areas of the city and in the Moscow region the proportion of those who did not leave the house, even higher — about 75 per cent of all movements. This means that only one third of residents of the Greater Moscow are responsible for traffic jams and additional load on public transport during peak hours. At that, about 20 per cent of all morning trips are forced transits through the centre (so called “excessive indirect routs”). Residents’ perception of the city and their attitude towards it have been analyzed using semantic analysis of social networks data streams.

It turned out that positive comments were almost exclusively connected to the comfort of the environment, and negative comments were more about local issues and social conflicts. At the same time, despite the fact that most of the social network users live in the periphery, it is like it does not exist in their lives; they almost never speak nor think about it.

Economy

The research has proved the hypothesis that Moscow’s spatial economy is badly imbalanced. The economy has responded to Soviet-period internal imbalances in the use of the city’s territory, including its periphery, with a distorted pricing mechanism on the housing market, which is not set to encourage developers to create a diverse and

8

3 moscow urban forum

qualitative urban environment. The monotony and poor quality of residential developments outside the city centre are aggravated by excessive population density, insufficient commercial and social infrastructure and shortage of job-generating places. However, these factors do not bring down housing prices: analysis shows that their level and growth depend not on the quality of housing and urban environment, but on the very fact of it is being in Moscow. Regrettably, what makes Moscow attractive is not high economic competitiveness but the benefits of its capital status, including the concentration of cash flows generated primarily by the country’s huge export revenues. The city fails to derive adequate revenues for development from its extremely valuable assets such as housing, land and commercial property; industrial zones are loss making; property and land taxes are virtually non-existent. In existing model of Moscow’s spatial economy, construction of new square meters becomes the main source of revenue.

Politics

Specifics of Moscow’s periphery is that it has not one but two centres. In this area the role of centre is played, on one hand, by the historical core of the city and, on the other, by territory along the Moscow Automobile Ring Road, multi-functionality of which attracts resources. As for the area between these centres, it becomes less compacted.

Micro-districts are intermixed with green-field areas; houses are intermixed with wastelands. How this space can be made efficient? Authors of the research suggest concept of a SuperPark, a territory neither countryside, nor a city, yet is interpreted by a man, re-planned and filled with important to people functions. It is impossible to administer territory of such a size without the public becoming constructively involved in the development of all the aspects of urban life, including social, economic, transport and spatial. What is needed is for the city to have an infrastructure of selforganization that will connect civil activism and public space. It is impossible to preserve ­special character of Moscow’s periphery and achieve its balanced development within Moscow agglome­ ration without valid urban-planning policy on agglome­ration scale. Realistic approach should be based on a combination of medium-term and long-term spatial planning.

9

Balanced development

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Balanced development of a modern megacity — opportunity or necessity?

Is it possible to monitor the effects of growth? Is it real to achieve a balance in the development of megacities? These are the questions for which answers are being sought today in all agglomerations — from New York to Beijing, from Sao Paulo to Tokyo. Moscow is no exception.

Speakers and Panellists: Yasushi Aoyama, Professor at Meiji University, Tokyo, Doctor of Political Science; Greg Clark, an Expert on Urban Development for Inter-governmental Organizations; Yury Grigoryan, the Founder of the Meganom Architectural Bureau, Director of Education at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design; Sir Edward Lister, Chief of Staff and Deputy Mayor of London for ­Policy and Planning; Justin McGuirk, Strelka Press Chief editor; Fernando de Mello Franco, Municipal Secretary of Urban Development, São Paulo; ­Sergei ­Sobyanin, Mayor of Moscow.

Over the past hundred years, many cities have grown in tens or even hundreds of times. Explosive growth of such cities resulted in stark contrast between their centres and periphery and has become a major obstacle in their road to prosperity. City centres often significantly outperform their suburbs in such aspects as quality of life, work conditions and leisure facilities, as well as the quality of public institutions and business environment.

Yury Grigoryan, Director of Education at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design and curator of the Archaeology Of The Periphery research, is positive that the situation can only be changed by the systematic development of the periphery. The subject concerning what to do with suburbs is extremely important for Moscow. Most of Moscow’s residents live outside the city centre and spend most of their lives there. To raise attention to dormitory suburbs and to make them interesting in terms of investment, it is necessary to see their importance, including historical. It is time for Moscow to regard its development not merely as further housing construction, but as an improvement of already existing urban spaces.

For example, improvement of transport accessibility is the only way to solve the main problem of poor connection links between centre and outskirts. Currently, it is very difficult to get to “the city” from a number of peripheral areas; this poses a threat of degradation of these areas and decline in quality of life. Signs of such a process can already be seen in South-East Moscow.

10

Researchers discovered another problem — “cyclic model of Moscow periphery degradation”. Developers use Moscow’s land to generate almost unlimited profits from the new housing construction whilst failing to invest in the development and renewal of this resource. Moscow has to strike a balance between putting restrictions on the amount of housing construction and creating new jobs and infrastructure for small and medium-sized businesses in dormitory suburbs. Problems of disparity are common for the major cities all around the world, noted Justin McGuirk, Strelka Press Chief editor (the publishing arm of the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design). In the 21st century, given the rate of urbanization and the state of suburbs of the fastest-growing cities, “cult of centres’ may lead to disastrous consequences. These and other issues were discussed at the first plenary session by representatives of megacity governments — Fernando de Mello Franco, São Paulo’s Municipal Secretary of Urban Development, Sir Edward Lister, Chief of Staff and Deputy Mayor of London for Policy and Planning, and Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin.

Report

Fernando de Mello Franco, Municipal Secretary for Urban Development, São Paulo São Paulo is in urgent need of transformation. It is the ­largest industrial city in the western hemisphere. The

3 moscow urban forum

population of São Paulo amounts to 11 million people and almost 20 million in its metropolitan area. Managing such an enormous industrial city is not an easy task. Presence of problems is indicated by the decline in industrial production. People are cut off from places of work, industrial areas are poorly interconnected. Living conditions of about a third of the population are in urgent need of improvement. At that, forests that surround São Paulo form a natural framework for the city; therefore, all its problems can be solved only through the development of existing territory and not through adjoining new one. This means that the city admin­istration needs to come up with develop­ ment models that would support construction of new transport links creating a unified and effective framework for the city and its transformation to a polycentric city. The city is developing underground railway system, widening narrow streets and roads. The city government has to work on environmental prospects of space to boost its economic value and also reorganize the city’s economy to give the most vulnerable population groups of the city new opportunities.

Report

Sir Edward Lister Chief of Staff and Deputy Mayor of London for Policy and Planning For London, growth of its population is an important economic factor. This is why London focuses its attention on new housing and infrastructure development.

Present day London has grown from hundreds of villages connected by transport infrastructure. The historic city center with its low-rise buildings is nation’s heritage that must be protected. The London Plan — the city’s development strategy — became a sort of “bible” for London. It regulates housing development in the center and beyond.

This is very important because today’s 8.4 million of London inhabitants will reach figure of 9 million people by 2020 and 10 million by 2030. London needs to build about 25 thousand apartments each year. City needs new homes, kindergartens, hospitals; the very fabric of the city should change. On other hand, London has a restriction — a green belt, which is not subject to destruction and clearing. But there are alternative grounds for new construction — the old docks and other eco-

nomically unprofitable zones, providing approxi­ mately 80 per cent of the construction space. However, the main obstacle to the implementation of these plans is lack of transport infrastructure and communication, underdevelopment of which restrained changes in the past as well.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#urbanbalance

Perspective Sergei Sobyanin, Mayor of Moscow It is obvious that without altering current strategies and methods, further development of megacities is impossible. In Moscow, the same decisions were made to change its urban policy. We move from the centripetal to a polycentric model of developing the city. We stopped construction projects of 25 million square meters, redirected resources to the development of industrial zones and undeveloped areas. First of all, it is subject to make the peripheral areas of the city more comfortable to live in, more diverse and multifunctional. Transport accessibility is our priority. Our plan to improve connectivity between the center and periphery includes construction of new stations for the Metro, which currently does not reach a quarter of Moscow’s districts, construction of new roads, including chords connecting outer areas, development of two large interchange circuits — railway ring road and a second ring in the Metro. To improve connection between Moscow and the Moscow region, where live another 8 million people in addition to the 12 million Muscovites, 200 kilometres of roads are being constructed and repaired.

Construc­tion of the new Central Ring Road will start next year. However, transport is not the only area of focus. Today, two-thirds of the city’s budget is being spent on development of dormitory suburb infrastructure.

Just this year, in the peripheral areas at least 30 kilometres of traffic-free zones were created. The new program includes improvement of pedestrian zones within a 1.5 kilometre radius of transport hubs to make it easier and more enjoyable to get to them. These local pro­jects are easier to implement for municipal authorities in each individual area. This is why the funds allocated for the community beautification are distributed among local budgets, which helps us achieve another very important task — development of local bodies of self-government.

11

Models of urban development

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Models of urban development for modern agglomerations

Polycentric structures and extensive transport systems are key to the successful development of agglomerations. This fact is recognised by all major cities, including Moscow. However, to be able to implement major projects and changes, the agglomeration needs legislation that enables horizontal cooperation. Here Moscow faces serious problems.

Session curator: Russian Urban Planners Association (RUPA); Speakers and Panellists: Uma Adusumilli, Architect, Chief of Planning Division, Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority; Edkham Akbulatov, Mayor of Krasnoyarsk; Yasushi Aoyama, Professor at Meiji University, Tokio, Doctor of Political Science; Gabriella Gómez-Mont, Director and Founder of Laboratorio Para La Ciudad, Mexico City; Maurice Leroy, former Minister of City Affairs in charge of Grand Paris project (2010 — 2012); Alexander Puzanov, General Director at the Institute for Urban Economics; Marat Khusnullin, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Urban Development and Construction; Elena Chuguevskaya, Director of the Department of Strategic Development and State Policy in the Sphere of Territorial Planning, Ministry of Regional Development of the Russian Federation; Alexander Epstein, independent expert, urbanist, member of the Russian Urban Planners association (RUPA).

Today, centres of many major cities grow by extending urbanized territories that form a unified organism with the centre — agglomeration. Cities not only expand beyond its borders, but also transform into global political, economic and cultural players on par with whole country. Maurice Leroy, former Minister of City Affairs in charge of Grand Paris project, pointed out that according to some projections, by 2050 agglomerations are going to make up 60–70 per cent of the entire planet’s GDP. Yet, it’s not just about money. Today, cities accumulate all types of assets, not just financial. Sustainable development of agglomeration calls for revision of city management systems and creat-

ing structures of agglomeration, including changes to the regulatory framework in the field of urban planning, budgeting and taxation, as well as creating “alternative centres’ on the periphery and transport infrastructure. It is important to balance development of transport systems simultaneously with efforts to decentralize the city and disperse its inhabitants, in particular, pointed out Yasushi Aoyama, former Vice-Governor of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government. In the middle of the last century, the main emphasis of Tokyo’s governance was placed on management of transport systems, namely the construction of new fast traffic routes and ring roads, transfer hubs and the underground

Boston Metropolitan Area Planning Council and its efforts to coordinate planning Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) was established 50 years ago. Its mission is to plan directions of development and to coordinate work of various authorities and agencies of Greater Boston. There are more than one hundred subjects in Greater Boston. Accordingly, the MAPC is gover­ ned by 101 municipal government representatives, 21 gubernatorial appointees, 10 state and 3 City of

12

3 moscow urban forum

railway system. Nevertheless, intensive transport construction has not solved the problems of the city. In the second half of the 20th centu­ ry, a turn took place towards decentralization of the city and efforts were aimed at developing new well-interconnected centers within the ring road.

Today’s Moscow set itself a similar task, but a challenging obstacle is the lack of coordinated management of the agglomeration, where responsibility currently shared between the two entities — Moscow and the Moscow region. How can this problem be solved? Alexander Puzanov, General Director at the Institute for Urban Economics, said that there are two models of agglomeration management. The first model imposeds cooperation within agglomeration, and the second one encourages it. In any case, it is very difficult to ensure the development of such a complex system without horizontal cooperation. The need arises to create a new level of budgetary systems, regulations and requirements of inter-municipal cooperation, but the development of statutory instruments does not yet correspond to such tasks. However, not only Moscow agglomeration faces these obstacles. In general, Russian legislation and management practice are not yet ready to deal with such problems.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#urbandevelopment

Boston officials. The agency itself has only 80 employees. The agency’s budget is 12 million US Dollars and aspects of work include data collection and analysis, strategical planning for regional development, land use, environment, transport, local government legislation, economic development and local projects. In 2008 MAPC adopted the Metro Future: Making a Greater Boston Region project, a 30-year plan which serves as a guide for the work in all areas. Most of the work performed by the agency is of data collection and forecasting. In January

Perspective Marat Khusnullin, ­Deputy Mayor of Moscow for ­Urban Development and Construction The polycentric ­principle of development is one of the key factors of Moscow’s urban development. It involves the formation of new centres for business activities and new areas of economic growth in peripheral ­areas, as well as overcoming centripetal tendencies in daily traffic. Moscow’s territory has increased by a factor of 2.5; with this, Moscow received substantial addition to its territorial reserves for residential and industrial construction (52 thousand acres), and increased its recreational potential (188 thousand acres). Areas for economic growth are being set up in the city periphery, including newly-adjoined territories.

They will potentially “draw in” part of daily business activities and a portion of the commuting population. Overall, the potential of the newlyannexed territory alone is 1,076 million square feet of estate property and we’re planning to create a million new jobs in this new territory, and it will have around 1.5 million residents.

Spatial plans have been developed and are due to be approved soon. A new vision for transport structuring has been formed, as has been for engineering services. Funding for key infrastructure objects for 2013–2016 is being provided by the Targeted Investment Programme of Moscow. We have begun construction of underground connections to this territory — one section of the underground with three stations (one of which will be a transit hub) will be put into operation in 2014 and will provide the accessibility of two technological parks. Within the next three years we will reconstruct the Kaluga High Road and begin to form transverse road links. Work has begun on upgrading the ­radial lines of railway, which will also allow accessibility to the newly-adjoined territories.

2014, a forecast was submitted of the region’s need in new housing. The study considered two kinds of demographic scenarios — conservative, termed Status Quo, and a scenario focused on the needs of the region in attracting new residents, necessary for economic growth, called Stronger Region. The first scenario predicts population growth at 6.6 per cent until 2040, the second twice as much. In the first, housing needs will grow by 17 per cent and in the second scenario by 24 per cent, with significant increase in the number of multi-apartment buildings.

13

Smart megacities

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Smart megacities: technology, data and social communication

Feedback from citizens and day-to-day life data processing technologies are the priority in the Development of the “smart city” technology. As well as the other solutions they allow both the authorities and residents to interact with the city in real-time.

Session curator: Department of Territorial Development, School of Public Policy; Speakers and Panellists: Fareed Abdulrahman, Managing Director of TECOM Investments, UAE; Roger Bayley, Head of the architectural bureau Roger Bayley Inc., Vancouver, Canada; Artem Ermolaev, Head of the Moscow Information Technologies Department; Sergey Zuev, Rector of the Moscow Higher School of Social and Economic Sciences and Dean of the School of Public Policy; Pavel Kozlov, Director of Sales in Corporate and State Sectors, Here.com (Nokia Maps); Dmitry Maselsky, Head of Ericsson Russia; Willy Müller, Managing Director of the Agency for the Development of Urban Infrastructure Barcelona Regional, Spain; Alexei Novikov, Managing Director, Russia and CIS, Thomson Reuters; Roman Postnikov, Director of the Marketing and Customer Service Segment, OJSC MegaFon; Konstantin Fokin, CEO of the Moscow Innovation Development Centre.

How does “smart city” technology change traditional way of life and vice versa, and how does lifestyle, tradition and culture influence the use of new technologies? The fast pace of ​​city life requires an understanding of the processes happening in the city “in real time” and not retrospectively, based on statistical data. Participation of citizens in this process is very important. At the end of the day, it is citizens themselves who create that array of information, which they are able to use. Finding ways to increase citizen engagement in the information space is a necessary condition for the development of “smart city” During the discussion, participants concerning themselves with topics of advanced ­technology had a natural determination to divide the city on “hardware” (spatial framework, transport, infrastructure) and “software” (behavior of people, information flows, social networks). At that, the “software” progresses independently, irrespective of the wishes of the authorities and city services. Moreover it burgeons so rapidly that it could not be analyzed by well-tested instruments of the Fordist era. Use of statistics, which have long been part of urban planning, is retrospective recording of data. It may not reflect the city’s current state — “here and now”. Today, statistical tools are supplemented by means of “big data” — huge volumes of information being collected automatically, for example, from a mobile phone or by employing special methods like message analysis systems in social networking or transport tracking systems.

14

According to representatives from Nokia and Ericsson companies, one of the most interesting and promising sources of data on modern city life is data provided by mobile operators. Artem Ermolaev, Head of the Moscow Information Technologies Department, pointed out that a study will be published in 2014 based on the collected data of three mobile network operators Moscow was already working with. It is not easy to see real people behind vast sets of figures, which take city management to a new level.

Bigger data leads to better bus service Cooperation between KT Corporation, formerly known as Korea Telecom, and the Seoul Metropolitan Government helped bring the public transport system in the Korean capital to a whole new level. “Big Data”, provided by the mobile operator, combined with the information gathered by the city, which is available for wide use, allowed to compensate for the shortcomings of conventional statistics. Given the fact that during the day public transport is used extensively and based on the data of the local transport-operating agency, the opportunity to work up new routes and timetables becomes available. On the other hand, at night time (buses in Seoul are also made use of during

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Artem Ermolaev, Head of the Moscow Information Technologies Department Centralized system of urban technologies should enhance the quality of life in the city. ­Today in Moscow, there is active development of technologies aimed at supporting the city’s development. First and foremost, they are for monitoring the needs of the residents and meeting demands for the provisional public services. One example is an integrated healthcare information system that gives residents the opportunity to book an appointment on the Internet, have online medical records, and to receive reminders about visits to medical institutions. At the same time, this system helps track the workload on multiple institutions and districts, as well as their efficiency. For example, based on collected data, it was decided to integrate polyclinics, so patients can be moved in between one and another freely and without hassle, and in case of high workloads takes pressure off doctors. Another example is monitoring the work of utility and housing maintenance services.

Every day 102 million square meters of roads need to be cleaned in Moscow. We have decided to monitor this work by connecting road cleaning

machinery to the GLONASS system, enter the route and then trace its progress in the monitoring centre located in the Department of Utility and Housing maintenance Services. Replacing inspectors with the automated systems allows to accurately check how contractors follow the terms of their contracts. In addition, surveillance cameras (the city has about 130 thousand of them) also help monitor whether courtyards are cleaned regularly and record violations. Special software is now being developed. Our work is aimed at improving living conditions in the city. For that purpose we created the Nash Gorod (Our City) Internet portal, where citizens can leave their comments, ask any of public institutions a question and receive an answer. This portal also allows you to assess the current situation and figure out pockets of stress. Another important aspect is to increase the safety of city life, so we set up cameras in public places, courtyards and communal entrance hallways. Now we’re working on an intelligent system that prompts about unusual situations. Data from cameras is kept for 5 days, and therefore allows to resolve disputes on roads, solve crimes, etc. In addition, it is planned to make recordings from cameras available to citizens, so that they can, for example, monitor the situation in their own communal ­entrance hallway.

However, it is necessary, as the lives of these very people produce this “big data” — the purpose of which is to allow city management to improve the quality of living for citizens. Apart from “smart city” development, it is important to take care of

educating the “smart user” — a person actively included in the information space.

late hours — for example, by large quantities of tourists) the intensity drops and as a result there is insufficient data. Previously, night routes were worked out based on the day routes, but it became obvious that this approach does not work. Korea Telecom analyzed the travel pattern within the city at night, based on data provided from phone calls, and identified areas of the city most popular as a destination. More than 300 million records were analyzed and compared to various data collected by the administration of Seoul. Results were put over the map of people’s movements around the city. This helped to calculate the optimal bus routes, stops and schedules, which not only met the demand of residents, but also turned

out to be the most economical for the public transport system, as well as took into account the requirement for a high level of safety when travelling at night. Many bus routes were changed and some stops, for example the university, were added while others, such as the Seoul Arts Centre, were removed. This also helped establish 7 new routes at night time, which were usually overloaded during the day. In addition to the fact that it is a significant step forward in the management of the transport system, it is also a step towards a better quality of life. Since the bus fare is 10 times cheaper than the average overnight trip by taxi, it has become cheaper for citizens of Seoul to travel within the city.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#smartmegacities

15

Self-realised citizens

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Self-realised citizens: how can they be encouraged to actively participate in the city’s affairs?

Local Governments in a number of cities have managed to find ways to efficiently communicate with residents, and engage them in local and citywide development projects.

What kind of complexity does this involve?

Session curator: Dmitry Kokorin, development director of International Memorial; Speakers and Panellists: Sophie Body-Gendrot, P ­ rofessor of ­Political Science and American studies at the Sorbonne, Paris; Director of the Centre for Urban Studies; Denis Volkov, Head of Development of the Levada-Centre; Sergei Kapkov, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department of Culture; Irina Postolenko, expert from the Institute of Expert Training of Local Government, RANEPA; Anastasiya Rakova, Deputy Mayor of Moscow, Chief of Staff to the Mayor and Moscow Government; Alexei Titkov, Political scientist and expert in the field of regional policy; Elena Chernova, Head of the Laboratory of Sociology of Urban Development at Russian Research and Project Institute of Urbanism; Alexei Shaposhnikov, Chairman of the Moscow Council of Municipalities; ­Alexander Shumsky, Head of the Probok.net Expert Centre; Selamettin Ermis, Director of Foreign Relations Department of the City of ­Istanbul, Turkey.

A modern city is a tangle of recurring unresolved issues and new ones cropping up all the time. Construction of new roads, large-scale projects, limitations on use of private vehicles — all of these meet both resistance and acceptance from different groups of citizens.

Growth of human capital is an essential prerequisite for the development of the city and its success in the global competition for resources. The richer society is, the more educated and skilled the people are, the more actively groups of citizens form, sometimes with conflicting interests.

When these groups face an infringement of their interests, they may resist changes, sabotage them, and protest actively or silently. In the opinion of Denis Volkov, head of department of development at “Levada-Centre”, the very growth of human capital is what generates civil activists whose attention is directed towards different urban problems, including the environment, preservation of architectural heritage and traffic. It is not uncommon for urban movements to radicalize. At the same time, this is also a sign that people are seriously interested in the future of their district or city.

In case of finding the right methods of interaction with citizens, this interest can be relied on and can help to improve the quality of feed-

16

back, make it constructive, and allow residents to share the responsibility of choosing the direction of development of the city. More and more people get involved in the development of urban projects and their implementation.

Sergei Kapkov, head of the Moscow Department of Culture, is certain that the more people get involved in this work, the sooner proposed solutions are implemented. At the same time, the aim shouldn’t be to simply engage with the active population, but also to build a long-term relationship of cooperation with the citizens. Active involvement of residents means that both parties shoulder a responsibility for the result and are both flexible about their initial positions. The first stage includes city’s Internet portals to improve feedback and crowdsourcing projects, which are an effective way to study public opinion. The first stage must be followed by the next steps, including: expanding the role of local governments and increasing citizen participation in formal and informal decision-making processes, like in public forums.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#citizens

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Anastasiya Rakova, Deputy Mayor of Moscow, Chief of Staff to the Mayor and Moscow Government The number of people concerned about the future of their city grows with every year, and we believe that by engaging these people in the management process, we will significantly increase its effectiveness.

As it follows from the survey results, 39 per cent of Muscovites do not travel beyond their neighbourhoods at all, and become closely attached to its life. They form established territorial communities, to which local issues are the only important ones. Therefore, the key approach to engaging active citizens is in developing local governments and new ways of communication with the citizens. In 2012, elections

were held in all 125 municipalities. Citizens elected 1560 delegates, of which 50 per cent were new people. Many of them are well-known bloggers who actively discuss urban issues and offer their solutions, gathering around themselves the most active citizens.

Local representative bodies are in charge of distributing all the financial resources related to the development of the district. Today, only the funds allocated towards the maintenance of public spaces and courtyards are distributed without the control of representatives of municipal authorities. We believe that people should take on some of the issues in organizing their lives, but to avoid chaos, control mechanisms should be developed that can be activated in case of a crisis.

One mean of controlling from “below” are public hearings. Our investment programme is extensive; we are ­implementing major urban and transport projects, which will ultimate-

ly make the city more comfortable. But during the process, conflicts are inevitable. Conflicts of interests are caused by the fact that often large transport projects are implemented in the area of already existing neighbourhoods and are unpopular with residents.

Public hearings are tools developed in an attempt to resolve conflicts of interest. Each month we have about 30 hearings. Currently we are in the process of developing a new standard of their conduct, which will be implemented into practice in 2014. Its main components are: (1) informing all parties involved to a maximum potential; (2) involving both adversaries and supporters of the project in the discussion; and finally, (3) accounting for all constructive suggestions received. If the results of the public hearings show that the shortcomings of the project are bigger than the merits, we think it’s right to abandon its implementation.

17

Improving the quality

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Improving the quality of the urban environment and social standards

In a majority of megacities residents of the suburban areas feel inferior in comparison with the centre residents. This fact hampers the development of the city and becomes a source of social tension. How to ensure the growth of the quality of life on the periphery and who should be the driving force of these changes?

Session curator: Graduate School of Urban Studies and Planning; Speakers and Panellists: Pushpa Arabindoo, Co-director of Urban L ­ aboratory, University College London (UCL); Olga Vendina, Head Researcher at the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Gleb ­Vitkov, research associate of the Graduate school of Urban studies and Planning; Alexei Muratov, Partner at the Strelka consulting bureau, Head of Strategies for Territorial Development; Leonid Pechatnikov, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Social Development; Cameron Sinclair, founder and CEO of ­Architecture for Humanity; Mariana Barroso Ferreira Urban planning manager at the Urban Planning Municipal Bureau, Rio de Janeiro; Feng Feifei, Director of Urban Planning and Design Department of Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning and Design.

Space in city centres is limited. Scarcity of available land in the centre together with the increasing demand due to natural and migration growth of the population causes a constant drive for business. Developers are now working on areas just outside the centre towards the periphery of the city. In their pursuit of profit and impressive balance sheet ratios developers fail to provide social and transport infrastructure for newly developed housing and business estates. As a result, new neighbourhoods in the periphery are able to house a population of a small town, but the quality of life in them is lower than in the city centre. And this is despite the fact that investment opportunities in city centres are restricted by their existing density and numerous regulations and thus are not as good as in the periphery.

This imbalance is typical not only for Moscow. It can be seen all over the world, explained Pushpa Arabindoo, Co-director of Urban Laboratory at University College London (UCL). The basis for development of many cities is the peripheries, which are now shifting from areas of survival to places of investment. Previously, peripheries have been associated with social and economic marginalization, but now they are becoming more and more attractive to the global capital. However, authorities often build luxury housing on peripheries and forget about the already existing districts that need to be improved and developed. As a result, the peripheries are created full of unequal conditions where the less fortunate coexist with the wealthy and prosperous.

This leads to tension and social unrest. As an ex-

18

ample Ms Arabindoo has referred to Chennai located in India. It was hoped that a number of the city’s issues would be resolved by increasing its territory by 2.5 times. However, the city did not benefit from this expansion. The old peripheral areas degraded even further yet, and next to them enclosed neighbourhoods for the middle class were built.

Mariana Barroso Ferreira, Urban planning manager at the Urban Planning Municipal Bureau of Rio de Janeiro, explained that the city has an elongated shape and the wealthy and socially advantaged areas are located in the East and partially in the South sides of the city, while the working-class districts are concentrated in the northern part. There is a huge social imbalance between the North, South and East of the city. These areas were also poorly connected with each other by transport. In this situation Rio de Janeiro took an unexpected decision to not eliminate the favelas and push marginalized population out of the city, but instead to engage residents in active social activities and provide them with job opportunities. This decision allowed Rio de Janeiro to distance itself from vulnerable groups and, on the other hand, to raise the standard of living in the favelas. However, the city has aimed its efforts and investments not at housing development, but rather at the improvement of urban infrastructures, the construction of new transport routes and provision for easier access to places for cultural events. Feng Feifei, Director of Urban Planning and Design Department of Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning and Design, explained that the attitude of residents towards

3 moscow urban forum

the urban space could be a key factor. Currently, about 8 million residents of Beijing are migrants from other provinces. Most of them came to Beijing in search of employment. Peripheral areas are filled with people who rent apartments or houses.

Although there is electricity, water and other amenities, residents of these areas continue to re-create the village way of living. These people may not be poor but they simply do not perceive Beijing as a place of permanent residency and do not consider themselves as residents of Beijing. It is unlikely that the public or private investments in construction work or in the development of infrastructure will rectify the situation. So efforts and investments should be aimed towards the construction of new communities and this requires a different approach, time, not to mention fraught with political risks.

Evidently, Moscow has to learn both how to balance in between developing the infrastructure on the periphe­ry and how to engage residents in the process of redevelopment in their districts.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#urbanquality

Perspective Leonid Pechatnikov, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Social Development Moscow was developing erratically. This caused a number of social issues. For example, the situation in healthcare. It has led to one area of the city having plenty of hospitals and polyclinics, and lack of them in another. Although, the total number of medical institutions in Moscow looks as if it is sufficient. But construction of new clinics without effective use of what has already been constructed is also irrational, so we have decided to integrate outpatient clinics into a union.

First, it solves the problem of availability of specialized medical care.

Not every small clinic has the specialist needed. In the outpatient clinic association, specialists are not assigned to specific small clinics, but are available to patients in the entire union. This has increased the availability of their services to the public. In addition, if a waiting list to see a specialist is too long in the nearest clinic, the patient is of-

fered a choice whether or not they want to see specialist in the same field at the next nearest clinic belonging to the association.

In regard to the education system, we had no other option but to follow the same idea of integration.

We have 50 elite schools located in the city centre and the South-West.

Parents attempt to send their children to these schools by all means possible. However, at the same time, we had just over 500 schools with places available. So we went towards the creation of school coalition networks, where strong schools with good reputation were coupled with weak schools that weren’t popular with children and parents.

First of all, it made large schools more independent financially. Secondly, talented head-masters and their teaching staff received new premises and classrooms, where they could extend their skills and their capabilities. Later, they were joined by pre-schools and kindergartens. This year, we have opened the first university lyceums, when several major Moscow universities have opened specialized classes, which are funded by the Moscow government.

19

Investment attractiveness

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Investment attractiveness of a city

In competition with other cities for investment, everything is important: preparation of projects, quality of the urban environment, development of social infrastructure, attraction of human capital… Are there ready-made solutions that can be used?

Session curator: Moscow City Investment Agency; Speakers and Panallists: Sergei Belyakov, Deputy Minister of Economic Development of the Russian Federation; Oleg Byakhov, Director of Business Development, IBM Russia and CIS; Jan Dirk Waiboer, Senior Partner and Managing Director at BCG; Dr Liu Thai Ker, the Founding Chairman of Centre for Liveable cities, Director of RSP Architects Planners & Engineers Pte Ltd, former Chief Architect of Singapore; Alexei Komissarov, Moscow Government Minister and Head of the Department of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship; Sergei Lyovkin, Head of the Department of Urban Development of Moscow; Maxim Reshetnikov, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department of Economic Policy and Development; Igor Titov, Director for Government Relations and Corporate Affaires, Renault Russia; Roel Spee, Global Leader of Plant Location International (IBM-PLI), IBM Global Business Services; Markus Frank, Head of Frankfurt’s Economic ­Affairs Department, Germany.

Today, effectiveness of the city government is measured by the quantity and quality of existing and future jobs. Therefore, urban policies should take into account not only the current economic needs of the city, but establish long-term developmental courses that encourage foreign investment. Competition between cities and countries is exacerbated by the uncertainty of the future of the world’s economy. To win the trust of as many investors as possible, city authorities have to take a variety of measures that should improve the quality of the urban environment and social infrastructure as well as influence human capital growth. Only such a systematic approach will increase the economic attractiveness of Moscow internationally and compared to other Russian cities. What determines the attractiveness of cities for business? This question has many answers based on experience, theory and research. Globalization, worldwide spread of transnational corporations with headquarters in most cities makes it easier to compare cities with each other. For example, this approach is used by IBM. Its department Plant Location International looked at the hundred largest cities in terms of attractiveness for investment. Roel Spee, Global Leader of Plant Location International shared with participants the research findings. The study estimated the number of jobs created by foreign investors, market attractiveness for investment, “entrance fee” for investors, resources for support functions (utility systems, printing industry, accounting), number of RTD departments, etc. In general, Moscow is in the middle of the list of all the researched cities and higher in the ranking of developing countries. The major advantage of

20

Moscow is in its status of being the capital in the country where centripetal tendencies play a decisive role. Igor Titov, Director for Government Relations and Corporate Affaires, Renault Russia, tried to ana­lyze whether or not it is much more expensive to carry out business in Moscow, without relying on data from international ratings. According to him, working in Moscow appears to be economically beneficial even with the high running costs.

Markus Frank, Head of Frankfurt’s Economic Affairs Department, presented an example of reverse calculation, when the city analyses its own attractiveness for business. City Economic Development Strategy is focused on those industries that currently play the most important role in its economy.

Frankfurt is already known as the largest financial centre of Germany and a platform for the pharmaceutical industry. These fields of business formed the basis for the future development plans. For many years Frankfurt was investing in the development of transport infrastructure — the airport, the railway service, and digital communication. Today, 80 per cent of German and 40 per cent of European Internet traffic is transferred via Frankfurt.

Report

Dr Liu Thai Ker, the Founding Chairman of Centre for Livable Cities and former chief architect of Singapore If the city is small, it needs to be very careful not to lose its positions in the global competition for investment. An example of such a case is the story of Singapore. How does Singapore, with due account for such a small area, guarantee

3 moscow urban forum

continuous growth of the economy? The first reason is long-term planning. Back in 1991 Singapore had 2.6 million inhabitants. Today the number of residents amounts to more than five million people. Nevertheless Singapore still has 100 square kilometres of vacant land, in other words, 100 square kilometres of space for investment. In the 90s Singapore conducted a study on how much space people need to live comfortably. Based on this study, city officials were able to make the city as compact as possible and leave space for future development.

The second reason is in the city’s comfort and predictability including safe environment, reliable currency, low tax rates and efficient service available to foreign investors. The third reason is the harmonious development of the city. Singapore cares about the environment.

There are comfortable places to live, work and relax, good schools, including for children of expatriates. And the last reason. The city has worked hard to attract and train high-qualified scientists and engineers. Singapore provides them with the best technological setting for conducting research. Life is comfortable for them in Singapore. This is both a sign and great support for investors to their business.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/forum2013/ program2013/#investments

Perspective Alexei Komissarov, Moscow Government Minister and Head of the Department of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship Two years ago, the Moscow authorities began to give more thought to the development of targeted policies to attract investors to certain industries and began to work on necessary infrastructure. The IT industry was highlighted as a priority. We have built Technopolis Moscow, which is devoted solely to innovative projects.

Another important area of work is human resources. Highly qualified specialists are a competitive advantage of Moscow. Starting next year, we are launching a pilot programme that focuses on the practical training of engineers. Engineering students of the best universities will be able to receive work experience at factories and the entire educational programme will be focused on working with specific problems.

The development of numerous industrial zones is of high importance. In Moscow, they occupy an area equal to, approximately, half of Paris.

One of such zones is the South Port, which develops around Technopolis MOSCOW. The second zone is Zelenograd, which was created 50 years ago as a cluster of microelectronics, and now we face the challenge of its revival.

Kolomenskoye — is the third industrial zone. The city’s openners availability is very important to us.

Therefore, from December onward we will be publishing information about our needs — not a request for specified products or goods, but communicating the problems needing to be solved.

The idea behind this is that other cities one way or another had or presently have similar issues; somebody might already have an answer. We will be looking for solutions and address businesses with suggestions. It may become a way of attracting the interest of investors to the city.

21

Development and implementation

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Development and implementation of an effective housing policy

What affects the cost of housing and the development of the real estate market; how can a high quality of life be achieved under conditions of a permanent shortage of square metres? Looking at international experience, Moscow has come to believe that the solution is in the construction of rental housing.

Session curator: Centre of Urban Competence of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA); Speakers and Panellists: Dmitry Aksenov, Chairman of the Board of Directors of RDI Group; Nikita Bantsekin, Head of GR and Foreign Investors ­Relations Department, Russian Housing Development Foundation; Leonid Kazinets, President of the National Union of Real Estate Developers; Dr Liu Thai Ker, the Founding Chairman of Centre for Liveable Cities and Director of RSP Architects Planners & Engineers Pte Ltd, Singapore; Denis Mazhukin, Commercial Director of Terra Auri; Vladimir Samoshin, independent expert at the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation; Olga Serdyuk, Deputy General Director of the State Corporation Housing Reform Fund; Natalya Sergunina, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Economic Policy and Property and Land Relations; Martin Hunscher, Deputy Head of the Department of Urban Development and Planning, Frankfurt, Germany; Frank Junker, Head of ABG, Frankfurt’s Housing Development Company, Germany.

Increase in the amount of rental housing constructed in Moscow is seen as the answer to many problems. So far, however, this is a distant prospect. According to Natalya Sergunina, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Economic Policy and Property and Land Relations, in Moscow’s secondary market only about 200,000 apartments are rented out. At the same time, the city cannot engage in the construction of rental housing because of the shortcomings of the Russian legislation. Once necessary legislations are adopted at a federal level, Moscow will immediately begin building rental housing. Then the Russian capital might have projects similar to Frankfurt’s housing support programs presented to participants by Frank Junker, Head of ABG, Frankfurt’s Housing Development Company. The purpose of one of them is rental housing at a monthly cost of 5 Euros per square metre. Housing development under this program is subsidised by the local authorities. Funds are invested in construction of energy-efficient houses.

Maintenance costs of such houses are much lower, and, therefore, rent price may be kept at a cheaper level. Another program involves purchase by the city of ownership of secondary housing for its rental to middle-class people.

The effectiveness of these programs depends largely on the pace of construction. Currently, developers can afford long projects only if there is a possibility for higher returns, which raises the price per square metre. But work is hindered by administrative barriers. However, according to Ni-

22

kita Bantsekin, Head of GR and Foreign Investors Relations Department, Russian Housing Development Foundation (RHDF), there are certain changes for the better. In RHDF’s projects, the time between of signing the lease until the commission of the building’s has been reduced by half in comparison with what usually happens in the industry — 2.4 years instead of the usual 5 years. Acceleration is achieved by transparency and optimization of procedures, distribution of sites by auctioning. RHDF has it easier because it is responsible for the fate of federal lands. Once it comes to the land owned by the federated entities, administrative barriers are difficult to overcome, lamented Leonid Kazinets, President of the National Union of Real Estate Developers. According to Mr Kazinets, Moscow has achieved great success in terms of reducing barriers, but this experience has not yet reached surrounding regions. However, if this happens, in the coming years we would be able to see quite a radical change in the housing policy of the Russian state, with an emphasis on the construction of rental housing. Accumulated international experience suggests that such a mechanism makes it possible to improve the living conditions of a significant part of the population. This not only stimulates economic development, but also improves the moral environment throughout the country.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#housing

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Natalya Sergunina, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Economic Policy and Property and

Land Relations In regards to the housing, the main priority of the Moscow government is the fulfillment of the city’s public obligations to those who need improvement of their living conditions, including: people on the affordable housing waiting list, orphans, families with many

children and other categories of people who, in accordance with our legislation, are entitled to a free housing. Outside this sphere, a key issue in the coming years for the Moscow Government will be the development of rental housing. Legitimate market for rental housing will allow to reduce commuting — people will be able to choose their place of residence on the basis of proxi­ mity to the workplace.

For the time being, we cannot start construction of rental housing due to the federal legi­ slation lacking clear descrip-

Neighbourhood of social housing in the former industrial zone Korovino Moscow considers industrial zones as a potential for expansion of housing construction. Korovino, a former industrial zone in West Degunino district of Moscow, can become the first among many successful projects of this kind. The first it may become largely because it is being built in record time for comprehensive development.

11 prefabricated houses and one ­monolithic (a total area of ​​150,000 square metres) are being built from the ground up in 11 months. Reduced time and costs are largely due to the fact that the developer — TERRA Auri company — is the general designer, technical authority and management company. However, the success this

tion of the legal rights of tenants and landlords. On top of that, the status of buildings under construction, intended for rental housing, needs to be defined. For example, in Europe, an apartment in the “tenement house” cannot be transferred to freehold disposition. Now, Russia is developing similar legislative regulations on the federal level. Once they are ready, Moscow can legislate its own regulatory framework. We are already beginning to look for appropriate sites for the construction of rental housing, which can be auctioned out.

project depends on the implementation of to create a comfortable living environment. Korovino is designed so that there are enclosed courtyards between houses, which will be used for sports grounds, recreation and walking areas. In the old fashioned districts, parking often takes up the entire space next to the building. In Korovino it will be allocated away from the courtyards. The open area between buildings will have a garden square laid out. Based on sociological research, optimal composition of commercial and social infrastructure will take space on the ground floor of the housing. At the same time, the cost of construction is not astronomical, because the design of standardized panel series is used for buildings with developed new facades.

Modern facing materials are used and together with Moscow Committee for Urban Development and Architecture individual color schemes were chosen for each house. Residents will be able to clearly recognize their home among others. Besides decorative function, facing tiles made of modern materials help to increase the energy efficiency of the new buildings. It may be said that this apartment complex will not be inferior to its commercial counterparts. Within one budget our architects improved design of apartments, making them more functional and comfortable. Moreover, the standard solutions were changed for entrances and common areas. Nearby will be a 22 acre park, kindergarten, school and polyclinic.

23

Human capital for the city

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Human capital for the city: the balance of local and external resources

Today, worldwide migration processes should be taken into account in regard to the human capital when it is looked on as a part of general economic system; in fact this is the only way human capital should be regarded. Marcello Balbo, Professor of Urban Planning at Università Iuav di Venezia, apprised that since Moscow is a global city, it will increasingly face the challenges posed by international migration. Recent data suggests that the number of migrants in the world reached 230 million people. Since this process cannot be stopped, city authorities will have to take into consideration the needs of migrants. It is necessary to understand that migrants are beneficial to the local community and should be recognized as fellow

citizens. According to Michael Keith, Director of the Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS) and the co-director of the University of Oxford Future of Cities programme, this is more important because economy now depends on human capital more then on any other of its forms. With the increase in the level of migration, city authorities are faced with the task of assimilation of newcomers and development of living spaces. In the UK, the government is in process to form general immigration policy on working with migrants.

In 2007, The Commission on Integration and Cohesion indicated four key points related to migration policy: (1) mutual future suggests diversity of identities; (2) the concept of citizenship must take

into account the breadth of local, regional, national and transnational rights and responsibilities; (3) ethics of hospitality should work towards the newcomers; (4) it is necessary to develop a sense of social justice, which consists not only of equality of opportunities and consequences, but also the transparency of decision-making. Oleg Pachenkov, Deputy Director of the Centre for Independent Social Research, agrees with his colleagues that we have to recognize that migration will always be there. It is necessary to appreciate migrants not as guests, but as citizens. Vladimir Mukomel, Head of the Sector for Research of Migration and Integration Processes of the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, added that migrants are actually not big news for Moscow. In the early 20th century, only one fifth of its inhabitants were born in Moscow. A hundred years later this number has increased to two thirds of Moscow’s population. At the same time, according to mortality statistics, two thirds of the dead in Moscow have not been born in it but moved to it in between the 20s and 50s, during the time of intensive development of the Russian capital. Often, the population of Russia has no notion of the economic and social benefits from the presence of immigrants. Solutions to legislative and infrastructural problems as well as greater levels of tolerance in society are tasks that must be undertaken by the state. It’s the only player who is obliged to care about long-term consequences of the development of the labour market, which determines the competitive advantages of the city.

Integration through teaching and family

and the English language. Same reasons lead to their isolation: their husbands spend most of their time at work, poor English makes it difficult to make friends with neighbours. These women find it difficult to make plans for the future and to set goals (86 per cent of the study participants) and it is not connected with their background or the level of education they received back at home.

Analysis of the lifestyle of the study participants showed that English language teachers from training programmes for immigrants could play a key role in their integration. Study participants were asked to name five figures they trust most at

the moment. Most of them gave the first place to their husbands (70 per cent of the participants).

English language teachers were in one of the places in the lists of the most of the participants (only 15 per cent of the participants didn’t include them at all). Siblings made the list but were behind by far (to 58 per cent of the participants they are not authority at all, 21 per cent have put them third). Family members of newly arrived citizens are busy at work so teachers are often the people with whom immigrants spend most of their time. After appropriate training, teachers can teach not just the language, but also help

Competition between megacities is not only becoming increasingly intense in the investment market, but also in the labour market. How can a city be made attractive for specialists of different levels, which it needs, without disturbing delicate social equilibrium?

Session curator: Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design and National Project Institute; Speakers and Panellists: Alexander Auzan, Dean of Faculty of Economics in Lomonosov Moscow State University; Marcello Balbo, Professor of Urban Planning at Università Iuav di Venezia; Olga Gulina, Director of the Institute on Migration Policy; Sergey Zuev, Rector of the Moscow Higher School of Social and Economic Sciences and Dean of the School of Public Policy; Sergei Kapkov, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department of Culture of Moscow; Alexander Kirillin, Head of the Department for Labour and Employment of Moscow; Michael Keith, Director of the Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS), UK; Vladimir Mukomel, Head of the Sector for Research of Migration and Integration Processes of the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Director of the Centre for Ethnopolitical and Regional Studies; Oleg Pachenkov, Deputy Director of the Centre for Independent Social Research, St. Petersburg.

Jitka Markova, a British scholar, native of the Czech Republic, has studied the specifics of integration of Muslim women from Asia. The study was conducted among 159 women who have recently arrived in the UK. Despite the fact that they have not fully integrated yet, these women were satisfied with their life in the new country.

To the surprise of the researchers, these women have almost no interest in the various benefits available from the state and hardly use them. The reason for that is in the low level of integration, lack of knowledge of both the English legislation

24

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Sergei Kapkov , head of the Department of Culture of Moscow The specific nature of the situation in Moscow is that the city is, in fact, the prime customer of migrant workers. These people work in housing maintenance, communal service and construction sectors. Their life is closely tied up with their place of work. For example, if, during the weekend, you go for a walk to Patriarch’s Ponds, you will meet groups of migrants, who work to keep the area clean during the week, and now came here again to socialize and spend free time in each other’s company.

However, it is important to talk not only about temporary migrant workers, who came to Moscow from countries — former Soviet Republics, but also about the Russian residents who have moved to Moscow. These could be students, children of wealthy parents, and people moving in search of work.

All of them also have an impact on the urban environment and leisure sector.

Each arrives to Moscow with their own bundle of knowledge, background, traditions, and often continue to behave as they use to do back at home, without realizing that their behaviour in Moscow looks out of place. I am absolutely sure that all national conflicts are, in fact, intercultural conflicts. Therefore, the subject of adjustment and integration of migrants to life in Moscow is very important.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#humancapital

understand the intricacies of the local laws and regulations. That would require higher salaries so teachers can have time for that without taking it from the teaching of the language. Mothers-in-law are the second most influential person in life of every third participant of the study. Often they have already lived in the country for some time, have greater life experience, and as we know, often play a major role in the lives of daughters-in-law.

It is significant that neighbours, i. e. locals, and television, for the majority — the main source of information, were put at the bottom of the list in these ratings.

25

City strategy

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

City strategy: what factors need to be considered?

The administration of any city, planning on improving the lives of citizens, has to create a sustainable strategy for development, otherwise constantly changing circumstances will not allow it to finish any project, even a very good one.

Session curator: World Bank; Speakers and Panellists: Andrew Altman, Visiting Senior Fellow at LSE Cities, former Chief Executive of the London Legacy Development Corporation; Greg Clark, an Expert on Urban Development for Inter-governmental Organizations; Rashid Seedat, Head of the Gauteng Planning Commission (GPC), Johannesburg, South Africa; Marat Khusnullin, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Urban Development and Construction.

Formation of a new development strategy implies an attempt to predict the future of the city for decades to come. Greg Clark, expert reviewer on cities for inter-governmental organizations, pointed out that the city often moves to strategic planning at times of crisis and overcome it, releases the potential that is hidden at that point. Clark studied the practices of strategic planning of thirty cities around the world. According to him, successful and ambitious strategies have by several characteristics. Firstly, they have a far-reaching time-frame.

Secondly, integration of different levels of planning — transport system, land use, environment protection, etc. Thirdly, the work involves several different management levels — national, regional, urban, municipal. Fourthly, successful strategy takes into account political cycles, change of elites, and form around the plan a coalition of various forces that are interested in long-term cooperation. And lastly, at the base of successful strategies lie not just ambition to achieve some indicators, but a dream and vision of the future.

An example of such an approach was given by Rashid Seedat, Head of the Gauteng Planning Commission in Johannesburg. Development strategy of the South African capital was created for the period up until 2055. The main priorities in it are sustainable development, social equality, equitable and efficient use of resources. The city’s strategy was aligned with the national development plan and development plans of the province. Johannesburg managed to convince its political partners that it is important to choose a city that can be-

26

come a driving force for the whole territory, which already generates most of the revenue, and which would benefit from further investments.

It helps to have a catalytic project that can give an extra impulse to the strategic plan. It may be the expansion of the city, such as in Moscow, or moving the airport, as they did in Hong Kong.

To use significant resources that were obtained through such projects the city needs to make circumspect and balanced decisions. That is where the process of strategic planning starts. In New York, for example, at the municipal level, a lot of attention is paid to the improvement of the quality of life in the city so people would want to live in it not only for economic reasons. Thanks to large catalytic projects, it becomes possible to engage not only the private sector, but also other stakeholders, in particular, active citizens willing to work as a volunteers.

Moscow is still lacking overall development strategy; it is in the process of being developed.

Strategies of individual departments, the transition to a three-year budget planning are stages of which this work is comprised, and to complete it may be even harder than to start.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#strategy

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Marat Khus­ nullin, Deputy Mayor of Mos­ cow for Urban Develop­­ ment and Construction While working on the strategy of further development of Moscow, we took into consideration several factors. Firstly, a high level of intelligence of human capital. Moscow is among the world’s largest cities in terms of population; there is a high concentration of qualified professionals. Secondly, the advantages of spatial potential.

Moscow is the centre of a welldeveloped and diversified region and is situated at the crossing of Trans-European transport corridors: North-South and EastWest. Moscow is Russia’s largest transport hub. It is 62 per cent of total ridership of Rus-

sian Railways, 35 per cent of all freight traffic, and 87 per cent of all air traffic. Moscow has a significant resource of released territories of industrial use (areas of redevelopment), resource of territory of rundown housing redevelopment, large areas of untamed nature, and the Moscow ­River. Our plans of spatial development should take into account both, the need for the development of transport infrastructure, and the need for the correlated development of the available territorial resources.

Thirdly, the economic advantages: high GRP and per capita income (Moscow generates about 22 per cent of Russia’s GRP); high prese­nce of leading global companies, the media, diplomatic and trade missions. Moscow is Russia’s leader in terms of development of financial services. It has significant investment potential — it is the entry,

Development Strategy of Visakhapatnam (India) The Indian city Visakhapatnam is a major industrial centre (steel industry, shipbuilding, petroleum and chemical industries, a port). It has a population of 14.5 million people and occupies an area of 515 square kilometers.

In 2005 Visakhapatnam took up on designing the development strategy with the assistance of the Cities Alliance project. From the start the city identified the following priorities: increase in the efficiency of the city, combat against poverty, improvement of the quality of management and achievement of financial sustainability. A committee of representatives from the city’s main departments led the process. Interests of the poorest groups were represented by the Department of Development of Urban Community. The stakeholders were defined and included regional and city authorities, major industries, educational institutions, and representatives of the civil society.

Sessions were held in which stakeholders were explained the objectives of the initiated process and its positive future impact on the city. Subsequent to the results of dialogues with the ­stakeholders

exit and generation point of investment and financial gateway of the whole country. Therefore, we are implementing in practice the idea of forming in Moscow an international financial centre and corresponding infrastructure. By working on the ideology behind further development of the city, we have identified the main task as the creation of new areas of economic growth, which are linked to finding the solution to the existing problems with an aim to transform Moscow into a modern, hightech city, world’s major metropolis, comfortable for living, working and recreation. “Moscow: A City that Is Comfortable for Life” is the title of the Moscow Government programme of actions, which outlines plans for territorial and urban development, development of the infrastructure, municipal services, and urban environment.

were identified subjects for the workgroups: ­management, poverty and slums, economy, tourism, water supply, sewers, transport, education, the city’s budget, and regeneration of the old centre of the city. Each group included representatives of stakeholders according to their interest in solving relevant problems, as well as city officials and civil society activists. Each group has identified the situation in their subject, pointed out the key issues and made recommendations. Through consultations and focus groups, a vision for the future of the city was formulated: Visakhapatnam has to become an economically active and safe city, free from discrimination, with the best social infrastructure and opportunities for its residents, businesses and tourists. Based on this vision, four key objectives were outlined: (1) the development of the business environment, which will lead to an economic upturn by 2030; (2) ensuring proper water supply and sewer service in every home by 2015; (3) development of the infrastructure, including the creation of the best transport system in India by 2030; (4) development of social infrastructure with emphasis on health and education by 2015.

27

Local landmarks

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Local landmarks: a source of identity and resource for development of outer areas

Development of the periphery requires investments not only in the creation of jobs, houses and infrastructure, but also into the cultural space. What can we be proud of, how to find or create a symbolic cultural capital that will make the locals love their neighbourhood, and tourists to visit it?

Speakers and Pannelists: Gennady Vdovin, Director of the Ostankino Museum; Yury Grigoryan, the Founder of the Meganom Architectural Bureau, Director of Education at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design; Elena Zelentsova, Deputy Head of the Department of Culture of Moscow; Igor Kozlov, Head of the Department of Tourism and the implementation of state programmes of the Committee on Tourism and Hospitality Management, Moscow; Jos Cuijpers, an architect, expert at the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment; Paddy Pugh, Director of conservation and planning for the John McAslan + Partners architectural bureau, UK; Oleg Rozhnov, Minister of Culture of the Moscow Region; Antonina Savilova, participant and organiser of the Podelniki art group, Ekaterinburg; Narine Tyutcheva, Head of the Living City architectural movement, member of the Presidium of Russian National Society of Protection of Historical and Cultural Landmarks; Marina Khrustaleva, board member at the Moscow Architecture Preservation Society (MAPS).

Culture must be considered as an instrument just as important as economic, legislative and infrastructural instruments for developing the periphery. If the city relies on its creative industry to follow in the steps of manufacturing, and expects it to become the new impelling force behind the economy, it is important to understand that for creative entrepreneurs the past is a key resource, as well as symbolic and cultural capital, no less important than financial. It is necessary to locate and update elements of this capital among other things in monotonous, at first glance, modernistic buildings of districts, which were raised next to plants and factories, many of which are closed now. Work with the cultural heritage should be focused primarily on creating a comfortable environment and attract the attention of local residents to their neighbourhood. At the same time, according to Jos Cuijpers from Project Office Of Spatial Development (POSD) in Amsterdam, the current model, in which the historic centre of the city is used as the main tourist attraction, can become rather disturbing for the city’s life. Cities like Venice become altogether abandoned during the summer by its residents. In case of peripheral areas, it is necessary to look for an alternative model. An example of a successful result is the experience of making a cultural landmark out of fortifications of the defense line of Amsterdam built in the 19th century. The line is 85 kilometres

28

long, has 75 watchtowers and about a thousand other cultural objects. It passes through several municipal districts. In 1999, a special bureau was created to manage this line. The bureau’s mission was to preserve the line as a cultural landmark and generate a programme of activities, which would make it interesting for tourists. The fortification line became a line of museums, wine cellars, art studios, hotels, conference rooms and restaurants.

This example shows that in some cases it is neces­ sary to adjust not only principles of managing places of heritage value, but also the principles which determine what can be regarded as a historic heritage and what is not. It is important to consider not only factors on which object or space is now given the status of a monument (its age, historical and cultural importance), but their importance to the local community. A similar approach is already being used in the UK, mentioned Paddy Pugh, Director of conservation and planning for the John McAslan + Partners architec­tural bureau. “Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance”, published in 2008, stated that principles used in conservation should include not only preservation of the original shape of the building and materials used, as it used to be previously, but retain its local significance as well. This principle was used, for example, in the restoration of De La Warr Pavilion, which was attended by Pugh. Prior to starting the restoration works, experts realized

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Elena Zelentsova, Deputy Head of the Department of Culture of Moscow One of the key priorities for the Department of Culture of Moscow in 2014 will be the decentralization of cultural life. Most of the cultural sites are located within the Moscow Central Administrative District. But Moscow today is a city of cities. Other districts must become independent cultural centres, but it won’t happen due to the construction of museums, or the opening of new stages. It requires finding its own symbols and landmarks for every district, for their identity not to be shaded by the authority of the Bolshoi Theatre and the Kremlin. These objects need to be identified and made appreciable. The main question today is what kind of mechanisms can be used to reveal such objects and bring them to light. To begin with, we examine the monuments of the 20th century. After that, of course, industrial heritage. Previously, the evaluation of the quality of life was influenced by presences of industrial zones, because plants and factories harm the environment. Today, the situation is different: factories stopped working, and their territory is used to house cultural centres, which should replace industrial production, turning it into a creative sphere.

that the particular value of the pavilion is in its location on the hill with the sea view. This greatly influenced the work of the restorers.

In Moscow, cultural potential and the identity of the outlying areas have not yet manifested. In the framework of the “Archaeology of the Periphery” research an attempt was made to draw up a list of objects of heritage value and to put them on Moscow’s map. Work used sources including not only formal records of heritage assets, but also the expert opinion of specialists in Moscow Studies and the city’s history. The list includes 625 objects, 407 of which have an official status as a heritage landmark. Most of the objects are concentrated inside the Third Ring Road, which corresponds with the general Moscow centripetal trends — the farther from the centre, the less valuable it is. This does not mean that there is, indeed, no value; it just remains to be determined.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#localidentity

Development of the art infrastructure in Moscow Currently Moscow has two ongoing projects aimed at developing contemporary art located outside the city’s centre. The first one is initiated by the National Centre for Contemporary Art (NCCA), one of the most respected institutions in its field, with branches in several cities across the country. NCCA has had plans for constructing a new large complex with space for exhibitions, research and education facilities since the first half of the 2000s. In 2013, the final decision was made on the location for the complex in Khodynka — the large area in the North-West part of Moscow not so far from the Third Transport Ring Road and which is under active development. In the 2000s, there emerged a lot of new housing, where there will be a large park and retail property. NCCA has held an architectural competition for the design of the building with the participation of well-known Western architects and selected a winner. The centre will become not only a place of attraction for art lovers from all over the city, but also one of the world’s largest art centres comparable to MoMA in New York and the Pompidou Centre in Paris. However, would the centre be interesting to the local residents?

Moscow’s Department of Culture is trying to solve this problem. In 2013 it has launched a programme to reform the current infrastructure of art galleries inherited by the city from the Soviet era. An association of “The Art Galleries of Moscow” has been created, which included 18 of the 19 existing galleries and exhibition halls, opened in the later Soviet era all across the periphery, which were city areas at the time. Each gallery is curated by specialists in a different field of art: Art-Residence, Environmental art, Arts and Crafts, etc. All of the galleries are scheduled to be reconstructed in accordance with the modern requirements for exhibition spaces. Curators promise to work with different formats, including 3D installations, performances and media art. Besides that, activity of the galleries should go beyond their walls using Public Art projects. A key feature of the programme is its focus on local communities, their interests, the involvement of residents in the dialogue.

29

From Moscow to Sao Paulo

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

From Moscow to Sao Paulo: similarities and differences between cities in rapidly developing countries

Special study performed by PricewaterhouseCoopers for the Forum demonstrated that the largest cities of developing countries are faced with similar problems: the needs of citizens grow with the growth of the economy but the resources needed to meet them are limited.

Session curator: PwC; Speakers and Panellists: Uma Adusumilli, Chief of Planning Division, Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority; Hazem Galal, Partner at State & Local Government Sector Global Leader, PricewaterhouseCoopers in Qatar; Pravesh Ranjan Jha, Pvt. Secretary to Chief Misiter, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, Delhi Secretariat, India; Sergei Kuznetsov, Chief Architect of Moscow; Yang Ming, Chief city planner at Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning and Design (BICP); Gabriella Gomez-Mont, Director of the Laboratorio para la Cuidad, Mexico City; Fernando de Mello Franco, Municipal Secretary of Urban Development, São Paulo; Andrei Sharonov, Advisor to the Mayor of Moscow, Dean of the Moscow School of Management Skolkovo.

The PricewaterhouseCoopers study “From Moscow to Sao Paulo. Emerging 7 cities of Opportunities’ captures the situation in emerging cities and forecasts their development up to 2025. Besides Moscow and Sao Paulo, the study analyzed the situation in Beijing, Mumbai, Mexico City, Istanbul and Jakarta. Among these seven cities the main rivals are Beijing and Moscow. Each city has its own strengths. On the level of development of the intellectual capital Moscow comes out on top thanks to mass literacy and a high percentage of people with a higher education among city population.

But Beijing surpasses Moscow on the number of hotel rooms, tourists, international associations, arriving and departing airplanes. Chinese and Russian capitals share the first place in terms of technology development. Beijing is significantly ahead of Moscow on Internet accessibility in schools, but Moscow has better-developed broadband Internet. Will this competition be as active in the future? In 2025, Beijing will be the fastest growing city due to the continued influx of people from rural areas. In Moscow, the experts predicted the lowest population growth compared to all seven cities studied.

However, Beijing and Moscow will still have the same proportion of the working age population, 58 per cent each, but for Beijing it will be a noticeable setback due to the aging of its population — cur-

30

rently it is 61 per cent. On the other hand Sao Paulo and Jakarta are expecting a large influx of workers — from 51 per cent to 57 per cent and from 51 per cent to 61 per cent respectively.

What do the cities think about PwC forecasts? Fernando de Mello Franco, Municipal Secretary for Urban Development in São Paulo, said that São Paulo, indeed, is a magnet, attracting many new residents, and is a fast growing economic centre.

But rapid development has its downsides — after breaking outside the poverty line, people start to have higher expectations of education quality, healthcare, policing and other social services. At this point, it turns out that the public sector can not provide the right quality of these services, and business also can not cope with the growing demand on any benefits, and the quality of life in general.

This leads, among other things, to mass unrests. It is obvious that the answer is in the development of infrastructure and improvement of the quality of life, but addressing these tasks cannot be called an easy job.

Yang Ming, Chief city planner at Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning and Design (BICP), in his turn has commented on the study by outlining the four factors of successful urban development, which can be identified by studying the process of urbanization in China. First, reforms aimed at creating a more open society and market. Second,

3 moscow urban forum

the wide range of zones of the industrial development, which prompted the growth of cities. Third, unique financial mechanisms that can produce the initial investment capital by allocating land use rights. Fourth, the right balance between industrialization and urbanization — industrial growth should outpace the growth of cities, which eliminates the threat of large-scale unemployment.

However, blindly following these guidelines cannot guarantee a solution to other issues such as transport, housing shortages and social inequality. In approaching these issues, Beijing and Moscow are very similar as well. For the past 6–7 years, the Chinese capital has allocated a lot of resources towards the development of rail transport, and the underground network has tripled in size. The city seeks to strengthen the link between central areas and the suburbs by reaching a balance in their development — new hospitals and schools are built in the centre; the same happens on the periphery.

Moscow is using similar principles in reaching balance between the centre and periphery. Development of social and transport infrastructure is seen as a key to positive change, and the inability to provide a proper level of infrastructure — as a big issue.

Perspective Sergei Kuznetsov, Chief Architect of Moscow What can be presupposed about the development of Moscow up to 2025? First of all, Moscow ought to be a bright city in all its aspects — from urban planning to exceptional modern architecture. Secondly, Moscow will become a city with comfortable infrastructure — we can see how much effort is being invested towards this. Thirdly, Moscow in the future will develop into an intellectually and culturally advanced city. It is important to note that the main basis, which keeps professionals, is the opportunity to have a particular quality of life and level of income. It is difficult to predict the number of kindergartens and schools, or to say that there will always be a chance to find affordable housing. This will depend on the success of our program for rental housing. The major force in this direction we should preserve trends of the city’s growing economy and continuously search for new resources. In addition, attracting young newcomers does not negate the above mentioned. After all, interesting architecture and vibrant atmosphere are benefits of city life. Although, the harsh climate could be an issue; however, a comfortable city will nevertheless attract people.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/forum2013/program2013/#moscowsanpaulo

31

Ecology of a megacity

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Ecology of a megacity: transition to integrated strategies

Modern environmental strategies for megacities target the natural landscapes, as well as post-industrial zones, transport infrastructures recycling, and construction. Cities need to form a comprehensive environmental policy.

Speakers and Panellists: Roger Bayley, Head of the architectural bureau Roger Bayley Inc, Vancouver; Alina Bisembaeva, Deputy Head of the Department of Transportation and the Development of Road Transport Infrastructure, Moscow; Anton Kulbachevsky, Head of the Moscow Department of Nature Management and Environmental Protection; Anna Kurbatova, Director of Urban Environmental Research & Design Institute and Institute of Territorial Development; Ksenia Mokrushina, Curator of the Development of the urban environment and planning programme of the Arhpolis centre of territorial initiatives; assistant of the city planning programme ICLEI / UN-Habitat Urban Low-Carbon Emissions Strategies; Martin Powell, Head of Urban Development at Global Centre of Competence for Cities, Siemens; Pekka Sauri, Deputy Mayor of Helsinki with the portfolio of Public Works and Environmental Affairs; Wolfgang Teubner, Executive Director of the ICLEI European Secretariat.

Post-industrial economy requires change of emphasis in the urban development. Industrial advancement is now a thing of the past, and the comfort of the urban environment has become highly important. It plays a key role in ability of the city to attract the intellectual capital that is essential for the development of the new economy.

Quality of life in a city is not determined just by its environment. That is why, today, world’s leading cities are searching for models of sustainable development, which include many different elements.

It includes, for example, providing residents with fresh food, which is a positive thing both from an economic and environmental point of view.

Roger Bayley, Head of the architectural bureau Roger Bayley Inc, spoke about the experience of Vancouver, where new construction projects pay a lot of attention to the preservation of the agricultural infrastructure next to the new districts links to other parts of the city so all residents have access to the local produce.

However, the model for sustainable development doesn’t rely on specified measures, but rather a complex development strategy and the search for the most effective solutions, whilst using the least amount of resources. Wolfgang Teubner, Executive Director of the ICLEI European Secretariat, pointed out that this model can not be adopted

32

by political decisions from “above”. Implementation of many of these measures, such as recycling, reduced use of cars, energy saving, etc., rests on the shoulders of citizens, therefore, the most favourable scenarios should be discussed with them.

Moreover, at management level, intercommunication between departments and regions is very important, as well as the development of both administrative and physical infrastructure with a view for future objectives of sustainable development and not the past experience projected onto the new challenges. Moscow also has to withstand the test of great temptation. According to Anna Kurbatova, Director of Urban Environmental Research & Design Institute and Institute of Territorial Development, expansion of the city is a great opportunity and a huge responsibility at the same time. New urban policy should include new standards for the evaluation of the quality of urban planning decisions. The transport and engineering framework should be developed based on an identified ecological frame, natural ecosystems.

They were lost in historic Moscow, but can still be saved in the new territories.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#ecology

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Anton Kul­ bachevsky, Head of the Moscow De­ partment of Nature Man­ agement and Environmental Protection 2013 was Russia’s Year Of The Environment and was dedicated to the development of new environmental policy. Its key idea was to unite the two “E” — economy and ecology. For the post-industrial city, devoid of its own industrial production, the social component is becoming increasingly important. Comforts of city life are becoming the key factor of its growth and ability to attract capital. It is crucial to realise that the environment is not charity but a pragmaties, and can be capitalized. Property in green areas cost considerably more, environmentally friendly areas

contribute to growth of human capital. We have outlined several specific focus areas for the implementation of environmental policy. No doubt, transport comes first. Today, a fifth of the country’s vehicles, around 4 million, are concentrated in Moscow. To counteract harmful emissions we have switched to using fuel standard Euro-4. In addition, we are developing infrastructure to accommodate electric and hybrid vehicles; currently, in Moscow there are 40 charging stations for these vehicles. The next area of focus is power-saving technology. We have already launched a lighting system using LED lights in parks. A power plant run on solar batteries has been launched in the Altufiev reserve. Virtually all nature reserves are equipped with solar powered modules, providing free access to Wi-Fi. We are expecting for New Moscow to become the main place for the

Why Copenhagen have won the European Green Capital Award in 2014 The European Green Capital Award was established in 2010 to acknowledge cities, which have achieved great results in environmental protection. It is also another method to promote “green” ideas and successful practices.

In 2014, the “green” award was handed to the Danish capital. Each year, the government of Copenhagen brings together a consortium of 75 non-profit and business organizations to shape a plan of projects to be done in the city. Copenhagen has already achieved impressive advances in environmental protection. Moreover, the Danish capital promises to become a city with a zero carbon footprint by 2025. Today, air over the city receives 1.8 million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year. It is planned that shift from coal to biofuel for the central heating system, wide use of alternative energy together with higher energy

introduction of technologies employing renewable sources of energy, where there is an opportunity for harnessing wind and solar energy. Furthermore, new building standards have been brought in, according to which allowable losses of electricity per square meter should be greatly reduced. Yet another line of work is landscaping and comprehensive improvement of the environmental situation. Today, Moscow has launched and implemented the Million Trees programme.

Also, we are initiating the development of “green” roofs as a continuation of our idea to use planters. This is a serious step, but not the only one. A cement conveyor in Pechatniki has been closed and treatment facilities of Moscow’s oil refineries have been reconstructed. The Moscow government set these priorities: a healthy city — a comfortable city.

efficiency of buildings will reduce this figure to 1.2 million tonnes, while other environment protecting measures will compensate for the damage they cause so carbon neutrality will be established. To achieve this result it is necessary, in particular, to reduce heat consumption by 20 per cent, to reduce industrial consumption of electric power by 20 per cent and domestic consumption by 10 per cent. It is necessary to achieve carbon neutrality of CHPP, rapid development of alternative energy forms (primarily — use of wind and bio fuel). Recycling of plastic waste will allow to end the need of its incineration and organic waste will be used in biofuel production. Twothirds of the journeys around the city will have to be done on foot, by bicycle or by public transport (which also will become “green”), with 50 per cent of the active population switching to cycling. 20–30 per cent of cars and 30–40 per cent

33

Creation of new centres of attraction

THE GLOBAL AGENDA

Creation of new centres of attraction: approaches and projects that have changed cities

The development of metropolises is linked to the need to create new centres of attraction in a city — spaces, ideas and directions for the economy that can compete with already existing “centres” of the city, or even replace them. Creation of such “centres” is a priority for urban policies in Moscow as well. The question is — how can that be achieved?

Speakers and Panellists Uma Adusumilli, Architect, Chief of Planning Division in Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority; Sir Edward Lister, Chief of Staff and Deputy Mayor of London for Policy and Planning; Joe Montgomery, Chief Executive of the Urban Land Institute (ULI) Europe; Natalya Sergunina, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Economic Policy and Property and Land Relations.

Today, big cities are the driving force of the economy. This status gives cities the opportunities they have never had before, but also requires from them a lot of effort in maintaining the rate of growth while keeping a balance. For example, according to Sir Edward Lister, Deputy Mayor of London for Policy and Planning, in the next 10 years, the population of London is expected to increase by a million people and the city will soon face a ­housing crisis. In addition, cities are required to invest in the development of infrastructure, to improve the quality of life and care for the environment, to innovate. According to many studies, these are the factors which influence decisions made by investors. But most of all, the city is in need of housing, i. e., new development centres, which need free space.

Uma Adusumilli, Chief of Planning Division in Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority said that Mumbai already has such centres. The city has about one million people living in slums, from which they are trying to move to districts of social housing with ready to use ­infrastructure, including bus services, transport hubs, municipal markets and shops, and large shopping centres.

To find space for the new districts, Mumbai is using a variety of different methods: government agencies are being moved to the northern parts

34

of the city; adjacent to Mumbai marshes are being drained; manufacturing is being moved beyond the boundaries of the city; new pieces of land are being purchased. Of course, this has not led to the slums being completely emptied. But with some people moved to new homes, the quality of life for the remaining people has improved due to decreased density.

In any case, the authorities are required to use a combination of methods including ­compelling measures, cooperation and market-based approaches. The necessary instruments include: legislation on land use, the ability to change tax rates and offer subsidies to those companies which take part in the development of areas of interest (in a way useful to the city), as well as clear and understandable arguments in favour of certain decisions. However, they need to have a clear development plan and a balanced strategy.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/forum2013/ program2013/#citychange

3 moscow urban forum

perspective Natalia Sergunina, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for economic policy and property and land relations: Moscow has begun to bring to rights the cost of land. This led to the fact that manufacturing companies started to ask themselves whether they use their territory effectively, and whether it would be for the better to lead out, partially or completely, their production out of the city, and release their territories. Correspondingly, we are faced with a difficult choice — it is more profitable to have production with workplaces or the released land resource? What to do with these areas? For us it is very important to find a balance between the highly profitable use of the released territories and creation of jobs for highly qualified specialists. The citizens are interested in both.

Thence follows the second problem — to find a balance between global projects and individual interests. Take, for example, the construction of the Metro. For those who will be able to use it but reside at a distance — construction is a positive thing. For those who live next to the construction site it is the opposite.

Their quality of life will worsen due to the transport interchange hub on their doorstep.

It is a matter of their comfort, and this creates a problem.

The third problem is finding a balance between stimulating and restrictive measures that the city as a manager can use in order to make sure that, on the one hand, expensive land is used effectively and, on the other hand, not to lose the capacity of existing manufactures.

In addition, Moscow has experience in the development of new territories. Newly attached territories have been burdened by certain number of permits for the construction of housing — with no plans to create jobs.

Then how to stimulate the construction of commercial property? Currently we assume that the new rules for calculating the tax on real estate come into force on the 1 January 2014. New tax will be based on the cadastral value, a percentage of the market value of the property. We do not see other means of stimulating the transfer of jobs to places with good provision of housing.

It is important that this tax will not affect wages, since was introduced only in respect of highmargin objects like shopping malls and offices that have an area of over 1,000 square meters. There are other objects that, under the new system of taxation, are excluded from this category. Consequently, with the competition, which is observed in the city, and based on the different tax systems for different buildings, dominant businesses will not be able, through any sort of monopoly, to create a situation where the forgone revenue will result in reduction of the wages of workers.

35

Moscow reforms

THE moscow AGENDA

Moscow reforms: implementation expe­ rience, assessment of results and signifi­ cance for success beyond the centre

The Moscow City Government has implemented and launched several important reforms, including the development of public transport and social infrastructure, improvement of quality of urban environment. Which of these are the most important for the city, and what is necessary to be done in the future?

Speakers and Panellists Alexander Auzan, Dean of Faculty of Economics in Lomonosov Moscow State University; Richard Burdett, director of the Urban Age and LSE Cities Programmes at the London School of Economics and Political Science; Olga Golodets, Deputy Prime Minister of the ­Russian Federation; Mikhail Kuzolev, President, Chairman of the Management Board of OJSC the Bank of Moscow; Enrique Peñalosa, Former mayor of Bogota, chairman of the board of directors of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy of New York; Cameron Sinclair, ­Executive Director and co-founder of Architecture for Humanity organization; Sergei Sobyanin, Mayor of Moscow; Arina Sharapova, journalist, PhD in sociology, representative of the Mayor of Moscow; Vladimir Yablonsky, Director of the Social Projects department of the Agency for ­Strategic Initiatives (ASI).

As mentioned by Sergei Sobyanin, the Mayor of Moscow, part of Moscow, which is referred to as the periphery, is home for two-thirds of Moscow’s population and covers two-thirds of its territory.

Therefore, when the city takes steps towards the development of its periphery, it affects the quality of life of the majority of Moscow citizens. Conversely, if what is done has no positive impact on the situation for the majority of people, is it needed at all, continues Enrique Peñalosa, chairman for the board of directors of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy of New York, former Mayor of Bogota. However, the economic development and infrastructure improvement per se do not lead to a better life if the city fails to provide equal access to all the benefits — urban space, education, healthcare, safety, etc.

Inequality is what makes people feel dejected.

Besides, inequality does not pay. A bus with a hundred passengers would have had to take a hundred times more space on the road than a car with a single passenger, but, in reality, this is not the case — hundreds of cars and a half-empty bus stand in traffic jams at the same time, resulting in everyone losing time. Moscow has the potential to make dedicated bus lanes, and this is good, continued Mr Penalosa. However, in the centre, peo-

36

ple who want to cross the road are forced to use underground passages, a further example of inequality — the motorists have an advantage over pedestrians.

Richard Burdett, director of the Urban Age and LSE Cities Programmes at the London School of Economics and Political Science, began his speech by illustrating quality of urban life by addressing transport services. According to Mr Burdett, in Hong Kong, which is home for about 10 million people, the average travel time is 11 minutes. In Sao Paulo, which has around 14 million residents, the average travel time is 4 hours. In West London, average life span is 82 years, while in East London — 75 years. This is an example of imbalance within just one, relatively rich city. The London city government is now trying to change the situation for the better: improve transport connections without use of private cars, create new jobs, and build easily accessible schools and hospitals. This will take time; maybe two decades will pass before equality in the British capital is achieved.

The Mayor of Moscow Sergei Sobyanin agreed with foreign experts, but pointed out that Moscow is a densely built city, and has 5 times less roads compared to any other major European city. Therefore,

3 moscow urban forum

sometimes it is necessary to remove traffic lights, intersections, construct flyovers in some locations and to narrow down the carriageway in others.

Mikhail Kuzolev, Chairman of the Management Board of OJSC the Bank of Moscow, is confident that the quality of life in Moscow is improving.

Since the VTB group bought the Bank of Moscow, the bank’s mortgage portfolio has grown more than threefold. This is a sign that Muscovites have a sense of confidence if they are ready to do such a long-term investment. Amid the rising welfare, Muscovites make long-term purchases and become more interested in the city life. The Bank of Moscow initiated the Velobike project, a public bicycle hire scheme. Project has been implemented with the support from the cycling activists, who

Perspective Sergei Sobyanin, Mayor of Moscow At times of crisis in the global economy, Moscow, nevertheless, has kept its appeal as one of Europe’s major investment sites. By the end of 2013 investments in the economy of the city amounted to over 40 billion US Dollars. Currently, we are developing estate property of more than 8 million square metres.

However, we revoked construction projects of nearly 25 million square metres, because of their potential bad impact on the urban environment. At the same time, Moscow has new territories which will be subject of intense development for decades to come.

Needless to say, development of valid urban policy for the periphery is not an easy task; every little part of built-up area is a cross point for a number of different interests. Today, about 80 per cent of all the city’s resources are used to improve quality of life in peripheral areas. The Moscow City Government has launched one of the world’s largest programmes for the development of public transport. We have constructed 72 kilometres of new roads and 14 large transport infrastructure facilities. Reconstruction of five major road arteries has been completed. New undeground stations brought the Metro closer to homes and places of work of nearly a million Muscovites. About 30 more undeground stations are being constructed. They will improve level of transport accessibility of south-western, south-eastern and northern districts of Moscow. We are constructing a second circular line for the Metro, and have launched construction and reconstruction project of the Moscow Ring Railway, which will lessen the load on the city centre and central part of the Metro, and will facilitate mobility between the peripheral regions.

helped to define the best locations for the first hire stations in the city. Olga Golodets, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation, referred to her personal experience as a resident of the city. She is positive that the city has become more comfortable to live in. There are more well-appointed courtyards and pedestrian zones; fee-paying car parking spaces relieved the centre of Moscow from chaos. But the city still remains uncomfortable for families with children. It is necessary to improve areas near preschools and schools.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#moscowreforms

In Moscow, the education sector was funded very unevenly and resulted in imbalanced assistance with equipment, technology, and different quality of education. Today, three quarters of Moscow schools provide their pupils with a high-quality education — this is a big step forward. In the healthcare sector we have similar tasks. We work towards equal availability and improved quality of healthcare. Over the past two years, all outpatient centres in Moscow were equipped with modern medical equipment. New polyclinics are being constructed in the areas where their number was clearly insufficient. City hospitals have received a lot of new equipment and now have a better capacity to provide modern medical care. Furthermore, despite the fact that the municipalities invest intensevily in the healthcare sector, there is still a place for private sector participation. Not so long ago we have formed the first public-private partnership for reconstruction of the former Number 63 City Hospital to create comprehensive proprietary hospital. Currently, we are preparing another large-scale medical public-private partnership. Improved living environment is another way to achieve equality. For the well-being of the city it is very important to maintain a high level of municipal improvements to prevent any unkempt and unsightly areas. Across Moscow, single regulations apply to street and courtyard cleaning.

All areas, without any kind of differentiation, receive budgetary funds for landscaping, creation of playgrounds for children and other activities of municipal improvement. We are gradually transferring the right of decision-making on necessary improvements as well as on allocation of funds required for this purpose to municipal self-governments, which are better informed on what needs to be done in each specific area or yard.

37

Moscow reforms

THE moscow AGENDA

Richard Burdett: “Increased quantity of roads, transport services and investments do not automatically lead to a better quality of life”

Cities are complex structures where physical world is closely intertwined with social.

Sustainable development is possible when the authorities have a vision of the future, experts correctly formulate the problem, and residents influence the decision making process.

Richard Burdett is Professor of Urban Studies at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and director of LSE Cities and the Urban Age programme. He is a Global Distinguished Professor at New York University. Burdett was Chief Adviser on Architecture and Urbanism for the London 2012 Olympics and architectural adviser to the Mayor of London from 2001 to 2006. He was Director of the 2006 Architecture Biennale in Venice. Research interests of Richard Burdett focus on the interactions between the physical and social worlds in the contemporary city and how urbanisation affects social and environmental sustainability.

38

— The human aspects of city issues are very important to you. You speak about quality of life and inequality substantively, using figures, but with a great passion. However, the city officials are more likely to formulate the problem in a technocratic or economic light. Is this bad?

— Enrique Penalosa, for example, speaks about human perspective in city planning and management quite a lot. What is crucial is that you can’t solve urban problems through technology alone. Having more roads, transport, investments, etc., does not automatically result in better quality of life. Moreover, even a city with an good public transport infrastructure can, nonetheless, be boring. This is because cities are much more complex, multi-layers systems.

At London School of Economics, my colleagues and I are trying to capture the complexity of the city structure. Transport, education, housing, health, public government and decisionmaking systems and involvement of citizens should be pieced together, as well as studied individually.

— It seems that an ordinary person cannot influence such a complex system.

— This is not true. It all depends on the maturity of the political system. Take, for example, London. We have an elected mayor, and if we do not like him — we elect a different one. There are 33 boroughs within the city. Each borough also holds elections every four years. Therefore,

3 moscow urban forum

there is a group of people who represents my area, so my voice is heard. On the other hand, I do not believe that cities should be designed and organized by communities only. There should be people who can look at bigger issues and make decisions on a grander scale. However, mechanisms to influence them should be present. Take, for example, India, a country I adore.

It is the biggest democracy in the world. At the same time, in most cases on a city level the people have very little influence; cities are managed by chief ministers appointed from the centre.

This is what I call a city without citizenship.

— What role in this scheme is given to experts and scholars?

— Architecture would be a good analogy here.

An architect is only as good as his client. If the client lacks vision, it will be reflected in the building. The same applies to cities. Cities need civic leaders who who have vision. Experts are often too wrapped up in their field of work. You have expert on housing, expert on transport, expert on health. This is one more reason why a city needs leaders — they should have a clear understanding ow they feed expert knowledge into a bigger picture. On the other hand, I had an interesting experience working with the previous Mayor of London Ken Livingstone. I was his adviser, together with architect Richard Rogers.

— How profound can awareness of an expert be, when most of the data about the city is concentrated in the hands of the city officials?

— I don’t think so. City officials usually have data on how many homes, cars, or murders there are in the city. But this is just statistics. The role of good experts is to be able to provide an interpretation. What you do with this data, what does it mean? The first thing people do is rush to compare how many cars are in Oslo, how many in Istanbul, London, Moscow, New York. Do we have more cars or less? Is this good or bad?

In London, for example, a large and relatively wealthy city, has quite a high car ownership level, but very low car use. People use public transport to go to work. At the same time, there are cities where the situation is the complete opposite — the city is poor, but roads are clogged

with cars. It is more important, in my opinion, what kind of people use public transport. London and Hong Kong, for example, have relatively high level of GDP per capita, and have wealthy people among their residents. So, when 95 per cent of people working in the City of London use public transport, this means that among the underground passengers there are not just wealthy, but extremely wealthy people; not just millionaires, but billionaires. In Moscow, is it possible to find someone who earns 100 thousand dollars a month using a bus? I doubt it. This is because public transport is also a matter of status, comfort, and safety. Sao Paulo has a new subway system, but the elite do not use it — for them it feels awkward. So this all about what questions do you want to ask. The relationship between experts and politicians depends on the latter.

They define the agenda. They say either “I want to make a city of equal opportunities” or “I want to attract as much foreign investment as possible.” In the first case you would need one kind of experts, in the second — very different.

— Ten years ago, London was also more interested in becoming a global financial centre rather than a city of equal opportunity, was it not?

— I think you are mistaken. London has always been interested in both. Except, perhaps, for the dark period of increased centralisation under the Premiership of Margaret Thatcher. There were the borough councils and the central government, and no one in between. As a result, each borough was trying its best to raise funds.

Some were successful, some not so much. Meanwhile, there was no united vision for the city, no general idea. And I continue to insist that this is very important. This is not to say that London alternated between the Neo-Liberal and Social Democratic parties. Both, Tory Boris Johnson and Labour Ken Livingstone, support the same top priorities of urban policy: sustainable development, social equality, need of immigration for economic growth, and, of course, competitiveness on the global market. This is less of a matter of political or party views, and more about the DNA of the city, which allows it to move forward in spite of change in the government.

39

Coordinated motion

THE moscow AGENDA

Coordinated motion: global standards of transport infrastructure planning for Moscow

Large-scale transport reform is taking place in Moscow. How can the development strategies for different types of transport and the construction of transport infrastructure be coordinated?

Session curator: McKinsey & Company; Speakers and Panellists: Maksim Liksutov, Deputy Mayor and Head of the Department for Transport and Road Infrastructure Development; Karima Nigmatulina, Acting Director of the State Unitary Enterprise «Research and Project Institute of Moscow City Master Plan»; Enrique Peñalosa, Former mayor of Bogota, chairman of the board of directors of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy of New York; Tonko Sankovich, General Director of the Augur Estate, General Director of OJSC Masshtab; Jonathan Woetzel, McKinsey & Company in Shanghai, China.

When it comes to changes in Moscow, elements of the transport reform are named first — from the development of the underground to the bike hire scheme. In Moscow, transport issues are particularly important. The road network accounts for less than 10 per cent of the entire area of the city.

The level of congestion during rush hours is estimated at 42 per cent, and every year the number of cars is growing by 5 per cent. It is no surprise that the transport problem is a priority for the Moscow government. Huge funds are allocated to fight this crisis of infrastructure. According to the targeted investment programme of the government of Moscow, before the end of 2016, 2.519 trillion Russian Roubles (around 69.5 billion US Dollars) will be invested into the transport infrastructure.

Karima Nigmatulina, Acting Director of the State Unitary Enterprise “Research and Project Institute of Moscow City Master Plan”, believes that the development of the transport system gives impulse to the development of the entire area, and the city.

In Moscow, there is a huge demand in housing and offices space. This demand can be a driving force for the economy, but only if the transport infrastructure and real estate would develop simultaneously. Plus, almost all roads in Russia go through Moscow, so the Moscow transport hub affects the whole country. It is necessary to manage this flow of people and cargo wisely. Saved time, reduced unnecessary mileage, improved environment and

40

safety — these factors will increase the economic potential of the region. Although the spatial structure of Moscow was created in view of a different level of car ownership, according to Ms Nigmatulina, this does not mean that a person should not buy a car, but that he would be more comfortable travelling by public transport. Among other things, this means construction of new roads, especially, the ones connecting peripheral areas of both Moscow and New Moscow.

Enrique Peñalosa, Former mayor of Bogota, chairman of the board of directors of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy of New York, insisted that the construction of roads is not an option. Overload is created not by the number of cars, but by the length and number of journeys. Therefore, no matter how many highways there will be, the problem of congestion will remain. It is necessary to restrict the use of cars and give priority to buses. Experience shows that the Bus Rapid Transit system is more efficient than the underground — it carries more passengers and costs less. Moscow has a lot of wide roads; it would be easy to dedicate one of the lanes to buses. Plus, it is necessary to convert all urban highways into avenues and boulevards. ChampsÉlysées in Paris has 10 lanes, but it is one of the most attractive pedestrian zones in the world due to the traffic lights, wide pavements, streets, shops and boutiques.

3 moscow urban forum

Transport problems can not be solved just by constructing new roads and developing public transport. Without an effective settlement system it is impossible to avoid transport crisis, whatever the budget. Jonathan Woetzel, Director with McKinsey & Company, drew attention to another important type of rational settlement system — the TOD concept, a multi-functional area in close proximity to public transport. These areas are usually a highly compact development and represent a mix of residential and commercial property.

Houses, offices, retail and public areas are located in close proximity to public transport — not further than 800 meters from the station. In some cities, a land-use and construction system was ­designed based on the TOD concept.

For example, in the Brazilian Curitiba the tallest buildings are built along the main transport corridors, so the inhabitants find public transport convenient to use. Both local residents and transport experts have doubts regarding the construction of roads. Meanwhile, the promised effects of the transport reforms have not yet occurred. Only by 2020 the average travel time in Moscow is expected to reduce by a half, from 90 to 50 minutes, while the current reform is designed only for the period up to 2016.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#coordinatemotion

41

Coordinated motion

THE moscow AGENDA

Enrique Peñalosa “Transport solutions are more a matter of equality and politics rather than money and technology”

As Mayor of Bogota, the 10 million inhabitants’ capital of Colombia, Enrique Peñalosa profoundly transformed the city. His achievements are known across the world. How it became possible to reduce city traffic almost by half and why improved transport is political as well as engineering task.

Enrique Peñalosa was the mayor of Bogotá, Colombia, between 1998 and 2001.

Among his main achievements is reducing vehicle traffic by 40% in due to the ­introduction of Bus Rapid Transit ­system TransMilenio. These days, Peñalosa is president of the board of directors of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy of New York. He has advised governments in Asia, Africa, Australia, Latin America and the US and has lectured internationally in numerous environmental, urban design and policy and university forums. He is actively involved in the political life of the city and the country in general. He is considered a potential candidate for the presidential elections.

— When you were the Mayor of Bogota, in a short time you have reduced traffic in the city by 40 per cent. How did you manage that?

— In Bogota the traffic situation was dire. Streets were in absolute chaos. People were parking anywhere they wanted, and drove as they pleased.

Bogota was packed with terrible traffic jams, and the situation was getting worse with each passing month. Our solution to the transport problem included several initiatives. First, we have significantly limited the use of cars. Car use during peak hours was reduced to only two days per week, where the days depend on the number plate. Then we introduced a fee-paying parking system, and made car ownership more expensive.

Second, we have built the TransMilenio bus rap-

42

id transit system. Buses travel at a high speed on dedicated lanes. Bus stops have a special design to allow passengers quick and easy boarding.

— Is the TransMilenio system similar to the one in Curitiba, Brasil, where the first BRT system was launched back in the 70s?

— Yes, they both use the same principle. Although, our BRТ is more integrated. In Curitiba, different contractors operate different routes. Interestingly, the Curitiba experiment had limited success outside of Brazil. To begin with, we were the only followers. But after us BRT became actively used all over the world.

— How long did it take you to launch the TransMilenio system? How much does it cost?

How fast is it?

3 moscow urban forum

— We worked as fast as we could. The project has gone from concept to launch in just three years.

We had a very tight schedule. As for the costs, the BRT is ten times more cost effective. In China and India, the average capital cost per kilometre of underground is 100 million US Dollars, in Brazil — 250 million. It cost us the same 250 million US Dollars to build the first 40 kilometres of TransMilenio, including costs of construction of pavements and boarding stations, and purchase of buses. Average speed is up to 45 kilometres per hour. Passenger capacity is 47 thousand people per hour. The average time interval between buses during peak hour is less than a minute. By the way, I have not mentioned the third initiative of our program — Ciclorutas de Bogotá. We have constructed 300 kilometres worth of cycling paths and bicycle parking facilities. We even have a 10-metre wide Cycling Highway. Before Bogota, bicycles were actively used only in Amsterdam and Copenhagen. Our success inspired Paris, London and many other cities.

— In Russia, car owners perceive any limitations with utmost disapproval. How strong was the pressure on you in Bogota?

— There were many protests. Pressure on me, as on the Mayor, was strong. People all around the world love to travel by car. There aren’t so many eccentric people who, under otherwise equal conditions, would prefer to take a bus instead of driving a car. It is a different story if taking the car is expensive, plus taking a bus saves time; if getting to work takes you one and a half hour by car, and only 15 minutes by bus. By introducing TransMilenio BRT systems we were able in a short time to create an alternative to the use of cars. By the way, in the third year of me serving as Mayor, Bogota had a Car-Free referendum, and people expressed popular support of the Car-Free Day initiative. During this day, privately-owned vehicles are restricted, leaving the streets to public transport, cyclists, and pedestrians. Results of this referendum demonstrated that my ideas were popular. Generally speaking, transport solutions are more about equality and politics rather than money and technology. For me the idea of equality is very important. Parking is not a constitutional right. And if all people are equal, the bus with one hundred passengers should have a hundred times more rights than a car.

Perspective Maxim Liksutov, Deputy Mayor and Head of the ­Department for Transport and Road Infrastructure Development: The transport infrastructure in Moscow has reached a critical state. More than half the motorists in Moscow take over an hour to get to work.

During rush hour our road network is overloaded by 42 per cent, public transport by 22 per cent. A number of sections of underground and surface transport are overloaded by 20 per cent, local railway by 32 per cent.

Our goal is to achieve comfortable livelihood conditions for residents of Moscow by developing a stable functioning, safe, appealing and comfortable transport system for all population groups. Some of the tasks include roads free of traffic, comfortable and regular public transport, safe and comfortable paths for pedestrians and cyclists, and safe and civilized taxi service with approved quality standards. In Moscow, a targeted investment program has been approved up to 2016. Out of the city’s budget 1.6 trillion Russian Roubles will be put to use on the transport infrastructure. Around 145 billion Russian Roubles of the federal budget will be invested into the railway. We are also expecting to attract 769 billion Russian Roubles from private investors. This money will be spent developing transit hubs. In total, 2.519 trillion Russian Roubles will be invested in the transport infrastructure by 2016. The top priorities for the budget use will be the improvement of the underground and road network, as well as the development of railway, which has the highest carrying capacity after the underground.

By 2020 we will build 63 underground stations and 110 kilometres of lines, in other words the Moscow Metro will expand nearly by half. By 2020 262 transport interchange hubs will be build, 256 kilometres of additional main railway lines will be reconstructed as well as over 300 kilometres of arterial highways and link roads. From 2016 the Moscow Small Ring Railway will be open to passengers. By next year we will have around 5 thousand bicycles, 350 bike rental stations and additional cycling lanes. By 2020 road traffic should be significantly reduced.

Carrying capacity of infrastructure in New Moscow has reached its limit, while the number of journeys is expected to increase nearly two-fold by 2020. We intend to actively develop the suburban railways in Kiev and Kaluga directions. We want to increase their carrying capacity several times. For the short term we have planed a programme of 55 tasks including the construction of nine new aboveground transport routes, two public transport dedicated lanes and thirteen park and ride facilities.

43

Entrepreneurship and the city

THE moscow AGENDA

Entrepreneurship and the city: the scope of interaction

The role of small and medium businesses in the city is crucial. They provide jobs, and necessary services conveniently located for residents. They bring diversity, vibrancy and comfort to urban life. What role do entrepreneurs currently partake in Moscow? What kind of support do they need from the city?

Session curator: Faculty of Economics of the Lomonosov Moscow State University; Speakers and Panellists Vladimir Efimov, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Moscow Department of City Property; Mike Emmerich, Chief Executive at New Economy, Manchester Denis Kaminskiy, founder of Future Today; Mikhail Khomich, Professor and Development Director of the Business Incubator of the Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University; Alexei Komissarov, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship of Moscow; Alexander Svinin, Member of the Management Board of the All-Russian Public Organisation of Small and Medium Enterprises Opora Rossii Suren Vardanyan, Vice President of the Moscow Chamber of Commerce; Shahar Waiser, founder and owner of GetTaxi; Lawrence Wright, Founder and Director of the Startup Academy, Moscow School of Management Skolkovo.

Entrepreneurship is an important factor in the city development. The private sector diversifies the economy, whilst income tax makes up for onethird of the city budget revenues. That is why the city initiates programmes of direct and indirect support to the private sector, and develops enabling environment for business activity. Shahar Waiser, founder and owner of GetTaxi, said that taxi services are among businesses which count on the support from the city. Taxis affect the transport situation in the city, because they are an alternative to a private car. According to Mr Waiser, taxi service companies could be used for social advertising, participate in the licensing of taxi drivers. However, participants, who represented the government, commented that social advertising, as a resource, can not be legally used to support any business.

Alexander Svinin, Member of the Management Board of the Opora Rossii Enterprises, said that in recent years more than a billion dollars has been invested in start-ups, but support of traditional business, which is 90 per cent of the Opora Rossii members, does not look all that promising.

For example, it is difficult to solve the problem of non-stationary trade, which is so important for first-time entrepreneurs, because many of them can not afford to rent premises in Moscow.

Lawrence Wright, Founder and Director of the Start-up Academy, Moscow School of Manage-

44

ment Skolkovo, said that start-ups also seek support from the city. Prices on services of real estate agents, PR, web-design, etc., are too high for any business, whether it is a new or an already established company. Lawrence Wright ­continued that it is necessary to promote a culture of startups — the fast and daring business projects.

Shahar Waiser added that this applies to the entrepreneurial culture in general. Entrepreneurs should be recognized as heroes. The Mayor of ­Moscow can use his reputation for this. Vladimir Efimov, Head of the Moscow Department of City Property, has agreed that the promotion of startup culture is necessary. He added that information about the development of Technology Parks, where start-ups are provided with infrastructure support, might be appropriate subjects for public service advertising. But the idea of the city authorities influencing market prices, in his opinion, is unacceptable.

Denis Kaminskiy, founder of Future Today, has noted that the financial environment for small and medium businesses is undeveloped. Entrepreneurs need support of Working Capital Facility. Mr Kaminsky proposed three procedures for such support: (1) credit granting for small and medium businesses, which have signed major contracts; (2) an overdraft facility, i. e. credit extension in the amount of one-, two-, three-months of the company’s turnover to finance current operations;

3 moscow urban forum

(3) support for small and medium-sized businesses during an economic crisis, for example, tax deferral, even at the market rate. Alexey Komissarov, Moscow Government Minister, argued that the city is trying to withdraw from direct financing of entrepreneurs and has developed several alternative methods. Among these mechanisms is a guarantee fund, through which companies would be able to get a bank loan without full collateral.

Perspective Alexey Komissarov, Moscow Government Minister, Head of Moscow Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship Department: Business activity in Moscow must be improved. At its current it amounts to 25 per cent of the city’s economy, which is not nearly enough. To support entrepreneurship it is necessary to divide businesses into two main groups: innovative companies and traditional businesses. They need different supporting measures, they work on different tasks and their ac-

­ nother mechanism, which has appeared recently, A is a micro­finance fund, which will provide concessional loans to microfinance institutions under the obligation to lend funds to any entrepreneur.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com

tivities result in different benefits. Innovative enterprises grow rapidly, during which they create many jobs, laying a great foundation for the future economy, while the number of jobs added by traditional small businesses usually is inconsiderable. In Moscow level of support for innovative busines­ses is at a world standard, while the support for traditional business is somewhat lacking. However, we are planning on taking big steps forward to change this. The first stage is the introduction of multifunctional centres, where the ­maximum number of services will be available in one place. Over time this ­service will become fully electronic, minimizing contact with

officials. We are on the way to creating of open data resource, making information about the number of residents, children, families and vehicles easily accessible. At the same time this resource will have number of exi­sting services, cafes, shops and restaurants, making it easier to choose where to go and with what, without having to spend large sums on marketing research. Thus, it is possible to predict any company’s potential in the local area. We will ­continue to support innovative businesses, we have plans for additional subsidies that will offset the costs of obtaining ­export licences and international certificates.

45

Centres outside the centre

THE moscow AGENDA

Centres outside the centre: Moscow’s potential as a polycentric megacity

Crossing over the bar of fifteen million inhabitants, cities develop features of a metropolis.

The time has come for Moscow to get ready. How to choose areas where new centers can be created?

Session curator: Graduate School of Urban Studies and Planning; Speakers and Panellists Mikhail Ahn, First Deputy Head of the Department of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship of Moscow; Alexander Vysokovsky, Dean of the Graduate School of Urban Studies and Planning; Maxim Gasiev, President of PSN Group; Andrew Jones, Managing director of AECOM Design; Ilya Zalivukhin, Architect, Founder of Urban Planning Company Jauzaproject; Nikolai Kazansky, Managing Partner of Colliers International in Russia; Alexander Kollontai, Deputy Director of State Unitary Enterprise “Research and Project Institute of Moscow City Master Plan»; Sergei Kuznetsov, Chief Architect of Moscow; Vladimir Sergunin, ­Regional Director of Business Development, Colliers International, Russia; Leonid Smirnyagin, Professor of Socio-Economic Geography of Foreign Countries at the Lomonosov Moscow State University.

There are many cities, which are going through the process of transition to the structure of a megacity. Mexico City, Sao Paulo, ­Mumbai, Singapore, Istanbul, as well as Moscow, are among them. They are at different stages of the process. Today in Moscow areas that are at the same distance from the centre, have similar characteristics. There are no communities willing to associate themselves with any other centre, except historical. There is no clear definition of what a periphery is and there is insufficient data as to where and how new centres can be created.

However, this situation is gradually improving.

For example, already back at the First Moscow Urban Forum, experts jointly identified more than 25 thousand acres of industrial land requi­ ring redevelopment. According to Andrew Jones, Managing director of AECOM Design, these areas are the right place for new centres of the Moscow megacity. Today, the city is ready to start redevelopment of about 10 thousand acres. According to Mikhail Ahn, First Deputy Head of the Department of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship of Moscow, addition of just this area will increase existing floor space in Moscow by about 40 per cent. He explained that this action is essential since housing per capita in Moscow is half of what it is in European capitals, with the same situation in the retail. This means that even without increase of population, the city would still be in need of housing development. Another issue that has to be considered is finding the right balance of residential property,

46

which Moscow “eats” almost instantly, and type of property, which defines the characteristics of a new centre or a new district.

Andrew Jones has invited participants to look at the practice of London, where, in the past decade, effort was made to turn railway stations into high-quality urban centres with office space and cultural amenities around them. The railway has become the main form of transport connec­ ting the British capital with the north of the country. Moscow also needs to diversify its traffic flows, which are assured by the large variety of its forms, from retail to travelling students.

In his turn, Alexander Kollontai, Deputy Director of State Unitary Enterprise, Research and Project Institute of the Moscow City Master Plan, recom­ mends not to forget about those aspects of a polycentric city which are not part of the phy­ sical world — cultural diversity, demo­cracy and free market. According to him, a new centre can be considered as formed if it has multiple functionalities, far-reaching transport links with the surrounding areas and the ability to develop and transform. The first two characteristics can be designed and built, albeit at a high cost. Although, insufficient information (as pointed at

by Leonid Smirnyagin) about the city will be a hindrance. Unlike New York, in Moscow nobody, including the city planners, knows the number of all the cafes and small businesses on every single street. Today, the difference of borders of vernacular communities and administrative territories is ignored.

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Sergei Kuznetsov, Chief Architect of Moscow, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Architecture and Urban Deve­lopment of Moscow Polycentrism — identification of prerequisites and development of the new alternative city centres — is the priority of a megacity. Today, Moscow is not the only city concerned by this issue, so there is an opportunity to study the experiences of others, use good practice and customize it.

For example, Singapore has already established alternative centres. A group of delegates from Moscow had a chance to explore these areas during their visit to the city. Tokyo is one of the most interesting cases. The shape of Tokyo if turned that

its “outgrowth” pointing to the southwest — looks similar to the shape of Moscow with its new territories. Twenty years ago Tokyo was solving the same problems Moscow is faced with today: monocentric model, derelict industrial areas, poor interconnection of territories.

Moscow already has places of growing business and social activities — places with good transport accessibility, or supported by someone’s principles. For example, the Rublyovo-Arkhangelskoye area, which is a subject of interest from the Sberbank Russia group of companies. A master plan for the site will be determined in the course of an international competition. Another example is Molzhaninovsky district, advantaged by its close proximity to the airport and presence of the Moscow to St. Petersburg Railway. Among similar areas are

Skolkovo and Kommunarka. Inside the “old” Moscow, it seems right to focus on the development of cultural and recreational areas. The Moscow River could play an important role in that.

Issues of freight cargo turnover, required by Moscow, draw attention to the development of logistics centres backed by the railway network. Another matter of high priority is to get rid of the “bung” made of industrial zones in the south-eastern quarter of the city, which complicates access to this part of the city. For this purpose, territory of the ZiL factory is already being redeveloped. Next in line is development of the territory of the Serp i Molot plant. Competition for the design concept of its reconstruction has been already announced. The main principle for the development of the both sites is to increase their transit capacity.

“Cities with multiple centres already exist. We need to learn how can these centres be identified and developed further,” says Ilya Zalivukhin. He provided the example of Singapore, where new areas are formed by the natural framework of the city. Moscow already has such places: Luzhniki, area of the All-Russia Exhibition Centre, Sparrow

Hills. Plus, Moscow has integrated many previously separate villages and small towns.

Old Oak Common, London

country towards Birmingham and in other directions. Development plans also include construction of the light rail. The Old Oak Masterplan for the area of 155 hectares has been designed by Terry Farrell and Partners, famous for their development projects of areas in Guangzhou, Shanghai, etc. Masterplan suggests a multi-functional building that will provide the appearance of 140 thousand new jobs and 12 thousand housing units. Furthermore, the Queens Park Rangers football club is planning the construction of its new stadium for 40 thousand seats as part of the club’s programme to return to the Premier League, conjointly with investing into nearby residential properties. The grand plan for the area in the coming 30 years, developed jointly by the city government and investors, has been opened for discussion at the end of 2013.

The idea to transform Old Oak Common, one of the most depressing areas of London, into a major transport hub emerged back in 2011. The idea became relevant thanks to a fairly new initiative of the development of the British high-speed rail service. Old Oak Common is positioned in a strategically important location for this project, at the intersection of several railway routes. Consequently, the area’s potential happens to be in its worst part — neglected territories around numerous railway tracks. The new interchange station is planned to be finished by 2026. It will become a transfer hub for express trains from all of the four London airports. For Heathrow, its nearest airport, the station will become a sort of a gateway. At this station it will be possible to get a train to the north of the

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#outcentres

47

Cultural norms

THE moscow AGENDA

Cultural norms: Soviet recreation and education infrastructure under new conditions

Moscow’s industrial character of the Soviet era reflected in its cultural space and architecture. Today it has to adjust to the new conditions and requirements of modern urban culture. Is this possible?

Session curator: Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design; Speakers and Panellists; Sergei Kapkov, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department of Culture; Boris Kupriyanov, Deputy Director of the Moscow City Library Centre; Alexei Levinson, sociologist; Svyatoslav Murunov, urbanist, Founder and Director of the KBR. Creative Economics group of companies, Penza, Russia; Georgy Nikich, Curator of the Association of Exhibition Halls of Moscow; Alisa Prudnikova, Director of the Ural branch of the National Centre for Contemporary Arts; Grigory Revzin, Special Correspondent of the Kommersant Publishing House, Expert at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design, Professor at the Graduate School of Urban Studies and Planning; Yury Saprikin, Editor-in-chief, Joint Company Afisha–Rambler; Yulia Shakhnovskaya, Deputy General Director of the Polytechnic Museum; Martin Steffens, Director of the 48 Stunden Neukölln Art Festival, Berlin, Germany.

The master plan of the city during the Soviet Union times outlined principles of availability of cultural amenities to every resident. Moscow is covered by a network of libraries, exhibition centres and art galleries, and community centres.

However, with the fall of the USSR, the existing structure has lost its relevance. Today, it requires reorganization and adjustment to the new needs of city residents.

Grigory Revzin, a special correspondent of the Kommersant Publishing House, expert at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design and professor at the Graduate School of Urban Studies and Planning, described the current situation with cultural space of the city. Standards of the Soviet Union required cultural institutions within walking distance at 50 square centimetres per capita. Such a principle can be applicable if there is a person who is managing cultural and ideological activity in the periphery. But what can this be today?

Can the Soviet infrastructure of community centres and libraries be used to start spreading some other ideology? Experience has shown that residents are very negative towards active dissemination of contemporary culture.

According to a survey, 52 per cent of residents do not leave dormitory suburbs, 39 per cent are satisfied with their lives and do not want to change anything in it. Predominantly, these are retired

48

people or men and women who go to work, but within the area of their residency do not walk further than to a school, hairdresser, shops, or kindergarten. To such a community everything new, including culture, is not progress, but a threat.

Nevertheless, attempts are made to give a new life to the cultural infrastructure of the Soviet times.

For example, work of galleries and exhibition halls on the peripheral areas is being rejuvenated, said Georgy Nikich, curator at the Association of Exhibition Halls of Moscow. The nature of their function has not changed since the Soviet era, but lost its relevance. Local residents are unaware of their existence.

The problem is not only in the subject of their work, but also in the way this work is organised.

The centralized type of management of the past does not fit in the current situation, when local communities and their diversity become more and more important. The scale of the Soviet c­ ultural project forces to look for a universal solution.

At the same time, life of local communities requires careful and individual solutions.

Svyatoslav Murunov, director of the KBR. Creative Economics group, proposed the following scheme: one third of the space should be given to informal groups, which exist in big numbers in the suburbs; one third should be given to businesses connected to culture (book shops and music stores), and one third left to be managed by the state.

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Sergei Kapkov, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department of Culture The idea to have a whole ministry devoted to culture belongs to the Soviet Union where the world’s first Ministry of Culture was formed back in 1953. The ideology behind the work of the vast cultural infrastructure was outlined by the Soviet government and the Communist Party. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, as Vitaly Kurennoy figuratively described, this infrastructure like an “ironclad train was pulled to the side tracks, and is slowly decaying there.” Former mechanisms have lost their purpose; funding was reduced; so questions arose — who needs these cultural institutions today; what is their purpose? At the same time, Moscow was actively developing, huge new areas were constructed; for example, Tushino, with 30 thousand inhabitants and only two cultural establishments. Therefore, we have two

objectives in focus: creation of new cultural centres within every district and evolvement of the existing cultural institutions of the Soviet era, such as libraries.

Moscow has 453 libraries. They form a huge network, which can be used to create the Moscow “city lounges’ throughout the city. A new type library can be the place to meet up, communicate, work, study; one can read a book or just browse the Internet. Libra­ries can become a socalled “third place”, which with time should have more functions added: bookshops, educational centres for seniors to help them to use computers, and much more. Together with Boris Kupriyanov, who oversees this project, we want to get rid of the Soviet model of a library — just shelves with books, stuffy rooms, “be quiet, take your books and leave” sort of place. At the same time, it is important for us to keep the idea behind the creation of public libraries — a space with no money relations, where people would feel comfortable regardless of their income. In libraries, all are equal. This year we have launched two pilot proj-

Libraries could be the most appealing form of cultural institution to local residents, said Boris Kupriyanov, Deputy Director of the Moscow City Library Centre. Libraries have always been there; they provide familiar and easy to understand services; and are, traditionally, well trusted.

The reform of Moscow libraries, which is lead by Mr Kupriyanov, first of all should bring libraries up-to-date, to make them comfortable and full of modern services to offer. At the same time they should keep their function as libraries, to which people are accustomed. This combination of fami­ liar and new can generate potential for modernization. The results of the first reformed libraries give reason to hope.

Alisa Prudnikova, Director of the Ural branch of the National Centre for Contemporary Arts, has shared her experience of working with symbolic capital and infrastructure, inherited from the Soviet times. Ural Industrial Biennale of Contemporary Art as a project was shaped by the indus­ trial chara­cter of the Ural region and is trying to actualize this industrial basis for modern society.

ects: in the Dostoevsky library in the Chistye Prudy area and library at 127, Leninsky Prospekt.

The Dostoevsky library is a showcase for the project. We installed large windows, opened access to book shelves. Visitors can pick up a book by themselves and have some coffee. They can bring their children along — the library has a playroom. This is a completely new type of library — a space for self-improvement and communication. During the first few months after the reorganization, the number of visitors has grown fifteen times. This fact is very important for us, because the Department of Culture competes for leisure time of Muscovites with shopping centres, gyms, cinemas, etc. Our task is to promote our institutions, to entice people with our services and to make sure that everybody is satisfied with their visit. Hence, our pro­ jects, such as: “Night of the Arts”, “Night of the Music”, “Biblionight”, etc. Through these projects, we are able to attract interest of a great number of people, many of whom only at these events learn that they have a library or museum next door.

For its venue, Biennale is using communal centres of the Soviet times. Old-fashioned aura of these places does not fit the idea behind the Biennale.

Most of their visitors are preschoolers and seniors who have little interest in contemporary art. However, when residents are explained what curators of the event wanted to say, they become a loyal audience and many of them even become volunteers.

What strategy would produce the best result; which policy would be the best approach to modernize the city’s current cultural infrastructure. Nobody knows precise answers to these questions just yet, since none of the projects in this area can be considered complete. But there is a danger — which was indicated at the end of the meeting by Yulia Shakhnovskaya, Deputy General Director of the Polytechnic Museum — curators who are accustomed to patronize the audience can only alienate them further.

To access session highlights video and other ­materials please visit: www.mosurbanforum. com/forum2013/program2013/#culture

49

authorities and citizens

THE moscow AGENDA

authorities and citizens: from alienation to cooperation.

Practice in Moscow

Moscow already has some experience in involving residents into the management of their city. The city authorities have realized that independent evaluation of their efforts helps to choose the best solutions for urban problems. However, this work is not as simple as it seems. Residents are not always keen to engage in activities outside their own courtyard.

Speakers and Panellists: Anastasiya Rakova, Deputy Mayor of Moscow, Chief of Staff to the Mayor and Moscow Government; Natalia Klimova, Head of the State Fiscal Institution Open Government; Mikhail Maximov, First Deputy Head of the Mayor’s Office of the Moscow Government; Evgeny Kozlov, Head of the Department for Improvement of Administrative and Management Processes of the Executive Bodies of the Mayor’s Office of the Moscow Government; Elena Gromova, Director of the State Budget Institution Multifunctional Centres Providing Public Services in Moscow; Ermolai Solzhenitsyn, Senior Partner of the Moscow office of McKinsey & Company.

Moscow is not the only city with a problem of alienation between citizens and the government.

This problem exists in all of the major megacities. Formed in the second half of the 20th century, mechanisms of managing large cities of the industrial era presumed that the whole complex of problems can only be recognized from the “top”; only the authorities together with industry experts (transport specialists, city planners, economists, etc.) can make the right decisions.

Experience has shown that during transition of the society from the industrial to post-industrial development, these mechanisms are failing. However, this fact was observed as far back as the 60s.

Projects, which were initiated in this way, often have a negative effect on the quality of life of citizens and miss the Genius Loci of individual area.

Worse still, it results in growing alie­nation between the government and citizens.

At the instant, when city turns to people in search of their opinion and wants to share the responsibility for the chosen direction of development, it turns out that there is no one to rely on. Moscow has also encountered this problem, said Anastasiya Rakova, Deputy Mayor of Moscow, Chief of Staff to the Mayor and Moscow Government. Mutual distrust between citizens and officials; insufficient mechanisms for cooperation in civic society — how to overcome these obstacles? The Moscow City Government has chosen the follow-

50

ing principle — to support only such forms of interaction with the Muscovites, which are already popular with the residents, and then gradually expand this cooperation. How big was this cooperation at the beginning?

Regular sociological studies help to u ­ nderstand what exactly the citizens want. The results do not look encouraging: two thirds of the total ­number of residents do not want to participate in mana­gement of their city at all, 20 per cent of the people are interested only in issues directly ­related to their communal entrance hallway and courtyard. Nevertheless, in 2011, the M ­ oscow government began to develop interactive web-sites.

At first, there were few thematic sites; later they were integrated into a single unified Internet portal.

It can be used to find information on 110 aspects of management and development. It can be used to leave comments, messages and complaints. Residents have already used the website to comment about one in four houses in the city and one in six communal entrances. About 4–5 thousand complaints are submitted weekly — a half of all addresses to the city authorities. Today, about 80 per cent of problems, reported by citizens through the website, are getting solved. Notably, the average time of the complaint handling is 4 days, and answers to all questions coming from residents are open to be viewed.

3 moscow urban forum

The other area of focus is provision of public services in electronic format. It is not only an advanced way, which improves the quality of life by reducing the time expenditures of residents, it is also a way to minimize contacts with officials.

This reduces chances of mutual distrust. Electronic forms already exist for 103 services and features have been transferred to electronic form, of which 54 — completely.. There is no need any more for visits in person with paper documents. Electronic interaction between citizens and govern­ment is complemented by the open data portal, which provides access to 243 different sets of information — from the map of open ice skating rinks to registry of the CCTV cameras. Moreover, about 50 sets of data were collected by special request of Muscovites. Among them, a list of petrol stations with quality fuel, working hours of maternity hospitals, map of public toilets. Part of the data has already been translated into English. Contractors, prepared to invest their own funds, carry out development of mobile applications.

Of course, the problem of alienation of citizens and authorities, lack of interest among residents about the future of their city, and hence the reluctance to take responsibility, will not be solved quickly. Real instruments of influence on urban policy were not available to many generations of Muscovites. This happened not only because of the specifics of political principles of the USSR, but also because the city was visioned as a single object of management, rather than a group of subjects — a mistake made not only in Moscow, but also in many cities of the Fordist type. This experience can not be passed overnight. Interaction space, which has already been created, is not flexible yet. In fact, there are only two types of communication: “complaints” and “services”. But it already gives an opportunity to accumulate new experience.

Participatory Budgeting in New York

districts by the participatory budgeting is scheduled to discuss the distribution of nearly 15 million US Dollars. Prior to the start of this program, a two-phase study was conducted to assess whether the New Yorkers are ready to participate in such a process. Analysis of the data collected during indepth interviews helped to design suitable mechanisms to involve citizens. The process is based on quite a tight schedule. The first two months are dedicated to the discussion of local community needs, their identification and the articulation of the requests during specially organized “brainstorms”. After that, selected delegates continue to work on the evaluation of the projects. They are divided into separate committees dealing with different matters, such as housing, education, safety, etc. These committees work on the projects details, which are aimed to resolve a variety of issues up until the end of February. Projects are presented to the residents and are subsequent to feedback and are reviewed and refined during March and April. After that projects are put to a final vote. ­Local authorities implement the winning projects, and the process starts up again.

Participatory budgeting presumes that the people manage the city funds themselves. This instrument was used for the first time in 1989 in the Brazilian city of Porto Alegre. The residents were offered to decide the future of a considerable part of the city’s budget through discussions and consultations in their districts. This approach is useful in several ways at the same time. It contributes to the level of control the local residents have over the distribution of their own taxes, provides the possibility of equal participation for every resident regardless of their status, boosts the level of understanding and awareness in the field of city management, as well as strengthens the communities unity and sense of responsibility for the future of their city. The principle of participatory budgeting is currently practiced in more than 1,500 cities of all sizes. Among the newcomers is New York. It all started in 2011 when four of the city districts applied this method in their budgeting. Today there are eight such districts. In the September 2013 — April 2014 budget cycle of these

To access session highlights video and other ­materials visit: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#authorities

51

the appropriateness of modernitY

THE moscow AGENDA

the appropriateness of modernity: the architectural process through the eyes of business

More and more foreign architects enter the Russian market, including through competitions. How will this affect the quality of the urban environment? Past experience working with foreigners is not exactly trouble-free.

Speakers and Panellists: Оlga Aleksakova, architect, Partner at Buromoscow; Petr Kudryavtsev, Partner at Citymakers; Artem Kuznetsov, CEO of Guta Development; Denis Leontiev, Head of the Strelka consulting bureau; Evgenia Murinets, Deputy Head of the Management Board of the Architectural Council of the Committee for Architecture and City Planning of Moscow; Aidan Potter, Board Director at John McAslan + Partners, UK.

The impact of foreign architects on the Moscow architectural market is one of the topics discussed constantly. However, most of these discussions come to provocative statements from customers about the poor quality of domestic architecture and counter-arguments from architects about idolising anything coming from the West. Meanwhile, a new generation of Russian specialists has appeared. They have experience of studying and working abroad, so they understand what the advantages of foreign bureaus are, but are not afraid to compete with them.

Practices of large well-known foreign bureaus are among their advantages. They view the experiment as a major driving force of the design process, maintain a high pace of the creative process at any stage and high technical level and project management. Another ­advantage is organization of the design process — it has a bigger number of stages, therefore more points of quality control. According to Denis Leontiev, Head of the Strelka consulting bureau, the abi­lity of foreign architects to work efficiently outside their own markets is linked to their initial focus on export of services as an element of business strategy — if a part of the world is experiencing a crisis and projects stop, they can still progress in another. This approach originates from the economic situation of the 80s, with Japan having a construction boom, while the rest of the world was recovering from the crisis of the 70s.

52

At the same time, this business strategy does not negate the need to adapt to the design standards in each country. Describing his experience of working in Russia, Aidan Potter, Director at John McAslan + Partners, says that work with the Russian client is always based on personal relationships and requires, in particular, personal presence, which is not always convenient to a manager of a global company. Plus, the process of getting familiar with the context, understanding the local situation and studying the regulations, in general, is very time-consuming. Оlga Aleksakova, partner at Buromoscow, has experience of working abroad. According to her, peculiarities of the Russian architectural market do not make it significantly more complicated compared to other countries. She describes three different forms of working relationship between Russian clients and foreigners. The first one is when a famous architect is invited and partnered with a local architect for the project support. The second form is when just the name of the celebrity architect is used by people with no connection to him, which creates problems at the legal level. The third form is when a mediocre foreign architect is invited based on the idea that any average Western office is supposedly better qualified than any ave­ rage Russian one.

The last attitude is, to some extent, due to the small number of professional architects in Russia. In any case, complexities of working with

3 moscow urban forum

foreigners can not be avoided — the ­signing of contracts, their formalization, ­promptness of payments, the search for adequate local partners. Speaking from experience, Artem Kuznetsov, CEO of Guta Development, says, that the level of client’s proficiency is important in any case scenario. Guta Development, at the beginning of its activity, has tried to work with ­celebrity architects, including Jean Nouvel and Norman Foster. However, these attempts have not been successful — at that time the company had insufficient skills in drawing ­technical specifications. He also pointed out problems of communication with the design office from abroad. It is too far to travel, and phone calls are not enough. In such a situation, the project supporting team of the Russian architects is turned into translators and has no time left to influence the quality of the project, its fit to the client’s needs and to the Russian context.

One of the most significant problems in this situ­ation is the cost of services. International practice, which involves dozens of stages of project development, suggests high fees.

Client’s attempts to save money, say, on fees to the Russian architects for project support, does not lead to the best choice of specialists. It results in a big number of ill-designed parts, lots of random solutions, replaced materials, etc., pointed out Evgenia Murinets, Deputy Head of the Architectural Council of the Committee for Architecture and City Planning of Moscow.

What might be the problem? According to Denis Leontiev, the problem is that the Russian architects are eager to compete at the ideological level, but pay little attention to their technical abilities. As a result, detailed design documentation is often done in Turkey, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, etc. The reason for this probably lies in the quality of the Western architectural education, which was already mentioned by Ms Aleksakova. Compared to the Russian specialists, even young Western architects have a better knowledge of structural systems, engineering, and project management.

The internationalised Russian architecture market would help local design bureaus to enter the overseas markets and to feel fairly equal to foreign practices. Especially, since expansion of the Russian corporations to other markets has

already begun. Architects might have joined them by designing offices of their foreign missions, providing the quality of their services is adequate. Subsequently, the quality of architecture would improve back in Russia as well.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#modernity

Perspective Evgenia Murinets, Deputy Head of the Architectural Council of the Committee for Architecture and City Planning of Moscow Generally speaking, Moscow does not have fixed policy regarding engaging foreigners in the local market. However, it is obvious that their presence motivates Russian specialists by bringing international competition. This is fair. Nowadays, Moscow has begun to hold a lot of architectural competitions and the word “consortium” became a part of active vocabulary. At present, most commonly, consortium is led by a foreigner. There are no results yet, enough to discuss whether this approach is beneficial, as well as there is no “navigation” of some sort through the structure of the process. At the same time, there are examples of successful cooperation with foreign bureaus being subcontracted by the Russian general planner.

Naturally, it is necessary to have someone who understands what is a valued city landmark, monument of archi­tecture, and how these concepts are interpreted by the law. Far more controversial are examples of project support of foreign desig­ners done by architectural units of developer’s companies. Because once the design concept of the ​​ project is embraced, developers begin to repeat it with some variations by themselves, creating a new iteration of standar­dised development. In this respect, it is important to maintain the attitude to any project as to the author’s statement, the implementation of which the author controls at each stage.

53

Panel Moscow

THE moscow AGENDA

Panel Moscow: limitations and development potential

The periphery of Moscow is the area of key challenges for the city — social, cultural and political. Analysis of problems and potential of the periphery allows us to formulate the concept of its development — a SUPERPARK, which can be the answer to these challenges, a spatial solution and fun.

Session curator: Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design; Speakers and Panellists: Oleg Baevsky, Architect and Urban Planner, Deputy Director of State Unitary Enterprise «Research and Project Institute of Moscow City Master Plan»; Mikhail Blinkin, Director of the Institute of Transport Economics and Transportation Policy, Higher School of Economics; Andrey Chernikhov, Vice President of the International Academy of Architecture, Moscow; Yury Grigoryan, Head of the Meganom architectural bureau, Director of Education at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design; Brian Evans, Practicing urbanist and landscape designer; Alexander Lozhkin, Director of the State Regional Budget institution Perm Regional Research and Production Centre for the Protection of Monuments (Cultural Heritage), Professor at the International Academy of Architecture, Moscow; Alexei Muratov, Partner at the Strelka consulting bureau, Head of Strategies for Territorial Development; Eugenia Murinets, Deputy Head of the Architectural Council of the Committee for Architecture and City Planning of Moscow; Grigory Revzin, Special Correspondent of the Kommersant Publishing House, Expert at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design, Professor at the Graduate School of Urban Studies and Planning; Oliver Schulze, partner at Schulze + Grassov, Copenhagen, partner at Citymakers, Moscow; Daniyar Yusupov, ­Expert at the Open City Laboratory independent expert initiative, St. Petersburg.

The characteristic of Moscow housing structure is that residential areas are mostly located outside the city centre. Rapid growth of these areas occurred 60 years ago, and now this is approximately fourfifths of the city’s footprint. Mainly, these areas are built up with standardised houses made of prefabricated panels of reinforced concrete, which were arranged, yet again, according to standardised spatial layout design for residential areas. Architects of that time were excited by the novelty of this task. Back then, equal level of comfort meant transition to a new level of quality of life for the country. Standardization of concepts for layout planning and design back then seemed to be an expression of this noble task. Developed in this way areas were built up and populated, by historical standards, almost in a single-step, says Grigory Revzin, expert at the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design. People were settled in newly created artificial and homogeneous space, which did not have either a centre, or outskirts, and where everything looked the same.

Equality was the key principle of the development of Soviet Moscow since the 1950s. This principle found practical use in the development of social and cultural infrastructure. The same regulations were used in all of the neighbourhoods to determine the number of polyclinics, community centres, schools, cinemas, libraries and bakeries. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union, centralized

54

management of resources became a thing of the past, and life found a different rhythm. The “Archaeology of the periphery” research has shown that urban sub-centres inherited from the ­Soviet times do not coincide with current areas with central functions. Mapping functions across the Moscow space allowed to detect places where the concentration of them appeared to be higher than in the rest of the city, apart from the centre. Among these places were the Sokol area, Bolshaya Cherkizovskaya streets, the Metro stations Academicheskaya and Maryino. There are no existing pre-requisites, either in terms of architecture or urban planning, for these areas to form a new centre. At the same time, their locations remind places where historically towns were set: at the road fork, on a hill by the river, etc. It turns out that transport, electricity and water mains are parts of joint property of the city space, on top of which other cities are formed, each with approximately 300–400 thousand inhabitants.

This is just one of approaches to interpret the peripheral area, proposed by the research. Depending on the specific discipline, analysis of the research findings may reveal something else. Analysis of the transport infrastructure of this part of the city, for example, leads to the differentiation between areas based on their transport accessibility and interconnectivity. This way it becomes possi-

3 moscow urban forum

A city within the city — in Sokol, the neighbourhood next to the intersection of two major highways, the concentration of services is one of the highest in the capital

ble to identify relatively prosperous areas, and areas in need of urgent and radical help. According to Mikhail Blinkin, director of the Institute of Transport Economics and Transportation Policy at the HSE, today insufficient attention is paid to the subject of caring capacity of the public transport. For example, it turns out that, although it is very easy to reach the Metro station Vyhino, but to get inside the station and then take a train became problematic since the line was extended to ZHulebino. Mr Blinkin named thorough land survey of the multi-storey housing areas as an important aspect in achieving accessibility and control over vehicle-to-population ratio.

Alexei Muratov, Partner at the Strelka consulting bureau, links surveying with the subject of transferring the rights to participate in the area mana gement to the residents. According to him, in gene­ral, territory of the periphery is in quite good condition, but this is thanks to the centralized planning and management, capabilities of which

are not limitless. Now, authorities must share responsibility for the future of the periphery with the residents. However, it is not clear to what extent they are ready for this role. Oleg Baevsky, deputy director of the Institute of Master Planning for the City of Moscow, calls this situation a “test on civic responsibility” for a reason.

The list of possible interpretations of the problems and potentials of the periphery does not end there.

The research has revealed that a closer look at periphery removes the image of monotony and tedium, for which it is customary to blame for the past 30 years. The next step is to convert this discovery into development projects, beneficial to the whole agglomeration, because here is the place where the vast majority of its inhabitants live.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#panelmoscow

55

City, suburbs or countryside

THE moscow AGENDA

City, suburbs or countryside: model for development of new areas of Moscow

In the middle of 2012, by adding the territory of 1.5 thousand square kilometres Moscow has increased its size by factor of 2.5. Which model can be used for the development of the recently added areas?

hospitals, with minimum of job opportunities — only retail and few service businesses. Developers are motivated to ensure that micro-districts would have jobs for at least a half of the their resident.

However, current situation with New Moscow still leaves possibility to find alternative development models. New Moscow has real chance to abandon established over the last 20 years building templates, and withdraw from replicating old life patterns. New Moscow has a chance to become an ex-

periment, during which new environmental and spatial settlement pattern might be created, which adequately correspond the challenges of the postindustrial world.

Simple regulations

parking along them is impermissible, so parking spaces are hidden behind homes or in alleys.

The city is well-planned for pedestrian transit.

The third principle regards mixed-use buildings.

In Poundbury, there is no strict zoning: private and social housing, shops, offices and public buildings are not separated, but are combined.

The fourth principle is diversity. Buildings vary in type, facades, size and value. The fifth principle is strong emphasis on the community. Public spaces are well developed with the distinct centre of the area. The sixth principle is that cities should be small. After finishing all four phases of construction, Poundbury will have 6 thousand inhabitants. The seventh principle is a low-rise construction. There are no large scale buildings, all of the public spaces are compact and community friendly.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#suburbs

Session curator: Laboratory of Urban Studies of the Moscow Institute of Architecture; Speakers and Panellists: Martin Dubbeling, Vice President of the Netherlands Professional Organisation of Urban Planning and Design (BNSP) and Vice President Urban Planning Advisory Teams (UPATs) of the International Society of City and Regional Planners (ISOCARP), the Netherlands; Ellen Dunham-Jones, architect and professor teaching urban design at the Georgia Institute of Technology, USA; Fedor Kudryavtsev, Head of the Laboratory of Urban Studies of the Moscow Institute of Architecture (MARCHI), General Director Architectural bureau ArchNOVA LLC; Alla Makhrova, Senior Research Fellow, Faculty of Geography of the Lomonosov Moscow State University, PhD in Geography; Karima Nigmatulina, Acting Director at the State Unitary Enterprise, Research and Project Institute of the Moscow City Master Plan; Sun Shan, Deputy director of Shanghai Urban Planning and Design Research Institute, China; A ­ ndrei Vasiliev, Head of the Real Estate Sector at Basic Element; Vladimir Yudintsev, Head of the АRTE+ architectural bureau; Vladimir Zhidkin, Head of the Department for Development of New Areas of Moscow.

Ambitious project to expand the administrative boundaries of Moscow has created a unique situation. The Russian capital gained unprecedented land resources for development. In the coming decades massive territories will be undergoing construction, yet it is not clear which model will be used for this development. There are at least three possible scenarios of development of this area. The first scenario is replication of multistory microdistricts according to the Soviet standard of urban development. Today, territory of the Moscow region is being built up mostly under such a scheme.

The share of multistorey micro-districts accounts is 93 per cent of the total construction of residential property. The second scenario is creation of a new city at the boundaries of the Moscow region.

This city can become a new core of the agglomeration. The third scenario is a ­ ctive suburbanization of the middle part of the new territories.

Karima Nigmatulina, Acting Director at the State Unitary Enterprise, Research and Project Institute of the Moscow City Master Plan, has pointed out that, having considered all of the options, the city have chosen the use of cluster approach in the development of New Moscow. Twelve areas were selected. They will become compact developments with reasonably dense build-up centres. These areas will form framework of new housing on the

56

territory of New Moscow. According to Ms Nigmatulina, there will not be high-rise buildings in New Moscow. Compact format assumes that average number of floors should not exceed 10 floors. Few accent buildings will be considered acceptable, up to 14 floors tall, but no more than 15 per cent of the total construction volume. These ­areas are ­expected to have relatively high density of housing. A large area is planed to have 8 thousand square metres per hectare. Building density of a small area will not exceed 25 thousand square met­res per hectare.

The key issue for New Moscow is creation of new jobs. According to Sun Shan, Deputy director of Shanghai Urban Planning and Design Research Institute, in addition to a high-capacity transport infrastructure it is necessary to secure space for industrial zones; this will allow future residents of New Moscow to work close to home. Vladimir Zhidkin, Head of the Department for Development of New Areas of Moscow, said that government plans to create 800 thousand jobs in the Troitsky & Novomoskovsky Administrative District (TiNAO). During last one and a half years, none of the proposed draft plans for the development of the new territory was approved because they were focused on the development of residential pro­ perty and social facilities, schools, kindergartens,

3 moscow urban forum

In the 90s, the town of Poundbury was built in the outskirt regions of Dorchester. Prince Charles was in charge of the project, whilst Leon Krier acted as the architect. The town was built following historically traditional architecture and it resembles a medieval European city. The houses in Poundbury are no taller than three floors; nevertheless, the city is rather densely developed. Poundbury is an example of a ­building development consistent with principles of the New Urbanism movement.

The first of those principles is to ensure that a city is walkable. All essential services for residents, shops and stations are within walking distance — no more than a ten minute walk. The second principle is priority for the pedestrian, not the vehicle. Streets are narrow as it is and

57

City, suburbs or countryside

THE moscow AGENDA

Ellen Dunham-Jones: “We have to show that there is another way to live — densely, yet efficiently”

In your article for the “Archaeology of the periphery” research you talk about small projects initiated by the residents of suburbia to change it. Do you believe that such projects can make a difference on the scale of a whole country?

Ellen Dunham-Jones is widely recognized as a leader in finding solutions for aging suburbs. She is the co-author of Retrofitting Suburbia: Urban Design Solutions for Redesigning Suburbs. The book contains examples of successful projects that have given new life to old warehouses, shopping centres and office buildings. Ellen Dunham-Jones received undergraduate and graduate degrees in architecture from Princeton University and taught at the University of Virginia and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology before joining the Georgia Institute of Technology.

­ In your article for the “Archaeology of the — periphery” research you talk about small projects initiated by the residents of suburbia to change it. Do you believe that such projects can make a difference on the scale of a whole country?

— Do you know one of the key differences between suburbia and downtown? Although we are accus­

58

tomed to the fact that there are many historic buildings in downtowns that need to be preserved, culturally we are all used to the idea of change in the downtowns. As buildings age and decay they are replaced with new ones — and it’s a sign of a healthy economy. But in suburbia there is a cultural expectation that the built landscape will remain forever frozen in the form it was first constructed in.

We have to show that there is another way to live, maybe a little more compact than they are used to, but more efficient with a mix of uses in easy walking distance with the benefits of urbanism. ­— How do you distinguish a good periphery from a bad one?

— The first criterion that comes to mind is accessibility. In the United States, as in Russia, the farther it is from the centre, the cheaper land becomes, hence housing is more affordable. But this is only at first glance. When you add the cost of getting to the centre, to work, to school, to the shop — then the price of this life already looks different. Today, in the U.S. most families with income below the average spend more on commuting than on housing. This also applies to municipal services. The lower the density, the more expensive becomes the construction and maintenance of utility systems, roads, emergency services, and so on. Therefore, the first criterion is accessibility. The second criterion is public health. In America, it is a popular opinion that suburbs have a healthier lifestyle and life in the city is harmful. This belief originates back from the 19th century, when lack of hygiene and poor sewers and water supply led to recurring outbreaks of infections. But now this is no longer the case. Now, the problem is chronic diseases like obesity, heart disease and diabetes more than infectious diseases. It turns out that people living in

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Karima Nigmatulina, Acting Director at the State Unitary Enterprise, Research and Project Institute of the Moscow City Master Plan We support comprehensive and balanced development of the new territories. Developing spatial design for the Troitsky & Novomoskovsky Administrative District (TiNAO), we have considered several scenarios and have chosen the option of compact developments in the first zone of the new territory. What are the prerequisites for this decision? Currently, population of Moscow is 12 million people. The Moscow region has approximately 7 million inhabitants, of which around 200–300 thousand people permanently reside in TiNAO. Number of resident of Moscow and its region will continue to grow. According to prognosis, before 2035 population of the Moscow metropolitan area may grow by an-

other 4 million inhabitants. As much as possible, we would like to “pull” this additional population to the territory of TiNAO to avoid its concentration in Moscow in its historical borders. We have tried to take into account all the possibilities and limitations of the new territories. One of the most important factors to consider is preservation of forests, which form green belt of the capital. Spatial design has set a clear position — it is necessary to preserve all of green resources, all the woodland, even if they are not a part of conservation forests. Another important precondition associated with nature is careful attitude towards the water resources. In case if active construction will be carried out along the rivers, they will disappear. The development concept we have decided on is seen as follows — new territory will be divided into compact and dispersed formations. Compact formations assume denser development, the principle of which is walkable access from the place of residence to work, social in-

suburbia tend to get much less physical activity in their daily routines. They spend more time sitting indoors and in cars.. And all that time in the car means they are at greater risk of dying from a car crash, the leading cause of death for anyone under age 34. Another criterion is damage to the environment. Detached houses waste more energy, and the pollution from all of the driving means that suburbanites have carbon footprints 2–3 times larger than urban dwellers.

— And yet, people are drawn to individual housing. Is it possible for it to be the other way round, without resorting to drastic measures and restrictions?

— This is a matter of general education — books, lectures, and workshops with ordinary people. My new urbanist colleague, Peter Calthorpe, works with communities engaged in scenario planning.

He did a seminal project with the community of Salt Lake City. It is a very conservative, Republican city — the nation’s Mormon capital with the highest birth rate in the United States. The city and its suburbs are situated in a valley surrounded by mountains. Where will they house their rapidly growing population? Peter’s office held hun-

frastructure and leisure facilities.

These compact formations are correlated with twelve growth areas, including Administrative and Business Centre in Kommunarka, logistics centre Bekasovo, airport complex Vnukovo, the Troitsk Innovation Centre, recreational area Voronovo and so on. The new transport framework will first of all connect these particular areas. All other territories, we believe, should be developed fairly sequentially. Regarding public transport, underground is being extended and The Metro will be available in the first zone of New Moscow. The rest of New Moscow will have a network of other forms of public transport with high passenger capacity, such as Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Plus we want to connect New Moscow with the historical part using existing service of the Moscow Railway in Kursk and Kiev directions.

There are no plans for a new radial railway to go through TiNAO, instead cross-link between the mentioned lines of the Moscow Railway is being considered.

dreds of workshops with local people in different areas throughout the metro region. They laid out large maps of the valley and handed around poker chips the size of a neighborhood: one colour for individual houses, the second — for multi-apartment buildings, the third — for office blocks, the fourth — for commercial property, etc. Participants of the workshops quickly realized that if everyone were to live in individual houses, the space in the valley would not be enough and they would have to take development up into the mountains, a prospect they all agreed they wanted to avoid.

They began to stack the chips of the individual houses. This helped the communities realize that they needed to build much more compactly with more multi-family buildings. Then Peter designed four scena­rios for the entire metro and calculated how much space, investment in infrastructure, the building types, and the cost for each. I believe seventeen thousand people voted — an impressive amount of community participation. They voted the the third scenario — much more compact than what they had been used to. This wouldn’t have happened without educating people to look at the capacity of the region as a whole.

59

Development on a megacity scale

THE moscow AGENDA

Development on a megacity scale: change of paradigm

Shift of investors’ interest from the housing development to multifunctional and infrastructure projects — is the key to positive changes in the city. However, the transition to the new model will require considerable effort.

Session curator: Institute for Urban Economics; Speakers and Panellists: Sergei Cheremin, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department for External Economic and International Relations; Andrei Grudin, Managing Director of Pioneer Group; Alexei Komissarov, Moscow Government Minister and head of the Department of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship of Moscow; Nadezhda Kosareva, President of the Institute for Urban Economics; Andrei Likhachev, Project Manager of Planet-ZIL, Expert of the Open Government of the Russian Federation; Joe Montgomery, Chief Executive of the Urban Land Institute (ULI) for Europe Tatyana Polidi, Executive Director of the Institute for Urban Economics; Igor Pyatibratov, Director of the Development Department of Millhouse; Oleg Soloschansky, President of INTEKO, the First Vice-President of the Association of Russian Builders; Konstantin Timofeev, Chairman of the Moscow Committee on the Implementation of Investment Projects in Construction and Control of Shared Construction; Evgeny G. Yasin, Academic Supervisor of the Higher School of Economics.

Subject of the integrated development of metro­ polis involves a constant balancing between the discussions of the individual parts of the city and their synergy. For example, it is impossible to talk about the development without raising the in­ vestment subject. According to Joe Montgomery, Chief Executive of the Urban Land Institute (ULI) for Europe, Moscow, in this respect, is an attrac­ tive city for foreign investors. Indeed, Moscow now has quite a few projects with the participation of interna­tional capital. For example, reconstruction of the Dinamo stadium is conducted by Codest In­ ternational S.r.l in partnership with the VTB bank with the support of export agency Sacho; invest­ ment volume of around 500 million Euros. How­ ever, all this does not negate concerns about the risks of investment. Development of Moscow and solution to many of its problems ends up to be a captive of competitiveness of the city on the glob­ al market.

According to Alexei Komissarov, the Moscow Gov­ ernment Minister, redevelopment of industrial zones should attract investments, foreign and lo­ cal, most of all. However, the real work on the de­ velopment of these areas requires the support of tough urban policy, zoning and viable partner­ ship of private business and the state. According to Igor Pyatibratov, Director of the Development Department of Millhouse, the city would benefit from supervision over the quality of architecture, as well as development of infrastructure facilities.

Furthermore, companies need foreseeable oper­

60

ating environment to plan their actions. For An­ drei Grudin, Managing Director of Pioneer Group, such an example is programme for the construc­ tion of transport hubs by 2020. It gives insight on the location of growth areas, around which com­ plex development is expected to start. After all, the area next to transport hub is favourable for the development of large and modern commercial in­ frastructure: office and retail spaces, which at­ tract large numbers of people. According to Kon­ stantin Edel from INTEKO, when developing a new site, developers are not even troubled by the need to give up some of the premises in favour of roads and parking spaces, because it increases the over­ all capitalization.

However, uncertainty regarding the planning hori­ zon and comprehensiveness of approach remains unresolved. Understanding the city in gener­ al, which is responsibility of the state, and tar­ geted development managed by private capital are not correlated, pointed out Alexander Vyso­ kovsky, Dean at the Graduate School of Urban Studies. Developers are already talking about the development of new sites, while the city has not yet thought of how to respond to increasing traf­ fic at these areas, for example, whether the Met­ ro will cope with added passenger traffic, as, at the moment, its network is growing only a little. Bal­ ance between markets, social problems, even ob­ ligations to provide social benefits — all of these will change with the development of new districts.

Viewpoint of the city authorities on these pro­

3 moscow urban forum

cesses is not always clear. Experts point out that no one plans delay in population growth, changes in the structure of the economy and social struc­ ture. Evgeny G. Yasin, Academic Supervisor of the Higher School of Economics, is positive, for ex­ ample, that eventually Moscow will become an in­ tellectual centre with smaller residential densi­ ty, and suggests that investments should be made in universities, cultural infrastructure, rather than housing. Search for a balanced approach to devel­ opment is in fact search for a balance of inte­rests of the city and developers. However, it can only take place in case of concerted development strat­ egy, which would have place for each of them. At this point, such a strategy does not exist just yet.

Meanwhile the city cannot (and should not) stop economic growth and development of the resi­ dential and commercial properties comes back to the old-fashioned patterns of the quickest pos­ sible returns.

Perspective Alexey Komissarov, ­Moscow Government Minister, Head of Moscow Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship Department Reconstructed industrial zones are one of the key resources for Moscow’s development. They attract investments; provide the periphery with infrastructures it lacks and with new jobs. However there are some issues involved. Each industrial zone is divided between a huge number of proprietors, some of whom are municipal and fe­ deral governments, and some are private owners. It is one thing when they discover that their land is now allocated for office buildings instead of warehouses but an entirely different story if this site is to be turned into a road. It is obvious, that reorganized industrial zones should improve connectivity of different parts of the capital, but the city has no legal instruments to resolve conflicts of ownership. Territories of the South Port, Kolomenskoye and Zelenograd were selected as pilot projects.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#megadevelopment

South Port The South Port industrial zone occupies a territo­ ry of 632 hectares in south-eastern Moscow, with borders defined by the Third Ring Road (TRR), Volgograd prospectus, Lublin street and the Mos­ cow River. Of these, 310 hectares is an industri­ al area, which belongs to 238 owners of all kinds.

Can South Port be converted into a new urban centre? The start was made 2 years ago, when the Moscow Techopolis was created on the rede­ veloped territory of 28 hectares released by the AZLK automobile factory, which produces Moskv­ ich cars. Factory buildings were modernized and office spaces were added; project completion is scheduled for 2014. By that time, private invest­ ment in the project will amount to 12 billion Rus­ sian Roubles. As a result, 5 thousand jobs will be created. Commissioned by the Ministry of Science, Industrial Policy and Entrepreneurship of Moscow general plan for reconstruction of the territory will be implemented at the same time. The recon­

struction involves appointment of several areas.

The Moscow Technopolis will be conjoined with The City Lab urban laboratory with its innovative and manufacturing facilities, as well as residen­ tial area Harbour City, recreation area Green Rib­ bon Park and the Sky Village art cluster. Designers proposed to increase the coastline of the territory fourfold through adding channels and to create a unique residential area. Green Ribbon Park will cover territory of unused railway tracks and will have promenade areas, bicycle paths, etc. In ad­ dition, this linear park will serve a new concept of water use, which involves purification, and par­ tial repeated use of water. For the Sky Village, ex­ isting industrial buildings will be reconstructed.

The whole area, particularly City Lab, will become a proving ground for new technologies developed in the Moscow Technopolis. Their successful im­ plementation during development of the South Port zone will prompt their use in other a ­ reas of the city.

61

Life beyond the centre

THE moscow AGENDA

Life beyond the centre: diagnosis and prognosis

Moscow’s dormitory suburbs look similar, but the social environment in them can be quite different

Balanced development of Moscow assumes more or less equal quality of life in the entire city. Nevertheless, while the centre is considered to be a better place to live than the periphery, although it does not affect day-to-day life, outskirts will remain closed on themselves. This imbalance both symbolic and practical needs attention.

Speakers and Panellists: Sophie Body-Gendrot, Professor of Political Science and American studies at the Sorbonne, Paris; Director of the Centre for Urban Studies; Valentin Bogorov, Client Training Specialist in IP & Science, Russia and CIS, Thompson Reuters; Alexei Levinson, Head of Social and Cultural Studies Department, Levada Centre; Michael Lurie, Dean of the Department of Anthropology of the European University in St. Petersburg; Oleg Pachenkov, Director of the Centre for Applied Research of the European University in St. Petersburg; Vladimir Petrosyan, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department for Social Security; Elena Trubina, Professor of the Faculty of Sociology of the Ural State University; Olga Vendina, Head Researcher at the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Zhanna Zayonchkovskaya, Head of the Migration Analysis and Forecasting Laboratory of the of the Institute of National Economy Forecasting of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Today, part of Moscow between the Third Ring Road and the Moscow MKAD Ring Road is home to more than 90 per cent of the Moscow’s popu­ lation; in fact, it is 12 per cent of the total popu­ lation of Russia. In Moscow, it is peripheral areas that are customary and natural location, and not the centre. Yet, according to Alexei Levinson, Head of Social and Cultural Studies Department, Levada Centre, Russians think of the capital as territo­ ry only within the Third Ring Road, if not small­ er. Semantic analysis of social networks, conduct­ ed for the “Archaeology of the Periphery” research, indicates that today, the centre of Moscow as well as its old border along the Moscow MKAD Ring Road, are associated with much more vivid imag­ es than the space between them. This semantic emptiness contradicts with characteristics of the area both social and economic, people and their lives. For example, according to Vladimir Petrosy­ an, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the De­ partment for Social Security, more than a half of residents of the periphery do not go to the centre, though they have a car, or even two, in the family.

People shop and use services in their own neigh­ bourhoods. Elena Trubina, Professor of the Facul­ ty of Sociology of the Ural State University, sug­ gests that their needs in culture are met thanks to the Internet. Studies indicate that the so-called periphery is closed on itself; there are not so many journeys made between the centre and out­ skirts and functional links are not strong. Centrip­

62

etal character of the city appears to be not as ab­ solute as it seems, although it does not make the city polycentric.

Common centre becomes needed only when it comes to exercising an important collective right.

According to Olga Vendina, Head Researcher at the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences, this is when clashes might happen. It is caused by the big size of Moscow — any majority gets eroded in the capital. Added active growth of number of migrants who maintain the image of a stranger, does not contribute to unity. By the way, according to Zhanna Zayonchkovskaya, Head of the Migration Analysis and Forecasting Laboratory of the of the Institute of National Economy Fore­ casting of the Russian Academy of Sciences, turn­ over of people has dropped compared to the Soviet times due to decrease of “stream” from Moscow.

Oleg Pachenkov, Director of the Centre for Applied Research of the European University in St. Peters­ burg, believes that throughout the world, the im­ age of the area is shaped by the quality of urban environment in it. The finer the architecture, ade­ quately ambitious surroundings and the wider di­ versity of services (art galleries, cafes, restaurants, shops), the better the image.

Can shift occur in the foreseeable future and pe­ ripheral areas will find their identity and will form new centres in this space, which will be discerned and denoted by the residents themselves? Mr Pachenkov sees a possible risk that Moscow, infi­

3 moscow urban forum

nitely expanding and absorbing the neighbouring towns, whose inhabitants work in the capital, will leave the first zone of periphery “empty”. He sug­ gests something to think about — “What makes a person to be a Muscovite, Where is the transition­ al point to a different quality and person becomes not a Muscovite?” So far it turns out that to be a Muscovite means to live off capital which is pro­ duced at the heart of Moscow; in other words, life at the expense of the economy of the whole coun­ try. Then the periphery of the capital is almost the entire country. Mr Levinson thinks that solu­ Perspective Vladimir Petrosyan, Moscow Government Minister, Head of the Department for Social Security Moscow is one of the most populated cities in Europe. Greater London has about 8.5 million people currently living in it, whilst for Moscow this number is more than 12 million. By analysing Moscow’s population we can see that currently 63 per cent of the population are people of working age. Just above 1.5 million Muscovites (13 per cent) are under age. Every fourth resident is a senior. More than 2.8 million residents are retired people. Currently system of the social ser-

tion involves political changes, transition to local governments. Michael Lurie, Dean of the Depart­ ment of Anthropology of the European Universi­ ty in St. Petersburg, believes that it is ­necessary to turn to local people for new knowledge and def­ initions; to structure, jointly, the symbolic space so that it could compensate shortcomings of the real one.

To access session highlights video please visit: www.mosurbanforum.com/forum2013/ program2013/#beyondcentre

vices is undergoing reorganisation. More than 50 per cent of the city budget is being pumped into this sector. Most of these funds are used for targeted programmes, inclu­ding one-time financial aid to citizens who are experiencing difficult circumstances, of an average size of 5,600 Russian Roubles. The department rarely engages in comparing different residential areas, but this program requires a more thorough analysis of the various parts of the city. It has already been discovered that the majority of the less fortunate reside in south-eastern Moscow. Not to mention that around 80 per cent of the inhabitants in the Lianozovo area are not satisfied with their income, while in the Krasnoselskoye area the number of

unsatisfied is 2 times lower.

The residents of the Solntsevskoye district have a lower purchasing power than that of Taganka area. Location does not alter the districts equal rights in accessing social services. Where there is a lack of in-patient infrastructure, residents are looked after by outreach brigades, as well as receive inpatient care at home, etc. An equal approach to this service demands that, with an increase in the city’s territory, services also become available in the newly formed areas, which have 67.3 thousand pensioners, including 16,000 people with disabilities and a massive quantity of large families.

63

Tax instruments

THE moscow AGENDA

Tax instruments for urban development

Property tax can play an important role in the life of cities, increasing their economic stability, becoming a management tool of the development. In Russia, the real work on property taxation has only just begun — in Moscow and the Moscow region.

Session curator: Faculty of Economics of the Lomonosov Moscow State University; Speakers and Panellists: Uwe Bekker, Chief Magistrate on Finance, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Vladimir Efimov, Head of the Moscow Department of City Property; Mike Emmerich, Chief Executive at New Economy, Manchester, UK; Leonid Kazinets, President of the National Union of Real Estate Developers; Vladislav Korochkin, All-Russian Public ­Organization of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises Opora Rossii; Artem Kuznetsov, CEO of Guta-Development; Andrei Makarov, Chairman of the State Duma Committee for Budget and Taxes; Kirill Nikitin, Expert in tax assessment. PwC partner, columnist at Izvestiya, member of the Expert advisory council at Delovaya Rossiya; Sergei Shatalov, Deputy Finance Minister of the Russian Federation.

Tax concessions or additional fees may either push or slow down processes in the city. However, this approach does not correlate with the notion that stability is vital for taxation policy. “Rules can be good or bad, but more importantly, they must be constant” — said Sergey Shatalov, Deputy Finance Minister.

Nevertheless, changes will be made, he noted, in particular, the entire system of property taxation has to be reviewed. This would involve expanding gradually application of the property’s cadastral value when determining the amount of property tax to be paid. Work in this direction began in Moscow and Moscow region. To start with, it was decided to set a volume of 5 thousand square me­ tres as the threshold quantity for levying a tax on office and retail property.

Uwe Bekker, Chief Magistrate on Finance of Frank­ furt am Main, describes taxes as a tool which helps to treat people and companies equally. Bud­ get of Frankfurt is 3.3 billion Euros, 60–70 per cent of the budget is generated from corporate tax; 15 per cent of the income tax, which later is transferred from the federal level to the regions, is the tax on land and property.

Naturally, tax rates are higher in the centre than in suburbs, so some companies move to suburbs and restaurants and service trades follow them.

This impacts the quality of life in the city. At the same time, taxes provide funds to finance, for ex­ ample, the costs of improving the quality of pre­ school education, which leads to the increase of

64

population and raised rental rates for housing.

The city has to adjust the tax instrument, consid­ er different outcomes depending on whether tax rates will be increased or decreased.

Currently, Moscow looks into the possibility of ­establishing “the city duty” which would involve property taxation for companies and would en­ sure business’ contribution to the development of infra­structure. For example, it is estimated that to ensure a comfortable living environment in Mos­ cow, it requires, for example, 12 thousand roubles to be spent on transport infrastructure per square metre of housing and further 14 thousand roubles on the underground.

Some of these costs are covered by supplementary payments. Maxim Reshetnikov, Minister of Mos­ cow Government, Head of Economic Policy and Development of Moscow, believes that introduc­ tion of the property tax brings business logic and efficiency to the development of the city.

Today, this is a pilot project of introduction of the real estate tax, the results of which will be used to correct the federal taxation system. The Mos­ cow region is the second party of this pilot proj­ ect. Both in Moscow and the Moscow region sub­ jects of the new tax are properties with floor space above 5 thousand square metres. A cadastral reg­ ister is gradually being formed, and will be used as a source for assessment of taxes.

In the past of Moscow, commercial property was subject to taxation based on their book value.

This system was putting developers of new com­

3 moscow urban forum

Perspective Maxim Reshetnikov, Minister of Moscow Government, Head of Economic Policy and Development of Moscow The problem, which we are experiencing regarding revenue of the Moscow budget from tax, and in our taxation system in general, is that existing regular sources of revenue are not able to cover our fixed costs, that is, there is a permanent risk coursed by the budget variability. This situation is typical not only for Moscow; all regional budgets experience the same.

In recent years, share of revenue from the profit tax in budget

was getting smaller, and this is the primary, and, probably, most pressing problem of our taxation system. The revenue from tax on personal income generates main part of the budget — 45 per cent, while revenue from profit tax has decreased to 35 per cent.

Therefore, the primary task of restructuring the taxation system should focus on making it consistent and balanced. By which means it could and should be done? The answer is — by means of increasing the property tax.

For example, in New York 30 per cent of the budget is formed by revenue from the property tax.

Currently, in Moscow, it accounts for only 8 per cent (113 billion Russian Roubles). Increase of this share should occur as a result of the city participation in the pilot

mercial property into a disadvantaged position as nominal book value of new property is close to its market value while the same for property in the centre is close to zero. Now corporate property tax will be calculated using cadastral values rath­ er than nominal book values. The Department of City Property published an online calculator that can be used to calculate the tax due based on in­ tended use of property; the online calculator has already been used by several thousand people.

Vladimir Efimov, Head of the Moscow Department of City Property, pointed out the lack of differen­ tiation in category of real estate use: residential and commercial. In fact, the function of commer­ cial property is very diverse and could be relevant in tax assessment. At the same time, there are 17 categories of land use.

Mike Emmerich, Chief Executive at New Economy, who works with the government of Greater Man­ chester, believes that system Property taxation, which creates equal valid motivation and financial liquidity for all, helps people suffering losses dur­ ing development of the city. At that, he empha­ sises importance of fiscal autonomy of the mu­ nicipalities, which can influence development of urban infrastructure. Introduction of the new tax and adjustment process of its calculation and ad­ ministration, of course, is not exactly good news for taxpayers as is any other change in taxation

project which gives regions the right to introduce new corporate property tax for owners of office and retail property, subject to properties with floor-space over 5 thousand square metres. We have established a reduced rate of 0.9 per cent, although the fede­ral law allows use of 2 per cent rate. At the same time, at the end of the last year, fiscal privileges were introduced in order to foster innovations and will be available to technopolises and technoparks. It is clear that their value will grow from year to year. Another novelty is tax pa­ tent, which allows to reduce the number of unscrupulous entrepreneurs who currently underreport their profits. In the future it should become available to any form of business ownership.

policy. But it is necessary to bind together the de­ velopment of the city and citizens and companies that profited from this development.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: http://mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#tax

This year, Moscow is expected to spend about 1.6 trillion Russian Roubles, including: 250 billion Russian Roubles — social assistance 660 billion Russian Roubles — schooling, healthcare, streets cleaning, etc.

162 billion Russian Roubles — development programme 360 billion Russian Roubles — investment programme, investments in transport infrastructure, schools, hospitals, etc.

65

Design of public spaces

THE moscow AGENDA

Design of public spaces

Comfortable urban environment also means absence of “visual noise”, including absence of gaudy and flashy signboards

Last two years Moscow was actively improving its public spaces. Now, the capital has new traffic-free areas, benches; first embankment has undergone reconstruction. What is more important in public spaces — content or design?

Session curator: Social Projects Department of the Agency for Strategic Initiatives (ASI); Speakers and Panellists: José Asebilio, Professor at the Academy of Architecture, University of Italian Switzerland; Andrei Bokov, President of the Union of Architects of Russia, Academician of the Russian Academy of Architecture and Building Sciences (RAABS); Sergei Desyatov, Director of the Design Centre ARTPLAY; Andrei Greenev, founder and owner of State Development Group; Erken Kagarov, Art Director at Art. Lebedev Studio; Irina Korobina, Director of the Schusev State Museum of Architecture; Alexander Kudryavtsev, President of the Russian Academy of Architecture and Building Sciences (RAABS) since 1999, President of the Moscow Architectural Institute (MARCHI); Peter Kudryavtsev, co-founder of TDI, partner; Sergei Kuznetsov, Chief Architect of Moscow, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Urban Planning and Architecture of Moscow; Dmitry Likin, architect, co-owner of the Wowhaus architectural bureau, member of the Board of Trustees of the Strelka Institute; Ular Mark, President of the Estonian Centre of Architecture, Estonia; Yuri Nazarov, President of the Union of Designers of Russia, Member of the Council for Culture and Arts under the President of the Russian Federation, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Arts; Stepan Orlov, Deputy of the Moscow City Duma; Aidan Potter, Director of John McAslan+Partners architectural bureau, UK; Oliver Schulze, A leading Danish urbanist, is a partner at Schulze + Grassov, an urban design studio (Copenhagen), and partner at Citymakers (Moscow); Arina Sharapova, journalist, PhD, professor; Alexander Skokan, Director of the Ostozhenka ­architectural bureau; Sofia Trotsenko, Russian art producer, founder of the Center for Contemporary Art Winzavod.

Public spaces left a prominent mark in history.

Squares of Athens had philosophers holding dis­ cussions; there were theatres and amphitheatres.

Unfortunately, today the city is given to road traf­ fic, regrets architect José Asebilio. A public space is primarily a place of city life and never ending ebullience.

Discussions about pedestrian zones are not enough; it is necessary to talk about the develop­ ment of the entire public space. There are a lot of questions in this subject: “what” and “how”, and “why”. Dmitry Likin, architect, co-owner of the Wowhaus architectural bureau, member of the Board of Trustees of the Strelka Institute empha­ sised that establishment of an effective mecha­ nism of communication between the authorities and general public will make it possible to discuss future initiatives — the “what” and “why”; and the professional community will answer “how” it can be implemented.

Then the discussion about public spaces will not slide into a matter of someone’s taste and personal preferences based on “I like it” or “I do not like it.”

It is an effective channel of interaction that will allow the authorities to share their plans and will help the public to get into habit to respond to pos­ sible changes.

He is convinced that there are objects that should be assessed, but from very pragmatic point of view: benches, litterbins, signboard placement on their own are unobtrusive objects, but can mark­ edly affect our impression of the city. Art. Lebe­

66

dev Studio jointly with the Moscow City Architec­ ture has developed an advertising and information placement concept, which had positive response from people. Today, in addition to a certain free­ dom and diversity of forms, there should be discipline.

There is more to it than what one’s taste is and how it can be regulated, says Stepan Orlov, Deputy of the Moscow City Duma. Urban environment is a space of communication and business activ­ ity. Beautiful pedestrian zones that appeared in Moscow recently, despite the resources invest­ ed, often remain lifeless. He believes that design­ ing the urban environment architects must create infrastructure for recreation, entertainment and business. Namely for purposes of function, there should be four components: trade, public catering, entertainment and education. Then public space in the city will enliven.

The emergence of business may reflect badly on the public spaces. Largely because of this, the city has lost a lot of public spaces in the past 20 years, regrets Irina Korobina, Director of the Schusev State Museum of Architecture.

In the Soviet times, public spaces, by all means, were also not too swinging — empty squares in­ tended for parades and march-past held twice a year. Yet still, they existed. That is public spaces that make the city to be city, while each business expansion breaks it into fragments. Even in the centre public space exists more nominally, because the centre of Moscow is not pedestrian — friendly.

3 moscow urban forum

Partly, concern for the comfort of the urban space should be passed to the developer, pointed out An­ drei Bokov, president of the Union of Architects of Russia. In the 60s, New York was in terrible state, but then, legislation was passed which obliged developers to contribute to improvement of ur­ ban amenities. This resulted in sculpture on the Perspective Sergei Kuznetsov, Chief Architect of Moscow Widely known “The Death and Life of Great American Cities’ by Jane Jacobs presents a convincing thesis, which surmises that public space primarily lives by its surrounding, and design comes later. Regardless of how you design the pedestrian zone, unless it works as a multifunctional space, it is of no use to the public. Construction development of micro-districts in the periphery

streets, paved squares in front of skyscrapers, and so on; and modern habitat began to form.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit the Moscow Urban Forum website at: www.mosurbanforum.com/ forum2013/program2013/#publicdesign

did not include public spaces into their structures, where the space on ground floors could have been used to carry out useful functions. “Business friendly” buildings are mainly located in the centre, where the ground floors are welcoming to retail businesses, cafes and other urban amenities.

Some cities follow strict rules, in which, for example, banks cannot have prime location on the street. Moreover, many cities have practices under which the ground floors are given ­specific function, which cannot be changed; in case of breach of this rule harsh pen-

alties are imposed. For example, in London many follow this practice, and in Germany it is a common case.

Influence from the state is essential in this case. Any large bank will always pay more than a café or grocery store. It is unnecessary to subsidize the rent for projects that are economically disadvantageous to start with in comparison to banks. Instead, they should be assigned for a specific function, and premises either stay empty, or rented out as a coffee shop. However, such systems designed to manage urban space are yet to come into existence.

67

Key approaches

THE moscow AGENDA

Key approaches to Moscow’s territorial development

Urban development requires a strategic plan. What problems it should address? What ideas it should be using?

Speakers and Panellists: Richard Burdett, Professor of Urban Studies, and director of LSE Cities and the Urban Age Programme; Ellen DunhamJones, Architect and professor teaching urban design at the Georgia Institute of Technology; Marat Khusnullin, Head of the Moscow Department for Urban Development and Construction Alexei Muratov, Partner at the Strelka consulting bureau, Head of Strategies for Territorial Development; Alexei Novikov, Managing Director of Thomson Reuters in Russia and CIS; Jonathan Vottsel, Senior Partner at McKinsey & Company, Shanghai, ­China; Alexander Vysokovsky, Dean at the Graduate School of Urban Studies.

Moscow is a Fordist city and has clearly zoned spa­ tial structure: administrative centre, industri­ al zone, and residential area. This structure does not meet the requirements of modern city and had led to the fact that Moscow in its current state is a combination of imbalances accumulated over the many years, which have to be comprehended to achieve healthy development of the city.

For example, the Moscow agglomeration is one of the world’s greatest cities based on all indicators, including economical. Economy of the city can

68

be compared with economy of Iran or Sweden; in terms of GDP it is similar to New York. However, as pointed out Alexei Novikov, Managing Director of Thomson Reuters in Russia and CIS, the main en­ gine of the city’s economy is real estate, infinite burgeoning of square meters, which leaves the im­ provement of urban environment on the sidelines.

Huge disparity between the centre and p ­ eriphery in quality of the infrastructure is yet another imbalance.

Transport problems are evidence of another dispar­ ity. The majority of Muscovites live on the periph­ ery, and travel yet again to another peripheral area, but are forced to do so through the city centre.

These and the other imbalances must be corrected.

Much has been done in this direction: zoning pol­ icy in conjunction with the new taxation system; reorganization of the industrial areas; construction of the chord roads; practical implementation of in­ formation technology in administration and in the relationship between the city and its residents.

Although, this is certainly not enough. There is a need in expressed urban policy in general and in relation to the peripheral areas of Moscow in par­ ticular, as well as publicly presented ideology of the development, said Alexei Muratov, Partner at the Strelka consulting bureau, Head of Strategies for Territorial Development. This is necessary, for example, to select one of the two options solving the problem of survey: so called the “Singapore ap­ proach” or the “Moscow approach”. In the first case 70 per cent of the land is managed by the state, and only 30 per cent is in private ownership; in the sec­ ond case the ratio of the opposite. Any of these ap­ proaches has the right to be, but the choice has to be made and made accordingly to the declared goals of the development. Another important is­

3 moscow urban forum

sue is the combination of long-term and me­ dium-term development strategies based on a combination of the Master Plan and the Gener­ al Plan. Finally, the surge of civic engagement, which can be seen in recent years in Moscow, indicates that civil society is ready to share with the authorities responsibility for the fu­ ture of the city, but needs the infrastructure.

The city should take responsibility for its de­ velopment and should not rely on the market alone. This lesson London has learned 40 years ago, commented Richard Burdett, professor of Urban Studies, and director of LSE Cities and the Urban Age Programme. Should the city continue to expand, if it has a lot of empty ar­ eas still; should developers be allowed to build only luxury housing — all of these should be described in the urban development plan.

Moscow is facing difficult tasks; the capital has set itself ambitious goals, including the develop­ment of New Moscow. Since Moscow is one of the world’s cities, its experience of find­ ing solutions to these problems would come in handy around the world as well as can be an example of dedication and determination on the path to change.

To access session highlights video and other materials please visit: www.mosurbanforum.com/forum2013/ program2013/#keytodev

Common ways Published in 2012 World Bank report “Eurasian Cities: New Realities along the Silk Road” has shown that challenges faced by Moscow are mas­ sive, but not unique. Report examines the posi­ tion of the cities of the former USSR, China and India. In regard to the cities of the former So­ viet republics, it was found that the nature of challenges they are facing is the same. Similar­ ities are found in both what is happening with these cities now and what needs to be done. One of the biggest challenges is the need to review the attitude to the city. Western cities grew nat­ urally; they were expanding, absorbing villag­

Perspective Marat Khusnullin, Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Urban Planning Policy and Construction This year we hold the Moscow Urban Forum for the third time and once more discuss problems of the city: the imbalance between place of residence and place of work; lack of the infrastructure development; the gap between the existing potential, the level of business activity and the quality of the urban environment. Meanwhile, the true-life city has grown beyond its administrative boundaries and integrated into the territory of the Moscow region. Currently, we are working closely on amending the existing General Plan and have scheduled to complete it in two years. Master Plan will determine the development of the capital for 20 years and will define perspective for the next 50 years. The main principles of the Master Plan are: polycentric city; use of resources of the Moscow’s territory within its old borders; elimination of imbalances in the development of territories; accelerated development of the transport infrastructure; and creation of conditions conducive to attracting investment. The result of our efforts over the past three years can be seen in positive tendencies: increasing volume of investments in fixed assets and of construction and commissioning of the property. This indicates increasing investment activity, growing number of jobs, renewal of real estate fund and growing tax base as well as budget revenue. All of our plans and programmes are made ​​publicly available on the websites of the Government of Moscow and Integrated Body for Urban Design Policy and Development of Moscow. We are ready for dialogue with investors and experts from any field of urban life, which we consider to be useful in our search for new solutions to urban problems and our aspirations for new quality of comfortable urban environment.

es and small towns, and creating housing for newcomers.

Development of the Soviet cities was rigidly con­ trolled by the central and city authorities. Yet, dis­ economies which the planned economy could ­afford, such as long-distance travelling due to low-density of settlements, in the post-Soviet city lead to big problems, for example, deregula­ tion of obligatory fixed registration has led to the growth of the cities’ population and increased load on their transport systems. For these cities tran­ sitional period meant lack of funding for most el­ ements of the infrastructure: roads, public trans­ port, housing, etc.

69

The Festival Day

The Festival Day

How can discussions about the future of the city reach a broader audience? The Moscow Urban Forum has invited Muscovites to look at the recent data and to meet experts from both Russia and abroad.

Marina Khrustalyova, curator of the Festival Day This year, the Festival Day of the Moscow Urban Forum took place for the first time. The Forum is a major event attended by several thousand participants. However, surveys have shown that local residents, students and even professionals do not have enough information about its events, discussions and results.

At the same time, public’s interest is very high.

After all, during the Forum, Moscow is ­visited by many interesting guests from around the world: renowned urbanists and architects, ex-

perts on urban planning, sociologists and other specialists. The Festival Day has given an opportunity to specialists and ordinary citizens to learn about international practices, to attend open lectures of distinguished experts and to have discussions of their own. That is how forum about the city has reached the city.

To be closer to people, the Festival has held events all over the city. Open lectures by the Forum’s key speakers in the ZIL Cultural Center and the Moscow Technopolis in southeastern Moscow were attended by as many as five hundred guests each.

«Archaeology of the Periphery» Exhibition The Manezh Exhibition Hall The “Archaeology of the Periphery” research is a study of outer areas of the world’s major cities and Moscow above all. It was made specifically for the Forum by a team of the best Russian and international experts. In addition to the 500-pages long book, The Forum has organised a special exhibition which was in the limelight since the first day of the event, and on the third day has opened its door to the general public. The exhibition took place in the main space of the Manezh Exhibition Hall where ten stands were set with maps of the world’s major cities and information about their size, population, and correlation between the centres of these cities and their periphery. Separate stands were assigned to each of the six sections of the research. Visitors could study maps, infographics, and information about the key findings and their interpretations. The most popular stand turned to be the one prepared by the team of the “Data” section. Life of the city was animated using data, collected with the support of the MegaFon mobile phone provider. There were other exhibitions alongside. Different departments of the Moscow Government were sharing results of their current projects and future plans. Exhibition of the “What does Moscow Want” project unveiled dreams of Muscovites.

70

3 moscow urban forum

The Museum and the City Round-table the ZIL Cultural Center Museums have always been cities hallmarks. For a long time Moscow did not open new museums, but recently situation has changed. Private Jewish museum and Center of Tolerance was opened, architectural concept was chosen for renovation and construction of the new building for the Polytechnic Museum, competition was completed for a new building for the National Centre for Contemporary Arts. Chain of the city’s exhibition halls is being reformed; new life was given to The Manezh Exhibition Hall and Museum of Moscow. Will the new buildings and institutions become as symbolic for the city and its cultural life as the Tretyakov Gallery and the Pushkin Fine Arts Museum have become for Moscow, the Hermitage and the Russian Museum for St. Petersburg, the Louvre for Paris, the British Museum and the Tate for London? What should a modern museum be like? Whom it should served — the art or the city? Who needs it — the elite, tourists or local residents? Future of museums was discussed by foreign and Russian experts among which were Sergei Kuznetsov, Chief Architect of Moscow, Ekaterina Pronicheva, First Deputy Head of the Moscow Department of Culture, Julia Shakhnovskaya, Director of the Polytechnical Museum, Alina Saprykina, Director of the Moscow Museums Association. All the participants concurred that a modern museum should no longer be a “Temple of Arts but an active player in the city’s life and initiator of social and cultural changes.

Special child in the city Round Table The Dostoevsky Library Improvement of courtyards and playgrounds in the city is going well, but not always takes into account children with special needs and their integration into the urban environment. The participants gathered to discuss characteristics of truly all-inclusive and safe playground, standards it must comply, their number required in the city, and ways to support a friendly atmosphere between playing children.

Among those took part in the discussion were the Naked Heart Foundation and non-governmental organization Perspectiva; staff members of the Center for Curative Pedagogics and the KSIL company; manufacturer of equipment for playgrounds; representatives from the Moscow authorities and administrations of the city parks, and parents of children with special needs. The Naked Heart Foundation shared with participants their experience of building all-inclusive playgrounds and play parks across the country. By now, the foundation has built 107 playgrounds and play parks in 79 Russian cities. Single meeting was not enough to talk through such a complex and important matter, so it was decided to continue the discussion at the next Moscow Urban Forum.

71

The Festival Day

Lectures by the Forum’s Key Speakers The Moscow School of Architecture, The ZIL Cultural Center, the Mosocw Technopolis, The Moscow Architectural Institute After two days of professional discussions, the most important guests of the Forum appeared before the general public: Jan Gehl with results of the research of public spaces in Moscow; Enrique Peñalosa proving that equality is made of mobi­ lity and quality of urban life; Richard Burdett with his take on Urban Legacy; and Cameron Sinclair with his opinion on role of architecture for humankind. Admittedly, they are no strangers to public lectures and their names are already well known in Russia, so no surprise that their lectures were packed with audience.

Fantastic Library: Russia meets the Netherlands The Dostoevsky Library Recently Moscow libraries were given a new life. In the Soviet Union, public libraries were opened throughout the city. However, with time they almost lost their appeal. Today, the Moscow Library Centre, Boris Kupriyanov, the owner of Moscow’s Falanster and Tciolovskiy bookshops, and the SVESMI architectural bureau took on a major project turning libraries into “city lounges”, community centers, etc. The Festival Day hosted an exhibition presenting experimental library projects from the Netherlands. Visitors of the exhibition could meet with the architects, artists and curators working in this field today. Games for children, design objects, installations and videos helped to recreate a Dutch library space in the heart of Moscow. ­During the “Moscow Libraries: Strategy and Tactics discussion, Boris Kupriyanov and ­Alexander Sverdlov, architect from SVESMI, shared results of the Moscow ­Libraries development project, its achievments during the past year and the future plans.

Mechanisms of competitive practices Round-table The Manezh Exhibition Hall The story of competitions with participation of foreign architects in post-Soviet Russia does not look bright. For some reason, none of them resulted in a success. Until recently. Two years ago, the situation has changed. Attended by the best Russian and foreign architects more tha twenty competitions were held one after another, including competitions for design concept of the Zaryadye Park and architectural concepts for the Museum and Educational Centre of the Polytechnic Museum and Lomonosov Moscow State University; competitions for new building of the Tretyakov Gallery and the National Center for Contemporary Arts, buidings in the Moscow City and Tverskaya Zastava Square, as well as for park at Khodynka field and the others. All of a sudden, Moscow has got back its place on the world’s best architecture map, and inspired a renewed interest from its residents along the way. However, there were a lot of debates over the terms of the competitions and the need of foreign participants in them, as well as over the role of organizers and structure of the jury. As part of the Festival Day, the round table was held in The Manezh Exhibition Hall and gathered experts and, at some point, competitors, among which were Sergei Kuznetsov, Moscow’s Chief Architect and Chairman of the Architectural Council of Moscow; Kristin Feireiss, an architectural critic, founder of the architectural gallery Aedes and member of the Pritzker Prize Jury; Andrei Bokov, President of the Union of Architects of Russia; Denis Leontiev, Head of the Strelka design bureau, and the others. All the participants concurred that competitions helped to change situation on the architectural market. New players entered the market, quality of technical designs as well as customer’s competency is improving. However, inadequacy of legislation hinders the development of competitions. Today, there are no regulations regarding international competitions, so both organizers and participants have neither rights nor obligations to each other.

72

3 moscow urban forum

The First MOST Street Art Forum Winzavod It was Forum inside the Forum. Street Art has ceased to be a marginal and underground form of art in Moscow too. Recently, several dozens of large-scale Street Art works adorned the city. What is more, it was done with consent from the city administration and artists did not have to run away from the police. Instead, they were given cranes, paint and everything else they needed. So, what is next? What could be the role of Street Art in the city? What is it — fun or an «airbrush» of changes? Special forum dedicated to these issues gathered together artists, curators, and city officials. The Festival Day was concluded by the presentation of the street art award and exhibition of the best projects of the season.

Urban Documentary Film Programme Film screenings The Fakel cinema There are many documentaries made about architecture and cities, and interest to this subject is growing. Life in cities is changing; yet, it is not always clear what these changes will bring with them. Curators of the Beat Film Festival already brought to Moscow Gary Hustwit’s Design Trilogy which is composed of the documentaries Helvetica, Objectified and Urbanized, films about graphic, industrial and urban designs. For the Forum’s Festival Day they picked four films. TINY: A Story about Living Small follows one couple’s attempt to build a Tiny House from scratch with no building experience. The Human Scale is about an architect and professor Jan Gehl and his view on modern megacities and their development. My Brooklyn is a gentrification debate on displacement and neighbourhood change.

The Venice Syndrome explores the hidden, unknown side of the carnival city.

73

What Moscow Wants

What Moscow Wants

The city changes, and the people themselves can contribute to its development; for this they need both a comfortable and inspiring tool. This was attempted in the crowdsourcing project “What Moscow Wants”.

Officially, more than 12 million people live in Moscow, however, when you consider commuters, tourists, businessmen, the number of city “users” is much bigger.

From time to time, all of them face the fact that the city is not comfortable for everyone and that it is not beautiful or pleasant everywhere; people rarely move from irritation to something more specific — ideas and suggestions. This does not mean that residents do not have them; yet, they cannot be found by public opinion polls, nor do they get sent to the newspaper. You need to build a special mechanism that can pick up on them. Such a mechanism has existed all over the world for quite a while now — crowdsourcing projects that gather ideas of the city’s residents for its development were implemented, for example, in the United States (Neighborland, Change by Us, Simplicity), the UK (Spacehive), Germany (Nexthamburg) and Turkey (Nextistanbul).

To a greater or lesser extent, they have the same structure: there is a website with a map of the city, on which you can leave notes — “This is a good location for a park”, “I’d like to get rid of the old garages here”, etc. The city government, architects, wishing to serve society and the residents themselves — all of them can make use of this feedback.

The “What Moscow wants” project, launched by the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture, and Design and the Moscow Urban Forum, differs from other projects in its limitation for time.

In the first phase, from July to September 2013, ideas were gathered. In the second phase, designers and architects offered their solutions. The third stage consisted of an exhibition and the selection of the best projects, which was done during the Forum. The “What Moscow wants” project was an experiment; a tool to analyse public

74

opinion. For this reason, those who proposed the idea had to describe not only the proposal itself (the website suggested starting with the words “It would be great if …”), but also to explain why its implementation is needed for the people and city (“With this people can …” and “This way the city can become …”). At the same time visitors could vote for someone else’s suggestions.

Within a couple of months, 2134 ideas had been submitted by the Moscow residents. The majority of them suggested changes in the centre, followed by the west and north of Moscow, then the Southeast, South and South-West districts. The most popular idea was to organize markets near the Metro, lay out parks in dormitory suburbs, build cycling paths, public toilets and separate waste collection points, etc. Moscow residents also asked to improve the rainwater collection system (and place drains not along, but across the road which is more convenient for cyclists), turn abandoned tram and railway tracks into parks, restore monuments (from the Kitaygorod wall to the Publishing magazine “Ogonek” printing press), make more ramps for ­mothers with pushchairs, people with disabilities, cyclists and even build Disneyland. In an analysis conducted by the projects organizers, five words were used very commonly: “comfortable” “clean”, “safe”, “beautiful” and “interesting”. These are the words citizens want to associate with Moscow after its transformation.

In the second phase, the project gathered concepts and projects by designers and architects based on the ideas the citizens provided: the revival of Moscow markets, ideas for new parks, waterfronts and residential areas, creative stalls and benches, vertical parking and so on — only about 80 projects. On selected topics workshops were conducted with their authors — how to accurately construct the market or park. At the end of pro­

3 moscow urban forum

ject the Forum held an exhibition, in which all of its participants could vote: architects, urba­ nists and developers. Based on the results of this vote the top ten projects were selected that met the wishes expressed by the Moscow residents:

playgrounds, gardens and parks, public transport, markets, toilets. Eventually, based on popular vote, the selected project turned out to be extremely simple: put a ramp in every school for skateboarders and rollers.

Playbox Bureau Buromoscow www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/proposals/89 56 Forum votes/rating 8 out of 431 on the website In the city centre, next to the Metro station “Krasnoselskaya”, there is a neglected garden square with an area of about one hectare. However, for local residents this new square has turned out to be more of a hassle rather than an area for relaxation. The original creators of the project want to redesign it by implementing sports- and playgrounds, create an artificial landscape and raise it above road level. This will allow to build parking lots for cars. Raised platforms with high mesh fences and graphics on them will be visible from afar. The newly created volume of construction will occupy an indefinite amount of space around the Metro station, becoming point of attraction.

“Culture Navigator”, Part 1: “Culture Map” CITIZENSTUDIO, D. Nikishin, M. Beilin www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/ proposals/91 158 Forum votes/ rating 12 of 431 on website “Culture Map” is similar to the Metro map: walking routes instead of the Metro lines, cultural objects (museums, theatres, etc) instead of stations.

Each line has its own colour and name. The system brings together well-known and lesser-known cultural objects. Users are given the opportunity to create journeys themselves or select one of the suggested routes. In the city, the system is presented via information stands, navigation signs and mobile apps with navigational features.

75

What Moscow Wants

Public transport stops Alexander Kuznetsov, Natalia Strutinskaya www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/proposals/36/ 93 Forum votes/rating 73 of 431 on website Public transport stops often end up being neglected. At the same time, this is a place where people spend 5–10 minutes every time waiting for their ride. If you add up all the time spent waiting, it can easily end up being many hours. If stops would have Wi-Fi available, built into seats so­ ckets to charge gadgets, navigation system helping to decide on the best route — all of the above could make the time spent at the stop more useful.

The energy needed to make all of this work can be generated by solar panels installed on the roof, and by mechanical energy generators installed in the floor.

Bridge “City” Sergei Schiopu Denis Varane www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/proposals/152/ 66 Forum votes/ ranking 326 of 431 on website London and Paris have twice the amount of pedestrian bridges over the Thames and the Seine than Moscow has, while their population is much lower. Given that the traffic load on the Moscow-City is always increasing, it was proposed by the project authors to build another pedestrian bridge, but more convenient for pedestrians and cyclists than the existing bridge «Bagration».

Bridge «City» takes into account the problem of convenience and safety, and the need to create a space with beautiful views of the Moscow River. They also made sure that there were no issues regarding the height requirement for passing riverboats.

“Renaissance of dormitory suburbs” Peter Markin www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/ proposals/143/ 100 Forum votes / ranking 144 of 431 on website Dormitory suburbs in Moscow suffer from lack in both quality and pleasant urban spaces. There is a ­distinct lack of cultural and business activi­ties. Despite these shortcomings, these areas have great opportunities, which can be made use of: high population density, well-developed infrastructure and a huge resource of land. «Renaissance of dormitory suburbs» can convert them into new cultural and business centres. Wide passages will make the streets more comfortable. Courtyards can help strengthen neighbourly relations. Empty lawns will transform into oases.

76

3 moscow urban forum

Reconstruction of New Arbat Street Daria Onohova www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/ proposals/22/ 93 Forum votes/rating 74 of 431 on website In accordance with the Moscow government plans the New Arbat street was to be freed of government agencies which are to move to New Moscow. This would create a new residential space in the city centre which would partially solve the housing issue in Moscow. Residential areas need a new functional habitat. The author of the project developed a concept for the New Arbat street landscape; nature flows into gray futuristic city, giving it a new image with hills and real wildlife suddenly emerging in the middle of the city.

77

What Moscow Wants

Local markets Nastya Tikhomirov www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/ proposals/144/ 55 Forum votes/ rating 16 of 431 on website There are 37 food markets in Moscow. However, their placement density is low — on average there is only one market in every third area. There is a lack of infrastructure, and the author of the project offers a new typology: during the weekend areas serve as Farmer’s Market, and on weekdays turn into recreational centres of the district, helping the formation of the local community. In this newly created space gastronomic events could happen during the weekend, and important issues concerning the area could be discussed during the week.

Public toilets in parkS Anton Evtukhov www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/proposals/45/ 47 Forum votes/ rating 20 of 431 on website There are not enough public toilets in the city.

They are especially needed in parks. The author of the idea suggests a toilet, near which you can safely park your bike, and inside change baby’s nappy or simply freshen up. There are spacious rooms for different types of visitors, including a special entrance for people with disabilities.

“GaRden is the place” Anastasia Kozlova, Yulia Nemov www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/ proposals/96/ 63 Forum votes/ rating 21 of 431 on website Authors of the project proposed the development of agricultural centres in the Jasenevo residential area based on use of lightweight structures and participation of the local residents. Structures are built over ineffective areas; for example, over garages and abandoned construction sites. Their main function is recycling of organic debris and producing of some vegetables and fruits. In addition, these gardens can be used as centres of further education, serve as laboratories, etc.. It is also proposed to use the same lightweight structures for community centres, mini-offices and corner shops.

78

3 moscow urban forum

Playground with infinite paths Bureau Megabudka www.moscowidea.ru/ideas/proposals/51/ 56 Forum votes/ rating 5 of 431 on website An infinite path gives children the opportunity to invent games and move non-stop. Overall three-dimensional form of the object allows parents to see their child all the time and, if necessary, to help him or her.

79

About the Forum

About the Forum Moscow Urban Forum has been held annually since 2011. It is an international conference on urban development, architecture, economics and strategic urban planning. The Forum is held under the auspices of the Moscow City Government with the involvement of Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobiyanin. The Forum’s international partner is the Urban Land Institute. The Programm Committee is represented

by Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design. Each of the Forums was based on a survey of both foreign and Russian experts. Common principles of all of the Forum’s topics are inter-disci­ plinary approach and human aspect. Inter-disciplinary approach assumes that subject is being analyzed through the multiple different aspects of urban life: economic, cultural, social, etc. Human aspect brings the belief that citizens, their needs, dreams and problems are the basis for any urban project and reforms. In order to identify global and local trends in the development of megacities the Moscow Urban Forum performs a study on an an-

80

nual basis. The Subject of each subsequent study is based on the current topic of discussion in the Forum. The Forum’s objectives are determined in accordance with its structure: discussions, exhibitions, lectures that are open to the public. Each year several thousand people participate in the Forum, of which more than 200 are speakers.

Some of foreign experts who have participated in the Forum over the years are: Richard Burdett, professor of Urban Studies and director of LSE Cities and the Urban Age Programme; Saskia Sassen, a sociologist and economist; Simon Anholt, international expert in the field of branding cities and regions; Alejandro Aravena, architect and Pritzker Prize jury member; Deyan Sudjic, director of the London Design Museum, architectural critic; Ian Gale, urbanist and architect; Richard M. Daley, former Mayor of Chicago; Enrique Peñalosa, Former mayor of Bogota, chairman of the board of directors of the Institute for Transportation and Deve­ lopment of New York.

3 moscow urban forum

participants

countries

Russian regions

27

35

3590 254 Speakers

The Third Moscow Urban Forum

4 plenary sessions 328 media

sessions

representatives

23 384 000 online audience:

Public programme: more than 50 events