The 400-meter skyscraper of Gazprom Neft will be completed by spring 2018. Dubai-based Arabtec Holding became the contractor for the "zero" cycle of work, namely the construction of walls in the ground and the pile field for the tower.

The total construction area will be 330 thousand square meters. The skyscraper will house the headquarters of Gazprom Neft and other offices, as well as a children's Education Centre, a planetarium, a conference hall for 500 seats, a sports complex, galleries, cafes and restaurants, shopping areas and much more. A third of the territory of the site will be occupied by green areas and cultural objects.

Planned: a giant parking lot for 2000 cars, an amphitheater facing the water, a high-rise observation deck. Lakhta Center and the 300th Anniversary Park will be connected by a covered pedestrian bridge.

Previously, Gazprom wanted to build its gigantic business center on the Okhtinsky Cape, directly opposite the Smolny Cathedral. A protest campaign led by city defenders forced a change of plans. Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian government Dmitry Kozak called the decision to move construction to the Lakhta region a "compromise". However, city defenders do not agree with this assessment.

Historical environment in Lakhta? Do you know our city well? The city center is far away, the question is simply not relevant now.

- Local city defenders continue to insist that the tower will become a dominant feature, it will block something. According to the project, it is 462 meters in height.

In fact, the height of the tower is 462.7 meters. How to understand the statement of city defenders that the tower will close something? Close the view of the Primorskoye Highway? View of the residential area? Do you care? It will be visible against the background of other objects - I agree, but it will definitely not close or dominate significant historical objects. If the house is beautiful, why strive to ensure that no one sees it? Our project is very beautiful, the time will come when everyone will be proud of it.

I saw one photo-toad. The picture showed our tower against the background of the Bronze Horseman and the caption: “Look, what an angle, everything is spoiled there, it’s impossible to take a picture.” I don’t know… I myself have taken many photographs next to the Bronze Horseman, but I have never photographed the statue from the side of the tail. Why do people care?

- And what is the most important difference between the Lakhta Center project and the infamous Okhta Center project?

These are fundamentally different projects. A simple business center was designed on Okhta - a tower with office space. In fact, it turned out to be a closed space, a thing in itself. An employee would come there, work, get everything he needs, and at the end of the working day he would go home.

The rest of the citizens could get into the Okhta Center to visit the observation deck or sit in the revolving restaurant on the 74th floor.

The Okhta Center was not supposed to create a social infrastructure, while the Lakhta Center provides for a very large amount of additional functions that, in terms of area ratio, will dominate over the office component.

The bulk of the offices in the Lakhta Center is located in the tower, and under it there will be a whole city for residents of nearby areas and tourists. The public component of the project includes sports and medical centers, shops, conference rooms, an entertaining science center for children and a planetarium.

- How was the idea of ​​a planetarium born?

Architects always strive to offer a certain chip, zest. We have several on our project. The idea of ​​a planetarium was not born immediately. We had a multi-light space, and we all thought about how to use it in the best way. For a month and a half we worked on this issue, and then - once! And the planetarium was born! A huge ball, which, as if from all over, was thrown into the building, and it stuck to the facade. Very effective. It will be visible both from the street and from passing cars, it will be another reason for people to come to us.

- Has the tower itself become larger than the Okhta Center project?

The tower became taller, larger in diameter, changed in shape and structure. This is a completely new project. Outwardly, there is some similarity, it seems, yes, the same tower, but in fact the towers are completely different.

- Are there design differences?

The basic design scheme remained unchanged, we were only able to optimize and reduce the number of technical floors, were able to abandon some columns, and simplified the beam system. And in the Lakhta project, decisions on the organization of construction have changed significantly, new technologies have been applied. Currently, we have successfully completed work on the arrangement of the pile foundation of the tower and the multifunctional building. In Lakhta, bored piles with a diameter of 2 meters were laid under a high-rise building, and foundations in the form of barrettes were provided at Okhta, which are much more expensive. This became possible because the situation with soils is much better in the new place. Thanks to this and other optimization solutions, we get good cost savings per square meter.

- What are the parameters of the tower?

The office part will occupy about 120 thousand square meters, and the total usable area will be approximately 200 thousand square meters.

The tower is office, and everything connected with it is the maintenance of office space. The top of the tower has been created for public functions, there is an observation deck, a revolving restaurant and a conference hall area that can be rented out for short-term rentals for any events. The rest is the offices of our investor.

- Do you plan to lease space to other companies?

At present, everything is being done according to the needs of the investor, but, perhaps, some areas will be leased to third-party tenants.

- The project on the official website involves the placement of an apartment complex in the building, these premises will also not be sold?

Not an apartment complex, but a hotel with two hundred rooms, a simple four-star hotel. Can you imagine how many business trips we have? You have to put them somewhere. This is the headquarters.

- That is, the apartments will not be bought by anyone, including the top management of the company?

No. This is a clean hotel with its own logistics solutions, delivery and cleaning of the premises. If there were apartments for sale, we would change a lot in the project.

- Tell us about the space around the tower.

Parking for tourist buses is provided on the adjacent territory of the business quarter, there is access to the berthing facility, and the Poltava museum complex will appear.

The entrance groups in the Eastern part are intended for employees, they are decorated with a very beautiful arch, a span of 99 meters, a unique engineering structure. Business and tourist life will unfold around this arch.

From the southeastern part of our territory, a large walking area begins, stretching along a pedestrian bridge to the park of the 300th anniversary of St. Petersburg. The walking route will be about 8 kilometers, the issue of building a pedestrian bridge to Krestovsky Island is being worked out.

The pedestrian zone is not 1.5 meters wide paths, it is a space where any events could be held, up to the May demonstrations. An amphitheater is located on the southern part of our territory.

- Can you tell us a little more about the amphitheater?

The amphitheater appeared in the project by accident. There was a very complex volumetric-spatial solution for the operated roof of the covered parking lot. It was necessary to create a smooth transition from the highest point of the roof to the water, and our architect proposed to place an amphitheater for 2,000 people. We gladly agreed, and we have one more "trick".

As a result, we got a space where we can hold any events related to open air and water. We want to see water fountains, water shows, theatrical performances, competitions from the amphitheater...

The northern part of the territory will be used for pedestrian accessibility. There will be railway platforms, a metro station. We are planning to hold open-air exhibitions on Northern Square.

- In the project on the official website, the lake also appeared

Is the water of the Gulf of Finland not enough for you? There was no lake, there were and are water surfaces, and this is something completely different. There were water surfaces not by chance. We carried out aerodynamic tests to determine the wind loads on the tower itself, as well as the comfort level of the pedestrian areas.

As a result of this work, we have identified areas where very strong winds are possible due to downward air currents. We marked these zones in red on the plan, and then changed the “red” to “blue” and made a water surface there. People will not walk in these zones, and the project will receive decorative and protective functions for pedestrian zones.

- How will the transfer be organized?

The metro station is expected only by 2025, so it will take 7 years to operate the facility without a metro. The transfer issue will definitely be resolved, but so far the first thing that comes to mind is to use the shuttle service from the Staraya Derevny and Chernaya Rechka metro stations.

The project also provides for a sufficient number of parking spaces (according to the standard, one parking space for 5 employees and 1 parking space for 10 visitors should be created, but we plan to make more parking spaces), and for tourism purposes, a transfer hub project is being worked out together with the city - these are the new Lakhta railway platforms ”, intercepting parking lots. There will also be public transport stops. All this should be operational by 2017.

- And how many people will work in the tower?

In total, about 10,000 people will be on the territory of the complex every day: more than 5,000 office employees and about 4,000 visitors and tourists.

- Can you name the approximate amount of investment in the project?

I am not involved in this matter. I only determine the validity of specific decisions. For example, we calculate the efficiency of refrigeration systems. I know how much money we will save on this. And the total cost of the project is the competence of my management.

- And if you compare it with the Okhta Center project, which project is more expensive?

This cannot be compared at all - the objects are completely different, but the cost of construction of one square meter in the Lakhta Center project is lower, because the situation with soils is different here. We are just very lucky. And the amount of usable space here is much larger.

- Will the object be introduced in stages or in one queue?

If we were like in the Moscow-City MIBC, when the entire building is divided into separate stages of construction, each building is put into operation independently - we would be terribly happy, but all our buildings are a single whole of one object. Project documentation was developed without singling out queues, without singling out start-up complexes, without singling out construction stages.

In our project, engineering support, transport accessibility and everything else is created in a complex manner; one tower cannot be put into operation. We wanted to divide it into stages, but it didn’t work out, so we will put everything in at the same time, for which the builders thanked us a lot (in quotation marks). We will have to put into operation all 400,000 square meters at once. This will be a feat, because in Russia there was no such thing as 400,000 square meters being commissioned at once.

- Tell us what is happening at the facility now? What stage is going on?

Work is in full swing. The piles have been completed, and the excavation of the tower excavation has been completed. This colossal structure - five football fields with a depth of 20 meters. It's so beautiful it's breathtaking. There are spacer disks, a wall in the ground, everything is massive and solid ... A colossal building structure. You can physically feel the work of structures. People work down there, they are very small, because the height still makes itself felt. Near the bay, and in the pit is dry. A person far from construction does not fully understand how difficult it is. It's just beautiful with capital letter, beautiful in terms of human capabilities, his engineering.

The high-rise business center under construction in St. Petersburg is often called the Gazprom Tower. This building will be the highest in the Northern capital and the second largest in Europe after the Ostankino Tower. The skyscraper is being built by Gazprom and it will house the headquarters of this concern and its company.

Recall that initially the construction of a business center with a height of 400 meters was planned to be carried out on a site of 4.7 hectares, in the center of the Northern capital, which caused a sharp protest from city defenders and the public. The object fell into the protected zone, where the monuments included in the list of UNESCO sites are located.

Soon, the governor of St. Petersburg, Valentina Matvienko, canceled the decree allowing the developer to deviate from the altitude of 100 meters allowed in this place.

The new site of 14 hectares for the construction of the Lakhta Tower is located in the north of St. Petersburg at the exit from the city between the Gulf of Finland and the Primorskoye Highway. The distance from the construction site to the city center is about 10 km. According to experts, now the Lakhta Tower, although it will be visible from almost all areas of the city, but it will not close the sights of St. Petersburg and dominate historical sites.

At the same time, the tower will be perfectly visible from the sea; it will become a kind of beacon that welcomes those who come to the city by sea. It will be a landmark object of the sea facade of the Northern Capital.

Unlike the old project, in addition to the office part, the Lakhta Center will house social infrastructure facilities.

The office part will occupy premises in the tower itself, and the buildings at its base will be used for social facilities - shops, sports and medical centers, a children's educational center and a planetarium.

At the top of the tower will be an observation deck, a revolving restaurant and a conference room.

Lakhta Center Tower - brief description

The customer and investor of the project is Gazprom Neft, the construction project was completed by the British architectural bureau RMJM - Robert Matthew Johnson Marshal.

The general contractor is the Turkish company Renaissance Construction (established in St. Petersburg in the 1990s, founded by Turkish businessmen). Dozens of institutes and construction organizations are involved in the construction of the building.

The height of the building with the spire will be 462 meters, and the total weight of the tower with all infrastructure, glazing, and even furniture and people will be 670,000 tons.

The area of ​​one office floor is from 668 to 2060 sq. meters.

From the side of the Gulf of Finland, the Lakhta Center tower will appear in all its splendor in the form of a spire soaring upwards. It can also be compared to a drop of water flying upwards.

Peter the Great conceived Petersburg as the sea capital of Russia. And according to the idea of ​​the authors of the project, from afar, from the sea, the Lakhta Center will look like a snow-white yacht.

The project provides for several architectural highlights, the main of which are a modern planetarium and an open amphitheater.

Planetarium

The planetarium, designed for 140 people, will take unusual place- at the height of the fifth floor of one of the buildings adjacent to the tower. It will look like a huge ball, which seemed to be thrown into the building with all its might, and it stuck to the facade. Of course, such a spectacular form of the building cannot but interest everyone who passes or drives by.

During the sessions, a variety of special effects will be used - a moving floor and illusions of lightning and rain, virtual smoke and smells.

Amphitheater

The idea of ​​​​creating an open amphitheater facing the sea is connected with the need for a smooth transition from a high roof to a body of water. Here, viewers will be able to admire water fountains and various shows on the water, as well as participate in theatrical performances and competitions.

• When laying the foundation, many principles were taken from nature. So, the piles at the base of the building, like the roots of a giant tree, go into the ground by 82 meters. Above the piles, a “box-shaped” foundation 17 meters high was built, which guarantees the stability of the building
• The maximum allowable deviation of the structure from the vertical along the entire height is no more than 6 millimeters. Not to be confused with the amplitude of a building's vibration during a storm.
• Double-glazed windows have passed a variety of tests: under high water pressure, air currents and fire. The glasses are made using a special film that will not allow the glass to break into fragments.
• All materials used in construction are non-combustible or fire retardant. But despite this, the evacuation of people is thought out as much as possible. In the event of a fire alarm, air is forced into the central core, made of reinforced concrete, which prevents it from smoking. Going to the central core, where there are stairs, a person is safe
• To wash windows, a special system will be used that moves along rails arranged on the ribs of the tower.
• In strong winds, the top of the building can deviate by 46 cm from the vertical, and at the level observation deck(at a height of 357 meters) the maximum deviation will be 27 cm
• To prevent birds from crashing into windows, double-glazed windows are edged with opaque material, and the glass itself is non-mirror. In addition, during mass flights of flocks, the backlight will be “frightening”. This way the birds will see the glass.

Surrounding area

From the east side of the building there will be an entrance for the office staff. This part of the complex will appear as an arch with a span of 100 meters.

A pedestrian zone 8 km long will start from the southeast side. It will include a bridge and a huge space for public celebrations and festive events.

The northern part of the territory will be used for various exhibitions, and in addition, in the future, a railway platform and a metro station will be built here.

In addition, next to the tower there will be a parking lot for tourist buses and a museum of the Poltava ship.

Transport infrastructure

In the future, between the Lakhta Center and the metro stations "Chernaya Rechka" and " Old village» it is planned to establish a transfer. In 2025, it is planned to build a metro station.

The development of transport infrastructure is promoted primarily by the World Cup. In 2018, the Begovaya metro station will be opened, one of the exits of which is located at a distance of just over a kilometer from the Lakhta center, that is, within walking distance.

The Lakhta Center Tower will become the center of a new business district of St. Petersburg, one might say Petersburg City, and the development of transport infrastructure will turn this undeveloped area of ​​​​the Northern capital into a model of a modern and high-quality urban environment. Please note that the project is expected to be completed in 2018.

SAINT PETERSBURG, 5 January. /TASS/. The St. Petersburg tower of the public and business Lakhta Center, invested by Gazprom, plans to become the tallest building in Europe in 2017, the press service of the center told TASS. At the same time, the final height that the tower will reach next year, 2018, will exceed 462 meters.

Now the tallest building is the Vostok tower on the Federation skyscraper in the Moscow City business center in the capital of Russia. Its height is almost 374 meters.

"In 2017, Lakhta Center plans to become the tallest building in St. Petersburg, the tallest building in Russia and Europe," the press service said.

Business center "Gazprom"

The Russian transnational corporation Gazprom has been discussing for many years a project to build a multifunctional public and business center in St. Petersburg. Initially, the company intended to build a center in Krasnogvardeisky district on the banks of the Okhta River, far from the historical center of the city. The height of the spire on the building, designed by British architects RMJM (RMJM), was to be 396 meters. Petersburg residents reacted ambiguously to the location of the tower, they were especially embarrassed by the height of the building, and the city authorities went to meet the city defenders and moved the location of the complex.

Based on the existing Okhta Center project, the investor developed the Lakhta Center project with a tower whose height ranged from 300 to 500 meters. For the sake of this, the authorities of St. Petersburg increased the maximum possible height of buildings under construction in the Primorsky district, where the skyscraper was supposed to be located. The area of ​​the territory for the complex, purchased from the LSR group, amounted to 14 hectares. It is located on the coast of the Gulf of Finland. It was also assumed that public spaces would appear in the center: a technology museum, a yacht club and a number of others.

Since October 2012, work began on the zero cycle of the high-rise building. In October 2013, a building permit was obtained for the entire complex, including a mixed-use building. In the spring of 2015, the construction of the complex continued at a rate of one floor per week. This summer, the Lakhta Center tower broke the record for the height of buildings and reached 147 meters.

Significance for the city

Despite the ambiguous reaction of the city public, the construction of the Lakhta Center brought positive changes to the city's transport infrastructure. As reported in October 2015, PJSC Gazprom promised to invest 21 billion rubles in the development of the territory near the Lakhta Center.

The office of the vice-governor of the city Igor Albin noted that in order to ensure transport accessibility of the Primorsky district, it is planned to build a railway stop, a metro station, equip bus stops, intercept parking, off-street pedestrian crossing, in particular, to the business center. Such measures are necessary, since according to the plan, about 5,000 employees will work in the complex. As of the end of 2016, financing in the amount of 1.069 billion rubles was provided for construction and installation works, out of the required 7.152 billion rubles, the press service recalled.

According to Vladislav Fadeev, head of the research department at the consulting company JLL in St. Petersburg, Vladislav Fadeev told TASS, based on the status of the owner and user (Gazprom structures will move to the tower), this project is very important for the city.

“Already, there is a movement following Gazprom of its various contractors, and the presence of headquarters in St. Petersburg will support this process in the future. Further development of the territory around the Lakhta Center is also expected, mainly for the needs of Gazprom and its subsidiaries. structures. As a result, a new business center of the city will be formed, which, along with the formed business zone in Pulkovo, contributes to the decentralization of the city," he said.

"From the point of view of architecture, the most important thing is that in the current location, all the architectural advantages of the project do not conflict with the key panoramas of St. Petersburg," says a representative of the consulting company JLL. However, not everyone shares this opinion. Thus, the General Director of the Hermitage, speaking about the architecture of the city, noted that "there are fresh things" that point to negative phenomena in the architecture of the city, and expressed dissatisfaction that from the windows of his office one could see "how this terrible tower is growing."

"We still have not developed the mise-en-scene of the funeral of the first person of the state", the departed ruler can claim a noticeable architectural object only if it is an Egyptian pyramid or mausoleum

Elusive Height

The construction of the 300-meter Gazprom City tower in St. Petersburg is in doubt. The head of the UNESCO World Heritage Center, Francesco Bandarin, said that if this project is implemented, St. Petersburg will be deleted from the UNESCO world heritage list. And this will not be the only contribution of the skyscraper to the cultural history of the city, the special correspondent of Vlast believes. Grigory Revzin .

President and UNESCO

Well, deleted from the UNESCO list, so what? They were included in this list in 1990, and before that they lived - they did not grieve. Of course, St. Petersburg is the only metropolis in the world that is included in the World Heritage List in its entirety, and this is prestigious. But, on the other hand, it does not directly affect anything. UNESCO has neither economic nor administrative powers; it cannot punish Gazprom or Valentina Matvienko in any way. This organization creates public opinion - but Russia is not the best thing in the world without UNESCO. best opinion.

The President of Russia also spoke not very scary. Vladimir Putin at a press conference in the Kremlin said three phrases about Gazprom City. First: "I understand the public concern that this building will be too close to the center. And in general I share this concern." The second: "Everything that was created in St. Petersburg in architecture is the achievements of previous generations. Then St. Petersburg became the center of architecture and culture. Our generation did nothing. Some kind of impetus is needed, fresh air, a center of business activity is needed." And the third: "I do not want to influence the decisions made by the city authorities, do not shift these decisions onto me. I have enough problems of my own."

The position of the opponents of the skyscraper from the very beginning was that the construction of a new high-rise building near the city center would violate its historical appearance. In the form in which this position was expressed by Vladimir Putin, it was first voiced by Mikhail Piotrovsky in September 2006: the construction of the tower itself is possible, but in a different place, away from the center. The position of supporters of the skyscraper was formed much earlier, during the competition for the Mariinsky Theater, won in 2003 by Dominique Perrault. It was then that a number of architects, and then Governor Valentina Matvienko, spoke in the sense that the continuation of the work of Peter the Great was not about preserving the heritage of St. Petersburg, but inviting foreign architects and cutting through a new window to Europe with their help.

These ideas in different time seized different people, and now we got to Vladimir Putin, and both at once. He started biblically wisely, in the genre "and you are right, Valentina, and you, Michael, are right," but instead of making a judgment, he ended somewhat unexpectedly: in general, it's none of my business, whatever you want, sort it out. So there is no dot.

Alliance Against the Skyscraper

After analyzing the publications about the skyscraper "Gazprom", you can find an amazing picture. Since September, about 100 informative publications have appeared on this subject. Of these, only three are positive, the rest shout: "Help!" For today's Russia, this is a unique alignment - we have a movement directed against the authorities, which grows from below and is not coordinated by anyone.

The movement has several independently operating centers. The first, undoubtedly, are architects, and the center here is the St. Petersburg branch of the Union of Architects (chaired by Vladimir Popov). Back in July 2006, when the competition for the skyscraper project had just been announced, they wrote a letter to Valentina Matvienko, which spoke of the inadmissibility of building a high-rise facility opposite the Smolny Monastery. Having received no positive response, the architects began to act. Their successes are significant enough. On their side, they attracted the Moscow Union of Architects (chairman - Viktor Logvinov), the Union of Architects of Russia (chairman - Yuri Gnedovsky), the International Union of Architects, where the same Yuri Gnedovsky is vice president, Russian academy architecture, at the session of which in November the competition for the Gazprom building was called "architectural gangsterism". This movement is inherently deeply apolitical, loyal to the authorities (architects value orders) and compromise. It becomes radicalized insofar as no compromise is offered. They managed to achieve two effects. Firstly, the competition for the building of "Gazprom" was actually disrupted. The position of Russian architectural organizations led to the fact that none of the respected domestic masters entered the jury and, moreover, three Western stars left it - Norman Foster, Kisho Kurokawa and Rafael Vignoli, who could shut up any Russian opposition. Secondly, they managed to organize a lot of publications (all publications before October 2006 mention the Union of Architects in one way or another), including in the foreign press (up to the New York Times, which may have influenced the position of Western stars). I think that the Union of Architects of St. Petersburg, a rather chamber organization, had never before realized the extent of its potential influence.

Secondly, these are the bodies of protection of monuments. Again, since they are part of the St. Petersburg administration, and before the election of Valentina Matvienko they were shaken up for a second term (the head of the St. Petersburg Committee for State Protection and the Use of Monuments Igor Yavein resigned, and Vera Dementyeva took his place), then this center of the movement is loyal to the authorities and prone to compromise. However, since their opinion was ignored, they began to look for allies - in this case, cultural figures. Mikhail Piotrovsky's speeches and the arrival of a UNESCO delegation to St. Petersburg are the result of the work of this center. It should be recognized as somewhat more influential, since all those who disagree here are government officials, and they can operate with the appropriate channels. Mikhail Piotrovsky, for example, spoke on behalf of the Council for Culture and Art under the President of the Russian Federation, and the presidium of the All-Russian Society for the Preservation of Monuments also wrote a letter to the president.

The movement for the protection of monuments in Russia has a dual nature - its most authoritative figures are included in the structures state power, but there are still a lot of people who are "on the street". As a rule, they do not have a common position, and in Moscow, say, Yuri Luzhkov has perfectly learned how to shut up the “street” with the efforts of officials. However, this did not happen in St. Petersburg - Valentina Matviyenko's ignoring the position of state security agencies led to the fact that officials closed with the "street".

Finally, the fourth center is political parties. These generally do not tend to notice social movements of this kind and usually deal with more global issues, so they joined the struggle later than everyone else. But there are elections in St. Petersburg, and the struggle for votes is important. The most active position was taken by members of Yabloko - they included the fight against Gazprom City in their election program and tried to organize a referendum in the city (according to media polls, 90% of residents are against the construction). As a result, the St. Petersburg electoral committee first refused to register the initiative group for holding a referendum (as usual, 3 members of the initiative group out of 30 had inaccurate information in the questionnaires), and then withdrew Yabloko from the elections in St. Petersburg. The result was not long in coming: the fight against the Gazprom tower was included in their program by the Union of Right Forces and Just Russia. Sergei Mironov personally spoke out against the tower, which again makes one wonder about Gazprom's position on this issue. For politicians, it is obvious that the position on the tower issue does not lead to a systemic conflict with Gazprom.

Valentina Matvienko does not want to play on four fields at once, preferring not to notice them. But the further the scandal develops, the more united the ranks of opponents. Today, the "street" plays extremely weak, but it's a matter of time.

Why is this needed?

This is the most mysterious question in the whole history with two main participants - "Gazprom" and the administration of St. Petersburg.

Gazprom does not comment on its decision, it just wants a skyscraper. At the same time, the future skyscraper is not the headquarters of Gazprom, it will quietly remain in Moscow, and a regional branch should be built in St. Petersburg. Actually, we are talking about 20 top managers and 2000-3000 employees. In all respects, this is not enough for a 300-meter building, and it will obviously be rented out (the estimated capacity of the building is 20,000 people). That is, for Gazprom, this is generally an investment in office real estate, in some, excuse me, non-core asset. It's not that he is somehow capable of influencing Gazprom's economic reputation. In the overall picture, these are, of course, some insignificant percentages, but it is completely incomprehensible why such a fuss should be raised for the sake of a non-core asset.

It is all the more unclear why Gazprom needs an office skyscraper in the area of ​​the historical center of St. Petersburg. This would be understandable if we were talking about a less self-confident company that compensates for doubts about its significance with boorish behavior. For example, in Barcelona, ​​the main skyscraper in the city belongs to a company that, in the Russian manner, should be called "Barcelona Vodokanal" (Aqua Barselona). Everything is clear here, a very important company, controls most of the city's plumbers. But "Gazprom" in Moscow is sitting on Nametkina Street, in a building, although it is high-rise, but not too much, and even in the "City" in Moscow it seems like it is not going to move. "Gazprom" is such an organization that people themselves go to it, not caring in the least that it is so far from the Kremlin. And then all of a sudden the regional branch of the company turns into a 300-meter high tower in front of the Smolny - why?

For some time, a version was circulating in the media that it was being built personally for Vladimir Putin and that it was in this tower that he should sit after he left the post of president of the Russian Federation. Among opponents of the construction, this version is popular, but, in my opinion, it is very doubtful. It is customary for us to attribute the most idiotic initiatives to the personal desires of the president, and here it comes to the point of absurdity. For example, sculptor Sergei Gulyaev, who was accused by colleagues in early February of unethical behavior in decorating the Federal Military memorial cemetery, explained the significance of his work by the fact that "we still have not developed a mise-en-scene for the funeral of the first person of the state," even somehow not understanding what he could be for developing such mise-en-scenes. Even assuming that Vladimir Putin does step down as president in 2008, he is unlikely to be careless enough to sit in front of the new president in Russia's tallest tower. It's an ancient law that a departed ruler can only claim a prominent piece of architecture if it's an Egyptian pyramid or mausoleum. If he is still alive, then he must be placed somewhere in the shade and not irritate people with the fact of his existence.

The second participant of the project is the city administration. There is something to think about. The area of ​​Bolshaya Okhta, where Gazprom's skyscraper is going to be built, is a very depressive environment with dilapidated houses and abandoned industrial enterprises. Of course, the arrival of such an investor as Gazprom can greatly improve the situation. If I were in the place of Valentina Matvienko, I would also fight for it with both hands. But it is completely incomprehensible why it should be a skyscraper. The site overlooks the Neva embankment, the embankments of St. Petersburg are a magnificent view, an architectural brand that can glorify the city much better than a skyscraper and is much better suited to President Putin's idea of ​​​​making something majestic with the help of the current generation of politicians. If you definitely need a skyscraper, then it is not clear why in this place. After all, Valentina Matvienko is not the head of the Okhtinsky district, but of the whole city, what difference does it make in which district the Gazprom office will be located?

The behavior of Valentina Matvienko is illogical, because she is growing opposition in the city for no apparent purpose. Some see it as simple perseverance. The stronger the pressure of opponents, the stronger the desire to overcome it. After all, think for yourself - the grandiose work has been done. Such a customer was brought to the city! They made an international architectural competition for it! We found such a wonderful project, RMJM built skyscrapers in Dubai! No, you try to do it all! And then there are some inspectors for the protection of monuments, old women, students - this is simply ridiculous and insulting. We have to prove it to them.

Perhaps so. But it seems to me that in such a case there cannot but be a purely economic interest.

Business in Dubai

In St. Petersburg, in the center it is forbidden to build more than 24 meters (the height of the Winter Palace, the norm has been in force since the 18th century), and around the center - 48 meters. It's called the city's high-rise regulation, and it's the law. To build a skyscraper, you have to break the law. Why do this is not clear. There is no logic in this.

But here it seems: maybe here it is necessary to change the cause and effect? Perhaps it is not the law that needs to be broken in order to build a Gazprom office, but a Gazprom office needs to be built in order to break the law? The first time Valentina Matvienko spoke out against the high-altitude regulations back in September. "Building no higher than 48 meters is a dead end for us," she said. The same position was repeated by the First Deputy Governor Alexander Vakhmistrov on the day of the UNESCO delegation's arrival in St. Petersburg. He is convinced that height restrictions should be set only for the buffer zone of the historical center, and when developing other territories, no one should be limited.

Oddly enough, this is a somewhat more significant issue - at least for the city administration. She is constantly faced with the fact that investors close to her demand high-rise construction and rest against city regulations, as far as the center and surrounding areas are concerned. Simultaneously with the Gazprom skyscraper, the issue of the Baltic Pearl complex, which is being built by Chinese investors, is being discussed - it is 170 meters high. But we are not even talking about such complex high-rise complexes that are unique, but about buildings of 20-30 floors in the city center, which are not too expensive to build and operate and give the investor the maximum income. And this is a critical issue. By itself, the Gazprom skyscraper, although it will spoil the silhouette of the city, but only at one point. However, if you start building dozens of 30-storey buildings in St. Petersburg, then the city can not only be deleted from the UNESCO World Heritage List, but generally forgotten about it as a cultural phenomenon. On the other hand, this will allow investors to quickly turn around.

Serious economic problem. Critics of the skyscraper emphasize that the construction of skyscrapers today is not a sign of economic prosperity, but, on the contrary, of economic backwardness. They are built in Asian countries, they are symbols of the rapid development economy based on natural resources, cheap labor and financial speculation. The problem is that in Russia such an economy is not a reality, but a goal. The point here is not in artistic values, but in how investment flows are arranged.

Petersburg is a city with a huge historical center twice as large as in Moscow. A city with a huge amount of space. They need reconstruction, but reconstruction is an order of magnitude more subtle type of development business than new construction. Here everything is much more complicated - and the project, and construction technologies, and the management system, and, as a result, the business itself. The story of the Gazprom tower shows that the St. Petersburg administration, alas, has not learned how to work with such a business, either to generate it or to interact with it. Instead, they preferred to force Gazprom to break through the height regulations and develop after that by demolishing the old quarters and building Dubai skyscrapers in their place.

I think that Gazprom's skyscraper will not be built. Valentina Matvienko was left alone in this case. Gazprom has shown itself to be a passive ally. Vladimir Putin distanced himself from the project and agreed with the point of view of Mikhail Piotrovsky (after the president literally repeated his position on the project, he should be recognized as one of the most authoritative cultural experts in today's world). political Russia). The ideological program of construction has come to a standstill - it is pointless to build a symbol of today's prosperity and high level of Russia, if Europe, thanks to this, equates us with savages destroying a monument of world significance. The ranks of the construction opponents are only growing stronger, and the St. Petersburg administration is not in a position to work with them.

In addition to all this, the building also cannot be built, at least in the form in which it is submitted for the competition. It is too thin for 300 meters, the width of the building there is 20 meters, which means that, in fact, all areas of the building are occupied by a core of rigidity with elevator shafts and utilities, and there is no space left for offices. For this project to be realistic, the skyscraper would need to be two and a half times as wide, which is a completely different project. With him it will be the same as with the Mariinsky Theater Perrault - when it comes to real design, the project will have to be completely redone, terminate the contract with the authors and look for new ones.

But that doesn't mean the danger is over. For the first time, the issue of building a skyscraper in St. Petersburg arose in 1994, when it was decided to build the Peter the Great Tower here. Then Academician Likhachev saved the case. Ten years have passed, the question arose again, Mikhail Piotrovsky saves the case. So, excuse me, you can’t get enough of academicians. This question will arise again and again until the city learns to make money on reconstructions. This is a different level of the construction business, but without it St. Petersburg is doomed.

Skyscraper by elimination

Anna Tolstova

The government of St. Petersburg promptly responded to the recommendations of UNESCO experts to keep the height regulation in the city.

On February 7, the city commission on the Rules for Land Use and Development approved a new concept of high-rise regulations supported by Smolny. Formally, restrictions on the height of buildings in the historical center of the city and the buffer zones around it remain. However, exceptions are allowed: in some cases, when it comes to unique urban development projects, it will be possible to violate height restrictions through public approval procedures. Lawyers and the St. Petersburg Committee for Urban Planning and Architecture have been entrusted with developing a procedure for public approval of unique projects. However, until now, any scandalous architectural project in St. Petersburg, causing violent public indignation after the fact, has been approved by the public.

In other words, although there are strict height restrictions (48 meters) in the area where the 396-meter Gazprom City skyscraper is supposed to be built, they can be violated if the public unanimously recognizes the Gazprom project as unique and finds it possible to make an exception for it. Employees of the St. Petersburg Committee for the Protection of Monuments have no doubt that such exceptions may soon become the rule.

"This does not threaten the city with any sanctions"

St. Petersburg hosted a regional UNESCO conference dedicated to the problems of preserving historic cities included in the World Heritage List. One of the days of the conference was devoted to St. Petersburg - the only metropolis in the world, the historical center of which is entirely included in this list.

UNESCO experts listened to the report of officials of the local committee for the protection of monuments, reporting on the success in preserving the architectural heritage of St. Petersburg. However, representatives public organizations, concerned about the state of the historic city center, members of the Preservation Council cultural heritage under the government of St. Petersburg, the local branch of the Union of Architects and the local branch of the Society for the Protection of Monuments were not invited to the conference. Nevertheless, they managed to meet with the participants of the UNESCO conference and convey their concerns to them. The most serious problems remain the construction project of Gazprom's skyscraper and the idea of ​​abolishing the height regulation in St. Petersburg. The discussion was further aggravated by the message that if the Gazprom City project is approved and the height regulation is canceled, St. Petersburg may be transferred from the UNESCO World Heritage List to the list of World Heritage Sites in Danger. Vlast correspondent Anna Tolstova asked about how real this danger is, both invited and not invited to the conference - Alexander Margolis, member of the Council for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage under the Government of St. Petersburg, Grigory Ordzhonikidze, Executive Secretary of the Russian Commission for UNESCO, and Igor Makovetsky, President of the Russian National Committee for World Heritage.

Alexander Margolis : Moscow infection creeps into St. Petersburg

- What threats for St. Petersburg would you like to draw the attention of the participants of the UNESCO conference to?

- We focused on the danger that we now put in the first place. We see it in the desire of the government of St. Petersburg to abandon the height regulation. Shortly before the start of the conference, Vice-Governor of St. Petersburg Alexander Vakhmistrov, who oversees the construction side of Smolny's activities, said that the high-altitude regulations hinder the city's development and should be cancelled. This will certainly entail a wave of uncontrolled modern construction, including skyscrapers. UNESCO world experts - Francesco Bandarin, Director of the World Heritage Center, and his colleagues - strongly supported us, said that the abolition of the height regulation is absolutely unacceptable, and took a definitely critical position regarding the Gazprom City project. None of us denies the possibility of high-rise construction in St. Petersburg in general. The controversy unfolds exclusively around the place: we argue that at the mouth of the Okhta, strictly opposite the Smolny Cathedral and not far from the Alexander Nevsky Lavra, such construction is unacceptable. The "sky line" of the city will be destroyed, and the landscape and silhouette of St. Petersburg may be its main value as a phenomenon of world urban planning art. Whereas the construction of the same skyscraper, say, on the ring highway, in the area of ​​the cable-stayed Obukhovsky bridge, is quite possible.

- Is the Council for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage concerned about the fact that the height regulation is already being violated in the center of St. Petersburg? For example, at the corner of Nevsky Prospekt and Vosstaniya Street, it is planned to build a 35-meter building of the Stockmann shopping complex, and according to the regulations, the permissible height on Nevsky is 28 meters.

“Of course I'm worried. Here we also encounter various forms of scams. Let's start not with Stockmann, but with the so-called Mont Blanc, which, before our eyes, grows floor by floor on the spit of the Vyborg side, next to the St. Petersburg hotel. We ask how this is possible, because the height of 48 meters, which is prescribed by the height regulation in this territory, has long been surpassed there. We are told that the law does not have retroactive effect: allegedly this project was agreed with the previous administration of Vladimir Yakovlev before the current administration approved the temporary high-altitude regulations in 2004. Now they are trying to prove to us that the height of the Stockmann complex was agreed almost in the last century. I have not seen these documents, but the question arises: how many such structures in the center of St. Petersburg were agreed before 2004? Once in 2007, Vakhmistrov announced the abolition of the regulations, which means that, with all his free handling of this document, he still fetters.

Another danger that worries us is connected with the demolition of old buildings in the center. For example, I repeatedly drew the attention of the authorities to the fact that after the fire, St. Anne's Church, which was turned into the Spartak cinema in the 1930s, was not only not being restored, but there was not even an attempt to build a temporary roof to prevent the final destruction of the remains 18th century monument. This means that someone is deliberately bringing the church built by Yuri Felten to collapse. Thus, in a very seductive location in the city center, a new building site is formed. This method is flourishing in the city. Any house that is settled and not repaired for several years in a row, I consider as a potential victim. If we count all similar cases in the center, and there are dozens of them, then there will be a feeling that a mighty movement has arisen to demolish old Petersburg.

- Is the process of demolishing buildings in the center of St. Petersburg and replacing them with remodels following the Moscow path?

- The problem of the demolition of the originals worries us - indeed, this is the Moscow model. What is happening today in St. Petersburg means that the Moscow infection is crawling today from Belokamennaya to northern capital. It is precisely those forces that destroyed historical Moscow before our eyes, now with their money and with their cynicism have decided to take over St. Petersburg. What are you clinging to old mansions - we will build you as it was and even better. This is the philosophy of the new elite.

- If St. Petersburg is nevertheless excluded from the UNESCO World Heritage List, what is the risk for the city?

- Of course, it can be experienced. But this will be a crushing blow to the prestige of the country, because the application for the inclusion of St. Petersburg in the UNESCO list came from the country, and not from the city. Of course, this will affect the image of St. Petersburg and affect its attractiveness for investment, its attractiveness as a tourist center. But we are talking about people who make money. They may have already decided that they can sacrifice all this by building Petersburg to their liking. By the way, what are they selling now - the most beautiful views from the windows of their penthouses. When they build up the center with these penthouse skyscrapers, their real estate prices will plummet - they are actually sawing the branch they are now perched on. But we are dealing with marauders who do not think about tomorrow at all.

Grigory Ordzhonikidze : everything will end fine with regard to St. Petersburg

- Is there a real threat that St. Petersburg may be excluded from the UNESCO World Heritage List?

-- There is no question of delisting. If the Gazprom tower is built within the so-called buffer zone extending to the regulated development zone, then it is quite possible that the World Heritage Committee, which will meet in New Zealand in the summer for its regular session, may decide to transfer St. under threat. At the same time, I note that the construction project was not officially considered. But this is very famously used by different parties that want to make PR for themselves on this wave.

- To what extent does the city government understand that the abolition of the high-altitude regulations may lead St. Petersburg to be excluded from the list?

-- The government of St. Petersburg is in full possession of the information. The chief architect of the city during the period of our conference spoke on television and said that the height regulation would be preserved.

-- What are the possible consequences of St. Petersburg's exclusion from the World Heritage List?

- This does not threaten the city with any sanctions. This will mean that in relation to this object, Russia does not comply with the provisions of the international Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, to which it has joined. If we do not comply with any provisions of this document, the object is transferred to the "list at risk" - until measures are taken to eliminate this threat. But I think that with regard to St. Petersburg, everything will end up fine.

- Have there been precedents for exclusion from the World Heritage List of some other countries, cities?

- All around. Germany, the USA, Chile, Egypt, Azerbaijan... There are different criteria by which objects are transferred to the lists of endangered objects: either a complete loss of universal value, or a violation of certain provisions of the convention, in particular, housekeeping with damage to the object. Or, for example, building, as happened in Baku. They are still on the list of endangered. In principle, this is not some shameful list. Thanks to him, you can announce an international campaign to save the monument.

Igor Makovetsky : UNESCO cannot deal with all this mass of affairs

-- What are the results of the UNESCO conference held in St. Petersburg? And what are the chances of St. Petersburg being excluded from the UNESCO World Heritage List?

“Nothing like that was discussed there. St. Petersburg prepared a detailed report on the comments on the protection of the historical part of St. Petersburg, which were made two years ago at a session of the World Heritage Committee. It was about how the security zone was built. Now, according to the UNESCO convention (on the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage. - "Power"), we are obliged to create buffer zones for world heritage sites. Petersburg submitted this report on buffer zones: it will be considered at the July session of UNESCO in New Zealand. I think the assessment will be generally positive.

- How did UNESCO experts react to the idea of ​​abolishing the height regulation in St. Petersburg, which was expressed by the St. Petersburg authorities?

- Negatively. We believe that all high-altitude regulations should be preserved. The closer to the center, the stricter the regulations. But even beyond the buffer line, which, say, in the Smolny Monastery area runs along the Neva, the regulations do not allow construction above 48 meters.

- What happens if the regulation is cancelled?

- Well, first of all, the regulation has not been canceled yet. Moreover, the conference considered it necessary to expand the buffer zones with high-rise regulations to the development control zones surrounding the actual protection zone of the historical center.

- However, in the guarded center of St. Petersburg, some sites are brought into the zone of regulated development, construction begins there. As, for example, on the territory of the Tauride Garden, a monument of federal significance.

- Specialists of the Committee for the Protection of Monuments of St. Petersburg did not report on this at the conference. They just advocated the preservation of the height regulations and the expansion of the buffer zone.

- Are the high-altitude regulations and the construction of the Gazprom skyscraper a problem for the St. Petersburg authorities or should they be resolved at the federal level?

- First of all, the governor of St. Petersburg is responsible for this. But since the city is a world heritage site, and the convention was signed by the head of state, any decision must be coordinated with the federal government.

-- AT last years in St. Petersburg, many buildings in the historical center are being demolished, and then new ones are being built in their place. According to experts, buildings are often unreasonably recognized as emergency. Has this issue been discussed?

“The fact is that this is not our issue. Historical development is the business of the city administration, the Ministry of Culture and the protection of monuments. If they justify that the building is dilapidated, does not comply with all our building rules and safety standards, and are going to restore it in a new form - what can UNESCO say here? You yourself know how this happens, you ask me a question that you yourself would easily answer. The World Heritage Center accepts applications from anyone, anyone can write there about the destruction of the monument. But we have not received such complaints. UNESCO cannot deal with all this mass of affairs - this is the business of the country that signed the convention and guaranteed the preservation of world heritage sites.