Kaliningrad: Visions of the Future. Urban development of the city centre

Documentation of theinternational Symposium15-17 June 2005in Kaliningrad

Urban development of the city centre

Kaliningrad: Visions of the FutureKaliningrad: Visions of the Future

Urban development of the city centre

Documentation of the international Symposium 15-17 June 2005 in Kaliningrad

LocationConference Centre at the Ocean Museum - Naberezhnaja Petra Velikogo 1Kaliningrad/Russia

PromoterMunicipal Authority Kaliningrad, Department of Architecture and Urban Design,Kaliningrad/RussiaÖffentlicher Verband "Kaliningrader Kulturkontakte", Hamburg/Germany

ManagementOOO "Nikor-Projekt" GmbH, Kaliningrad/RussiaD&K projektentwicklungsmanagement, Hamburg/Germany

ModeratorsDr. Vladimir Renevic Krogius, Moscow/RussiaProf. Peter Zlonicky, Munich/Germany

With kind support ofÖffentlicher Verband "Kaliningrader Kulturkontakte", Hamburg/GermanyKaliningrad Branch of the Russian Union of Architects, Kaliningrad/RussiaDr. Christina Weiss, Minister of the Chancellor's Office, Representative of the FederalGovernment for Culture and Media (BKM), Berlin/GermanyDeutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH, Berlin/Germany

Kaliningrad: Visions of the Future

1 Foreword1.1 Opening address of the Symposium, held by Tatiana L. Kondakova1.2 Opening address of the Symposium, held by Prof. Dr. Dieter Biallas

2 Introduction

3 Lectures3.1 First Day 15.06.2005

3.1.1 Lecture 1 – Tatiana L. KondakovaCurrent state of development of the city centre/problems of the centre

3.1.2 Lecture 2 – Olga V. KrasovskayaVisions of the Future, Tasks of the present and roots of the past

3.1.3 Lecture 3 – Dr. Werner MöllerActualisation of the European City

3.1.4 Lecture 4 – Oleg I. VasjutinHistorical and development stages of Königsberg/Kaliningrad

3.1.5 Lecture 5 – Prof. Marcin OrawiecTransformations

3.1.6 Lecture 6 – Prof. Irina V. BelinzevaStylistic peculiarities of architecture in Königsbergin the 13th - 20th century

3.1.7 Lecture 7 – Venzel T. SalakhovHistory and contemporaneity in the planning patternof Kaliningrad's city centre

3.1.8 Discussion – First Day

3.2 Second Day 16.06.2005

3.2.1 Lecture 8 – Prof. Gennadij M. FedorovGeopolitical aspects of the relationships between the European Union and Russia –The place of Kaliningrad and the Oblast in the context of economic and cultural relationships

3.2.2 Lecture 9 – Prof. Sergej D. KozlovInvestment projects and their influence on the planning structure of the centre of Kaliningrad

3.2.3 Lecture 10 – Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Jürgen BloechLocation factor architecture and other economic location factors

2

ContentsInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

ContentsContents456

8

1515

16

20

30

38

50

56

70

82

85

86

98

104

3

3.2.4 Lecture 11 – Dr. Elke KnappeKaliningrad – a strong partner in the Baltic Region?

3.2.5 Lecture 12 – Flemming FrostStrategy of urban projects

3.2.6 Lecture 13 – Dr. Otto FlaggeAnalysis of urban structures

3.2.7 Lecture 14 – Olga V. MezeyKönigsberg/Kaliningrad – Wandering centre in the context of transformation of transport communications

3.2.8 Lecture 15 – Prof. Dr. Eckart Güldenburg (held by Julius Ehlers)Structural changes of ports – a chance for urban development?

3.2.9 Lecture 16 – Daniel Luchterhandt“Building civil society” – Experience from St. Petersburg

3.2.10 Dicussion – Second Day

3.3 Third Day 17.06.2005

3.3.1 Lecture 17 – Jochen Brandi and Andrej DerbenkovTraces of history and future images of the island city on the River Pregel

3.3.2 Lecture 18 – Prof. Peter ZlonickyContinuity and inconsistency – Experience from Berlin

3.3.3 Lecture 19 – Anna Brunow-MaunulaMethods of controlling the townscape of Helsinki

3.3.4 Lecture 20 – Dr. Sergey V. SemenzovOn the principles of retaining the urban genetic code in the process of reconstruction and development of the city

3.3.5 Recommendations

4 Summary

Participants

Illustrations

Imprint

110

118

124

132

142

150

160

163

164

172

182

192

204

206

212

216

226

4

1 ForewordInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

Foreword1 Foreword

5

1.1 Opening address of the SymposiumTatiana L. Kondakova

Dear Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen, dear Guests!

It is my pleasure to welcome you at our symposium. This meeting is a good sign for the develop-ment process of our city.

In preparation of the 750th anniversary of the city, we are doing a lot of construction work, andhave acquired a taste for it. At the same time we are beginning to understand that besides thetasks of the moment, it is necessary to start a comprehensive development project in the historicpart of the city.

We are going to speak about the development of the central part of our historic city, about thecurrent state of the city, and how we would like to see it in future.

I hope we will all share our experiences and ideas about the direction the administration andprofessionals will have to take to make the most wonderful dreams come true, for the city and itsinhabitants.

6

1 ForewordInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

1.2 Opening address of the SymposiumProf. Dr. Dieter Biallas

I am a representative of the working group Kulturkontakte Kaliningrad which has provided theimpulse for this symposium and also secured the financing by the two German institutions thatsignificantly contributed to this symposium. We also managed to engage the cities of Gdansk,Hamburg, Kiel and Rostock to participate in the programme. Please allow me to briefly introducethe working group.

Kaliningrader Kulturkontakte was set up in the first half of the 1990s with the aim of opening awindow of dialogue between Kaliningrad and the West – especially Germany. To us, this seemednecessary at that time because of the rightwing political forces that endeavoured to exploit thechances in the post-perestroika era to spread dangerous, and to some extent revanchist, ideasthat certainly are contrary to the prevalent wish for intercultural dialogue and reconciliation. Theidea came in the guise of private initiatives. Our working group wanted to prevent the spread ofsuch ideas in the Kaliningrad Region, and instead, commence a dialogue to overcome the frontsof the Cold War seeking reconciliation of our peoples. Core members of the group were MrsGräfin Dorothea Razumovsky, Renate von Metzler, Haug von Kuenheim and myself. Weorganised several art exhibitions, state-aided and privately funded, a film festival and meetingsof Russian and German artists in Kaliningrad and in Germany respectively. Here, in Kaliningrad,12 painters met on the ship Vitjas and in Lich, near Frankfurt, 12 sculptors met – Germans andRussians in equal numbers. These projects are both state-funded and funded by private sourcesin Germany.

After several years the rightwing influence ceased and numerous links were established betweenthe Kaliningrad region and its western neighbours, especially Scandinavia and Germany. Ourinitiative was no longer the only one and the group gradually withdrew.

The imminent anniversary of the city gave cause to think about whether the working group couldcontribute, a kind of birthday present to the city. We decided to give an impulse to the discussionon the urban development of Kaliningrad that should build on the thought that had previouslygone into the subject, and to encourage contacts to western urban planning partners. In talks withthe city council and private partners in Kaliningrad the proposal was developed to facilitate aninformation trip by a delegation of Kaliningrad experts to meet experts in the cities Gdansk,Hamburg, Kiel and Rostock.

The choice of cities was determined by two main factors: all are located on the Baltic Sea or areformer Hanse towns, and all suffered from massive destruction in the Second World War and adifficult period of reconstruction. The trip was a great success.

Our second proposal was related to this symposium. We suggested a meeting of experts formthe neighbouring countries right here in Kaliningrad in order to establish a dialogue with thenumerous local experts. Also the public should be involved in the discussions about the future ofthe city.

7

The role of the working group was mainly to win the participation of the above-mentioned citiesand to organise the outstanding financing of the German contribution for both these events. Wemanaged to gain the cooperation of GTZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammen-arbeit) and the State Minister for Culture and Media of the German Federal Government, Dr.Christina Weiss. We mobilised a total of 200,000 Euro and contributed to enlisting Germanexperts to partake in the preparation and realisation of the symposium.

We believe that this contribution is an answer to the wish voiced by large sections of thepopulation – that the citizens will claim the city as their own by tying into its history and linking itto the present and future, thereby creating a homeland for themselves.

In this respect our efforts are a small contribution to heal the wounds left by the war and itsaftermath, the wounds of disavowal and hostility in the years 1939-1945 and in the post-warperiod in the whole of Europe.

I hope this symposium will be a great success and would like to thank

the German institutions that have contributed to the financingthe cities of Gdansk, Hamburg, Kiel and Rostock for their expert and financial contributionsthe Russian partners who worked on this project and helped finance itthe experts from the East and West for their participation and contributionsand you, for being here and for your attention.

Thank you.

8

2 IntroductionInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

Introduction2 Introduction

9

For more than half a century the urban community of Kaliningrad, its architects and engineershave been facing the problem of shaping the vision and image of the centre of the city. The Cityof Königsberg/Kaliningrad has developed for almost 750 years, it is characterised by distinctivearchitectural ensembles, squares and parks that reflect cultural traditions and art-historical andaesthetic trends of the various epochs and historical episodes.

Tragic events of World War II caused catastrophic damage to the cultural fabric of the old city.Entire layers of the historical foundations of the existing urban area were razed to the ground.The city centre was particularly badly affected. The political consequences of the War resulted inchanges in the indigenous population and in the transformation of the urban planning culture ofthe city.

During the post-war period the urban community endeavoured to restore the life of the city.Originally the city was reconstructed without changing the structure and its street network. Laterthe urban fabric that had grown over centuries was abandoned. As a consequence of thepsychological and emotional condition of society after the cruelties of the War, the ideological linewas the absolute neglect of the former architectural and urban pattern of the city centre. It wasdecided to build quite another socialist city – Kaliningrad – to replace the old Königsberg, in which the memory of the centuries-old history of the place would be erased gradually.

Finally, these directives resulted in the decision to demolish the damaged buildings in thehistorical quarters. The most dramatic alterations took place in the city centre: whole districtswere cleared, the city and its street network extended, standard mass-construction implementedin microrayons, which was the directive state policy on architecture and town planning for alongtime.

The redevelopment of the city centre had to serve the ideological confrontations of the past.However, an adequate solution was not found and its appearance remains unfinished. After thedemise of the ideological age, land use and urban design issues merely cause dissatisfaction.

In the context of the changes on the political map of Europe and in the economic system ofRussia, the civil society of this enclave – the Kaliningrad Region – faces the challenges of newtimes. The tasks include the development of Kaliningrad as a Russian city within the realm theEuropean Union.

The authorities of the city are now faced with the necessity of identifying recent and currentprocesses within the city's development, to formulate new aims for the social, cultural, architec-tural and artistic vision of the historical settlement.

To achieve this, a new comprehensive plan of the city was commissioned. Several scientificforums, cultural exchanges and contacts with many experts from European cities took place. Themain idea of the discussions was the further development of the city, which no longer was tofollow the course of destruction and erasure of the former townscape and buildings, but theirsensitive inclusion into a new environment, taking into consideration the continuation of allcurrent developments. An active dialogue is being held between the community of Kaliningradand organisations of former citizens of Königsberg.

10


The present Symposium is held within the framework of the 750th anniversary celebrations of thecity and is supported at highest state level. At the organisation committee's meeting on the 60thanniversary of the foundation of the Oblast and 750 year anniversary of the foundation ofKönigsberg, on 20 October 2004, the decision was made to hold an international festival,“Kaliningrad Visions”.

Initiators of the Symposium are the Department of Architecture and Town Planning at KaliningradCity Hall, the Kaliningrad branch of the Russian Union of Architects and the association“Kaliningrader Kulturkontakte” (Germany), with the friendly support of the Representative of theFederal Government for Culture and Media, Dr. Christina Weiss, and the Deutsche Gesellschaftfür Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ).

Object of the SymposiumThe focus of the Symposium is the centre of Kaliningrad within the historical ring of the secondrampart fortification: Gvardejsky Prospect, Yunosheskaya Street, Rakitnaya Street, LithuanianRampart, Kalinin Prospect and Zheleznodorozhnaya Street including the adjoining “green belt”areas.

Tasks of the SymposiumThe international Symposium has the following objectives:

- To induce discussion among the invited specialists, based on the analysis of the currentsituation, problems and development potential of the inner city; to find the best methods anddraw up possible development scenarios of the central part of Kaliningrad;

- To form a circle of creative professional groups and specialists who are not indifferent to thefate of the city and who, in the interest of development prospects, will participate in theforthcoming international competition for the development of Kaliningrad.

Results of the Symposium will serve the organisers and the local authorities as a basis fordrawing up a programme for the international competition for the development of the inner cityof Kaliningrad.

Current state of the areaThe core of the city, the geographical and compositional centre, has not been developed. Previ-ously approved projects have not been completed yet. The focal point and main elementson the huge empty space in the city centre are the major transportation routes crossing the cityon two levels, Leninskiy and Moskovskiy Prospects, and the “House of the Soviets”, built in theBrutalist style, that was never completed.

The historical buildings in the inner city were lost, the land is now open space. The infrastructureand the urban design of these areas is minimal. The only surviving building is the Cathedral thathas been partially reconstructed. It is an island within an area of historical destruction.

11

Natural and artificial water areas are found in the centre. Their function is purely recreational,except for the harbour section of the River Pregel. The flood plain of the river is natural incharacter. Numerous urban functions are not linked to the water's edge.

In the inner city, within the area of the second defensive rampart, the main characteristics of theradial planning system are preserved. The existing town gates and the green belt on the site ofthe old ramparts form the historical planning framework until today.

The historical urban structure was destroyed. The newly developed squares and spaces areclearly too large for the existing buildings.

The vehicular traffic system in the centre of the city is unsatisfactory, the situation close tobreaking point. The centre is overloaded with transit traffic in a north-south direction caused bythe absence of special relief routes and only few bridges across the River Pregel. Railwayterminals are located on opposite ends of the city centre.

Congestion of the city led to the deterioration of the environment. Strong west-east winds sweepalong the open valley of the river unhindered by buildings, causing aerial erosion and thusworsening the microclimate of the city. This is mostly felt in winter.

Pedestrian traffic and links into the densely populated quarters are unordered. Urban designstandards of pedestrian pavements and traffic safety are low.

Residential areas within the city centre are of pre-fabricated concrete construction typical of theSoviet period. The road network of these areas was extended contrasting the historical streetsystem. Building densities were reduced according to environmental regulations at that time.Institutions and service industries are evenly distributed and generally focused on trade andentertainment.

Administrative functions and retail trade centres are located along the main traffic routes, Lenins-kiy Prospect, Mira Prospect and Victory Square. Their chaotic locations do not comply with stan-dards of accommodation and care of the local population.

At the intersection of Leninskiy Prospect and the green belt, two unfinished projects from theearly 21st century can be found: Victory Square and the square at the Southern Railway Station.On Victory Square a public, administrative, religious and trade centre is currently being devel-oped, leading to a displacement of functions from the core of the city.

The pre-fabricated concrete buildings along the main roads are monotonous in appearance. Ex-isting historical buildings are disharmonious and a neutral transition to newly built areas islacking. Technical conditions of historical buildings are unsatisfactory as these are not maintainedor refurbished. Pre-war housing stock and the first generation of mass-construction pre-fabs areevidently falling derelict – the lack of technical maintenance led to deprived living conditions.

Some of the open spaces are of historical origins, others were created on vacant sites after thedemolition of existing buildings. The quality of existing mature trees from before the war is low,

12


new planting has been added to compensate this. Many trees are over mature or diseased, andthere are numerous areas of uncontrolled vegetation.

Technical supply networks of the city have been partially renewed, but still need considerableinvestments for modernisation and reconstruction. The underground service networks in thehistorical core have mostly not been exploited, as the area is not built up. Their condition needsbe examined and documented.

Main urban problems of the cityThe main urban and spatial problems of the inner city of Kaliningrad can be listed as:

- Non-existent or insufficiently distinguishable city centre as a place of historical origin anddevelopment;

- Lack of specific plans for the city centre both in detail (micro scale) and as general conceptsand proposals. This also applies to the appropriate relation of the “inherited” and the“contemporary”;

- Insufficient coordination of transportation issues between the architectural proposals and thefunctions of the centre.

The general condition of the inner city requires the formulation of an urban doctrine. The greatestchallenge in this is the creation of an individual image for the city. There are two different planningapproaches: The reconstruction of the lost city centre and the search for new forms. The resultwill directly depend on the cultural understanding of the investors.

Analysis of the urban aspects leads to the following conclusions, questions and tasks that needto be addressed in solving the problems of the inner city of Kaliningrad:

- The approach to history and appreciation of the place. The interrelation of history and thecontemporary in terms of planning and actual building: Further disintegration or continualintegration of modern urban design?

- Kneiphof Island: Possible historical reconstruction and revitalisation of the local quarter withinthe limits of the island location, with extensive areas of historical buildings and existingunderground infrastructure, as an object of urban archaeology.

- Functional zoning of the city centre, its composition and structure. What functions may be orneed to be implemented in the centre of Kaliningrad?

- Architectural and artistic design of the inner city and its periphery: artistic image of the centre,urban system, silhouette of the city.

- Scale of building development in the inner city: interrelation of scales of man-made andnatural landscapes – balance and dislocation. Is it possible to make the city centre ofKaliningrad comfortable?

- Transportation planning in the centre: Solving problems by redirecting transit traffic or bybuilding high-speed thoroughfares; reorganising north-south traffic flows; completion of theinner ring. Structuring pedestrian traffic – pedestrian areas; segregation of pedestrian trafficand vehicular traffic.

- Re-establishing the links between urban land uses and the river and the image of the city onthe waterfront. Bridges in the centre – was it right to give them up? Is it possible to reclaimthe romantic appeal of “Euler's solution”?

13

- Optimisation of green open spaces, revitalisation of historical green spaces and the revival ofurban recreational functions. Relation of open and built up spaces in the inner city.

- Ways of creating a regional style of architecture for Kaliningrad: orientation on historicalassociation, the architecture of the Baltic states? Adopt the international contemporary styleor vernacular architecture?

- Ways of modernising concrete pre-fab quarters: demolition or reconstruction, increasingdensities or return to historical building types.

- Creating an inner city that is attractive to tourism: transition of single sites into complexes ofdifferent historical epochs and events, related to history, culture and European historicalfigures.

- Founding of a school for restoration and the education of experts specialised on local culture;links to schools in neighbouring countries. Improvements in the field of preservation andmaintenance of historic monuments.

14

3 LecturesInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

1

3.1.1 Lecture 1 – Tatiana L. KondakovaCurrent state of development of the city centre/problems of the centre

3.1.2 Lecture 2 – Olga V. KrasovskayaVisions of the Future, Tasks of the Present and Roots of the Past

3.1.3 Lecture 3 – Dr. Werner MöllerActualisation of the European City

3.1.4 Lecture 4 – Oleg I. VasjutinHistorical and development stages of Königsberg/Kaliningrad

3.1.5 Lecture 5 – Prof. Marcin OrawiecTransformations

3.1.6 Lecture 6 – Prof. Irina V. BelinzevaStylistic peculiarities of architecture in Königsbergin the 13th - 20th century

3.1.7 Lecture 7 – Venzel T. SalakhovHistory and contemporaneity in the planning patternof Kaliningrad's city centre

3.1.8 Discussion – First Day

15

First Day3.1 First Day 15.06.2005

16


Lecture 13.1.1 Lecture 1 –

Current state of development of the city centre/problems of the centre

Tatiana L. Kondakova

Current state of development of the city centre/problems of the centre

My presentation is not going to be entirely traditional. I would like to tell you about my ownobjectives and about the objectives the citizens have set before their authorities. I hope to hearyour opinions on whether my understanding of the problems of the city is similar to yours.

What was the incentive for conducting this Symposium? We believe that it was a public necessitycaused by the citizens' dissatisfaction with the conditions of the urban environment in the historicpart of the city.

Only fifteen years have passed since 1990, but a lot has changed. In the first place – the citizenshave claimed their environment. People's requirements have grown not only in a material sense,but also in the spiritual realm. When we meet our colleagues in mainland Russia, we often hearthat in Kaliningrad, unlike in many other regions, there is an established civil society. It certainlyis an exaggeration, but we nevertheless agree with the fact that we actually have forces thatexpress the ideas of the urban community, including public claims made to the authorities. Thesepublic claims have quickly moved from the purely material to the spiritual, to the realm of cultureand life styles in the modern city.

That is why we are now talking about the cultural heritage, about the city's history, and also aboutour role in making and sustaining this history.

In the discussions on the built development, its conveniences, buildings, courtyards, entranceways and flats, the views expressed by the citizens are a direct response to the condition of thecity. Unfortunately, negative impressions prevail.

It seems to me that in the course of our Symposium it is necessary to determine possible trendsof development, and change and restoration of the built environment in the historic city centre;this would not only allow a rational utilisation of land resources but would reconnect the tornfabric of history. This is the main objective.

Kant put it succinctly, “Upwards does not always mean high into the air”. These are verysignificant words that one should recall while considering the urban development. This is anactivity that has both a material and an ideal component – benefit and beauty on the one hand,and huge capital investment on the other.

We all feel nostalgic for a city in which none of us have lived. We all have a certain mental pictureof this city: based on photographs, maps that are available today, and on the existing urbangeography. In our understanding it was an ideal city. An unconscious desire emerges, to restorewhat has been lost. But should these ideas be distributed?

How can the city develop?When preparing for today's Symposium, I read letters, translated into Russian, of travellers whohad visited the city. I was struck by a letter dated 1931, in which a traveller wrote that it was

17

impossible to cross the centre of Königsberg, that there was little vegetation and that somethingshould be done with the lakes. That letter could have been written today.

Today, we want the city centre to meet all our requirements. What should be done first? Wheredoes the decade-long journey start onto which one would have to embark to solve the problemsone by one? What we would like to do, is to develop the historic city in a way that it can becombined with modern claims.

When we asked our architects' opinion about how they would like to see our city, we received ahuge variety of ideas: these include a theatre in the historic building tradition to super modernbuildings in the high-tech style. Everyone should see something of relevance to him in the city,and everyone should find what he needs. But there must be something in common, to uniteeveryone. Convenience and attractiveness of the redeveloped city centre is the final aim whichwe will pursue in our creative work.

This is what I would like to talk about, and hear your opinions, so that the ideas expressed todaycan be formulated into statements and tasks. We believe that the time has come for the city totalk about its role, not only in the context of our country, but also the whole of Europe. I wouldlike excellent professionals to take part in the development of the city. In the coming years wewant to conduct an international competition for the development of the city centre. A brief mustbe written for this competition. I believe that the success of the competition will, to a great extent,depend on how the brief will be formulated. A positive result will, on the one hand, depend on theplanners’ understanding of the project and, on the other hand, on the degree to which the public’sdemands are reflected in the programme.

Today, we are unable to answer all questions, but I hope that we will find answers that will helpus to move on, as a result of our meeting. After my presentation you are going to hear thepresentation of the author of the city's masterplan. It is an important document. The significanceof the work that has gone into compiling this document will become apparent when working withit.

While developing, restoring and redeveloping the old centre, the city should not lose its face, itshould retain its historic, economic and cultural features that make it significant, both for Russiaand for the whole of Europe.

I would like to ask all those present to share their experience, knowledge and opinions with mycolleagues and myself so that our endeavour may succeed. Your work will be embodied in thefuture of the city, which we will jointly decide on and that will be appreciated by future genera-tions.

18


19

NameTatiana Lazarevna Kondakova

OriginKaliningrad/Russia

ProfessionArchitect, Lawer

Main profession fieldMunicipal services in control of urbandevelopment planning

Main subjectUrban zoning and land register zoning,architecture and urban planning,normative and statutory control of urban development

Personal ProfileResume

20



Visions of the Future, Tasks of the present and roots of the past

Olga V. Krasovskaya

Visions of the Future, Tasks of the present and roots of the past

This year Königsberg-Kaliningrad celebrates its 750th anniversary. Considering its complicated,and, at times tragic history, recognition of the fact of a continuous 750-year history is a significantevent in itself.

The first visit to the Kaliningrad Oblast in the early 1980s and first impressions are easy toremember: an amazing railway station of red-brick with covered platforms reminding of the film“17 Moments of Spring”, and the surreal view of the gothic Cathedral ruins side by side with theunfinished concrete bulk of the Soviet administrative monster.

At that time it was impossible to imagine that the Kaliningrad Oblast would be open for inter-national tourism, the Cathedral would be restored, the Lenin monument “removed for restoration”and the new church raised on the square (former Hansa Platz) right in front of the City Hall. Itwas hard to imagine – but we see it happening now.

The international Symposium “Town planning development of the Centre of Kaliningrad” washeld in the wake of the city's 750th anniversary events. It is dedicated to the issues and ideas forthe development of Kaliningrad and its centre in the 21st century.

It was extremely interesting and important that from the very beginning of the conference a widerange of questions concerning the place and role of the Kaliningrad Region and its capital inmodern society were raised. It is significant as the town planning ideas present strategic ideasconcerning deep socio-economic and political processes of the modern world.

As head of the authors' group that developed the Urban Masterplan of Kaliningrad, I was askedto state the central points of the project and formulate the main problems concerning the centreof Kaliningrad and approaches to solving these.

The first aspect was the accurate formulation of strategic ideas and development aims for thewhole Kaliningrad Region, because without this basic stage, the best architectural ideas willremain mere visions. The geopolitical situation of the Kaliningrad Oblast has a specific characteras the region is separated from the main territory of the Russian Federation by other independentstates. Surely isolation of the Region from the mother country causes a lot of difficulties, such asbreakdown of the traditional economic ties, difficulties in transportation, problems of goods tran-sit, tariffs, job placement and competitiveness of economy etc. But! Taking a look at the modernmap of Europe it is obvious that the exclave situation of the region surrounded by EU countriesalso implies a number of potential advantages for the Kaliningrad Oblast and Russia as a whole.

I. The Region1. The utilisation of strong points of the region's geographic locations – creating a “Region of

Cooperation”, the place where representatives of different nations could enter into coopera-tion in the widest sense – human, economic and cultural. The task of expansion of coopera-tion between the RF and the EU can, and must be intensely implemented in the KaliningradRegion and its capital Kaliningrad.

21

2. Communications – inclusion of the Kaliningrad Oblast and Kaliningrad in the internationaltransport corridor system – the problems of development of transport infrastructure, borders,tariffs and determining the role of Kaliningrad port in the system of international traffic.

3. Tourism as a tool of cooperation and economic development.

II. The CityThe priorities of the Kaliningrad town planning strategy are formulated in the Urban Masterplan:

- Legal decision-making – developing a package of regulating documents: the Masterplan, theplan of historic and cultural monument conservation zones, rules of land tenure and building,other standard acts, public hearings procedures etc.;

- Openness of the city – accordance of spatial opportunities for cultural, economic and politicalcooperation, creating territorial conditions for investment, reservation of the territories for awide range of activities, access to information;

- Cultural self-identification (discovering the regional cultural phenomenon and individualarchitectural image of the place in the world, the Baltic Region and Russia);

- Urban environment – a secure and friendly, convenient for life, ecologically safe and beautifulcity.

Solutions of the Masterplan of Kaliningrad are aimed at providing this town planning strategy. Letus dwell on the most important points of the project.

1. Sustainable economic developmentOrientation of the city on the multifunctional pattern of economic development determines thenecessity of reserving territories for transportation, financial, business, commercial, scientific-educational, manufacturing and research-and-production units as well as health care, culture,sports and administrative institutions. The following measures are proposed: creating commer-cial and business areas along the main radial transport directions and the ring road; modernisa-tion of the port area; development of innovation techniques – reservation of the territories forindustrial and business complexes – techno-depots; creating an international fair and exhibitioncomplex.

2. Ecology of the cityRealisation of a range of measures aimed at improving the city environment – planning, air andwater protection, technical, technological etc. General ecological compatibility of urban activities.Reorganisation of industrial areas and transformation of a number of industrial units to servesocial, business and residential functions.

3. Forming a natural ecological frame of the cityKaliningrad has unique opportunities of creating the image of a “green city” and to return to theformer reputation of one of the best-furnished European cities. Among the measures outlined aredevelopment of the city and suburban green and recreational areas; reconstruction of the archi-tect Schneider's historical greenbelt and recreation area of the Lower and the Upper Lakes, MaxAshman Park, green vales of rivers and springs; preserving the “green diameter” – the ecosys-tem of the River Pregel; creation of “green wedges” as buffers between residential areas.

22


4. TransportComprehensive development of the transport infrastructure and public conveyances. Develop-ment of the external transport system – redevelopment of the airport Khrabrovo; redevelopmentand building of the external transport routes, promoting the removal of transit traffic from Kalinin-grad; redevelopment of the port area, developing water communications and tourist and sportsboats maintenance infrastructure; building terminal and logistic complexes etc. Developingpedestrian areas and bicycle routes. Development of public conveyances including ecologicallysafe electrical transport. Reconstruction of the existing transport infrastructure – the network ofroads, streets, passages and transport structures. Constructing transport relief roads (first of allfor the elevated bridge), ring roads, new bridges and road junctions. Optimisation of traffic,equipping stations with park and ride facilities on the land of railway terminals and stations andmain approaches to the centre. Establishing a system of underground car parks. Improvingcarriers stock, introducing ecological standards.

5. Reconstruction and development of residential areasComprehensive reconstruction and furnishing of the existing micro-districts and neighbourhoods;building new accommodation in consideration of interests and means of all social levels of thepopulation, implementing social housing programmes; development of new residential areas –construction of service facilities, organisation of reliable transport services, technical infrastruc-ture of the new residential areas; promoting expressive architectural design for residentialbuildings. The planned volume of the housing programme proposed by the Masterplan is 4.5 mil-lion square metres.

23

1 | masterplan

6. Development of social infrastructureThe standard of living and quality of life of city dwellers depends in many respects on the city'ssocial components. Thus active development steps are proposed for public spaces and serviceprojects – health care, education, sport, culture and trade in all administrative districts of Kalinin-grad; establishing residents' centres; creating pedestrian zones and squares; arranging multi-functional service zones along the main entrances into the city.

7. Development of tourismTourism is one of the most dynamically developing sections of the world economy. Proposedmeasures include development of all main constituents of the tourism infrastructure – areas andprojects as tourist attractions, transport maintenance, all kinds of services and information facili-ties, a network of hotels for various categories of tourists, improving quays and other recreationalspaces. The general condition of the successful development of tourism is a safe, green, con-venient and beautiful Kaliningrad.

8. Modernisation of technical systemsProviding the energy and ecological safety of the city and region; modernisation and reconstruc-tion of supply systems and leading technical structures; building modern sewage systems andrainwater drainage; orientation on resource-saving policy; package of engineering measures forthe preparation and improving of urban areas.

III. The CentreThe centre is the major element of the city, the focus of both positive and difficult qualities of theurban environment. The success (or failure) of designing a city centre is greatly determined bythe extent to which the measures are specific and focused.

The urgent problems are:- Absence of a concept for the centre supported by all participants of the process, as well as

no definite aims for the development, function and shape of the central area at the currentallocation of building land;

- Absence of a balance of public and investment interests, virtually spontaneous building ofnumerous commercial projects not taking into account the problem of car parking, pedestriantraffic, complex service systems;

- Transport congestion – “north-south” transport streams cross the central part of the city sincethere are no relief roads; public transport is limited and the citizens are forced to depend onprivate motorised traffic which increases the volume of traffic even more; lack of pedestrianareas and car parks – the centre is for transport and not for pedestrians;

- The city does not use its waterfront – the quays are not used for water tourism, recreation,promenades, the hydrologic system (the Upper and the Lower Lakes, River Pregel, minorstreams) are in a bad condition;

- Unsatisfactory quality of the environment and ecological situation in the centre – there arefew public open spaces, the number of green spaces is reduced, investors build on greenareas, residential buildings and courtyards are in a bad state; extremely high levels of airpollution in the centre as a result of motor traffic and industrial emissions.

24


The principal conceptual points concerning the rebuilding and development of the city centre areformulated in the Urban Masterplan. The territory within the historic inner city is earmarked as aspecial multifunctional area for the entire city centre. It should mainly take on a series of functions– cultural, commercial, business, representative, tourist, residential, informational and others.Multifunctionality, cultural and environmental diversity are indispensable conditions of the citycentre.

The following main direction of a comprehensive reorganisation of the city centre are outlined inthe project:

- Revival of the historic and cultural significance of the central zone, restoration of historic andcultural monuments; creation of architectural and spatial designs that are appropriate to thehuman scale;

- Reconstruction and architectural design of the main urban focus in the centre – CentralSquare, Victory Square, Kalinin Square, reconstruction and improvement of the city's mainstreet – Leninsky Prospect;

- Dominant locating of public and business sites, cultural entertainment and trade projects inthe central zone;

- Reconstruction and improvement of the existing housing areas in the central area;- Reconstruction of the existing street and road network, building of new bridges and roads in

order to remove transit traffic from the city centre, building modern car parks (multilevel, inte-grated into building complexes, including underground car parks) and pedestrian areas;

- Comprehensive improvement of open spaces and planting in the centre, rehabilitation ofhistoric green spaces, improvement and rehabilitation of natural areas at the Lower and theUpper Lakes;

- Design of architecture and landscape, and comprehensive improvement of quays and thewaterfront along the branches of the River Pregel, facilitating of landing stages and arrangingsports and tourist boats maintenance.

- Reconstruction of the main urban focal points and central areas.

Central square (the area of the former Royal Castle) Serious town planning mistakes were made on this site. These are the demolition of the RoyalCastle and construction of an administrative building on its foundation that has remained un-finished for over ten years.

The Masterplan proposes to create a public business and culture centre on the site of the CentralSquare with special historic (archaeological) tourist facilities. The Royal Castle (reconstructingparts of the Royal Castle is possible), the archaeological layers should be protected as a historicmonument. The architectural urban development strategy for the square and the adjacent areasshould be determined by a design competition.

Immanuel Kant Island (Kneiphof) The proposal is to organise a discussion engaging both professionals and the public on the alter-native urban concepts for the island, which was a self-contained unit within the town for cen-turies. The Masterplan puts forth the idea of regenerating the historical environment of the islandand restoring the historical fabric, the character and scale of buildings. Architectural solutions can

25

be diverse – ranging from the restoration of a number of historical buildings to modern architec-tural imagery at the scale of the historical streets and squares. Also possible is a combination ofreconstructing historical buildings and retaining green open spaces in other parts. It is essentialthat the island, which was and is the cultural, material and spiritual centre, is the starting point ofacquaintance with modern Kaliningrad, should rise as the genuine spiritual and cultural centre ofthe city. Decision-making and the definition of investment intentions should take place on thebasis of a design competition brief.

Victory SquareVictory Square and adjacent public areas are the contemporary administrative, business, com-mercial and transport centres of Kaliningrad. The proposal is for a continuation of the architectureand reconstruction of this complex public area. The main measures are the development of theroad junction with traffic at different levels; extensive use of underground car parking; completionof the Cathedral; reconstruction of the Central Market area; restoration of historical buildings(House of Technology of the former East-Prussian Fair etc.), improvements of open spaces, re-construction of the concert hall Rossiya, reconstruction and improvement of the North RailwayTerminal.

The South Railway Terminal Square (Kalinin Square)Important is the design of a multifunctional public centre for transport, business and commerce,an “Open City” (hotel, shops, offices, representatives' offices of transport companies, tourist infor-mation, car rental, entertainment). The fundamental urban measures are the reconstruction of

26


2 | Land use plan

the square including vehicular access at different levels; a green pedestrian area; reconstructionof railway and bus terminals; measures to optimise the organisation of public transport at therailway station; construction of underground car parks.

Leninskiy ProspectLeninskiy Prospect is the main street of the city. It is part of the top priority redevelopment zones.Proposed is the modernisation and redesign of the typical post-war buildings, inserting newbuildings of different functions into existing buildings, increasing the number of storeys of existingbuildings and adding lofts, architectural improvements of crossroads, construction of car parks,comprehensive improvement of streets and courtyard spaces, redevelopment and design ofsquares. It is important that not only the building fronts are included in the comprehensive urbanredevelopment measures, but also those near to the main road.

IV. Development of the modern city centre in its historical contextThe subject of the Symposium, “Town planning development of the centre of Kaliningrad”, isclosely associated with an understanding of the roots, the “genetic code” of the place, mentionedin other presentations.

It should be noted that the development of the Masterplan of Kaliningrad and definition of deve-lopment points in the city centre, took place in conjunction with the project of dividing the city intoprotection zones for the cultural heritage of Kaliningrad. This project, according to RF legislation,is an indispensable condition of urban development activities and the treatment of land in histori-cal surroundings.

The aim of the project is the modern urban development of Kaliningrad in the context of tradi-tional European culture, the definition of protective measures and the tasks of creating a modernopen city.

For the realisation of these aims the significance of the historical territories of Kaliningrad needto be classified. Within these territories different protection zones for objects of cultural heritageare distinguished and special regulations for urban development activities established that isderived form the value of the city environment and the value of individual historical and architec-tural features of the historic territories.

Protection regulations (town planning regulations) should improve the condition of the historicstock and link modern town planning with the conservation of the historic and cultural heritage ofKaliningrad.

Beside the general conservation tasks of the cultural heritage in historic cities, Kaliningrad, as acity occupying a special position within the Russian Federation, is at present faced with thespecific task of creating a unique modern architectural image, as this task was neglected in thepost-war period. The search of its particular image and the process of cultural self-identificationby the urban community is a complex, delicate and personal task. It should be noted that it onlybecame possible to address this problem in a “non-ideological context” after 1991.

27

Spatial planning is one of the tools for improving our life. With all the different views and opinions,urban environment is the result of a dialogue between various social groups.

The problem of the current development of the city and its centre comprises many issues andaffects the residents of Kaliningrad. The views and ideas of the urban community and amongspecialists of the “proper” development of the city may differ significantly. It is important that theurban development of Kaliningrad is accurately described and implemented in the interests of theurban community as a whole.

In our view, the subject of searching a spatial form for the centre of Königsberg-Kaliningrad, asthe heart of an open Russian city with ancient European roots, is one of the most intriguing andfascinating tasks of modern urbanistics.

28


29

NameOlga Vjaceslavovna Krasovskaya

OriginSt. Petersburg/Russia

ProfessionArchitect

Main profession fieldMaster planning for cities, senior project architect

Main subjectMasterplan for the City of Kaliningrad,project of conservation zones of culturalheritage of the City of Kaliningrad,building control in the City of Kaliningrad


30



Actualisation of the European City

Dr. Werner Möller

31

Actualisation of the European City

In recent years the significance of the European city has been the topic of a growing debate. Onthe one hand, much effort is put into city centres to ensure the conservation and reconstructionof spatial and architectural elements that bear witness to past epochs. These activities rangefrom exact reconstruction to so-called critical reconstruction, and to the introduction of architec-tural and urban references alien to the locality. On the other hand, the end of the European cityis proclaimed in professional debates. Arguments oscillate widely between the search for identity,loss of face, scale, tourism, globalisation, transformation and new lifestyles.

1 | Design of the ideal city form the treatise of Filarete, around 1465

The question of which type of the European city is referred to is hardly ever asked. Generallyreference is made to ancient Greece or the ideal urban plan of the Renaissance and the pictures-que historic city centres of different European epochs, to set the atmospheric background tocurrent economic, planning or architectural projects or, at best, as a reference to the lost senseof proportion and scale.

Apart from the prerequisite of built and spatial beauty the term “European city” rather stands forthe exemplary organisation of economic, cultural and legal matters by urban society, in constantcompetition with other cities. This civilising pursuit of balance and prosperity in the European citywas to be mirrored in the design of the city, and not vice versa. It was a flexible system ofexchange of goods and knowledge, communication and migration, whose strength and stabilityconstantly had to be pitted against changing economic, political and social conditions. Changingdemands and utilisation patterns finally determined the appearance of the European city – fromcompact city to urban sprawl. However, the fragility of this civil framework really was, and is,expressed also in the large number of wars and racist disputes within Europe. The wholesaleidealisation of the European city has another downside since its history is inseparable fromEuropean colonisation of the world, starting with the conquest of Antiquity or the discovery of theNew World, leading up to the industrial age. Looking at it matter-of-factly, the much praisedmodel of the European city is less the embodiment of Arcadian beauty and dignity rather than anexpression of the imprint of European hegemonic thought.

2 | Town centre of Siena

32


In this context, today's reference to the term “European city” is more of an emotional anchor, anexpression of longing for a putative ideal state, in times of immeasurable change and transfor-mation. From this mental perspective a comparison to the late 19th century is permissible, whenthe equilibrium of society was severely threatened by uncontrollable growth of the cities. Todayit is global competition and the individualisation of society that dominates local, regional andnational development, and that shakes our view of the future.

In the course of this competition the recalling of past virtues has spawned some odd quirks inGermany. One example is the desire to revitalise the centre of Braunschweig: after many futile

3 | Founding plan of Caracas, around 1560

4 | Braunschweig Castle prior to its destruction in WW II

33

5 | Demolition of Braunschweig Castle,watercolour by Karl Schmidt, 1960

attempts in the 1950s, to reconstruct and find new uses for the war-damaged castle – such asthe seat of the Technical University and later a conference centre including cinema and hotel –the ruin was demolished in 1960, on the basis of a democratically reached decision by the citycouncil. The area was developed, according to the urban planning ideals of the time, into a car-oriented and green city centre. As a relic the past fragments of the old castle now furnish the newlake in the city park.

To improvement the city centre of Braunschweig and enhance its competitiveness with commer-cial developments in the periphery and with neighbouring towns, a competition for a large ECE

6 | Site of the former Braunschweig Castle after demolition

8 | Ground floor plan of Braunschweig Castle Arcades, 2005

10 | Model of Braunschweig Castle Arcades, 20059 | Computer simulation of Braunschweig Castle Arcades, 2003

7 | Open space design around Braunschweig Castle Arcades, 2004

34


centre on the site of the former castle was held in 2003. The always present latent desire for thereconstruction of centrally located historic buildings destroyed in the World War II, was taken upand the reconstruction of the castle facade – the entrée to the shopping centre – incorporated inthe competition design. In conjunction with the existing efficient traffic system of the area, plan-ned and installed in the 1960s, representatives of the city of Braunschweig and the managers ofECE speculated for a new quality of urban recreation and the representation culture of shopping.This concept had previously been successfully applied in the extended use of railway stations ornewly constructed inner city malls, such as ECE centres – and the trend continued uninterrupted.New to Braunschweig is the radical rededication of the castle motif, a symbol of centralistictemporal power turned show-facade of a modern shopping palace. Even public debate againstthe project seems to have been employed in advertising creating much public response.

The history of the castle district in Braunschweig is an example of how the architectural andspatial changes in function of the city centre is an expression of the changing values of urbansociety of the 20th and early 21st century – and how difficult it is, reflecting the past, to fall backon the architectural and spatial achievements of the European city.

Another attempt to stop the move from the city to the periphery, and to compact inner city areasonce again, is to offer housing near the centre on “green landscape” sites. Amidst residentialareas from Wilhelminian times, one of the metaphors of the European city of the 19th century,“city houses” appear on derelict industrial land or large infill sites, typical suburban terraced hou-sing estates of different styles. This trend can also be detected in the transformation of old indus-

12 | ECE-Center Klagenfurt (Austria), opened 2004

13 | ECE-Center Wetzlar (Germany), opened 2005

11 | ECE-Center Brünn (Czech Republic), opened 2005

35

trial buildings and the refurbishment of housing in the Wilhelminian style: Specific suburban formsof single-family homes are implanted into old structures under the theme of “loft living” or “livingin the Wilhelminian style”. Next to the traditionally more neighbourly form of living in tenementblocks with a shared stairwell, the private house now has two to three storey maisonette flats,ideally with a separate entrance, integrated garage and private garden.

These two examples alone, the ECE centre as the new city centre and the high, individualdemands related to urban living, make clear the drastic new spatial and social configurations thatdetermine the restructuring of the “European city” in the age of globalisation and individualisa-tion.

Perspectives for the European cityNext to massive restructuring processes cities were exposed to in the last decades, awarenessof the long recognised problems of European population development is now increasing – andthese problems will be more pressing for the prospects of the European city with growing urbani-sation and competition. Until recently increased mobility, flexibility and youth culture were seenas an inseparable entity, and a guarantee for success in the context of global competition.Europe and its cities can no longer ignore the fact that, in parallel to the ongoing transformationfollowing the fall of the iron curtain and the enlargement of the EU, it must start thinking about anaging and decreasing populations. Even cities that are still growing are faced with the acuteproblem of over-aging of their population.

15 | Town houses in Leipzig (Schleusig), 2005

16 | Town houses in Leipzig (Schleusig), 2005

14 | Town houses in Leipzig (Plagwitz), 2005

36


These are aspects of the “European city” that most of all require a process of rethinking in civilsociety, and concentration on their very own potentials from which concrete spatial and architec-tural solutions should be derived. Current endeavours to palliate, such as to compensate the lackof population growth by increasing migration, sound cynical in the wake of rising racism alone,as does the euphoric presumption of the prospects of unhindered mobility in old age based onexcellent health care.

37


NameDr. Werner Möller

OriginLeipzig/Germany

ProfessionWork placement at Thonet GmbH, study of Graphic Design and Painting as wellas History of Art, New German Literature and European Ethnology at Philipps University in Marburg/Lahn

Main profession fieldPublicist and curator

Main subjectModern Movement, 20th and 21st century

38



Historical and development stages of Königsberg/Kaliningrad

Oleg I. Vasjutin

Historical and development stages of Königsberg/Kaliningrad

The historical development stages of the city of Königsberg-Kaliningrad are a certain decodingof cause and effect and development principles of an urban system as a territorial and spatialtemporal entity, resulting from the effect of various external and internal historical factors.

The existing system of periodisation is based on the idea of a continuous change of town plan-ning cultures, when one town planning culture is gradually replaced by another.

In spite of the tragic losses and further dramatic consequences for the whole artistic and buildingcivilisation of the city, the existing sequence of stages is, until now, considered the basis of theurban development anatomy of the city.

Stage I: 1255The first town planning stage starts from the change of the geographic fate of this area and isclosely connected with the general historical processes of cultural-political and economic charac-ter that took place in Europe. That is why Königsberg is an integral part of the general formationprocess of new towns in Europe (according to K. Bucher, approximately 400 new towns wereestablished in Germany in the 13th century).

In 1255, the military and political will of the Order, its spiritual-missionary feat and wish for land-scape changes were realised in the founding of the Castle of Königsberg, close to the historicaltrade route leading to Zamland. Thus, the Castle's place within the system of the Order of castlesin Prussia was determined.

The choice of the location for the city was in the best Vitruvian traditions, and the first stage wasfixed in character from the start. With the founding of the Castle, the nucleus of the town wasplaced, its reference point fixed as the zero coordinate. The direction of the town's future deve-lopment grid was also determined. The angle (f) of the vector axis (B) towards Rome and Maltaprobably meant orientation towards, and fixation of, the metaphysical beginnings, links to themother country – the Latin Empire.

Territories and settlements received new names, the proto landscape of the future city was givenLatin names. Thus, the area in front of the Castle was given the name “insula major” (I), the futureLöbenicht “insula inferior” (II), and Kneiphof Island was called “insula advocati” (III). A dam wasbuilt for the power supply for the economy of the Order, the resultant Castle pond the first man-made landscape feature of the future city.

The first stage took place against the background of the Rhine-Roman period, and its charac-teristic imagery is closely connected with the key landscape (Berg – mountain) that gives thename to the future city.

Thus, with the change of the historical and cultural landscape in 1255, the change of the townplanning cultures took place – from the Prussian ancient settlement of Tvangste to the Latincolony of Königsberg.

The genetic code of the first stage is Latin metaphysics.

39

Stage II: late 13th century to the end of the 16th centuryThis stage of development covers a period of three centuries, including both the time of the Orderand the period of formation of a new administrative and political system that became the Duchyof Prussia in 1525.

The key event of this stage is the formation of three self-sufficient urban units and three types ofmedieval law – the towns of Altstadt (1286), Löbenicht (1300), Kneiphof (1327) and, in 1340, theirjoining the system of European integration, the Hanseatic Union.

The common town planning culture of the three towns (archetype) genetically corresponds to thetown planning typology of Roman military towns of the 2nd century AD (Lambesis, Timgad, Gera-sa) that were based on the regular plan of Hippodamus.

As a result of the Christian reconsideration of the regular grid plan, it was subsequently interpre-ted as a repetition of the Latin cross. The use of this phenomenon in the planning of the townmade it possible to attain missionary, protective, ritual and sacral aims. At this stage the first measuring scale of the city was determined. Its diameter was approximately500 m, and the dimension of each town was immediately connected to the spatial unit of thelandscape on Kneiphof Island, and proportional to it.

The development of the infrastructures of the three European Medieval towns with their own townhalls, markets, churches, fortresses, ramparts, gates, bridges and outskirts determined the cha-

40


1 | Stage I: 1255

racteristics – the castle as the defensive and dominant unit which rules over a dense regularpattern of structurally linked and complementing Western European towns. At this time the mostimportant architectural/urban development pair was constructed, the Castle and Cathedral,giving rise to the specific silhouette of the towns.

In terms of style, the second stage includes Gothic and the early Renaissance, its genetic codeis the imperial Ancient Roman regularity.

Stage III: early 17th – mid 19th centuryThe main historical event immediately connected to the third stage of the development of thetown, determining its structure, was the establishment of the royal, political and economic capitalof Prussia. In 1724, this resulted in the union of the three independent towns of Altstadt, Kneiphofand Löbenicht into a single Königsberg. This led to the extension of the general urban module ofthe city. As a result of a new defensive initiative in response to the new status of the city, new rampartswere constructed and the development space of the town fixed in a second dimension. Its dia-meter was approximately three kilometres and its construction implemented in two phases.

In the first construction phase (1626-1843) a simplified system of ramparts was created. The in-sufficient density of the inner city influenced the geometry of the fortifications that did not reachthe ideal length of its circumference.

41

2 | Stage II: late 13th century to the end of the 16th century

In the second phase (1843-1862) the system of ramparts was essentially completed. The densityof the inner city formed the perimeter of the ramparts into a better shape – that of a circle, dimen-sioned according to the rules of fortification art at the time.

The special feature of the urban culture of this period is the two-part composition of the spatialstructure of the city comprising two types of grids:

- Type I – urban structure of the Hippodamus plan in the central part of the city;- Type II – radial structure of the inner city that developed on the basis of historical, natural and

trade routes leading to the Castle.

This period is characterised by the architectural and urban planning multiplicity of the city en-vironment – new building types, squares, open spaces, landscapes etc. are established. A largestylistic capacity of the stage is reflected in the combination of the Renaissance, Baroque,Rococo, Classicism (the style “Zopf”) and Biedermeier. In the context of this multiplicity, theseven Königsberg bridges can be distinguished as a cultural occurrence that acquired a newquality – the phenomenon of “urban planning mathematics” (Euler's formula).

The characteristic image of the third stage of the city's development is as follows: the horizontalspace consisting of a dense urban core and a strong natural landscape component that corres-ponds to the notion of “provincial capital character”.

The genetic code of the stage goes back to the aesthetics of the mathematical culture of theRenaissance.

42


3 | Stage III: early 17th – mid 19th century

Stage IV: late 19th – early 20th centuryThe fourth stage of development started against the background of the industrial revolution thathad just begun and determined a new quality of life. The motorcar, railway and tram drasticallychanged the concept of speed (movement), resulting in a new perception of space.

By the end of the 19th century Königsberg, a town-fortress surrounded by defensive rampartsand a historically typical radial-circular structure and densely built up, had exhausted its possibili-ties and reached a critical point in its development. Hence, by the beginning of the 20th centurythe situation is characterised by the move to areas beyond the fortifications.

With the change of the city's military and defensive doctrine its third scale was determined. From1905 to 1908, 17 suburban territories with the total area of 2.530 hectares were merged with thecity. The territorial and spatial fixation of the third scale of the city was the construction in 1890of a new defensive belt consisting of 12 forts.

The special feature of the urban planning culture of the fourth stage is the prevalence of a north-west direction in the city's development. An innovation of the urban development of these areaswas the new ideology of the garden city. This gave rise to a trend of deurbanisation that resultedin the disintegration of the urban environment of Königsberg. But intense development of moderntransport infrastructure projects in the city compensated for the possible consequences of thisnegative process, and as a result it determined urban mobility and provided access to new terri-tories.

With the appearance of new districts of Amalienau and Maraunenhof two typologies of urbanKönigsberg emerged. The first is a dense and closed, radial-centric inner city, and the second isopen, consisting of districts with independent urban grids and self-contained coordinate direc-tions.

One of the new planning features was the use of a fan-shaped urban grid.

The stage can be characterised as the decentralisation of the city, dualistic contrasting anddivision of the city environment into past and present, the archaic and the contemporary. Thestylistic specificity lies in the processing of the old aesthetic experience, i.e. Eclecticism (Histo-ricism and stylisation) and Neo-Classicism.

The genetic code of the fourth stage is the regularity of E. Howard's garden city.

Stage V: first third of the 20th centuryThe symbolism of the town planning processes of the fifth historical stage in the city developmentcan be viewed as the realisation of the third spatial and temporal concept (Z. Gidion) – interactionand mutual penetration of internal and external spaces.

In 1910, part of the old ramparts of the inner city were demolished. As a result two “towns” wereunited, the old inner town within the ramparts and the new outer town that had reached thesignificance of an independent entity. This was possible because public communication centreshad established at junction (A, B) which included architectural ensembles of a new compositional

43

and stylistic type. That is, the interaction and mutual penetration of two urban mega-forms tookplace. With the emergence of the main urban diameter of the city as a continuation of the “cardo”,a large urban module (1.200 m) was developed, also as a system of parcelling the nodes withinthe main city diameter, even though its vector orientation was changed in the process.

Thus, the urban planning culture of the stage can be characterised by transition from mono-cen-trism to polycentrism.After the ring of the old ramparts had lost its original function, its adaptation brought a new urbanquality – a landscape green belt and parks for the city.

During this period the infrastructure of the railway and port was considerably strengthened. Newindustrial harbours were constructed that corresponded to the new dimension of the rapidly deve-loping city. In the city the functional theme began to dominate as an aesthetic principle with thetransition from the Art Nouveau to Bauhaus.

The stage can be characterised as a free (second) wind of the city with new green lungs, demo-cracy of architecture and urban spaces with freedom of movement and the aesthetics of open-ness and continuity.

The genetic code of the stage is Cubism (visual revolution).

44


4 | Stage IV: late 19th – early 20th century

Stage VI: “Project towns” designed Königsberg of the 1930s and Kaliningrad of the 1950sThis historical stage was not completed, but it is undoubtedly of great value since it shows theattitude towards the city under radical conditions of further development in as much as characte-rising certain similarities in the approach to urban development of different civilizations at thisparticular stage of history.

This period demonstrates the “power and might” of the states in the creation of “form and style”in the city under different conditions in the totalitarian regimes. The shared urban culture of thetwo states lies in the “organisation and regulation” of the shape of the city, aspiration for a certainideal and its symbolism. In this respect they are close to each other. The scales of new master-plans are of equal value, and, in their proportions enough to completely change the appearance,the character and the status of the city. The differences are only in the methodologies of thedesign approach. The German design period is characterised by succession and the sustainabledevelopment of the idea of polycentrism within the historical and cultural urban symbolism of theLatin cross. Its genetic code is the continuation of the imperial Roman tradition. The Soviet townplanning culture can be characterised by change (replacement) of the architectural and urbansymbols and a return to the monocentrism of the radial-circular town planning system. Thegenetic code of this town planning culture is the colonial transfer of the town planning forms ofMoscow and St Petersburg.

45

5 | Stage V: first third of the 20th century

Stage VII: Second half – late 20th centuryAfter turning from the capital of East Prussia into a Russian provincial city Kaliningrad fitted thecategory of a province, as in the Roman Empire the word meant “defeated country”. In the consi-deration of this stage one should start with the notion of a “trophy city”, with the understandingthat something “foreign” became “our own”. The urban and architectural colonisation that follow-ed a short period of adaptation resulted in different relationships between such categories as“native-foreign”, “old-new”, “past-future”.

At the very beginning of the 1950s, an independent urban unit was allotted for the representa-tional purposes in the destroyed townscape – Stalingradsky Prospect (now Mira Prospect). Theresult of reconstruction activities in this area was a scenario of Stalinist monumental Neo-Classi-cism. At first the reconstruction was conducted on the basis of the historically grown urban struc-ture – that is why two types of city environments developed at that time: the urban quality of theGerman time supplemented with the quality of the Soviet period. However, the masterplans forthe city developed in the 1960s denied the city's historical planning context that had evolved overcenturies. And the All Union architectural competitions conducted in 1964 and 1974 proposedmodels for new planning resolutions. As a result an ideological set was adopted that completelyignored all previous architectural and urban culture of the city. At first this resulted in two totallydifferent cities in one location, leading to a clash of their respective cultures, and further, to thecomplete change of the planning morphology, scale, character and image of the city.

The basis of the proposal of the new Soviet city was the earmarking of 85 hectares of open spacein the city centre that was traversed by two urban routes (Moskovsky and Leninsky Prospects)and the manifestation of the new dominant symbol (House of the Soviets).

46


7 | Stage VI: “Project town” Kaliningrad of the 1950s6 | Stage VI: “Project town” Königsberg of the 1930s

With the onset of mass industrial construction the socio-economic experiment of architecturestarted. This promoted the dictatorship of standardisation and standard construction, which, inturn, determined the new principles of urban development. Buildings all constructed of a type andat one time replaced the ensemble architecture of the streets and squares. With the continuedspread of residential quarters of this ideology over the entire city, the parcelling of spaces wassignificantly increased and led to the considerable expansion of the city. The variety of forms andspaces of the historical city was destroyed.

Formation of such a “new socialist city” that was fundamentally different from the existing histori-cal prototypes became the architectural and urban planning ideology of the dramatic period,starting in the late 1950s and continuing, with some transformations, into the present.

Thus, the denial of West European culture, unwillingness to understand and accept the historicalcity, the lack of archives and the ideological taboo of the subject of Königsberg until recent times,gave rise to the next stage – the war between Kaliningrad and Königsberg. This did not involvedirect destruction and demolition but redevelopment. All this finally led to a tragic outcome in theharmonious continuity of the cities. The genetic code of the seventh historical stage of the urbandevelopment of the city is Soviet Modernism.

The International Congress of Architects that took place in Barcelona in 1995 was held under thesymbolic and topical motto: “The past, the present and the futures”. Strangely enough, the mottowas often incorrectly translated – the last word was translated as the future. Indeed, if there isonly one past, only one present, there could be several futures. It is all up to us.

It seems that we are currently on the verge of the eighth town planning stage. What is it going tobe like? The town planning doctrine of the eighth stage should give the answer to this question.That is why I am going to raise this issue for further discussion.

The town planning doctrine should, first of all, objectively diagnose the city on the basis of theassessment of the existing situation, should determine the 'territory' of architecture, formulate themain principles of the regional architectural and town planning policy, its strategy and tactics. Itshould propose to the profession architectural and planning methodologies and technologies.The doctrine should also contain aims and objectives, main directions, stages of development oftown planning and architecture, as well as the tools of their implementation. For the townplanning doctrine it is important to develop a characteristic image for the city – a certain line ofassociation that relates to the image of the townscape. The content should be a conceptprogramme for all the regional architectural and urban planning activities that can only beimplemented on the basis of a systematic approach.

ResultThere could be three main proto-conceptual vectors of urban development.

The first seems the most familiar. It focuses on the continuation of the construction of Kaliningradas an artificial and abstract city, not at all connected with the local regional characteristic, an ag-

47

gressive outpost in the Baltic. In this case, both external and internal conditions can be forecast– all the possibilities of integration will be closed for us, and the ongoing difficulty and permanenttension of the situation will take up most of the inner resources.

The second vector would be a revival of the old Königsberg. It is incredibly difficult, archaic andreminds of childish maximalism. In this case one could dream a little, but except for the incorpo-ration of fragments imitating the past, this would be dishonest towards history.The third vector follows. We settle on the cultural uniqueness of the city among many historicalcities in Russia and Europe, and declare the harmonious succession of the cities Königsberg andKaliningrad, and act according to the chosen course. The professional concepts and develop-

48


8 | Stage VII: Second half to late 20th century

9 | Evolution of Kaliningrad

ment technology will show how this should be done. They will undoubtedly be based on the his-torical-cultural component of the city and region. This vector seems to have a future.

Considering the evolutionary chain of the development stages of the city it is necessary to em-phasise the urban destruction that was done during the seventh stage. That is why the aim of theeighth stage is to heal the wounds and to establish a harmonious link, not only to the seventhstage but to all previous stages, which will promote the sustainable development of the city.

49


NameOleg Ivanovic Vasjutin


ProfessionArchitect

Main profession fieldProject planning and journalism

Main subjectThe cultural link Königsberg/Kaliningrad

50



Tranformations

Prof. Marcin Orawiec

51

Transformations

Rheinpark Süd, DüsseldorfIn the year 2000, OX2architekten were commissioned by IDR GmbH to examine the future po-tentials of the 100 hectare Reisholzer Hafen site in Düsseldorf to raise public awareness andpolitical interest for one of the last remaining continuous development areas to the south of thecity. The in part visionary character of the proposal provided an impulse for discussion about thefuture of the partly industrial area and inspired the future-oriented urban planning developmentof the harbour.

2 | Rheinpark Süd – Site plan

1 | Rheinpark Süd – Night-time perspective

52


O.VISION – the city for people and their healthThe special attraction of the urban design scheme for the 60-hectare site of the former coalminein the centre of the Ruhr Basin for the client Projekt- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft Oberhausen,was the multifaceted chances for the modernisation of society, economic dynamics and technicalprogress and innovation. The O.VISION project combines these challenges in one central themeof fundamental significance: “People and their health”. The appearance of the arena in the urbancontext embraces the presentation and display of the ideal human condition as well as theobservation and control of people's actions.

3 | O.Vision – Perspective

4 | O.Vision – Site plan

53

SchanzenstraßeThe scheme was awarded second prize and is a comprehensible and expressive gesture design-ed at an urban scale, which is detached from the existing industrial fabric. Confident and conse-quently linear the future media district in Cologne will be developed into an independent anddistinct urban neighbourhood.

7 | Schanzenstraße – Site plan

5 | Schanzenstraße – Perspective 1 6 | Schanzenstraße – Perspective 2

54


WesselingThe urban design concept is based on three macro-structures composed in a radial arrange-ment.

The large differences in scale compared to the immediate surroundings are addressed withinthese units and thus facilitate a fitting transition between the different ensembles.

On one side we find the dominant image of the three blocks which are of a similar scale to theindustrial structures. On the other the breakdown of the blocks towards the interior into units ofuse, dimensioned according to the requirements, provides a transitional zone to the scale of theresidential areas.

10 | Wesseling – Site plan

8 | Wesseling – typical sketch 9 | Wesseling – Model

55


NameMarcin Józef Orawiec

OriginAachen/Germany

ProfessionArchitect

Main profession field/Main subjectTownplaning, Architecture and Design

Lecture 6

56


3.1.6 Lecture 6 –

Stylistic peculiarities of architecture in Königsbergin the 13th - 20th century

Prof. Irina V. Belinzeva

57

Stylistic peculiarities of architecture in Königsberg in the 13th - 20th century

The architecture of Königsberg developed over centuries along the artistic characteristics of theBaltic south coast. The Medieval Brick Gothic of the 16th century was replaced by the Renais-sance in its European version, known as Mannerism and found in the transition from the MiddleAges to modern times in the regional schools of Northern European countries. In the 17th – early18th century the architecture of the city saw phases of Baroque and Classicism in their Dutchform. The second half of the 18th century, the French influence was noticeable. Historicism inKönigsberg in the 19th century showed itself in its pan-European form. One example of this styleis the new building at Königsberg University, built by F. Stüler in the Neo-Renaissance style. ArtNouveau buildings are mainly concentrated outside the city centre, in the villa district (Amalienau,now Kutuzov Street). In the 20th century the architecture of the city followed the popular Euro-pean styles – the Bauhaus style of the 1920s and the concept of reconstruction of the city of theperiod of the totalitarian regime (urban development project of 1938).

The specific feature of development in Königsberg is a certain conservatism that is manifestedin the preservation of the medieval urban structure of the city centre that remained almost un-changed up to the beginning of the 20th century. Besides, a certain time lag was observed, caus-ed by the city's remoteness from the main artistic centres of Europe.

At the founding of the city in 1255, a plan after Hippodamus, resembling a grid structure, formedthe base. The most regular was the plan of the Old City that extended in an east-westerly

1 | Town plan of Königsberg by Jochim Bering, 1613

58


direction along the river, coinciding with the trade routes established in ancient times. TheLanggasse (now Moskovsky Prospect) ran across the entire city connecting two opposite gates.On both sides of, and at equal distances from, the main street were two parallel streetsintersected by roads at right angles (Ill. 1).

The founding of towns on pagan territory conquered by the crusaders was not only for practicalreasons of increasing trade or taking agricultural lands, but also had spiritual motifs that justifiedhardships and deprivations which were inevitable while settling in foreign countries. Only thesacred city of Jerusalem and its respected divine prototype that had just been lost by Christians,but was still remembered by many knights, could serve as an urban ideal for the knights of theTeutonic Order. As is generally known, the urban planning rules of the Middle Ages are steepedin images of the sacred city of Jerusalem. The images of the urban form of the Divine Jerusaleminfluenced worldly architecture.

It seems probable that the crusaders, while colonising conquered lands in north-eastern Europeand in the founding of new settlements, pursued the example of the lost city that had not forfeitedits sanctity. According to the Apocalypse, at the time of the old Jerusalem's decline conditionsemerge for the establishment of the new earthly Jerusalem (Apocalypse, 3, 12). Perhaps thetowns founded in the Baltic by the Order were a variation on the subject of the reconstruction ofJerusalem on earth. There is a lot of evidence that testifies to the connection between the ideaof Jerusalem – both earthly and divine – and Königsberg. In the 19th century an ancient castlecalled Jerusalem was located not far from the Prussian Königsberg. A Russia traveller wrote in

2 | Fragment of the epitaph – Königsberg in the guise of Jerusalem

the early 19th century, “Jerusalem is situated at the distance of three quarters of an hour fromKönigsberg (...). The place name has a special origin. To be admitted to the Order, Germanknights had to crusade (conduct pilgrimages) to Jerusalem, as the city was the original object ofthe Order. After they lost holy graves they were unable to perform their vow but at least they triedto keep their word. That is why the Knights built a palace in this area, called it Jerusalem andsoothed their conscience by arranging pilgrimages there and having fun conductingtournaments.” (1)

In the 14th-15th century crusades to Prussia were extremely popular among the Europeanknights including those who were not members of the Teutonic Order. Trips to Königsberg andparticipation in military operations against pagans were considered a special achievement andprivilege and were comparable to a pilgrimage to Rome, Jerusalem or Santiago de Campostela.In Prussian Königsberg knights from all over Europe – from England, Scotland, northern and sou-thern Italy, Aragon, Portugal, Germany – spent their time at feasts, hunting and tournamentswhile waiting for the beginning of campaigns against eastern pagans – Prussians, Lithuanians,Slavs (who had been christianised by that time).

Hans Nimpch's (1476-1556) epitaph that is kept in the Museum of Varmy and Mazur in Olshtyn(Poland) testifies to the connection between Königsberg and the image of the Divine Jerusalem.It used to be kept in the northern nave of Königsberg Cathedral. It is a simple composition inclu-ding a painted image of a crucifix in an architectural frame. The most interesting feature in thismemorial is the city of Königsberg with its typical towers and church spires in the background inthe form of the earthly Jerusalem. The painting is by Henry Königswiser (around 1530-1583), acourt artist of Duke Albrecht, the most outstanding painter of Königsberg in the 16th century. Hehad been trained in Wittenberg by Lukas Cranach, the famous master of the Northern Renais-sance in Germany, who praised him immensely in his letters to the Duke. (2) (Ill. 2)

During the further urbanisation near the already established coastal city of Königsberg, newurban developments, called “New Town”, were successively added to the old town. Every newlybuilt New Town had its own administration (town council), trade organisations and even profes-sional specialisation. Along with the relative political and economic independence the New Townswere determined by the presence of their own urban structure in the form of a perpendicularstreets pattern, which deliberately did not match the basic pattern of the old town. The new townswere surrounded by their own town walls that were erected even on the side of the adjacent olddistricts. The presence of considerable limitations initially put the New Towns in the secondaryposition. Only two of the New Towns – the main part of Gdansk and Kneiphof in Königsberg (thatwas originally called New Town), due to their favourable location and the settling of merchantshere, became serious competitors to the Altstadt – the old town of Königsberg. Löbenicht was ina less favourable position, its development disturbed by the proximity of the Prussian settlementLipze.

An important stage in the history of the formation of the spatial structure of Königsberg is theconstruction of the defensive ramparts (1624-1636) that enclosed the city into a kind of singleartistic and compositional unit. Comparing the appearance of Königsberg of the 17th century andthe first plans for the construction of Petersburg, one will notice certain similarities between the

59

60


principles of formation of the spatial structure of the two cities. This was manifested in the con-cepts for the fortress of Petersburg (1703), in planning of Vasilievsky Island by D. Treseni (1714),in the projects of the masterplan by J.B.A. Leblond (1717), as well as in other proposals concer-ning the new capital (Ill. 3-4).

The most notable similarity is the choice of location for the town. Like Königsberg, St. Petersburgwas located not far from the sea, in an area with three large islands in a river. The natural ana-logies were strengthened by the use of the planning principles. On the former plans of Königs-berg of the 17th century and the first half of the 18th century, and in the well-known project of St. Petersburg by J.B.A. Leblond, a regular city is introduced, divided into separate districts bythe arms of the river and enclosed in an oval of fortifications with projecting battlements.

Several similar details can be distinguished in the planning of Königsberg and St. Petersburg.Both cities have a citadel closes the main river. In Königsberg, it is situated on an artificial islandwhere the river leaves the city, while in St. Petersburg the citadel is located, mirror-inverted,where the river comes into the city, on a natural river island. On Zayachy Island in the River Neva,by the order of Peter the Great in 1703, an “earth fortress” was first built with six bastions thatwas later replaced by a stone fortress. The idea of Peter I of a regular urban pattern on Vasiliev-sky Island is interesting. The island was going to be populated by merchants and artisans. Thiswas also done in Kneiphof. St. Petersburg's district of “New Holland” – the customs territory andan area for the storage and drying of shipbuilding timber – also has its analogues in Königsberg.In the 17th century, the Dutch occupied four fifths of the shipping area in Königsberg; there was

3 | Town plan of Königsberg by Suchodolez Mladschij, 1740

61

a special wharf for ships from Holland – Hollenderbaum. The Russian Tsar Peter I lived in thisarea, he was well aware of the customs regulations of Königsberg and frequently mentioned thenecessity to adopt some of these.

Numerous records testify not only to the visual impression that Königsberg made on Peter theGreat, who welcomed all foreign influences, but also to the role of Königsberg's immigrantcitizens in the construction of the first regular Russian fortresses. Thus, J. Stelin noted that: “thefortress St. Petersburg was initially founded on two earth banks and later by Johann Kirschsteinfrom Königsberg.” (3)

In Baltic cities districts of equal form were divided into separate blocks divisible by a certain mea-sure of length: the old kulma measuring cane (4.32 m) or new kulma cane (4.707 m) (Ill. 5). Astone model of the measure of length of 4.32 m was embedded into the east wall of the templein Kulma.

Residential buildings of three to four storeys, their narrow facades facing the street, and anacute-angled end pieces, occupied most of the districts. An average height of the buildings fromground floor to the eaves was also regulated and was approximately 30 “feet”, or about 8.6 m.

The city buildings were similar in type, of equal height and width, erected along the “red line”forming a corridor-like street. Minor differences in the details of the facades did not play a signifi-cant role in the arrangement of the area that was enclosed by buildings, like by a wall. A row ofthe similar compositional units was a specific feature of the medieval street. (Ill. 6)

4 |Town plan of St. Petersburg by J.B.A. Leblond, 1717

62


Plots allotted to the citizens were called “inheritance” (Erben). There were full and half “inheri-tances” and the so-called shacks (Buden). The average width of one site intended for construc-tion of a shack was the size of two measuring canes, while for the construction of a shack it wasonly one cane (generally 4.707 m). The width of construction sites differed, and no regularity wasidentified regarding the alternation of single-module, one and a half or two and two and a halfmodule plot. In Königsberg the plots were two new measuring canes on average, i.e. 8.6 m wideand four to five canes deep, i.e. 17.2-21.5 m. The building usually occupied two thirds of the plot,the rest of the area was intended for the inner courtyard with a well.

Initially the method of building was timber-frame construction, which can be explained by thewealth of building materials, timber and clay. It is assumed that colonists had introduced thetimber-frame building technique from the Northern Germany, while wood had always been themain construction material in Prussia. Roofs were covered with available materials – rush, thatchand boards. The historical buildings of timber-frame construction in the Baltic were located on thepeninsula Ambarov – Lastady in Königsberg, up to World War II.

In the 14th-15th century, rich citizens started to build their houses of brick. Each of the threeneighbouring towns – the Old City of Königsberg, Löbenicht-Königsberg, Kneiphof-Königsberg,had its own building regulations. One of the oldest manuscripts of Königsberg, dated 1394, con-tained building regulations that had been adopted in Löbenicht in 1385. (4) The document mainlyregulated the so-called neighbourhood rights that were important in the context of an increasinglack of space in the rapidly growing town.

5 | Ordnance survey map of Königsberg, 1815

63

After 1525, during the reign of Duke Albrecht in Königsberg, the Renaissance developed in theform of Northern Mannerism that had been brought from Holland (second half of the 16th centuryto the beginning of the 17th century). A great influence of Dutch culture was felt in NorthernGermany, Denmark and in Baltic coastal regions, as early as the 15th century. This increasedfurther in the second half of the 16th century. Dutch Protestants oppressed by the SpanishCatholics, searched for shelter in large and rich port cities in Northern Europe – also in Königs-berg, that had had close trade links to the Netherlands for a long time. In 1530, more than 4.000Dutch Protestants arrived in tolerant East Prussia and settled in the capital and international portof Königsberg.

New tastes in the urban construction were taking shape under the influence of the ducal courtwith its artistic aspirations oriented to the European capitals. Duke Albrecht and the subsequentrulers of East Prussia rendered special patronage to the artists – representatives of the NorthernMannerism movement who had come from the Netherlands. Numerous historical sources andartistic monuments, most of which have been lost, testify to this fact.

Due to the Dutch masters a certain artistic unity appeared “on the areas stretching as far asHolland and coastal provinces of Germany in the west, surrounding Denmark, Southern Sweden,Northern Poland and running further east as far as Riga and Tallin” (5). Establishing their work-shops in the coastal cities of Northern Europe, the representatives of Northern Mannerism dis-seminated drawings and artwork possessing unique original features in their artistic language.Strange grotesques, fantastical figures of people, animals and plants are intertwined, growing

6 | Development of facades in Baltic coastal towns, 1400-1900

into one another. Elaborately decorated “ears” and other kinds of ornaments made up the basisof the new European style. Used as examples were the albums of Vredeman de Vris andCornelis Floris engraved by Jeronim Kock in Antwerp at the end of the 16th century. The albumsby Vredeman de Vris were used as “catalogues” of different types of forged ornament and draw-ings of grotesques. Examples of compositional combinations of complicated ligature of figurativeand ornamental images were borrowed from Cornelis Floris. Both artists worked in Königsberg.

The Dutch made gravestones for Duke Albrecht and his wife Duchess Dorothea (1549, 1570).The epitaph to Duke Albrecht, complex in its concept and artistic forms, the remains of whichcould still be seen after the war on the east wall of the chorus building, was created by thefamous Dutch artist Cornelis Floris. He probably also crafted the gravestones for the DuchessesDorothea and Anna. The sculptural composition of the monument to Margravine Elizabeth, DukeAlbrecht's wife, was made after 1547 by Willem van den Block from Mekhelen who studied atCornelis Floris' studio in Königsberg for 14 years. Design of the Hall of Muscovites in the 16thcentury (the name was later transferred to a different building of the castle) was also done by theDutch artists.

The Renaissance style, in the form of Northern Mannerism borrowed from the Netherlands, dic-tated new patterns of design of both portals and interiors of the castle as well as of residentialhouses (Ill. 7, 8, 9, 10). Representational facades had rich sculptural ornaments in the form ofmasks, heads, animal and plant motifs that were made under the influence of Cornelis Floriswhose patterns had spread along the coast, or created directly in his Königsberg studio.

By the end of the 17th and beginning of the 18th century, building in Königsberg adopted a diffe-rent style that can be named either as Classicist Baroque or Baroque Classicism. It was mainlybased on different Dutch examples. In the towns of the south coast of the Baltic Sea, where Pro-testantism had prevailed as early as the first quarter of the 16th century, the problem of buildingnew churches arose. Protestant church building in the Baltic Region was not extensive due to thenumber of large-scale Medieval religious sites that had been adapted to Protestant servicesduring the period of Reformation.

The consecration of the first reformatory church in East Prussia took place in the presence ofFrederic III and his court on 22. January 1701, on the first Sunday after an important event – thejoining of the Prussian Duchy to the German Reich. Built according to the plans of the Berlinarchitect Johann Arnold Nering, the church is a complex spatial composition in a north southorientation. The plan of the church followed the New Church in The Hague, built by an unknownartist in 1649-1655. The unfinished tower of Königsberg Castle Church was also based on theearly buildings of the Netherlands – Zunderkhirkhe (architect Hendrick de Keiser, 1603-1611) andVesterkhirkhe (unknown architect, 1620-1631). Castle Church combined Gothic remains (stonestellar vaults of the apsis and the tower that also served as a belfry), Baroque compositionaltechniques in the form of the transverse interior space and massive columns in the lower part ofthe tower and other classic details. The appearance of Gothic forms in the 17th century can beexplained by the Renaissance of the church scholasticism and a wide spread of mysticism. (Ill. 11, 12, 13)

64


65

A characteristic example of the local style, besides the church in the Castle village (1690), is thetown hall of the Old Town. German researchers assume that A. Schlüter designed the ceiling ofthe hall on Kneiphof Island (the town hall was destroyed). The town hall, built in 1695-1696, wasin the style of a rather modern town house (Ill. 14). It is assumed that the French artist, JeanBaptist Broebes, who was born in Paris and studied there, built it. After he had been expatriatedfrom France as a Huguenot, he worked on the construction of the town hall in Bremen. In 1692-1697 he was involved in the construction of the fortress in Pillau near Königsberg.

The stylistic analysis of the sculptural decoration of the ceiling confirms the assumption about theauthorship of the famous master A. Schlüter (Ill. 15, 16, 17). Perhaps, the first acquaintance ofPeter I and Andreas Schlüter took place in May 1697, during his two months' stay at the “GrandEmbassy” and at the visit of the Tsar himself. A. Schlüter's arrival in Königsberg at that time couldhave been connected with the moulded decorations of the town hall ceiling that were completedaround 1697, or later. At that time A. Schlüter was in the service of Brandenburg Elector Frede-rick III. (the future Prussian King Frederick).

The buildings of the Middle Ages survived in Königsberg for a long time, occupying quite a largearea of the city centre. In the 18th century, many city manors were built within the earth rampartsthat had been built of a large diameter to accommodate future expansion. The design of palacesfollowed the leading stylistic trends of the European architectural fashion – of the late Baroqueand reserved early Classicism. Here, the general European style acquired its typical regional

7 | Portal of Königsberg Castle- south entrance to courtyard, 1551 8 |Portal of house no. 27 Langgasse on Kneiphof – early 17thcentury

66


features of the local upper Baltic artistic tradition – the use of the expressive material brick, anda preference for high tiled roofs etc.

On the vast areas of the inner city, and instead of the shabby or burnt medieval buildings,appeared new palaces and apartment buildings for government officials. The classicist manors,built in the Saxon or French tradition with Rococo elements, were retained in Königsberg up toWorld War II. They were Saturgus' manor in Lastady, the Royal Palace in Königstrasse, theDennhoff manor in Bergplatz, Walenrode manor etc.

The Russian architect and gardener, A. Bolotov, described in his memoirs the park at the estateof the merchant Saturgus. Built in the Roccoco style with many motifs, quaintly cut trees, es-paliers, fountains, conservatories, menagerie and cabinet of curiosities. The park was laid out in1753 on the site of an existing garden of the early 18th century. It is possible that impressions ofthe park had an impact on the future activities of the famous landscape gardener.

Changes in the appearance of the city in the 19th century were brought by the ruin and subse-quent reconstruction of the church in the Old Town. Due to the soft ground the church subsided,the west tower leaned, the pillars and vaults cracked. The church had to be demolished, and asquare was built in its place that was later named after Kaiser William. A new church was built inthe Old Town nearby, on the site of the old theatre, by the famous architect F. Schinkel in theNeo-Gothic style (consecrated in 1845).

9 | Residential building in Bergstrasse, in the Old Town ofKönigsberg – early 17th century

10 | Residential building in Junkerstrasse on Kneiphof, 1654

67

During the 19th century, the appearance of some of the streets in the inner city changed. The netof small curved streets was straightened in parts. The ramshackle medieval buildings were re-placed new houses in the style of Historicism of the 19th century, abundantly decorated with Neo-Gothic and Neo-Renaissance details. The University building (by F. Stüler, student of F. Schin-kel) and related clinics and institutes were constructed in this style on the main square ParadePlatz in 1842-1862. The unity and integrity of the naturally developed historical and architecturalenvironment of the city was destroyed by the aesthetic concepts of ideal construction in the 19thcentury. Stylised buildings in the sense of European “history” replaced the historic environmentto form new streets. The widening and changing of streets had positive effects, since improve-ment works were conducted in the districts, old ditches filled, standing water cleaned and sewagesystems constructed. The drawback of redevelopment around the Castle was the destruction ofthe historically important medieval city, as well as modernisation and conversions of the remai-ning facades and the construction of numerous commercial buildings. In the course of extensionworks of trading companies the house where I. Kant lived was demolished in 1893. Extensiveconstruction activities after World War I were resumed in Königsberg only at the beginning of the1920s. These were initiated by H. Lomeier (1881-1968) who was elected First Mayor. He imple-mented the concept of turning of the whole of the Königsberg agglomeration into a garden city.

The hesitation regarding the construction of the city centre reflected the Soviet development inthe post-war period. The post-war structural and planning systems for the centre of Kaliningradwere divided into options. One proposed the relocation of the centre of Kaliningrad to one of the

11 | Castle Church of Königsberg, 1690

12 | Plan of Königsberg Castle Church, 1690

13 | Königsberg with Castle Church in background

68


inner city districts, others even a completely new city centre across the entire area of the histori-cal town. The development of the architectural image of the city was initially based on the diffe-rentiation of the cultural heritage into “own” and “foreign”, into “suitable” for the socialist construc-tion and “unsuitable” for the political endeavours. In the late 20th century appreciation of thehistoric architecture followed, in the context of the “modernised” creative techniques of post-modernism.

Regarding the stylistic changes in the image of the architecture of Königsberg/Kaliningrad, fourmain stages can be distinguished; each of these was connected with a change of a certainleading paradigm. The medieval city was an embodiment of the concept of recreation of a DivineJerusalem on the earth. In modern times (16th-18th century) the architectural style was inspiredby the concept of creating a powerful secular state based on Protestantism and borrowing artisticimpulses from the Dutch and later from the French culture. In the 19th century and the first halfof the 20th century, one of the leading paradigms was the idea of national patriotism that mani-fested itself in different forms ranging from basically progressive appeal of the period of Romanti-cism in the early 19th century to the Medieval heritage, to national socialism in the pre-war andwar periods. The second half of the 20th century, when the city became capital to a Russianregion, was marked by the idea of establishing a new socialist city on the ruins of the devastated“German presence” (Ill. 18).

After perestroika and the city's opening in the 1990s, the need arose to formulate a new spiritualconcept for the city, which can be expressed as “Kaliningrad – a city with European roots andtraditions, and a European future”.

14 | Königsberg Town Hall on Kneiphof, 1695 15 | Ceiling decoration at the Town Hall 1696-1697, A. Schlüter

16 | Fragment of ceiling decoration at the Town Hall 1696-1697, A. Schlüter

17 | Detail of ceiling decoration 1696-1697, A. Schlüter

69


Notes:1 Rosenwahl P.: Bemerkungen eines Russen über Preußen und dessen Bewohner, gesammelt auf einer im Jahr 1814, durch dieses Land

unternommen Reise. – Mainz, 1817. p. 147-1482 Dethlefsen R.: Die Domkirche in Koenigsberg in Pr. nach ihrer jüngsten Wiederstellung. – Berlin, 1912. p. 613 Stelin J.: Aufzeichnungen über die schönen Künste in Russland. M., 1990. T.14 Hauke: Das Buergerhaus in Ost- und Westpreussen. Tuebingen. 19675 Bialostocki Jan.: Obszar nadbaltycki jako krajobraz artyctyczny w XVI wieku.

Bialostocki Jan. Refleksje i syntezy ze swiaya sztuki.-Warszawa, 19786 Gause F.: Königsberg in Preußen. Die Geschichte einer europäischen Stadt. Leer, 1989

18 | Post-war project in the centre of Kaliningrad, 1950s

NameProf. Irina Viktorovna Belinzeva

OriginMoskau/Russland

ProfessionPhD Science of Art

Main profession fieldHistory of Art and Architecture

Main subjectUrban planning and architecture inKaliningrad and in the Kaliningrad Region,architectural history of Königsberg.

Lecture 7

70


3.1.7 Lecture 7 –

History and contemporaneity in the planning patternof Kaliningrad's city centre

Venzel T. Salakhov

History and contemporaneity in the planning pattern of Kaliningrad's city centre

The town planning activities in the centre of Kaliningrad, both design and building, had beenaimed at creating a new image of the city until the 1990s. But the urban fabric of the city that hadevolved over centuries was not taken into consideration; the appearance of places that hadsurvived and the anthropogenic landscape were destroyed. As a result the cultural trend andurban traditions of development of the city centre were broken.

The changes took different forms in the various parts of the city centre, but its core changeddrastically. A new core was developed based on the town planning doctrines of the 1960s-1970s.Their grand scale failed to withstand the test of time and the economy of the cold war period. Atpresent the centre has lost its old image but has not acquired a new one. In the course of timethe mistakes of socialists doctrines in the development of the new city centres became visible –the gigantic scale, the narrowness of functions and dispersion of the construction with buildingsisolated from the city environment.

When perestroika reforms were started in Russia and the ideology ceased playing the dominantrole in architectural decision making in the development of the city centre. The dissatisfactionwith its current state induced the authorities and architects to search for a different way to deve-lop the centre.

Central areas and the core were included in the process of town planning activities of the newmasterplan for the city. The community again has to look for ways of developing the image of thecentre.

One of the best and proper ways of designing the centre is returning to the successive develop-ment of the city in consideration of the surviving elements of cultural heritage. As such one canconsider historical buildings as well as the urban elements of the cultural heritage, but also thechanges that have taken place in the city core. So, what is this heritage and what means can beused for the creative development of the centre?

The object of protection of the contemporary cultural heritage of the city of KaliningradThe historical heritage of the city of Kaliningrad is both numerous and various. It comprises itemsthat make up cultural heritage of different peoples of Europe – Lithuanians, Poles, Germans,Prussians and Russians.

However, the degree of their preservation, comprehension, concentration, integrity and complexcharacter differs depending on the area of the city. The particularity of the monuments' locationin the city is their distribution across all the districts. At that, the number and the value of itemsof cultural heritage in the city centre is lower than the number, state of preservation and integrityof monuments in the peripheral areas.

In the medieval core of the city the pattern of planning and building was lost and is representedwith only one structure, the Cathedral – a historical and architectural monument of the 14th cen-tury.

71

The inner city has partially retained its planning pattern, as well as all the main transport routesand some historical buildings including several rare integral town planning elements. The seconddefensive rampart framing the area of the inner city has been preserved to a great extent. Thespatial connection and integrity of the fortifications can be clearly seen in the planning pattern ofthe city. Its system comprises all the elements (though to different degrees of preservation) of thePrussian fortification school of the mid 19th century. They were either retained in their originalform or adjusted for recreational needs of the population after the fortification had lost its mainfunction.

The peripheral areas of the city beyond the ramparts have mainly retained their layout and theintegral building pattern. All the post-war town planning activities in these areas were conductedwith regard to the layout and the building pattern. Though one can see some discordant deci-sions of fragmentary inclusion of standard housing and other buildings in the pattern of the histo-rical site.

Different areas of the city have different conservation grades for the objects of protection. Withinthe Medieval city core the objects of protection include the following:

- Town plan of the territory;- Monuments of architecture and town planning;- Archaeological cultural layers;- Proportion of spaces – open, built up, green spaces;- Elements of the natural landscape – relief of river banks and the riverbed, Kneiphof Island

etc.

Within the inner city the objects of protection include the following: - Monuments of architecture and town planning;- Retained layout;- Retained system of streets, squares and open spaces;- Views, areas of compositional influence, architectural nodes and accents;- Areas of possible cultural layers;- Retained integral town planning entities – districts, streets, building complexes.

Methodology of preservation and development of cultural heritage of KaliningradIn different historical areas of the city centre different methods of conservation or redevelopmentof historical monuments, culture and places of interest can be applied.

In the historical core of the city the method of regeneration of the historical environment can beapplied, on the basis of the historical plan and recreation of the buildings according to preservediconographic material. If this is not available the stylistic imitation of buildings is also possible.The degree of the possible implementation of the method can be determined after the completearchaeological excavation of the sub-structure of the medieval core of the city. The Cathedral andthe riverbanks can serve as a scale for the design limitations and decisions.

In the inner city the method of revalorisation of the built-up area can be applied – the programmeof the restoration of its buildings, recreation and revitalisation of the lost architectural, composi-

72


tional and utilitarian values. The main direction of the town planning activities in this area is therehabilitation of the distorted environment, “pulling together” of the torn pattern of the city withinthe main compositional and planning axes. The retained architectural and urban monuments, thered lines of the historical built-up sites indicate the scale.

Due to the lack of historical buildings in the city core and the scattered locations of some architec-tural and urban monuments in the inner city, Kaliningrad needs a special methodology for its con-servation activities. The basis of this methodology should be the conservation of the historicalheritage and the reconstruction of the lost heritage that is the bearer of genetic features of thearea.

The objective can be attained using the method of binding frames, while the planning activitiescan be carried out in the whole city. But the form of activities is subject to special regulations –strict regulations applied only to conservation issues. The rest of the infrastructure can be con-sidered as peripheral to the of actions. For the city of Kaliningrad the method can be used in thefollowing forms:

- Identification and consolidation of the compositional and planning axes with spatial nodesand focuses that should possess the qualities of invariability and stability in time, shouldcontain sites representing the values of the epoch and create an environment of historicallyrecognisable sites of the city;

- The built-up areas between them should be considered as a neutral territory for constructionactivities regulated by the planning rules. The objects of historical heritage that form islandswithin these territories are the criteria on which the regulations are based.

Since the most important urban elements that determine the perception of its artistic image arethe three components the plan, the centre and the silhouette, it is proposed to identify and toconstruct frames of the city that are stable in time and space- the planning frame, the compo-sitional frame and the silhouette frame (dominant).

The frames with their symbolic elements, nodes and focuses are restricted by firm regulationsand thus protected in urban development terms. The aim is the conservation and restoration ofthe fields of perception of the historical building fabric. The space between them makes up theneutral environment for construction. Special town planning regulations would govern limitationson scale, height, layout, style, colour and materials.

Linear-spatial frame of the city of KaliningradThe linear-spatial frame of the city has established since the 14th century and developed withoutany drastic changes until the middle of the 20th century. Historical trade routes with prevailingnorth-south, west-east directions, and commercial centres served as the basis of the frame.

The direction north – south was formed by two roads leading from the amber coast to the south,as far as the Mediterranean. The direction west-east was shaped by the waterways and roadsfrom the Baltic Sea coast to the Baltic States and Russia.

The topography, safety and convenience of the area caused all the roads to cross near the hillTvangste at a fortress and ford across the river. With the fortification of the Order Castle and

73

development of adjacent towns, the trade routes were consolidated by bridges, fortified city gatesand trade squares etc.

The first defensive belt, established in the 17th century, secured the main routes of communi-cation by building new city gates. Before the beginning of the 20th century there were eight ofthese routes. After the main road in the south was constructed to the city district of Ponart, thenumber of roads increased to nine.

At that stage of evolutionary development of the spatial frame until the middle of the 20th century,the routes of communication formed two converging bow-shaped chords in the meridional andlatitudinal directions. The space formed at their crossing point was the medieval core of the city,crowned by a powerful dominant, the Royal Castle (Ill. 1).

In the second half of the 20th century, during the Soviet period of the city's development, the maindirections of communication did not undergo any significant changes. Moreover, the roads re-ceived a clearer geometrical shape due to the demolition of the ruined buildings and the straight-ening the roads. Most of the roads in the city core were changed but still passed through the citygates.

The routes of communication accentuated the open squares. Their position and combinationchanged several times in the course of the city's development until the early 20th century. Thecity centre was formed by four squares situated two by two as a suite on the main roads to thewest and east of the Royal Castle. They were Hezekusplatz and Wilgelmplatz on the west sideand Münzplatz and Schlossplatz on the east side.

Along the radial axes of the main roads alternating squares at an irregular rhythm were situatedat the junctions or in their lobbies. All the circular rays ended in open squares at the city gates.

From the mid-20th century on, the rhythm and location of the squares on the main roads changeddrastically. The changes were most significant in the historical city core. The rhythm and the scaleof small and pleasant squares in the centre were replaced by gigantic open spaces devoid ofbuildings. At the same time the roads coincided with the directions of the historical routes (Ill. 2).

The squares along the main roads were partly retained, some new ones were built in the contextof reconstruction works along the roads. In some cases they clearly improved the urban situationof excessively built-up districts of the inner city (southern part of Leninsky Prospect, BagrationStreet, Moskovsky Prospect, Klinicheskaya Street etc.). The view of the open spaces at the citygates has been completely retained (Ill. 3).

The particular feature of the city of Kaliningrad is the unchanged appearance of the existingframe at the development of the railway network. In the mid-19th century, the defensive functionof the town wall was still intact and the city could be entered through railway gates, without usingthe main roads. Until the end of the 19th century the city was a closed system. The junctions oftransit routes were located outside the ramparts.

74


75

The fort belt, built in the late 19th century, gave rise to the construction of the third ring road. Itsinclusion in the planning structure of the city was a further successive development step of thespatial frame. The planning nodes that were formed at the junctions of main roads with the ringroad created the external outlines of the frame. The outer borders of the city are still beingshaped. The forts could assimilate this role due to their specific function – the hidden positionwithin the landscape.

Compositional frameThe dominant axes of communication and active compositional zones within the city in whichbuildings and complexes of public, cultural, historical and symbolic significance are concentratedform the compositional frame of Kaliningrad. The elements of the frame of the city core wereformed by the incremental increase of planning structures of the medieval towns Altstadt,Löbenicht and Kneiphof. Each of them had borders, walls, compositional axes and emphasis.

The first premise forming the compositional frame of the city core was the construction of thecommon outer town wall surrounding the three towns and adjoining the citadel – the RoyalCastle. A marked compositional axis was formed, north-south (cardo) and west-east (decuma-nus) that united the compositional axes and nodes of some towns. The common compositionaldominant of the settlement was the Royal Castle.

The next step towards the development of the compositional frame was the construction of a sys-tem of defensive ramparts with town gates. This consolidated a huge area comprising towns and

1 | Linear-spatial frames Königsberg, 1938 2 | Linear-spatial frames Kaliningrad, 1996

76


suburban areas. The roads to the gates formed the compositional axes that gradually turned intoroutes of the exposition of compositional nodes and dominants: street junctions, squares withpublic buildings and complexes with dominant buildings (Ill. 4).

Due to the outline of the city ramparts, designed by I. Schtraus, a professor of mathematics fromKönigsberg University, the city was radial-centric in plan. The Castle became the compositionalcentre of the whole city. This significance was underlined by various elements of the composition– both natural and architectural. The spatial influence and visual connection to the castle deter-mined the general of the character city, let alone its socio-political status of the residence of thepower sovereign.

The modern compositional frame of Kaliningrad had been developing for approximately threehundred years, retaining in time and space the main directions of the compositional axes, nodesand emphases. Its basis is the compact plan of the inner city. The type of development resultedin the spatial integrity and compositional completeness of built-up areas, whose borders were thedefensive ramparts with emphases in the form of city gates.

The texture of the built-up areas that grew in the early 20th century beyond the ramparts did notdisplay these characteristics. The extensive new areas and low growth rates of the town preven-ted the development of the compositional subject of the town centre. Perhaps, the changing ofartistic and stylistic tastes of the community hampered its development. Each district developedlocally. The architectural and artistic image of the place, the compositional zoning of some settle-ment types should be noted.

3 | Former town gate

77

The third ring of the town was also complete in plan, but it lacked compositional emphases anddominants. It was formed by military forts, whose large mass and vast areas were hidden in thenatural landscape.

The post-war stage of the city development is characterised by the loss of integrity of the histori-cally developed compositional system of the centre. The disintegration of the fabric of built-upareas and elimination of the over-ground infrastructure resulted in the loss of urban landmarksand scale of the area. The further reconstruction of the built-up areas was conducted withouttaking into consideration historical planning, which was ignored on principle. As a result the com-positional centre of the city was lost, though its natural component was preserved.

Designers understood the importance of a component of emphasis in the centre and tried tocreate new dominants in the form of the House of the Soviets and Central Square. However, theisolated position, remoteness from current every-day life and gigantic scale of open spaces failedto create a compositional core compatible with the historical centre. At the same time, all thedominant compositional axes, nodes and borders of the compositional structure of the inner cityhave remained (Ill. 5).

The silhouette frameThe city's silhouette was characteristic of European cities. Since the Middle Ages the dominantsin every city were the church spires and the Order Castle towering above. The local dominantsof city halls and palaces of the upper class echoed them.

4 | Compositional frames Königsberg, 1938 5 | Compositional frames Kaliningrad, 1966

78


6 | Königsberg, 1729

With the growth of cities the number of dominants marking the new settlements increased. En-gravings of the 17th and 18th centuries display a picturesque silhouette (Ill. 6).

All through the history of the city the bell tower of the Royal Castle was a dominant feature.Steeple tops of churches were clustered around it. Since the territories of cities and suburbanareas were not large, the dominants were densely clustered. Although later the height of averagebuildings in the city was extended to five or six floors, the church spires and the new religiousbuildings of other confessions invariably towered above the horizontal line of the silhouette.

The church dominants of later suburban settlements were situated quite far from the city centre.Their location was more isolated, and they were less dense due to the extensive areas of newcity districts.

By the beginning of the 20th century, the developed silhouette of the city looked as follows. Thecity centre had the highest density of dominants. Their location created a varied picture of visualperception points. According to the degree of density they could be divided into three zones.

The first zone includes the highest dominants of the city core of the highest density. The zonedisplays a concentration of two groups of dominants. To the west – from the highest vertical linesof the city, spires of the Altstadt Church and the Castle tower, and four church spires and chur-ches of other confessions in the east. They seem to balance one another in the thick of the otherdominants. The second zone comprises the historical dominants of the districts within the defensive ram-parts. The line of density of their visual links makes up a hexahedral figure. Each face is a certainperspective frame of the visual perception of the zone silhouette.

The third zone comprises the dominants of the peripheral areas of the city. The lines of their outervisual links make up a scalene quadrangle. It forms four perspective frames of perception of allthe dominants of the city (Ill. 7).

The most favourable viewpoint representing the typical silhouette of the city is the valley of theRiver Pregel flowing in a west-east direction, and the view from the plateau in the south. Theselines of visibility consecutively open up images of the silhouette of the city.

79

The analysis of the pictures of various perspectives of the silhouette shows that the dominantsare clustered in four parts of the city. Dominants in the northern part of the city, near the elevatedTvangste hill, are especially picturesque. They dominate the whole city and can be seen fromboth close and remote viewpoints.

The middle group of dominants is composed of the spires at Kneiphof and Lomse. They are si-tuated in the low-lying area, in the range of the visual axis opening the city panorama in a west-east and east-west direction.

The southern group of dominants is made up of the spires of dominants in the Haberberg districtsituated on a plateau above the river valley. The prevalent dominant here is the spire of the Ha-berberg Church terminating the compositional north-south axis and counterbalancing theadditional axis of the powerful dominant of the Castle tower.

Another characteristic panorama of the city silhouette opened up from the south. From the pla-teau at the suburb Haberberg a picturesque view of the river valley and its north bank with Tvang-ste hill could be observed. The dominants of the silhouette were densely clustered around thestrong vertical line of the Castle tower, smoothly falling to the suburbs of the inner city.

In the early 20th century, on the west side of the panorama, new dominants of industrial buildingsof the sea port were developed. Their height and weight exceeded the historical dominants of thecity centre, but they were of a comparable scale in the silhouette due to their remoteness fromthe centre. The silhouette extended towards the open waters of the bay.

7 | Dominant frames Kaliningrad, 2005

80


During the post-war reconstruction of the city the historical silhouette changed disastrously. Theoverwhelming majority of the dominants of the city core, of the centre and the inner city weregradually lost. The modern silhouette of the city, being flat in the centre, does not correspond tothe topography of the area and the functional zones of the territory.

The modern town planners understood the compositional meaning of the highest spot in the cityand tried to create a new dominant – the House of the Soviets. But its scale and weight are in noproportion to the huge new square around it. There are no other dominants or buildings suppor-ting it, as there used to be (Ill. 10).

The present city centre needs urban planning measures which are adequate to its position andmeaning. The direct reproduction of the old dominants is hardly possible. But it is possible to bor-row the context of the historical silhouette and create new dominants characteristic of the loca-tion, clustering and panorama of high-rise points. Ths is helped by the formerly built-up sites ofthe old historical dominants – the Royal Castle, Altstadt Church, the central post office, BurgChurch, Löbenicht Church, Sackheimer Church and other dominants of the city and local signifi-cance.

ConclusionsBased on the analysis conducted, the following succession scenario of the historical identificationof the area can be proposed for future town planning activities in the city of Kaliningrad:1. For the historical city core – regeneration of buildings on vacant sites, on the basis of the

historical town plan and the increase of densities in the “loose” areas with the inclusion ofhistorical and modern “island” developments.

2. For the city centre – return to the principle of row construction within the inner city with theselected regeneration of the street scale and the increase in densities of “loose” areas withan urban development pattern, open or in rows.

3. For the city silhouette – recreation of the general city dominants of the centre on vacant sitesassociated with the symbolic image of the area. It is important that redevelopment take placeon the exact spots of the former dominants and that their composition within the environmentis recreated rather than literally reproduced from historical designs.

81


NameVenzel Takievic Salakhov


ProfessionArchitect

Main profession fieldUrban planning and residentialdevelopments, conservation of culturalheritage, building conservation

Main subjectConservation of cultural heritage inKaliningrad

82


The city and its region

Kaliningrad – a European city?- How can the wish be realised for Kaliningrad to become a more beautiful and liveable city?- What elements and qualities should the urban environment have?- Kaliningrad could become a Russian city under European influence – which elements/

aspects of both cultures need to be considered?- Strengthening of the subsidiary principle.

Participation of all players in urban development processes!- How can the identification of citizens with their city be strengthened?- How can a general open-mindedness of the public regarding the development of the city be

achieved?- How can many players, especially the public, be integrated into the planning process?- Visions must become mission statements.

Strengthening of the cultural and economic significance for Europe! - What could be the character of Kaliningrad, the region between Russia and Europe? - How can other European neighbouring states, other than Russia and Germany, be integrated

into the development processes of Kaliningrad?- How can the economic situation of Kaliningrad be improved in order that investors initiate

development projects?- Courage of self-reliance and active future marketing of the strengths and potentials.

Discussion3.1.8 Discussion – First Day

83

84


2

85

3.2.1 Lecture 8 – Prof. Gennadij M. FedorovGeopolitical aspects of the relationships between the European Union and Russia –The place of Kaliningrad and the Oblast in the context of economic and culturalrelationships

3.2.2 Lecture 9 – Prof. Sergej D. KozlovInvestment projects and their influence on the planning structure of the centre of Kaliningrad

3.2.3 Lecture 10 – Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Jürgen BloechLocation factor architecture and other economic location factors

3.2.4 Lecture 11 – Dr. Elke KnappeKaliningrad – a strong partner in the Baltic Region?

3.2.5 Lecture 12 – Flemming FrostStrategy of urban projects

3.2.6 Lecture 13 – Dr. Otto FlaggeAnalysis of urban structures

3.2.7 Lecture 14 – Olga V. MezeyKönigsberg/Kaliningrad – Wandering centre in the context of transformation of transport communications

3.2.8 Lecture 15 – Prof. Dr. Eckart Güldenburg (held by Julius Ehlers)Structural changes of ports – a chance for urban development?

3.2.9 Lecture 16 – Daniel Luchterhandt“Building civil society” – Experience from St. Petersburg

3.2.10 Discussion – Second Day

Second Day3.2 Second Day 16.06.2005

86



Geopolitical aspects of the relationships between the European Union and Russia –The place of Kaliningrad and the Oblast in the context of economic and culturalrelationships

Prof. Gennadij M. Fedorov

Geopolitical aspects of the relationships between the European Union and Russia –The place of Kaliningrad and the Oblast in the context of economic and culturalrelationships

The future planning decisions and architectural appearance of Kaliningrad depend, to a great ex-tent, on the success of the socio-economic development of the Kaliningrad Region and its appealto migrants, the influx of whom affects population growth of both the Region and its administrativecentre. The demographic potential of the city and its development, as well as the dynamics of thepopulation in the suburbs of Kaliningrad as a centre of the urban agglomeration, are importantfactors influencing planning decisions. This influence is both direct (taking into account the ne-cessity of housing and public facilities) and indirect (via increasing the production of goods andservices, growth of general wealth and corresponding increase in the city's budget, parts of whichare spent on the development of municipal services).

At present, Kaliningrad is the pole of the region's economic development. 45% of the region's po-pulation and the same percentage of housing are concentrated here, as well as 78% of industrialproduction, 77% of retail trade turnover and 68% of house building. The city's enterprises provide92% of the national income. The unemployment rate is rather low and salaries are 30% higherthan in the rest of the region.

The role of the Kaliningrad Region in the economy of the country and the prospects of the socio-economic development of the region are assessed ambiguously. Therefore, the forecasts con-cerning the regional centre differ.

Scenarios that are at present being developed by both Russian and international experts aresubject to geopolitical and geoeconomic interests. As a reflection on the cooperation “throughoutthe region” of various actors with regional, federal and international interests, these scenarios dif-fer to a great extent. The scenario of the Russian outpost in the Baltic represents one pole. An-other is the separatist idea of the “fourth Baltic republic” with suggestions of creating the euroregion of “Prussia” and the plea to organise a Russian-European condominium in the region. Theplaces between these poles are taken by various versions of less tendentious regional strategies(an ordinary region as part of the Russian Federation, Special Economic Area receiving federalsupport, a region with a different special economic regime, the official strategy of the “region ofcooperation”).

The Kaliningrad Region, as a Russian exclave in the Baltic and at the same time an enclavewithin NATO and the EU, depends in its development and vital functioning of the relationshipsbetween Russia and Byelorussia, Lithuania, Poland and the EU.

The balance of Russian and EU interests determines the success of a regional strategy. Today,Kaliningrad is one of the important centres of international contacts and the object of variousprojects developed by both Russian and international experts. The EU enlargement to the Eastand the region's turning into an enclave within the EU has led to a number of political, economicand social problems. The solving of these will reflect the true extent of the development of theinternational cooperation between Russia and its Western European partners. The experience of Kaliningrad, both positive and negative, may be helpful in the adjustment of Russian foreigneconomic and political strategies.

87

Under conditions of a publicly declared partnership between Russia and the EU, the settlementof political, legal and economic issues emerging in the Kaliningrad Region in connection with theEU enlargement, is of great importance. It serves as an indicator of both parties to move frompolitical declarations to action. At the same time, the solving of burning international and legalissues (including technical ones, such as the visa problem) is not end in itself, but the precon-dition for rapid economic development of the Kaliningrad Region, as the region of cooperationbetween Russia and the EU in the 21st century.

The cooperation between Russia and the EU in the Kaliningrad Region is not starting fromscratch. The mechanism of the Free, and later of the Special Economic Zone has, in fact, alreadyturned the region into an experimental area of international interaction where (on the initiative ofthe Russian party) new integration mechanisms are being polished. Approximately 2,300 jointand international enterprises have established in the Region, contributing to the development offoreign economic activities. Numerous international projects are being realised which help to im-prove production and the social infrastructure that is necessary to draw investment. Cross-bordercooperation with Poland and Lithuania, the new members of EU, has also increased during thelast few years. This process includes interaction through the euro regions “Baltics”, “Neman”,“Saule” and “Sheshupe”. Scientific research contacts with Germany have been revitalised. TheRegion started taking part in projects of interregional Baltic cooperation, including the EU “North-ern Dimension”.

Cooperation in Kaliningrad is one of the elements of a wider partnership between Russia and theEU. The Union has granted about 40 million Euros for various TASIS projects in the Kaliningrad

88


1 | Abutting Baltic states

Region since 1991. From 2004 to 2006, the region will receive approximately 50 million Euros inthe course of the TASIS programme of technical cooperation.

The EU has actually rejected the idea of signing a special treaty on the Kaliningrad Region,proposed by a number of Russian representatives. It was suggested to carry on collaborationwithin the general relations between Russia and the Union (though the decision to establish aspecial committee on the Kaliningrad Region was made, it has not been set up yet).

The EU supposes that Kaliningrad exporters benefit from its enlargement, as the EU customs du-ties are lower than Polish and Lithuanian import duties. Actually, the main obstacle for export toLithuania and Poland is not high duties, but the absence of competitive goods in the region thatwould meet the standards of EU. So lowering export duties to the neighbouring countries willhardly eliminate the inconveniences connected with the rise of prices and complications of com-munication with “continental” Russia in the near future.

In assessing Russian propositions to establish a special trade regime for Kaliningrad and the EU,the Union pointed out that as Kaliningrad is an integral part of Russia, giving it a special status(e.g. free trade area or customs union) would cause difficulties. It may generate political and legalissues. Besides, Russia according to the European Commission, will hardly grant Kaliningrad thenecessary autonomy. That is why the EU is not sure the region will need a special regime (inother words, the idea is actually rejected, though in a gentle manner).

The parties should, as soon as possible, come to a mutual understanding on the KaliningradRegion and the integration of Russia into the all-European region, which has been declared themost important objective common to both Russian and the EU.

Russian interests can be conventionally divided into federal and regional. The first group includesretaining the Kaliningrad Region as part of the Russian Federation and in the all-Russian econo-mic space. This is to become an indispensable condition in any discussion on the prospects ofregional development.

Federal interests in the region are also of military and strategic significance, presupposing sup-port of Russian military positions here, at a level sufficient to provide national safety.

Furthermore, the Kaliningrad Region is able to fulfil significant all-Russian economic functions.However, taking into account the level of realisation of the regional development programmes,the federal centre has not yet determined the functions of the region in the all-Russian divisionof labour.

The economic significance of the region in the long-term prospective is connected with the useof its geographical advantages, which are not yet recognised by the federal authorities. That iswhy the region should start a number of new projects aimed at satisfying federal and interregionalinterests. These could be the use of ports, forming a complex of consignment warehouses andcorresponding organisation of international logistics, complex processing of extracted amber,agricultural products, development of seashore resorts, creating a Russian-international techno-polis depending on the regional and federal scientific and technical potential with a complex of

89

export-oriented enterprises. These projects should be planned from the point of view of economicand social effectiveness of their realisation in the Kaliningrad Region (including comparison toother similar projects in various regions of the country). This will raise the awareness of thefederal authorities regarding issues of regional development.

Federal interests were formulated in the federal target programme “The Kaliningrad Region –development up to 2010” aimed at “creating conditions for the sustainable socio-economic deve-lopment of the Kaliningrad Region based on expanding export-oriented enterprises and achie-ving a standard of living comparable to that in the neighbouring countries”.

Securing geostrategic Russian interests in the Baltic Region includes:- Development of Kaliningrad as a large transport centre in the RF through modernisation of

the transport infrastructure;- Securing the power supply of the region through the reconstruction and construction of new

sources of power;- Improving the ecological situation, achieving the normative level of major environmental con-

ditions.

The tasks at federal level are the following:- Transformation of the regional economic structure towards export orientation;- Improving the Special Economic Zone as the mechanism of developing the economy of the

region and its integration into the world economy, development of an effective system of SEZmanagement with the participation of federal and regional authorities;

- Developing the telecommunication infrastructure;- Improving tourist and recreational facilities;- Structural reorganisation of the amber industry.

Taking into account the EU enlargement, the Kaliningrad Region should build a system of cross-border economic relations with the neighbouring countries in the context of their integration intothe EU structures. If this is not done, the geopolitical and geoeconomic situation of the district willsubstantially decline.

Regional interests are versatile. First of all, the region is interested in the reorganisation of itseconomy, which should match the new geopolitical reality. That is why local authorities welcome

90


2 | Region Kaliningrad 2000-2010

both Russian and international investments into specialised industries. However, it is obvious thatinvestment should suit specific interests of the region, such as social and ecological ones. It ishardly surprising that the experts disapproved the projects of building oil-export harbours andgiant ports that would damage the ecosystem of the region.

At the same time, the sectors meeting the everyday needs of the population require particularattention at a regional level. These provide foods, industrial and consumer goods, commercialand housing services, health care and education. It is the task of the regional authorities tosecure budgetary financing of non-commercial organisations and creating favourable conditionsfor business development.

The EU acknowledges unconditionally that Kaliningrad is an integral part of the Russian Federa-tion. Its joining the Union separately from the whole of the country is impossible, since the EUdoes not enter into negotiations with individual parts of states.

According to the EU, its enlargement influences the neighbouring countries positively, includingRussia and the Kaliningrad Region, which can make good use of the new potential of itsgeographical situation.

The EU emphasises that the development of the Kaliningrad Region is the responsibility of Rus-sia and the region itself. Nevertheless, in view of the EU enlargement and in the context of the“Northern Dimension” policy, the Union expressed willingness to assist economic and social de-velopment. As it is pointed out in the European Commission reports, the Union is ready to discussand settle issues concerning Kaliningrad within legal-organisational mechanisms, provided bythe Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.

In our opinion, the EU should take part of the responsibility for the region's development, as theenlargement to the East changes its the external conditions. This responsibility should not belimited to providing funds, which largely return to Europe anyhow, through foreign experts' andconsultants' salaries, equipment supplies, and so on. The issue is of a political nature and shouldnot rest with technical details, as is sometimes the case with our partners (for example, theirposition concerning the transit visa problem).

Regarding the economic cooperation of Kaliningrad, the Russian and EU approaches coincidein two crucial points: economic isolation of the region should not be tolerated; the region's poten-tial creates promising opportunities for cooperation between the RF and the EU. In addition tothis, Russia considers the region as its Special Economic Zone where many legal procedures(customs, tax, registration) are simplified, making the region more attractive to domestic andinternational investors. Both new and traditional economic ideas and technologies (such as inter-national concessions) can be approved here. In particular the regulations of World Trade Organi-sation, which Russia will soon enter, can be worked out in the Kaliningrad Region.

Of course, the capacity of Kaliningrad's home market does not give grounds to consider it a subs-tantial factor for the economy of the whole country. The region is developing as a transit centreand a place for assembly enterprises working to substitute import into the RF. Export productionwith its favourable prospects also presents certain significance.

91

For foreign investors the region can be attractive not so much in terms of the export-oriented pro-duction, but rather in terms of its convenient location allowing access to extensive Russian mar-kets. This implies establishing joint ventures on the basis of both existing and newly createdenterprises. On the assumption that labour forces will be freed in the course of restructuring theeconomy, and that it is highly qualified and comparatively cheap, the new enterprises can beprovided with local staff.

The research carried out by scientists at Kaliningrad University in cooperation with Moscow andinternational experts created the basis for work on the strategic principles of regional develop-ment taking into account the regional, federal and international interests that come together inthe region. This research is reflected in a number of monographs and articles written by A. P. Kle-meshev, S. D. Kozlov, M. A. Tsikel, V. P. Zdanov, Yu. M. Zverev, T. R. Gareev, G. M. Fedorov andothers. I would like to note the article “The New Economy of the Kaliningrad Region” publishedthis year in 2 of “Voprosy ekonomiki”, the monographs “the Island of Cooperation”, “The SpecialTerritory of Russia”, “The Kaliningrad Region: Strategy of Cooperation”, “From Isolated Exclaveto the Corridor of Development: the Alternatives of the Russian Exclave in the Baltic”, “The Effec-tiveness and Perfection of the Mechanism of the Special Economic Zone in the KaliningradRegion” and “Formation of the New Economy of the Kaliningrad Region” published in 2002-2005.The titles speak for themselves.

Our conclusion is as follows: the region undoubtedly has all the preconditions for accelerated de-velopment. Realisation depends on the mutual activities of both local and federal authorities inaccordance with the region's development programme that presupposes its remaining part of theRussian economic space, while actively developing external links and participating in the Balticeconomic space. These ideas formed the basis of the strategy of the “region of cooperation” thatis being implemented in the Kaliningrad Region. It should be developed and improved.

A comprehensive approach, taking into account all the various intertwining interests in the region,presupposes the elaboration of the following documents and measures in order to create aninstitutional basis for sustainable development.

At the regional level it is necessary to improve regional legislation and to lower administrativebarriers for the development of entrepreneurship.

At the federal level it is advisable to develop federal policy regarding the Kaliningrad Region. Itsmain elements are the “Law on the Special Economic Zone in the Kaliningrad Region” and theFederal Target Programme “Development of the Kaliningrad Region for the period up to 2010”.

At the international level it seems expedient to conclude an agreement between the RF and theEU on the conditions for securing vital functions and development of the Kaliningrad Region asa region of mutual cooperation (it is necessary to convince the EU that such an agreement is ex-pedient), as well as to conclude other agreements and treaties with the Baltic Sea States andByelorussia.

The Partnership and Cooperation Agreement could be the basis for signing a special agreementbetween the RF and the EU. The initiative of signing such an agreement is supported by the

92


Kaliningrad Regional Duma. A number of proposals were formulated in the “Strategy of the socio-economic development of the Kaliningrad Region as a region of cooperation for the period up to2010” that was elaborated by the regional administration in collaboration with researchers fromthe I. Kant State University of Russia and other research centres of Kaliningrad and Moscow. Thecorresponding proposals have been put forward to the European Union by the RussianGovernment.

Besides covering the conditions of passenger and cargo transit via EU countries for securing vitalfunctions of the Kaliningrad Region, the agreement could address other aspects that are ofmutual interest.

Thus, considering the duty free import of goods from abroad (first of all, from the EU countries)to the Kaliningrad Region, Russia should insist on opening the EU market for Kaliningrad goods(at least to an equal amount as goods imported from EU countries). Besides, the exclave positionof the region and the changes brought by the EU enlargement have worsened the conditions andincreased the cost of cargo and passenger transportation between the Kaliningrad Region andother Russian regions. International law of the EU countries stipulates repair of the possibleeconomic damage caused by its activities.

The EU, judging by the publications and officials' speeches, is not yet ready to sign an agreementwith Russia on the Kaliningrad Region but prefers to work within the established and non-burdensome format of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement and technical assistancewithin the TACIS programme. It is significant that the European Union has not officiallyresponded to the Russian proposal of turning the Kaliningrad Region into a “pilot region” of co-operation between Russia and the EU in the 21st century. Neither has there been a response tothe “Strategy of the socio-economic development of the Kaliningrad Region as a region of coope-ration for the period up to 2010”. These ideas have not been rejected, they have just been“overlooked”. However, it should be noted that the Russian federal centre seems to be satisfiedwith the existing format of cooperation. As a result both Russia and the EU do not solve the pro-blems of the Kaliningrad Region as a whole, but consider them “as they appear” which is oftentoo late, causing a string of crisis situations.

Nevertheless, we proceed on the understanding that the present political difficulties are tempo-rary and all the existing problems will be solved for our mutual benefit. This will be the sign that

93

3 | National linkage of Kaliningrad

the European Union really considers Russia an equal partner and is ready for further the de-velopment of a close cooperation. An indication of the EU to pursue such a strategy would betheir consent to sign a special agreement securing vital functions of the Kaliningrad Region andits development as a region of mutual cooperation. In our view, the Kaliningrad Region could playa similar role in the relationships between Russia and the North Atlantic Alliance (as an aside: inthe summer of 2004 a joint Russia – NATO exercise was held in the Kaliningrad Region).

The Kaliningrad Region could play an important role in the approval of the EU – Russia coopera-tion in various spheres: in the elaboration of the concept of the common European economicspace, in the energy dialogue and the dialogue in the transport sphere, in the interaction in thefield of telecommunications and engineering technologies.

The geoeconomic approach helps to determine the region's prospective specialisation. In this re-spect the Kaliningrad Region can be considered a leader among other Russian regions, whichcould help the Russian economy to occupy a position of greater potential within the world labourdivision, compared to the present state. This is favoured by the current pattern of the regionaleconomy and the region's geographical position close to Russia's main trading partners, as wellas by the strategy of development of the Kaliningrad Region as “region of cooperation”.

A well-known fact is that the essence of the geoeconomic approach is active involvement in theinternational labour division and thus occupying the most favourable positions. In any nationaleconomy there are economic entities that are part of the internationalised reproduction nucleus,and there are also non-internationalised parts (outside the general context of world developmentbut serving as one of the sources of development of the national reproduction nucleuses). Thestate of the internationalised nucleuses determines the place of the country in its struggle for theworld income, i.e. the income on a world scale from external economic activities that is generatedwhen the goods and services produced within these nucleuses, using all kinds of nationalresources, are sold.

The state's income directly depends on its position within the international labour division, i.e. onthe availability of the internationalised reproduction nucleuses providing access to the worldincome. That is why the state has to play a significant role in their formation, in promoting the de-velopment of their branches by allocating loans for purchasing imported equipment, guaranteesand insurance on loans, beneficial taxation of income and property, introduction of accelerateddepreciation etc. One of the specific ways is the mechanism of the Special Economic Zone in theKaliningrad Region.

The regions that are best prepared for the innovations in the economic sphere should act as thepoles of development. The Kaliningrad pole of integration should play a more active role in Rus-sia's winning favourable geoeconomic positions.

It is widely believed that energy, aerospace, metallurgy and innovation are prospective fields forthe formation of the Russian nucleuses. However, it is equally important, in our view, to considerthe necessity of entering the market of consumer goods (at least on the domestic market, wherethe international competitors are prevalent at the moment, and a gradual penetration the worldmarket). In this respect the Kaliningrad Region, in its specific geopolitical position, provides the

94


unique opportunity to serve as a pole of development of such production activities (as presentlyexercised). Perhaps, this is the origin of the Russian government's policy regarding the new lawon the SEZ. It presupposes the reorientation of the regional economy from import-substitution toexport production, and also the role of the region as Russia's contact territory. But this chosenapproach should be given proper substantiation.

Even now the participation of the Kaliningrad Region in the internationalised nucleuses is higherthat in most of the other Russian regions. Import-substitution and export production make up thebasis of the industry. Servicing the external economic activities of the other regions is of greatsignificance. But one can assume that since the added value in the import-substitution is quitesmall, it could service “foreign” but not Russian nucleuses. However, the “upper stages” oftechnological processing, of importing raw materials and semi-finished products, are present inthe region. This can be considered as quite beneficial and a progressive direction of the region'sspecialisation. An actual drawback of the established pattern of the region's economy is thesignificant share of its non-internationalised sector and its weak links with the internationalisednucleuses.

Strengthening of the role of the Kaliningrad Region as a prospective “corridor of development”,promoting the integration of Russia in the global economy, meets all-Russian as well as regionalinterests. This direction should become the basis for a regional strategy ensuring sustainable anddynamic development of the Kaliningrad exclave.

It seems equally important to determine the place of Kaliningrad within the cultural interactionbetween Russia and foreign Europe. The recently published book by the Rector of the UniversityA.P. Klemeshev, “Russian exclave under the conditions of globalisation”, emphasises animportant role of the region located on the border between two civilizations: Russian and wes-tern. Will a new “velvet” curtain appear as a consequence of Hantington's hypothesis on theclash of civilizations, or will the cultures penetrate and enrich one another? Kaliningrad and theregion are doing a lot for the development of cooperation in this sphere (the Council of EuropeAwards to the city testify to this fact). Cooperation in the field of education is successful, as wellas in the sphere of social work. Kaliningrad undoubtedly has all the preconditions to become acentre of contacts, international exhibitions and conferences, the number and quality of which areconstantly growing (the present forum testifies to this fact as well as the forthcoming celebrationof the city's jubilee).

The realisation of a successful regional strategy makes the issue of a rational spatial organisationof the region's territory a pressing one. Actual steps in solving these problems were planned atthe end of 2004 in the comprehensive masterplan of the town planning development of theterritory of the Kaliningrad Region and its parts (our region is among the first Russian regions todo such work). A masterplan for the recreation zone on the seaside has been designed andmasterplans for a number of cities and towns in the region are being worked on. A compre-hensive plan of nature conservation in the Kaliningrad Region has been developed, landscapeplanning projects are being carried out (they are conducted by researchers from the Universityin cooperation with other specialists, including experts from Irkutsk where similar work has beendone and the support from the German Environment Foundation and researchers from BerlinTechnical University). The strategy of regional development perfectly fits the general strategy ofthe Baltic Sea countries in the course of the TACIS project “Seagull-IIRC”.

95

The development of the city of Kaliningrad should be coordinated with the development of thewhole of the western part of the region (Bagrationovsky, Gurievsky, Zelenogradsky districts, seaand bay coastal towns). This area practically corresponds to the nearby suburban area ofKaliningrad, the Kaliningrad agglomeration with a population of 690,000 (73% of the totalpopulation of the region). Within it several sub-zones can be identified.1. The city of Kaliningrad and its suburbs: industrial and transport sub-zone of the north coast

of Kaliningrad Bay (Svetly, Vzmorie), Kolosovka – Khrabrovo, Gurievsk – Vasilkovo, southernsuburbs – the villages of Nizovie, Severny, Yuzhny, Pribrezhny. Based on the degree of de-velopment of internal demographic and socio-economic links, the whole of this area could beincluded within the city boundaries of Kaliningrad. The other areas to the west of the regionare included in the sphere of influence of Kaliningrad:

2. Seaside resort sub-zone (Primorie – Zelenigradsk – Rybachy);3. Seaside defensive and industrial zone (Baltyisk – Donskoye);4. Immediate border to Poland (Ladushkin – Mamonovo, Bagrationovsk);5. Agrarian inner part of the Kaliningrad peninsula also with good potential for used for tourism.

Although in the recent years statistics have not recorded significant migration of people to Ka-liningrad, we believe that the situation will change in the near future. The population figures, in-cluding people of Kaliningrad who are capable of work, are going to decline rapidly due to thespecificity of the age structure of the population. Housing reserves will be available for peoplecoming into the city. At the same time, new jobs in connection with the revival of the economywill sooner be created in Kaliningrad rather than in the other settlements of the region.

We believe, that two thirds of those migrants coming to the cities and towns of the KaliningradRegion (both from other regions and from rural areas of the region) will be heading for Kalinin-grad in the near future.

With the lack of migration and maintaining the current birth rate and death rate the population ofKaliningrad will be rapidly declining. This will be in the region of 5,000 people annually during thefirst five years, and 4,500 people annually during the subsequent five years. The number of thepeople who are able to work will be rapidly decreasing, and within ten years will have declinedby more than 30,000. If the inflow of migrants amounts to 2,000 people a year, the labourresources will be decreasing by 8,000 in 2005-2010, and by 19,000 in 2010-2015.

The data in the table below reflect the trend of different age groups of the population in per centas to 2005, assuming the migration of 3,000 people annually:

Tab. 1: Forecast of age and sex structure of the urban population of the Kaliningrad Region (assuming a migration balance of 3,000 people a yearand increase in life expectancy), in % as to 2015

96


Population 2005 2010 2015

Total 100 97 96

Younger than 18 years old 100 89 95

At an age capable of work 100 95 93

Retirement age 100 105 108

97


In order to maintain the number of people at an age capable of work up to the year 2015, themigration inflow in 2005-2010 should increase to 4,500-5,000 people a year, and in 2010-2015to 7,000-8,000 people annually. In principle this is possible both with the increase of the inflow ofmigrants from other regions and from inner regional migration, and mainly from rural areas. Atpresent, the number of the rural population is considerably higher than it was in the early 1990s,though the employment rate in agriculture is lower. There also are some potential reserves in theincrease in mobility of labour resources in suburban areas. However, one should anticipate aprobable decline in both the population and the labour resources of Kaliningrad when forecastingthe development of the city's economy.

Thus, the system of interconnected and complimentary documents of spatial planning in theregion is manifested in the masterplan of the city of Kaliningrad. Strategic and spatial planning isjoined into a single entity that promotes dynamic development and rational allocation of theeconomy.

NameProf. Gennadij Michajlovic Fedorov


ProfessionEconomic geography

Main professional fieldRegional development, spatial planning

Main subjectGeopolitical problems of the Kaliningrad Region, economic and social development,territorial planning, functional zoning

98



Investment projects and their influence on the planning structureof the centre of Kaliningrad

Prof. Sergej D. Kozlov

Investment projects and their influence on the planning structure of the centre of Kaliningrad

The two companies, “Baltic Construction Corporation” and “Baltic Investment Corporation”, whichI run, have been given the honour of being organisers, owners and contractors in the implemen-tation of the two large projects in the centre of Kaliningrad. The first project, “Kaliningrad-750”, isthe construction of a business centre comprising a hotel and an underground car park (the totalarea of K-750 is 45,000 sq. m.). The second project is the construction of a shopping centre,business centre and exhibition centre – “Trade House Zentralny” (total area 21,000 sq. m.) – onthe site of the famous ruined “House of Machinery” (formerly part of the East German Fair byarchitect Hans Hopp). The amount of investment for the first project (the investor is RGS – Ned-vizhimost) is estimated at over 40 million Euros, and for the second project (the investor is thecommercial bank BIN) the amount is approximately 10 million Euros. It is planned that the firstpart of the centre “Kaliningrad-750” will be completed for the jubilee of the city. It involves a hugeamount of engineering works and the construction of an underground car park beneath a squareand fountain. The building shell of the Trade Centre will be completed in August 2005, and by thebeginning of July most of the fitting works will have been done.

The implementation of these projects, and other by our colleagues' construction projects in thecentre of Kaliningrad, testifies to the fact that after the loss of the historical buildings of the city,and of many years of arrested development in the area adjoining the House of the Soviets, theinvestment flow was inevitably directed to the formation of a new private sector, administrativeand religious centre in the area of Victory Square. The driving force behind the process was theadoption of the concept of building a city centre, by the City Hall and City Council in the late1990s. This concept was designed the architect O.V. Kopylov. The Cathedral of Christ the Sa-viour is intended as the dominant of the centre. Its construction promoted the development of thesites around the Cathedral and also determined the architectural appearance of the buildings, tosome extent even their functions.

This is the reconstruction of the historical destiny of a unique place that combined administrativefunctions (the magistrate), trade and exhibitions (the whole area from City Hall to the House ofMachinery), religious buildings (churches in Ivannikov and Partizanskaya Streets), recreational(landscape and parks in the fortification belt) and cultural (Arts Hall). It is predetermined by the

99

2 | Former House of Technology1 | Visualisation of Christ the Saviour Cathedral and shopping centreKaliningrad 750

100


3 | Bird's eye view of construction of Christ the Saviour Cathedral and shopping centre “Kaliningrad-750”

4 | Bird's eye view visualisation of Christ the Saviour Cathedral and shopping centre “Kaliningrad-750”

retained system of transport communications, trade and religious traditions of the existing areathat was the centre of public and business life of Königsberg in the 1920s-1930s.

The increasing attractiveness for investment of this part of the city, bounded by TeatralnayaStreet, Leninsky Prospect, Chernyakhovsky, Proletarskaya and Ozerov Streets, Sovetsky Pros-pect and Victory Square, is determined by a number of macro and micro economic factors.

Firstly, this means an actual increase in the standard of living and consumer potential of thepopulation.

Secondly, favourable legislation is in force: in Russia the Special Economic Zone, and on a regio-nal level the law for the support of investment in the form of capital investment, and on a munici-pal level the package of laws on investor support.

Thirdly, administrative support of projects was given by the City Council, by officials at City Hall,and most importantly, by the Mayor Mr. Yu. A. Savenko, who took responsibility for the controver-sial, large-scale reconstruction of the city centre.

Fourthly, a simultaneous consolidation of efforts of several investors facilitates the solving ofdifficult infrastructure problems (power supply, water and heat supply, sewerage), making theinvestment area even more attractive. The contribution of the participants of our two projects inthe development of the network and improvements of the urban environment is approximately300 million Roubles. More than half of this amount has already been allocated to solving the city'sproblems.

Fifthly, changing the architectural environment of large areas and solving engineering issues willenable the development of adjoining areas.

And finally, while developing a new centre – “Kaliningrad-750” – we are at the same time recon-structing the ruined monuments, such as Hans Hopp's House of Machinery in the style of Bau-haus. As a result, the attractiveness for tourist will increase which will improve the economy ofthe city.

The further prospects of development of the new administrative, public business and religiouscentre of Kaliningrad will, in my view, be dependant on the movement towards the Upper Lake.Chernyakhovsky Street will be redesigned and should be widened into a main road. It is impor-tant that heavy traffic is removed from Baranov Street. The old-fashioned and low quality residen-tial buildings that now face Chernyakhovsky Street are doomed to de demolished. It is clear thatthe prices for flats in those building are going to be quite high which may cause problems to theinvestor. The present shops already look like shrines to unbridled capitalism of the early 1990s.The former stables of the Kirasirsky Regiment (now the food market) are unlikely to be an attrac-tion in the city. It is impossible to retain the Central Food Market and the buildings in Chernyak-hovsky Street in their present state. We are aware of how similar problems were solved in Mos-cow, Minsk and other Russian cities. Modern complexes with parking areas have been built thatperfectly fit the contemporary architectural environment.

101

Underground development projects in the city can have considerable economic, social and eco-logical effects. It should be made obligatory to construct underground car parks while developingthe area above for recreation. In this respect the architectural solution found for the “Kaliningrad-750” project is exemplary. The first part of the complex will be completed for the jubilee of thecity. As a result of the considerable profits made by investors and owners of large units in the citycentre, the buildings could be linked to one another via pedestrian routes, elevated walkways andunderground passages in the same way as it is done in large cities of the world, such as Torontoand Montreal. However, it will be difficult to bring together the investors' efforts without proper co-ordination from City Hall.

While restoring and developing the area as a new public, business and religious centre, every-thing should be done for the revitalisation of its recreational potential. It seems obvious that agood pedestrian area must be built between Victory Square, Verkhnee Lake and Yunost Park,where Mrs. Putin is implementing her wonderful project. The function of a park in Schneider'sgreen belt, from Garazhnaya Street to Proletarskaya Street, should be restored: it is necessaryto build pedestrian paths, to restore small architectural objects, and, of course, landscape workneeds to be carried out on extensive areas of the park. The inclusion of a children's playgroundon the theme the style of Hoffmann's fairy tales would be desirable. The stream in the park needsspecial attention. It should be both cleaned and restored, and along the Trade House Zentralnyit should be culverted to create a new architectural and landscape complex connecting the parkwith trade and service spaces. Baranov Street should be pedestrianised between Gorky Streetand the crossing at Proletarskaya Street.

We made proposals for improvements of the park and a new recreation area between Gorky andPartizanskaya Streets, but this was turned down on grounds of the ecological survey. I would liketo believe that the attitude that investors are only interested in profits will finally subside. We arealso Kaliningradians, like everyone else living here. We are dreaming of a beautiful, pleasant cityto live in, and we are doing our best to transform it into a modern European city, and in manyrespects even a capital city. We want this to take place in a time span of two to three years. Infact, it is the creation of a new business, spiritual and cultural centre of Russia, a showcase ofthe success of present-day Russia within the European Union. Based on modest calculations thetotal volume of investment to take place in the next years in this area could amount to 250-300million Euros, if the corresponding administrative support is provided. This, in turn, will createnew long-term investment possibilities for the development of the city in the future.

102


6 | Original building of grocery market 5 | Extract from street map

103

NameProf. Sergej Dmitrievic Kozlov

HerkunftKaliningrad/Russia

ProfessionEconomist, Finance expert, Professor of Law, PhD Political Science

Main professional fieldMobilisation of investments, construction,urban development

Main subjectBuilding the public centre “Kaliningrad-750”,reconstruction of the inner city of Kaliningrad,the trade house “Centralnyj” (formerly “House of Technology”)


104



Location factor architecture and other economic location factors

Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Jürgen Bloech

Location factor architecture and other economic location factors

Since 1994, Venzel Salakhov and Andrej Derbenkow from Kaliningrad as well as Jochen Brandiand Jürgen Bloech from Göttingen have, in a Russian-German working group, studied the oldfabric and future potentials of the war-ridden Kneiphof Island in Kaliningrad (Königsberg), the siteof the cathedral.

Working with the group are interested partners from the Russian Immanuel Kant University inKaliningrad that is joined in a cooperation agreement to Georg-August University, Göttingen.

The development potentials of the central area of Kneiphof Island are of particular interest thatcould help to elucidate the special importance of the site to citizens and visitors.

Intense discussion on whether Kneiphof Island should be built upon began as early as 1990. Inthis discourse we pledged for a new Kneiphof on old foundations in the vicinity of the cathedral.The cathedral today lies isolated and could be given back its cultural setting by the reconstructionof the (now Russian) buildings for philosophy and humanities.

The area around the cathedral could also become a park for contemplation with a “philosopher'spath” which is a worthy approach to the grave of the great philosopher.

This was the context in which the idea was born to bring back the books of Kant's library, togetherwith modern international literature, to a location close to him. The director of the State andUniversity Library Göttingen, Elmar Mittler, has made a valuable contribution to the developmentof this concept.

Location factors and their function in the development of city and region Visitors to the city immediately notice the architectural fabric. This fabric often dominates the firstimpression and influences the visitor before he can have other experiences. In terms of tourismarchitecture can become a major location factor. This approach is an interesting starting pointwhen thinking about architecture as a location factor in conjunction with the future design ofKaliningrad. In doing this, the train of thought should consider economic as well as culturalaspects that are linked to architecture.

Location factors are specific influences that may be defined differently in different places andrecognised by business people, institutions and the citizens alike. This poses the question ofwhether architecture too can be mapped as a location factor.

A site-related survey will mainly ask about the advantages and disadvantages of the city andregion regarding the settlement of businesses and institutions. This approach looks at the so-called hard location factors that are expected to bring direct economic benefits. These are taxadvantages, cost of land, availability of qualified workers, transportation network, legal systemand others.

105

Soft location factors have other characteristics (also compare Thießen, 2005, p. 10 ff.). Theyaffect people's behaviour through sympathy and well-being and their preferences for spendingtime in a particular place. There is no clear delineation between hard and soft location factors.

Certain soft location factors have strategic potential in terms of attractiveness to tourism or toculture conscious management.

These may consider the cultural potential of a city in their choice of business location that willoffer an attractive environment to sophisticated and highly qualified staff.

This perspective on the attractiveness of location, determined by soft location factors, bears inmind that private people close to executive members of staff - and their happiness - will influencethe decision to want to work in a company located in an attractive location. In turn, excellentexecutive managers are an important potential for successful companies.

City and municipalities that are aware of the influence of location factors will carry out measuresto improve the attractiveness of the locality.

Access and transportation networks will be expanded and improved, for example, to reducetravelling time and costs for industrial companies and logistics firms.

Land for the relocation of industries is set aside. Cultural facilities are enhanced to increase thediversity and quality of the soft location factors.

Thus numerous activities are aimed at preparing local location factors for the future developmentof the region.

Location factor architecture, potential for the cityLooking at architecture as a soft location factor will also consider the position of architecture inthe historic development of the city as well as a part of the general cultural strategic potential.

The historic development of a city entails that buildings, cultural facilities and infrastructure inclu-ding parks and gardens, are constantly being created, transformed or conserved. In the courseof many decades the resultant townscape is the expression of the citizens' cultural appreciation.Outside visitors will either be attracted by the architectural overall picture or repelled.

Interaction of architecture and other location factorsThe development of the central areas of the city is of specific importance in the development ofKaliningrad.

The comprehensive plan for the city will propose architecture that will provide access to theinternational transportation network via specific stations such as harbour, airport, possibly

106


motorways and the railway station. Here architecture and logistics will work together in creatingthose potentials. In addition the link of infrastructure facilities for the city logistics (compare Eck-stein, 1992) will require the cooperation of architecture, urban planning and logistics planning.

Such building projects and their cross-linking will improve the hard and some of the soft locationfactors of Kaliningrad.

An area of particular value which requires cautious architecture, is Kneiphof Island. It is locatedin the centre of the city of Kaliningrad and also was the former centre of Königsberg. Thecathedral, constructed in the 14th century is now the only building on the island.

At the cathedral is the last resting place of the great philosopher Kant.

The Russian-German working group has examined ideas and concept to establish aninternational library in proximity to the cathedral.

The cathedral island and Kant's grave are elements of the urban cultural system that deserve tobe taken out of their isolated position.

The significance of Kant, as the founder of a philosophical revolution will be emphasised if hisphilosophy can be studied and discussed in his immediate surroundings. Emphasising his signi-ficance would simultaneously be the augmentation of the entire city as a central place.

The architectural concept for Kneiphof Island could improve its cultural meaning by developingthe island as a place for contemplation and, for example, making philosophy and the history ofphilosophy the focal point by creating a philosopher's path for historical philosophers with sta-tions for contemplation.

Adjacent to the cathedral a philosophical and international library could be built in the style ofKant's old university, of a sufficient size to host international scientific congresses. The directorof Göttingen library, Prof. Dr. Elmar Mittler, supports the library concept in Kaliningrad and hassaid: With a new building the “books could return to their former location” and find a final homein which the existing books and new acquisitions could be stored, expertly protected and lookedafter. Possible extensions could be built in rows of houses in a southwesterly direction along thecathedral. Access to the library would be across the existing Honigbrücke from the east; later thereconstruction of other bridges to the island would follow.

A repository building could be developed on the old foundations along the lines of a modern“warehouse” with a supporting structure to suit the special constraints of Kneiphof Island. Theurban archaeologist Wenzel Salachov proposes to expose the foundations and cellars stillhidden beneath the existing ground level and thereby “securing the evidence of the old buil-dings”.

107

SummaryArchitecture is one of the soft location factors which have an indirect but long-lasting effect onthe economy. Architecture is an attractive and harmonious composition comprising serviceindustries, production and citizens. Economic success is also advanced by architectural culture.

Literature:- Thießen, F.: Zum Geleit: weiche Standortfaktoren – die fünf Sichtweisen. In: Thießen, F., Cernavin, M., Führ, M., Kaltenbach, M. (Ed.):

Weiche Standortfaktoren, Berlin 2005, p. 9-34- Bloech, J., Ihde, G.B. (Ed.): Vahlens Großes Logistiklexikon, Munich 1997- Eckstein, W.: 1992

108


109

NameProf. Dr. Dr. h.c. Jürgen Bloech

OriginTranßau, Ostpreußen/Germany

ProfessionUniversity Professor,University of GöttingenSalaried Professor at the Immanuel Kant Russian State University

Main professional field/Main subjectStrategic planning, logistics, business studies


110



Kaliningrad – a strong partner in the Baltic Region?

Dr. Elke Knappe

Kaliningrad – a strong partner in the Baltic Region?

The perception of the Kaliningrad Region as a partner in the Baltic Region was rather one sidedfor a long time – it had the status of a closed region, and was known as the base of the Balticfleet. Only after the break up of the Soviet Union did the region and its capital Kaliningrad emergefrom this shadow.

Economy of the regionThe opening of the Kaliningrad Region was the beginning of some fundamental political andeconomic changes in the city and the region. Opening the borders to foreigners also brought theregion to the attention of its former inhabitants – the Germans began to visit their former homeand this meant – also for today's inhabitants – a confrontation with the German past.

The administrative centre of the region is Kaliningrad (formerly Königsberg), a city dominated bypost-war residential developments. The historic context of the town was hardly acknowledgedand the construction of prefabricated high-rise buildings has changed the inner city beyondrecognition. Another particularity is that residential and industrial zones are in close proximity (Ill. 3).A reduction of the quality of life by noise pollution, dust and odours is (still) tolerated by thecitizens; short travelling distances to the place of work playing an important part. A popularresidential area is located to the northwest of the city, where many dwellings were constructedon vacant land since 2003. Construction is primarily financed by private investors and the num-

111

1 | Kaliningrad, Housing and industry 2002

ber of social housing projects of the state has significantly decreased (Klemešev and Fjodorov2004). This means that the less well-off citizens live in the cheaper neighbourhoods to the southof the city.

Generally it can be noted that, despite of private investment, the area of living space per inhabi-tant is not very large (Ill. 4). The illustration further shows that the majority of construction deve-lopment, except for in the city of Kaliningrad itself, is taking place in Rayons Selenogradsk andBagrationowsk, i.e. in the west of the region and near its capital. Russian development is concen-trated mainly in Rayon Selenogradsk because of its beautiful landscape and a high quality of lifein the town of Selenogradsk. Illustration 5 shows the long lasting trend of residential developmentin the centre of the region and in the west, while the east only shows little building activity.

In economic terms the opening of the Kaliningrad Region meant the option for a new start alongthe principles of a free market economy. On 25.09.1991 the State Duma of Russia agreed thefree trade zone “Jantar” (amber). This paved the way to making the region attractive to foreignand Russian investors. It turned out, however, that the free trade zone took over the function ofa transhipment hub where many trading companies registered merely to import their goods tax-free and sell these at a good price to other regions in Russia. This brought no economic advan-tages, neither for Kaliningrad Region nor for the city.

In 1996 the Federal Law on the Special Economic Zone was passed. This, in a modified form,created the framework that was to ensure that foreign capital would settle here. Illustration 1shows that the foreign direct investments of 10.7 million US $ were not very high, in spite ofspecial concessions. The total foreign investment was 32.4 million US $ in 2004 (Ill. 2). The main

112


2 | Kaliningrad Region, Housing

reasons for this are the instability of law, changes of the law at short notice, a lack of infrastruc-ture and the fact that foreigners may not buy land, but only lease it.

A further reason for the slow increase of direct investment is the weak economy of the regionitself. Although after 1998, the year of the rubel crisis, the economy saw an upturn and sectorssuch as energy industries and engine construction developed at a fair pace (Table 1), theseactivities were not sufficient to make the entire region attractive.

For a long period of time agriculture was the dominant land use of the region, but has now lostits leading position; privatisation was carried out half-heartedly and many farmers now producefor themselves rather than the market.

On the other hand, the retail sector has developed greatly and the modern supermarkets of thenational chains such as Vester, Viktoria, Semja dominate the retail market in the cities.

113

3 | New public housing development 2004

4 | Share of foreign direct investment 2004 5 | Share of foreign investment according to countries 2004

Poland 6%

Germany 11%

Great Britain 35%

Lithuania 46%

other countries 2%

total: 10.7 Mio. US $

Great Britain 11.6%

Germany 11.4%

other countries 8.3%Poland 2.6%

Cyprus 21.3%

USA 16.5%

Lithuania 15.7%Switzerland 12.6%

Table 1: Economic structure of the Kaliningrad region (ratio of sectors in %)

Kaliningrad – a transportation hubThe region of Kaliningrad itself is relatively easily accessible, but to live up to the claim of beingthe hub of east-west trade, the road network is insufficient – important are the long distanceroutes. Illustration 6 shows the Via Haseatica, which is meant to be the link from Lübeck to St. Petersburg. This road includes a section of the former autobahn Berlin – Königsberg. Anothersection already built on the Russian side has not been opened because construction work on thePolish side is not finished. A further problem of the Via Hanseatica lies in the border crossingsbetween Poland to the Kaliningrad region and from the Kaliningrad region to Lithuania. Longcues form at the borders despite of some modernisation works that have been carried out,making goods traffic even more cumbersome. The result is that the majority of goods traffictravels on the Via Baltica, and thereby bypassing the region of Kaliningrad.

The claim of being the hub of transportation has not been realised, which is expressed in thegoods trade figures of the year 2004 (Ill. 7). The majority of trade is by rail; of greatest inter-national importance is the broad gauge line Kaliningrad-Kaunas-Minsk-Moscow. Other interna-tional connections serve Gdansk and St. Petersburg daily. A through coach travels daily on thestandard gauge track between Kaliningrad and Berlin.

Shipping has the second largest traffic volumes. Kaliningrad harbour is linked to the Baltic Seavia a 40 km sea canal and is virtually ice-free. At the end of the canal the outer harbour of thecity of Baltisk is an important Russian navy base in the Baltic.

The main problems of Kaliningrad harbour are the outdated facilities and the long approachthrough the sea canal. In contrast to other Baltic ports, e.g. of the Baltic States, Kaliningrad har-bour has no specialisation. It is a multi-functional place of transhipment for general goods andbulk cargo. Several options are being discussed regarding the future development and moderni-sation of the harbour infrastructure: a general redevelopment of Kaliningrad harbour or the deve-lopment of a new large port directly on the Baltic coast in the bay of Primorskaja, and also theutilisation of the free capacity of the navy base in Baltisk.

Kaliningrad – cooperation space in the Baltic RegionThe location of the Kaliningrad Region in the centre of the European Union is not just a logistic

114


1990 1998 2003

Energiewirtschaft 4 27 23

Maschinenbau 27 13 25

Holzverarbeitung, Zellulosegewinnung 10 9 9

Baumaterialien 3 2 2

Leichtindustrie 4 2 1

Nahrungsmittelverarbeitung 40 38 37

Andere 12 9 3

problem regarding the connection of the region to the motherland Russia, it also has significantdevelopment potential which should not be underestimated.

The region of Kaliningrad is the partner of several Euroregions (Ill. 8) and is thus closely linkedto the development of the Baltic Region. Close economic relations to neighbouring Lithuaniahave led to extensive Lithuanian investments making Kaliningrad one of the largest producers ofrefrigerators in Russia.

Looking after the heritage of Kant and the resolute development of the University of Kaliningradare factors contributing to the strengthening of Kaliningrad's role as a site for science and re-search. The European Union has also contributed, by means of comprehensive projects, to em-

115

6 | Road network of the Baltic Region

7 | Share of foreign investment according to countries 2004

Air1.1; 0%

Railways2059.3; 61%

Water (Inland-)929.6; 28%

Street374.7; 11%

Data in 1000ttotal: 3.36 Mio. t

phasising and subsidising the bridging function, rather than isolating the Kaliningrad Region: Thishas happened mainly with the help of development projects in areas supported by private finan-ce, cross-border cooperation and the development of the harbour, environmental protection,health and education, and the increase in efficiency of the local self-administration.

The willingness of the region to increase cooperation with its neighbours in the European Unionis clearly discernable. This will contribute to the strengthening of the existing economic and cultu-ral potential of the region and assess its value. The claim of the Kaliningrad Region to be a bridgelinking Russia to the European Union receives a solid base, and it can develop into a strongpartner in the context of a Baltic cooperation.

Literature:- Klemešev, A. P. und G. M. Fjodorov (2004): Ot isolirovannogo eksklava k koridoru razvitija. (Von der isolierten Exklave zum Entwicklungs-

korridor). Kaliningrad- Knappe, E. (2004): Kaliningrad aktuell (=Daten, Fakten, Literatur zur Geographie Europas, H. 7), Leibniz-Institut für Länderkunde, Leipzig- Zverev, J. M.(2004): Problemy i perspektivy razvitija promyšlenosti Kaliningradskoj oblasti (Problems and development perspectives of

industries in the Kaliningrad region), In: Vestnik 6, p. 27-36

116


8 | Kaliningrad Region – Euro Regions

117

NameDr. Elke Knappe

OriginLeipzig/Germany

ProfessionAgronomist

Main professional field/Main subjectShifts in land utilisation and settlement development in Eastern Europe


118



Strategy of urban projects

Flemming Frost

Strategy of urban projects

4 Q-books for Universitetsholmen in Malmö – From shipyard city to university town The present discussion about urban development revolves around understanding processes,developing strategies and carrying on a debate about the interrelationship among the variousplayers in the planning process; this attitude has been crucial in our work for the development ofUniversitetsholmen in Malmö.

In connection with the redevelopment of Universitetsholmen, from shipyard to a projected univer-sity area ready to accommodate 15,000 students, a dialogue guided by the architects was setinto motion. Embedded herein were a number of initiatives aimed at qualifying the users, politi-cians and appointed officials to take part in the making decision process. A test of the volumeproposals in relation to the overall plan resulted in the clarification of the prospective urban archi-tectural framework of Universitetsholmen in relation to the rest of Malmö's urban areas.

The four Q-books develop and lay down a strict urban architectural framework for the futuredevelopment of Universitetsholmen, to ensure, over the course of time, the individual specificidentity and quality of the areas. With regard to urban planning and construction, Universitets-holmen is rendered the object of an ongoing discussion, which, with the help of a three-dimen-sional model, is conducted on three levels: the urban level, neighbourhood level and urban archi-tectural level. The four Q-books lay down guidelines for the following urban areas and are orga-nised according to the different areas of responsibility within the city's administration:

119

1 | Q-Book 1

Q-book 1: overall urban strategy – secures the overall urban architectural strategy for the deve-lopment and land use of Universitetsholmen.Q-book 2: the city's floor – sets guidelines for streets, open plazas, parks and infrastructure.Q-book 3: the city's building structure – sets guidelines for the urban and building structure. Q-book 4: art in the public space – sets guidelines for the role of art in the public realm.

120


3 | Randers Barracks 1 4 | Randers Barracks 2

2 | Q-Book 2

Randers Barracks – An urban development strategy for Randers BarracksThe site is transformed from a restricted barracks quarter to a new centre for the surroundingresidential and business areas. New urban spaces such as streets, plazas and parks are intro-duced as the setting for public life and to improve the appearance of the neighbourhood. A greenrecreational strip with housing forms a link to the former exercise grounds, an area of greatpotential as a recreational space for the city.

121

Copenhagen's Inner Harbour – Harbour analysisCopenhagen's inner harbour is undergoing intensive development. A number of rather distinctivelarge-scale projects are beginning to form a new context for the harbour, which poses a challengeto the urbanity and identity of neighbouring areas.

The project makes its mark on the urban context of the city, the interurban zone and the harbourbecoming the basis of a new understanding of urban areas and the harbour. The interurban hasevolved in the space between the city and the harbour – two very different spaces – and com-prises an accumulation of functions, which are too large for – or too awkwardly disposed in rela-tion to – the city, but too small or irrelevant for the harbour. A special language of harbourarchitecture has come into being using its own idioms. Its scale is related to function, challengingthe scale of the city. In the interchange between these three contextual situations of differentscales, the point of departure is established for a new urban understanding and a new under-standing of the harbour.

The project is based on the formation of a 3-D computer model, which is employed as an opera-tional and didactic implement in the formation of a comprehensive, unified urban developmentstrategy, in which the infrastructure and supporting contributions from different interest groupsare correlated with the architectural proposals. The goal is to engender a wider awareness aboutthe potential of the land in Copenhagen's harbour and to provide insight and understanding priorto the necessary decision making process.

A series of volume studies investigate the quality of proposed urban structures sited on the banksof the harbour and across its water areas. The course of the waterway through the city is notseen just as a narrow river, but rather as a ramified and more multifarious dissolution of the city'sedge along the water. When a new connection is inserted, places that have hitherto beenperceived as the city's blind spots will suddenly become points of transit. Such new transit pointsignite and vitalise these sections of the city. New patterns of movement appear and, unexpec-tedly, places that were previously perceived as being far apart are interconnected.

5| Analysis of the inner harbour of Copenhagen 1 6 | Analysis of the inner harbour of Copenhagen 2

Transformation of the harbour area in Bergen, NorwayThe project is a vision for the future development of a cultural axis in Bergen that unites innova-tion and tradition. It encourages initiatives that support the cultural axis in the area. Guidelineswere formulated for its future development, emphasising the Nøstet shipyard as a place in Ber-gen with clear global references – where the present has left its marks.

Porcelænshaven ResidenceReconstruction of Porcelænshaven – The new buildingsBased on the historic significance of the site and its buildings as a testimony to Copenhagen'sindustrial development, the factory buildings are converted into about 200 new homes. The loftyindustrial spaces, with their particular construction and character, contain apartments and terra-ced housing of a simple design, while typical local materials and construction methods inspiredthe design of the new buildings.

122


8 | Porcelænshaven Residence 27 | Porcelænshaven Residence 1

9 | Bergen Sjöfront 1 10 | Bergen Sjöfront 2

123


NameFlemming Frost

OriginCopenhagen/Denmark

ProfessionArchitect

Main professional field/Main subjectUrban planning and landscape architectureEditor of SKALA Magazine for Architecture and Art, 1985-1994Professor of Architecture at Lunds University, Sweden, 1998-2001Guest Professor at Pratt University in New York, USA

124



Analysis of urban structures

Dr. Otto Flagge

Analysis of urban structuresby the example of Kiel: destruction and phases of reconstruction

Kaliningrad and Kiel have a shared past: their near total destruction in the World War II.

The port city of Kiel is located at the southern end of Kiel Fjord on the Baltic Sea. The aerialphotograph (Ill. 1) illustrates the incision of the deep water port into the centre of the city, whichinitially developed on the west bank.

Around 1940, Kiel was a strategic location of the German armament industry (ship building) withapproximately 300,000 inhabitants. Allied bombardment started as early as 1940, and by 1945about 80% of the city had been destroyed. Illustration 2 gives an impression of the extent of thedestruction. Illustration 3 shows the scene of devastation in the city. The sites that initially couldnot be built upon were planted with trees (Ill. 4) to make the temporary surroundings more bear-able.

Plans for the reconstruction of the city started at the beginning of the war. This, in combinationwith a competition, led to the rapid development of an urban concept that formed the basis forreconstruction. Concepts of fundamental structural change designed in the course of the compe-tition were not pursued. The historic town plan was the basis for all reconstruction proposals forthe city centre to the west of the Fjord. In keeping with the Zeitgeist, transport-oriented plans

125

1 | Kiel Fjord

were implemented, including road-widening schemes and the opening-up a few new street corri-dors. Trade and service industries were the anticipated land uses of the inner city.

Illustration 5 (view north from the railway station) shows how the formerly small-scale pattern ofbuildings was transformed into a clear building block pattern, without disturbing the urban scale.New, linked open spaces break up the previously densely built-up city centre. Completely de-stroyed industrial areas on the east side of the Fjord were rebuilt for commercial and industrialuse during the years of the so-called German “economic miracle”. Illustration 6 shows an exam-ple of a newly constructed machine factory from the initially prosperous 1960s.

The first phase of Kiel's reconstruction measures was completed in the second half of the 1950s.Retaining the basic structure of the road and canal networks allowed for rapid reconstruction ofthe city centre while making structural improvements. Plots were amalgamated, new open spa-ces created and the opening of the city towards its waterfront improved. Germany's first pedes-trian precinct was built. There was ample opportunity for building modern architecture. Initially,the new road spaces managed to accommodate the rapidly and continually increasing trafficloads. Car parking spaces were implemented in phases, some as multi-storey car parks. How-ever, by the 1970s the capacity limits of the reconstructed urban fabric became apparent.

The attempt to introduce an elevated pedestrian level in parts of the city centre (from the railwaystation to the north) at the beginning of the 1970s was only a partial success. Around the same

126


2 | Extent of destruction of Kiel after the World War II

3 | Destruction of inner city of Kiel

4 | Open spaces with temporary tree planting

time it became evident that existing retail space in the city centre was not sufficient for itssustainable development. Plans for the reorganisation of the southern inner city (periphery of thestation) to accommodate a large shopping centre on two levels were made and implemented inthe 1990s.

The commercial and industrial areas constructed on the east bank of the Fjord in the 1960sproved not to be sustainable and partly fell derelict. Structural changes in the port economy alsonecessitated a new planning approach. The logical consequence at the end of the 1990s was todevelop a planning concept that linked the derelict land to the east of the water (“Hörn”) to thecity centre to the west of the water. Illustration 7 shows the general disposition of land. At the topleft one can see the round of the “second old town”, partially surrounded by water. The retailareas of the inner city extend from that point on the west side of the Fjord up to the area southof the station. This is where the (pedestrian and bicycle) bridge crosses the water, linking thedistrict Gaarden in the east, beyond the industrial dereliction, directly to the city centre. Thederelict industrial areas themselves and peripheral zones on the waterfront are declared a“formal redevelopment area”. This received special rights to enable rapid new urban develop-ment. The special rights relate to the possibilities of land acquisition by the city and to controllingthe price of land. In addition, the legal position brings special financing opportunities (splitfinancing between city/federal state/federal government) for site clearance and infrastructuremeasures. Sale of the newly structured building plots, cleared of all contamination, will follow. Inthe northern part of the site a new ferry terminal was constructed now handling the largest ships.

127

5 | Adaptation of the urban fabric (view north from railway station) 6 | Factory Buckau-Wolf, 1963

Further south, the recently prepared areas are mostly earmarked for service industries, with asmall residential part.

Illustration 8 shows the masterplan for the southern “Hörn”. The planning process was organisedin several stages of increasing detail, some will have competitions. Each stage was discussedwith the citizens, always before the council meetings made binding decisions. During this un-doubtedly complex process many images were drawn and models built to explain the relevantplanning stages to the public and also to those involved in the design. For the implementation ofthe redevelopment measures, and to take the pressure off the municipal authorities, a body oftrustees of the city was appointed.

Illustration 9 shows an aerial sketch of the potential implementation of the masterplan. Illustration10 shows the elevation of the newly constructed ferry terminal. Illustration 11 the view from theeast onto the new bridge between the totally refurbished main railway station and the shoppingcentre beyond, constructed in the 1990s. Illustration 12 shows the view south onto the newwaterfront promenade on the east side of the Fjord, and illustration 13 the first completed buildingwith its “water square”, the stepped southern bank of the “Hörn”.

For the development area “Hörn” it was important that the city had ownership of the derelictareas. This was the only way in which to develop new public open space – especially the water-front promenade – and, after consultation with the plans of private investors, reorganise the landinto ideal plots and sell it. One critical comment would be that the currently weak German econo-

128


7 | Waterfront Kiel – city to the water

8 | Masterplan Hörn

9 | Sketch of Masterplan Hörn

my has led to a slower development of the “Hörn” than originally anticipated. Contracts betweenthe city and investors make no difference when firms go bankrupt. Nonetheless, the developmentarea “Hörn” has opened opportunities for the city, which will have a strong impact on its urbanfuture.

The experience from Kiel can be summarised as follows: - Grown urban fabric requires sufficient scope for change.- Urban planning objectives must be clearly defined for all the different detail stages to set a

framework for public and for private investors. - Municipal plans must incorporate the state and political levels. - Intense public participation at all planning stages is the precondition to ensure an implemen-

tation process free of conflict.- Development areas must be closely linked into the neighbouring zones.- Urban planning projects must leave flexibility for detail. - Building land should not be sold to investors unless binding agreements on the projects have

been made and their implementation is bound by contract. This requires special agreements,e.g. on the cost splitting of transitional zones from private to public land.

If, finally, the experience from Kiel is transferred to the initial situation of Kaliningrad, this wouldmean that:

- Prior to a competition for the design of Kaliningrad's city centre around the cathedral, a clearbrief must be developed and agreed on a political level. These must start to define what

129

11 | Promenade with view to Hörn Campus

10 | Hörn Bridge and view to Kiel main station

12 | Hörn Campus

should be publicly funded and what should be privately funded. - The development of scenarios can be helpful in the decision making process on a political

level. - All development concepts for Kneiphof Island need to incorporate the areas on the periphery

of the island. - Private investors only finance projects that pay-off in the long-run. The implications of this fact

require that some projects must remain in the public sector, if one is to find the right solutionfor Kaliningrad's sensitive central island location around the cathedral.

130


131

NameDr. Otto Flagge

OriginKiel/Germany

ProfessionUrban planner and municipal planning consultant Government building officer of Kiel (retired)

Main professional field/Main subjectUrban development and urbanrefurbishment with projects in Mainz,London, Bonn, Leverkusen and Kiel


132



Königsberg/Kaliningrad – Wandering centre in the context oftransformation of transport communications

Olga V. Mezey

Königsberg/Kaliningrad – Wandering centre in the context of transformation of transport communications

The objective of my paper is not to offer a recipe of what should be done to the centre of Kalinin-grad, but first of all to consider the causes of its appearance, to analyse the transformation aswell as to trace its development and “wandering” along the area that is now marked by thesecond defensive ring of the former city fortifications.The paper is a research attempt that aimsat comprehension, comparison and systematisation of the interconnections and mutual influen-ces of the city centre and the urban transport communications, and finally, to find the possibilitiesthat open up for the entire city when the right balance of transportation in the city centre is achie-ved.

The content of the paper is, to a great extent, based on the work of several groups of Kaliningradarchitects that have made proposals for the development of individual parts of the centre (withinthe context of improvement of the transport situation: in the central, commercial and adminis-trative zones of the city) – Victory Square, Central Market, Chernyakhovsky Street, the square ofthe South Railway Station. The collaborators in the paper are Alexander Nevezhin, Oleg Vasjutinand Anatoly Seljutin. The paper is aimed at showing and explaining the phenomenon of the wan-dering centre of the phantom-city Königsberg, and at helping Kaliningrad in the reconciliation ofhistory and contemporaneity.

In the late 1980s, the historical archives of the city were opened to the public. The possibilityarose to speak openly about the history of the city and to search for approaches to protect thesurviving cultural heritage. The overlapping of historical and contemporary layers, especiallywithin the inner city in the second ring of the fortification, is delightful and cause for contemplationand observation. One starts to compare the problems and to understand. One tries to find waysof merging the past, present and future. With the aim of revealing the pattern of change in thecity centre in time and space, I, like Oleg Vasjutin, have divided the development of Kaliningradinto stages.

The first stage: The core of the development of the entire centre of the future Königsberg is theappearance of the Order Fortress on Tvangste Hill. The basic factor determining the location wasthe waterway, the River Pregel, as well as the trade route from Germany. The function of the cen-tre was established for military and administrative reasons (Ill. 1).

The second stage: The formation and development of the three towns in this area. This signifi-cance of the Castle was lost. Each city built independent centres. These centres had differentfunctions: administrative, commercial and spiritual. At that time waterways were increasing insignificance and commerce expanded rapidly. External factors, such as the condition of streetsand roads, were gaining in importance, i.e. the transport structure started developing. This pro-cess was later continued in the street network of each of the towns, Kneiphof, Altstadt and Löbe-nicht (Ill. 2).

The third stage: The structural development of the town centre that had already been united un-der the name of Königsberg started after 1724. The city grew within the second rampart ring of

133

defensive fortifications. What were the characteristics of the centre at this stage? During thisperiod three previously independent centres of the three towns grew and were united into asingle multi-functional central core of the city. Its main function, besides its administrative andspiritual roles, was commerce. The new function of education was introduced with the foundingof Königsberg University. The water transport communications developed and acquired evengreater significance. Traffic flows from the outside increasingly influenced the city's structurewithin the ring, and as a result a circular system of the inner streets was formed (Ill. 3).

The fourth stage: The construction of the third defensive ring was a significant step in the deve-lopment of Königsberg. The second ring lost in importance and its area turned into a green belt.The centre of the city of Königsberg also changed. As the city grew and spread, its centre also

134


2 | Stage II – Three cities with town halls, main trading places and aspiritual centres

1 | Stage I – Statement

3 | Stage III – 1724-1866

had to grow. Two squares were built at the South and North Railway Stations. This clearly testi-fied to the growing importance of the new mode of transportation, the railway. The railway wasgradually extended and started competing with water transport. Road traffic was also important.But one could detect within the structure of the centre that the historical core was still of greatsignificance. The two linear centres of north-south orientation extended to the newly built squar-es. The structure of the fourth stage of development of the city of Königsberg and, in particularof its centre, is a linear with a centric pattern in the historical core. In the centre the pre-warKönigsberg had a large historical core with different land uses. The direction of further develop-ment was towards the north-west, towards the new residential areas.

What were the characteristics of the transport network? Railway and water transport were still ofgreat importance, but it was decided to close the first transport ring. The aim was to solve theemerging conflict of transit traffic by directing it around the central core of the city (Ill. 4, 5). Thiswas the state of the city transport structure of the city of Kaliningrad in the post-war period up tothe 1960s. The central part was almost free of construction; the city centre was moved north. Inthe course of the formulation of the urban policy it was suggested to move the centre to thepresent Mira Prospect and Karl Marx Street.

The fifth stage is the period of post-war destruction of the old city centre and the formation of thenew city. The ruins of the lost historical centre were not touched for a long time. The city livedbeyond the inner city. Only one through road linking the north and the south of the city crossedthis area. The ring around the central part of the city had not been completed. The historical coreof the city center completely disappeared, it was replaced by an open space. The functions of thecentre, commercial, administrative, cultural, sports and recreational, were concentrated withinthe area stretching from the square at City Hall (Victory Square) to the former cinema Skala onthe park and near Queen Luisa Church.

The sixth stage covers the 1970s. These are the years of Soviet socialist town planning develop-ment. As previously stated, the principles of town planning of that time presupposed a certaingigantism. The centre of Kaliningrad was to return to the site of the historical core, the former siteof the Castle. A gigantic square was envisaged with no attractions except some fountains andflowerbeds. A Sports Centre appeared, and a sculpture park was established on Kneiphof Island,near the ruined Cathedral. These three large, flat spaces that attempted to represent the func-

135

5 | Stage IV – Radial ring structure, historical core, present linearcentres

4 | Stage IV – After 1912

tions of the city centre replaced the historical centre. There were also the linear centres, in thesouth reaching as far as the square at the South Railway Station, offering few public attractions.In the north, the linear centre reached as far as the square at the monument to the Motherland,next to City Hall and the cinema. Victory Square also was a gigantic area, an unordered urbanensemble of historical buildings of the 1920s-1930s that remained unchanged until recently(Ill. 6).

The seventh stage covers the 1990s up to the present day and displays the following features inthe central part of the city: the former core of the city was enlivened with the reconstruction of theCathedral. However, the area is still an open space lacking public facilites. The territory that wasleft of the town of Altstadt looks the same; an open space devoid of attractions. The Sports Centreon the embankment of the River Pregel, the World Ocean Museum, public areas (shops,recreation) on Verkhnee Lake, the University and the linear centre along Leninsky Prospect aregrowing and different service facilities, mainly commercial, are being built there. The ground, firstand second floors are transformed from residential to non-residential uses. The area around theCentral Market is developing rapidly. The city centre is expanding, as it had previously done,beyond the second ring (now Gvardeisky Prospect) towards Mira Prospect in the north-west. Anew spiritual centre and a commercial area along Chernyakhovsky Street at the Central Marketwere developed.

The prevalent functions of the city centre are commerce and business (offices). Among thetransport systems the most significant is the roads network. The railway network has temporarily

136


6 | Stage V – After the destruction of the war – 1960s

lost its importance. So, what can be said about the modern transport system? There is a well-defined ring where Moskovsky Prospect joins Gvardeisky Prospect. It looks broken, which doesnot encourage transit traffic bypassing the centre. The elevated bridge across the River Pregel,at 9 April Street in a north-south direction has not yet been completed (Ill. 7). Having analysed allthe previous stages of formation of the city centre, the state of the transport structure, and thelocation of the city centres in Königsberg and Kaliningrad, conclusions can be drawn that testifyto the problems. These are listed categorically. The first problem is that the water areas areignored. The river is not of importance to the central part of the city. This contradicts the fact thatfor centuries this was the main factor in shaping the city.

The second problem is the area extending in a north-south direction. This includes the modernLeninsky Prospect, the linear centre of Kaliningrad with many public services. It is also the maintransit route from the north to the south. I would like to draw attention to the total incompatibilityof the two functions: transit traffic and city centre (by transit I mean inter city communicationsbetween the north and the south parts of the city). Chernyakhovsky Street is in the same si-tuation. It has already been established as the main commercial street of the central trading zoneof Kaliningrad, which, is located on the ring road taking all the traffic from the centre. This is aburning problem of traffic congestion.

The third problem is the ring not being closed and the wish to relieve this route, at least partially,from through-traffic in the central area. The north-south chord (9 April Street) does not give riseto any conflict since the city centre is moving westward. The east part of the ring does not have

137

7 | Stage VI – 1970s

many public services and it is traditionally considered less of a centre, i.e. it does not fulfil thespecific functions of a centre.

The fourth problem is area around the ring at Leninsky Prospect and Teatralnaya Street. Itscentre is the defined by City Hall and the cinema on one side, and the monument to the Mother-land on the other. This area is characterised by a difficult traffic situation, as it is located on thelarge junction on the city ring at the access to the north-south transit route. This route is also themain road of the city of Kaliningrad. A lesser problem is the access of Moskovsky Prospect ontothe ring. There are further problems at the egress of the South Railway Station and main roadsoutside the ring. I would like, once again, to emphasise the problem of Moskovsky Prospect. Itcompletely cuts off the waterfront from the north-western part of the centre, and leaves nopossibility of uniting the two. The situation will remain unchanged unless Moskovsky Prospect isrerouted at ground level rather than being aligned above or below ground (Ill. 8 – aerial view).

Illustration 8 clearly shows how the elevated bridge is depriving the island Kneiphof of a chanceto develop. Firstly, the scale of the city today does not correspond to that of a city with thepopulation of 400,000. Secondly, the buildings near the elevated bridge are less than perfect.

For many years several groups of specialists have worked on trying to solve the transportationproblems in the central part of Kaliningrad. The latest studies that we have conducted as a groupbrought us to the conclusion that the whole of the central part of Kaliningrad within the ring shouldbe considered since the problem cannot be solved partially (Ill. 9).

138


8 | Aerial view of Kneiphof

Following the analysis of all previous development stages of the centre we came to the followingconclusions.

With the radial-circular system, the transit ring must be closed. Within the entire city area thestreets should double up as they used to in the past. They should not be too wide, but must havea good traffic flow capacity for all traffic conditions. The central streets should remain as such buttransit traffic through the actual centre should be removed. The issue of the section of MoskovskyProspect and the elevated bridge should be solved. In that one needs to find solutions for vehi-cular traffic and pedestrians in order to join the north and south parts of Kneiphof Island with therest of the territory.

It is evident that the area of the former historical core remains a white spot on the map, as wasthe intention. At present I have no recipes for what, and to what extent, should be or could bebuilt upon, and where open spaces should be located. I believe the answer will be found in time.We are not ready yet. The aim of the symposium is to gradually formulate specific questions toobtain detailed answers to the most important issues.

Regarding the remaining traces of the centre, which I have described as wandering, I would liketo say the following: It is the origin of the city. At present excavations of the Royal Castle foun-dations are being conducted. The area of the historical core of the city ( the former three towns)is the open space at Kneiphof and Altstadt. The linear centre of the city underwent further deve-

139

9 | Problems of the present condition of the city centre of Kaliningrad(Stage VII – 20th/21st century)

lopment along the north-south axis, and further along the north-west, bypassing the former his-torical core and both arms of the river, the Old Pregel and the New Pregel.

And finally the following questions should be posed:1. How compact or extensive should the future centre be?2. Should the historical core be left as open space, and to what extent?3. Should the centre be developed along the riverbank towards the port?

I propose that these fundamental questions are put to the participants of the ideas competitionfor the further development of the centre. Later they should be included in the programme of thefuture architectural and town planning competition for the realisation of the centre of Kaliningrad.

140


141

NameOlga Viktorovna Mezey


ProfessionArchitect

Main professional fieldUrban development planning

Main subjectMasterplans, residential developments,community facilities and transportation planning


142



Structural changes of ports – a chance for urban development?

Prof. Dr. Eckart Güldenberg (held by Julius Ehlers)

Structural changes of ports – a chance for urban development?

The far reaching structural changes in maritime traffic and port economy have altered the har-bour landscapes throughout the world; in many European port cities extensive areas of urbanland are falling derelict. Shipbuilding and maritime traffic are the two major economic factors ofthe “maritime cluster” comprising transhipment/storage, port and shipping related public facilities,port related industries, fishing trade and maritime recreational facilities.

Changes in the shipbuilding industryGlobalisation and high-technology in the shipbuilding industry are the characteristics of a chang-ing shipbuilding industry:

On the one hand, demand and production of world-wide shipbuilding is still growing on a highlevel. On the other hand, product innovation and new production methods have led to a concen-tration on a diminishing number of efficient companies. Also global relocation, mainly to EastAsian countries (Japan, Korea and China), and a dramatic decline in employment has led to thedereliction of extensive dockyards, often located in the centres of European port cities.

Modern shipbuilding is primarily based on installation and systems engineering. Research anddevelopment is focused on minimising pollutants, energy technology, innovative vehicles andnew driving power concepts.

The ultra-modern production engineering of dockyards is supplemented by an increasing inde-pendence of location of the supplier industry.

Despite the highly developed technology sector and the rationalisation and cooperation efforts,German and European shipbuilding has little hope for the future in the absence of internationalagreements controlling or preventing competition for capacity and subsidies. The downwardtrend in European shipbuilding is towards repairs, up-grading and conversion jobs, and also spe-cialised and navy shipbuilding.

In terms of port development this means a reduction in land occupied by the shipbuilding indus-tries, or even the closure of docks, and a lasting spatial deconcentration of the supply industries.

Changes in maritime trafficCharacteristics of changes in maritime traffic are technological and organisational changes inmaritime transport and transhipment like increasingly larger ships, the specialisation and stan-dardisation of transport, the mechanisation of cargo transhipment and the intermodal transport,especially of containers.

The requirements for the development of ports are primarily new terminals with a sufficient depthof water and short access to the sea, specialisation on particular goods, efficient transhipmentfacilities and large docks, expansive storage capacity and good access to rail and road for trans-portation to the hinterland.

143

Special conditions and restrictions apply to Baltic maritime traffic and the ever-increasing sizeshipping units and economics of scale.

These are the often restrictive water depths at the access points to the Baltic Sea (Kiel Canalmax. 9 m), or on the detour via Skagerrak and the Great Belt (20 m), but most of all limited depthsof navigation channels and of all the docks of the south-eastern Baltic Sea ports.

Large seafaring container ships of the panmax class (approximately 5,000-8,000 TEU) cannotcall at any of these ports. Transhipment capacity, manoeuvring space and the service capacityof these ports are also still insufficient.

This makes the ports of Bremerhaven and Hamburg important hubs for Baltic container shipping,where containers are loaded onto feederships (capacity max. 1,500 TEU, generally 500-800TEU) specially suited to the Baltic Sea.

Another reason for the extensive use of the so-called feederships is the lack of economic centresand densely populated agglomerations, and the low population numbers in the hinterland of mostports.

Short-sea shipping is thus dominant in the Baltic Sea, typified by high transport frequencies andrelatively low or reduced loads and smaller ships, good punctuality and flexibility to ensure pairedjourneys and return freights.

Furthermore, highly frequented sea-crossing corridors on the straits are dominated by ro-roferries. Alternative land-connections rarely exist, if at all.

The transformation of the Soviet Union and the integration of Poland and the Baltic States intothe EU has opened new economic relations with lasting implications for the role and organisationof maritime traffic in the Baltic Region.

Structural changes of Port CitiesPort cities are trying to compensate the structural changes affecting maritime traffic, shipbuildingand seaport industries, as well as the resultant loss of employment, by introducing revitalisationprojects in disused harbour areas and by building new, efficient ports. These considerations mustinclude the opportunities arising from naval disarmament and the vacating of ports and water-fronts formerly used for military purposes, found in nearly all the port cities represented here.

The dereliction of harbours opens opportunities for urban development. New mixed uses can beintroduced while the city centres, harbours and waterfronts, are re-integrated spatially and inurban design terms.

Harbour areas, previously inaccessible to the public, noisy and dangerous, will provide links with-in the urban fabric and access to the water's edge. The city's waterfront can now be experiencedby its citizens.

144


The question is whether it is possible to analyse, in a comparative study of several Baltic ports,the development of harbour areas falling derelict in the course of structural changes of themaritime economy, and how this is can be achieved. The object is to gain insight in urban designprocesses and methodical issues that are all equally relevant and of interest to these cities.

The general conditions of structural changes of the port economy, such as containerisation, de-industrialisation and military disarmament, apply to most ports in the south-eastern Baltic. How-ever, neither the socio-economic parameters, nor financial resources, nor the actual local con-ditions, nor the planning and building traditions, are the same for all Baltic ports. Structural chan-ge occurs quite unsimultaneously.

In contrast to their past function, or rather their role in a planned economy of division of labour,the harbours of the former German Democratic Republic, Poland, the Baltic States and Russiaare now in open competition with one another.

The determining factors in redefining their individual harbour function are the specific localconditions in the context of an increasingly international trade and transport association in theBaltic. The emerging economic complexity and transnational sea and land routes can be eitherprivileging or disadvantageous to the port cities.

The local conditions for transit traffic to large cities which are easily accessible, or denselypopulated regions in the hinterland and/or terminating and originating traffic in relation to thenumber of inhabitants as well as production and distribution in each particular catchment areaplay an important role in the relocation of port cities in the context of competing cities in the Baltic.

In how far the chances of structural change in ports are utilised, the regeneration of abandonedharbour areas exploited for future urban development, also depends on the planning and buildingtradition of each city.

This reflects the formative process of public opinion, the consent or dissent of conflictinginterests. The resources and market positions of investors, as “global players”, and planners, as“local actors”, are different. While business decisions primarily pursue quick profits, the cityneeds to consider mid-term to long-term urban development perspectives.

These result in lines of conflict between the sometimes self-governing port authorities thatendeavour to attract businesses, and the municipal planners and implementation authorities thatact in the public interest.

Lines of conflict may also arise between the social needs of the local population and the superiorpolitical urban planning requirements.

Several examples can be quoted, of contradictions between social, sustainable urban develop-ment policies and the municipal politics pursuing the necessity of budget consolidation by optingfor dubious short-term solutions in establishing businesses.

145

These existing conflicts and contradictions hinder integrated planning strategies for derelicturban harbour areas and waterfronts.

In most large Scandinavian port cities, such as Oslo, Copenhagen, Malmo, Stockholm and Hel-sinki, structural changes of harbour functions and the maritime economy have progressed far.Hence the questions at hand can be discussed with reference to examples of completed schem-es and existing proposals for waterfront urban development projects (WUD).

Helsinki is exemplary of relocating its entire modern port facilities to Vuosaari. This site has goodaccess from the sea and excellent infrastructure links to the city and the hinterland. The “Vuo-saari Harbour Project” is equipped with the latest container transhipment facilities, has extensivedistribution and production areas, and comprises new residential development. Relocation ofexisting facilities is a precondition for urban planning measures to successfully integrate andregenerate abandoned port areas in cities, as in Katajanokka, Ruoholahti and Herttoniemi.

Land is freed by the redevelopment of these central sites and can be made available for newuses, such as service industries, housing, public utilities and open space. But also the land usesof the harbour are reorganised in consideration of appropriate locations for specialised labour:disused shipyards, warehouses and port-related business enterprises are closed or relocated tomake way for modern ro-ro ferry terminals, cruise terminals or marinas.

In Helsinki economic structural changes and urban renewal of derelict port areas are carried outsimultaneously – at breath-taking speed and to high urban design standards. This is mainly dueto Finland's economic drive, penetrating markets with great innovation potential and assumingan entrepreneurial role between western and eastern Europe. Helsinki is an area of economicgrowth facing continuous pressure on housing caused by the internal migration of the Finnishpopulation. The annual average of a growing migration population in Helsinki was 3,000 peoplein the past years. The public authorities have largely managed to finance the non-profitableinvestments of revitalising derelict port areas (e.g. demolition, landfill, new waterfronts, access).At the same time development costs of new ports and residential areas (outer and inner localpublic infrastructure, expansion of the Metro etc.) are met.

Other reasons for the successful transformation of Helsinki's urban development are the highlydeveloped Finnish planning and building tradition, a disposition of much of the land by municipalor government bodies, well-established distribution of work, and cooperation of private investorsand public authorities and relocation of polluting facilities and technical infrastructure into granitebeneath the ground.

The German Baltic ports of Flensburg, Kiel, Lübeck, Rostock and Stralsund are in the middle ofthis development process. A large proportion of the reallocation projects on their waterfronts andof harbour-related land uses have been planned in concept, some have already been imple-mented.

A comparative study should also include the functional changes of selected port cities in Poland(Szczecin, Gdynia, Gdansk), the Baltic States (Klaipeda, Riga, Tallinn) and Russia (St. Peters-burg, Kaliningrad).

146


Adaptation processes of harbours The following adaptation processes to the changing requirements of maritime traffic and tranship-ment of goods can be observed.

In ports located inland on rivers, development is partly being relocated to the estuaries. In Ger-many this applies to Lübeck on the River Trave and Rostock on the Warnow. It also applies tothe Polish ports of Szczecin on the River Oder, to Gdansk on the Mottla and to Russian Kalinin-grad on the Pregolya. Consequently Travemünde, Warnemünde and Swinoujscie are in a supe-rior position. In Gedansk the north port is built directly on the coast – land for expansion is avail-able. Regarding Kaliningrad – although located on the mouth of the River Pregolya and linked tothe Baltic Sea via an approach canal across the Vistula lagoon, 43 km in length – the questionof a possible increase in importance of the port at Baltijsk, sited directly on the Baltic Sea, needsto be examined.

Some of the south-eastern port cities of the Baltic were established directly on the coast of theopen sea. In Germany these include Kiel, in Poland Gdynia, in the Baltic States Tallinn, in RussiaSt. Petersburg and in Finland Helsinki. Brought about by structural economic changes, these portcities are also subject to reorganisation, new land uses, relocation of port facilities and themaritime economy, thereby opening new opportunities for urban development.

In St. Petersburg the modernisation of the harbour facing the Finnish bay is progressing, whilesimultaneously new ports are being developed, e.g. the landfill in front of Wassilij Island for cruiseships. The Russian Baltic ports of Primorsk/Vyborg and Ust Luga are developed at the sametime.

Riga and Klaipeda are characterised by the fact that they have developed along the course ofthe River Daugava and the Curonian lagoon to the Baltic Sea respectively. For Riga – where theharbour functions extend along the River Daugava, from the city centre to the mouth on the BalticSea, one fundamental question arises: should development concentrate on a new outer portdirectly on Riga Bay, or on decentralised development of specialised port facilities and businesslocations, along the River Daugava, in compromise with all other urban development.

Questions on the structural changes of portsThorough preparation and interpretation must precede the substantiated comparison of pastdevelopments in several cities, their development potentials, relevant urban design conside-rations and plans, and their implementation. First and foremost this the following questions needto be asked.

1. ConditionsWhat are the geographic, topographic and hydrographical site conditions characterising city andport development?What are the historical and economic requirements of the city and port development? Which isthe historical relationship of city and harbour, especially in ports located in inner city areas or oldtown centres, and what new opportunities arise?

147

2. Development of maritime economy In how far do the site conditions of the port meet new requirements of maritime traffic regardingwater depth, container storage, container traffic and other infrastructure? What are the characteristic changes of the industrial port economy? What are the prospects forshipyards and shipbuilding (any specialisation, retreat to repair yards, closures of all shipyardsand termination of shipbuilding)?Are there any raw material industries (oil refineries, petro-chemistry etc.) and what is their abilityof adapting to changing environmental conditions? Are the oil tanker terminals linked to oil-producing regions via pipelines? Are existing power stations in keeping with the latest technological developments, or are thereplans for relocation?

3. Urban design objectivesWhat are the proposals of masterplans, structure plans, strategic plans and other developmentplans for the waterfront and port development areas, particularly regarding to the allocation ofnew ports areas, and the regeneration and reallocation of land uses in disused ports?

4. ImplementationHow far has the relocation of port facilities and the maritime economy to new sites progressed?What are the new infrastructure projects, and what traffic routes to the hinterland are there?In how far could the remaining industries and power stations etc. be adapted to meet newenvironmental standards?What new land uses could be established in disused areas and on derelict harbour sites?

5. Parameters of implementationWhat is the role of existing planning laws and land laws?What is the availability of land? Is there a limitation to private rights of use on ownership of buil-dings on public/government owned land?Can proposals governed by public law be implemented? What is the relationship of public planning proposals to private initiatives and the private sector?What role do developers' companies play and how are they governed or organised? In how far is the financing of the redevelopment of former harbour areas dependant on publicfunding by the municipality, the State, or the EU?In how far can the allocation of specialised land uses be implemented, or rather, is there com-petition between different port development projects?

6. Urban design questions on KaliningradHow is the demand for operational port areas in Kaliningrad evaluated?:

- How restrictive are the existing hydrographical site conditions (limited water depth of 8.2 m inthe docks and the approach canal, approximately 43 km in length) for the development poten-tial of the harbour of Kaliningrad (e.g. for modern container traffic and raw materials)? Is thepossible development of certain functions at the sea port of Baltijsk an alternative to Kalinin-grad?

- Which of the port functions (including port affined industries and commercial businesses)have development potential, also for Kaliningrad?

148


149


- Which areas of land, docks and traffic infrastructure is suitable or necessary? Which of thesecan be made available for reallocation in the context of urban redevelopment ?

- In how far can the central trade location of Kaliningrad be improved by better access from thehinterland to the motherland, and links to the European road and rail network? – notwith-standing the possibility of increasing industrial production of goods by special agreement withthe EU and/or the establishment of a free trade zone?

- Looking at it from another angle, it needs to be examined if there is a demand for alternativeland uses in the existing port areas of Kaliningrad. Does demand exceed the available landin the inner city and along the banks of the River Pregolja, earmarked (for a change of use)for housing, mixed use, administration, offices, commerce, culture, leisure and local recrea-tion? And are the harbour areas (beyond the railway bridge) suitable for these uses?

- Would the location of these particular waterfront and harbour sites be especially suited tothese uses?

- What infrastructure and ecological conditions would have to be considered?

Literature:- Buchhofer, Ekkehard: Die Rolle des short-sea-shipping in den TINA-Verkehrsnetzen des Ostseeraumes, in: Europa Regional, Heft 2/2003- Schubert, Dirk: Umbau von brachfallenden Hafen- und Uferzonen, in: HANSA International Maritime Journal Heft 4/2001

NameProf. Dr. Eckart Güldenberg

OriginKiel/Germany

ProfessionUrban Planner

Main professional field/Main subjectHousing, urban and regional planning

NameJulius Ehlers

OriginRostock und Itzehoe/Germany

ProfessionUrban PlannerArchitect

Main professional field/Main subjectUrban structure plans, integrated urban development and regional plans, urban regeneration,urban design, residential developmentplans, conversion concepts

150



“Building civil society” – Experience from St. Petersburg

Daniel Luchterhandt

“Building civil society” – Experience from St. Petersburg

It may seem a little odd for someone from Hamburg, in Kaliningrad, to report on recent develop-ments in St. Petersburg, a metropolis of 4.7 million inhabitants faced with major challenges. Butin the sense of a unifying Europe it is considered necessary to understand the processes and themotives behind the developments. And furthermore, St. Petersburg is an extremely attractive city.

Transformation processSt. Petersburg and Kaliningrad are as different as can be, but both cities are in the middle of adramatic transformation process that could hardly be more radical or more complex – not just interms of urban planning and urban design but chiefly in economic, social, institutional and politi-cal terms.

The change of system naturally had a considerable effect on urban planning. It is no longer“easy” to plan and build cities – as it was at the time of the General Plan of Leningrad in 1960,which proposed the extension of the city with a residential belt and put this into practice.

Today, planning is the interaction of different players and their individual interests. Politics andadministration have lost much of their influence. They have to reposition themselves, redefinetheir roles and grow to fill them. Planning needs to be increasingly strategic. Planning is moreand more the steering, moderation and bringing together of different interests – with the aim offinding a mutually acceptable solution. Planning is becoming increasingly more like quality ma-nagement. The difficulty lies in the definition of one's own values and collective values, and tokeep these on course during the process, that is, not to arbitrarily/heedlessly dismiss the pro-claimed aims.

Because of the complexity of the transformation processes and the high speed at which theyoccur planning is not always an enviable task and challenge. It touches the inherent personalconvictions of the planner and sometimes forces him into a radical rethink. It is clear that thisdoes not happen at the push of a button.

The following will look at in how far St. Petersburg has dealt with its own transformation processin past years and how different planning procedures were used to bring together heterogeneousinterests.

Urban regeneration and urban development in St. PetersburgThe development challenges of St. Petersburg are of an essential nature. They mainly are:1. renewal of the historic inner city with conservation and refurbishment of existing historic struc-

tures and reclaiming public space2. development of the local economy especially trade, tourism and new services3. improvement of living conditions and housing.

UNESCO estimated the cost of the complete renewal of the historic inner city at 30 million dol-lars. While Kaliningrad is concerned with the reconstruction of its historic centre, St. Petersburg

151

152


1 | A changing city – comprehensive redevelopment of the urbaninfrastructure

2 | Not everything can be done overnight: Transformation needs time

4 | New world of experience and new luxury: a new shopping centreat the Metro station Vladimirskaj

3 | Old world of experience in new splendour: Mall on NevskijProspekt

has to constantly struggle for the upkeep of its existing buildings – architectural monuments aswell as “profane” buildings, parks and open spaces, technical infrastructure or keeping pace withthe constantly growing vehicular traffic. It seems obvious that the city will not handle this effortjust with its own resources. Consequently the strategy is to provide stimuli for private investment.The city has concentrated on key projects that should improve the business climate and attrac-tiveness to tourism. Apart from the restoration of important buildings and ensembles (Hermitage,Peter-Paul Fortress etc.) the main concern is the reclamation of urban spaces, as public spacefor interaction and as private/semi-private space for people to withdraw. Around Nevskij Prospectfar reaching changes have taken place in the last years. New pedestrian areas, expensively de-signed squares and new lighting has created a pleasant environments of a high quality. With thenew design of Haymarket as an important traditional trading place, the formerly dangerous area

153

5 | “How long will this go on for?”: An apartment meansenhancement of the living conditions

6 | New perspectives of living: Successors to prefabricated homes

dominated by the mafia is now safe again. It is this site that was declared an “investment zone”in the context of an investment strategy offering favourable conditions (tax advantages) and statesubsidy for follow-on projects.

The development of public spaces made a major contribution to the stimulation of the local eco-nomy. New uses, in turn, will lead to the intensified use of urban spaces, especially in summer.This also applies to the new courtyards that significantly improve the residential area along Nev-skij.

Privatisation and the refurbishment and reconstruction of old apartments in the city centre areprogressing slowly. More important for St. Petersburg are the dynamic changes on the peripheryand in its green areas where in excess of 2 million square metres of privately financed housingof different standards was built. Many people, however, have the basic need for a home, supplyof water and electricity, and safe housing.

Compared to the initial situation considerable renewal has taken place – for urban society andfor individuals.

“Building civil society”On my first visit to St. Petersburg in the autumn of 2003 – contrary to all pessimistic predictionsof my colleagues – I met the openhearted staff of the Department of Urban Design and Architec-ture. The deputy head, Viktor Polishuk, provided me with plans and information on currentprojects, was available for interviews and further cooperation. His work on a new General Planhe accompanied with the – in my view remarkable – statement: “We want to build civil societyhere.”

Civil society! In the classical order it is the third sector apart from state and market. It describesthe realm of public life that is based on self-organisation and the individual. Initiatives, societiesand associations are an expression of a civil society that operates in the sphere of market andstate but without becoming part of it (because these would then pursue different aims from thoseof a civil society). The functioning society is founded on shared values based on laws and a con-stitution, and also the respect of its people. And at the same time, civil society is the expressionof the democratic self-conception of society.

154


7 | The pass to membership in civil society 8 | “Together we can do anything” – Finding support for blind faith inauthoritarian structures

What contributions can urban planning make in the development of civil society, what role can itplay?The chance lies in the discourse of society. The desired living conditions for the future, valuesand standards are subjects related to planning. They concern questions ranging from the layoutand furnishings of homes, architecture and neighbourhood, to the functional structure of citiesand to other general questions of urban living. To organise this discourse in the triangle of powerof state, market and civil society, and to derive at spatial solutions is an important contribution inthe transformation of the overall urban situation.

ProcedureIn democratic societies transparent procedures are the only way to reach “clean solutions”. Be-cause there is not one model solution that will be to the mutual agreement of all, a clearly struc-tured, cleanly applied and fair procedure should be conducted for the legitimisation of the result.

District 130The extent and complexity of the task of renewal require innovative planning and developmentstrategies. Limited financial resources will result in an increasing number of model projects thatare meant for copying. The conception of District 130 was preceded by, in my opinion, anexceptional procedure that significantly contributed to the quality of the project. Starting point wasa competition that did not search for competing solutions for a certain site, but asked plannersfrom St. Petersburg to submit a proposal for the site of their choice. The aim was to exemplifythe diverse tasks of urban renewal and find an integrated solution for these.

The project combined the restoration of the ailing technical infrastructure, including contaminatedsoils, with the design of land freed by demolition and its financing through the sale of four buildingplots. The new pedestrian zone is to extend retail areas around Nevskij and illustrate the interac-tion of technical matters, urban quality and economic feasibility. The project also contributed tothe international transfer of knowledge.

Sennaja PloshadThe results of urban development in St. Petersburg illustrated above are said to have been car-ried out according to the official rules and planning procedures. However, it still remains to be

155

9 | Project Kvartal 130: integrated renewal creates new quality in the city centre

asked if it would not have been more appropriate if, especially in the case of the Haymarket(Sennaja Ploshad) project, the former municipal architect had not done the design in his ownpractice, or, if instead, several independent schemes should have been worked on in the courseof a competition. Architect of the design and regulatory authority in one person is not consideredto be a confidence-building situation, even though the outcome could have been worse.

Strategy plan 1997A remarkable procedure was the one related to the development of the strategy plan in 1997when the city started thinking about controlling its development after many years of planninglethargy. It was a complex process in which all groups of society, from politics and administration,economy, science and citizenship discussed the aims and tasks of St. Petersburg and docu-mented the result in a plan. The city also involved the citizens in the associated action “MojGorod” when asking them to participate in formulating the strategic development of the city. Thismeant a learning process for the entire urban society and was an important signal to the citizens.

The result was in integrated plan, which represented an important step in the writing of the almostcompleted General Plan. A procedure of such perspective has not been carried out in the citysince; regrettably not even in the context of the current exhibition of the General Plan whereinvolvement is limited to the formal participation procedures.

New Passenger Harbour CompetitionThe development of a new ferry terminal in front of Wassili Island is one of the recent challenges

156


11 | Sennaja Ploshad – the most lively square in town

10 | State planning: Redevelopment of Haymarket has brought improvements

the city will face. The project is to be largely financed by private investors. St. Petersburg hasheld an urban planning competition to provide ideas for the new territory. In a transparent proce-dure several alternative schemes, and the design selected by the jury were made public. Thiskind of procedure is generally considered as positive. In view of the fact that at the same timeprojects by the name of “Sea façade” or “Sea cascade” are being completed and people will soonmove into the apartments that have a view of the sea which could then be lost, it seems that moreconsideration of their interests would have been better. The results show a clear preference forthe interests of investors; and occasionally complete ignorance of the existing fabric andneighbourhood. In terms of the discourse of urban society competitions can only be the begin-ning.

12 | Deep roots: Peter the Great as the ideal master planner of St. Petersburg

Mariinskij IIThe final positive example of St. Petersburg is the invited international competition for the Mariin-skij Theatre organised on the initiative of the artistic director of the Gergejev Theatre. The compe-tition was mainly noted for its openness and effort to publicly discuss the schemes within the city.Of less importance is the jury's decision in favour of the design of Dominic Perrault, rather thanthe broad discussion on new architecture in the historical urban context on the one hand, andlegitimisation of such a decision by an independent jury on the other. The procedure also had anexceptional feature: the entries were exhibited prior to the jury session and its decision, givingcitizens the opportunity to comment on each of the schemes. Unfortunately it is not known in howfar the suggestions and objections of the public influenced the jury – but the decision for Perrault

157

14 | The project “Morskoij Kaskad and Morskoij Fasad”

13 | Maximum economic exploits at the expense of first-rate homesand quality of life

158


at least seems to be sustainable. (But rumour has it that it is very difficult for him to set up anoffice as a foreign “businessman”).

GummersbachThe early public participation at the Mariinskij Theatre has inspired planners in Gummersbach totry this in a procedure for a large industrial site in a town near Cologne. They succeeded in con-vincing the Chamber of Architects, although such deviations are generally not permitted by thecompetition regulations. More than 500 people visited the exhibition within three days and madequalified comments about the entries. It was observed that the citizens explained the proposalsto one another and discussed the potentials of the town. These comments will leave an impres-sion for the jury of what will be feasible in the town. And suddenly it became possible to discussa previously rejected shopping centre in its urban context, and the conditions for its realisation.Fronts are broken.

Learning from St. Petersburg!

Literatur:- Goldhoorn, Baart (2002): St. Petersburg, Project Russia Vol. 26- Leontief Centre (1998): St. Petersburg City Center Rehabilitation, St. Petersburg- St. Petersburg City Rehabilitation Project (2004): http://fisp.pgdg.ru, Zugriff 4.11.2004

15 | Project Mariinksij II 16 | More faith in future generations: Not only outward support ofchange!

159


NameDaniel Luchterhandt

OriginHamburg and Dortmund/Germany

ProfessionSpatial Planning

Main professional fieldUrban planning, urban development,informal planning procedures

Main subjectCurrent urban development of St. Petersburgand other East European metropolises

160


Economy and investment

A strong city needs a strong region!- How can both city and region be strengthened?

The Kaliningrad area should be transformed into a corridor of development.- What effects will this have on the morphology of the city?- What options does the city have for negotiations with the Government?

The labour market is increasingly dependent on migration.- What social conditions are to be expected in the city?- How will the housing market develop?- How much time does the city have for the pre-emptive relieve of tension?

Large projects are catalyst of urban development.- What is the context?- New developments in the north: effect on the existing centre?- How can contracts ensure the separation of private and public interests?

Kaliningrad needs to develop a specific profile, boost its strengths.- What potentials do the city and the region have?

What are the implications of the confined boundaries of the city?- Isolation or partnership? Network of the Euro regions?- Contractual agreements between the Government and the European Union?

Concept for a city?- Intellectual cultural centre? How to facilitate quality architecture?

Infrastructure of the city

Rethink planning.- Clearly defined objectives. Write scenarios. Set priorities.- Design and implement small sites in a mosaic-like manner, consider links into adjoining sites.- Make procedures transparent, facilitate public debate.

Conversion of the harbour – a chance for the city.- How does one transform the harbour while maintaining employment?- How can the flow of goods be based on the division of labour?- How can tourist ships moor in a central location in the city?

Priority: the development of the city centre.- Its role as a central location for retail trade?

Discussion3.2.10 Discussion – Second Day

161

- How can out-of-town development be controlled (green field retail developments)?Function as an administrative centre?

Redevelop transportation system.- How to take transit traffic out of the centre, relief of the inner city?- How can the centre of the city be redesigned?

Develop key projects.- Central task: Design of public spaces. - Environment for private investments! Create a pleasant environment!

Set up networks!- Kaliningrad, with its region and cooperating cities, is strong.

Draw up contracts.- Secure balance of strengths and weaknesses. Uphold social justice.- Look after existing assets!- What to do in case of insolvency?

Set up a round table at the end of the Symposium!

162


3

163

3.3.1 Lecture 17 – Jochen Brandi and Andrej DerbenkovTraces of history and future images of the island city on the River Pregel

3.3.2 Lecture 18 – Prof. Peter ZlonickyContinuity and inconsistency – Experience from Berlin

3.3.3 Lecture 19 – Anna Brunow-MaunulaMethods of controlling the townscape of Helsinki

3.3.4 Lecture 20 – Dr. Sergey V. SemenzovOn the principles of retaining the urban genetic code in the process of reconstruction and development of the city

3.3.5 Recommendations

Third Day3.3 Third Day 17.06.2005

164



Traces of history and future images of the island city on the River Pregel

Jochen Brandi and Andrej Derbenkov

165

1 | Kneiphof, city island and the cathedral on the River Pregel

Traces of history and future images of the island city on the River Pregel

Topography eastward – westwardIt is said that on city excursions one should, whenever possible, approach harbour towns fromthe sea – that is by boat. The study of the first beginnings of cartography show that very early onextremely accurate information on the depth of water and coastlines was available in order toreach the coast safely.

The old trade routes to the Amber Coast across the Baltic Sea towards the former city ofKönigsberg, the Kaliningrad of today, reveal a landscape that has always been described incolourful terms and in a special light. A “double coast” emerges as the ship finds its way into thenarrow opening of the Visula Lagoon near Pillau (Baltisk): a succession of spaces from the ex-panse of the sea to the enclosed lagoon, into the mouth of the River Pregel (Pregolja), upriverinto the transition from harbour to city. Controlled, constructed embankments dividing to form anatural island within the city – the so-called Kneiphof. Further east, towards Insterburg/Gumbin-nen (Tschernjachowsk/Gussew), the river disintegrates into an archaic water landscape of stilland flowing currents. In some places the banks dissolve into reeds and marshland.

In this distinctive topography one encounters the biography of the town, now 750 years old,founded by crusaders of the German order. If, in the minds eye, one changes direction and turnsdownstream, one follows the route along which the East-Prussian population fled during the lastmonths of the war, in the spring of 1945. They were headed for the open sea, where they hopedto be saved.

Since then Königsberg is a Russian city, now celebrating its 60th anniversary. It is the western-most, ice-free harbour of Russia with the political vision of an “open gate to Europe”, the so-called oblast, now an enclave in the Baltic Region, enclosed by Poland and Lithuania.

City trilogy at the mouth of the river PregelKönigsberg (Ill. 1) comprised three formerly independent towns – the island town of Kneiphof inbetween the old and the new Pregel rivers, the old part of town and castle on elevated ground,and the crafts people's town of Löbenicht upriver. This historic centre was razed to the ground bythe bombings of August 1944 and during the battle in the spring of 1945. The last witness of the“erased city” is the Gothic cathedral on Kneiphof island, as if Königberg's great son, thephilosopher Immanuel Kant, who is buried by its side, had taken the church under its wing. Here,on this densely built-up island in the mouth of the River Pregel, the first building of Königsberguniversity (Collegium Albertinum) stood, whose European history of research and teaching iscontinued by the Russian university that now has adopted the name of Immanuel Kant.

Kneiphof – empty space?The island has remained unpopulated and derelict since the end of the war in 1945, and exactlythis is where its unique cultural chance lies – in not being easily available for the fast buildingprojects of investors, out of scale with the surroundings, as seen on the opposite bank (Ill. 2).This has left time and space to think about the future of Kneiphof and to discuss its prospectiveappearance by means of several alternatives.

166


2 | View of the city island Kneiphof, Kaliningrad around 2000

One obvious alternative would be to leave the derelict island, traversed by an elevated roadbridge, in its do-nothing state, an open space. But this topos of a formerly independent towndeserves to be examined in terms of its cultural and urban values – or in terms of the economiccriteria of Jürgen Bloech, “hard and soft location factors”.

The first building proposal was put forward by the young Kaliningrad architect Yuriy Zabuga whohad just finished his studies in the 1980's. His scheme, at the time considered to be courageous,not historicising but modern in design, opened the necessary discussion on the repopulation ofthe island in the River Pregel.

Old town plan – new buildings A more recent alternative was worked on by a Russian-German collaboration in the mid-1990'sthat tried to build on the historic town plan of old Kneiphof in a “critical reconstruction” (Ill. 3). Notthe two other neglected areas, the old town and Löbenicht, which were rebuilt, but only thevacant Kneiphof island offers the opportunity – as the Kaliningrad urban archaeologist VenzelSalakhov put it – to decode the “genetic code of the sunken city” and its rich history of cultureand trade, and lost human scale. Buildings restricted to four-storeys in height, tracing the formeralignments and edges of squares, would represent the continuation of culture and urban planningacross the desolated island, to remind of the past life on Kneiphof.

Old streets, squares and courtyards have been covered in a 1.5 metre layer of rubble since 1960,letting the old cathedral appear sunken. Beneath this layer the foundations, cellars and groundfloors still exist. To expose this historic layer and make it accessible to the citizens would meanto publicly discuss the fate of this town, with “raised or down-turned thumb”.

In the context of the exposed spatial information one would find convincing arguments for thishistoric topos to be given back its former dense and urban life. This could, transform the towncentre, the only remaining possible location for this transformation of the old (and only seeminglysunk) European town, into a new European model city (Ill. 4), which is currently politically claimedby the Russian government and the population.

Invisible urban layers – terra incognitaIn this context it is reminded (Ill. 5) of the proposals to conduct excavations by Kaliningrad arch-aeologists on Kneiphof, possibly starting in the vicinity of the cathedral and former Albertina Uni-versity. While information on the old town plan and parcelling of land is available in the archives,deep excavation, that is exposing the elevations of the former hidden cellars beneath groundlevel, would lead to a layer that will reveal the fragmented town.

The exposed lowest layer of Kneiphof should not just become a museum. Its geometry createsspatially fascinating opportunities for old basements to receive a newly constructed first floorabove, perceiving this as a whole and utilising the “time lagged layers” as public and privatespace. A new sophisticated architecture with a “frugal footprint” – i.e. supporting structures –would be placed above the foundations and cellars, thus leading back to the historic roots, the“scale and pattern” of Kneiphof.

167

168


3 | Historic town plan of Kneiphof before 1945

4 | The “new Kneiphof”, a citical reconstruction of the old town plan

Return of books to Kneiphof?Which parts of the island Kneiphof could accommodate old and new life and who will be first tofind the way back to the area around the cathedral? For some time now the old books of theAlbertina, as well as those of the reputed Wallenrodt Library that was partly located in thecathedral have been considered. These books are now spread across the world, and in someplaces inadequately stored. It seems obvious that this cultural treasure should be brought backto its place of origin, first of all to guarantee their conservation?

In kind consultation with the director of the University Library at Göttingen, Professor Elmar Mitt-ler, a project was developed to set up a repository for these “homecoming” books which would,in time, be expanded into a modern library at Russia's Kant University – above the foundationwalls of the old Albertina.

The concentration of these valuable cultural assets in the vicinity of the cathedral would result inpeople soon following the books – one possible step on the way of regaining foothold on Kneip-hof. Since “Historisches ist nicht, das Alte allein festzuhalten oder zu wiederholen. Dadurchwürde die Historie zugrunde gehen. Historisch handeln ist das, welches das neue herbeiführtund wodurch Geschichte fortgesetzt wird.” (“The historical is not merely recording or repeatingthe old. This would lead to the demise of history. To act historically is to effect the new andthereby continuing history.”) Karl Friedrich Schinkel.

169

5 | Sketch section

Genius Loci on Kneiphof – speculationIf one could engage the great son of this European city to partake in this discourse and ask himabout topos and logos, he would possibly give us this piece of advice to take with us: “Ein künftigunbebauter, stadtentleerter Kneiphof wäre nur ein Friedhof um mein Grab. Ein wiederbelebterOrt des Wissens würde dagegen an Büchern und Arbeitstisch festhalten, die mir – ohne Königs-berg je verlassen zu haben – hier zur eigenen Welt geworden sind.” (“A future undeveloped,vacant Kneiphof would be the cemetery around my grave. But a revived place of knowledgewould hang on to books and desk, which have – without ever having left Königsberg – becomemy own world.”)

170


171


NameJochen Brandi† November 2005

OriginGöttingen/Germany

ProfessionArchitect

Main professional field/Main subjectArchitecture, urban design and landscapeprojectsInternational competition achievements (in USA, Russia, Senegal, Turkey, Vietnam, a.o.)European Steel Design Award 1976Publication: LANDSCAPE – determined city

NameAndrej Derbenkov


ProfessionLong distance captain

Main professional fieldLocal history and landscape history,journalism

Main subjectUrbanistics, history of the Kaliningrad Region

172



Continuity and inconsistency – Experience from Berlin

Prof. Peter Zlonicky

Continuity and inconsistency – Experience from Berlin

A comparison with KaliningradBerlin is different. Berlin is larger, is a capital city. Berlin was shop window for the developmentof East and West. Berlin has seen some rapid development after reunification, but neglectedsome districts. Berlin today is in a critical phase of transformation.

What do the two cities have in common? Kaliningrad and Berlin have similar historical referen-ces. Both cities build bridges – territorial between East and West. The most important bridgeswere built by the spirit of enlightenment and the sciences in the nineteenth century, culture andart in the early twentieth century. Berlin destroyed economic and cultural bridges in the warstarted by the National Socialists, and ultimately caused the destruction of both cities.

Town PlanThe destruction of Berlin did not start with the bombardment of 1943 to 1945, but with the demo-lition of entire districts for the grand axes planned by the National Socialists. The radical restruc-turing of the traditional urban framework and the demolition of a total of 73,000 flats were to makeway for the proposals of Hitler and his chief architect Speer to put up representative buildings forthe “Third Reich”. Aim was to make Berlin the world capital and to proclaim it as “Germania” aftera world exhibition in 1950.

173

1 | The great north-south axis and the “Hall of the People” (exceeding 300 metres in height, compared to the old Reichstag in the foreground) fromthe design of Albert Speer (1941)

174


2 | Plan of the inner city prior to demolition in the war black: existing buildings; light blue: construction sites; mid-blue: almost completed projects;blue-violet: Government buildings; ochre-yellow: new public spaces

3 | Plan of the inner city after reunification black: existing buildings; light blue: construction sites; mid-blue: almost completed projects; blue-violet:Government buildings; ochre-yellow: new public spaces

The “cold war”, the development of West German and East German governments – especiallythe construction of the wall, led to Berlin being a divided city. Looking at the town plan after recon-struction, it becomes apparent that two ideologically competing proposals have the same basicconcept. The town plan should be retained in principle, the city should be more open, less dense,more green; the city should be a representative place, but also a place to live.

Reunification set off a building boom in Berlin. Even before the decision for the new capital wasmade (1991) old and new landowners secured the best sites for themselves (Potsdamer Platz).The development of the capital was initially planned as a comprehensive new construction pro-ject, the restraint of decreasing resources led to the conversion of the existing fabric.

175

4 | current plan of the inner city black: existing buildings; light blue: construction sites; mid-blue: almost completed projects; blue-violet:Government buildings; ochre-yellow: new public spaces

5 | Brandenburg Gate 2005, pictures of a destroyed square 1945

Today, Berlin is a shining city that is especially attractive to young people – and it is also a citythat is in the middle of a severe economic and financial crisis. Investments in the hinterland weak-en inner city areas. Inhabitants move to the periphery. The birth rate is decreasing, like in all Ger-man cities. Also the financial strength has adapted to the general situation – Berlin has livedbeyond its means for too long. Public infrastructures and difficult neighbourhoods and their socialproblems have been neglected, such as the industrially produced new estates of the 1970s/80s.

StrategiesAmong the numerous contributions to the urban development of Berlin, the following three con-cepts show innovative development options that reach beyond the city.

In the social and cultural crisis of the 1980s Berlin developed a system of “cautious urban rene-wal” by the example of the neglected district Kreuzberg. In collaboration with residents' groups,especially with active young people, it was possible to save the “broken city”. Kreuzberg still hasproblems today, but the built environment and the infrastructure have been modernised, disad-vantaged inhabitants are largely integrated.

Immediately after reunification an active senator set up the “city forum”. Over the space of threeyears players in the field of urban planning in Berlin met twice monthly for two days: represen-tatives of the political parties, economy, trade unions and environmental groups, building socie-ties and tenants, urban planners and architects. Each group was allocated a “bench”. Additionallythere was a “bench for interjectors”: independent citizens, artists and writers. The senator re-

176


7 | Berlin Study, Strategies for the city; title page of the publication6 | Objectives of cautious urban renewal of the district Kreuzberg

sponsible for urban development and the environment participated in all meetings, but saw hisrole as “first listener”, only contributing to the discussion when it was in danger of going off thesubject. The Berlin City Forum was the model for many similar forums in other German cities.

The “Berlin Study” combines different strategies for the development of the city. It was composedby independent scientists and politicians who developed programmes for “twenty-first centurysociety”. These strategies focus on integrative politics for the city and its districts. They strive forsocial peace as a prerequisite for economic development.

The “critical reconstruction of the city” was the constant motif of urban planning in Berlin sincethe late 1980s. Adherence to the historical town plan, preference of “urban parcel planning”, re-ference to classical building heights and design of structured facades were the guiding principlesof urban development that was determined by an understandable desire to recreate the tradi-tional townscape, but which also led to the immobilisation of the town, displaying little willingnessto take risks with new architecture. The reconstruction of public spaces was successful and inthe best tradition of the model of the European city.

Building blocks in a new BerlinReunification, invoked by all West German governments and hoped for by many citizens' groups,also from East Germany, has taken politicians and the city of Berlin by surprise: there were noconcepts for the time of reunification. At least common infrastructure was rebuilt within a shortperiod of time. However, the traces of the common history – of the divided city – were demolished

177

8 | Public space Unter den Linden; title page of the publication of theSenate office, ca. 1996

along with the Berlin wall. The “wall in people's heads” is still present in the minds of the citizensof Berlin and it is up to the young generation to overcome this.

During the initial period that lacked a concept large firms helped themselves: Daimler Benz, Sonyand others bought the rights to implement large scale urban development projects in the citycentre. The buildings on Potsdamer Platz, and now also on Leipziger Platz, display a new scalethat is appreciated by businesses and visitors to the city, but not by the people of Berlin.

The “Schloss debate”also is an answer to the new scale of the city: at least in the centre it shouldbe possible to reconstruct historic urban spaces. The reconstruction of the palace itself is aproblem: it strengthens the tendencies to erase the history of the last seventy years. The former“Palace of the Republic”, the modern East German Parliament building, would have to bedemolished. Proposals for new uses have not been put forward. Fortunately there are noprospects for realisation.

Pariser Platz on Brandenburg Gate is still loved by the people of Berlin and tourist for being thesalon of the city. Frozen with the rigid regulations of “critical reconstruction”, it would today be anempty square – if the new Academy of Arts had not opened up its controversial glass façade ontothe square. For a few weeks now it has been a lively space in the centre of the city.

Handling remembranceWith the reunification of the city, important memorials of the post-war period were taken on, asfor example the monument of the Soviet army. They will also be protected in future.

178


9 | The Berlin wall as art and as reminder, only retained in a fewplaces

10 | New building on Potsdamer Platz, view from Leipziger Straße

11 | Historic centre of the city, view of the “Palace of the Republic”;title page of advertising brochure

It took 60 years to build memorials for the murdered European Jews in Berlin. Only a few weeksago the Holocaust Memorial was opened, a large field of steles that deliberately avoids indoctri-nation, letting each visitor, based on his own experience and knowledge, reflect the most severecultural inconsistency that emanated from this city. People who use it in a multitude of ways nowhave adopted the site as a public open space.

The project “Topography of Terror”, an institution to come to terms with the history of the perpetra-tors of the Nazi regime, has not been realised until now. Misgivings that the construction of thememorial is stalled in the interest of surviving perpetrators are not without reason.

The smallest memorials are the paving stones set into the footpaths in front of the houses of for-mer Jewish citizens. They remind of names and dates of those residents who were driven awayor murdered. A growing number of citizens are involved in this individual way of coming to termswith history. A growing number of stones in many of Berlin's streets are expression of the wish tocome to grips with a past that has been suppressed for a long time.

Which Berlin experience is of interest to Kaliningrad?Not wanting to transpose proposals for Berlin onto other cities, it is however possible to gene-ralise the experience. If at all from Berlin, some of the Berlin strategies and projects can be usedas building blocks for the model of the European city. In this sense they can be generalised – asBerlin has learned from many other European cities.

179

12 | New Academy of Arts in its old location,Pariser Platz 4

13 | Memorial for the murdered Jews in Europe 14 | Stumbling blocks: Reminders in front of the houses of residentswho were driven away or murdered

The search for the lost centre is the topic of many debates in European cities. In Berlin, wheretwo centres developed during the period of the wall, the aim is to find one common centre. Is itenough to rebuild the historic facades? Is there such a thing as a common intellectual centre?What determines the identity of the city?

“Critical reconstruction” is an attempt to reproduce some of the essential elements of the Euro-pean city: public spaces, streets and squares, a typical building pattern, including heights anddensities. Does this have to be combined with a strict set of rules? What are the acceptableexceptions?

Large building projects are gaining in importance in European cities – they are landmarks, evi-dence of the strengths of a city. Is the economic strength not also dependant on the social, thecultural climate of a city? Apart from traditional infrastructures, are not soft infrastructure ele-ments such as environment, design quality, the cultural and social conditions important? Are notthe economically successful city on the one hand, and the social city on the other, two insepara-ble sides of the coin?

The city has to be read like an open book of history. There are large signs and numerous smalltraces of memory of good and also of awful times. Are these memories to be shaped by themunicipal institutions alone? If the city is the project of its citizens – should they not have theopportunity to actively participate in the process of remembrance?

Sometimes it is the debate on strategy for a project that is more important than the product itself.Every city must provide levels for such a debate – levels that are carried by the commitment ofthe people. They offer the forum for a joint learning process, for formulating public opinion, forstrengthening civil society. Can the international urban development forum in Kaliningradstrengthen public debate on the further development of this European city?

180


15 | The Symposium in Kaliningrad

181

NameProf. Peter Zlonicky

OriginMunich/Germany

ProfessionArchitect with a focus on urban planning

Main professional field/Main subjectUrban development and urban design,cautious urban renewal, development aid in the Near East, in Northand West Africa, evaluations in Rumania, in Haiti and Brazil, cooperation with Pratt Institute in Brooklyn,NY. Research mainly in the field of socialcompatibility of large projects and the futuredevelopment of urban districts.


182



Methods of controlling the townscape of Helsinki

Anna Brunow-Maunula

183

Methods of controlling the townscape of Helsinki

Why present Helsinki at a seminar about Kaliningrad. Helsinki is young and there are only fewhistorical layers. The city is at present holding a strong position as a growing economic, adminis-trative and cultural city. One interesting aspect of Helsinki is that it can be conceived as a physi-cal manifestation of a democratic welfare state.

HistoryOn the 750th anniversary of Kaliningrad Helsinki has just celebrated its 450th anniversery. Hel-sinki, however, was not built in stone until after 1810. Frequent fires, mainly caused by battlesbetween the Russians and Swedes, destroyed much of the urban fabric of earlier times.

The historic centre, built between 1820-50, was financed by the Russian Tsar Alexander I. Thetown plan was conceived by Johan August Ehrenström and its buildings drawn by the Germanarchitect Carl Ludwig Engel (Ill. 1). This centre still gives the towscape its identity and scale,although the population of Helsinki has grown from 15,000 in 1850, to 555,000 in the year 2000.

The capital of Finland has, for a long period of time, been a growth pole (Ill. 2), mainly due tointernal migration brought about by changes in economic conditions. The urban development ofHelsinki has gained attention not because of exceptional solutions or spectacular projects, butbecause of its high urban qualities.

Urban QualitiesMunicipal steering and democratic control of development have always had a relatively strongand independent status. I state a few of the reasons:

- The city, together with the municipality and the state, has always been a significant landowner and taxes have been comparatively high.

- In the capital, the demand for developable land and development rights has always been sufficiently high to keep the power in the hands of the regulating bodies.

- In Finland, corruption, which generally gravitates towards this sector, is almost non-existent.

1 | Helsinki 1877, painting by Oskar Kleineh

184


Consequently, decisions regarding city planning have been in the hands of democratically elec-ted bodies while professionals have carried out the actual planning. The tax income has beensteady, even though the city is constantly struggling with a cash deficit.

The following has contributed to some of the urban qualities:

Helsinki has a well-functioning infrastructureDepending on the political majority, the focus of investment shifts between public transport andprivate cars. The result is that while we plan for the extension of a Metro line we build extensivemulti-storey car parks in the city centre. Both are needed (Ill. 3).

Everyone has a roof over his or her head; most people own their own homeAfter the World War II, Finland faced a major period of transition. New housing was in great de-mand in industrial areas. The government wanted to promote frugal money management amongthe citizens, but there were further political reasons why people were encouraged to becomehomeowners. A housing policy, which still prevails, was started by a system of reasonably pricedloans and inexpensive building technology (Ill. 4).

The influx in population to the Helsinki Metropolitan Area is great, and the demand for housing isconstant. The majority of high-rise housing development is subsidised by the government, andtargeted at the private market. The government still regulates the conditions for the allocation ofhousing and controls prices. One of the problems of this situation is the resultant uniform residen-

2 | Helsinki Masterplan 2001

185

3 | Transportation 1986-2004

4 | “Säteri” Prefabricated panel construction

Private vehicular Buses Trams Underground Regional railway

186


tial solution, where architects have to put in much effort to try giving the buildings an individualfinish (Ill. 5).

Public space and sites for public buildings are safeguarded in the masterplan. Not only concerthalls, theatres and museums but also schools, libraries, health and day-care centres have playedan important role in creating the identity of the townscape. The city has generally taken care ofpublic construction works (Ill. 6). Only recently the need to develop concepts for private sectorfinance has emerged; this has many reasons, including a shortage of resources.

It should be mentioned that the Church still plays an important role. New churches are built withseparate tax money.

Local plans generally allocated space for commercial development in excess of that required byproperty developers. Nevertheless, the steering of developers' wishes has succeeded in Helsin-ki, but this is no longer so beyond the city boundaries (Ill. 7). Even the neighbouring towns arecompeting for newcomers by allowing considerable deviations from their local plans, or by amen-ding detailed local plans in conflict with the masterplan.

Controlling the building processNew legislationIn Finland the control of land use and building is based on legislation. Legislation is modelled on

6 | Library in Kuusankoski5 | “Arabia” Residential block

other Northern European countries – you will be familiar with the general principles of these actsand regulations.

The new Land Use and Building Act was adopted in 2000. It includes reforms that requireddecades of preparation. The biggest changes in land use legislation were in the area of nationalplanning.

- Many of the differences between rural and urban areas were abolished. - The preparation of detailed local plans was transferred from county level to the municipalities. - It was stipulated that a certain proportion of the increase in land value, that is, added value

brought about by additional development rights, is made payable to the municipality. - The opportunities for citizens to participate in the process were also increased. - Demolition permits were among the reforms of building legislation. - Requirements for sustainable development and for the right of citizens for a good living en-

vironment were incorporated in the new Land Use and Building Act.

Building legislation is complemented by regulations, and the city's own guidelines and decisions.The principal instruments to enforce and monitor the regulations are the process of zoning andgranting building permits.

City Planning DepartmentHelsinki has invested considerably into local planning. The City Planning Department has almostone hundred employed architects who prepare and control the implementation of projects. Boththe planning department and the private sector also commission consultants to prepare draftplans. In both cases, further development and detailed planning are carried out largely behindclosed doors in the City Planning Department. A democratically elected body, the City PlanningCommittee, approves the plans, and representatives of political parties can assert influence onthese decisions.

Citizens can, with justified arguments, delay or stop processes by filing a complaint about a pro-ject (Ill. 8).

187

7 | Office building for Stakes and Senate Properties

188


Building Control DepartmentThe department has over one hundred employees in total, handling permits required even forsmall-scale construction projects. Formerly, anyone could apply for building permission. Current-ly, an applicant is required to prove that he or she has the necessary professional skills for thetask. The department's principal function is to check that the projects comply with the plans andmeet requirements.

The town planner may have added a number of guidelines on the appearance of the buildings,and the regulation department ensures that these are followed. This may apply to the retentionof part of an old building, integration in the existing environment or design guidelines for achie-ving uniformity in a newly built area.

8 | Urban planning process

selection process for land areato be developed approved master plan

D E T A I L E D P L A N N I N G I N H E L S I N K I

programm

e & schedule

draft planproposed plan

approved plan

network diagram of the detailed planning process

public participation &assessment initial sketch plans work programme

exhibition & discussionforums on draft plan draft plan

draft plan toPlanning Committee

proposed plan to PlanningCommittee for approval

proposed plan - revisions& public comments

proposed planon-deposit

proposed planto City Board

plan approvedby City Council

proposed planmay be returned to

Planning Committeefor revision

The building supervisor has the right to present his or her views on issues of design and appea-rance, which are handled by the Cityscape Advisory Board.

The democratically elected Building Committee has the final say on building permits. The stan-dard practice is to abide by the opinion of the presenting official of the Building RegulationDepartment.

Influencing the building processCityscape Advisory BoardThe Cityscape Advisory Board operates under the Building Regulation Department. Its membersinclude the highest-ranking officials of the department, the City Planning Department and twooutside experts, who are invited as members and generally represent the best of the architecturalprofession.

During its life of almost five years the board has earned great respect within the building industry,even though it is a voluntarily appointed body. This achievement stems from the board's con-siderable professional expertise enabling it to make clear long-term policy decisions – despite thefact that it has to tackle questions of appearance, which are subjective by nature.

The highest-ranking official responsible for planning issues is the Deputy Mayor for City Planningand Real Estate, who has set up an unofficial body, the Urban Planning Academy, as his own ad-visory body. Its invited members include professionals and representatives of related fields. De-pending on the issues dealt with, he may also invite pertinent decision makers to the meetings.

The Finnish Architectural PolicyThe Finnish Architectural Policy is a new instrument for creating a better built environment. It isvery much a tool of today, a tool for finding ways of nurturing good environments without over-burdening public sector spending.

Therefore, we must find new ways to increase awareness. We must have influential figures re-presenting players in various fields more visibly committing themselves to the nurturing of goodenvironments alongside their own goals. We must promote the creation of networks betweenexisting resources and willing voluntary decision makers.

The main objectives of the policy:The Finnish Architectural Policy Programme charts the central development and maintenancemeasures with regard to what makes a good built environment, and condenses them into 24actions (resolutions) mainly aimed at players in the public sector. In most cases the responsiblebody is clearly specified.

The programme has three strong tendencies: Strengthening the expertise and specialist organi-sations; producing obligations and willingness that guarantee a good cultural quality of the builtenvironment; increasing participation and information related to the rights and responsibilities ofcitizens.

189

190


The main objectives, originally expressed as 24 actions, are:- to create opportunities for the realisation of the constitutional rights of citizens to have a good

environment,- to facilitate the citizen´s rights and his/her responsibilities for his/her own environment by

promoting architectural education and public awareness,- to set high standards for public building and property management,- to set an example for the whole construction sector,- to encourage the use of procedures that will enhance architecture and high quality building,- to promote innovation through architectural education, research and development work,- to improve the care of our architectural heritage and development of the built environment as

part of a broader approach to cultural history and architecture.

The City of Helsinki has begun preparing its own Architectural Policy, including the general goalsmentioned earlier, as well as specific proposals for action. The Architectural Policy Programme,approved by the City Council, should not just impose restrictions on the building industry but alsomotivate its players to invest in a better-built environment.

Architectural competitionsA significant percentage of notable buildings in Finland have come about as a result of architec-tural competitions since 1876. Finland has a most successful record of realising winning competi-tion entries and satisfied clients (Ill. 9). The reason for this lies in the way competitions are carriedout.

9 | Myyrmäki Church 10 | Viewing tower at the zoo in Helsinki

191

A professional body advises clients on how to write clear programmes that abide by our ratherstrict rules. But above all, the long and thorough judging process in which two professional jud-ges, chosen by an independent body or by the invited competitors, are much in charge of theresult. The jury consists of about ten members from different fields, but the two “chosen” profes-sionals are in charge of analysing all entries, presenting them to the other members of the jury,identifying the criteria as a result of discussions, and obtaining necessary calculations or expertopinions. This process goes on for about eight or ten weeks in which four or five jury meetingsare held. The aim is to guarantee that the client really gets the best schemes and a solution thathe wants to continue with. There has never been a problem in keeping the authors of the entriessecret during the whole process.

Other instrumentsImportant discussions about architecture and the townscape of Helsinki are held in different insti-tutions in the capital: the Aalvar Aalto Academy, the Building Information Foundation and theArchitects' Society.

The renowned department of Architecture at the Helsinki University of Technology is a valuableresource in shaping the future identity of our capital (Ill. 10).

Personal ProfileVita

NameAnna Brunow-Maunula

OriginHelsinki/Finland

ProfessionArchitect

Main professional field/Main subjectArchitecture and Urban planningGuest professorship at the University of AppliedSciences Hamburg, 1995-96 and at the Collegeof Visual Arts, Hamburg 1999-2002

192



On the principles of retaining the urban genetic code in theprocess of reconstruction and development of the city

Dr. Sergey V. Semenzov

On the principles of retaining the urban genetic code in the process of reconstruction anddevelopment of the city

The issues of retaining the historical heritage of any city and the possibilities of developing thecity as a whole (on an urban planning scale and in its architecture) are two sides of a medal. Thereality is constantly setting urban development tasks while retaining its historical heritage andgives examples of attempts to retain history within modern development.

All historical cities have developed over centuries. They all possess their specific characteristicsthat are revealed in the uniqueness of the urban frame (building system), in the system of functio-nal and environmental zoning, in the system of ensembles and outstanding buildings, in the his-torical context of the ordinary urban fabric, in the peculiarities of stylistic unity and variety of theurban environment. These peculiarities can be seen in the specific urban genetic code of eachcity.

The urban genetic code is not only discernible in each particular building (planning, composi-tional, stylistic, image and other features of buildings, structures, even complexes and ensem-bles), but also in the design rules of the entire city environment that developed over centuries,unique to every city, including the construction rules of each particular building in the context ofdevelopment of an individual city.

Unrestrained and uncontrolled modern development is harmful for any historical city (Paris, Ber-lin, London, St. Petersburg, Moscow etc.) just as indiscriminately retaining absolutely everythingthat survived from the past. Each city has its own specific measure of the historical and the newthat allows it to develop rather than destroy the historical urban, architectural and cultural basis.This measure is determined by maturity and the system of community requirements, political willof the authorities, and expertise of the professionals. The historical heritage is determined by thesystem of monuments, objects of protection and the system of conservation areas.

The analysis of development of the world architecture shows that modern buildings remain up-to-date and attract attention for 20-30 years at the most. Then comes the inevitably stage offundamental re-evaluation of their urban significance within the changed systems of values. Mostof them are found to be of no value and are (often even obligatorily) replaced by new ones. Thatis why all over the world masterpieces of mass industrial construction are being cruelly anddauntlessly pulled down. Even retaining the many urban ensembles, squares and avenues thatappeared in capitals and large cities in the 1960s-1970s, built in the fashionable then style of LeCorbusier is questioned. And many older buildings, houses, and ensembles, which are less pre-tentious, are generally held in higher cultural, public and professional esteem. Moreover, they areunique and possess specific features.

In order to maintain the historical image of the city it is necessary to retain the most importanturban, architectural and historical cultural objects – the highest bearers of this historical tradition.One of the generally acknowledged methods of retaining our heritage is the protection ofhistorical monuments, the creation of conservation zones of various types (attractions, conserva-tion areas, protected areas, areas with building regulations, areas of vertical limitations etc.).

But this proves to be insufficient. Contradictions between the requirements of modern develop-ment and those of retaining historical buildings are found practically everywhere. The problems

193

of modern urban developments are often solved by means of satisfying modern demands on citylife (according to norms, requirements, town planning regulations) and within the system of mo-dern protection measures (protection of individual buildings, system of protected areas, historicaland architectural plans, urban protection areas etc.). But it proves not to be effective. Reckless-ness, contradiction and deficiency in this approach can be seen in the demolition of historicalcentres of Moscow, Stockholm, Berlin and Kaliningrad, for example. Even the creation of differentconservation areas around individual old buildings does not prevent them from being destroyed.

This approach works perfectly well for single buildings, but it fails to work for the whole urbanenvironment. General problems of conservation and simultaneous urban development are pre-determined by the problems of conservation and development of the urban genetic code of aparticular historical city. This does not only mean retaining specific buildings, but to a greaterextent retaining urban territorial rules of the formation and development of cities.

For instance, the three-hundred-year-old history of St. Petersburg shows that the basis of itsdevelopment had been the principles of regularity and measure, a clear rule for the process ofurban development. Initially, under Peter I and during Anna Ioannovna's reign, these strict plan-ning regulations were introduced (they were even expressed in figures, with well-defined zoningand a clear system of codes). The progress of St. Petersburg was based on principles and inter-connected parallel development of architecture and property rights, and design principles of itscultural field. Admittedly, the most important feature of modern St. Petersburg is not only thepresence of a considerable number of outstanding architectural monuments, but first and fore-most, its unique historical urban context, unique town planning regulations, unique town planningrules of the whole city environment. For St. Petersburg this piecemeal approach of retainingindividual monuments is absolutely insufficient, even if the immediate environment is retained.The conservation of nearly 8,000 buildings, complexes and ensembles fails to save St. Peters-burg's historical context. The piecemeal approach to conservation and restoration cannot ensurethe protection of the uniqueness of the whole urban environment. The example of St. Petersburgshows that in order to preserve its individual historical and modern character (the unity of thehistorical and the new), it is necessary to apply the design rules of the urban environment in thewhole city, and the entire St. Petersburg agglomeration. Naturally, it is more difficult to implementthe design rules for the environment rather than preserving its individual elements.

As expected, it is only possible to ensure the compatibility of historical buildings with modernarchitecture within the design rules of the urban environment. As a comparison, in medicine itwas discovered long ago that only genetically related organs, tissues and cells are biologicallycompatible. It is doomed to failure if one tries to combine genetically incompatible organs, tissuesand cells – great efforts will be needed not to destroy the immunity of the whole organism. If weconsider a city as an organism, the placing of genetically incompatible elements (buildings, struc-tures, ensembles, complexes, roads, squares, blocks of extrinsic buildings etc.) will inevitablylead to the destruction of the historical city. If instead of the historical construction with clear spa-tial characteristics (density and configuration of streets, embankments, canals and squares, func-tional zoning, density, height and number of storeys, stylistic, architectural and silhouette charac-teristics of the construction etc.) open spaces are formed, this is also destructive within the con-text of the city. In all historical cities many of such incompatible objects have been created.

This problem is typical of any historical city that attempts not only to preserve its historical monu-ments but also to progress. The key terms of the issue are as follows: conservation (of buildings,

194


structures, complexes, ensembles, elements of the historical environment, monuments of histori-cal heritage, objects of urban conservation and protection areas), development (of buildings,structures, complexes, ensembles, elements of the historical environment, the city on the whole),historically formed design rules of the urban environment, urban genetic code.

Unfortunately, the issue is not legally secured. The town planning code (of 2004) and the law “onthe protection of the historical heritage of the Russian Federation” (2002) do not provide ways ofsolving the problem. In fact this rests with the personal experience, expertise and intuition ofdesigners. This experience is not always positive, especially if professional issues are mixed withpride and politics.

So how can the problem be solved? Without denying established approaches, it is also neces-sary (in quantitative and qualitative terms) to discover an individual urban code of the city, forexample of Kaliningrad. This code must be included in the system of planning legislation andplanning documentation (such as masterplans, surveying projects, possibly restorable planningprojects and building projects, pivotal historical and architectural plans and in systems of conser-vation measures, town planning regulations), as well as in the system of project documentation(through architectural plans and architectural restoration projects, holding of competitions, in ten-der documentation, in the conservation obligations etc.).

The characteristics of the urban genetic code can be expressed in empirical, evaluative data, aswell as in precise quantitative and qualitative indices. The urban genetic code can only be dis-covered on the basis of research of all the stages of development of a city as a whole and peculi-arities of its historical and modern buildings.

A. The main system peculiarities of the urban genetic code are as follows:- Spontaneity of design or creation and development according to masterplans;- Degree of control over the city's development exercised by the authorities and professionals;- Degree of presence (absence) of planning regulations, formulated and approved rules and

regulations;- Typology of the urban environment on the whole and its peculiarities (agglomeration, mega-

polis, city, settlement, system of settlements, etc.);- Degree of regularity and irregularity of the urban environment;- Urban and general cultural significance of the city or settlement in question.

B. The characteristics of the urban genetic code:- Urban framework (hierarchy, typology, specific planning regularities, planning parameters,

specific alignments, configuration of main traffic routes, squares, canals, roads, etc);- Urban fabric (hierarchy, centricity, functional regularities and peculiarities, system and peculi-

arities of dividing into blocks, groups of blocks, suburbs, districts, planning areas, zones, sur-veying system, allocation of planning zones for different purpose etc.);

- Environmental zoning and characteristic regularities of each zone (or district);- Architectonics of the urban environment (polyrhythmic of urban emphases and zones, cha-

racteristic heights, building densities etc.);- Rules of territorial interaction of elements of the urban framework and urban fabric;- System of urban dominants and town planning background;- System of vertical dominants;- System and typology of visual links (fields, corridors, zones, axes, networks, etc.);

195

- Most important bearers of the urban characteristics that require unconditional preservation;- Incompatible bearers of urban characteristics that require immediate changes.

C. Object characteristics of the town planning genetic code:- Specific historical buildings, constructions, complexes, ensembles, their historical, composi-

tional, planning, stylistic and other peculiarities;- Rules of territorial interaction of the object elements (buildings, constructions, complexes, en-

sembles);- Significant bearers of object characteristics that require unconditional preservation;- Strictly incompatible bearers of object characteristics that require immediate changes.

In practice, at this stage all historical cities develop the characteristics of the genetic code, butwithout discovering the rules of their territorial interaction. A single step approach of revealing,describing and preserving them prevails without taking into consideration their interaction in thespecific urban context. And the main system peculiarities and urban characteristics of the geneticcode are hardly considered.

As an example, the analysis of the main system peculiarities of the urban genetic code of St. Pe-tersburg is included.

St. Petersburg was initially established according to a special town planning programme, theRussian variant of a world capital. Up to 1917, the building and improvement of St. Petersburghad been considered one of the most important national issues. The reforms in St. Petersburgwere conducted along with reforms in all of Russia. The town planning and architectural activitiesin the capital on the River Neva in the 18th to early 20th century were mainly conducted underthe personal control of the emperors and empresses. Peter the Great rejected the direct copyingof both Russian and west European towns. The searches for analogies in urban form and archi-tecture in Amsterdam, Paris, Venice, London, Moscow etc. showed that St. Petersburg does nothave any direct parallels in world architecture. One can only discover single elements of townplanning, architecture, building construction, legislation, system of management from other citiesand schools that were inimitably combined in St. Petersburg. The city absorbed mainly Russianand West European practice transforming it into a unique combination of specific St. Petersburgarchitecture of a specific St. Petersburg spatial scale.

St. Petersburg, an unprecedented large, regular city, was created in the conditions of the pre-dominance, both in Russia and in Western Europe, of the medieval town planning tradition withpicturesque curved streets, non-geometric plans and unregulated construction. Small regulartowns, fortresses, country estates and castles were still rare. The development of St. Petersburgand its town planning and architectural features is a phenomenon in the world's urban planningand architectural theory and practice. During the 18th century and the first half of the 19th cen-tury, St. Petersburg was not only an unprecedented urban experience for the architects of theworld, but also an object of imitation in the town planning practices of many countries. It can bestated that in the 18th century and the early 19th century, St. Petersburg was the world's testingground for town planning and architectural ideas. Many ideas of Western European architectsremained unrealised in the West, but were first implemented in St. Petersburg and then returnedto Western Europe as realisable and implemented projects deserving of European imitation.Mass reconstruction of the West European cities of the 19th century according to the rules ofregularity was conducted not only on the basis of theoretical ideas of West European treatises

196


and local experiments, but also under the influence of the actual practice of St. Petersburg'sgrand regular town plan.

St. Petersburg' s town plan is a worldwide phenomenon.

The urban genetic code of St. Petersburg was actually developed in the course of three centu-ries. Peter the Great laid the most important principles of its development. Under the reign of thetsar-reformer's followers the crystallisation of the main planning principles of the city was continu-ed. At present the issue of preserving the urban genetic code of the city and the whole of theagglomeration is pressing since current activities will result in the destruction of the code.

The main system peculiarities of the urban genetic code of St. PetersburgUnity of the capital city and its outskirts, their formation according to a single spatial programmeFrom the very beginning in 1703, a huge agglomeration began to establish, but not the city. Thecity, its near and remote suburbs (fortification, industrial, noblemen's manors, peasants' dwel-lings), the system of reserved forests and areas, the road system, natural waterways and man-made canals, the integrative system of administration of the capital city and the province, integra-tive town planning, architecture, property legislation – all this was aimed at the creation of acapital agglomeration, but not a city in its own right. Peter the Great determined its initial spatialparameters: from Oranienbaum to Kronstadt (in the west) to the mouth of the River Volkhov (inthe east), from Sestroretsk and Toksovo (in the north) to Krasnoe Selo and Sarskaya Myza (inthe south). In time the borders of the agglomeration changed, but the principles of the co-ordinated development of the city and its outskirts remained unchanged.

Succession of development of the city and the whole of the agglomerationThe territory on which St. Petersburg was founded was not uninhabited. The city and most of itssuburbs and roads were formed on the basis of existing settlements of the 13th and 14th centurythat had outlived the Novgorod, Moscow and Swedish development periods of the Neva area.Many modern neighbourhoods and districts of St. Petersburg, and most of the suburbs arelocated on pre-Petersburg settlements; hundreds of kilometres of pre-Petersburg roads becamecity avenues and streets. In the area of the modern Greater St. Petersburg more than 400 settle-ments existed for centuries. In the nearby outskirts there were about 600 settlements. Besides,the development of the city itself was successive in character. Often the ideas formulated byexperts were implemented decades later by a new generation of architects. The first ideas for thedesign of the city centre and sub-centres of the capital on the River Neva, that still exist, wereexpressed by J. B. A. Leblond (1717). The first villages, similar to the principles of the fashionablegarden city of the early 20th century, were built on the banks of the Neva from 1739-1740, whenvillages for regiments of the life guards were established. The first ideas for constructing a damfor the railway from Lisy Nos via Kronstadt to Oranienbaum go back to 1844-1846.

Cyclicity of development of the city and the agglomerationAt different times the development of the city and the entire agglomeration was based on differentprinciples that successively replaced one another. The three main types, three main strategies ofthe spatial development of the areas can be distinguished into the strategy of extensive de-velopment, strategy of intensive reconstruction and strategy of compositional improvement of thecity and its outskirts. These strategies successively replaced one another, showing cyclical (non-linear) characteristics of development of the city and of the agglomeration. The strategy of exten-

197

sive development (by means of maximum development of earlier rural areas and extension ofthe city borders) was implemented in 1703-1761, 1802-1815, 1836-1879 and 1917-2004. Thestrategy of intensive reconstruction (within the stabilised city borders and the borders of the sub-urbs) was prevalent in 1762-1801 and 1880-1900. And the strategy of compositional improve-ment of the city and the outskirts (with the maximum development of the ensemble character ofthe entire urban environment and establishment of the main ensembles of the city and of signi-ficance to the whole of Russia) was implemented in 1816-1836 and 1901-1916. Each strategytype of city development has its own special type of masterplan, special systems of legislation,special systems of city administration and regulation.

City development on the basis of masterplansThe design of masterplans and main programme documents of the territorial and organisationalstructure of the city was obligatory for 300 years. Often, especially in the 18th century and early20th century, masterplans did not only determine the strategies of spatial development of the city,but also predetermined changes of borders and administrative division within the city, changesin the system of the city administration, of the town planning, architectural, construction andproperty legislation. Masterplans complimented each other, and grew one out of the other. As theanalysis of the world's urban planning shows, the elaboration and implementation of masterplanswas a compulsory condition for a world capital city. In the 18th century and beginning of the 20thcentury, establishment and development of St. Petersburg – Petrograd, and the design of itsmasterplan were considered a matter of national significance. The reforms in St. Petersburg werepart of the all-Russian reforms and were implemented under the personal control of the emperorsand empresses. All 19 masterplans for the city were a continuous and successive series of townplanning ideas for the development of St. Petersburg – Leningrad – St Petersburg. In accordancewith different development strategies of city, different types of masterplans were designed andimplemented.

Among the masterplans of extensive development are the following: a set of masterplans, impe-rial approved by Peter the Great, for several districts of St. Petersburg (1712-1715, 1718-1724);a set of imperial approved masterplans for several districts, areas and complexes of St. Peters-burg elaborated in the Commission on St. Petersburg's construction, in the headquarters of theLife Guards regiments, in the Chief Police Office (1735-1746); “Plan of the capital city of St. Pe-tersburg” (I.F. Truskot, 1748-1749); a set of imperial approved masterplans of individual peri-pheral areas of St. Petersburg drawn up in 1805-1836 (also in the “Committee on the con-struction improvement and hydraulic works”); a set of imperial approved masterplans of indivi-dual districts of St. Petersburg (1840-1879); a project of regulation of Leningrad (1925); Master-plan of Leningrad (L.A. Iliyn and others, 1926-1934); Masterplan of Leningrad (L.A. Iliyn andothers, 1935-1936); Masterplan of Leningrad (N.V. Baranov, A.I. Naumov and others, 1938-1939); Masterplan of Leningrad's reconstruction (N.V. Baranov, A.I. Naumov and others, 1944-1948); Masterplan of Leningrad's development (V.A. Kamensky, A.I. Naumov, G.N. Buldakov, V.F.Nazarov, G.K. Grigorieva, 1958-1967); Masterplan of Leningrad's and Leningrad region'sdevelopment (G.N. Buldakov, V.F. Nazarov, G.K. Grigorieva and others, 1980-1987).

Among the masterplans of the intensive reconstruction periods are the following: “Master dra-wing of St. Petersburg” by J.B.A. Leblond (1717); “New plan of the capital city and fortress of St. Petersburg” (A.V. Kvasov, 1765); “New plan of the capital city of St. Petersburg” (1776); “Newplan of the capital city of St. Petersburg” (1792, edited in 1796); “Design plan for the regulation

198


of the city of St. Petersburg” (1880); “Plan of the city of St. Petersburg and regulation of streetsuntil January 1, 1909” (1909).

Masterplans for compositional improvements of the area are the projects of the “Committee onimprovement of all the constructions and hydraulic works in St. Petersburg and adjoining areas”(1816-1836), the plan of regulation of Petrograd (I.A. Fomin and others, 1919-1923). An initiativeto develop a masterplan was also proposed by L.N. Benua, F.E. Enakiev, M.M. Peretyatkovich,N.E. Lansere (“Plan of St. Petersburg’s transformation”, 1910).

Development of the city and agglomeration on the basis of the town planning regulations, “modelprojects”, standard and individual design, under the complete control of architectsAlmost from onset in 1712, a strict system of clear, well-defined (with quantitative parameters)town planning regulations was introduced in St. Petersburg. Simultaneously the policy of indivi-dual design of large projects (buildings, structures, ensembles) and standard mass building fol-lowing “model projects” was introduced.

Regularity of the urban system, geometrical character and density of the street networkOne of the most outstanding features of St. Petersburg is the rule of straight roads and a geo-metrical grid. From 1703, the young city was developed on the principles of picturesque, non-linear planning. After 1712, by decree of Peter I, the reconstruction of built-up areas was startedusing straight streets and canals. Since the time of J.B.A. Leblond's (1717) project the rule ofgeometrically well-defined squares was introduced. The network of new villages acquired cleargeometrical outlines and special – typical only of St. Petersburg – building densities, avenues,streets, canals and squares. The optimal network of urban roads was purposefully created for St. Petersburg, governed by a specific size of cells or blocks between the routes. This develop-ment differed considerably from the principles of the formation in other cities around the world.This principle of regularity, geometricity and special density became one of the main design prin-ciples of the planning frame of St. Petersburg.

“Sloboda”(village) character of the areaThe territories of the city in all periods of its development were built up with separate, local com-positions of slobodas of different sizes. This principle also goes back to the times of Peter theGreat, but was manifested during the reign of Anna Ioannovna and Elizaveta Petrovna. Almostall the territories of the historical city were formed according to the sloboda principle.

The ensemble character of the design of areaDeliberate inclusion of the city and the whole of the agglomeration of the Neva area in the singleensemble. A most important feature of the urban environment of St. Petersburg is its ensemblecharacter. Ensembles that emerged at different periods and are of different compositional stylesformed a hierarchical multi-level system of ensembles in the city and its suburbs, in the courseof time. The main ensembles in the city are its main squares and the main Neva area. Since thetimes of Peter the Great, the Neva (from its source to the mouth) and Kronstadt Bay displayedthe main ensemble elements of the city itself and the main compositional elements of the wholeof the agglomeration.

The system of vertical dominantsThe system of vertical dominants of the city has almost always been one of the most importantelements of the capital environment that was created purposefully and professionally. From

199

1710-1712, Peter I formulated the design rules of the system of vertical dominants in the city. Theaxes of “prospects” and streets are aligned to vertical dominants: church cupolas, towers andspires of public, industrial and residential buildings. In the 1730s to 1740s, the spatial system ofvertical dominants was developed, based on the principle of the “field of perception” with verticalstwo to five times higher that the urban buildings of one to two storeys that could be seen fromalmost any spot. After the transition of the 1770s to the solid fire walls and increase in theaverage number of storeys from two to three or four (from the 1820s), and later five to six storeys(from the 1890s), the principle of the “field of perception” ceased to function. In the second halfof the 19th century architects deliberately switched over to the principle of “corridors of percep-tion” and started creating a system of turrets, bay windows or similar emphases. The old verticaldominants and new vertical emphases formed a single spatial multi-level system. Up to the1950s, these general principles of accentuation remained. The rejection in the 1960s of the verti-cal dominants led to the spatial disorder of the whole of the industrial city, resulting in a clearlyperceptible discomfort of the city environment.

Regularity and regulation of building neighbourhoodsGradually a single principle for the regular layout of neighbourhood blocks and building within theblocks was formed in the city. Under Peter I, the rule of building along red lines was formulated.The outer buildings did not yet occupy the whole of the front of the block and fences with gateswere built along the red line. J.B.A. Leblond proposed to implement the principle of outer buil-dings along the red line, but using fire walls along the embankment of the Neva. Regulationsgoverning the height and number of storeys were also introduced, as well as a differentiation ofpermitted types of buildings according to their materials in the whole territory of the city and thesuburbs. From the end of the 1730s, during the reign of Anna Ioannovna, regulation of buildingwithin the neighbourhood blocks was introduced. From the 1770s, under Catherine II, the rule ofsolid brick fire walls of a fixed height along the red lines in the area from the Neva to the RiverFontanka was introduced (after J.B.A. Leblond). Even in areas of regulated timber constructionbuilding rules applied. The following principle of construction was gradually developed andexisted up to the end of the 19th century: brick buildings were constructed in the city centre, brickand timber buildings in the suburbs, timber mass construction in the outskirts. In 1919-1920, anew principle was introduced: solid brick fire walls (or solid perimeter walls) of different styles inthe centre of the city; brick buildings, possibly not of the fire wall type, detached multi-storeybuildings with landscape elements in the periphery; and detached buildings (cottage type)surrounded by countryside outside the city. This principle was followed until the end of the 1950s.The construction of the perimeter type was always applied in the central territories of the city. Inthe inner city (even in the newly developed large sites) the construction of the fire wall was com-pulsory, for example, on Suvorovsky Prospect, on Bolshoy Prospect of Vasilievsky Island. Rowsof housing were constructed on the outskirts of the city and signified the peripheral character ofthe area. From the 1960s, with the transition to industrial methods, all development constructionwas of the row housing type. Practically not a single new route has been added to the centuries-tested rules of construction of central routes of St. Petersburg.

Multi-style arrangement of the city environmentSince the times of Peter I, attempts were made to create a mono-style urban fabric. They werecontinued during the reign of Anna Ioannovna, Elizaveta Petrovna, Catherine II, Alexander I andNicolas I. In pictures and engravings the city looked perfect, but actually applied to whole of thecity the mono-style was monotonous in appearance. But in 1842-1843 the monarch prohibitedthe construction of buildings of a single style. With the simultaneous increase of building in the

200


city (tenfold by 1880) the multi-style construction (of the epochs of Historicism, Modernism, Neo-Classicism) retained the principles of regularity (the construction was done along the red lineswith fire walls of a limited height), but it ensured diversity in the city environment. This period ofmulti-style construction formed almost 90% of the historical environment of St. Petersburg, sohighly praised all over the world. A return to the mono-style principle was implemented in theindustrial construction in new blocks in the second half of the 20th century, with all its negativeconsequences.

Urban and suburban types of sitesRules of laying out urban, outskirts and suburban blocks into plots. The urban neighbourhoodshad a clearly regulated division into residential and non-residential areas. The sizes of plots hadbeen standardised since the early projects of D. Treseni and J.B.A. Leblond, and they were finallygrouped and specified during the reign of Anna Ioannovna, at the end of the 1730s. The plotswere supposed to be rectangular (residential use) or non-rectangular (for public uses), 20-30meters wide along the red line and half the length of the block. Borders of the urban plots duringthe 18th and 19th century were stable. The plots in outskirts and suburbs, used as countryestates, for industrial purposes, or as green areas, did not have to conform to the standard size.After they were incorporated into the city, plots were often changed from the suburban type intourban types and urban construction rules applied. An example is the following: during the trans-formation of the suburban River Fontanka into a canal (1780-1790) the suburban dacha siteswere replaced by plots for urban layouts. Urban plots were the most important cells of the envi-ronment and the chief bearers of St. Petersburg's unique urban scale. They determined the front,the dimensions and the height of the buildings along the streets, densities and cellularity of thehistorical buildings blocks. In the course of comprehensive refurbishment works in the secondhalf of the 20th century, survey boundaries were abolished. This practice and the construction ofmodern out-of-scale buildings led to the destruction of the fundamental basis of the urbanenvironment of St. Petersburg and its historical plots.

System of gardens and parks as one of the most important elements of the urban environmentIn 1715, the proposals for Vasilievsky Island by D. Treseni included gardens in the urban environ-ment. In the 18th century and beginning of the 19th century, the creation of public gardens andparks in the city was obligatory. During the times of intensive mass construction in St. Petersburgin the middle of the 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century, parks and public gardenswere laid out on any vacant piece of land under control of the emperor, governor and the cityduma. The gardens and parks, not only in the suburbs but also in the city itself, were and still areone of the most important spatial systems of St. Petersburg.

System of canals in the city and in the suburbsAmong the most important elements within the urban framework and the entire agglomeration isthe system of navigable canals and water culverts extending from Oranienbaum to the Ladogaarea. The greatest canal-building activities were conducted under Peter the Great (numerousrealised canals and proposals that were not implemented in the area of the future St. Petersburg,a canal along the south shore of the bay of Finland, Ladoga canal, Kronstadt canal, Ropshinskyand Ligovsky canals, proposals for constructing canals up to Sarskaya Myza), during the reignof Catherine II (Kryukov and Ekaterininsky canals, River Fontanka, canal ditches within the cityboundaries and along the borders of the outskirts) and during the reign of Alexander I and NicolasI (Obvodnoy canal).

201

System of town planning regulations and functional spatial height limitationsAny construction in the city, in the outskirts and in the suburbs was conducted on the basis ofwell-defined town planning regulations. The first regulations were introduced in the reign of Peterthe Great. They formed part of the masterplans and were obligatory for all builders, includingmembers of the imperial family. The emperor himself controlled all kinds of building activities andredevelopment in the city centre.

Dynamism of spatial trajectories of formation of the centre and the main functional zones. Thesuccessive development and enlargement of the city and its suburbs led to the relocation of itsmost important components. The spatial structure of the city is dynamic. For example, the mainadministrative centre was moved from Troitskaya Square on Gorodskoy Island (St. Petersburg)to the spit of Vasilievsky Island and later to the Admiralty. Gradually and considerably its bordersexpanded up to the 1930s, when it was attempted to move it further south to the crossing atMezhdunarodny Prospect and Tsentralnaya Dugovaya Street. In the 1940s it was again locatedin the area of the Palace Square. The trajectory of the port is as follows: canal at the Kronwerk,division into military and commercial ports (Kronstadt and Galernaya harbours), north wharf ofthe spit of Vasilievsky Island, separation of the specialised bread and forestry ports,establishment of the sea port in the area of Gutuevsky Island, separation of the outer harboursin Oranienbaum and Luzhskaya Bay. The zones of the nearby suburban dacha areas are asfollows: Summer garden and the island (until the 1710s), then the banks of the Moika, ofKarpovka, Chernaya river (until the 1750s), of Fontanka (until the 1780s); the areas along thePetergoff Road and the banks of the River Neva, tsar manors and manors of high officials in allsuburban districts. The elitist residential areas of the city were located in the following sites:embankment near Troitskaya Square on Gorodskoy Island (until 1712), the area of the futureShpalernaya Street (1712-1716), the spit of Vasilievsky Island (1716-1721), Palace Embankment(1720-1760s), extension of the borders of the elitist residential area along Angliyskaya Em-bankment and along Nevsky Prospect (1760-1800s), then the elitist residential area was trans-ferred across Fontanka to the zone of Furshtatskaya, Zakharievskaya, Sergievskaya Street(1800-1880s), development of new areas on St. Petersburg Island and along the modern Pros-pect of Decabrists (1890-1900s), establishment of the elitist residential areas on Mezhdunarodnyand Suvorovsky Prospects (1940-1950s). In a similar way one can trace the trajectory of spatialtransfer of almost all significant town planning elements. “New Holland”, for example, was loca-ted in a different place before 1737, namely on the site of the arena of the Horse Guards Regi-ment.

The legislative succession of the city developmentA consistent town planning legislative base for the city and its outskirts was being constantly andsuccessively developed since the times of Peter the Great. It had been in force continuously, untilthe end of the 1930s when a transfer to a new system was made. Many of the decrees by Peterthe Great were supported by the legislation of Anna Ioanovna, Elizaveta Petrovna, Catherine II.These decrees were included in the Complete Laws of the Russian Empire, in the Code of Lawof the Russian Empire, became paragraphs and chapters of all the editions of the ConstructionStatute and Task Regulations. The transfer at the end of the 1930s to the system of buildingcodes (SniP) broke down the continuous successive line.

ConclusionsThe urban genetic code of St. Petersburg has been developing for centuries and retains its conti-nuity to the present. It has been acknowledged as one of the highest achievements of town plan-

202


203


ning art of the world. The historical centre, historical outskirts and landscapes of St. Petersburgand its agglomeration were made a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1989. Retaining the geneticcode, even under conditions of new mass construction and mass standard buildings, will be a re-quirement for preserving the individual character (based on the historical development) of St. Pe-tersburg. The destruction of the genetic code, even if hundreds and thousands of individual mo-numents are saved, will only help retain single monuments, but not St. Petersburg as a completehistorical and urban ensemble. The focus on a few fashionable, glossy buildings is the funda-mental danger in maintaining the city's genetic code.

NameDr. Sergey Vladimirovic Semenzov

OriginSt. Petersburg/Russia

ProfessionArchitect

Main professional fieldUrban planning, reconstruction andrestoration of the historical environment

Main subjectMasterplans, planning control, local planning and building construction, historical and theoretical research

204


As a conclusion to the International Symposium the participants formulated the followingrecommendations:

1. Broaden the scope of the central topicsIn the further development of the City of Kaliningrad discussion of the following topics seems ofparticular importance:

- The joint development of city and region.- Securing and linking water and landscape areas within the city.- Maintaining existing residential areas, improvements of residential environments. - Demographic development, the effect of increased immigration on the economic and social

life in the city. - Relieving the city centre from private motorised traffic, improvement of local public transport,

securing the tramlines, improvements for pedestrians and also for cyclists. - Enhancing the attractiveness for tourism. - Securing the “genetic code”, the identity of the city.

2. Select spaces for the development of the city centreThe participants of the Symposium recommend the prioritised treatment of the following spaces:

- The extended inner city, also in its relation to the periphery of the city. - The inner urban area of the harbour.- Historic Kneiphof, the island and adjacent areas.

Development within these areas should be assigned priorities.

3. Establish further procedures:- The diverse findings should be collected in a report and published. - The next step can be the preparation of a first workshop in which the topics (1) and spaces

(2) are looked at in context and first ideas should be developed. Participants in the workshop should be mostly university students and young architects/urbanplanners from Kaliningrad.

- Following the workshop a further symposium should assess the results and establish thebasis for a subsequent competition.

- The competition should – corresponding to the position of the City of Kaliningrad and its geo-graphic links – be an international competition.

The participants in the symposium recommend that the political committees of the city shouldconcern themselves with these recommendations and the subsequent report. They request therepresentatives of the City of Kaliningrad to open up the spaces required for a positive develop-ment of this endeavour.

Recommendations3.3.5 Recommendations

205

206

4 SummaryInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

Summary4 Summary of the Symposium

207

Summary

Russian organisation committee's summing-up of the results of the internationalSymposium

“Kaliningrad: Visions of the future – Urban development of the city centre”

The promoters of the international Symposium held in the City of Kaliningrad, on the initiative ofthe Directorate of Architecture and Urban Design of the City Council in cooperation with theArbeitskreis Kulturkontakte Kaliningrad Hamburg, issue the following statement.

Essential aspects are:- An international charter for the preservation and reconstruction of monuments and sights

(Venice, 1964) and for the protection of historical cities (Washington, 1987); - The existing friendly relations of Kaliningrad to European partner cities and their creative cul-

tural circles of architects;- The pursuit of a “region of collaboration” in Kaliningrad, between the European Union and the

Russian Federation, as stated in the Federal Target Programme, Comprehensive TerritorialScheme, proposal for a new Masterplan for the city, and also in the declarations of publicorganisations;

- The pursuit of the integration of work and the creative collaboration with architects from Euro-pean countries, in accordance with the current principles of stable development and uphol-ding the common values of the cultures and peoples; The intention of organs of local self-administration to discuss, within the extended circle of Russian and international experts,questions concerning the condition and perspective for the development of the centre ofKaliningrad. The object of this measure is to evaluate the situation and to jointly draw uprecommendations for further action.

The questions stated in the programme of the Symposium was examined and discussed,announcements and reports heard, and discussions held. As a result the following statementscan be made:

- The location and significance of Kaliningrad, as a historic Russian city that is closely connec-ted to the history and culture of a number of European nations, are unique.

- The active involvement of Kaliningrad and the Kaliningrad Region in the systems of inter-national economic and cultural affiliations between the countries of the Baltic Region, and theinter-personal relations of all their inhabitants, should be promoted.

- The strategic economic objectives of the Kaliningrad Region are the development of a trans-portation node of international importance, an international centre of commercial cooperation,a research and production centre and a culture-tourism link. A considerable part of this poten-tial is centred in Kaliningrad.

- Priorities of strategies of the urban development of Kaliningrad, as stated in the new Master-plan for the city are: Open-mindedness of the city for development initiatives, setting up a

208


legal framework for urban development decisions, pursuit of a specific cultural identity, crea-ting a high-quality urban environment.

A number of problems in the area must be considered in the course of formulating urban develop-ment policies, making decisions on the preservation and utilisation of the rich cultural inheritanceof the city and in the context of its central location. These problems must be carefully examinedin order to develop comprehensive solutions. They are:

- the historical centre that was affected during World War II, the inner city area where all buil-dings were lost, now is an vast area with unfinished buildings;

- insufficient usage of the huge infrastructure and investment potential of the spaces in the citycentre that could be increased significantly with the development of an ordered overall propo-sal for the area.

- the absence of a contemporary design concept for the city centre that is endorsed and sup-ported by all players. The lack of understanding for the necessity of securing the balance bet-ween public and private investment interests in the reconstruction and new development ofthe centre.

In consideration of these conditions the participants and the chairmen of the Symposium formu-lated recommendations, on the basis of which the organisation committee has composed thefollowing notes on solving existing urban planning problems. These are presented to the localpublic and the decision makers:

- Issues of the urban development of the city centre shall be examined in the context of thestrategic development objectives of the region as a centre of international cooperation bet-ween countries within the Baltic Region.

- Strategic decisions on the urban and architectural design of the city centre shall be made onthe basis of the international competition, which should address international interests andthe urban scale.

- Multifunctionality of the city centre shall be achieved by creating unique sites that accommo-date federal, regional and urban functions, and that are appropriate to the relevant scales.

- The construction of the centre, its design and architectural image, shall be devised in adialogue between the various social groups and associations of the urban public.

- The development of the city centre shall be continued in the spirit inherited, by securing theharmonious interaction of the cultural inheritance that needs to be preserved and contempo-rary architecture. Further, the principle of preservation and restoration of existing sites of thecultural inheritance should be upheld; they are the temporal and spatial determinants of thecity.

- A decree shall be issued on waiving the right to build on the vacant sites in the historical cen-tre until a land use plan, as a basis for the international competition, has been released.

- Existing housing stock and the typical concrete pre-fab blocks in the centre, that no longermeet constructive, operational, social, economic and aesthetic demands, shall be moder-nised.

- In the reconstruction of areas with existing buildings in the centre of the city, the historicalbuilding pattern should, if possible, be implemented, i.e. blocks, narrow street frontages, en-closed spaces with small squares and open spaces.

209

- Sites in the city centre that require a special form of development and building in terms offunctional, historical and other criteria shall be earmarked, to facilitate a variety of settingsand a harmonious interaction between different types of townscape.

- The traffic congestion in the city should be relieved by rerouting transit traffic onto roads bypassing the centre, and also by construction diametrical routes on different levels. This willensure the long-term realignment of traffic flows outside the centre.

- Areas for a separate pedestrian network, independent of vehicular traffic, should be allocatedwithin the city centre. In addition, cycle paths should be constructed.

- Buildings in the city centre are to embrace the River Pregel to extend the urban environmenttowards the waterfront and open opportunities for water related tourism and recreation as wellas the establishment of a service infrastructure.

- The focus should be on working out scenarios that are primarily concerned with the balanced,successive, functional development of problem sites in the urban centre. These include:

1. The area on Zentraljnaja Plostschdj, the natural core of the city and its administrative,commercial, cultural and tourist focus. The idea is the reestablishment of its primaryfunction in the urban system and the intensification of the usage of surrounding areasby concentrating in it important buildings for the authorities, service industries, trade,recreation and culture.

2. The area on Plostschadj Pobedy, now a significant administrative, public, commercialand religious centre in modern Kaliningrad. The idea is to further develop the multi-functionality of the site.

3. The area on Kneiphof Island, the node and interface between the districts on the left andright banks of the River Pregel that is now to be developed into a centre for culturaleducation and tourism. The idea is to reconstruct historical buildings around the Cathe-dral, thereby creating a symbolic zone of the lost medieval town, with parks as localrecreation areas.

4. The area on Nishnij Prud and Werchnij Prud, representing a homogenous landscapeunit as part of a unique, interesting, natural, ecological system within the city that is apublic open space of general urban significance. Measures to protect the site need to betaken and private development of inappropriate projects must be prevented.

5. The area at South Station, the centre of the left bank of the Pregel, accommodatingtransportation, commerce and trade functions and thereby relieving functions of thecentre and around the Plostschadj Pobedy area.

In recent years the interest of investors and contractors in the centre of Kaliningrad has grownrapidly. Participants in the Symposium are of the opinion that delay of decisions on drawing up acomprehensive proposal for the design of the centre of the city will lead to irreversible processes(scattered buildings), foregoing the opportunity to develop and implement a unified, well-ba-lanced urban concept.

Presently the urban public is faced with the task of determining the direction of the developmentof the city centre in the 21st century and to actively control its fate in this new era of history. Thisresponsible task requires the combined intelligence, know-how and material resources of allpotential players in the urban processes – organs of the state and the municipality, the businessworld political parties and public organisations, and the entire population.

210


The following short-term (two-year) measures for the implementation of the ideas and recom-mendations delivered by participants at the Symposium could be: 1. The planning and implementation of a workshop for the conceptual development of the entire

city centre and its most difficult zones – with the help of the creative powers of invited, inter-national architects and experts.

2. Setting up an exhibition of the proposed concepts, public debate on these proposals, and acontinually updated, publicly accessible database holding information on the task and thedevelopment potentials of the city centre.

3. Holding an international competition for the reconstruction and development of the city centreof Kaliningrad.

25 June 2005 Kaliningrad

211

212

ParticipantsInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

ParticipantsParticipantsCaroline Ahrens

D&K projektentwicklungsmanagement, Hamburg/Germany

Aleksey M. ArhipenkoOOO “+4”, Kaliningrad/Russia

Prof. Irina V. BelinzevaFine Arts Institute, Moscow/Russia

Prof. Dr. Dieter BiallasTransparency International Deutschland (TI-D) /Deputy Lord Mayor (retired), Hamburg/Germany

Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Jürgen BloechUniversity of Göttingen, Göttingen/Germany

Jochen Brandi † November 2005Architects Jochen Brandi, Göttingen/Germany

Anna Brunow-MaunulaArchitects Brunow & Maunula, Helsinki/Finland

Ivan D. ChechotPRO-RT Institute, St. Petersburg/Russia

Tatiana N. ChekalinaKaliningrad State University, Kaliningrad/Russia

Natalia I. ChepinogaOOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia

Uwe DrostD&K projektentwicklungsmanagement, Hamburg/Germany

Julius EhlersAC-Planergruppe Julius Ehlers, Itzehoe/Germany

Alexandr I. EpifanovInstitute of Federal Architects, Moscow/Russia

Vadim G. EremeyevArchitect, Kaliningrad/Russia

Dr. Veniamin G. Eremeyev“Rosprojekt“, Kaliningrad/Russia

Prof. Gennadij M. FedorovKaliningrad State University, Kaliningrad/Russia

Dr. Otto FlaggeMunicipal Planning Consultants, Kiel/Germany

Flemming FrostJuul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark

213

Konstantin K. GembitskiyAdministration, Association of Municipalities of the Kaliningrad Region, Kaliningrad/Russia

Sergej V. GnedovskiyUnion of Architects of Russia, Moscow/Russia

Pavel M. GorbachArchitect, Kaliningrad/Russia

Jana GrabowskiD&K projektentwicklungsmanagement, Hamburg/Germany

Aleksey B. GubinLocal History Society of the Kaliningrad Region, Kaliningrad/Russia

Valeriy D. GubinTerritorial Administration of Orel Region, Orel/Russia

Sergej A. GulevskiyOOO “+4”, Kaliningrad/Russia

Silvia S. GurovaInternational Department of Kaliningrad City Hall, Kaliningrad/Russia

Hans-Heinrich HansenDepartment of Urban Planning in Kiel, Kiel/Germany

Dr. Andrej P. KlemeshevKaliningrad State University, Kaliningrad/Russia

Dr. Elke KnappeLeibnitz – Institute of Regional Geography, Leipzig/Germany

Tatiana L. KondakovaChief Architect of Kaliningrad, Kaliningrad/Russia

Dr. Sergej M. Kopychina-LorensInstitut “Kaliningradgrazhdanprojekt”, Kaliningrad/Russia

Dr. Valentin S. KorneyevetsKaliningrad State University, Kaliningrad/Russia

Prof. Sergej D. KozlovRegional Duma, Kaliningrad/Russia

Olga V. KrasovskayaNPF “Enco“, St. Petersburg/Russia

Dr. Vladimir R. KrogiusInstitute of Reconstruction Works INRECON, Moscow/Russia

Dr. Helena G. KropinovaDepartment of Socio-cultural Services and Tourism, Kaliningrad State University,Kaliningrad/Russia

214

ParticipantsInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

A. P. KudrjavtsevArchitectural Academy, Moscow/Russia

Prof. Vladimir I. KulakovArcheology Institute of the RAS, Moscow/Russia

Valeriy V. KuzlianovDeputy Chief Architect of Kaliningrad, Kaliningrad/Russia

Dr. Sergej V. LebedihinArchitect, Kaliningrad/Russia

Daniel LuchterhandtUniversity of Technology Hamburg-Harburg, Hamburg/Germany

Prof. Jury S. MatochkinRegional Duma, Kaliningrad/Russia

Olga V. MezeyOOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia

Dr. Werner MöllerBauhaus Foundation, Dessau/Germany

Alexander V. NevezhinArchitect, Kaliningrad/Russia

Dmitriy OfitserovInternational Relations Department of Kaliningrad, Regional Administration,Kaliningrad/Russia

Prof. Marcin OrawiecOX2architekcts, Aachen/Germany

Alexander V. PopadinFreelance Writer, Kaliningrad/Russia

Victor I. PustovgarovAdministration of Kaliningrad Region, Kaliningrad/Russia

Venzel T. Salakhov“AO BUDIMEX”, Kaliningrad/Russia

Alexa SaureD&K projektentwicklungsmanagement, Hamburg/Germany

Yuriy A. SavenkoMayor of Kaliningrad, Kaliningrad/Russia

Anatolij N. SeljutinArchitect, Kaliningrad/Russia

Sergej V. SemenzovResearch Institute of St. Petersburg and the Northwest Region, St. Petersburg/Russia

215

Prof. Sergej I. Sokolov“Giprogor” Institute of Urbanistics, St. Petersburg/Russia

Prof. Sergej Y. TsiplenkovKaliningrad Sociological Centre, Kaliningrad/Russia

Vjacheslav S. UvarovInstitute “Kaliningradgrazdanprojekt”, Kaliningrad/Russia

Oleg I. VasjutinArchitect and Urban Planner, Kaliningrad/Russia

Jurij I. ZabugaArchitect, Kaliningrad/Russia

Elke ZlonickyUrban Planning Practice, Munich/Germany

Prof. Peter ZlonickyUrban Planning Practice, Munich/Germany

Lecture 2 – Olga V. Krasovskaya1 | Masterplan

No source2 | Land use plan

No source

Lecture 3 – Dr. Werner Möller1 | Design of the ideal city form the treatise of Filarete, around 1465

Source: Benevolo, L.: Die Geschichte der Stadt, Campus Verlag – Frankfurt a. M./NewYork, 8th Edition, 2000, p. 577, Ill. 882

2 | Town centre of SienaSource: Benevolo, L.: Die Geschichte der Stadt, Campus Verlag – Frankfurt a. M./NewYork, 8th Edition, 2000, p. 350, Ill. 567

3 | Founding plan of Caracas, around 1560Source: Benevolo, L.: Die Geschichte der Stadt, Campus Verlag – Frankfurt a. M./NewYork, 8th Edition, 2000, p. 675, Ill. 1002

4 | Braunschweig Castle prior to its destruction in WW IINo source

5 | Demolition of Braunschweig Castle, watercolour by Karl Schmidt, 1960No source

6 | Site of the former Braunschweig Castle after demolitionNo source

7 | Open space design around Braunschweig Castle Arcades, 2004Source: City of Braunschweig and ECE Projektmanagement GmbH &Co.KG

8 | Ground floor plan of Braunschweig Castle Arcades, 2005Source: City of Braunschweig and ECE Projektmanagement GmbH &Co.KG

9 | Computer simulation of Braunschweig Castle Arcades, 2003Source: City of Braunschweig and ECE Projektmanagement GmbH &Co.KG

10 | Model of Braunschweig Castle Arcades, 2005Source: City of Braunschweig and ECE Projektmanagement GmbH &Co.KG

11 | ECE-Center Brünn (Czech Republic), opened 2005Source: ECE Projektmanagement GmbH &Co.KG

12 | ECE-Center Klagenfurt (Austria), opened 2004Source: ECE Projektmanagement GmbH &Co.KG

13 | ECE-Center Wetzlar (Germany), opened 2005Source: ECE Projektmanagement GmbH &Co.KG

14 | Town houses in Leipzig (Plagwitz), 2005Author's photograph, 2005

15 | Town houses in Leipzig (Schleusig), 2005Author's photograph, 2005

16 | Town houses in Leipzig (Schleusig), 2005Author's photograph, 2005

216

IllustrationsInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

IllustrationIllustrations

217

Lecture 4 – Oleg I. Vasjutin1 | Stage I: 1255

Source: Oleg I. Vasjutin, Kaliningrad/Russia2 | Stage II: late 13th century to the end of the 16th century

Source: Oleg I. Vasjutin, Kaliningrad/Russia3 | Stage III: early 17th – mid 19th century

Source: Oleg I. Vasjutin, Kaliningrad/Russia4 | Stage IV: late 19th – early 20th century

Source: Oleg I. Vasjutin, Kaliningrad/Russia5 | Stage V: first third of the 20th century

Source: Oleg I. Vasjutin, Kaliningrad/Russia6 | Stage VI: “Project town” Königsberg of the 1930s

Source: Oleg I. Vasjutin, Kaliningrad/Russia7 | Stage VI: “Project town” Kaliningrad of the 1950s

Source: Oleg I. Vasjutin, Kaliningrad/Russia8 | Stage VII: Second half to late 20th century

No source9 | Evolution of Kaliningrad

Source: Oleg I. Vasjutin, Kaliningrad/Russia

Lecture 5 – Prof. Marcin Orawiec1 | Rheinpark Süd – Night-time perspective

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany2 | Rheinpark Süd – Site plan

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany3 | O.Vision – Perspective

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany4 | O.Vision – Site plan

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany5 | Schanzenstraße – Perspective 1

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany6 | Schanzenstraße – Perspective 2

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany7 | Schanzenstraße – Site plan

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany8 | Wesseling – Typical sketch

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany9 | Wesseling – Model

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany10 | Wesseling – Site plan

Source: OX2architekten, Aachen/Germany

218


Lecture 6 – Prof. Irina V. Belinzeva1 | Town plan of Königsberg by Jochim Bering, 1613

No source2 | Fragment of the epitaph – Königsberg in the guise of Jerusalem

Source: Jager, E., Schreiner, R.: Das alte Königsberg. Veduten aus 400 Jahren –Regensburg-Grünstadt, 1987

3 | Town plan of Königsberg by Suchodolez Mladschij, 1740No source

4 | Town plan of St. Petersburg by J.B.A. Leblond, 1717No source

5 | Ordnance survey map of Königsberg, 1815Source: Kartensammlung des Herder-Instituts, Marburg

6 | Development of facades in Baltic coastal towns, 1400-1900 Source: Material Gdansk, Polen

7 | Portal of the Königsberg Castle – south entrance to courtyard, 1551No source

8 | Portal of house no. 27 Langgasse on Kneiphof – early 17th centuryNo source

9 | Residential building in Bergstrasse, in the Old Town of Königsberg – early 17th centuryNo source

10 | Residential building in Junkerstrasse on Kneiphof, 1654No source

11 | Castle Church of Königsberg, 1690No source

12 | Plan of Königsberg Castle Church, 1690No source

13 | Königsberg with Castle Church in backgroundNo source

14 | Königsberg Town Hall on Kneiphof, 1695No source

15 | Ceiling decoration at the Town Hall 1696-1697, A. SchlüterNo source

16 | Fragment of ceiling decoration at the Town Hall 1696-1697, A. SchlüterNo source

17 | Detail of ceiling decoration 1696-1697, A. SchlüterNo source

18 | Post-war project in the centre of Kaliningrad, 1950sNo source

Lecture 7 – Venzel T. Salakhov1 | Linear-spatial frames Königsberg, 1938

Source: AO BUDIMEX, Kaliningrad/Russia2 | Linear-spatial frames Kaliningrad, 1996

Source: AO BUDIMEX, Kaliningrad/Russia

219

3 | Former town gateNo source

4 | Compositional frames Königsberg, 1938Source: AO BUDIMEX, Kaliningrad/Russia

5 | Compositional frames Kaliningrad, 1966Source: AO BUDIMEX, Kaliningrad/Russia

6 | Königsberg, 1729No source

7 | Dominant frames Kaliningrad, 2005Source: AO BUDIMEX, Kaliningrad/Russia

Lecture 8 – Prof. Gennadij M. Fedorov1 | Abutting Baltic states

No source2 | Region Kaliningrad, 2000-2010

No source3 | National linkage of Kaliningrad

No source

Lecture 9 – Prof. Sergej D. Kozlov1 | Visualisation of Christ the Saviour Cathedral and shopping centre “Kaliningrad-750”

No source2 | Former House of Technology

No source3 | Bird's eye view of construction of Christ the Saviour Cathedral and shopping centre

“Kaliningrad-750”No source

4 | Bird's eye view visualisation of Christ the Saviour Cathedral and shopping centre“Kaliningrad-750”No source

5 | Extract from street mapNo source

6 | Original building of grocery marketNo source

Lecture 11 – Dr. Elke Knappe1 | Kaliningrad, Housing and industry 2002

Source: Knappe, E.: Kaliningrad aktuell (=Daten, Fakten, Literatur zur Geographie Europas, H. 7), Leibniz-Institut für Länderkunde – Leipzig, 2004, p. 29

2 | Kaliningrad Region, HousingSource: Knappe, E.: Kaliningrad aktuell (=Daten, Fakten, Literatur zur Geographie Europas, H. 7), Leibniz-Institut für Länderkunde – Leipzig, 2004, p. 58

220


3 | New public housing development 2004Source: Sozialno-ekonomiceskoe polo�enie Kaliningradskoj oblasti v 2004 godu (The sozio-economic situation in the Kaliningrad Region 2004) – Kaliningrad, 2005, p. 130

4 | Share of foreign direct investment 2004Source: Sozialno-ekonomiceskoe polo�enie Kaliningradskoj oblasti v 2004 godu (The sozio-economic situation in the Kaliningrad Region 2004) – Kaliningrad, 2005, p. 47

5 | Share of foreign investment according to countries 2004Source: Sozialno-ekonomiceskoe polo�enie Kaliningradskoj oblasti v 2004 godu (The sozio-economic situation in the Kaliningrad Region 2004) – Kaliningrad, 2005, p. 52

6 | Road network of the Baltic RegionSource: Knappe, E.: Kaliningrad aktuell (=Daten, Fakten, Literatur zur Geographie Europas, H. 7), Leibniz-Institut für Länderkunde – Leipzig, 2004, p. 37

7 | Share of foreign investment according to countries 2004Source: Sozialno-ekonomiceskoe polo�enie Kaliningradskoj oblasti v 2004 godu (The sozio-economic situation in the Kaliningrad Region 2004) – Kaliningrad, 2005, p. 20

8 | Kaliningrad Region – Euro RegionsAuthor's illustration

Lecture 12 – Flemming Frost1 | Q-Book 1

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark2 | Q-Book 2

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark3 | Randers Barracks 1

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark4 | Randers Barracks 2

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark5 | Analysis of the inner harbour of Copenhagen 1

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark6 | Analysis of the inner harbour of Copenhagen 2

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark7 | Porcelænshaven Residence 1

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark8 | Porcelænshaven Residence 2

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark9 | Bergen Sjöfront 1

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark10 | Bergen Sjöfront 2

Source: Juul and Frost architects, Copenhagen/Denmark

Lecture 13 – Dr. Otto Flagge1 | Kiel Fjord

Source: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

221

2 | Extent of destruction of Kiel after World War IISource: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

3 | Destruction of inner city of KielSource: Jensen, J.: Kieler Zeitgeschichte im Pressefoto, Wachholtz Verlag – Neumünster, 1984

4 | Open spaces with temporary tree plantingSource: Jensen, J.: Kieler Zeitgeschichte im Pressefoto, Wachholtz Verlag – Neumünster, 1984

5 | Adaptation of the urban fabric (view north from railway station)Source: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

6 | Factory Buckau-Wolf, 1963Source: Jensen, J.: Kieler Zeitgeschichte im Pressefoto, Wachholtz Verlag – Neumünster, 1984

7 | Waterfront Kiel – city to the waterSource: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

8 | Masterplan HörnSource: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

9 | Sketch of Masterplan HörnSource: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

10 | Hörn Bridge and view to Kiel main stationSource: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

11 | Promenade with view to Hörn CampusSource: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

12 | Hörn CampusSource: Planning materials of the Urban Planning Department, Kiel

Lecture 14 – Olga V. Mezey1 | Stage I – Statement

Source: OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia2 | Stage II – Three cities with town halls, main trading places and a spiritual centres

Source: OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia3 | Stage III – 1724-1866

Source: OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia4 | Stage IV – After 1912

Source: OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia5 | Stage IV – Radial ring structure, historical core, present linear centres

Source: OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia6 | Stage V – After the destruction of the war – 1960s

Source: OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia7 | Stage VI – 1970s

Source: OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia8 | Aerial view of Kneiphof

No source

222


9 | Problems of the present condition of the city centre of Kaliningrad(Stage VII – 20th/21st century)Source: OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/Russia

Lecture 16 – Daniel Luchterhandt1 | A changing city – comprehensive redevelopment of the urban infrastructure

No source2 | Not everything can be done overnight: Transformation needs time

No source3 | Old world of experience in new splendour: Mall on Nevskij Prospekt

No source4 | New world of experience and new luxury: a new shopping centre at the Metro station

VladimirskajaNo source

5 | “How long will this go on for?”: An apartment means enhancement of the living conditions No source

6 | New perspectives of living: Successors to prefabricated homesNo source

7 | The pass to membership in civil society No source

8 | “Together we can do anything” – Finding support for blind faith in authoritarian structuresNo source

9 | Project Kvartal 130: integrated renewal creates new quality in the city centreNo source

10 | State planning: Redevelopment of Haymarket has brought improvementsNo source

11 | Sennaja Ploshad – the most lively square in townNo source

12 | Deep roots: Peter the Great as the ideal master planner of St. PetersburgNo source

13 | Maximum economic exploits at the expense of first-rate homes and quality of lifeNo source

14 | The project “Morskoij Kaskad and Morskoij Fasad”No source

15 | Project Mariinksij IINo source

16 | More faith in future generations: Not only outward support of change!No source

Lecture 17 – Jochen Brandi und Andrej Derbenkov1 | Kneiphof, city island and the cathedral on the River Pregel

No source

223

2 | View of the city island Kneiphof, Kaliningrad around 2000No source

3 | Historic town plan of Kneiphof before 1945No source

4 | The “new Kneiphof”, a citical reconstruction of the old town planNo source

5 | Sketch sectionNo source

Lecture 18 – Prof. Peter Zlonicky1 | The great north-south axis and the “Hall of the People” from the design of

Albert Speer (1941)Source: Durth, W.: “Deutsche Architekten”

2 | Plan of the inner city prior to demolition in the warAuthor's illustration

3 | Plan of the inner city after reunificationAuthor's illustration

4 | Current plan of the inner cityAuthor's illustration

5 | Brandenburg Gate 2005, pictures of a destroyed square 1945Author's photograph, 2005

6 | Objectives of cautious urban renewal of the district KreuzbergAuthor's illustration

7 | Berlin Study, Strategies for the city; title page of the publicationAuthor's reproduction

8 | Public space Unter den Linden; title page of the publication of the Senate office, ca. 1996Author's reproduction

9 | The Berlin wall as art and as reminder, only retained in a few placesAuthor's photograph, 2003

10 | New building on Potsdamer Platz, view from Leipziger StraßeAuthor's photograph, 2003

11 | Historic centre of the city, view of the “Palace of the Republic”Author's reproduction

12 | New Academy of Arts in its old location, Pariser Platz 4Author's photograph, 2005

13 | Memorial for the murdered Jews in EuropeAuthor's photograph, 2005

14 | Stumbling blocks: Reminders in front of the houses of residents who were driven away ormurderedSource: Nina Zlonicky, 2005

15 | The Symposium in KaliningradSource: Elke Zlonicky, 2005

224


Lecture 19 – Anna Brunow-Maunula1 | Helsinki 1877, painting by Oskar Kleineh

No source2 | Helsinki Masterplan 2001

Source: Urban Planning Department, Helsinki3 | Transportation 1986-2004

Source: Urban Planning Department, Helsinki4 | “Säteri” Prefabricated panel construction

No source5 | “Arabia” Residential block

Source: Jussi Tiainen6 | Library in Kuusankoski

Source: Jussi Tiainen7 | Office building for States and Senate Properties

Source: Jussi Tiainen8 | Urban planning process

Source: Urban Planning Department, Helsinki9 | Myyrmäki Church

No source10 | Viewing tower at the zoo in Helsinki

Source: Jussi Tiainen

The editors have, up to the production deadline, endeavoured to find all copyright owners ofillustrations. Persons and institutions who could not be located, and who would like to assert theirrights for illustrations printed, are asked to contact the publishers.

225

Publisher/OrganisersMunicipal Authority of Kaliningrad, Department of Architecture and Urban Design, Kaliningrad/RussiaÖffentlicher Verband “Kaliningrader Kulturkontakte”, Hamburg/Germany

Concept/DesignD&K projektentwicklungsmanagementHohe Brücke 1 / Haus der SeefahrtD-20459 HamburgTelefon 0049 40 36 09 84-0Fax 0049 40 36 09 84-11E-Mail [email protected]

Uwe Drost, Alexa Saure, André Westendorf

OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH236006, g. Kaliningrad,Moscowski Prospekt 12Telefon 007 401 34 22 93Fax 007 401 34 20 52E-Mail [email protected]

Olga Mezey, Dr. Helena Kropinova, Venzel Salakhov

Organisation/Editorial StaffD&K projektentwicklungsmanagement, Hamburg/GermanyUwe Drost, Alexa Saure, Anniki Stuhr, André Westendorf

OOO “Nikor Projekt” GmbH, Kaliningrad/RussiaOlga Mezey, Natalia Chepinoga

Municipal Authority, Kaliningrad/RussiaTatiana Kondakova, Valeriy Kuzlianov

Kaliningrad State University, Kaliningrad/RussiaGennadij Fedorov, Dr. Helena Kropinova

Architects, Kaliningrad/RussiaVenzel Salakhov, Oleg Vasjutin, Jurij Zabuga

Freelance Editors, Kaliningrad/RussiaN. Martynjuk, A. Sokolova

226

ImprintInternational Symposium Kal iningrad

ImprintImprint

227

TranslationRussian-German/German-RussianMargarita Beck, Elena Depken, Elena Gordeeva, Zanna Glotova, Jana Grabowski, Olga Peteshova, Vladimir Ryzkov

Russian-EnglishNatalja Andreeva, Elena Kostyk, Anna Samojlova

German-English/English-GermanCaroline Ahrens

PhotographsOlga Mezey, Venzel Salakhov, Alexa Saure, Natalja Yagunov, Prof. Peter Zlonicky

Notes on disseminationThis brochure is published for the purpose of public relations of the Municipal Authorities ofKaliningrad. Political parties, or their candidates and helpers, may not use this brochure forcanvassing purposes during election campaigns. This applies to all elections. Not allowed is thedistribution at election events, information booths of political parties and the inclusion, printing orposting of party political information or advertisements. Passing on the brochure to third partiesfor the use of election canvassing is also prohibited. Irrespective of the time scale of elections,this brochure may not be used in any way that could be construed as partiality of the publisherstowards any political group. These restrictions are valid irrespective of the channel of distribution,i.e. irrespective of the way, and in what quantities, this information has reached the recipient.

K

Documents

Kaliningrad: Visions of the Future. Urban development of the city centre