Gazprom tower approved, controversy stays
Published: 23 September, 2009, 16:24
Edited: 22 July, 2010, 20:42
Russia's natural gas giant Gazprom has won approval to build a company skyscraper in St. Petersburg. The new Okhta Center’s 403-meter tower will be among the tallest buildings in the world.
Debate had surrounded the project, with many critics fearing the building will ruin the city's carefully preserved skyline.
Nonetheless, members of St. Petersburg’s government have voted unanimously for the approval.
Public debates on the issue on September 1, 2009 also were deemed to have a favorable outcome. The tower’s opponents, however, are convinced that the debates were conducted with violations and were largely kept concealed from general the public.
“All the legal questions correspond to current law; no violations were made by the decision. Obviously the tower is noticeable, but most of the committee members shared the opinion that it doesn’t affect the historic view,” St. Petersburg region’s governor Valentina Matvienko said.
 Proposed Okhta tower against the background of the Admiralty building… |
Russia’s Yabloko party is suing St. Petersburg’s authorities for granting the approval. One of the reasons for the lawsuit is that the regulation height of buildings in the area is no more than 100 meters.
According to the executive secretary of Russia’s committee for UNESCO affairs, Grigory Ordzhonikidze, city officials had no authority to give their permission.
“As the historical center of St. Petersburg is listed as a UNESCO world heritage site, it’s subject to the federal government’s control,” Ordzhonikidze told Interfax, adding that the issue is not the whole Okhta Center, but only its tower.
 …and as seen from near the Smolny Cathedral |
Should the tower be built, it might hamper Russia’s chances to be elected to UNESCO’s governing body.
The Okhta Center, set to be completed by 2016, will occupy one million square meters, with construction costs of $2.3 billion. Initially they were to be divided between Gazprom (51%) and the City administration (49%), but after the city scrapped the expenditure item from its 2009-2011 budget, Gazprom will secure the financing by itself.
23.09.2009, 10:47
RT test drives newest space suitMan hasn’t yet set foot on Mars, but the outfit he'll be wearing when he does is ready. They are produced at Russia's legendary spacesuit factory, which designed the garments used by the first man in space. |
23.09.2009, 16:58
Killer fireworksAt least one person has been killed and 34 injured in an explosion at a fireworks warehouse in the central Russian town of Voronezh. |
I agree, Count Cash, next time... I recently visited Russia --- for the first time --- and Sankt Pete was the first place I visited. I heard of the controversy. And I thought how odd, why not do something really creative. I always think that Russia must start leveraging money much better. So, when a state giant goes out to spend a lots of money, many things come to mind. Why do the copycat thing? What I would like to see in Russia is a new Russian town, an architecture adapted to the Russian weather, a mixed use complex, of which Gazprom office space is just one component. Russia is stuggling with the preponderance of population in few cities, while vast, beautiful spaces are not leveraged at all. Russia does have good railroad and air travel, so it will make sense to build a modern mini-city, that will sustain a comfortable life style for coporate, government, research, university, health or other uses, along with all the municipal services, from schools to trash. But by being a closed-in environment, a great deal of innovation can happen in the use of energy, quality of air and water supplies, temperature management, etc. Parks, cycle paths, monorail, escalators, elevators, moving sidewalks, and the coffe shops with palm trees! Why not? Gazprom can create a core module, that would allow other enterprises, govenment, universilties and others to add on. That way, much will be learned about how to build the self-contained cities, their optimal size, creating multiple vs. one large, etc. etd. For the truth is, with all due respect to Sankt Pete, it is fighting a valiant, but loosing battle with its ever-crumbling facades! You cannot import an European invention and expet it to do well under the harsh climate. A new skyline in the city --- I think it is good. It will energize the skyline. After all, I do not think that the endless row of old factories along Neva river exactly add to the beauty of the city skyline.
I just worry this is a copycat, skyscraper race concept. Why didn't Gazprom do something completely different, like an eco friendly low lying energy self sufficient busienss environment with public parks, cycle paths, a monorail ....... Up maybe good in small countries, where land is a premium, but why don't we do something else. I am not saying this is wrong, or shouldn't happen, just saying lets think for ourselves! Maybe next time!
A new Gazprom tower is good but why ruin the existing city by building it in amongst the old buildings in the centre of the city?. Build it away from the old city as Paris does . Rome does not allow new tall buildings in the old city because they know it would ruin the old city. There are many sites away from the centre of the city.. Do the people at Gazprom not have any respect for Russian history? People come from all around the world to see the old historic city of St Petersburg.