Anatoly Gordeev
“Today, Chisinau is working on a project of “reactualization” of the General Plan. However, the very notion of “reactualization” is already questionable: it is impossible to reanimate a document, which in its essence was generated by another era and another system of city management,” he writes.
Gordeev believes that the 2007 general plan failed for systemic reasons. It was realized by no more than 15-20%. And the key reason is the methodology. It was created in the middle of the 20th century for the needs of the planned economy of the USSR. That is why the initial data was formed by the USSR Gosplan, all indicators, including the population size, were approved centrally, and implementation was based on a vertically controlled system of resource allocation.
A characteristic example: in the General Plan of 1989, the estimated projection showed the population of Kishinev at 1.1 million people, but the Gosplan approved only 900 thousand – and only this number was considered “legal” for design.
At present, the methodology has not changed – only the shell has become different, the architect writes.
Despite the change of the political and economic system, the methodology prescribed in the new Urbanism and Construction Code has remained the same in essence and structure. This means – linear forecasting; a static model of the city; a document that itself is immobile, while city life is mobile; no adaptive development management.
Any deviation from the Code will be discarded by the examination. Therefore, the outcome is predictable: even if world-class “stars” are involved, the product will be the same General Plan-2007, only under a new label – “reactualized”, Anatoly Gordeev believes.
The situation with the historical and architectural reference plan is similar. The main problem is the categorization of monuments.
The system of categories inherited from the 1970s-1980s does not reflect either the current value of the objects, their vulnerability, or the principles of historical environment management adopted at the international level.
As long as systemic errors are not eliminated, any projects are doomed.
We cannot move forward if the fundamental contradiction remains – modern urban reality multiplied by the methodology of the 1960s.
Therefore, as a result, any General Plan automatically turns into a repetition of the 2007 General Plan. Any historical-architectural plan inherits the errors of the old classification. Any “reactualizations” remain cosmetic operations on the outdated system.
