Russian Gazprom Building

“Gazprom” is the biggest Russian corporation, worth over $200 billion, translated as “Gas Production”.

It serves gas and oil to the whole Europe, people in Russia often make jokes that Gazprom keeps Russia just like a servant for itself, and if there would be some need for “Gazprom” to join Europe to Russian Federation it would be done next day without any problems because all the Europe depends on Russian gas. Also some analytics say that Putin after his presidency ends would head Gazprom.

So here are the projects of Gazprom main corporate building in St. Petersburg (they have already a complex in Moscow). People of St. Petersburg demand to stop this projects in coming to life because they want to preserve “cultural and architectural unity of the city”. But if Gazprom wants something nobody can say something to it.

Look what they going to build in St. Petersburg:

gazprom building

gazprom building

gazprom building

gazprom building

gazprom building

gazprom building

22 thoughts on “Russian Gazprom Building”

  1. I’m as a citizen of St. Petersburg would like to see it built. I think it would look quite well.
    And it’s planned to be at the side of the city, I don’t see how it may affect cultural center.

    And, of course, high buildings can’t be built in the center, it’s forbidden, because it may really affect city architecture.

    But in this situation I think it’s nice and will greatly improve the city view in that place. What is wrong if one of the best architectures in the world would finally build something new and stylish in our city?

    Last project is my favorite.

  2. I like second from the bottom – SpB style, reminds me of late 30`s constructivism.

    About Gazprom joining Europe…
    I`d say it`s more possible that EUROPE will join GAZPROM someday.

  3. From the architectural point of view these buildings are beautiful but it all depends where they put it. It would definitely not fit around Vasilievsky Island. Has to be in some other part of town where this new building will not take the attention off the beautiful St. Petersurg “skyline”.

  4. to Dido

    You see… we only have a great historical center, and… that’s all. Population is increasing and city in growing. And what do we have on the sides of the city, which is called as one of the most beautiful in the world?

    We have there blocks, blocks and nothing but blocks, with some usual shops around and (sometimes) mixed with soviet-era monuments and parks. Architecture that is shown on this picture can make our city MUCH better. St. Petersburg is a huge city (not as Moscow of course), but it’s like a few cities in one.

    And everything else (except historical center) is quite boring and grey. I really hope this modern architecture will start to change things.

  5. You vastly overstated the importance of Gazprom to Europe. Russia provides 30% of European energy needs. And do not forget that Norway (worlds 2nd largest exporter) supplies Europe too – and Gazprom has no influence there. Plus the EU is going on a trip now to visit places like Kazhakstan etc to secure further deliveries from other countries. It is with good reason Europe thinks Russia is not the ideal supplier to trust. Trust being the operative word here.

  6. although it might look nice, it would definitely spoil the looks of old sankt peterburg. such buildings are much more interesting in dubai for example 🙂

  7. I think there pwetty (purposeful mispelling)
    Honestly I dont think the least one is realistic (Though it is the most original) It’s just there to promote the construction project. The Fourth one looks to much like Dubai, I like the first one. Can someone help me understand the second plan? Is that supposed to be a building?

  8. To Andrew:
    In many european countries it is far more than 30%. There is not much Europe can do. Gas from Norway is expensive. Anyway I like the first one:)

  9. Wow. I think that those designs are amazing. As far as whether they belong in the city…ehh, I can’t say. But they are beautiful designs.

  10. Ugly stuff.
    Doesn’t fit with SP at all. There are no high buildings like that, so if you build one this big, it will make the city look like a caricature.
    Like what happened in Moskou. Many nice historical buildings have been destroyed to make place for ugly megalomaniac structures like this. Monuments erected for those in power. In general extremely poorly build [time is money, and in Russia money is everything nowadays]

    No respect for the heritage of the old Russia, no respect for culture, history or the people who have to look at this ugly thing. Though the people in Russia are so numb after many many decades [even centuries] of being completely overlooked by those in power that they will probably not even lift a finger. And going to court to appeal will not help either, because the judges will never interfere with ‘theose in power’ [Like i.e. Loesjkov, mayor of moskou. He can do everything and no-one can stop him. Oh yes, once he was stopped : when he wanted to demolish the Bolshoi theatre instead of restoring it…

    I keep my fingers crossed…

  11. well. . . if they build it on the outskirts of the city, they protect the historic areas, and all major cities are continually expanding, so eventually the Gazprom building(s) will be within the center of a heavily populated (new center?) of the city, and maybe by then it will be considered a historic landmark too.

    the Empire State building in NYC was built in (what was then) an unpopular area of the city, too far away from the financial district, and it took years for them to fill it up with tenants. Now of course it’s right in the center of Manhattan, full of tenants, and historic too.

  12. Awesome buildings, although in my opinion, an architect is not only needed for constructing them, but an architect/historian is also needed for giving them a proper location, especially in a city with a great historical center like St-Petersburg.

    Paris, with an area like La Défense, has proven to me that it is definitely possible to properly locate certain areas for these kind of buildings without ruining the appearance of an historically unique heritage, and I think there are plenty of similar examples where “the old” and “the unavoidable new” can perfectly co-exist together without destroying historically characteristic elements, even in much smaller cities (e.g. Maastricht with areas like Céramique).

  13. The second are third ones are very nice, although the third one looks like it’d be a headache to build.

    The first one looks like a perfume bottle, the fourth one doesn’t work together at all and the sixth one looks like a cinema.

    The fifth one is just bizzare, I can’t visual that as a real building at all.

  14. the problem that you take on with just openly resisting a building like the Gazprom tower is that you exclude yourself from the dialogue. they have the power to build whatever they want, but if you involve them in a discussion about the building it may change to become more appropriate. the dumbest thing anyone could have done for the competition was to throw out the european jurors, because they probably would have helped reach a compromise. also, change is inevitable. you can’t stop it, it will happen, so why not be involved?

  15. impressive.
    especially project in sea of lava.
    now you know, where Sauron resides[in future].

    dont blame Taliban.
    they [relatively]good people.

  16. why shouldn’t one mix old fashioned architeture with modern buildings?
    because of velleity from conservative minds, holding evolution up?
    then i say don’t mix progressist minds with orthodox ones

  17. It’s sad but it will be, sooner or later. So we can only hope to prosperity that will comes with that gazoskreb.
    Half-Breed, ya tut nedavno, tut mozhno so svoimi po russki obschat’sa?

Leave a Comment