The Paradox of Russian Cities
Russian cities often benefit from a functioning city administration, an active civil society, and a strong framework of urban regulations. Yet, when we look at the current state of the urban environment, they appear far from the ideal of an attractive, livable city.
Thomas of TSPA and Anton Shatalov of Proektdevelopment—a young and innovative practice contributing to the emerging urban design scene in Siberia—discuss this paradox using Krasnoyarsk as a case study.
The conversation was hosted by GorodPrima.
🔗 Read the full dialogue (in Russian): A Masterplan Won’t Solve Anything
“Excerpt from the Dialogue (Translated)
Anton:
If people notice and value good design, who should change their attitude? For many, the connection might not be obvious. Most people aren't ready to pay more for design because they don’t see it as a necessity.
Thomas:
Let me share three studies on quality of life:
1. The first one is from Berlin, where researchers studied housing typologies for the elderly. They found that in buildings with shared hallways—spaces where neighbours could interact—there were significantly fewer emergency calls. Neighbors helped one another before anyone called an ambulance.
2. The second is from the U.S., where researchers showed that in areas where streets were walkable and cars weren’t necessary, people walked more, gained less weight, were healthier, and lived longer.
3. And finally, in Barcelona, analysts confirmed that for every €1 invested in infrastructure and public space, the city gained €3 in return—through taxes, land value increases, rent, tourism, and more. Simple economic logic that can be quantified.
