Scientific Journal of Riga Technical University Architecture and Urban Planning
Agate Eniņa, Jānis Krastiņš. Creative Work of the Architect Daina Danneberga in the Context of Architectural Heritage of the Soviet Period
2010
Volume 4
Fig. 6. A project drawing of the RPI campus in Ķīpsala with the dormitory buildings arranged along Balasta dambis. Around 1968. Architect Jānis Vilciņš. [3]
Fig. 7. The master plan for RPI in Ķīpsala, a sketch design. 1970. Co-author – architect Kārlis Alksnis. [2]
Only few examples of perimeter blocks originating from the Soviet period have been preserved. In this regard, the building of the Union of Fishermen Collective Farms has a special merit. In the context of development of the historic urban environment it is necessary to assess the future process for regeneration of the post-war perimeter blocks. Today the Sports Palace in Krišjāņa Barona iela has been demolished as well as laboratory buildings of Riga Technical University in Old Riga. It is easy to destroy the seeming “non-values”, however, it is necessary to assess the quality of these buildings so that in future these years would not become blank spots in the history of architecture. There is a need for a programme for survey and inventory of architectural attributes of the Soviet period with guidelines how to continue popularising and raising public awareness of this heritage. The temple of knowledge or the university campus of Riga Polytechnic Institute in Ķīpsala (Figures 4 and 5) became the most remarkable achievement in the architect’s career and the most familiar constructed object. The first master plan for the construction of the campus in Ķīpsala was elaborated by the architects Jānis Vilciņš and Voldemārs Zaķis [3]. The axis of the prospective Daugava Northern Crossing and the site for the river shipping complex foreseen in the development plan were taken into consideration. According to the initial project concept it was intended to position school buildings in the middle of Ķīpsala, and to arrange high-rise dormitories along Balasta dambis, planning to demolish wooden houses of the historic fishermen village (Figure 6). Since the architect Vilciņš was also designing other significant public buildings in Riga (the building of the press (Preses nams) and the building of the Central Committee of the Communist Party), Daina Danneberga became chief architect of the project. Retaining the initial typological concept of ‘the carpet principle’ for the university campus (Figure 7), the location of the dormitories was changed and separate blocks of faculties were designed (Figures 8 and 9).
Fig. 8 and 9. The RPI campus in Ķīpsala. Project drawings. 1970. Co-author – architect Kārlis Alksnis. [2]
Only some faculty buildings have been constructed from the entire grandiose project. One of the reasons why the project was not implemented in full was a complicated coordination process of the project. The Latvian SSR could approve only such projects where the total construction costs did not exceed 2.5 million roubles; therefore the entire project was divided into phases where separate buildings were erected. Several episodes give evidence of the complicated construction procedure in the Soviet Union. For example, skylight windows for drawing workshops could not be obtained anywhere. Kaspars Rutks, head of the Capital Construction Division at RPI, managed to find like a needle in a haystack a Jewish roofer, who had practiced back in the times of the first Latvian Republic. At first this roofer made one sample surface from flat glass, and later made the rest of the windows for the roof of the new RPI building. Similarly it was almost impossible to design a staircase with freestanding steps so that it would convey an impression of monumentality and solemnity. Only the architect’s spitefulness prevented it from being constructed with the ordinary slanted beams [1]. Such a detail, which being simple is also quite significant for architectural quality, is highly regarded also today. In 1975, the construction of the building of the Faculty of Civil Engineering began (the project was developed in 1972). The architecture of the building reflected typical trends of Late
38