Modern architecture is now everywhere. For Example Almaty, have you seen it recently? Only construction inside the city! Almaty is trying to be modern, but this modernasation is destroing old historical art buldings like Soros Center.
People of Kazakhstan wake up!
Why destroy the history? Without history we wont be who we are!
Soros Center Community Art Center is something that should be cherished and sponsored by the government. If not the government other charity centers for example Tengri Center. Tengri Center is a new charity center which is focused on helping children, protecting art, encouraging children in art, protecting environment for a better future!

wake up Kazakhstan!

www.tengri-center.org

Leave a message what you think about chnage in Art, Environment problems, or anything else in Kazakhstan on this website.!

In my humble opinion, government buildings need to be build in classical style.

I’m originally from Berlin and we faced similar problems with Soviet-style architecture. Most houses on Karl-Marx-Allee (former Stalinallee) have been renovated now after being in decay for a long time.

They now house extremely beautiful and spacious flats. They were built in the 50s, showing that reconstruction also took place in the East.

Other examples of state-of-the-art Soviet architecture include the House of the Teacher.

While the bleak examples of Soviet conformism and working class paradises are to be found everywhere (especially in the far eastern districts), it was difficult to persuade people that not all GDR-dated buildings are inferior to older buildings or their counterparts of western architecture of the same time.

This blog post here sums it up quite nicely: http://www.krug2ke.com/archives/2004/01/BerlinArchitecture

Soviet architecture, for most, consists of Krushevkas, bleak factories, and numbing 16 story edifices which bring to mind the worst housing projects of NYC or Chicago. Perhaps time and energy is better spent finding ways to make those habitats more livable.

Residents are only offered below-market rates when the city, rather than a developer, demolishes a building through a process that somewhat resembles eminent domain, usually for the construction of a road or other civil project, as was done with the Satpaev extension to Luganskova.

In other cases, residents are well within their rights to refuse or at least wait for a better offer, and a great many do exactly that. Walk a few blocks to the area between Panfilov and Ablay Khan, between Kurmangazy and Shevchenko. This entire area save one parcel is slated for development, yet there are still businesses and residents in some of those buildings, two years after the announcements were made.

Even offers that are “below market value” (difficult to establish in this market anyway) are likely 5 to 10 times higher than what was paid for those same properties as little as five years ago.

And if there are any significant numbers of tourists coming to Almaty to look at architecture, I haven’t heard of it. Even before the demolitions began Almaty had little of interest in this category, as it is a very young city anyway.

Your point about the similarities to many modern construction projects is valid. I’ve read the same criticisms of MUDs in Washington, DC. If the US, Dubai, and other countries around the world are modernizing this way, how is it we expect Kazakhstan to sit down and grind out truly creative and innovative architecture while investors are screaming for more new luxury apartments to buy up and buildings can’t go up fast enough to please everyone?