13
A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report
Theme 2 Global Moscow = Liveable Density Density Contrary to many public announcements and personally-held beliefs, the results of the Panel’s research and consultation do not point to Moscow being an extraordinarily dense city. Moscow is either in line with, or less dense than many other global cities in Europe and elsewhere in the world.
Google images
Moscow residents expressed a concern at the level of density, which they believed to be the cause of the relatively poor quality of the urban environment. The Panel did not agree with this notion and found that Moscow’s level of density is actually an asset that should be valued and protected. There may exist a level of confusion between the effects of urban density and the sensation of congestion, in particular traffic congestion. The Panel wants to reinforce the distinct differences between density and congestion, where the cause and effect of both phenomena require careful interpretation. The Panel listened to city residents who commented on the crowded urban conditions and observed that Moscow suffers from a Soviet-era road pattern, with enormous ‘super blocks’ that push all the vehicular traffic onto relatively few very large roads. These concerns about both isolation and crowding are valid, as are the difficulties associated with the conditions of residential blocks that often lack scale and character and can create an oppressive environment for residents. However, despite these residences being high rise, overall, the developments are no denser than more attractive low and mid-rise housing in other parts of Europe.
The average density of Moscow is 10,300-residents/sq km, which is equivalent to the density of inner London (10,900 residents/sq km), while Manhattan, the central area of New York City, is 26,800-residents/sq km, a density that is more than double that of Moscow. Many Asian cities, such as Shanghai, Tokyo, and Mumbai are substantially denser than Moscow. What is significant about Moscow is that its urban density is relatively constant over its entire settled area, which compares to New York where there is a balance of areas of ultra-high density with other areas of relatively low density. This creates psychological relief for people and is an important quality to consider when developing master plans for new areas. However, it is congestion, not density that is the major challenge facing Moscow. Congestion in the central part of Moscow is triggered by the centralised model of the city, with almost 40% of Moscow's work places concentrated in 4.5 km radius around the Kremlin. Transport is one of the areas that Moscow can focus on to address the congestion issues it faces and this is addressed later in the report.