The Narkomfin Building in Moscow, designed by architects Moisei Ginzburg and Ignaty Milinis between 1928 and 1930, is a landmark in modernist architecture. A bold experiment in communal living, the building remains a crucial reference point for architects exploring collective housing and social architecture.
The Narkomfin Building Technical Information
- Architects1-8: Moisei Ginzburg and Ignaty Milinis
- Location: Novinsky Boulevard, Moscow, Russia
- Topics: Constructivism, Modernism
- Area: 5,000 m2
- Project Year: 1928 – 1930
- Restoration Period: 2017–2020
- Photographs: © Natalya Pokrovskaya
The solution to the housing problem will come not through private, individual structures, but through the collective effort of society.
– Moisei Ginzburg 9
The Narkomfin Building Photographs
The Narkomfin Building Historical and Social Context
The Narkomfin Building was conceived during a time of great social transformation in the Soviet Union. The late 1920s marked the consolidation of Soviet power under Joseph Stalin, and architecture was seen as a critical tool for creating the “new Soviet man.” The building was designed to reflect the collective ethos of the USSR, where private spaces were minimized in favor of shared living and social integration.
Moisei Ginzburg, a leading figure in Soviet Constructivism, envisioned the Narkomfin Building as more than just a residential structure—it was an experiment in lifestyle engineering. Influenced by the avant-garde ideas of Le Corbusier and the Bauhaus, Ginzburg, and Milinis sought to redefine urban housing by introducing communal amenities and integrating functionalist principles that promoted social harmony. The Narkomfin Building was designed for employees of the People’s Commissariat of Finance (Narkomfin), reflecting the government’s ambition to house a new professional class in a collective, communal setting.
According to anthropologist Elena Chernets, the Narkomfin was conceived as a “transitional type of house” intended to move society from individual housing to communal living. Unlike more radical projects, the Narkomfin Building sought to maintain comfort with smaller private apartments and shared communal spaces like dining rooms and laundries. The vision was to create a new, collective way of living that would reflect the evolving socialist ideals of the time.
Architectural Design and Innovation
At the heart of the Narkomfin Building’s architectural innovation lies its modular layout, designed to blend private and communal living spaces. The building comprises a series of duplex apartments (F-type units), which were revolutionary at the time. These units feature two-level living spaces with double-height ceilings in the living areas, allowing for greater spatial flexibility and natural light.
The design also incorporates communal kitchens, dining areas, and laundry facilities—spaces intended to encourage interaction among residents and reduce the need for private kitchens, reflecting the socialist vision of collective living. However, many of these ideas were never fully realized due to a lack of funding, and residents preferred to maintain their private routines. For example, people often ate in their apartments rather than using the communal dining areas, undermining the architects’ vision of shared living.
Ginzburg’s architectural philosophy was rooted in the belief that architecture could reshape society, and the Narkomfin Building embodied this vision. The building’s minimalist aesthetic, characterized by smooth, flat facades, strip windows, and pilotis, reflected the Constructivist ideals of simplicity and utility. The use of reinforced concrete as the primary construction material showcased modern techniques and allowed for more significant structural flexibility, contributing to the building’s modernist appeal.
Critique of the Impact and Reality
Despite its architectural brilliance, the Narkomfin Building faced numerous challenges from the outset. The Soviet government’s policies shifted in the 1930s, and Stalin’s regime moved away from the romantic ideals that had inspired the project. As a result, the building’s communal spaces were never fully utilized as intended. Over time, the building was adapted for more conventional residential use, with individual kitchens being retrofitted into many units. This shift diminished the original vision of collective living, and the building began to deteriorate as maintenance was neglected.
The Narkomfin Building symbolized the gap between romantic architectural ideals and practical reality. The pressure to house a growing urban population led to communal spaces being converted into living areas, and single-occupancy units were often filled with entire families. These mismatches between design and use led to dissatisfaction among residents, who struggled with the lack of privacy in a building designed for communal life. The architectural critic Vladimir Paperny notes that by the late 1920s, Soviet culture was pulled in two directions: toward collective living and reinforcing traditional family structures. This tension played a vital role in the challenges the Narkomfin Building faced.
Over the decades, the building fell into severe disrepair. By the early 2000s, it wasn’t easy to recognize the building as a Constructivist masterpiece. Former residents like art historian Ulyana Dobrova, who lived in the building before its restoration, describe its decayed state vividly. They recount crumbling facades, broken windows, and even fungal growth inside the apartments. This deterioration was a stark contrast to the building’s original modernist ambition.
Restoration and Contemporary Relevance
In 2017, a comprehensive restoration project began, led by Alexey Ginzburg, the grandson of Moisei Ginzburg. The restoration, completed in 2020, aimed to preserve the building’s original architectural elements while upgrading its infrastructure to modern standards. This delicate balance between restoration and renovation is a critical lesson for architects today. The restoration team removed later additions to the building and carefully reconstructed elements based on Ginzburg’s book “Zhilye,” which detailed the original design.
Despite numerous challenges, including finding replacements for original materials such as the building’s cast-iron radiators, the restoration was considered a success. Garik Barsumyan, the head of the development firm involved, noted that many of the original architectural features and marketing ideas were successfully implemented, even though some aspects had to be modified for modern use.
The Narkomfin Building’s restoration has reawakened interest in its architectural significance and relevance in today’s housing debates. In a time when urban density and affordable housing are critical global issues, the Narkomfin Building reminds us that collective living models offer valuable solutions. Its emphasis on shared spaces, community-oriented design, and the integration of functional aesthetics resonates with contemporary movements in co-living and sustainable urban design.
For architects, the Narkomfin Building symbolizes architectural ambition and cautions against how sociopolitical contexts can alter or undermine visionary projects. Its recent revival offers hope that buildings like it—rooted in a specific historical moment yet resonant with contemporary architectural discourse—can continue to inspire new generations of designers.
The Narkomfin Building Plans
The Narkomfin Building Image Gallery
About Moisei Ginzburg
Moisei Ginzburg (1892–1946) was a prominent Soviet architect, theorist, and key figure in the Constructivist movement. Born in Minsk, he studied architecture in Italy and at the Riga Polytechnic Institute. Ginzburg is best known for his work on communal housing, notably the Narkomfin Building in Moscow, embodying his collective living vision. As a founder of the OSA Group (Organization of Contemporary Architects), Ginzburg played a crucial role in shaping modernist architecture in the Soviet Union. His theoretical writings, especially the book Style and Epoch, laid the foundation for Soviet modernist architectural thought, advocating for functionalism and the social role of architecture in creating a new socialist society.
Notes & Additional Credits
- Structural Engineers: Sergei Prokhorov and Vladimir Bodiansky
- Restoration Lead: Alexey Ginzburg (grandson of Moisei Ginzburg
- Number of Floors: 6
- Building Materials: Reinforced concrete, glass, and steel
- Support Structure: Pilotis (elevating the main body of the building)
- Facade: Flat, minimalist, and functionalist with horizontal strip windows
- Total Area: Approximately 5,000 square meters
- Unit Sizes:
- F-type (duplex): 50–80 square meters
- K-type (single-level): Approximately 30 square meters
- Ginzburg, Moisei. Style and Epoch. MIT Press, 1982.
- Cohen, Jean-Louis. The Future of Architecture Since 1889: A Worldwide History. Phaidon Press, 2012.
- Kopp, Anatole. Constructivist Architecture in the USSR. Academy Editions, 1985.
- Cooke, Catherine. Russian Avant-Garde: Theories of Art, Architecture, and the City. Academy Editions, 1995.
