Kostiantyn Rudnev is a chief engineer at Drozdov & Partners. Kostia has been working in the industry for over 22 years, including 20 years at Drozdov & Partners. He studied engineering in the Czech Republic.
“I worked at the bureau in two stages – from 2002 to 2008, and from 2010 to the present. I first met Oleg Drozdov a long time ago – in 1994, when construction was beginning to develop in Ukraine and there was a construction boom. At that time, it was very important for me to find a meaningful and fulfilling job.”
What does it mean to you to be a chief project engineer? What are the main tasks you perform in the office?
For me, my job means being responsible for the decisions made in projects. It is also a long and constant cooperation with customers and architects that must meet modern standards. That’s why it’s important for me to make relevant and balanced decisions in projects and keep them under control.
In the bureau, I develop engineering concepts – how the project should work, how it can be implemented. During the design process, I play the role of a project manager, controlling the execution of tasks, checking the work for errors, and if they occur, correcting them at any stage. If the object is very complex, I work with contractors, and if there are architectural problems, I work with architects. At the preliminary design stage, I calculate whether there are any restrictions on architectural solutions so that there are no conflicts with the further work of engineers.
Why do you think having a chief engineer is critical for the successful implementation of projects?
Not all architectural firms have a chief engineer on their staff, and often architects try to fulfill this function.
Having a chief engineer on the team is an opportunity to check all projects for engineering capabilities at an early stage.
Projects are becoming more and more complex from an engineering point of view over time, so engineers need to be involved and someone needs to work with them. There are also a lot of young people working in the bureau now, who need to be consulted to make their work more meaningful, and I am also involved in this.
Do you have a project that you consider to be a good example of the importance of your role in the bureau?
VG Horse Club is my first big experience. All the solutions that were laid down in the project were eventually implemented.
Teatr na Podoli project was very complex – I traveled to Kyiv every week with the chief architect of the project to supervise and attend meetings.
At the same time, in these projects, the architects had a lot of responsibility, and the work was useful for society.
What new technologies and trends in engineering do you think might affect architecture in the near future?
In my opinion, architecture will be primarily influenced by climate change, the economy, changes in the availability of resources and their cost. This can affect both architectural and engineering solutions and the equipment used.
For example, facades with photovoltaic panels will become more common very soon as energy becomes more expensive. Or the latest government requirements – public buildings must be equipped with these panels to generate and supply energy.
The war has a great impact on decisions. For example, sheltering is an additional task for architects and developers, which also affects the cost of projects. The war makes us rethink the buildings we live in and makes us think about how to live in a modern environment.
Of course, we want a more positive outcome, and we want to find solutions to make our lives more comfortable even in the new realities. And architecture and engineering systems are trying to provide this comfort of life.
What were the most difficult stages in the bureau’s work?
During the construction boom, the bureau worked on the Ave Plaza project.
It was a new experience for the bureau, which was mostly engaged in reconstructions at that time, and this project with a huge area and commerce became a real challenge for us, where we tried to apply all the modern solutions of the time.
The second difficult stage was the construction crisis of 2008-2009. It was a complete reboot of the bureau, a reform of design systems, a change in the composition of employees and their division. Previously, Drozdov & Partners had quite a few engineers, but this crisis led to a reduction in the team. Already in 2010, the firm was working on complex projects for private homes, and they needed someone to preserve the architectural solutions and help with engineering.
And of course, the war was a big shock. In 2021, we had certain ideas and ambitions, a whole package of powerful projects. The reality of 2022 completely turned all our plans upside down.
What is important in your work?
The most important thing is to make a quality product.
And the most interesting thing for me is when you work on a project and constantly receive new information. Architectural and engineering solutions change and transform over time, and each project has its own specialty, its own specifics, which are interesting to explore. And this is the great advantage of our work.
What impresses you most about the work of Drozdov & Partners?
I like the detailed and comprehensive approach used by the office.
In the end, the client receives a full-fledged product that he can start implementing. We work with the client in great detail, interview them, help them navigate the project and our solutions. And then the solutions we offer become meaningful and understandable to the client.
There are not many other architectural firms with this approach, because it takes a lot of time and carries a financial burden, but this is our specialty for the market, and many customers understand this.
About the Kharkiv School of Architecture
I have taught at the Kharkiv School of Architecture twice.
Before the war in Kharkiv, I taught a course on engineering systems – what they are, where to locate them, and what the design phases are.
The second experience is recent. I gave lectures to the 3rd year students of the Kharkiv School of Architecture on building physics, the main idea of which was to consider the physical processes that occur indoors and outdoors. Students performed practical tasks and felt like engineers. I helped them to form a holistic picture of what they do on projects and how it works in the complex.
I also learned together with the students – they asked interesting questions that I also wanted to explore. I believe in sharing experiences and accepting new information, and our communication with the students was mutually beneficial.
