The list of "advice" from the city hall, announced at the press conference, is in fact an attempt to consolidate the success. Recently, the city authorities have corrected a number of their previous orders, bringing them in line with the law on the protection of monuments (Federal Law No. 73). This, according to representatives of "Arkhnadzor", made it possible to remove 25 Moscow addresses from the list of buildings subject to demolition. The social movement strongly supports this action of the Moscow authorities, but points out its insufficiency. In order not to be unfounded, the activists of the movement announced at a press conference a list of resolutions of the mayor's office, which, in their opinion, still need to be adjusted.
The fact that advice has been offered to the Moscow government is somewhat surprising. Even more surprising is the form - dry, detailed, businesslike. Most of the orders, which were discussed at the press conference, permit capital construction prohibited by law in the protected zone of the monument; or threaten to destroy an existing building, walk through it with an all-destructive reconstruction. Arkhnadzor not only listed these buildings and these decrees, but also commented on which words of the document threaten the monument in each specific case. You read the comments - and you wonder what the power of a word is, if it, this word, has the power of a decree. Just a couple of wordings - and there is no home.
Further, "Arhnadzor" formalized its position on each object (read the resolution) in the form of recommendations - listing the points what exactly needs to be changed in the texts of the city government decrees so that they comply with the law and do not threaten monuments or historical buildings. “These decrees, which contradict the main provisions of the current law on the protection of monuments, hang over heritage sites like a sword of Damocles,” Konstantin Mikhailov, coordinator of the Arhnadzor public movement, explained to journalists. "Some of these documents were adopted at the beginning of the 2000s, in the midst of investment activity, and, unfortunately, despite the assurances of officials that some projects are being revised, in general, preparations for implementation or implementation are continuing on them."
This approach to the protection of monuments must be recognized as new. Previously, experts were mired in the texts of resolutions on the relevant councils, but, having no chance to change what had already been approved by the mayor's office, they could not protest against the wording, and made recommendations only based on the already existing situation. And social activists protested against the destruction, but very emotionally and more on the streets (or at exhibitions), while they were not particularly involved in detailed analysis of bureaucratic texts. Either it was boring, or they also considered this business hopeless. And here - an analysis of the "letter of the law" and a detailed list of what needs to be changed in this letter in order for it to be for the better. The new tactics, and I must admit, turned out subtly and extremely exciting. For example, a lot of new from these recommendations can be learned about the technologies themselves to bring the wishes of investors for the reconstruction of historical mansions into visible compliance with the law.
So, for example, everyone (well, almost everyone) knew that the problem of Children's World was in the concept of “subject of protection” introduced in the law on the protection of monuments. The decor of the facades is an object, and all the insides are not an object; and, therefore, it can either be gutted, leaving the shell of the outer walls, or even demolished altogether, building a remake with a similar decor. And how many people have been talking about it, for three years for sure. But only now the details became known. It turns out that the subject of protection for the Detsky Mir building is described not only in the monument's passport, as is usually done, but also in the decree of the Moscow government, and, therefore, the experts of the Moscow Heritage Committee cannot do anything, since the description was approved in a document of a higher authority. On the other hand, and this is another curious subtlety, the subject of protection is defined as facades, but the resolution does not say a word about the need to keep the “subject of protection” authentic, or even about the material from which this object is made. Which, in fact, frees the hands of the investor.
"Arhnadzor" proposes to amend the resolution on "Children's World" as follows: remove from it the description of the subject of protection; redefine the subject matter of protection by conducting a new examination for this; and generally prohibit the reconstruction of the Detsky Mir building by adding an appropriate clause to the resolution. In fact, all the demands of the defenders of the Dushkin building are formulated very briefly and clearly - copy and paste into the resolution. This is undoubtedly a new, businesslike approach to the protection of monuments.
Bureaucratic tricks have actually deprived Moscow and the wonderful estate of Princess Shakhovskaya-Glebova-Streshneva on Bolshaya Nikitskaya Street, which has ceased to be considered an architectural monument due to … a banal typo in the document. The wrong building number is indicated there - 19/13, instead of 19/16. According to Rustam Rakhmatullin, Rosokhrankultura considered this a sufficient reason to renounce the monument altogether. Following her, the Moscow Heritage Committee did this, changing the entry in the register - the neighboring Mayakovsky Theater turned out to be a monument! Meanwhile, the unfolding clearing of the site for the new stage of the Helikon-Opera theater has already destroyed the semi-circular wing of the 18th century and the wing along Kalashny Lane, despite the fact that they have passports and entries in the register. Such precedents, according to Alexander Mozhaev, inspire concern for other objects with erroneous addresses. For example, the Church of the Ascension in Kolomenskoye, so beloved by the mayor of the capital, is listed as an object of the Moscow region!
“Arkhnadzor” convincingly asks to correct the resolution No. 889-PP, paragraph 2 of which prescribes: “To carry out construction on the site of the withdrawn production of an office and residential complex at the address: st. Bolshaya Ordynka, 8, bldg. 1 . In fact, the fulfillment of this point will lead to the construction of the famous architectural monument of federal significance - the Church of the Resurrection in Kadashi - from three sides with massive new buildings, distorting the panoramic views of Zamoskvorechye. For the sake of construction in the protected zone of the monument, the demolition of historical buildings has already begun. This, according to Alexander Mozhaev, will not only destroy the only place in Moscow that has preserved the urban planning environment of the 17th century, but will most likely lead to the refusal of the UNESCO commission to protect the temple itself.
Another unique area that somehow escaped Soviet and modern construction is Khitrovka. The history of the struggle to preserve Khitrovskaya Square began in 2005, with the appearance of a decree on the construction of a business center here. And although later the square's ensemble was given the status of a landmark, Order No. 2722-RP still provides for the construction of an impressive office complex in the center of the square.
However, Arkhnadzor itself admits that this status, unfortunately, has almost no effect on the fate of the object, since its legal force is still in question. Ostozhenka Street, for example, bears a similar proud title, but we all know that by now this old Moscow street has been almost completely "cleared" for the elite quarters of the "Golden Mile". Alas, today investors have crept up to the very last islands of genuine development in the area.
This is a trapezoidal quarter located on the spit of Ostozhenka and Prechistenka, where two very famous monuments of the 17th century are located - the White and Red Chambers. The order of the Government of Moscow No. 1861-RP, adopted back in 2004, "On the reconstruction, restoration of buildings with the development of underground space and the reconstruction of the ensemble of shopping malls" threatens not only the construction of buildings that have never existed here, but also the demolition of a number of valuable objects that miraculously survived in 1970 th. This, in particular, houses No. 6 and No. 8 in Ostozhenka, one of which is part of the estate of Peter the Great's steward A. Rimsky-Korsakov and at the same time the house where P. I. Tchaikovsky, the other - an Empire-style mansion, which housed the studio of the artist V. I. Surikov. Underground construction can also lead to the loss of salvageable vaulted cellars of this quarter's demolished 1970s corner house.
Unfortunately, it is very common for the city administration to make irreversible decisions on completely unexplored or little-studied objects. One of such examples was cited by Rustam Rakhmatullin at a press conference - the house of L. Razumovsky on B. Nikitskaya, 9, adjacent to the Rachmaninov Hall of the Conservatory, has not been properly studied, but has already been removed from the number of identified monuments. The nearby Synodal House, on the contrary, is included in the register, although the decree on its reconstruction for the conservatory's library is likely to be more significant. According to Rakhmatullin, the library could be arranged just in Razumovsky's house with a suite, and the unique layout of the house where famous composers - Kastalsky, Chesnokov, Golovanov - lived - should be preserved intact.
Among the heritage sites listed at the press conference were industrial facilities, a number of which belong to the oldest Nikolayev (October) railway, which is a monument. In particular, the Circular depot, the first locomotive depot on the territory of Moscow in the 1840s, built with the participation of Konstantin Ton, was disarmed for no reason. Due to plans to build a high-speed railroad, the remaining nine depots all the way to St. Petersburg were also threatened. A paradoxical and in many respects absurd situation is developing, Konstantin Mikhailov noted, when the management of the railway demonstrates patriotic conservatism in an effort to return the historical name "Nikolaevsky" to the Leningrad railway station and at the same time appeals to the authorities with a request to "assist" in removing the protection status from the buildings of the Nikolaev era.
The press conference ended on an alarming note - in addition to potential threats, there are also quite real ones related to the desolation and destruction of monuments that will have to winter without roofs. The simplest in terms of design and materials, temporary roofs, according to Marina Khrustaleva, will save a number of valuable objects that have lost their roofs as a result of fires. Otherwise, next spring it will be possible to disarm them - the buildings will simply perish. Among the most needy objects "Arhnadzor" named the printing house of El Lissitzky, the communal building of the house of the People's Commissariat for Finance of Moses Ginzburg, the house of the merchant Bykov, built by Lev Kekushev, which burned down after being included in the list of identified objects, and the oldest house of the Arbat - the Zinoviev chambers of the 17th century.
