Larysa SKORYK: UNESCO wants to place the unique slopes of Kyiv under its protection, and the City Council wants to build on them

The Day and Larysa Skoryk once again took a stroll in Kyiv, this time after a letter was addressed to the President of Ukraine, signed by members of the Supreme Public Board for the Development and Preservation of the Historic Kyiv Environment. In that letter (The Day was the first to carry it), the intelligentsia of Kyiv expressed concern over construction projects on the unique slopes. This time Larysa Skoryk, accompanied by our journalist, commented on the problem areas on the slopes. The discussion focused on gigantomania and corruption.

THE PRINCIPLED STAND OF TWO PRYSIAZHNIUKS

What revision? (says Larysa Skoryk when discussing whether or not Chief Kyiv Architect Vasyl Prysiazhniuk is empowered to revise certain ideas conceived by his predecessor Serhiy Babushkin — Author) At best he could postpone resolving certain matters and I’ll explain why later. The city prosecutor (also Vasyl Prysiazhniuk by name, also replaced) was on our side when we fought to preserve Bohomolets Park. You know about it, The Day carried this sad story. The populace, the academician’s family, and our volunteer organization did their best to save Kyiv architecture and protect that park from being built up. The City Council resolved to erect high-rise apartment buildings at the edge of the park, and the projects would actually invade the park. You can imagine what the place with all those unique trees planted by the scientist would look like dominated by such monstrosities. But this is only part of the story. The main point is that there is a cabinet resolution recognizing the place as a historical memorial complex: this is like a people’s deputy’s personal immunity status. Meanwhile, the city administration went as far as planning a transfer of the Bohomolets grave! Moreover, that cabinet resolution turned out to mean nothing, and it was the same with the city prosecutor’s ruling to the effect that the construction project was unlawful (Prosecutor Prysiazhniuk was opposed to what could be mildly described as an incompetent land policy of the city administration, although I’d call it unlawful). What do you think happened? Two prosecutor rulings were overruled by City Council sessions. In other words, Kyiv Council deputies are supposed to know what’s legitimate better than the superior executive authority and the prosecutor’s office.

I recently had a call from Oleksandra Bohomolets, the academician’s granddaughter. She had bad news. The city prosecutor’s office, now headed by a different man, had revised their previous decision on the park. The story ended unexpectedly, however, as the deputy prosecutor’s verdict had two contradictory conclusions; construction was possible and not to be allowed at the same time. An analysis of the capital’s powers that be over the past several years leaves one confident that the said decision will be interpreted in a manner best suiting them. In other words, the Kyiv public is back to where it started. The most alarming aspect is that the remaining plots in the city are targets of a real onslaught. The residents of Pechersk wrote a letter of protest, for the place is actually the only oasis left in that district, where mothers can take their children and the elderly can take a stroll and sit in peace and quiet if they cannot go downtown for some reason or another. The more so that all this will soon cease to exist here and in the center of the city; the greenery per capita ratio is lowering at a frightening speed. Of course, one ought to give architect Prysiazhniuk credit for revising all such construction projects and blocking a great many smart ideas, especially on the long-suffering slopes of Pechersk. So far quite a few “architectural” projects are held back by the need to work out a detailed district planning state project. This task, long pressed for by the public, was finally assigned all city district administrations. Pechersk was the first to embark on it. However, unless the project is thoroughly examined by the Public Board (after all, it is made up of experts, not randomly selected activists), everything making our city unique will be destroyed. The detailed planning project does hold back the City Council’s onslaught on the capital’s architecture, but — there is a contest for the best embankment development project, from Poshtova Square to the Metro Bridge.

This is not the current chief architect’s doing, but a sequel to the land allotments practiced when Babushkin held the post. Incidentally, the lot at 17-G Sichnevoho Povstannia St. is allocated for a high-rise elite apartment building and the project is to be carried out by a firm with the eloquent name Arkhitektura Liuks (Deluxe Architecture).

The site is at the crossing of four areas under state protection — the Kyiv Pechersk Fortress, Lavra Monastery, Church of All Saints by Lavra Economic Gate, and the Church of Our Savior at Berestov. The upper high-slide-risk edge of the slope is 12 meters from the Lavra wall. This is where a twelve-story building will be erected with an underground parking facility.

Resisting this onslaught is very difficult. We’ve heard petulant voices upstairs about Prysiazhniuk’s performance as chief architect, his “containing” style. I also think that Prosecutor Prysiazhniuk’s replacement was caused by his principled stand; anyway, all that privatization of plots in Kyiv makes me think so.

MORNING VIEW OF CHURCH DOMES AND CABBAGE ON ST. SOPHIA’S FLOWER BED

The way to the “places of interest” lays through St. Sophia Square. Neither of us mentioned the ignominious fitness center by the cathedral or the withered boxed trees on the square long since nicknamed Gendarme Imperial Square by a dissenting group. And perhaps both kept our fingers crossed, for the place known as Kniazhy Dvir (Princely Court) seemed to draw excavators to it like a magnet, Larysa Skoryk noted with a sad smile. Viktor Yushchenko’s campaign headquarters was no longer on St. Sophia premises, but she said there had been excellent cabbage grown on a flower bed in summer, the usual cooking variety, not some exotic species. An apt addition to the bread-and-circus adage, and to the priceless ancient frescoes.

And there were the cabinet’s garages in Lavra Lane, by the Church of All Saints, with the domes of the Church of Our Savior at Berestov a little further on. Those living in an apartment building planned in place of the garages would enjoy the unique amenity of having their sins absolved every morning, as their windows would open on the memorial religious site, commented Larysa Skoryk.

Hasn’t it occurred to anyone that it’s best to tear down the garages, that they have no place by the Lavra?

Skoryk: Remember our saying that a sacred place cannot remain empty. Every vacant lot must be the site of a super-profitable apartment building, such is the policy of our urban-planning bureaucrats. Moreover, some want to lease a building on the Lavra premises! They want to make it a business center and the firm concerned is supposed to be a Ukrainian-SU venture. And the name, Sobi [For Myself], sounds just great. Somehow these people can’t grasp the simple idea that such a neighborhood is unacceptable. Or maybe they want to send bulldozers and tear down the Lavra, leaving several domes so people living on those twenty stories would have something to look at and make the sign of the cross?

Incredible!

Skoryk: Yes, twenty stories. Building anything smaller wouldn’t pay off, for the plot costs very big money.

LEONID BYKOV IN A DESERT

Look at him, Larysa Skoryk points to the statue of actor Leonid Bykov. They placed him here and left all alone in a kind of Texas. True, the statue is exposed to the elements and looks forlorn by the heat-insulated parking stalls near the Park of Glory and the former Palace of Young Pioneers. In fact, the whole place has a miserable touch to it after chopping down the trees.

“Would it look any better with just the Palace of Children and Youth?” this from our driver, he means the “architectural complex” formed by the construction of a high-rise parking facility right against the palace. “Looks nice,” he adds.

Skoryk: You think so? Even if it does look nice, every structure must be in its right place. The Dnipro slopes are a nature preserve. They can’t be dealt with so brutally. If they build up this place, Kyiv will no longer be itself, for this green pedestal is one of the capital’s major attractions.

But the former Palace of Pioneers right beside it doesn’t look very attractive.

Skoryk: No, but it’s a compact structure, only two floors, and it doesn’t stand out when viewed at a distance. Another thing is that it was built in place of the Military Cathedral of St. Nicholas.

We examined the parking stalls and discussed the glass trend in architecture, wondering where it came from to Kyiv. The fact remains that there is an increasing number of such structures being built.

Just look at this parking facility from the aesthetic angle. See that triangular awning over the two circular structures? To me it doesn’t rate a C minus. Compare it to the filigree and delicate Lavra ensemble, how it blends into the sky and verdant hills. Thank God, not all of the hills were destroyed. Of course, we received the Lavra Belfry contrary to the wishes and visions of a number of experts. It was built later, but its shape is in harmony with the ensemble, it is planned “narrow.” Now look again at that garage ziggurat and imagine that quite recently there was a beautiful green slope in its place creating a very lyrical backdrop for the Lavra. The mayor of Kyiv admonished the architects that they should come up with timely criticism if disagreeing with some projects. Remember The Day’s first roundtable discussing our architectural follies? With all respect due Mr. Omelchenko, certain topics have been debated for at least two and a half years, among them the Dnipro slopes, that they should not be tampered with, that they are a major attraction of Kyiv. Result? A pseudo-Babylonian style of garages, Bykov statue in a desert, and high-rise apartment buildings to challenge the Lavra Belfry. Look at this ziggurat! Even small details point to a lack of talent. Grated entrances varying in size, the first arch is large and vertical, the next one is smaller and broader, the next one is even smaller. All they’d need to make the picture complete would be a tiny door for a mouse. The same motif, but kept in the Ivan-the-Great-Ivan-the-Little-Ivan-the-Littlest spirit. An allusion to the Roman aqueducts? But their niches were structural elements, unlike what we have here.

LAND ALLOTMENTS AND UNWRITTEN LAWS

Skoryk: See that foundation pit by the verge of the slope (by Vatutin Park — Author)? A house will be built there. Do you know how much a square meter costs here? About $3,500. Who is going to listen to a handful of intellectuals concerned about the destiny of the capital, doing something small and low-profit? What makes our city authorities so enthusiastic about all those land allotments? Obviously the prospect of feathering one’s own nest. An allotment may cost between two hundred thousand and a million hryvnias. On paper. In actuality, it could be worth a million and a half dollars. The dynamics of lowering or raising prices depends on the number of people and nuances (for example, the locality). All this is added up, but the crux of the matter remains the same. It is also true, however, that the difference between the actual and official cost can be peanuts compared to subsequent revenues if the area can be expanded. Will this inspire anyone to respect the aesthetics and beauty of nature or tradition created over ages?

Of course, this high-rise project apparently strikes a discordant note in the Pechersk landscape. What would you have removed from the slopes if you could — I mean structures built under the Soviets?

Skoryk: The Kyiv Hotel and the Kyivmiskbud stele — at least, I’d have its size reduced, because it has a glaringly distorting effect on the silhouette of the Pechersk slopes. Well, that’s about it. Anyway, I can’t think of anything else as unjustifiably high or seriously damaging the environment. But when they build those high-rise projects, they’ll be much more aggressive than all the other irrelevantly tall structures in Pechersk.

Now look at this one (pointing to a structure in Hrushevsky Lane, to neighbor on a high-rise project). How many stories? Five. If you want to be build something, it mustn’t have more than six floors. There were repeated public appeals. But they wouldn’t listen. Besides, they’re building it on the very edge of the slope. The Lavra Belfry was erected much further from the edge. The piles will have to be driven into the ground at least 25 meters deep to support such a huge structure in this wooded soil. But only if they build according to set urban development standards, not the way they did their Aquapark [Transvaal Water Park] in Moscow. In other words, the foundation must reach the “mainland” — in this case the base layer, which can never be done here, considering that the hill is 50-60 meters in height, so erecting a structure this size if very risky. Every slope can have a landslide. Dynamic sites like this one are simply unpredictable and we don’t want another Kurenivka (mudslide), do we? And I don’t even mention the aesthetic aspect. These people are so profit- thirsty, they live by the old apres moi le deluge principle. This, of course, can’t but affect the quality of all the high-rise projects mushrooming these days, especially considering how much a square meter costs. People living on Hrushevsky St. fought a long, courageous, but losing battle. Back in 1996, we joined efforts and had one such project shelved. Under that project we’d have a monstrosity the size of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, higher than the Lavra Belfry and Hilton Hotel. But they won’t leave this place alone, they can’t!

Actually, several modern hotels are obviously necessary in Kyiv; we hear many voices saying our hotel accommodations aren’t adequate for this city.

Skoryk: I’m all for it! We’ve covered this ground. The main thing is to know what to build and where. We mustn’t allow any such projects at the verge of the slope. Besides, Hrushevsky Street is under a great traffic strain and the locality is one of the highest ecological risks in Kyiv. You can see smog descending every evening. Now picture a high-rise apartment building, with several cars owned by the tenants of every apartment. Or imagine a hotel in its place, meaning at least 30% added to the regular traffic. As to where to build and what, I’m instantly reminded of an ideal site, it’s on Chornovil St. (former name: Kosior St.). Ideal, because it presents no traffic problems, which is especially important for such construction projects. Yet the place is occupied by homeowners leasing out their premises. Are they comfortable living on the crossing of main traffic arteries? I have a feeling at times that all of Ukraine is going to move to live in Kyiv. Housing construction is a lucrative business. Even building hotels doesn’t seem as profitable. Although we oppose unjustifiable downtown cramming, one can find beautiful tourist sites in the center of Kyiv, but every such place is dominated by housing projects. An interesting detail is that some of the apartments are taken away by the city administration. Who do you think for? People on housing waiting lists? I doubt that any of these apartments has been or will ever be made available to them.

SO VERY EUROPEAN!

Larysa Skoryk says the scenic hill between the Dynamo Stadium and the Arch of Friendship could have been removed, as suggested by someone in authority.

Skoryk: Can you imagine this craziness? Remove it and build instead some kind of representative-entertainment-public-cultural center? Saying the place could be made accessible to the general public when not catering to foreign delegations; that the public would then be happy to enjoy the modern cultural amenities, after chopping down the last remaining old trees and making the place attractive in the European style! We began collecting signatures, staging an act of protest. Some people’s deputies joined the campaign. This hill is a unique historical and cultural site, you won’t find another one, anywhere in the world. In October 2002, Kyiv hosted a conference dealing with national historical and cultural heritage protection. UNESCO people attended and proposed to include that “green pedestal,” along with the defined water area, tributaries, and islands, in the list of UNESCO-protected cities. What about all those empowered to accept or reject such urban planning projects and to enforce certain urban planning standards? What are they doing? Is anything done to show that Kyiv is interested in being given this protection? They are selling parcels of land being protected by the state. Let me show you the place where we’ll receive that “godsend.” (Larysa Skoryk takes me to a site behind the Philharmonic Society)

Skoryk: Here we are. You can see the statue of Saint Volodymyr. A national historical relic. You can also see the stairs leading down to the Magdeburg Law Memorial. Another national relic. Turn away and you’ll see the Philharmonic Society. Yet another national relic. And now picture a restaurant built precisely where the protected areas of these relics cross. It’s supposed to be a small restaurant, praise God. But then we’ll have an Etrex Hotel built right here on this unique ground. They already have a land allotment, and the site has been privatized. Do you know how it’s described in the legal papers? It was sold for token money and designated as an industrial lot. Part of an area having unique historical importance sold for token money, as an industrial lot! Who gave them the right to assign this status to a territory which is legally three times under the protection of the state?

Did you see the project?

Skoryk: Yes, it looks huge and investment-infested, with a shopping center, entertainment and fitness facilities, and such. Expert consulting [and other red tape] done courtesy of Mr. Babushkin while still Chief Architect of Kyiv, which practically means that the project was okayed, with the only barrier to surmount being the “project study” bureaucratic procedure to be performed at the Mistobudivna rada Urban Planning Council, which he had made an obedient tool — I refused to attend its sittings because no one could make one’s ideas heeded, however well-argumented and principled, and every time every project was approved.

How does our current Chief Architect Vasyl Prysiazhniuk feel about this project?

Skoryk: I’ve mentioned that such projects are shelved for the time being, pending the working out of detailed district projects. Mr. Prysiazhniuk has taken a principled stand. Such projects take more than a couple of months. Each has to be justified in terms of location and then inclusion into the master plan. The latter might also require adjustments, since it was drawn up on short notice. I don’t feel overly sentimental about Kyivproekt authoring the document. They are responsible for so many architectural monstrosities! In some cases such projects are entrusted to private design bureaus, but in most cases this is done by Kyivproekt people, ones being on official payroll and at the same time running their own workshops. Take the Honchary-Kozhumiaky project, for example. It’s their doing, all of it.

Honchary-Kozhumiaky has compact buildings, if that’s any consolation.

Skoryk: True, but it’s only down that ravine. The buildings are small there, but the fact is that the construction project as such does not fit into the picture of that part of Kyiv, so raising the matter of elite housing projects in that area made no sense whatever from the architectural point of view. Talking of big and small forms, I know that there are proposals saying that the entire area down the slope from Kyianivsky Provulok and almost to the foot of Kniazhy Hory above the Honchary Ravine should be built up, like terrace buildings all the way down the slope, with a couple of 25-story apartment ones on top. The project applies Gegerine’s hotel panorama techniques — you must know that pseudomodern structure on Velyka Zhytomyrska, with the top ornament akin to well-rooms built in Myrhorod.

There should be another project added, known as European Square, from what we’ve heard for several years.

Skoryk: But of course (sounding bitingly sarcastic), we have that European syndrome, don’t we? A trend getting out of control, I should say. That European Square and then that European Union Embankment, a kilometer from that square. Our first President Leonid Kravchuk said something recently. I loved it: We must first learn to build a Europe within ourselves. True, for what we are being proposed is not even Asiatic.

FROM MADRID TO BELGRADE

Our next “place of interest” was Poshtova Ploshcha Square.

Skoryk: We are stepping into the territory of what promises to be the European Union Embankment. South of the Turtle (Larysa Skoryk’s byname for the small church by the McDonald’s, which she describes as “totally ugly, rebuilt on totally unjustified grounds” — but this rates a different story), toward Vydubychi, three kilometers were to be allocated for construction, as recently proposed to the Urban Planning Council. The project is God-awful, it’s as though they had traveled across Europe, borrowing a handful of structures on the way from Madrid to Belgrade, then trying in vain to make something of this motley crew. You should see those antique arbors on the roof! Collage. Whoever did them had no idea about modern architecture, I mean that we are in the third millennium, that we live in Ukraine. There is more. The project was dominated by a huge church, something making your hair stand on end, a compilation of a baroque and a pseudo-Byzantine style. In a word, the authors must’ve been completely crazy. Mr. Andriy Myrhorodsky (Deputy Chief Architect of Kyiv) correctly pointed out that the whole thing should be complimented with a replica of the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. Also, the project proposed a triple trestle reaching 15 meters in height, like a six-story building.

Really? How about the Metro Bridge? Its very presence would obviously interfere with that project, wouldn’t it?

Skoryk: Absolutely! The stated project had to somehow bypass the problem. Yet the point in question is different. That stupid project, as you know (mentioned by The Day at the time), was turned down, but there is still that contest for the best embankment project underway. I’m sure they’ll plan five, even seven-story structures, otherwise it won’t pay off. Look at the Kyivpastrans structure. Four floors only, yet blocking the Volodymyrska Hirka slopes. Will there be anything left after raising the embankment another twenty meters — and building so many projects?

I am not an inveterate retrograde, I believe that the slopes alongside the embankment must be developed, but in a civilized manner. This means that stairways should be constructed in several places, maybe a cable railway linking the upper and lower sections of the city. That’s the way it’s done in the rest of the civilized world, I mean cable railways, footpaths, cozy restaurants, a small hotel/motel at the foot. In fact, some of the structures on the embankment could be converted to serve such purposes — it’s just that one must put them in good order first.

Now consider what we’re offered in addition to that European Embankment (pointing to the slope with the funicular). There were five or six buildings at the foot. And there have always been enough people deprived of aesthetic taste. Those buildings were erected by merchants who didn’t care about nature and beauty. Also, there was no official protection of historic monuments in the current sense. When they decided to build a cable railway most of the structures were torn down, the more so that they had no historical value. After that the slope looked cute and the funicular provided regular up-and-down communication. Now we are faced with what appears the obvious question: Why not make the plots possessed by Kyivans their private ownership? And then start building projects on the verge [of the slope and the devil with the consequences]? Let me tell you something in conclusion. If the Dnipro slopes are destroyed, Kyiv will become something like Berlin, Vienna, a miniature version of New York, but it will have ceased to be as Kyiv.