Synod, but not that one

The work on a monument of federal significance, the Synod, which is being hastily adapted to the needs of the Presidential Library, is more reminiscent of shock construction than a thorough restoration. Particularly impressionable connoisseurs of beauty who find themselves today at the observation deck of Isaac are better off not looking in that direction - not every heart can bear it. However, we do not recommend looking in the other direction - if on the right, without unnecessary ceremony, Russia is adapted to the needs of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation, then on the left, Montferrand fell under the same great need.

Stardust
Let us remind you that the complex of buildings of the Senate and Synod (together with the Laval mansion and house 3 on Galernaya) and the Lobanov-Rostovsky House were transferred by one highest order to the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation. As officially explained - to ensure the activities of government bodies. Then, however, it turned out that in relation to the Lobanov-Rostovsky house there was no longer a state need - so it would not house the offices of federal officials at all, but an expensive hotel.
But the older the cognac, the more stars it has and the higher its price. And when it comes to building a five-star hotel in a monument building, there is no respect for the years lived. This is what they showed us by demolishing the courtyard outbuilding by Montferrand.
Property manager Vladimir Kozhin initially hoped to use the Senate and the Synod for equally profitable commercial projects - but a very loud scandal occurred when he shared his dreams publicly. In general, they agreed on moving the Constitutional Court, and for him the Senate. What to do with the Synod? Well, let there be a Presidential Library. But the library is electronic, and a building of this scale is not required to house hundreds of computers. How to occupy the huge areas? From the TV reports shown once, it turned out that only one floor was allocated for the library. The other two will have winter gardens, bars, restaurants and other facilities for VIP relaxation.
But our VIPs, as you know, see themselves only at the top - in the literal sense. Therefore, if there is an office, it’s about 400 meters away, but if it’s a restaurant, it’s panoramic, with a “magnificent view of classical St. Petersburg.”


Isaac in the service of digestion
They planned to do something similar with the Synod. On the official website of the Art Style company, information appeared about the order it received in December last year for the “development of an immovable monument of history and culture, the Synod building.” In particular, the concept of a panoramic cafe with a hall is in the attic floor.
It was especially emphasized that the essence of the concept “lies in the fact that the roof of the cafe will be glass with a magnificent view of St. Isaac’s Cathedral.” There are also computer models of interiors for rooms with characteristic attic sloping walls, glass from top to bottom.
The reality of these monstrous undertakings is also confirmed in the working drawings of the Synod reconstruction project, which were received last week by the editorial offices of some media from an anonymous source. As can be seen from these drawings, it is planned to significantly change the angle of the roof and add a glass cover to the classicism monument, which will rise above the level of the existing cornice by almost 9 meters.
The head of the Office of Rossvyazohrankultura for the Northwestern Federal District, Vitaly Kalinin, hastened to assure journalists that “there will be no glazing on the side of St. Isaac’s Cathedral or other modernity” (here I would like to clarify - what about from the Neva or Konnogvardeisky Boulevard?). Although he admitted that such innovations were contained in one of the project options, it was not approved by Rossvyazohrankultura.
Excuse me, what was agreed upon then? Vitaly Kalinin’s answer to this question seems somewhat vague: “The project for adapting the Synod building into a presidential library, provided by the Directorate of Administrative Affairs of the President of the Russian Federation, has been agreed upon by us in full in the part where the work is underway.”
But the work is being carried out at an inconsistent pace - today in one part, and tomorrow in another. For example, they are already dismantling the roof, but it is still not known for certain what form it will take as a result of the “renovation”, what decision has been approved for the attic floor?
“This answer from Kalinin really scares me,” admits Alexander Margolis, co-chairman of the St. Petersburg branch of the All-Russian Society for the Preservation of Historical and Cultural Monuments. — Where are the guarantees that the story will not repeat itself with the Renaissance Hotel on Pochtamtskaya, 4, whose swollen glass roof was the first invasion of the ensemble of St. Isaac's Square? Then, let me remind you, the developer came to KGIOP with a facade reconstruction project. Nothing was said about the second part - where it was about the construction of a completely new building of monstrous height in the courtyard. The security department, headed at that time by Nikita Yavein, approved this façade and calmed down. And when, after a while, they saw what was going on in the yard, Nikita Igorevich expressed himself in the sense that, they say, they shouldn’t jump on the bandwagon of an accelerating locomotive... That could happen here too. Kalinin agreed on something so innocent, some of it, but most importantly, not. But when it comes down to it, they will say - but we did not agree on this.
A recognized expert in the field of restoration, member of the federal and city councils for cultural heritage, Mikhail Milchik, is perplexed as to how it is even possible to carry out work on the monument in the absence of a generally agreed-upon project:
— Previously, this was unacceptable. They simply did not open financing until the project received sanctions from state security authorities. And if they discovered that the work was not being carried out according to the project, or was violating it, then they had the right to stop funding. And thus the work stopped. Today we have a different picture: there is no agreed project, but work is in full swing.

Collapse of cultural heritage
Mikhail Milchik also reminds that reconstruction of the monument is strictly prohibited. Only restoration is allowed, which also implies the possibility of adapting it to modern needs - with the obligatory preservation of all valuable (authentic) elements; In some cases, restoration repairs are acceptable. But not major.
Meanwhile, on documents leaked to the media, the project is labeled precisely as “major repairs and restoration of the Synod building.”
And this, alas, is far from an isolated case. The latest example is the Lobanov-Rostovsky House, cleaned down to the perimeter of the walls. Also, Chicherin’s House on Nevsky, where KGIOP approved the reconstruction project. Although the head of the committee, Vera Dementyeva, herself explained in one of her interviews that the concept of “reconstruction” allows almost any work to be classified in this category if, as a result, at least one genuine structural element is preserved, even if it is only the foundation.
In her recent message, Governor Matvienko categorically insisted on the northern capital’s exceptional achievements in saving and restoring monuments. However, experts assess the state of affairs in this area completely differently.
“We (not only in St. Petersburg, but throughout our country) are experiencing the collapse of the concept of “cultural heritage,” Mikhail Milchik is convinced. — The main value of any monument is its authenticity. The main criterion for resolving all issues related to heritage is the problem of preserving authenticity. This is also enshrined in the famous Venice Charter. And in the set of restoration rules issued by the Ministry of Culture as recently as 2007, we read: “Authenticity is a determining factor in the value of cultural heritage objects.”
Today we see at the Synod and at many other sites a disregard for this fundamental principle. The new generation of leaders usually understands heritage as a kind of decorative decoration for their lives. For them, these are just some facades in the spirit of Baroque or Classicism, spectacular interiors that can be “invented” or remade; it is quite in their taste to come up with something completely new - if the desire arises. All my fellow restorers have probably heard dozens, if not hundreds of times, a phrase typical of modern customers: “Why are you hanging on to this old thing? Why do you need these shabby walls? We will do better." It is difficult to show more convincingly what the collapse of cultural heritage is - this remark is the collapse of cultural heritage.
What can we say about such “little things” as historical furniture - the current owners prefer to make a new one “in the style of classicism” rather than restore the original one - probably unsightly, in their opinion, it was not intended for the ceremonial palace halls, but for an office, albeit of the highest class.
Let us note that the Art Style company in its design proposals turned out to be very sensitive to the customer’s tastes:
“Finishing materials for a panoramic cafe in the Presidential Library. B. N. Yeltsin, modern, using the latest collections of Spanish tiles and Italian lamps. A very interesting solution for a bar counter with a “falling” baguette. The bar equipment is decorated with Svarovski handles, the technology of the bar equipment is covered with a luxurious polished facade. The walls are decorated with tapestry wallpaper using German technology and natural fabrics. The glass ceiling is decorated with French blinds and golden organza fabric.”
Don't go blind from such beauty...

If you think about it, it won't last long
Nikolai Taskin, head of the Directorate for Construction and Reconstruction of Facilities in the Northwestern Federal District of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation, demonstrated his understanding of the liberties allowed in relation to exceptional objects in one of his interviews.
“We reconstructed the facility in a year and two months,” Taskin reported triumphantly. The haste is explained simply: “Now you can’t think for long.” Although there are still some shortcomings: “And in the restoration field they are used to thinking for a long time, analyzing for many months.” Although the desired trend is obvious: “In reconstruction projects, it is possible to combine the functions of restoration and modern design. It works, but it’s difficult.” And another lovely confession: “Not all historical rooms had paintings on the ceiling. Where she was not, she appeared. Somewhere they made reprints, somewhere they made modern paintings while preserving the historical style.”
“...And the historical “carpentry” was replaced with double-glazed windows,” adds Milchik, noting: “I don’t know, out of naivety or for some other reasons, but Nikolai Sergeevich openly declares the principles of anti-restoration here.” And he quite rightly does not use the term “restoration”, but speaks specifically about reconstruction - which, in fact, is what took place here.
The specialists of the Spetsproektrestavratsiya Institute, who worked in the Senate, tried as best they could to defend the restoration approach. It is not surprising that they were no longer invited to the Synod - here all the restoration work was entrusted to the workshop of Grigory Mikhailov, and the project of modern transformations was ordered to Evgeny Merkuryev, who had already proven at another presidential site (the Konstantinovsky Palace) his readiness to implement any whims of a high customer without unnecessary wrangling.
In the case of the Synod, this could lead not only to the appearance of a glass cone over the facade of the great Rossi, but also to the destruction of the inner courtyard - it is proposed to completely build it up, completely covering the level of the first two floors, to combine the space of the 3rd and 4th floors into a single room, “decorating” it along the way with newly made columns a la classic.

Terrible secret
In Merkuriev’s workshop they categorically refuse to show or comment on the project - we thought that they were ashamed, but we were mistaken: the customer does not order it. It’s the same story with Mikhailov’s workshop. “Art Style” responded to the invitation to take part in an open discussion of the project by removing all materials related to it from its website. The customer also remains proudly silent. The project was not submitted to public hearings and was not presented to the Heritage Preservation Council under the government of St. Petersburg.
And then the governor will be angry again - evil people are spreading unverified information! But we really wanted to get it first-hand, and so did the members of the council headed by Valentina Ivanovna personally. However, neither journalists nor authoritative experts have yet been shown anything other than a virtual fig.
“The most important requirement clearly follows from our laws: the right to reliable information,” reminds Alexander Margolis. — The story with the Synod is outrageous, first of all, because they behave as if they were creating a military defense facility somewhere near Plisetsk!
But in such a mystical city as St. Petersburg, one should always expect a symmetrical response to any vile deceit. The truth can unexpectedly burst out of the ground. Just like what happened when digging a pit in the Synod courtyard, when the excavator bucket hit the masonry of ancient buildings of the Dorossiev period. Leaks of information, publicity in the press - it was no longer so easy to disrupt everything quietly. The regional department of Rossvyazohrankultura managed to persuade the customer to allow archaeologists to access the finds. By this time, however, almost 80 percent of the valuable archaeological site had been destroyed.

Lonely human feat
“My work at this site is completely spontaneous,” says archaeologist Svetlana Shungina. — Because as soon as I met with a representative of the Presidential Administration Directorate, they directly told me that archaeological research at this site is not provided for, they are not written down in the plan. And there is no funding for this.
Without waiting for the conclusion of the contract, she simply began to work, realizing that the minutes were counting.
“I would call what Svetlana Shungina did a professional feat,” says Oleg Ioannisyan, head of the architectural archeology sector of the State Hermitage. “To fix so much in such a short period of time, when you literally have to snatch it from under the excavator bucket!”
Oleg Mikhailovich bitterly admits that the situation when archaeologists follow excavators is more the rule than the exception. Moreover, the law clearly defines the completely opposite order: scientific excavations and full recording of what is found must precede construction or any other economic work. There is a 2001 KGIOP decree on the protective zone of the historical cultural layer that has not been canceled by anyone. It follows from this that any excavation work at a depth of more than 0.3 meters must necessarily be preceded by archaeological excavations. The protective zone of the historical cultural layer covers the territory of St. Petersburg during the time of Peter I - that is, it also extends to the area occupied by the Senate and Synod complex.
“But, as representatives of the Administrative Department explained to me, this order of the KGIOP is not valid for monuments of federal significance,” says Svetlana Shungina.
Dubious statement. It turns out that the federal status of protection of one monument ensures the destruction of another - at the regional level? And one more thing: precisely according to the federal law “On the Protection of Cultural Heritage,” an archaeological object receives the status of identified (that is, all protection rights) from the moment of its discovery.
“If our Presidential Administration was a law-abiding organization, then last year they should have turned to specialists who have the right to conduct archaeological research, order this work in a civilized manner, and thus set an example for the people who will continue to build,” believes Svetlana Shungina. — If we had dug by hand, the walls would have been preserved higher up, we would have “read” all the arches and the wooden structures would have appeared in their entirety, we would have been able to see everything in its entirety. One of these days we will finish photographic and graphic recording and analysis of what we found. After this, as we are told, the surviving fragments of the excavated old walls will first be taken out; I don’t know how technically they will solve this problem. Then, when they begin to lay out the clean floor in the basement where it is planned to build a garage, they promise to somehow bring them back and lay out in brick the plan of the ancient Dorossievsky building - well, at least the drivers who drive into the garage will be able to look at them from the car window... But in general, we also have interesting archaeological finds - it would be worth presenting them in the halls of the Synod, showing the history of the building, the complex of these monuments. But we don’t know how it was decided to organize the space of the Synod itself, or whether there will be room for an exhibition there.
The design developments that have fallen into the hands of journalists so far allow us to be sure of only one thing: within the walls of the future high-status cultural institution - the Presidential Library - there will certainly be a place for bars and cafes. What else do you need to have a cultural time?

Tatiana LIKHANOVA