How much does it cost to destroy a house?

You can arbitrarily destroy a 19th-century building in the protected zone of St. Petersburg for 20,000 rubles. It was for this amount that the Adamant company was “severely punished” for collapsing a house on the corner of Liteiny and Tchaikovsky Street.

Oath in the Ruins
This happened last December, when one not at all wonderful day, St. Petersburg residents suddenly discovered with amazement that another historical building in the city center had been reduced to ruins. In January 2007, commenting to journalists on the “precedent of the demolition of the house on Liteiny,” Valentina Matvienko harshly criticized the actions of the perpetrators:
“The investor was given permission only to dismantle the emergency ceilings, but not the entire building,” the governor emphasized. “The fact that the house was demolished is a gross violation on the part of the Adamant company, and now a special commission is looking into this. She will assess how true the investor’s statement was that the house was in disrepair and could collapse at any moment (...). In any case, very serious administrative, financial, and legal measures will be taken against the Adamant company, which has already violated the agreed upon procedure for the reconstruction of the building. The company will be obliged to restore the façade of the house and pay fines, but they will not get off with this alone. Using the example of the house on Liteiny, we are obliged to warn everyone that such facts will be considered very strictly, and there will be very strict demands from unscrupulous companies. Such things are unacceptable in St. Petersburg.”

A millionaire was robbed of a penny
The people froze in anticipation of what kind of severe punishment the company headed by one of the Russian millionaires would suffer (according to Finance magazine, in 2006 the fortune of the president of the Adamant holding, Igor Leitis, was estimated at $155 million). The prolonged pause was broken by Adamant itself - in mid-October, its representative Igor Putenikhin waved on television a permit to demolish the house on Liteiny, 5/19, issued on the basis of an examination that established its unsafety in January 2007. That is, after the demolition (which happened, remember, in December 2006).
The restless deputy Kovalev sent another request to the governor, in which he asked to answer - did the government commission really issue such a document, and how legitimate is the permission issued retroactively? Along the way, the parliamentarian was interested in what kind of specialists were part of the said commission and which of the penalties promised by the governor were imposed on Adamant LLC.
And finally, just in time for the anniversary of the destruction of the house on the corner of Liteiny Prospekt and St. Tchaikovsky, it became known exactly what lesson Valentina Matvienko wanted to teach other unscrupulous developers, demonstrably punishing the culprit:
“The Department of State Construction Supervision of the Service for State Construction Supervision and Expertise of St. Petersburg brought Adamant LLC to administrative liability in the form of a fine in the amount of 20,000 rubles” ($760), the governor reports.
No less surprising is the list of those documents cited by Valentina Ivanovna, on the basis of which the technical condition of the ill-fated house was “determined”: the decision of the Lensovet Executive Committee of 1984 (!) and a number of more recent conclusions, including two issued... after the demolition (namely – January 10 and April 4, 2007), as well as one more without indicating the date of the survey.
Kovalev’s question about the legitimacy of backdated documents was simply ignored. But the names of specific persons who wrote and signed them are named. I would like (quoting from the governor’s letter) to name everyone: Chairman of the Expert Construction Commission V. E. Grinberg, Deputy Chairman V. P. Shatalov, members of the commission V. E. Arsenov, A. V. Rezunkova, M. P. Poteeva.

Officially
“The governor emphasized that the building at 5/19 Liteiny Prospekt (19 Tchaikovsky St.), built according to the design of the architect H. H. Tatski in 1882, is not a cultural heritage site, but it is located within the United Security zones of historical monuments in the center of St. Petersburg. In accordance with the resolution of the city government, the building was transferred on investment terms to Adamant LLC for reconstruction into a hotel. The investor was given permission only to dismantle the emergency floors, but not the entire building. The fact that the house was demolished is a gross violation on the part of the Adamant company.
(From the press service of the Governor of St. Petersburg dated January 16, 2007)
The price of impunity
That's how the grapes of the governor's anger dried up, turning into wrinkled but sweet raisins. Which, apparently, was very much to the liking of the object of anger.
The story of the unauthorized demolition of the house on Liteiny is not the only case of Adamant’s arbitrariness. The same company, without obtaining the necessary approvals, installed clumsy advertising billboards on the historical building of the Warsaw Station (which it adapted for the Warsaw Express shopping mall) - so much so that they covered almost a quarter of the front facade of this state-protected monument. When the indignation of citizens poured out onto the pages of newspapers, the chairman of the KGIOP Vera Dementyeva told reporters that she had “not seen such disgrace for a long time” and that in this fact “a real investigation had to be carried out, and even forged signatures appeared in it.” By the way, this is not the first statement by the head of the KGIOP containing information about such crimes. For example, speaking on the air of “Echo of St. Petersburg” this summer, Vera Anatolyevna said: the “disgrace” that grew up on Pochtamtskaya Street (the Renaissance Hotel, which rose above St. Isaac’s Square despite the restrictions of the height regulations. - Ed. ) did not agree with the KGIOP . That the signature of the then head of the committee, Nikita Yavein, “is not on this project,” and if the supposedly agreed upon papers exist, then “this, I assure you, is not the only case of forgery of his signature,” Dementieva concluded.
Perhaps the prosecutor's office will finally show interest in the statements of the chairman of the KGIOP?
But let's return to the main anti-hero of our story. Unauthorized demolition in the security zone, forged signatures appearing here and there, backdated approvals - these and other “pranks” that got away with them inspire Adamant to new exploits.
Having taken over the Moscow Hotel, the company began constructing a new building with an area of ​​25 thousand square meters in its courtyard. m. The compaction was carried out dangerously close to the existing swimming pool (its owners more than once turned to the builders with relevant complaints). An emergency happened in March of this year - a drilling rig working at a construction site collapsed on the pool building, breaking the roof. At that moment there were about 30 people there, and it was only by pure chance that no one was injured.
And after some time, the installation collapsed a second time, essentially splitting the pool in half.

Diamonds are not just girls' best friends

Despite all these glaring facts, the company, which considers itself a true jewel (judging by the chosen name), still manages to be in favor with the mayor and receive one tasty St. Petersburg piece after another.
The Saturn company, affiliated with Adamant, has decided to build another hotel within the walls of the identified historical and cultural monument at 23 Universitetskaya embankment.
What will remain of the walls themselves during these transformations and whether the neighboring building, the famous Trezzini House, which has stood unattended for decades, will collapse along the way, one can only guess.

The company’s immediate plans include the implementation of the project, already blessed by Valentina Ivanovna, for the construction of a new public and business district near the Warsaw Station, with the opening of the Izmailovskaya Perspective and the erection of a 150-meter office skyscraper. The fact that the declared height violates the restrictions established by law (the current height regulations) does not in the least bother businessmen who manage in a permissive regime.
Adamant's attention is drawn not only upward, but also inward - the holding is showing special interest in the "modernization" of metro pavilions with the accompanying superstructure of impressive commercial centers. It is known, in particular, about projects for the construction of a 6-7-storey complex on the site of the Sever cinema (at the corner of Ligovsky Prospekt and Obvodny Canal, where the exit of the new station should appear) and impressive retail space above the ground lobby of the Gorkov metro station Sky" in the Alexander Garden (which has the status of a monument of federal significance). Experts fear that if the latest project is implemented, key views of historical St. Petersburg - the Peter and Paul Cathedral, the Cathedral Mosque and the Lidval House - will be hopelessly disfigured, and that there will be one less green area in the old city.

Tatiana LIKHANOVA
Photo by Mikhail MASLENNIKOV

Direct speech
From an interview with Vera Dementieva, Chairman of the KGIOP, to the radio station “Echo of Petersburg” on July 26, 2007:
– What specific punishment did the Adamant company suffer? We are talking about a building on the corner of Liteiny and Tchaikovsky.
- They were fined, yes, and very seriously. We need to think about creating such conditions that it would be impossible to work like this in the city.

Yuliy Rybakov, artist, human rights activist, grandson of the architect H. H. Tatski:
“This is yet another evidence of the cynicism and arrogance of officials who clearly do not see their people and their culture. The amount of 20,000 rubles that was fined for those responsible for the destruction of the house built by my grandfather is comparable only to the cultural level of the current leadership of St. Petersburg. I have no more censorship words for them. All that remains is to announce a sweepstakes, asking the question: how many zeros must be added to the named amount of the fine so that it is equal to the amount of bribes and kickbacks in this case.