Authorities promise to put the monument in order

They will shortly surround the St. Sophia of Kyiv historical-cultural preserve with attention and care. Good news, of course, after all those years of underfunding and lack of understanding of the cathedral’s historic importance. Experts have more than once called into question its longevity. There is, however, another aspect making one worried and happy at the same time. That the municipal authorities have finally focused on the monument must be due, among other things, to an active campaign of protest on the part of professionals backed by the general public, particularly in view of the unauthorized construction project at St. Sophia’s (The Day has taken an active part in the campaign). What is worrying is the fact that the issue of the unique historic and cultural site was finally broached when the situation had reached its critical peak. It is a problem that ought to have never appeared in the first place.

In July 2002, with an active campaign of protest against the construction project within St. Sophia’s fenced-off area underway, Kyiv’s state committee for construction and architecture ordered a structural assessment of the unique memorial. A special commission was set up and it has since been busy, working out a detailed renovation and restoration plan and appointing contractors, observers, and bureaucrats responsible for every implementation stage, Valery Cherep, chairman of the committee, said last Monday. The plan emphasizes the replacement of all water mains (the latter have been in service for several decades without repair and are now in critical condition, causing frequent underground floods), strengthening the footing of the bell tower, replacing interior structural components. For the first time it was stated that there would be no financing problems; the project would be partially sustained by the state budget (UAH 2.3 million) and local budgets; the rest of the money would be sought from sponsors (including foreign philanthropists, considering that St. Sophia’s is a memorial of international acclaim) through a broad promotional campaign. It was further decided to allocate some UAH 8 million for the renovation project next year. In the past six years the state budget has managed to donate UAH 13 million. The memorial preserve’s administration claimed it was enough just for facelifts, although the site had long required major repair.

As the renovation project begin, all entities on St. Sophia’s premises will be moved out (they have leased over 4,000 mт for years on end). According to Mr. Cherep, after completing renovation and restoration no buildings and premises will be leased out. Actually, he said his committee had objected to such religious- business neighborhood back in 1996, but to no avail. At present, practically 80% of the unwelcome neighbors have been evicted. All firm proprietors renting St. Sophia’s premises were served notice beforehand and every such deal was negotiated, so there were no disputes to settle. In Mr. Cherep’s own words, they all “agreed that no vehicles should be admitted to the unique preserve.” He added that there was no double standard in ordering lessees out; even committee-affiliated entities were evicted on a par with the rest. Mr. Cherep cautioned against making a political thing of the fact that one of the lessees was Our Ukraine’s headquarters (although not on any official lists).

Indeed, politicizing would be highly irrelevant and improper, although one is amazed to note that, just as the confrontation between the organizations championing the preservation of monuments and bureaucrats that had okayed the unlawful construction project had reached its peak, when St. Sophia’s destiny was at stake, the OU headquarters located in the “epicenter” showed no response whatsoever. In fact, Our Ukraine showed some reaction only recently, issuing a statement to the effect that electricity and water supply would be cut off at the headquarters “without any explanations or stating reasons for severing the lease agreement.” Again not a word about St. Sophia’s.

As for the construction of a fitness center near the cathedral (the project was eventually ordered suspended), Mr. Cherep said “there will never be a swimming pool.” Several design institutes are trying to figure out what to do with the building excavation site. Any project, if and when approved, “will benefit the local residents and not damage St. Sophia’s,” the committee chairman stressed, adding that a joint board meeting of the committee and the city administration resolved to hold a contest to replace the city’s chief architect and the city planning committee’s membership (to include architects with alternative Kyiv development plans, compared to the current policy); this is another guarantee that no unlawful construction project would ever be allowed in St. Sophia’s vicinity. The current chief architect Serhiy Babushkin, exposed to severe criticism at the board meeting, is also likely to take part in the contest, but on the whole what the city planners are up to promises to become more transparent. Mr. Cherep assured that all projects would be discussed by “professional NGOs” and placed on the web site for the populace to see. Well, we’ll see what we’ll see.