Historic building owner has started demolition process
“The building of the Ural Regional Industrial, Economic and Cooperative Technical School (PROMECT) was built in 1930 by architects Alexei Makarov and Peter Osipov. It defines the look of the entire block and is part of the ensemble of constructivist buildings on Sennaya Square,” says Larisa Piskunova, one of the leaders of the Avant-garde Territory project.
At the end of December 2020, under pressure from the public, the Yekaterinburg authorities “strongly recommended” the building owner to suspend the demolition process until documents confirming the historical and cultural value of the object are received. The defenders of the building claim that the building was recognized as a historical monument back in 1985, and in 1997 this status was confirmed.
“Why should we stop the demolition? They [public activists] already filed in 2012 [an application] for the protection [of the building of the former PROMECT]. They were ridiculed there and this story was wrapped up. Soon all broken sheds will be called monuments, is that what we want?”, – said the former deputy of the Sverdlovsk Legislative Assembly.
Here are the comments left by readers of the article on this topic on the resource URA.RU:
“The activists are idiots, indeed. They just enrage people. They only know how to yell. And how much does it cost to maintain this junk? Why is it needed? ”
“If all the old buildings were preserved, then Yekaterinburg would not be a modern metropolis, but a large village consisting of log cabins and huts. Everything has its time.”
“And rightly so, that they are demolishing. How many more houses in emergency condition do we have to save?”
The situation around the college building clearly shows the attitude of businesses and Russians brought up in a capitalist society towards cultural and historical objects. “They have to be profitable” – period.
This is not the first time that the objects of Soviet constructivism have been attacked by the “new masters of life.” After all, these are not imperial palaces, not the memory of “The Russia they have lost.” On the contrary, it is evidence of the possibility of a fundamentally different society, where there is no exploitation of man by man; where “the free development of everyone is a condition for the free development of all.” Where a person is a friend, comrade and a brother/sister to another person. This is a reminder of the years of unprecedented country development rates.
And where personal profit controls everything else, you will have to constantly fight for the preservation of cultural heritage sites. After all, the new owners squeeze the maximum possible out of their property, investing minimal funds in maintaining its good condition.
Capitalists do not need architectural monuments if tickets for visiting them cannot be sold or if inside the ancient walls they cannot accommodate a hundred or two of hardworking employees, who work for a penny for the owner’s benefit.