“The dialogue with the Ministry of Culture did not work out”: what is happening with the project of the historical borders of Tomsk?

Dmitry Kandinsky / vtomske.ru

Social activists failed to establish a dialogue with specialists from the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, who made new changes to the draft boundaries of the historical settlement of Tomsk. The Society for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments interprets them as an attempt to erase the historical settlement of Tomsk “from the face of the Siberian land.” What problems have arisen with the document again – in the material vtomske.ru.

Let us recall that in November 2023 it was reported that the Russian Ministry of Culture adopted an order to approve the draft boundaries of the historical settlement of Tomsk. The document was sent to the Ministry of Justice for state registration. After that, he was returned to correct technical errors, and then again sent to the Ministry of Justice. In April it became known that the order was never registered. New changes were made to the draft boundaries, in particular, more than 500 monument buildings were removed from the subject of protection.

Monuments will be returned under protection

This week, the Ministry of Culture held two meetings on the topic of the draft boundaries of the historical settlement of Tomsk, Maria Bokova, chairman of the Tomsk branch of the All-Russian Society for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments (VOOPIiK), told vtomske.ru. According to her, the ministry’s specialists agreed that the deleted cultural heritage sites should be returned to the subject of protection.

“We were assured that these objects will be returned,” Bokova added.

The subject of protection is one of the main documents of the project of the boundaries of the historical settlement. The protected list includes approved historical and cultural monuments, identified cultural heritage sites, city-forming objects of historical value.

Are attractions at risk?

However, on other issues, representatives of the Ministry of Culture and VOOPIiK had disagreements. We are talking about town planning regulations.

“The key point about structural building materials, not finishing, but structural, was missing from the draft order. In practice this means that (when approving the document in this form – approx. ed.) in areas with wooden buildings, it will be possible to make frame houses, use reinforced concrete, and fill them with foam concrete or other modern materials. It will be enough to cover it with boards or other wood-like materials, and this will be considered consistent with the appearance and will not be a violation,” explained Maria Bokova.

She noted that the resolution of the administration of the Tomsk region No. 226 clearly states that in protected zones it is possible to use only traditional materials: wood as the main one, or wood and brick for mixed-type houses.

“There is no such clarification or mandatory requirement in the new draft borders. This is after Mrs. Sadova (Elena, leading adviser to the Department of State Protection of Cultural Heritage Objects and Urban Planning Activities of the Ministry of Culture – approx. ed.) worked on a project that had previously been agreed upon by the experts of the Scientific and Methodological Council,” said the chairman of the Tomsk branch of VOOPIiK.

The problem here is that the boundaries of the historical settlement are a federal document. After its final adoption, regional officials will not be able to interpret the document at their discretion.

“In general, the legislation on the protection of objects of cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation is quite vague, “spread out” across various laws, by-laws, orders, and explanatory letters. We are saying that the draft boundaries of a historical settlement should be a single, complete, holistic document. So that when it opens there are no reference standards,” Bokova added.

Another problem arose with the landmark places of Tomsk (they have historical buildings), including Voskresenskaya Mountain, Yurtochnaya Mountain, Tatarskaya Sloboda, Zaistochye, Lower and Upper Elan, Swamp, Tatarskaya Sloboda, Dvoryanskaya and others. In the document, these territories were included in the section of the subject of protection, where valuable city-forming objects (CGFO) are indicated. However, the law directly interprets that CGFOs are buildings and structures, not territories, but according to the law they are also subject to preservation. Social activists suggested including landmarks in another section, but representatives of the Ministry of Culture refused, Bokova said.

“The prosecutor’s office is obliged to take some measures”

Maria Bokova found it difficult to answer what exactly the current position of the Ministry of Culture is related to. “It doesn’t occur to me to talk about anything other than a corruption component,” she said, adding that there is every reason for an investigation by the prosecutor’s office.

“We (VOOPIiK) filed an official objection, including to the office of the cultural adviser to President Vladimir Tolstoy, since he oversees the development and approval of this project. Today we received notification that the appeal has been registered and a request has been sent to provide materials from the Ministry of Culture to assess the situation. The verification period is until June 20, 2024. We made the issue public, the prosecutor’s office is obliged to take some measures. <...> We will not dwell on what just happened. This is a painful topic for us, and other regions are also watching it. People respect our wooden architecture and the history of the city of Tomsk. We will not let this topic go,” Bokova concluded.

In its telegram channel, VOOPIiK emphasizes that dialogue with the Ministry of Culture did not work out.

“We <...> realized that we do not have allies in the preservation of historical Tomsk in the Ministry of Culture, and neither in the presidential administration,” the message says.

Let us remind you that Tomsk has had the status of a historical settlement since 2010, but the city still does not have the document that historical settlements are required by law to have. The development of the corresponding project and an attempt to approve it have been going on since 2016. In July 2022, the authorities talked about the latest version of the project received from the Ministry of Culture. The mayor’s office stated that this version of the document imposes significant restrictions on the development of the central part of the city and tightens the requirements for new construction. Social activists noted that the city, with its statement, is creating “negative public opinion towards the project.” The administration insisted that this version of the document has many shortcomings and adjustments are needed.