A new “architectural” scandal has emerged in the capital
On October 3, a historical building from the 1920s caught fire at 66-b Dmytrivska Street in central Kyiv. This is the so-called Rybalschenko Manor. During Soviet times, this building housed a daycare. This marks the second fire at the site, as the building first burned in the autumn of 2018.
“Kashtan NEWS” investigated the events surrounding the building.
Historical Background
The plot with the building at 66-b Dmytrivska Street belonged to retired soldier Tymofiy Rybalschenko. In 1899, a manor (the main building) and an outbuilding were constructed here. Later, the outbuilding was remodeled to accommodate a daycare. Thus, from 1920 until the mid-1990s, the building functioned without changing its purpose. Preschool No. 75 was designed for 75 children. Currently, it requires major repairs.
1 From daycare to competition
“The recent fire in the building is a continuation of a story that began much earlier when it housed a kindergarten,” explains Kyiv heritage preservationist and co-founder of the NGO “Heritage” Dmytro Perov. “In the 1990s, the building was mothballed due to a lack of children in the city to fill all existing kindergartens. In 2013, the site was included in the Kyiv city program for the restoration of preschool facilities. However, by 2020, the building was handed over for an investment competition.”
2 According to Perov, the conditions of the competition stipulated that the winner must demolish the old structure and construct a new one while preserving its purpose. This means that if a residential complex were to be built on that site, it must include space for a kindergarten on the ground floor.
Why does fire occur?
As is known, based on discussions by the Public Council at the Kyiv City State Administration (KCSA), buildings in Kyiv older than 100 years should be granted protected status. However, this is not beneficial for everyone, and not everyone is willing to accept it.
Perov does not rule out that developers who currently control such buildings may intensify their actions to avoid losing their acquired assets through the granting of protected status to old buildings. Therefore, one method they might use to achieve this goal is arson.
3 It is noteworthy that when the fire occurred at the Rybalschenko house several weeks ago, the flames were so intense that nearby cars began to burn. The neighboring historical building was also damaged, with part of its roof partially burned—indicative of the high temperature of the flames. This could suggest that a significant amount of flammable material was introduced to ensure the destruction of the object or to cause maximum damage.
“Most likely, the house was set on fire to prevent it from receiving any protective status—be it as a historical monument or an architectural landmark—allowing for the construction of a new building,” Perov is convinced.
Who is the investor?
According to Perov, the winner of the investment competition was the private enterprise “Trade and Transport Firm ‘Mebli,’” whose beneficiary is Mykhailo Hrosu—the father of singer Alina Hrosu. Among other activities listed in the official documents available to the public, “preschool education” is mentioned.
Fire and law enforcement
Of course, the capital's law enforcement could not overlook such an event as the fire in the building. Therefore, a criminal investigation into the intentional arson has been opened, and a pre-trial investigation is ongoing. However, what is concerning is that after the previous fire, law enforcement took similar measures but failed to find the perpetrators—both the instigators and executors.
4 “By the way, this is already the fifth fire in old buildings in Kyiv since the beginning of 2024. So, we have tangible evidence of intentional arson and the fact that no developer has been held accountable,” noted an activist, adding with irony: “Perhaps this time there will be an exception.”
Old scheme in new buildings
According to Perov, in Kyiv, the so-called investment competitions serve as a cover for promoting new construction.
“This is quite a common scheme involving investment competitions. For example, at 29 Lukyanivka, a former kindergarten was also handed over for such a competition. In Pechersk, an old building with a hospital was included,” the interlocutor noted.
If we look at the content of the competition, he continued, its essence is as follows. The Kyiv City Council, as the property owner, effectively grants permission for its physical destruction, and another permission for the construction of a new facility on public land. Meanwhile, the only obligation of the investor is to ensure that the new building includes space for an institution similar to that which was in the old building. Thus, Perov explains, it is possible to build a residential complex but place not a municipal institution of a specific profile in it, but a private one, thereby generating additional profit. In other words, the city gains nothing beneficial from this.
Why is there no protective status?
This question is not trivial, and Perov believes the answer lies in the offices of the Department for the Protection of Cultural Heritage at the KCSA. The activist also reminded that this year the Department received 1.1 billion UAH from the city budget for restoration and repair work on historical objects in municipal ownership, for developing accounting documentation, and for defending the status of landmarks in court.
“However, in fact, all these works have been inadequately performed by the Department. Instead, public activists defend landmarks in court and develop scientific design documentation to grant historical buildings the appropriate status,” the interlocutor remarked.
5 Dmytro Perov pointed out that in Kyiv, according to official information from one of Vitaliy Klitschko’s deputies, there are three thousand historical cultural heritage sites. Of these, only nearly a thousand have protective status as historical, architectural, urban planning landmarks, etc. Two-thirds of the buildings have no protective status whatsoever. Therefore, at any moment, construction machinery could arrive and destroy them. Afterwards, of course, there will be a statement from the mayor claiming that it was a cynical provocation. However, this will not rectify the situation.
This happens because, the public activist emphasized, the operational capabilities of the Department for the Protection of Cultural Heritage amount to one or two approved packages of accounting documentation per year. To develop the necessary documentation for all historical buildings in the capital for granting them protective status, at this pace of work, it would take more than a hundred years. It is unlikely that old Kyiv buildings will last that long.
Yevhen DEM'YANOV