PRAGMATIKA.MEDIA discussed with the architect, whose portfolio includes more than a dozen successfully implemented projects for the restoration and reconstruction of historical and socially significant buildings, not only the case of the River Station, but also the nuances of the restoration process in general. As well as the prospects of attic floors and the specifics of constructive dialogue with the public.
Oleksandr Kumeiko, chief architect of Kumeiko Architects and Edelburg Architects studios. Photo: Maksym Drobinenko
PRAGMATIKA.MEDIA: You have implemented several large projects related to the restoration and reconstruction of buildings, in particular objects that have a conservation status. Which of these projects were the most interesting or difficult to implement for you?
Oleksandr Kumeiko: It is difficult to single out a specific project, as each of them is interesting in some way. The biggest challenges are encountered in working with old buildings that were created at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries, they require a complete replacement of the floors. If you notice, rotten floors and sagging ceilings are the most sensitive problem of the historical foundation. Old Kyiv buildings have fairly reliable frames, thick, often multi-chamber walls made of the famous yellow "Kyiv" brick, stable foundations with a safety margin, but completely unreliable ceilings and walls.
In old buildings, we always deal with numerous cultural and household layers of different times, which do not allow us to assess the real state of the building at a glance. When you peel away the layers, the building is sometimes left with only a skeleton, a brick shell. And it looks very sad, it scares, especially a person who does not understand the essence of the restoration process, but is ready to shout loudly: "Look, they destroyed a historic building!" In fact, the normal work process of recovery is taking place.
The restoration of the River Station building in Kyiv was carried out in accordance with the security agreement. Image source: Edelburg Architects
Speaking about the specifics of the old Kyiv buildings, I mean all the houses, even those that are occupied and operated. In some, some repairs were made, the windows were changed, the walls were painted, but all this is cosmetic, which is very far from a full-fledged restoration/reconstruction. One of the buildings looks a little better, the neighboring one looks a little worse, but you have to realize that they have the same "stuffing". And there, under the layers of paint and plaster, is rotting wood and, perhaps, emergency ceilings. If the building is under protection, we do restoration, if the law allows, then of course the best solution is reconstruction.
In Ukraine, the status of a monument is like a sentence of hopelessness. Everywhere, both developers and architects worry that if the building is protected by law, planning its use for a successful business project is hopeless. This is not so. In fact, the restoration of monuments is a specific process that requires professionalism, but it really allows to bring buildings back to life. The problem is that we do not have so many architects, customers, experts and executors who know how to work with heritage in the same way as they do in Europe.
PM: In Europe, it is quite normal practice to restore the facade, but to completely update the entire filling, to replace both the ceiling and communications with modern ones. This is done, in particular, with objects of historical heritage. Why is this some kind of exceptional scenario for us?
OK.: He is not that exceptional anymore. We did practically the same thing in the process of restoring the building of the River Station in Kyiv. The facility will live a new life — with new communications, a reliable roof, and a reinforced frame. Everything is new, everything meets modern safety and energy efficiency requirements. But at the same time, we preserved the architectural monument, all its visual characteristics and key elements, analyzed all historically valuable transformations.
Each architectural monument has, or rather should have, its own protection agreement and passport of the monument. These are documents that clearly outline the parts and elements of the building that are under protection, as well as the criteria for their protection, periods of repairs (restoration), etc.
Restoration with adaptation to modern requirements is primarily a business process, the purpose of which is to preserve the object of cultural heritage and implement a successful business case
Firstly, the town planning value of the River Station building is its location on the square and its relationship with the surrounding objects. Secondly, the volume of the building itself, its external parameters, all monumental visual elements — both on the facade and in the interiors — are protected. Everyone followed the process of conservation of the mosaic panels, and at this stage of the work, people could freely visit the object, art exhibitions and other cultural events were held there. The process was as open as possible.
The very structure of the retaining structure, the pattern of filling the window and external door openings is also protected. And also - fences and central stairs. And we completely restored all this. The pattern of the metal fence on the roof was also accurately restored. Perhaps one would like to add a modern note, replace this fence with transparent glass, but the security agreement precludes this. That's why we researched the old drawing of the fence and recreated it in its original form.
PM: How did you manage to increase the functional area of the River Station building by more than 2 square meters within the strict framework of the restoration? m?
OK.: Partly due to the unique features of the building itself. It was built so that the foundations are five meters below the first floor. I think this is due to hydrogeological aspects and the lack of contemporary technologies to overcome difficulties with the operation of these premises. And these five meters were simply covered with sand, pieces of concrete, and construction debris.
You understand that for any business project, the opportunity to get additional space is very important. And restoration with adaptation to modern requirements is primarily a business process, the purpose of which is to preserve the object of cultural heritage, giving it a new function and life, and the realization of an economically successful business case. Therefore, when we saw the basement and studied the old drawings, we realized that we have a real chance to get additional space.
Restoration of the building of the River Station in Kyiv, project and implementation. Design under the supervision of chief architect Oleksandr Kumeik. Image source: Edelburg Architects
Restoration of the building of the River Station in Kyiv, project and implementation. Design under the supervision of chief architect Oleksandr Kumeik. Image source: Edelburg Architects
In addition to the basement, we discovered another space reserve — the upper technical floor. We went up to look and saw a space with an area of 1200 square meters. m! Of course, it didn't look very aesthetically pleasing: it was all garbage, bird waste. The main problem was the insufficient height of the ceilings - only 1,95 m. It seems like a crazy area "walks", but it is also impossible to use it. However, we decided to explore the possibility of somehow raising the ceiling. It is not possible to build on anything, it is forbidden to change the configuration of the volume of the building.
But we found a way out of the situation. The roof was a monolithic structure with long beams and floors poured over them. When we made dimensional drawings, it turned out that the thickness of the roof pie is almost 90 cm. Apparently, when the roof of the station was being repaired, the builders simply added layers of roofing material there - layer by layer. And the high parapet covered all the layers, which over time acquired a threatening thickness and weight.
We worked out the issue of replacing this thick sandwich with a thin, energy-efficient ceiling on metal beams. Profile sheet plus a thin screed — all together about 15 cm. In parallel, the use of modern insulation was worked out, since increasing the energy efficiency of the building is an integral task of any project.
And as a result, an insulated roof appeared that met all the requirements for the coefficient of heat transfer resistance. Replacing the roof allowed us to "take the height" - to raise the ceiling to 2,5 m. This is the minimally comfortable height of the room for a person. Thus, instead of five working levels, we have seven.
PM: The purpose of the commercial use of the object was changing: at first they wanted to place a food zone with a co-working space in the River Station, and a year ago it turned out that the building would house a university, or rather, a branch of the American University. Did it require you to do some project balancing? To what extent is the building, in principle, suitable for housing the university?
OK.: Although the change of purpose was a surprise, everything turned out very well in the end. So, initially it was assumed that the building of the River Station would be adapted to accommodate food courts and co-working spaces. We planned to use the space of the basement and the first floor to accommodate food courts with common rooms. This typology is already well known to everyone using the example of Kyiv Food Market or Odesa Food Market.
The idea was dictated by the fact that, in fact, the entire area of the Dnipro embankment in the area of Postova Square is occupied by food courts based on temporary structures for business activities. And if all this history is transferred inside the building, then it is possible, firstly, to free up the pedestrian zone, and secondly, to make this business work in any weather and in any season.
Reconstruction of the "House with Photos" building in Kyiv with the addition of an attic. Design under the supervision of chief architect Oleksandr Kumeik. Image source: Edelburg Architects
But at some point, the prospect of university accommodation appeared. An educational cluster has already formed in Podil, and the new university fits well into the general structure of the district. When the possibility of dividing the classrooms and seating inside the building was calculated, everything turned out to be suitable. The building has spaces of different sizes, in particular quite large ones - 170 square meters each. m, which is ideal for the audience. So the new goal fit perfectly organically and effortlessly into this object.
From the point of view of transport logistics, everything turned out even better. The food court is aimed not only at those who are nearby, but also at customers arriving, so the parking lot should be located in front of the object so that the driver who has the idea of stopping by for lunch or dinner can immediately see the parking lot. This, by the way, is true for almost all HoReCa and retail facilities.
In our case, the parking lot is located behind the building of the River Station. For an object in the field of education, the principle of parking can be as follows. The small size of the parking lot is also not a problem, given the close proximity of the metro. Thus, the placement of the parking lot does not block the view points and fronts of perception of the cultural heritage object, which in turn was very important for us as designers.
PM: You managed to preserve the former volume of the building. Was there still a temptation to experiment?
OK.: I emphasize an important point - we didn't just "experiment with volume", we didn't even have the right to think about it. And our case is a perfect example of the fact that it is not necessary to complete something, to build several floors on top. You can give the building a new life only by competently redistributing the space while preserving the historical volumes.
The transformation of attics into usable attics allows you to get thousands of functional square meters of space in the historical part of the city, without sacrificing cultural heritage
Someone will say now: "You had the opportunity to add two floors! And usually there is no such possibility!" In fact, the entire historical center of Kyiv is a real Klondike with a huge reserve of space. In many buildings, attic spaces reach one and a half to two floors in height! This is a unique opportunity to equip residential attics in Bruges, Strasbourg or Paris.
PM: Your practice involved the reconstruction of a building at 15 Yaroslaviv Val. This is what the residents used to call the "House with photographs" because old photographs were placed on the end in the window openings. And there on the roof appeared a new volume - the attic...
OK.: First of all, the "House with Photographs" differs from the River Station in that it is not a protected monument. We found this out at the first stage, before starting the design. But since the building is in a historical environment and certainly interdependent with the entire architecture of the Golden Gate, it should be subordinated to the cultural heritage, while preserving the primacy of its perception.
Therefore, in principle, we did not raise the height mark - relative to the ridges of the roof, it remained the same. In this case, we had the opportunity to reconstruct the roof. Previously, the house had a tented roof that reached almost 5 m in height. The design was problematic from the very beginning - the wide eaves collected rainwater, and something had to be done about it.
After our intervention, the attic space, which was not used in any way, acquired functional orthogonal proportions. An open terrace with a view of Yaroslaviv Val appeared. At the same time, for passers-by walking down the street, the view of the house remained the same as before. They simply do not see this attic from the perspective of pedestrians.
Oleksandr Kumeiko, chief architect of Kumeiko Architects and Edelburg Architects studios. Photo: Maksym Drobinenko
By the way, when you walk through Podol or Old Kyiv, pay attention to the roofs. You will discover a reserve of areas that are not used today. The transformation of attics into mansards, which can be used, allows you to get thousands of functional square meters of space in the historical part of the city, without sacrificing either height, facades, or the historical environment in general and the perception of cultural heritage in particular.
And what apartments can be made in these attics! This is just a restorer's dream! Undoubtedly, an examination of the foundations and supporting structures, engineering networks and communications is necessary - whether they are able to withstand the load, or whether they should be replaced or strengthened.
PM: Are they capable?
OK.: We worked with attics not only on Yaroslavovo Val, but also on other objects. The roofs were redone, in particular, of multi-apartment residential buildings, where the residents decided on the level of condominiums the issue of reconstruction/restoration with the adaptation of the attic for the arrangement of the mansard. And judging by our experience, the networks designed decades ago were calculated with a sufficient margin and can easily withstand another residential floor. Especially if we replace all the engineering with energy-efficient and modern ones, as we did during the restoration of the River Station. But, of course, each case requires an individual approach.
PM: Adjacent to the building at 15 Yaroslaviv Val is the former estate of the Sikorsky family, where the Ukrainian aircraft designer Ihor Sikorsky grew up. However, it is in an extremely deplorable condition. What do you see as the reason for this?
OK.: The main reason that a building with history, located in such an attractive place, is in such a deplorable state is the lack of desire of the owner (and possibly funding, since it is on the balance sheet of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine) to deal with the restoration of such an object. This clearly will not solve the problem of providing housing to military personnel.
Competition project for the reconstruction of the "Children's World" building in Kyiv by "Edelburg Architects" with facades by Dmytro Aranchii Architects. Image source: Edelburg Architects
Perhaps, if this object were handed over to the city administration, the restoration process would move from a dead point due to funding from the budget of the city of Kyiv (there are a lot of successful examples), and we would have the opportunity to contemplate the monument in a restored form and proudly hold excursions for guests of the capital.
But the problem is that the officials of the central government apparatus lack the political will and understanding that this issue needs an urgent solution. Immediate, because if emergency measures are not taken now, then Kyiv will also lose this building. And, of course, it is necessary to specify the function. What will be there: a museum and public spaces? Discussions in social networks are not a substitute for real actions and public hearings held in accordance with the law.
PM: In Ukraine, there are not so many architects who know how to work within the strict framework of the legislation on the protection of historical heritage. And there are two ways: raise the level of designers or liberalize the legislation, make it more loyal to issues of interference with historical heritage. Which way do you think is the right way?
OK.: I believe that our legislation is absolutely not oriented towards investing in the field of cultural heritage protection, and instead of clearly limiting the possibility of intervention, it requires a complete ban on any changes and works only as a factor of deterrence and punishment. Modern norms of sanitation and safety of operation of buildings directly contradict the DBN on restoration, and vice versa. Of course, providing the building with a new modern function, it is necessary to ensure operational safety, inclusiveness, energy efficiency, etc.
The architect-restorer must first evaluate the wishes of the investor, compare them with the legal framework and provide appropriate recommendations. The recommendations of UNESCO and other authoritative organizations of the world in the field of cultural heritage protection should not only be ratified, but also implemented in our legislation. Otherwise, the situation that is taking place today puts the decisions made by officials, architects and investors on the edge of legality, and leads to the emergence of conflict situations in society.
Kostyantyn Kovshevatsky, editor-in-chief of PRAGMATIKA.MEDIA, and Oleksandr Kumeiko, chief architect of Kumeiko Architects and Edelburg Architects studios. Photo: Maksym Drobinenko
Unfortunately, this damages the cultural heritage sites themselves, as investors are afraid to invest in restoring our beautiful buildings and structures and giving them new functions. There are no ways and methods, programs of stimulation, popularization at all. There are also no preferential rental rates for land or premises for investors, a state or city program for the restoration of facades of residential buildings for condominiums, and at least elementary restoration of forged and individual architectural elements. There is absolutely nothing!
We can't come to an old castle and say: "yes, our energy efficiency standards have changed, let's close the openings, insulate the walls with foam and replace all the windows." In fact, such incidents happen quite often. Specialists involved in heritage protection are aware of such conflicts, they are also aware of them in the organizations that issue permit documentation. In each such case, the issue is considered individually. But since there is no single logic of decisions, it is like roulette every time.
Regarding the shortage of experience in architects, I believe that practical experience is much more important than theory. But how will you get it if the restoration orders are single? In order for there to be more such projects, customers should appear who are ready to work within the framework of the law now, and not wait until the building collapses. From the very beginning, the client of the restoration of the River Station intended to fully comply with the requirements of the security agreement and passport of the landmark. Do not imitate its observance, but clearly and honestly observe the letter of the law.
We are very lucky, it's wonderful when a person approaches the matter responsibly and consciously accepts the words of the architect-restorer about what can be done and what can't be done. This approach should be popularized at the state level. Or to stimulate, as is done in European developed countries, where castles and palaces are sold for pennies under the obligation to restore them. I am sure that we also have people who want to restore old houses and have the financial means to do so. They just need clear and understandable rules of the game.
PM: Regarding the lack of a single logic of decisions in the permitting authorities, why not develop a model for solving this issue at least at the level of the Union of Architects? In the architectural community, there is also no consensus on the limits of what is allowed in the treatment of heritage objects?
OK.: Discussions are going on, but we have separate discussions among architects, and separate decisions by legislators. And those who develop laws do not always look at the situation from the position of architects. As recent events show, in order to pay attention to the opinion of architects, it is necessary to resort to almost revolutionary actions.
PM: There is also the "street factor", public opinion. Public resonance — is it good or bad, good or bad?
OK.: I think that all architects involved in designing in the urban environment have repeatedly felt the influence of public opinion. This has its pros and cons. The downside is the risks of using the current situation for the benefit of one or another political force (government/opposition) and the fact that someone's business interests are often visible behind the votes of the public. We understand that without public discussions neither a democratic society nor organic development of the urban environment will be formed.
In all cities of the world there are activists who express public opinion, in particular in the form of street protests, in this Ukraine is not unique. This is a sign that the society is democratic, freedom-loving, and thinks freely. But what should the parties be prepared for? To constructive criticism, evidentiary arguments. Any step must be supported and justified by regulations, laws, and context. And not based on subjective tastes, own opinion and strength of vocal cords.
The competition project for the reconstruction of the "Children's World" building in Kyiv by "Edelburg Architects" involved the construction of a new volume that expands the commercial area. Image source: Edelburg Architects
For example, people spoke about the reconstruction project of the "Children's World" building in Darnytsia, which we developed for Edelburg Development. "We don't like the colorful facade of "Children's World"!" - residents said. We reacted quickly to the feedback, immediately entered into a dialogue with everyone - both activists and deputies. The misunderstanding was that the activists assumed that we intended to replace the facade of the original building with colored panels, when in fact it was a sketch of a new volume, an extension.
But we cannot discuss according to the principle of "who will shout over whom". Therefore, the customer followed the path of reasonable dialogue: held a competition, the Chamber of Architecture determined the winner. But you know what impressed me personally? Considering how hot and loud the discussion was, 22 applications were submitted for participation in the competition. At the same time, only 5 works were submitted! As a result, the jury chose only five projects. And dozens of activists simply disappeared, including architects who were so worried.
Why didn't they submit projects? If the fate of the object is so important to you, it is necessary to submit your vision of the building being designed. According to the terms of the competition, this did not require either complex modeling or the creation of complex visualizations. It was enough to create a sketch. And to declare one's position, to present one's opinion in a professional manner, and not in vain. Another strange thing is the refusal of the author of the project to cooperate and participate in the competition as a member of the jury.
The following decision of Volodymyr Zalutsky remained unclear to me: first to speak in support of the reconstruction project and to remove himself at the time of the competition, rejecting the offer to become a professional arbiter in this architectural competition. It seems to me that when it comes to a socially significant object, personal ambitions and resentments must be recognized as secondary, such that instead of bringing resonance to the situation, they serve for the better for the social development of society.
The competition project for the reconstruction of the "Children's World" building in Kyiv by "Edelburg Architects" involved the construction of a new volume that expands the commercial area. Image source: Edelburg Architects
Despite the fact that I still consider our reconstruction project to be justified and completely in line with the design tasks, we accepted the decision of the society and the jury on the concept developed by Dmytro Aranchii Architects as the one that we will implement in the project. Although I read that even this project (the result of a public architectural competition for facades) does not satisfy many.
PM: The story with "Children's World" is still resolved, it is not dead. But very often the discussion between representatives of the public and the customer comes to a dead end. What to do in this case?
OK.: The owner (investor) very often forgets the needs and priorities of the citizens. Dialogue between the authorities, investors, and citizens is very important here. From the experience of designing in the city of Kyiv, I can say that the local Department of Cultural Heritage Protection is always open to a constructive and negotiation process. All Kyiv residents know about the loud scandal surrounding the reconstruction of the "Flowers of Ukraine" building.
I can summarize that the city, analyzing the arguments of the public, continues to look for mechanisms of interaction with the object's investor. Yes, today we have another ruin in the city center. Yes, the situation is difficult, but if all parties are constructively disposed, a way out can always be found. The city's resources are limited, so they cannot always explore potentially valuable city objects on their own.
For this, the public is involved, with which, in my opinion, a fairly direct dialogue has been established. I would not call the situation a stalemate here, it seems to me that with a sufficient level of communication, the restoration of this object will take a significant and successful position in the case of the developer. Although public resonance is necessary right now, this story should teach us all a lesson.
Communicated Kostyantyn Kovshevatskyi and Dana Balashova
