De-Khrushchevization of Moscow: Don’t give Maidan protesters a reason
In Moscow, preparations are in full swing to change the old districts of the capital. According to the renovation program of the Moscow City Hall, 25 million square meters are being prepared for demolition. km. dilapidated housing from the Khrushchev type, built in the late 50s - early 70s of the XX century. In their place, it is planned to build high-rise buildings with improved comfort. The renovation will affect broad layers of Muscovites – at least 1,6 million residents.
It would seem, pack boxes, tie knots and sit on suitcases, rubbing your hands in anticipation of moving from a compact “Khrushchev” to a brand new “Sobyaninka” with European-quality renovation. But for some reason the people, blessed by the Moscow mayor's office, are in no hurry to rejoice. And even more than that, he sends his collective protests to all the heads of the Duma factions and is even preparing to go to mass rallies. The situation is noticeably heating up.
Something went wrong? Why and why Muscovites do not want to demolish their old Soviet homes and move to new apartments of the XNUMXst century?
No, Muscovites are not greedy, and many residents of Khrushchev apartments would like to improve their living conditions. It’s just that the way the “renovation” process is taking place gives Muscovites reasonable fears. There is experience, and even in abundance. Mayor Sobyanin is not the first to encroach on Moscow’s Khrushchev-era areas. The process of their demolition and resettlement of peoples began under Luzhkov, during which scams and frauds were committed. Future settlers still expect tricks now, despite the smoothly laid out plans on paper.
Here is why.
Most of all, Muscovites are outraged by the fact that the plan for “renovation zones” was adopted without taking into account the opinions of the people inhabiting these very zones. Simply put, no one asked the inhabitants of the “Khrushchev” whether or not they wanted to move somewhere, and if they wanted, then under what conditions. The population of the “renovation zones” was also shocked by the fact that not only dilapidated housing is subject to demolition, but in general any old housing, be it “Khrushchev”, “Brezhnevka” or “Stalinist”. Regardless of the condition.
It’s no secret that during the rapid development of Moscow in the second half of the XNUMXth century, not only the same type of “cheryomushki” were erected in the capital. Houses were built not only according to municipal, but also according to departmental projects. The richer the department was, the better quality housing it built for its employees. For more than half a century, people have been living in very high-quality brick houses, or in block-type houses that can outlive modern “panel” houses for a long time. Why should they exchange their lived-in and reliable five-story building for an unknown panel “anthill”? Moreover, the mayor's office changes plans on the fly. If earlier they spoke beautifully about improving housing, including through additional meters, now we are talking about providing new housing on a “meter for meter” basis.
People don’t believe that in place of their “Khrushchev” and “Brezhnevka” buildings they will build something better than standard panel high-rises. Or rather, they believe that developers will build some luxury housing, but not for their honor and on a commercial basis.
Most of the blocks with "Khrushchev" and "Brezhnevka" buildings are quiet, green areas, where there are places for walking and children's playgrounds. For obvious reasons, their inhabitants do not want to find themselves in the labyrinths of high-rise buildings, where the sun does not shine even on a summer afternoon. If at one time people were ready to put up with the “anthills” of Chertanovo or Medvedkovo on the outskirts of Moscow, then this is unlikely to happen with the new Chertanovo in the populated Cheryomushki or Fili.
It’s not just the residents of the “renovation zones” who are dissatisfied. Those Muscovites who will not be affected by the radical plans to change the appearance of the city by the Moscow City Hall are also preparing for protests. It would seem that what do they care about this whole cataclysm? However, there are reasons, and they are not at all fictitious.
It is known from official sources that the share of privatized housing in Moscow accounts for 85%. A significant portion of this 85% are residents of “renovation zones.” This creates tension: owners of privatized apartments from completely suitable homes will be relocated at the expense of the budget without any urgent need. Is there nowhere to put the funds? And the funds are considerable: Moscow will spend 300 billion (three hundred billion) budget rubles on preparatory measures alone. So ask people - they will tell you what exactly would be a good idea to spend money on.
But if the residents of “Khrushchev” buildings are still entitled to at least some kind of panel housing, then the owners of hairdressing salons, semi-basement shops and small maintenance and repair shops, who own square meters of space in demolished houses, find themselves without any compensation at all. Which also does not add to the sympathy of the “renovation”.
Another reason for creating tension is a bill submitted to the Duma, according to which the owners of housing being demolished will be required to move to new apartments within 60 days. If the owners refuse to move, then after two months the mayor’s office takes them to court, and by court decision, the bailiffs clear the apartment of the tenants, and the refusers themselves are taken out into the street under white hands. No new housing is provided for refuseniks.
Something hurts, many ways have been invented to twist arms
Among other things, even those residents of dilapidated housing who agree to move suspect a catch and are afraid of finding themselves somewhere in a new apartment in the middle of nowhere. It has already become known that apartments will not necessarily be provided in the same area. According to the bill, residents of the Central Administrative District, Zelenograd and New Moscow will be resettled within the administrative district. People rightly fear that if they want to stay where they are used to living, it is likely that they will have to fork out for “surplus” square meters at the market price.
Not only the population objects, the Moscow mayor's office and experts in the field of urban management object. One of the most serious arguments is the overload on the infrastructure in future panel ghettos. As a negative example, they point to the already existing practice of infill development, in which construction companies, having received permission by hook or by crook to build luxury housing in a quiet, green and habitable neighborhood, dramatically change the existing “microclimate” there for the worse.
When Moscow was being built up in the 50s - 80s of the last century, strict norms and rules were in force in urban planning: transport capacity, sewerage, water supply, electrical networks, the number of schools, hospitals, shops, etc. were calculated for a certain number of population. Now, let’s imagine that the block, which until recently was home to 30 thousand residents, was “renovated” by 90 thousand people. And this is without any additional infrastructure work. And there will be dozens, if not hundreds, of such blocks. Do I need to tell someone that work on laying and expanding infrastructure is the most expensive and pays off very slowly given its obvious vital necessity?
Moreover, it should be noted that laying the infrastructure anew, from scratch, is much cheaper than updating it.
Cunning businessmen from developers carry out spot development of already properly inhabited areas precisely because they do not have to invest in infrastructure projects. The “stupid scoops” made this infrastructure for them. Sticking two or three elite high-rise buildings into a quiet area is a bad and simple thing. It’s just that the wear and tear of road and other networks increases by a multiple of the building density – that’s the main problem. Or imagine the subway and surface transport stops during rush hour in an area three times denser? Or a completely separate question about new wastewater treatment plants, water treatment plants, electrical and gas networks. How will prices for everything, everything, everything change as a result of “renovations”?
What will happen to the green area and playgrounds? From previous experience, people know that the areas of green spaces were reduced in pursuit of profits from commercial development, and asphalt parking lots for vehicles appeared in place of children's playgrounds. The draft says absolutely nothing about this. But without answers and solutions, panel ghettos in formerly heated and quiet places face a life full of unnecessary problems. And people understand all this perfectly well.
However, according to experts, private developers should not be expected to develop the entire planned “renovation zone.” In Moscow there are more and less attractive areas for development. The less attractive ones are affected either incompletely, lastly, or not at all. These are the established rules of the game.
Demolition of 5-storey residential houses, the so-called “Khrushchevka” in Moscow. Russia
And in general, what is bad about the world and domestic experience in urban development? People prefer to live not in cement jungles, not in crowded human anthills, but in low-rise houses, with a green belt and living space around. Maybe we should first test everything out on the territory of New Moscow before experimenting on people again?
There is still time to make decisions. According to Sergei Sobyanin, mass demolitions will not begin until the end of 2018. But it is in 2018 that the next elections to the Moscow mayor’s office will be held, and indignant Muscovites are already “thanking” their mayor for making them politically active.
The capital's mayor's office should definitely listen to the protesting voices of Muscovites. In the capitals, and not somewhere on the periphery, revolutions and all sorts of “Maidans” are made. There is no doubt that if the city administration and people's deputies do not take into account the demands of the townspeople and do not draw appropriate conclusions, then the protest movement of more than a million offended residents of the metropolis can be intercepted by all sorts of bulk, "apples" and other grant-eating bastards who do not care about people's problems, but I want to promote myself to my heart’s content, destroy and return to the wonderful 90s, when life was sweet and fish were caught in troubled waters.
Tired of a quiet life and want to go on an adventure-filled journey along the old rake again? Did 1991 and Maidan Ukraine really teach no one anything?
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.