Legislation in the field of preservation, use and state protection of cultural heritage facilities. State system for the protection of cultural heritage

Protection of cultural heritage sites in Russia

Experience protection of Cultural Heritage Objects Russia has several centuries. Starting from the first decrees of Peter I, the process of identifying and fixing Russian antiquities. In different historical periods, this process had its own characteristics, but at all times its effectiveness depended on the efforts of the state and society.
First of all, the preservation of heritage depended on the effectiveness of the monumental legislation, from the forms of ownership and the decision of the land, as well as from the flexibility of the cultural policy of the state based on authoritative scientific power. The political situation in the country, the level of culture of society also provided a great influence on the safety of cultural heritage objects. Subjective factors are very important - scientific addictions, professionalism, the properties of the personality of researchers, restorers and museum workers.
IN history of Protection of Cultural Heritage Several stages can be distinguished:
. The XVIII century, when the monumentaceous process in Russia was only born;
. XIX - early XX centuries. - the most important stage in the history of cultural heritage protection,
when the foundations of the state protection of heritage were laid;
. Soviet time;
. post-Soviet period.

XVIII century It can be considered as a "prehistory" of the protection of Russian antiquity. At this time, the state played a priority role in identifying and fixing old rarities, in creating the first russian museums. Decrees of Peter I became the strongest incentive of the development of this process. The circle of historical sources was significantly expanded, which was reflected in the formation of historical science, museum and Russian collectibles. Among the most important Petrov legislative documents - the February Decree of 1718. "On the brings of born freaks, also found unusual things ..."; Decrees of 1720 on the sending of governors from monasteries and churches of copies from unique documents and 1721 - about the prohibition of overjugate the found "mounded things" and, finally, the April Decree of 1722. On delivery from churches and monasteries "... a lot of things old fairy. " The implementation of these decrees led to the formation of a unique museum - Kunstkamera, as well as to the preservation of ancient weapon in Tsehghaus, the construction of the first triumphant arches. Historians as objects began to actively attract not only written, but also material sources. It was the historians who became the first researchers of the Russian antiquity. Among them - M. V. Lomonosov (1711-1765), V. N. Tatishchev (1686-1750), G. F. Miller (1705-1783).

A.A. Vinius	I'M IN. Bruce

Interest in historical knowledge, material residues - testimonies of the past - also affected the enlightened part of Russian society. The vivid indicator of this process was the active development of collectibles. The most diverse monuments, minerals, coins and medals, weapons, antique manuscripts, cards have become the subjects of private assembly. Among the collectors of that time - General Feldmarshal, scientist Ya. V. Bruce (1670-1735), A. A. Vinius (1641-1717), Brothers Golitsans, scientist P. G. Demidov (1738-1821 .).
FROM XIX century The targeted monural operation of the state and the scientific circles of the Russian society begins. Interest in the historical past, his material evidence was part of the national self-identification process.
Important role In the formation of a national self-consciousness played a patriotic rise of 1812. After the victorious war, monuments were established in honor of the victory over the Swedes in Poltava (1817), Minin and Pozharsky in Moscow (1818), in 1820 they began to collect funds for the construction of the column on the culish field. All this certainly affected the relation of the state and society to the objects of the antiquity. During the reign of Nicholas I in public policy, there is an in-depth of interest in national relics.

Moscow (Figure XVIII century)

In the first year of the board of Nikolai I, the Circular Ministry of Internal Affairs was issued by civilian governors "On the delivery of information about the remains of ancient buildings and to destroy these" (1826). The value of this document is difficult to overestimate - it was essentially a government program to identify information about the objects of the Russian Starny. In a short time, information was collected, which became the basis for the preparation of the first list of the ancient domestic monuments (more than 4 thousand facilities).
The legislative regulation on the part of the government was also subject to uncontrolled archaeological excavations, which was the result of the destruction of thousands of unique archaeological sites, unhindered export abroad found "kurgan antiquities". In 1834, the Government issued a decree, according to which no one had the right to excavate on the lands of public and government officials. It was the first step towards state control of all archaeological works.
In the XIX century In Russia, there was no special law on the protection of monuments of antiquity, but the state tried to regulate the safety of individual unique objects. There was a whole series of imperial decrees concerning the Kolomensky Kremlin, the Khorodskoy Wall.
Problems of preservation of antiquity monuments were reflected in the All-Russian Legislative Document - "Construction Charter". The charter of stroke forbade the remnants of the ancient buildings and fortresses, the provincial authorities should follow their safety. With the second halves XIX. in., despite the action of the "Construction Charter", in russian society The lack of a special law on the protection of antiquity monuments was felt more acute.

Kitchenskaya Wall (city Moscow)

Especially widespread the need to develop a special law on the protection of the Russian antiquity was discussed on the pages of periodic press, in scientific societies and various departments. In 1903, a commission was established under the Ministry of Internal Affairs to revise the "Construction Charter", in 1904 and 1908 - Commissions for the revision of existing regulations on the protection of ancient monuments.
The final document "Provision on the protection of antiquities" (1911) was submitted for discussion in the State Duma. The document presents a fairly slender state system of preserving monuments of antiquity, and the most bashered problems of the protection of the protection of the sphere were reflected, the preferential right to purchase by the government of all antiquities that were in possession of individuals were particularly stipulated.
"The Provision on the Protection of Antiquities" was not adopted by the State Duma. At the time when there was an indisputable power of private property, this document could not be approved. The other thing is that at the end of the XIX - the beginning of the XX centuries. The lawmaking process in the field of protection of the Russian Sturine was unusually active, the wider circles of the enlightened Russian society were involved in it.

MP Pogodin	S.S. Uvarov

Protection of Russian Starina XIX-early XX centuries. It is difficult to imagine without the activities of individual researchers - historians, archaeologists, historians of architecture and art historians. It was a time when knowledge, the initiative, the experience of various specialists led to effective results. Summarizing works on the history of Russia appear, the circle of historical sources is expanding, the method of their analysis is improved. In historical science, there is an independent area of \u200b\u200bknowledge about Russian antiquities - archeology. Along with the ancient rarities, which were in the sphere of attention of antiquity lovers for many decades, in the second quarter of the XIX century. Scientists turned in their research to Slavic monuments, seeing their originality and national flavor. Such scientists like M. P. Pogodin (1800-1875), I. E. Zabelin (1820-1908), I. P. Sakharov (1807-1863), A. S. Uvarov (1825- 1884) Much made to explore and systematize Slavic monuments. I. P. Sakharov in 1851 was published "Note for the Ferrus of Russian Antiquities", which was essentially a wide program for identifying and describing the Slavic monuments of antiquity. M. P. Pogodin and A. The Uvarov were not only known scientists, but also one of the most authoritative collectors of their time. The famous "Pogodinskie ancillary" on the uniqueness of his assembly did not have equal. The collection included handwritten and antiquity departments, MUNC-Cabinet, silver and copper crosses, prints, weapons, artistic values. "Poretsky Museum" A. S. Uvarova became one of the first manor museums of Russia, in which a unique collection of Slavic rarities was collected (old-line books, icons, crosses), which enriched the existing one at the beginning of the XIX century. Collection of "Antikov" S. S. Uvarova.
In the history of the protection of cultural heritage sites, the pureforming period is the most fruitful. Introduction to scientific turnover, analysis and systematization of various sources led to the formation and development of special historical disciplines - numismatics, spragistic, historical geography. About the archeology of this period you can talk about independent science With its tasks and research methodology. In the area of \u200b\u200bconservation of the Russian antiquity, an archaeological and artistic method of studying objects is formed when the monument is considered as a historical source and as an artistic phenomenon.
Further development of architectural criticism, a deeper study of medieval architecture monuments allowed the architects to formulate the concept "Monument to architecture", identify basic approaches in its assessment. Among the architects and restorers, a large place in their work of the ardent protection and restoration of architecture monuments, FF Richter (1808-1868), N. in Sultanov (1850-1908), V. V. Suslov (1857 -1920).

The concept of "architecture monument" during this period had quite wide borders - it included objects of cult and civil architecture, fortress shafts. At the beginning of the XX century. In this concept, the estate was included, the study of which began thanks to the activities of art historians N. N. Vrangel (1880-1915) and Yu. I. Shamurin (no later than 1888-1918).
The overwhelming majority of scientists of this time were members of archaeological and architectural and artistic societies. The role of scientific societies in the study and promotion of antiquity monuments is difficult to overestimate.
The largest archaeological societies were the Odessa Society of History and Antiquities (1839), the Russian Archaeological Society (1846) and the Moscow Archaeological Society (1864). The Russian archaeological society until 1889 conducted an examination of projects for the restoration of architectural objects. The active members of these societies were well-known scientists, artists and writers - F. I. Buslaev, I. E. Zabelin, M. P. Pogodin, S. M. Soloviev, V. O. Klyuchevsky, A. S. and P. with . Uvarov, A. M. Vasnetsov, K. M. Bykovsky, etc.
The study of architectural monuments has become a priority activity of professional architectural and artistic societies - Moscow Architectural Society (1876), St. Petersburg Society of Architects (1872), Artists Architects Societies (1903), Society for Protection and Conservation Monuments of Art and Starns (1909). In the field of attention of these societies were not only objects medieval Rus (Built until 1725), but also monuments of the XVIII, XIX, early XX centuries. The members of these societies were famous architects and artists M. D. and K. M. Bykovsky, F. O. Shechtel, N. V. Nikitin, L. V. Dal, D. Filimonov, A. N. Benua, M . V. Dobuzhinsky, N. E. Lancere, etc.

Experience in preserving monuments of antiquity, which was accumulated by Russian society and departments in the XIX - early XX centuries. became a significant foundation on which the scope of security and museum construction began to develop soviet years .

Based on all the achievements of the XIX - early XX centuries, the protection of antiquity monuments since 1917 experienced all the contradictory ambiguous Soviet era. First of all, this area fell into a hard ideological framework, which led to a constant ranking of the entire cultural heritage into individual categories, depending on ideological priorities. In comparison with the previous period, the Soviet era was the time of a certain opposition of the state and society in the field of preservation of monuments of art and antiquity. Especially critical was the state of cult facilities, which was determined by exacerbate relations between the state and the church.
After the events of 1917, those problems in the field of preservation of heritage were sharply aggravated, who were vividly discussed in Russian society at the beginning of the XX century. This applies primarily to the export of cultural values \u200b\u200boutside the country. The flow of exported values \u200b\u200bwas so huge that this problem caused a sharp resonance in public circles.
In the first months of the existence of the new government, this problem is on legislative level It was solved only partially. Separate orders of government concerned the safety of only a few major museum assemblies and monuments of antiquity ( Tretyakov Gallery and the estate of L. N. Tolstoy " Yasnaya Polyana"). And only on September 19, 1918, the decree of the Sovnarkom "On the prohibition of export and sale abroad of the objects of special artistic and historical meanings was approved, which was one of the few for the entire Soviet period of legislative documents on the monuments of the antiquity, which carried out strictly.
The general process of nationalization, which is characteristic of the first post-revolutionary years, touched upon and cultural heritage. On October 5, 1918, the decree of the Sovnarkom "On Registration, Reception for Accounting and Security Monuments of Art and Starny, which was in possession of individuals, societies and institutions, was issued, which determined the foundations of the state protection of heritage. First, the first state registration of monumental and "worn" monuments of art and antiquity was declared, which would have been in whose ownership. Secondly, tight control of all objects of cultural heritage was established. All this was the basis for the formation of the state protection system.
The most important element of this formed state system was the creation of a central institution for the protection of monuments of art and antiquity and the provincial security bodies, directly subject to the center. On May 28, 1918, the All-Russian Department of Museums and Protection of Arts and Starns was established (Museum department) In the system of the People's Commissariat, at the head of which N. I. Trotsky stood (1882-1962). The Museum Department was attracted to the work of the Museum Department - N. Mashkovtsev (1887-1962), T. G. Trapeznikov (1882-1926), P. P. Muratov (1881-1950), V. A. Gorodsev (1860-1945) and others. In June 1918, a commission for the disclosure of monuments of the Old Russian painting was formed (headed by I. E. Grabar) at the Museum Department. The entire sphere of protection of monuments of art and old days was concentrated in this department. His employees coordinated work in this area both in the center and in the provinces, solved the problems of the National Museum Fund, accounting and restoration of monumental and "movable". Before the museum department, the tasks of salvation of national treasure were delivered to the export of cultural values \u200b\u200bfrom mansion and mansion owners, they are taking into account, as well as creating museums of various profiles on them. The emissary of the department was sent to various corners of the country, where there were inventory inventory inventory collections. By June 1919, 215 ussers were examined, and above all, the estates of the Moscow region and the center of Russia.

On the basis of saved cultural values, museums of various profiles were created, many regional museum collections Required new exhibits. Only in Moscow and the suburbs appeared 33 new museums. Most museums were created on the basis of the existing architectural ensembles - estates, monasteries, palaces. These were museums - estates (19 - only in the Moscow region), museums monasteries (among them - Donskoy, Josepho-Voloq, Kirillo-Belozuri, etc.), Museums - Palaces (Winter, Stroganovsky, Gatchina, Pavlovsky, Livadian, Vorontsovsky) .
Nationalized private collections became the basis of a number of unique museums - the first museum of new Western painting (Collection of S. I. Shchukina), the second museum of new Western painting (Collection I. A. Morozova), Museum of Furniture (Collection V. O. Girschman), Porcelain Museum (Collection of A. V. Morozova), etc.
Thus, the activities of the centralized state system for the preservation of monuments of art and antiquity in the first post-revolutionary years gave fairly effective results. The two acute problems of heritage protection were substantiated. illegal export of values \u200b\u200band the formation of the foundations of state protection.
At the same time, the formation of a purely utilitarian attitude to the cultural heritage began - the monuments of the antiquity could be sold, rebuild, use on economic purposes. Especially in the critical situation there were religious buildings - churches and monasteries. Starting from January 20, 1918 (dates of the decree on the department of the Church from the state) and until spring 1922 (campaigns of the starving Volga region), church property was practically destroyed. The church lost all - church and monastic buildings, the objects of the religious rite, made from precious metals. The cult buildings belonged to once the churches were transferred to the rental rights of believers.

Vorontsov Palace (Saint Petersburg)

1920s - the beginning of the 1930s. - A new stage in the history of the protection of cultural heritage. All economic political processeswho happened in the country most directly influenced the areas of security and museum construction. In 1921, the country entered the era new economic policies. Consishes and self-sufficiency - the basic principles of the NEPA - provided for the existence of a decentralized financing system. All the severity of expenses for monuments and museums was to lie on the regional budget, and the responsibility for their safety is to local executive committers. The regional budget was extremely soaked and spent mainly for restoration work after the devastating imperialist and civil wars. In this regard, many monuments were doomed to destruction - lacked funds either on the restoration, nor for ordinary repairs or elementary security. Small museums simply closed.
The country began the process of re-registration of cultural heritage in order to identify the most valuable objects, which in fact meant the ranking of monuments. This process had not only economic, but also a political background: a rich historical past began to change the history of the revolutionary movement, objects were protected related to "single and collective actions directed against the serfdom, royal autocracy and capitalist system." So, in general, in Russia, from 540 estates, recognized as valuable in the first post-revolutionary years, on October 1, 1926, 221 estates were left on taking into account. The legislative process was justified by the decree of March 8, 1923, "On accounting and registration of art and antiquity objects."

Sukhareva Tower

By the end of the 1920s. Most of the Museums and Museums, Museums, Museums formed on the basis of private collections were closed.
Unique architectural and historical monuments were rebuilt, used on economic purposes, destroyed. It is enough to remember the destroyed most valuable monuments of Moscow - the Savior Cathedral on Boru, the Miracle and Ascension Monasteries, the Smarther Nikolaev Palace in the Kremlin, the Resurrection and Iverk Gate in China, the Kazan Cathedral, renovated by P. D. Baranovsky Shortly before the destruction, Church of Nicola Big Cross ( 1680-1688), Sukhareva Tower, Red Gate, etc. Many mentioned objects after the revolution were renovated, and in the 1930s. They are no longer.
In the years Great Patriotic War 1941-1945 cultural Foundation Countries suffered huge losses. Literally, unique architectural monuments were turned into ruins. Novgorod land (Savings of the Savior on Narrechury, Savior on Kovalev, Nikola on Lipne, Assumption on Volotoval Field, etc.). In Smolensk, the most valuable architectural objects were injured, was looted famous museum Russian Starina M. K. Tenisheva. Special damage was caused by the suburbs of Leningrad: a large Peterhof Palace was plundered in Peterhof, a large cascade blown up, fountains were destroyed. The Ekaterininsky Palace was damaged in Pushkin, its furniture and the famous Amber Room were taken to Germany; In Pavlovsk, a wall painting P. G. Gonzago was destroyed, a pink pavilion was burned, a hunting house.

Accounting for destruction, examination of monuments affected during hostilities (measurements, sketches, photo science) was carried out by specialists in the war years. In 1942, L. N. Tolstoy, Museum-Museums P. I. Tchaikovsky in Klin, K. E. Tsiolkovsky in Kaluga were restored and open to visitors. In October 1943, the decision of the USSR SCC was published on the restoration of the Museum palaces in the suburbs of Leningrad. In Novgorod, Pskov opened restoration workshops.
IN post-war years There was active activities to establish monuments in places of large battles, obeliskov on fraternal and solitary graves dead warriors. On February 18, 1946, the decision of the USSR Council "On the Taking Military Graves for Accounting and their Improvement" was published.
On the preservation of cultic monuments of architecture, in the years of the war, the government's policy towards the Church has positively influenced. On May 22, 1947, a resolution of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR "On the Protection of Architecture Monuments" was published, which emphasized that unique architectural monuments that preserved the fresco painting of outstanding masters should be used only in museum purposes or their direct intended purpose.

Essential value In the restoration of cultural heritage in the post-war period there was a resolution of 1948 "On cultural monuments", in which the classification of historical and cultural facilities subject to state protection (architectural monuments, history, archeology and monumental art) was given. In this document, the most important problem of using the heritage was set up - strengthening the liability of tenants for the safety of the object used.
In the post-war history of the protection of cultural heritage, years are allocated "Khrushchev thaw". The state policy of this period in the protection of cultural heritage was the most characteristic of the Soviet period. Mercley's minor achievements against the background of numerous destruction of monuments, ignoring the opinions of experts. Many questions related to the fate of cultural heritage facilities were solved by non-professional low-counter humans. By this time, three-quarters of the events of the monasteries were closed. By 1967, compared with 1958, only 7523 remained from 13,414 of Orthodox churches. All this led to the use of churches and monasteries on economic purposes, and often to their destruction. So, in the early 1960s. The Moscow Temple of Transfiguration in the village of Preobrazhensky is a monument of the era of Peter I - was blown up, since hembered the construction of the metro station.
Despite the publication in 1962, the instructions for organizing the security zones of architectural monuments, centers of cities radically changed their appearance. Dominant buildings appeared, distorted historical buildings. It is enough to recall the construction in 1963 by the Kalininsky Avenue, laid through the "lively fabric" of the old Moscow -arbatry alley.

Exceeding years - Very important stage in the history of the protection of cultural heritage. In 1965, the preparation of a multi-volume encyclopedic edition - an arch of historical and cultural monuments. Metropolitan scientific institutions and regional forces were connected to the fulfillment of this work.
A huge number of previously unknown monuments were identified and described, many of whom were subsequently included in government security lists.
In the mid-1960s. There is a creation All-Russian Society for the Protection of Monuments of History and Culture (Ipekik)which was the only public organization for the protection of monuments for all Soviet years, and the main task of which was the identification, study, protection and restoration of monuments of history and culture. Having significant funds, society has provided tremendous assistance to the state in preserving unique cultural heritage sites.
Among the founders, the victims were known cultural figures - I. L. Andronikov, P. D. Baranovsky, I. E. Glazunov, L. M. Leonov, D. S. Likhachev, B. A. Rybakov. The departments of the Ipex were opened in all areas, the edges and republics of the RSFSR.

D.S. Likhachev

The most important event in the protection of the cultural heritage of those years was the adoption in 1978 "On the Protection of Monuments of History and Culture". This law defined the protection of monuments as one of the most important state problems. In this document, topical problems of heritage protection were raised - accounting and use, the conditions for the implementation of contractual obligations between tenants and government protection authorities.
With all the positive provisions of this law, its implementation was not always successful. The articles of the law on responsibility for making damage monuments were practically not worked, with great difficulty, an article was implemented on the establishment of security zones, they were still sharply stood on financing.
In the early 1990s Russia entered into a new development phase, characterized by indigenous changes in the economy, political system, ideology. Finally, an ideological pressing of the administrative party leadership was eliminated, who played a decisive role in cultural processes over several decades.

Post Soviet period. In the 1990s. A series of laws related to the problems of preservation of cultural heritage were adopted. On April 15, 1993, I saw the light "On the export and import of cultural values", on March 17, 1994, the provision "On Archive Fund of the Russian Federation" was approved, on November 23 of the same year, the Federal Law "On Library Affairs" was adopted, April 24, 1996 . The Federal Law "On the Museum Fund of the Russian Federation" came into force, on April 15, 1998 - the Federal Law on the Restitution of Cultural Values \u200b\u200b("On Cultural Values \u200b\u200bDisplaced in the Union of the SSR as a result of World War II and located in the Russian Federation").
Despite these legislative documents adopted, the lack of a special law on the preservation of cultural heritage, which would reflect modern economic and social realities. The separation of state ownership to the federal and municipal, which was directly related to the fate of cultural heritage, demanded a detailed legal development.
On July 25, 2002, the President of the Russian Federation approved the Federal Law "On the objects of the cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the peoples of the Russian Federation", which was prepared taking into account the latest European experience and the real economic and sociocultural situation in the country.
Relying on international law, the law summarized the many years of activity of domestic scientists to develop a conceptual-terminological field of protection. The concepts submitted in the law are inseparable from the pan-European tradition of a wide interpretation of the concept of "heritage", which includes not only material objects, but also samples of spiritual culture, traditional technologies and form of management. Monuments are perceived today in an inseparable unity with their spatial environment, and the object of protection can be a territory with a unique layout, landscape and valuable objects of cultural and natural heritage.
The law with existing various forms of ownership, tasks are clearly defined. government agencies Protection of cultural heritage, covered the problem of privatization of heritage objects. The monuments of archeology, especially valuable objects of cultural heritage, monuments and ensembles included in the UNESCO World Heritage List, as well as federal value facilities are unconditionally. All other facilities can be private property if "the owner carries the burden of the content of the object belonging to it." The cultural heritage object can be redeemed by the state or sold during public auctions, if the owner does not fulfill its obligations.

The law reflected all current trends in the study of cultural and natural heritage as a holistic phenomenon. The interdisciplinary nature of many modern studies has become the basis of a wide systemic approach to the definition of the concept of "heritage". The concept of unique historical and cultural and natural territories is closely connected with this concept, according to which the security unit is not a monument and not even an ensemble, but the territory.
The practice of "media" is associated with the systemic approach to the cultural heritage, with which the problem of the ratio of old and new objects in urban development is solved. The concept of the medium covers not only material objects and their spatial relations, but also a person, its behavioral acts, methods of vital activity.
The cultural and natural heritage of Russia is actively involved in the global cultural space. Our country is a full member of such authoritative international organizations as UNESCO, IKOM, IKOMOS. Many unique monuments of Russia are under the patronage of these organizations.
Modern domestic researchers are developing new methodical approaches to the protection of cultural and natural heritage, which correspond to the international level. In the perspective of Russian protection, the creation of a network of biosphere reserves, the preservation of unique territories with the complex regeneration of historical and cultural monuments, traditional forms of business and environmental management.

Ukrakhevich A.V., Head of the Department (inspection) of the protection of the objects of cultural heritage of the Federal Service for the Russian Federation on oversight of compliance with the legislation in the field of mass communications and the protection of cultural heritage

1. Objects of cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the peoples of the Russian Federation

Objects of cultural heritage and their main features

Objects of cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the peoples of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as cultural heritage objects) are "objects of real estate with the works of painting, sculptures, decorative and applied arts, objects of science and technology and other objects of material culture arising as a result of historical events, which are value from the point of view of history, archeology, architecture, urban planning, art, science and technology, aesthetics, ethnology or anthropology, social culture and being evidence of eras and civilizations, genuine sources of information on the emergence and development of culture. "

The Constitution of the Russian Federation determines the responsibility of everyone to take care of the preservation of the cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation and gives the right to everyone to access cultural values \u200b\u200bassociated with the objects of cultural heritage.

Interdepartmental nature of relations related to the objects of cultural heritage

Relationships in the field of state protection, preservation, use and popularization of cultural heritage facilities are governed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, documents of international law in the field of cultural heritage, the foundations of the legislation of the Russian Federation on culture, federal law of June 25, 2002 No. 73-FZ "On the objects of cultural heritage (historical monuments of history and cultures) of the peoples of the Russian Federation "(hereinafter - FZ-73) and the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation adopted in accordance with it.

Other relations in the field of cultural heritage facilities are governed by civil law, land law, legislation on urban planning and architectural activities, ambient, administrative and criminal liability and other sections of legislation, taking into account the provisions of the FZ-73.

1.3. The main characteristics of cultural heritage objects

In accordance with FZ-73:

1) buildings, structures, memorial apartments, burials, works of monumental art, objects of archaeological heritage, groups of the above objects, as well as the place of existence of folk artists, the centers of historical settlements or fragments of urban planning and development, memorabiliaries, may be attributed to the objects of cultural heritage. , cultural and natural landscapes, cultural layers, remnants of buildings of ancient cities, settlements, spraying, parking lots, locations of religious rites;

2) the types of objects of cultural heritage are established - monuments, ensembles and attractions;

3) Cultural heritage sites are divided into categories of historical cultural meaning: federal, regional and local (municipal);

4) a separate object of cultural heritage can present value from the point of view of history, archeology, architecture, urban planning, art, science and technology, aesthetics, ethnology or anthropology, social culture;

5) regardless of the category of historical and cultural significance, cultural heritage facilities can be in federal property, property of the subjects of the Russian Federation, municipal property, private property, as well as in other forms of ownership, unless otherwise established by federal law;

6) Cultural heritage sites can be used in administrative, residential, socio-cultural, socio-political, cult, production and other purposes, if it does not contradict the established requirements for ensuring their safety;

7) Land plots within the boundaries of the territories of cultural heritage objects are in the prescribed manner to the lands of historical and cultural purposes, the legal regime of which is governed by land laws and FZ-73;

8) the sources of financing measures for state protection, the preservation and popularization of cultural heritage facilities are the federal budget, budgets of the subjects of the Russian Federation, local budgets, extrabudgetary receipts;

9) provides for the provision of benefits and compensation to users and owners of cultural heritage objects who have invested their funds to preserve cultural heritage facilities;

10) Provides control over the state of cultural heritage facilities.

2. State Protection of Cultural Heritage

The main functions of the state protection of cultural heritage sites

In accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the protection of objects of cultural heritage (historical and cultural monuments) is the subject of joint management of the Russian Federation and the subjects of the Russian Federation.

FZ-73 to the state protection of cultural heritage facilities:

1) state control over compliance with legislation in the field of protection and use of cultural heritage facilities;

2) State accounting of facilities with signs of the cultural heritage object in accordance with Art. 3 FZ-73, the formation and maintenance of the registry;

3) carrying out historical and cultural expertise;

4) establishing responsibility for damage, destruction or destruction of the object of cultural heritage, the movement of the cultural heritage object, damage to the object of cultural heritage, a change in the appearance and interior of this object of cultural heritage, which are the subject of protection of this object of cultural heritage;

5) coordination in cases and procedure established by FZ-73, projects for the protection of cultural heritage objects, land supro-plant, urban planning and project documentation, urban planning regulations, as well as decisions of federal executive bodies, executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments on the decline of land and changing their legal regime;

6) control over the development of urban planning and project documentation, urban planning regulations in which measures should be provided to ensure the content and use of cultural heritage facilities in accordance with the requirements of FZ-73;

7) the development of projects for the protection of cultural heritage objects;

8) issuance in cases established by FZ-73, permits for carrying out land management, earthworks, construction, reclamation, economic and other works;

9) coordination in cases and procedure established by FZ-73, carrying out land management, earthworks, construction, landlocative, economic and other works and projects of these works;

10) issuance in cases established by FZ-73, permits for maintaining the object of cultural heritage;

11) establishing the boundary of the territory of the object of cultural heritage as an object of urban planning activities of special regulation;

12) Installation at the objects of the cultural heritage of information inscriptions and designations;

13) control over the state of objects of cultural heritage;

14) other events, which are classified as FZ-73 and the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to the authorities of the relevant bodies for the protection of cultural heritage facilities.

Currently, in accordance with paragraph 1, 3 and 4 of Art. 63 FZ-73 Before registering the object of cultural heritage in the registry, rules for the protection, restoration and use of monuments of history and culture approved by the decision of the USSR Council of Ministers of 16.09.82 No. 865 and Art. 31, 34, 35, 40, 42 of the RSFSR Law "On the Protection and Use of Monuments of History and Culture", according to which the implementation of relevant authority on the protection and use of historical and cultural monuments is carried out by state bodies for the protection of historical and cultural monuments regardless of their category of historical and cultural significance.

The aforementioned rules ensure the continuity and continuity of the implementation of functions on the state protection of cultural heritage facilities in the transition period of the FZ-73.

Federal legislation provides for the possibility of transferring federal authority on the state protection of cultural heritage sites to the relevant regional bodies for the protection of cultural heritage facilities.

The main conditions for such a transmission are advisable to:

1) the presence of an independent executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation authorized in the field of protection of cultural heritage facilities;

2) coordination by the Federal Service for Supervision of Compliance with the Legislation in the field of mass communications and the protection of cultural heritage facilities for the position and removal of the head of the relevant regional authority of the protection of cultural heritage facilities, as well as issues of reorganization (liquidation) of the authority;

3) the availability of qualified specialists in the relevant regional authority of the protection of cultural heritage facilities;

4) control over the implementation of transmitted powers from the federal protection of cultural heritage sites.

Features of the transition period Federal Law "On the objects of cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation" until 2010

In order to bring relations in the field of cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation, in accordance with the FZ-73, the transitional period was determined by the law until 2010.

During the transition period, it is necessary to implement the following activities:

1) to develop and approve regulatory legal acts, the publication of which is related to the FZ-73 to the powers of the Government of the Russian Federation, and the laws of the relevant subjects of the Russian Federation in the field of cultural heritage;

2) adopt federal law, distinctive objects of cultural heritage, located in state ownership, federal property, property of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal property;

3) Register in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects The objects of cultural heritage included in the specified registry in accordance with Art. 64 FZ-73;

4) to register in a single state register of rights to immovable property and transactions with it requirements for the preservation of cultural heritage facilities set forth in security and lease agreements, security contracts and security obligations;

5) reduce the rental contracts of cultural heritage and contracts for gratuitous use of cultural heritage facilities in state ownership, with the participation of the protection bodies of cultural heritage facilities;

6) to ensure compliance with the procedure for the approval of urban and research and project documentation and the procedure for approving and issuing permits for carrying out excavation, construction, reclamation, economic and other works established by Art. 31, 34, 35, 40, 42 of the RSFSR Law "On the Protection and Use of Monuments of History and Culture";

7) When developing a provision on historical settlements, determine the procedure for the development and approval of complex (combined) zones for the protection of cultural heritage objects in the territories, within the boundaries of which are objects of cultural heritage of various categories of historical and cultural significance.

System of State Protection of Cultural Heritage

The effectiveness of the implementation of measures for the state protection of cultural heritage facilities is largely depends on the organization of the state protection system in the Russian Federation.

During the period of the Law of the RSFSR of 15.12.78 "On the protection and use of historical and cultural monuments", the state protection system included the Ministry of Culture of Russia and the local government agencies for the protection of monuments of history and culture in the face of cultural or other state bodies.

In accordance with the Decrees of the President of the Russian Federation of 03/09/04 No. 314 and from 20.05.04 No. 649, the Ministry of Culture and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation (Russian Ministry of Culture) was formed in the field of cultural heritage (Ministry of Culture of Russia), the Federal Service for Supervision of Compliance with Mass Communications and Cultural Protection Heritage (Rosokhrankultura) and federal agency for culture and cinematography (Roskultura).

The powers of the Ministry of Culture of Russia include the implementation of state policies and regulatory regulations in the field of state protection, the preservation, use and popularization of cultural heritage sites.

The powers of Roskultura include the maintenance of a single state register of cultural heritage objects and the organization of the state historical and cultural expertise against the objects of cultural heritage.

The powers of Rosokhrankultura include the other functions of the federal protection of the cultural heritage objects, defined FZ-73.

From the standpoint of the practical implementation of the functions of state protection of cultural heritage sites, the division of these powers between Rosokhrankultura and the Russian roskultura is impractical, because In accordance with Art. 33 FZ-73 State protection is a single process, state accounting is its basis, and the conduct of state historical and cultural expertise is the basis for decision-making within the competence of Rosokhrankultura. The separation of powers between federal services and federal agencies is based on the principle of separating control and supervisory functions from the functions of government management and the provision of paid services.

The maintenance of a single state register of cultural heritage facilities and the holding of state historical and cultural expertise cannot be considered as aware of the provision of paid services, since:

1) The composition of the registry key set by Art. 20 FZ-73 does not contain measures to use the information contained in the registry, but aims exclusively for registration, documentation and information support and monitoring of the registry data;

2) Rosokhrankulture cannot issue tasks, permits, prescriptions and coordinate documentation related to cultural heritage sites, without being able to promptly organize the necessary historical and cultural expertise;

3) Conducting state historical and cultural expertise is research non-commercial activities, as a result of which income is not formed, and all funds received from the Customer are sent exclusively to the organization and conduct of historical and cultural expertise.

Considering the above, it is advisable to combine the functions of the state protection of cultural heritage facilities, as not related to regulatory legal regulation and government management in Federal Service According to the supervision of the observance of legislation in the field of mass communications and the protection of cultural heritage.

The organization of the activities of state bodies for the protection of cultural heritage sites in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation currently requires improvement.

In accordance with the Law of the RSFSR of 15.12.78 "On the protection and use of monuments of history and culture" a significant number of powers for the protection and use of monuments (government accounting, the implementation of expertise, the conclusion of security and lease agreements, security contracts and security obligations; documentation coordination, The issuance of tasks, permits and regulations) was entrusted to the local state bodies for the protection of monuments.

The Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR in the established cases agreed specified documentsAnd also provided state control over compliance with legislation in the field of protection and use of monuments as part of its competence.

Changes in socio-economic conditions in the 1990s, adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the entry into force of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the Budget Code of the Russian Federation and other regulations of the Russian Federation led to the contradictions of the Act of the RSFSR "On the Protection and Use of History and Culture Monuments" with new legislation .

The main contradiction was in the inconsistency of the powers of state bodies for the protection of monuments of history and culture in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation defined by the above-mentioned Law of the RSFSR, and the permissible organizational and legal forms of their existence established by the newly accepted federal laws.

For example, in many regions, practical activities on the state protection of monuments of history and culture was carried out by scientific and production centers for the protection and use of monuments of history and culture under the ministries of culture of autonomous republics, the main departments and the management of the culture of the culisms and the regional executives formed in accordance with the order of the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR from 26.01.90 No. 33 "On the reorganization of the structure of the management of the protection of monuments of history and culture."

The lack of guidelines for their organizational and legal form of scientific and production centers in the right-point documents, their actual status of cultural institutions have become an obstacle to the protection of monuments of state control and supervision by these bodies. At the same time, in the regional bodies of cultural management, as a rule, the founders of these centers, the number of specialists authorized to deal with the protection of cultural heritage facilities and carry out control and supervisory functions, or minimally (1-5 people), or they are not at all.

However, in 60 constituent entities of the Russian Federation, these specialized organizations continue to function, exercising the powers of state bodies for the protection of cultural heritage facilities in the form of government agencies or state unitary enterprises.

FZ-73 provides that the powers of the relevant regional body of the protection of cultural heritage facilities should be carried out by the authorized body of the executive authority of the subject of the Russian Federation.

The activities of state bodies for the protection of objects of cultural heritage on the organization of the State Historical and Cultural Examination

In accordance with FZ-73, historical and cultural expertise is held in relation to:

1) objects with signs of the cultural heritage object in accordance with Art. 3 FZ-73 identified in the process of research and other works;

2) land plots to be made of economic development, including during construction, land suproofactive, reclamation and other activities;

3) documents justifying the inclusion of an object in the registry, the exclusion of the object from the register, a change in the category of historical and cultural value of the object of cultural heritage, assigning the object of cultural heritage to the particularly valuable objects of the cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation, attributing the object of cultural heritage to the objects of world cultural heritage, attributable object of cultural heritage to historical and cultural reserves;

4) projects for the protection of the object of cultural heritage, projects of land management, earthy, construction, reclamation, economic and other works, the implementation of which can have a direct or indirect impact on the object of cultural heritage;

5) urban planning, project documentation, urban planning regulations in cases established by FZ-73;

6) documents, including projects, justifying work on the preservation of the object of cultural heritage in order to ensure its preservation and use in modern conditions and work on the reconstruction of the lost object of cultural heritage;

7) documents justifying land management, earthworks, construction, reclamation, economic and other works, the implementation of which can have a direct or indirect impact on the object of cultural heritage.

State control in the area of \u200b\u200bpreservation, use, popularization and state protection of cultural heritage facilities

State control is carried out by the federal protection body of cultural heritage sites and the relevant regional bodies for the protection of cultural heritage sites within their competence. State control is implemented by:

1) monitoring the observance of legislation in the field of cultural heritage facilities in terms of ensuring the requirements of state protection, the preservation, use and promotion of cultural heritage objects by individuals and legal entities;

2) control over the development of urban planning and project documentation, urban planning regulations, design and work on ensuring the safety of cultural heritage sites, land management, earthworks, construction, reclamation, economic and other works;

3) control over the state of cultural heritage facilities.

The issue of regulating urban planning activities in historical settlements, requiring cooperation with the Federal Agency for Construction and Housing and Communal Services, as well as the Ministry of Regional Development was acquired.

More than 480 cities and settlements Russia was included in 1990 in the list of historical settlements by a joint decision of the Collegiums of the Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR and the State Construction of the RSFSR and the Presidium of the Central Council of the All-Russian Society for the Protection of Monuments of Nature and Culture (Ipex).

The impossibility of regulating construction activities in historical urban development at the time was due to the lack of legislative design of the status of settlements that have a preserved historical environment.

In 2001, the Government of the Russian Federation within the framework of the Federal Target Program "Preservation and Development of the Architecture of Historic Cities" (2002-10) was clarified by a list of historical settlements.

Legal definition The term "historical settlement" received in FZ-73, in which there is a concept of "the subject of protection of a historical settlement". In the historical settlement of state protection as a subject of protection, all valuable city-forming facilities are subject to: planning structure, building nature, landscape, archaeological system, appearance of buildings and structures, various functions acquired during development.

However, the implementation of the provisions of the FZ-73 in terms of historical settlements will be possible only in the event of a special procedure for regulating urban planning activities in these settlements and adjustment of the list of such settlements by the regulatory act of the Russian government.

Changes in land categories, on which there are objects of cultural heritage and their territory, to the category of historical and cultural land category after establishing general order Changes in the category of land in the Russian Federation.

Currently, when making a decision on the inclusion of an object in the registry (registration in the register of the cultural heritage object included in the Register in accordance with Article 64 of the FZ-73), the boundaries of its territory are approved, within which land plots should be attributed to the Land Categories of Historical cultural significance.

The lack of order of assigning land plots to the category of land historical and cultural land does not allow properly to ensure the safety of cultural heritage facilities using land legislation tools.

One of the decisions of this problem may be approval by the Government of the Russian Federation on the procedure for assigning land plots within the territories of the territories of cultural heritage sites to the lands of historical and cultural purposes and entering them into the land inventory of the Russian Federation, which requires a joint work with the Federal Agency for Cadastre Real Estate Objects to Determine The procedure for the implementation of this activity.

3. FREE OF CULTURAL HERITAGE

Problems of preservation of cultural heritage objects

Requirements FZ-73 on the need for repair and restoration work on the facilities of the cultural heritage of repair and restoration work and attracting specialists of restorers are often ignored by customers of works on monuments, which leads to the substitution of repair and restoration work by the reconstruction of cultural heritage sites.

A serious problem is currently the trend on the destruction of genuine monuments and creating more or less accurate copies of modern building materials instead of them, which was noted in the report of the Russian Architecture of Russia. State and development prospects ", prepared by the Russian Academy of Architecture and Construction Sciences in 2002

This tendency contradicts international law (Venetian Charter) and Art. 47 FZ-73, in which the recreation of cultural heritage facilities is carried out in exceptional cases in extremely significance of the object, and work on the recreation of lost objects of cultural heritage is carried out using technologies for the preservation of cultural heritage sites. This rate does not provide for the demolition of existing cultural heritage facilities.

Information on the state of a significant part of cultural heritage sites in the Russian Federation allows us to assess the current situation in this area as critical. In such conditions, there is a real danger that many historical and cultural values \u200b\u200bof Russia may be irrevocably lost in the near future.

With a reduction in the federal budget allocated for the preservation of cultural heritage sites, the share of other sources of financing - regional and local budgets, own funds of investors (owners or users), the Russian Orthodox Church and other denominations increased to some extent.

Exact quantitative data on the volume of these investments is currently not possible.

However, with some financing growth, in many cases, investors attract unqualified personnel, restoration is carried out with gross violations of methodological and technological standards, often without the design documentation in the prescribed manner and in the absence of certified professionals-professionals or contrary to their recommendations.

Such illegal actions should be stopped by all possible legitimate ways.

Special attention deserves the state of the estimated regulatory framework in the field of restoration and restoration work.

The production of restoration and restoration work at the cultural heritage sites from 01/01/05 should be carried out in accordance with "federal estimates" (FSN-2001) and "territorial unit rates" (Ter-2001).

4. Use of cultural heritage facilities

Features of renting objects of cultural heritage and gratuitous use of cultural heritage

According to the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the USSR from September 16, 1992 No. 865 "On approval of the Provision on the Protection and Use of History and Cultural Monuments", currently within the framework of the transitional provisions of FZ-73, immovable monuments of history and culture in state ownership were transferred to The established procedure for the balance of local state bodies for the protection of monuments (currently the relevant regional bodies of the protection of cultural heritage sites) for the provision of individuals and legal entities.

The procedure and conditions for the use of each monument in state ownership and provided to use on the right of lease or gratuitous use was determined by the relevant security document: a security-lease agreement for the use of a real estate monument of history and culture (hereinafter - a security-lease), a security agreement on The transfer of history and culture consisting under the protection of the state (hereinafter - a security agreement) or a security commitment to the immovable monument of history and culture.

The security and lease concluded between the physical or legal entity, which is provided to use the object of cultural heritage, and the corresponding regional authority Protection of cultural heritage objects, on the balance sheet of which this object consists. For the use of monuments on the basis of a security and lease agreement, a rent is charged, which comes to a special account and is spent solely on measures to ensure the safety of cultural heritage sites.

The security contract is concluded between the religious organization, in which the cultural heritage object is provided to perform religious rites in it, and the relevant regional authority of the protection of cultural heritage sites, on the balance sheet of which this object consists. For the use of cultural cultivation monuments for committing cult rites, the rent is not charged. When using religious organizations of cultural heritage sites, their individual premises, as well as related territories and structures in economic or other purposes, security and lease agreements are concluded on the general basis.

The security commitment to the immovable monument of history and culture is issued to the relevant regional authority for the protection of cultural heritage objects:

1) a physical or legal entity using the object of cultural heritage for residential, scientific, cultural and educational, tourist and other purposes;

2) a physical or legal entity, in the use of which the land-owned land plot with the objects of cultural heritage located on it, with the exception of objects used on the basis of security-lease or security contracts;

3) a physical or legal entity whose ownership of the cultural heritage arises before the entry into force of the Federal Law No. 178-FZ "On the privatization of state and municipal property" (hereinafter referred to as the Federal Law of December 21, 01 No. 178-ФЗ ),

For objects of cultural heritage, alienated from state ownership in accordance with Federal Law No. 178-FZ No. 178-FZ, a security commitment is issued in the privatization of the cultural heritage facility, the terms of which are determined in accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 16, 2002 No. 894 "On the Procedure Preparation and execution of security commitments in the privatization of cultural heritage facilities ":

• for the objects of the cultural heritage of federal significance - the federal body of the protection of objects of cultural heritage;
• for the cultural heritage sites of the regional and local (municipal) importance - the relevant regional authority of the protection of cultural heritage facilities.

Currently, the privatization of the objects of the cultural heritage of the federal value is suspended in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 63 FZ-73 before the adoption of the Federal Law, the division of objects of cultural heritage, which are in state ownership, federal property, the ownership of the subjects of the Russian Federation and the municipal property.

In accordance with the transitional provisions of the FZ-73 prior to registration in the prescribed manner of the object of cultural heritage in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (Monuments of History and Cultural) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation, security and lease agreements, security contracts and security commitments on the immovable monument of history and culture are applied, established by the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the USSR of September 16, 1992 No. 865.

After this registration, the provision of cultural heritage facilities should be carried out in accordance with Art. 55 and 56 FZ-73 by concluding on behalf of the relevant owner of the lease agreement of the object of cultural heritage or a contract of gratuitous use of the object of cultural heritage containing information about the features that make up the object of protection of the facility, as well as established requirements for the preservation of the cultural heritage object.

The absence of a legislatively defined owner of the cultural heritage object in many cases will lead to legal uncertainty, who is authorized to enter into a contract for the lease of the object of cultural heritage or a contract of free use of the object of cultural heritage.

Thus, the registration of the cultural heritage facility in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (Monuments of History and Culture) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation is formally grounds for the termination of existing security and lease and security contracts and in the conditions of uncertainty of the owner of the cultural heritage object can create legal uncertainty in eligibility Conclusions of contracts for lease of cultural heritage and contracts for free use of cultural heritage facilities.

Basic restrictions on the use of cultural heritage sites

In accordance with FZ-73, the cultural heritage object is used with the mandatory compliance with the following requirements:

1) ensuring the invariance of the appearance and interior of the object of cultural heritage in accordance with the peculiarities of this object, served as the basis for its inclusion in the registry and which are the subject of protection of this object described in his passport;

2) coordination in the manner prescribed by paragraph 4 of Art. 35 FZ-73, the implementation of design and land management, earthwork, construction, reclamation, economic and other works in the territory of the object of cultural heritage or on the land plot or section of the water object, within which the archaeological heritage object is located;

3) ensuring the regime of the content of land historical and cultural purposes;

4) providing access to the object of cultural heritage, the conditions of which are established by the owner of the cultural heritage object in coordination with the relevant body of the protection of cultural heritage facilities.

Restrictions on the use of the cultural heritage facility are included in the passport of the cultural heritage object, which is issued by its owner and is one of the required documents for state registration of rights and restrictions (encumbrances) associated with the object of cultural heritage.

Under the state registration of lease rights or gratuitous use arising from a security and lease agreement, a security contract, a security commitment to a real estate monument of history and culture, a lease agreement of the cultural heritage object, a contract of gratuitous use of the object of cultural heritage, a security commitment in the privatization of the cultural heritage facility, containing the necessary information to ensure the preservation of the object of cultural heritage, there is a state registration of restrictions (encumbrances) associated with the object of cultural heritage.

Conditions for the effective use of cultural heritage facilities

The total number of objects of cultural heritage included in the state lists of real estate monuments of history and culture is about 90 thousand facilities (without refining their object and property composition).

To implement the procedure for registering the object of cultural heritage in the registry, it is necessary to conduct a state historical and cultural expertise that substantiates the inclusion of these objects in the registry.

This procedure requires significant financial investments. The total amount of funds required for work related to registration is, according to expert estimates, not less than 9.5 billion rubles.

In accordance with FZ-73, registration should be completed by 2010. Given the volume and duration of registration for registration in the near future, the financial need to make registration and related to the conduct of historical and cultural expertise should be considered as a priority in implementing continuous funding.

Public security costs also include funds for monitoring the observance of legislation, the development of urban planning and project documentation, the development and coordination of projects for the protection of cultural heritage sites, control over the state of cultural heritage sites and a number of other events. These costs are provided for by the federal budget and budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

The most part of the cost of ensuring the safety of cultural heritage objects is the cost of preserving the objects of cultural heritage. For example, the share of restoration costs accounted for 68% (4.395 billion rubles) from the total amount of funding for 2001-05, declared in Section III "Cultural Heritage of Russia" of the Federal Target Program "Culture of Russia".

5. Financial support for state protection, preservation and popularization of cultural heritage facilities

According to expert estimates, the average cost of 1 m 2 restoration works is currently at the present time at least 31 thousand rubles.

According to a survey of state bodies for the protection of cultural heritage sites, 52 constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the total area of \u200b\u200bbuildings and structures related to the objects of cultural heritage and requiring restoration is more than 9 million m 2.

Thus, only in these regions can we talk about the needs of financing restoration work in the amount of at least 290 billion rubles.

To promising sources of formation financial means To ensure the safety of cultural heritage objects can be attributed:

1) Legislative delimitation of property rights on cultural heritage facilities as a means of determining real owners who can bear the burden of costs of maintaining cultural heritage objects;

2) privatization of cultural heritage objects as a method for diversifying the burden of costs for the content of a certain part of cultural heritage objects on a wide range of owners;

3) engaging as additional sources of financing costs for ensuring the safety of the objects of the cultural heritage of the rent for the use of land plots within the territories of the territories of cultural heritage sites;

4) the creation of the most effective mechanisms for accumulating and spending funds in the field of state protection, the preservation, use and popularization of cultural heritage facilities.

Organization privatization of cultural heritage objects, which should be carried out after the legislative delimitation of ownership of them requires preliminary creation required conditions.

In compliance with the necessary conditions, privatization even the investment attractive part of the cultural heritage facilities can bring significant funds.

Transfer of 1 million m 2 Monument buildings in private ownership, subject to their new owners of security obligations, it stimulates the restoration work on these facilities by the amount of approximately 2.5-3 billion rubles, the activation of the restoration industry, an increase in the production of building materials, the creation of an additional no less 50 thousand jobs. At the same time, the total volume of tax deductions to the budget on various reasons may be from 500 to 1000 million rubles.

In assessing the results of the privatization of cultural heritage facilities, it is advisable to take into account the income from the possible privatization of the landlines associated with them.

At the same time, despite the economic benefits from the privatization of cultural heritage facilities, it should not be considered as a mainstater to ensure the safety of cultural heritage sites.

Firstly, Most of the cultural heritage facilities do not have an investment attractiveness for potential owners, which is associated with the inability to use these objects for their needs (they include buildings and structures engaged in the authorities and management, organizations of culture, education, health care and science, religious and other non-profit Organizations; works of monumental sculpture, burial, objects of archaeological heritage and other objects of cultural heritage of common use), as well as with their technical condition, undeveloped infrastructure, remoteness and other factors.

There is no doubt that in relation to the cultural heritage ruled or in emergency condition and the absence of the Russian Federation, the subject of the Russian Federation or the municipal formation of funds for their restoration, the privatization of such cultural heritage facilities at minimal prices (actually free) can be one of the effective rescue measures Data of cultural heritage objects from the threat of physical loss.

Secondly, With the investment attractiveness of the cultural heritage facility, the possible income from its privatization should be correlated with the lease from the lease of this facility, binding costs for the creation of conditions for privatization and subsequent costs for the payment of compensation to the owner for carrying out work on the preservation of the object of cultural heritage.

6. Legal support in the field of cultural heritage facilities

Cultural heritage facilities are a special type of property, the treatment of which imposes certain obligations on their owners and users.

Features of possession, use and disposal objects of cultural heritage are reflected not only in the basic FZ-73, but also in the Land Code of the Russian Federation, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses, in federal laws on the state registration of rights to real estate and transactions with it "," On licensing certain types of activities "," On the privatization of state and municipal ownership ", other federal laws.

Features of design and construction in the territory of the Russian Federation are determined by the Urban Planning Code of the Russian Federation, in which the territories employed by the objects of cultural heritage are subject to special regulation. In January 2005, a new town-planning code was adopted, in which the features of urban planning activities in the territory of ancient Russian cities, which have a large number of cultural heritage sites, have not found proper reflection.

The competence of the state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities in relation to the objects of the cultural heritage of the Russian Federation is established in federal laws "On general principles Organizations of legislative (representative) and executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation "and" on the general principles of the organization of local self-government in the Russian Federation. "

However, despite such a serious legal framework, ensuring the protection, preservation and use of cultural heritage facilities, there is a need for its additions and changes.

For the implementation of federal laws in full, it is necessary to have the presence of relevant subtitle acts that have not yet been approved.

The Ministry of Culture and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation completes the coordination of the federal ministries of subtitle acts, the adoption of which is provided by the FZ-73, to make them in the prescribed manner to the Government of the Russian Federation for approval.

No provisions on the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects and State Historical and Cultural Expertise, the protection and preservation of cultural heritage facilities is difficult.

In addition, the lack of the above-planned acts prevents the safety of the object of cultural heritage during its sale or transfer to use, since without the definition of the object of protection and borders of the territory of the object of cultural heritage, it is impossible to establish burdens on this object to land within the boundaries of its territory and register an object in Land cadastre.

There is no provision on the procedure for granting the institution of justice to registration of the rights of real estate information related to the objects of cultural heritage and to the identified objects of cultural heritage (prepared by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation), which should be approved simultaneously with the Regulation on the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects ( Monuments of history and culture) Peoples of the Russian Federation.

In the absence of this sub-banner act, the authorities of the Justice may register transactions with objects of cultural heritage, without having information about features and encumbrances of these objects.

There is no provision on the estimated value of the object of cultural heritage, on the basis of which it is possible to determine the cost of the object when privatization and establish the insurance cost of the heritage object.

It is necessary to develop a provision for the assignment of land of cultural heritage objects to historical and cultural land.

Practice has shown that in addition to the subtitle acts to federal laws, it is also necessary to develop new legislative acts and add additions to current legislation.

It is necessary to develop a draft federal law on the delimitation of ownership of the objects of cultural heritage, the adoption of which will allow to cancel the existing moratorium on the privatization of the objects of the cultural heritage of the federal significance. If it is adopted, a ban on the privatization of the objects of cultural heritage of the federal significance and the registration of federal property rights, the rights of ownership of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the rights of municipal property and monuments of history and culture will be included in the civil turnover.

The main features of the objects of cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the peoples of the Russian Federation

Structure of subjects in the field of state protection, preservation, use and popularization of cultural heritage

Required conditions for the organization of the process of privatization of cultural heritage facilities

1. Adoption of the Federal Law on the delimitation of ownership of the objects of cultural heritage and operational formation, coordination and approval of the distinctive lists of cultural heritage sites.

2. Approval of methods for determining the subject of protection of the objects of cultural heritage and the boundaries of their territories.

3. Registration of cultural heritage sites in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (Monuments of History and Culture) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation, indicating the owners of cultural heritage objects on the basis of the information of the distinction lists.

4.1. Determination of the mechanism of deferred entry into the right of ownership, which takes into account the obligatory fulfillment by the future owner of a security commitment.

4.2. Determination of the procedure forced (including gratuitous) withdrawal from the unscrupulous owner of the cultural heritage object, which threatens the danger of complete physical loss or loss of its subject of protection.

5. Installation of the order and features of registration in a single state register of rights to immovable property and transactions with it restrictions (encumbrances) related to the objects of cultural heritage.

6. issuing passports of cultural heritage objects to their owners.

7. State registration of property rights to the objects of cultural heritage and restrictions (burdens) related to the objects of cultural heritage, based on the passport of the cultural heritage object.

8. Ensuring access to a private property facility for the inspection of state bodies for the protection of cultural heritage facilities.

9.1. Approval of the methodology for assessing the value of cultural heritage objects.

9.2. Approval of the methodology for assessing the insurance value of the object of cultural heritage, to determine the amount of damage, which can be caused by the object of cultural heritage.

In general, the privatization of cultural heritage objects is one of possible methods ensuring their safety only for investment attractive objects of cultural heritage (primarily buildings and land), which make up less than 15% of the total number of cultural heritage.

Possible options for making the legal status of land of cultural heritage

Option 1. When registering in a single state register of rights to immovable property and transactions with it (EGRP) of land plots, on which the objects of cultural heritage are located owned, operational management, economic management, lease or gratuitous use of legal or individuals.

* Land plots can be decorated in property, permanent (permanent) use, urgent use or for rent.

* The basis for registration is the availability of guidelines for the objects of cultural heritage and other real estate objects located within the boundaries of the land plot.

* Registration of the land plot to the USRP is carried out after registering a land plot in the Unified State Register of Land (EGRZ) and assigning the corresponding cadastral number with an obligatory location, boundaries and area area.

Option 2.When registering (re-registration) in the USRP transactions with cultural heritage objects (purchase and sale, operational management rights or economic management, lease agreements or gratuitous contracts fixing legal orindividuals relevant objects of cultural heritage).

* Simultaneously with the registration of the transaction, restrictions are registered (encumbrances) to use cultural heritage sites and their territories.

* Restrictions on the use of the territory registered with USRP may be included in the USRZ existing form Land Cadastre either in the form of restrictions on the use of land, or in the form of the contents of the corresponding territorial zone.

Option 3.Including information in the State Land Cadastre (GZK) in the event of a change in the current category of land on the land of historical and cultural purposes when registering real estate objects in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects of the Peoples of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as Registry).

* In GZK, information about the boundaries of the territory of the cultural heritage object (land plots located within the boundaries of its territory) and its contents on the basis of an extract from the registry are submitted.

* The procedure for registering the objects of cultural heritage in the registry requires determination of the subject of protection for each object, as well as conducting the interviewing boundaries of the territories of cultural heritage objects.

Option 4.The inclusion of information on historical and cultural restrictions related to land plots in the GZK when approving in the prescribed manner zones for the protection of cultural heritage facilities.

* Within the boundaries of the territories of each of the assertion zones of protection, a special territorial zone can be formed, in which restrictions on land butter, earthy, urban planning, construction or other activities are established.

* The official source of information on the territorial zone is the executive authority of the subject of the Russian Federation.

Option 5. Direct change of land category on historical and cultural land (it is advisable to use for attractions related to historical and cultural reserves).

* Is carried out by regulatory legal documents of the Government of the Russian Federation, the executive authority of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation or the administration of the municipality within their competencies.

* Perhaps only after the realization of state ownership of land in the prescribed manner.

* A prerequisite is a regulatory legal act on the change in the land category.

The problem of legislative definition of ownership of the objects of cultural heritage in state ownership

Questions relatedfrom the lack of legislative delimitation of property rights:

1. Who indicate as the owner when registering cultural heritage facilities in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (historians and cultural monuments) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation?

2. Who is the passport of the object of cultural heritage registered in the registry?

3. Who is obliged to provide documents for state registration of restrictions (encumbrances) related to the object of cultural heritage?

4. Who carries the burden of content (including the conservation) of the cultural heritage object shall be given to ensuring its preservation?

5. From whose behalf of the privatization of cultural heritage sites in state ownership?

6. Who is entitled to use cultural heritage objects to have revenues from their use after registering the object of cultural heritage in the registry?

Federal Law Out 25.06.02 No. 73-FZ "On the objects of cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the peoples of the Russian Federation":

1. It has determined the need to adopt federal law, the division of the objects of cultural heritage, which are in state ownership, for the federal property, the property of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal property.

2. Suspended the privatization of the objects of the cultural heritage of the federal significance.

3. Suspended the registration of the right of federal property, the rights of ownership of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation or the local government to the objects of cultural heritage in state ownership.

We invite you to take part in our journal! Send suggestions on cooperation, on topics of materials, your articles and comments on. We also invite you to take part in the events organized by the magazine (conferences, round tables, discussions).

This idea is discussed in the Government of the Russian Federation. The decision must be made before the end of 2016

"Heritage Guardians"

The preservation of cultural heritage can be a priority national project of Russia. Currently, the Government of the Russian Federation discusses the proposals of the Federal Ministry of Culture on the inclusion of the "Culture" direction in the list of the main directions of the country's strategic development. The concept provides for implementation in 2017-2030. Priority projects "Preservation of Cultural Heritage" and "Culture of Malaya Motherland".

According to our information, the concepts of these projects are supposed to be submitted in December 2016 at the International St. Petersburg Cultural Forum. If the project receives government support (it is expected that the decision must be made before the end of 2016), the issue will be submitted to the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for Strategic Development and Priority Projects.

Tasks and sense

Project developers rely on approved by the Presidential Decree "Fundamentals of State Cultural Policy", as well as the current "national security strategy of the Russian Federation", according to which culture is one of the strategic national priorities.

Basic principle The priority project "Preservation of Cultural Heritage" stated "preservation through development": "Increasing the availability of cultural heritage sites, cultural and economic development of territories, upbringing and spiritual development of citizens based on cultural heritage."

The project is intended, according to the initiators, to solve the following tasks:

Identification, inclusion in the state register and cataloging of cultural heritage objects;

Improving the state protection of cultural heritage sites;

Conducting scientific research in the field of preservation of the heritage and the development of scientific and project documentation;

Restoration, conservation and adaptation of cultural heritage sites based on integrated programs using foreign experience and best practices;

The creation of a modern domestic restoration industry;

Organization of maintenance and profitable use of cultural heritage facilities, an increase in its accessibility for the population;

Popularization of cultural heritage, including using modern information technologies;

Development of cultural tourism based on the use of cultural heritage sites renovated and entered into a cultural turnover;

Promoting the development of mass volunteer and voluntary motion for the preservation of cultural heritage;

Legal, financial and personnel support of the processes of preservation of cultural heritage.

The project is planned to be carried out in 3 stages: 2017 - 1 quarter of 2018; 2 quarter of 2018 - 2024; 2025 - 2030

According to the concept, at the first stage of additional expenditures of the state budget, and for 2 and 3 stages in the field of cultural heritage preservation, additional funding is planned in the amount of 30 billion rubles (including at the expense of income from the monuments renovated and entered into the cultural and economic circulation. A total area of \u200b\u200b400 thousand square meters. m annually ").

Global context

Judging by the concept of the project, his initiators are perfectly aware that the importance of preserving the national cultural heritage comes far beyond the specialized industry. The project developers have quite carefully studied the latest European experience, in particular, the declaration of the European Union of 2018 by the Year of European Cultural Heritage and Presentation in June 2016 in the European Union of Cultural Measurement Development Strategies foreign Policycorresponding to the most important priority for the European Commission - to strengthen the position of the European Union as a global player. In the documents of the European Commission, the importance of preserving the cultural heritage of Europe is emphasized not only to encourage cultural diversity, tourism development, attracting additional investments, introducing new models of management and increasing the economic potential of territories, but also for the formation and "promotion" of "pan-European identity".

In this context, the initiators of the project are concluded, "it is obvious that Russia, being a country with large quantity The objects of cultural heritage and their national code is as interested in the preservation of cultural heritage sites, since they constitute visual memory and the basis for subsequent development. "

Regional aspect

The project is planned to be implemented primarily in the territory of the regions of Russia with the "high density of cultural heritage facilities": Novgorod, Pskov, Smolensk, Arkhangelsk, Vologda, Bryansk, Yaroslavl, Kostroma, Kaluga regions, as well as in certain regions of the Caucasus and South Siberia. According to our information, the role of "pilot regions" was prepared by the experts of the Tver and Kostroma regions.

Special attention should be paid - In order to preserve not only the heritage objects, but also the cities and settlements themselves, which, according to the fair assessment of the authors of the project, in itself is a national strategic task. Territorial planning of the project will be agreed with the Ministry of Economic Development System Plans for the Development of Social Infrastructure in the Regions. When implementing the draft Ministry of Culture plans to coordinate efforts from the Ministry of Economic Development, the Federal Property Management Agency, Ministry of Economic Development, Ministry of Agriculture and other federal departments.

Plans and indicators

According to the calculated indicators of the priority project "Preservation of Cultural Heritage", the share of monuments, information about which By the end of 2016, 70% should reach 70%, in 2017 - 80%, and since 2019 it should be 100%.

Since 2019 it is assumed restore and enter "In the profitable use" of cultural heritage facilities - 400 thousand square meters. m annually.

Volume extrabudgetary funding "Activities for the preservation of cultural heritage sites" for 15 years is planned to be increased 60 times. In 2016, he must draw up 1 billion rubles, in 2017 - 5, in 2018 - 8, in 2019 - 10, in 2020 - 15, in 2021st - 20, in 2022- M - 25, in 2023-m - 30, in 2024-m - 35, and in 2030 - 60 billion rubles.

At the same time, the volume of attracted extrabudgetary funds from 2018 should significantly exceed the volume of similar state Budget Investments. For comparison, the concept of the project involves them: 2016 - 6.9 billion rubles; 2017 - 8.5; 2018 - 8.1; 2019 - 7.6; 2020 - 9.3; 2021 - 8.9; 2022 - 8.3; 2023 - 10.2; 2024 - 9.8; 2030 - 9.1 billion

True, the project assumes and additional, starting from 2019, financing preservation of monuments from the federal budget - 30 billion rubles. annually.

In general, by the end of 2030, it will be extremely interesting to discuss the situation and pressing prospects with the initiators of the project.

For the "Heritage Guardians" the idea of \u200b\u200bthe priority project "Preservation of Cultural Heritage" commented

Alexander Zhuravsky, Deputy Minister of Culture of Russia:

Preservation of heritage needs to be aware as the priority of socio-economic development

It seems extremely important that among the priorities, which are discussed on the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for Strategic Development and Priority Projects, has appeared culture. After all, culture - along with military-industrial complex, nuclear power and space - the sphere in which Russia globally competitive.

The sphere of culture in Russia needs not just in investing, it needs strategic development and in competent project management. If this is not done, it will gradually lose its competitiveness.

Any country, its citizens is distinguished by a special cultural, civilizational type. If the preservation and development of culture, its competitiveness does not become a strategic priority for the state, then sooner or later, the country, civilization loses its identity, blurred by more competitive civilizations. We see today as european civilization He experiences difficulties with the sociocultural adaptation of arriving migration communities. Including because for "new Europeans", European culture does not seem to be native, attractive and strong. The crisis of pan-European political integration coincided with practically official recognition of the failure of the European project of multiculturalism.

Therefore, today Europe in search of a reliable foundation of its civilization identity appeals to culture, and first of all - to its cultural heritage. It is in it, and not in the supranational political institutions, the European civilization re-acquires (or is trying to find) its own identity. That is why 2018 declared in Europe a year of European cultural heritage.

We have not only with the East a lot in common. We are also united by a lot with Europe and, above all, in culturally, from the point of view of cultural heritage. Recall at least Aristotle of Phiorewanti, remember the Italian architects of Russian classicism. Even crowd historical comparisons - "Russian Venice", "Russian Switzerland", etc. - They talk about how much in our culture is rooted in the pan-European heritage. At the same time, there were periods when European culture had more influenced us, and there were periods when Russia influenced others european cultures. In the literature, theater, ballet, performing arts. And even in architecture, especially if we talk about the contribution of the Russian avant-garde. Therefore, we need to be aware of the culture, the preservation of cultural heritage as a priority direction of the socio-economic development of our country.

Moreover, we have something to rely on: approved by the decree of the presidential basis of the state cultural policy, this year adopted a strategy of state cultural policy. We offer - in the framework of the implementation of these strategic documents - to introduce the preservation of cultural heritage among priority projects, to switch in this area to real project management, which will allow for the foreseeable time to solve many problems formed in two decades. This concerns the reform of the restoration industry, and changes in legislation, and change in the field of historical and cultural expertise, and the introduction of effective foreign experiences, and changes in mental approaches to cultural heritage. A new class of managers of integrated restoration projects, understanding not only in restoration, but also in the economy of culture, urbanistics, modern adaptive technologies.

Everywhere in the world, we are seeing the processes of valorization, capitalization of cultural heritage, the active use of this resource in economic processes, in the development of territories and regions. 40% of the building market in Europe is work with historical buildings. And our monuments are still perceived as a "unprofitable asset". The status of an object of cultural heritage reduces the investment attraction of the object of restoration. So far, conditions are not created, including a tax nature, for large-scale attracting investors and patrons in the restoration sphere, as done in a number foreign countries with comparable cultural heritage.

According to experts, the total investment required to bring in a satisfactory condition of tens of thousands of objects of cultural heritage of Russia is about 10 trillion rubles. It is clear that there are no such funds. And even if they were a magical way suddenly appeared - there are no restoration capacities and such a number of restorers so that these tools are effectively used. Thousands of monuments simply will not be able to reach them to them or when respectively means and power will appear.

Hence, need to change the legacy management system. We need system actions that can radically change the situation. It is not normal when 160 thousand monuments are "hanging" on the state budget, abnormally, when expensive real estate, once adorned our cities, is in a deplorable or even ruined state. The first priority is not even an increase in budgetary investment, but the creation cultivated Cultural Heritage Market, with a variety of forms of public-private partnership, which may come by the patron, investor, entrepreneur. We often love themselves to compare with the United States. So, in the US, for example, the key patronage in the field of culture is not a state (it accounts for only about 7% of total costs of culture), and not money of large corporations and billionaires (about 8.4%), but individual donations ( About 20 percent), charitable funds (about 9%) and revenues from Endoument-Funds (about 14%), which are also formed from private or corporate revenues. I do not urge to reduce the state support of culture, on the contrary. But I suppose, following the experts in this area, which is necessary at a more systemic level to form a multichannel system of cultural financing in general and preserving cultural heritage, in particular.

At the same time, it is not necessary for a mechanical increase in financing the sphere of preserving heritage, and a competent disposal of resources, their regrouping. Public consolidation is needed in the preservation of national heritage, association of state efforts with public organizations, with volunteer movements through which youth can be involved in the conservation of heritage, to explain it to its importance. And, of course, fundamental work is needed to promote cultural heritage, which sets the task of expanding educational activities in this area.

To solve all these tasks, we consider it necessary forming a project office On the basis of AUPIK, which will and generate projects in the area of \u200b\u200bpreservation of cultural heritage, and organize their implementation. It is necessary to show the effectiveness of this approach, to carry out the legacy of pilot projects in a number of regions, to create an effective management model in this area. These must be the projects of the "launching character", which stimulate investment activity, the development of small and medium-sized businesses, the creation of new jobs. Another project office is "RoskultProject" - is created to implement other priority projects in the field of culture, for the implementation of analytical and project activities, as well as monitoring state cultural policies.

And, of course, I repeat, the popularization of our heritage is needed, an explanation of its deep, ontological meaning as an integral part of the national cultural code.

The Ministry of Culture sent the relevant materials to the government with the rationale for the need to consider culture as another (twelfth) priority direction, and as a priority project - "preservation of cultural heritage". The project will be presented in December at the International St. Petersburg Cultural Forum. We hope that this initiative in one or another will be supported. We expect that the decision will be made until the end of 2016.

Oleg Ryzhkov, Head of the Agency for Management and the Use of History and Cultural Monuments (AUPIK):

Why do we have the Academy of FSB, but there is no Heritage Guardian Academy?

The National Project "Preservation of Cultural Heritage" from the very beginning should rely on specific projects implemented in the regions. The idea of \u200b\u200bmaking the preservation of cultural heritage by the locomotive of the economic and social development of several regions of Russia was suggested to us by the experts with which the Ministry of Culture conducted consultations. There are regions with an extremely high density of the concentration of cultural heritage objects, and this resource needs to be used. The involvement of monuments in the economic and tourist turnover should give a positive impetus to the regional economy: in addition to the creation of additional jobs, replenish the tax income base and tourism development, the preservation of heritage will increase the investment attractiveness of the region. The Tver and Kostroma region are recommended as pilot regions, but, of course, the project is designed to sell in all rich heritage regions of the North-West and Central Russia.

The meaning of the project is to the preservation of cultural heritage took a worthy place in the country's economic system. Now the Heritage Resource is all "enjoyed", but adequately does not invest in response. For example, Heritage Resources actively exploit the tourist industry - but does she invest in it? The regions are already income from the development of small and medium-sized businesses associated with the heritage - but does the legacy receive decent investments of regional budgets?

The national project will give priorities for investment, create a situation where the regions and local communities will not passively wait until someone comes and start saving their monuments, create points of economic growth - and will begin to do this. You need to invest in the basic resource, in the legacyand not in business, its exploiting.

Of course, the project has an ideological component: it is necessary to change the attitude of people to the heritage of their region, their small homeland, their country - as to their heritage. This is from my point of view, and there is upbringing patriotism, not abstract calls, but by real projects that local communities should be involved.

Of course, the popularization of architectural heritage, works on its preservation - as a scientific, innovative, creative activity - There must be a significant part of the information policy of the federal media, primarily television.

From our point of view, a certain restructuring of the Heritage Administration System will be required. The emphasis should be dismissed with the "guard" heritage on its "saving". Naturally, not due to the weakening of security and the state control as such, but by embedding these instruments into the system government policy.

Necessary, of course, create professional personnel training system For the sector of preservation of heritage, a system of scientific and educational institutions. Why do we have, for example, the Higher School of Economics, the FSB Academy - but there is no higher school or the Heritage Guardian Academy? Abroad to the preparation of such professionals - In France, for example, from 600 seats in the state bodies of the Heritage Guardia, only 20 people pass. And then, after this, 18 months should be held special training, and only then they are "let's" to the monuments. In Europe, there is a whole specialized industry in Heritage Science, dedicated to the cultural heritage and its preservation, including with the help of the latest physics, chemistry, microbiology.

Auipik we consider as a kind polygon of the National Project. Already today, projects in our facilities are being developed and developed in which approaches to preserving heritage as part of the development strategy of territories and regions are implemented.

We have begun, for example, to work with Ingushetia, an extremely promising project " Cultural landscape Jarah-Ass ", which will make this reserve the point of growth in the republican economy.

We have very interesting project In Uglich, where on the basis of the historic mansion of the winter and adjacent territory, we expect to create a center of handicraft crafts with a fair area, which will combine museum and educational functions with trade and entertainment. And at the same time increase the tourist attractiveness of the city - different ways, Up to the recreation of the technology of production of Russian glass becons of the XIII century, known to excavations.

We continue to work on the project In Peterhof, which involves not only the restoration of the complex of architectural monuments, but also recreation of the national Russian riding school as an intangible cultural heritage. We work on this together with the specialists of the Council on the equestrian heritage of France - they treated such an initiative with great enthusiasm.

An interesting project develops in industrial In the Tambov region, where we plan not only to renovate the preserved buildings, but to revive this estate as an existing economic complex, which will give impetus to the development of a whole territory.

Capital photo: Volunteer Saturday to save the flooded church of the Krochinsky Graveyard (XVIII century) in the Vologda region.

In order to preserve cultural heritage facilities, an improved policy and legislation that this moment It can not always save the objects from outside interference and punish the perpetrator. The main federal law of June 25, 2002 No. 73-FZ, which must ensure the safety of objects and popularize them shows many bars, through which the entrepreneurs are dishonest. The basic principles of the protection of cultural heritage were still in the 60s, but after significant changes in the economy and society in the Russian Federation, the changes in this part of the policy were entitled. The 2002 Law has revealed many concepts that have previously been complemented several times already in later years, including tightened punishment for violations, but the wave of vandalism was not stopped. One such problem is the lack of an effective list of objects taking into account their current state. By the time the state or local government aims pay attention to a particular object, it may already be in the stage of extremely launching without the possibility of restoring the preservation of historical and cultural value. This could also be avoided while improving interdepartmental coordination. The main task of the policy should be the preservation of this historical and cultural potential as an irreplaceable part of the culture and traditions of the state.

To date, there are several major organizations of public control, helping to preserve cultural heritage. Unfortunately, without possessing any powerful powers, they are unable to make cardinal measures themselves, but their intervention often leads to positive results. According to law No. 73-FZ public and religious organizations Can assist local authorities in the preservation and popularization of cultural heritage facilities. So, for example, the biggest and bright example serves All-Russian social organization "All-Russian Society for the Protection of Monuments of History and Culture" (Ipex), established in 1966. The organization has branches in different cities of Russia, unites not only professional architects and art historians, but also those who are not indifferent to the fate of culture. Today, the organization participates in the work of the expert councils of cities, sacrifices funds for the preservation of cultural heritage sites and monitors the immediate state of monuments.

In St. Petersburg, the protection of architectural monuments is engaged in the movement of the living city, established in 2006. The main activity is to preserve the historical appearance of the city by publishing materials in the media, holding rallies and pickets, collecting signatures and send letters to international organizations and authorities. Also, the movement arranges exhibitions and events to popularize cultural heritage and leads the register of lost or in emergency monuments in St. Petersburg. For example, this organization in 2007 managed to collect about 11 thousand signatures against the construction of a skyscraper of the Okhta-Center, as its construction was assumed in a historic place, which violates the landscape of the city.

The Government of the Novgorod Region earlier had a department of the Department of State Protection of Cultural Heritage at the local Department of Culture and Tourism, which in 2014 was separated into an independent organization. The Committee of State Protection of the Cultural Heritage of the Novgorod Region makes accounting of cultural heritage facilities, controls urban planning regulations, monitors the state of objects and much more. On the Committee's website, you can write an appeal or ask a question to the Chair who will be considered as soon as possible.

Today, the disputes about positive and negative sides Privatization of cultural monuments. In 2004, in St. Petersburg and 2008, the privatization program began in Moscow, which allows individuals to buy architectural monuments. Required condition - Preservation of historical and cultural appearance, restoration and protection of the object. The property can be obtained any building that the state exists for sale, except for religious buildings - they are transferred to the ownership of religious communities. However, wishing to acquire a monument of architecture are not so much - the high costs of restoring and maintaining objects, as well as some restrictions on the further use of investors are scared. From January 2012 in Moscow, for example, launched the Ruble program for meter, where the investor can buy a house for 49 years at a price of 1 square meter per 1 ruble per year, subject to the restoration of the dilapidated building.

According to the administration of St. Petersburg, active work is underway to preserve the objects of cultural heritage. For 2014, 537 permits for the restoration of monuments were issued, 65 facilities were included in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (Monuments of History and Cultural) Peoples of the Russian Federation, prepared orders for the protection of 722 cultural facilities. St. Petersburg monitors the observance of borders and the use of the historical territory, as well as the preservation of the historic center of the city. Difficulties causes rapid wear of buildings during high tourist activity - the Hermitage building, which was restored to its 250th anniversary, is already cracking, and there are chips of the top layer of plaster. Many monuments are still in a fallen state, but the actions carried out by the authorities and activists of St. Petersburg give hope for the best. Already in the first quarter of 2015, large funds were allocated to maintain cultural heritage sites:

Restoration work carried out on the territory of the Novgorod Kremlin on the eve of the anniversary of the city, covered a significant area cultural facility. The funds aimed at repairs the Kremlin went to the restoration of the walls, the ceilings of the halls, the Church of Vlasia and others. However, when carrying out these works, despite the preservation of historical layout, the appearance was significantly lost - old bricks, replaced by new, did not fit color gammanor texture. Wooden architecture, while maintained in primeval form. The information portal of the culture of the Novgorod region comments on this as follows: "It makes the fact that recently in the field of restoration work on historical and cultural monuments are going constantly. The funds of budgets of all levels and extrabudgetary sources are involved in their holding, including charitable contributions. " Official statements often disagree with news, so the information agency of the Veliky Novgorod characterizes every tenth cultural monument as located in an unsatisfactory condition.

And yet it is worth noting that today the priority areas for the protection of cultural heritage are:

• 1. Recognition of the primary role of culture in the revival and preservation of the cultural and moral values \u200b\u200bof the peoples of the Russian state;
• 2. Determination of security zones;
• 3. Protection of territories related to the lands of historical and cultural purposes;
• 4. Creating a favorable investment climate;
• 5. Conducting restorers and other works on preserving, improving the state of cultural value objects, monitoring the state;
• 6. Insurance of monuments of history and culture;
• 7. Monitoring the development of terrain located rado with the objects of cultural heritage and park zones;
• 8. Distribution of powers between different authorities;
• 9. Transfer dangerous to production facilities from the territory of historical and cultural significance;
• 10. Conducting engineering and environmental events (vibration protection, wandering currents, environmentalization of city transport schemes, lowering the level of groundwater, the device of storm sewers, vertical layout and improvement of historical territories, berelerting works).

Issuance of permission to carry out works on the preservation of the object of cultural heritage of regional importance, the identified object of cultural heritage

Terms of receipt of the service in OVI

• Who can apply for the service:

  Legal entities

  Individual entrepreneur

  licensed to carry out activities to preserve cultural heritage objects

• Service cost and payment procedure:

  Is free

• List of the necessary information:

  Application for issuing permission to carry out works on the preservation of the object of cultural heritage included in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (Monuments of History and Culture) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation, or the identified object of cultural heritage (research and survey work at the cultural heritage facility) (Original , 1 PC.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund

  It seems to obtain permission in the event of research and survey work on the window.

  Application for issuing permission to conduct work on the preservation of the object of cultural heritage included in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (Monuments of History and Culture) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation, or the identified object of cultural heritage (restoration of the object of cultural heritage, recreation of the lost object of cultural heritage, facility adaptation Cultural heritage for modern use) (original, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund

  It seems to obtain permission in the case of work on the restoration of the window, recreation of the lost window, the window tool for modern use.

  Application for issuing permission to carry out works on the preservation of the object of cultural heritage included in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (historical and cultural monuments) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation, or the identified object of cultural heritage (conservation, anti-emergency work at the cultural heritage facility) (Original 1 PC.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund

  It seems to obtain permission in the case of preservation, counter-emergency work on the window.

  Application for issuing permission to carry out works on the preservation of the object of cultural heritage included in the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Objects (historical and cultural monuments) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation, or the identified object of cultural heritage (repair of the cultural heritage object) (original, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund

  It seems to obtain permission in the case of repair work on the window.

  Document certifying the person of the person submitting an application (original, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund

  A document confirming the powers of the applicant's representative for submitting an application and documents necessary to provide a state service, on behalf of the applicant (when submitting an application signed by the applicant) (original, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund

  Document confirming the powers of the applicant's representative for the signing of the application on behalf of the applicant (when submitting an application signed by the applicant's representative) (original, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund

  A copy of the contract for the development of project documentation for the preservation of the object of cultural heritage (for conducting research and survey work) by the applicant (certified copy, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in the case of research and survey work (stitched, numbered, certified in the prescribed manner).

  Graphic Plan (Schemes) with the designation of seats of field studies in the form of shurps and probe, signed by the applicant (original, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in the case of research and exploration work on the window.

  Copies title leafs Project documentation with a stamp on its coordination or a copy of the letter on the coordination of project documentation by the relevant body of protecting the objects of cultural heritage (certified copy, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in cases of work on the restoration of the window, the device tools for modern use (stitched, numbered, certified in the prescribed manner).

  A copy of the contract for the applicant of the Restoration of the Cultural Heritage Object, tools for the object of cultural heritage for modern use with all changes and additions, applications that exist at the time of submission of the application (if available) (certified copy, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in cases of work on the restoration of the windows, the device tools for modern use (stitched, numbered, certified in the prescribed manner).

  A copy of the Agreement for the author's supervision and (or) a copy of the order for the appointment of a responsible person for holding the author's supervision and a copy of the order for the appointment of a responsible person for conducting scientific guidance (certified copy, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  They are submitted in cases of work on the restoration of the windows, the access to the windows for modern use, repair work, carrying out works on conservation and emergency operations (stitched, numbered, certified in the prescribed manner).

  A copy of the contract for conducting technical supervision and (or) a copy of the order for the appointment of a responsible person for carrying out technical supervision (certified copy, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in cases of work on the restoration of windows, the device tools for modern use, conservation and emergency operations on the window (stitched, numbered, certified in the prescribed manner).

  Project documentation (working) for conservation, counter-emergency work, signed by authorized persons (original, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in the case of work on conservation, counter-emergency work.

  A copy of the contract for the applicant to conservation, counter-emergency work with all changes and additions, applications that exist at the time of submission of the application (if available) (certified copy, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in the case of work on conservation, emergency operations on windows (stitched, numbered, certified in the prescribed manner).

  A copy of the order of the contracting organization on the appointment of the Russian Federation of specialists consistent with this organization and certified by the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation responsible for organizing their respective specialty works on the restoration specified in the approved Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of April 19, 2012 N 349 (copy, 1 PC.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in cases of work on the restoration of the windows, the adaptation of the windows for modern use, work on conservation and counter-emergency work on the window.

  A copy of the contract for the applicant's repair work (in order to maintain the objective state of the cultural heritage object without changing its features that make up the subject of protection) with all changes and additions, applications that exist at the time of submission of the application (if available) (certified copy, 1 pc .)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in the case of repair work (stitched, numbered, certified in the prescribed manner).

  Project documentation (working) or working drawings for local repair work with volumes of volume (list, description) of such works, coordinated with the customer (original, 1 pc.)

  • Mandatory
  • Provided without refund
  It is submitted in the case of repair work on the window.

• Terms of service provision

  15 business days

• The result of the provision of services

  Issued:

  • Permission to carry out work on the preservation of the regional value windows (Working paper, 1 pc.)

• Forms of receipt

  Through a legal representative

You can in the executive authorities of the city of Moscow as part of the pre-trial appeal.

Pre-trial (extrajudicial) procedure for appealing decisions

and (or) actions (inaction) of the Department, his official

persons, civil servants

1. The applicant has the right to file in a pre-trial (extrajudicial) procedure for adopted (committed) in the provision of state-owned solutions and (or) actions (inaction) of the Department, its officials, civil servants.

2. The filing and consideration of complaints is carried out in the manner prescribed by Chapter 2.1 of the Federal Law of July 27, 2010 N 210-FZ "On the organization of the provision of state and municipal services", the Regulation on the features of filing and consideration of complaints of a violation of the procedure for providing public services for the city of Moscow , approved by the Decree of the Government of Moscow of November 15, 2011 N 546-PP "On the provision of state and municipal services in the city of Moscow", this Regulation.

3. Applicants may apply to complaints in cases:

3.1. Violations of the registration period of the request (statements) and other documents required for the provision of public services, as well as the procedure for designing and issuing a receipt
in receiving a request and other documents (information) from the applicant.

3.2. Applicant Requirements:

3.2.1. Documents or information or implementation of actions, submission or implementation of which is not provided for by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow to provide public services, including documents obtained using interdepartmental information interaction.

3.2.2. Appeals for the provision of services not included in the Government-approved list of services that are necessary and mandatory for the provision of public services.

3.2.3. Making fees for the provision of public services not provided for by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow.

3.2.4. Documents or information, lack and (or) of whose unreliability
did not indicated at the initial refusal to accept the documents necessary for the provision of public services or in providing public services,
except for the cases provided for in paragraph 4 of Part 1 of Article 7 of the Federal Law
dated July 27, 2010 № 210-ФЗ "On the organization of the provision of state and municipal services.

3.3. Violations of the provision of public services.

3.4. Refusal to the applicant:

3.4.1. In the reception of documents, the submission of which is provided for by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow to provide public services on the grounds not provided for by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow.

3.4.2. In the provision of state services on the grounds not provided for by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow.

3.4.3. In the correction of assumed typos and errors in issued as a result of the provision of state-owned documents or in case of violation of the established period of such corrections.

3.5. Other violations of the procedure for providing a state service established by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow.

4. Complaints on decisions and (or) actions (inaction) of officials, civil servants of the Department are considered by his head (authorized by the Deputy Head).

Complaints on decisions and (or) actions (inaction) of the head of the department, including decisions made by him or his deputy on the complaints received in the pre-trial (extrajudicial) procedure, are considered by the superior authority of the city's executive power in accordance with paragraphs 5.6, 6 applications 6 To the decree of the Moscow Government of November 15, 2011 N 546-PP "On the provision of state and municipal services in the city of Moscow".

5. Complaints may be filed with the executive authorities of the city of Moscow, authorized on their consideration in accordance with this Regulation (hereinafter referred to as the authorities authorized to considerse complaints) in writing on paper, in electronic form in one of the following ways:

5.1. With the applicant's personal appeal (applicant's representative).

5.2. Mail departure.

5.3. Using official sites of bodies committed to complaints, in the information and telecommunications network Internet.

6. The complaint should contain:

6.1. The name of the Commissioner for consideration of the Complaint of the Authority or the position and (or) surname, the name and patronymic (subject to the presence) of the appropriate official to whom the complaint is sent.

6.2. The name of the executive authority of the city of Moscow or the position and (or) surname, the name, patronymic (if any) of an official, a state civil servant, solutions and (or) actions (inaction) are appealed.

6.3. Surname, first name, patronymic (if available), information about the place of residence of the applicant - an individual, including registered as individual entrepreneurOr the name, information about the place of finding the applicant - a legal entity, as well as the number (number) of the contact phone, address (addresses) of email (if available) and the postal address for which the response to the applicant should be sent.

6.4. The date of delivery and the registration number of the request (statements) for the provision of public services (except in cases of appealing the refusal to accept the request and its registration).

6.5. Information on decisions and (or) actions (inaction), which are the subject of appeal.

6.6. Arguments, on the basis of which the applicant disagree with the appealed by decisions and (or) actions (inaction). The applicant may be presented documents (if available) confirming the applicant's arguments or their copies.

6.7. Applicant requirements.

6.8. The list of documents attached to the complaint (if available).

6.9. The date of compulsory.

7. The complaint must be signed by the applicant (his representative). In case of filing a complaint with personal contact with the applicant (the applicant's representative) must submit an identity document.

The powers of the representative for the signing of complaints should be confirmed by attorney, issued in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.

The powers of the person acting on behalf of the Organization without a power of attorney on the basis of the law, other regulatory legal acts and constituent documents are confirmed by documents certifying its official position, as well as the constituent documents of the Organization.

The status and powers of legitimate representatives of the individual are confirmed by the documents provided for by federal laws.

8. The complaint report is subject to registration for a period no later than the working day following the arrival day.

9. The maximum term of consideration of the complaint is 15 working days from the date of its registration. The term of consideration of the complaint is 5 working days from the date of its registration in cases of appeal by the applicant:

9.1. Refusal to accept documents.

9.2. Failure to correct typos and errors made in documents issued as a result of the provision of public services.

9.3. Violations of the definition of typos and errors.

10. According to the results of consideration of the complaint, a decision is made to satisfy the complaint (fully or in part) or to refuse to satisfy the complaint.

11. The decision must contain:

11.1. Name of the authority considered by the complaint, position, last name, first name, patronymic (if there is a) official who has decided on the complaint.

11.2. Details of solutions (number, date, place of adoption).

11.3. Familia, name, patronymic (if available), information about the place of residence of the applicant - an individual, including registered as an individual entrepreneur, or name, information about the place of finding the applicant is a legal entity.

11.4. Familia, name, patronymic (if available), information about the place of residence of the applicant's representative, who submitted a complaint on behalf of the applicant.

11.5. The method of filing and the registration date of the complaint, its registration number.

11.6. The subject of the complaint (information about the applicable solutions, actions, inaction).

11.7. Installed when considering the complaints of the circumstances and evidence, their confirmation.

11.8. Legal grounds for making a decision on a complaint with reference to the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow.

11.9. The decision taken on the complaint (the conclusion about the satisfaction of the complaint or the refusal to satisfy it).

11.10. Information on the actions carried out by the Department in order to immediately eliminate the identified violations in the provision of public services,
as well as apologies for the inconvenience and information on further actions that must be made to the applicant in order to obtain a state service (in case of complaints) or reasoned clarifications of the reasons for the decision taken (in case of refusal to satisfy the complaint).

11.11. The procedure for appealing the decision.

11.12. Signature of an authorized official.

12. The decision is made in writing using official blanks.

13. Among the measures to eliminate the identified violations, including:

13.1. Cancel previous decisions (fully or in part).

13.2. Ensuring the reception and registration of the request, design and issuance to the applicant of the receipt (when evasion or unreasonable refusal to accept documents and their registration).

13.3. Ensuring registration and issuance by the applicant the result of the provision of public services (when evasion or unreasonable refusal to provide a state service).

13.4. Correction of typos and errors made in documents issued as a result of the provision of public services.

13.5. Return to the applicant money, the collection of which is not provided for by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow.

14. The authority authorized to considerse the complaint refuses to satisfy it in cases:

14.1. Recognition of applicable decisions and (or) actions (inaction) legitimate, not violating the rights and freedoms of the applicant.

14.2. The filing of complaints by the person, the powers of which are not confirmed in the manner prescribed by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the city of Moscow.

14.3. The applicant has the right to receive public services.

14.4. Availability:

14.4.1. The decision of the court decision on the applicant's complaint with the identical subject and grounds entered into legal force.

14.4.2. Decisions on the complaint taken earlier in the pre-trial (extrajudicial) procedure regarding the same applicant and on the same complaint (except for cases of appealing previously taken decisions in the higher authority).

15. The complaint is subject to leaving without an answer in essence in cases:

15.1. Availability in the complaint of obscene or offensive expressions, threats to the life, health and property of officials, as well as members of their families.

15.2. If the text of the complaints (part of it), the surname, the postal address and email address are not permanent.

15.3. If the complaint does not indicate the name of the applicant (applicant's representative) or the postal address and email address for which the answer should be sent.

15.4. If an authority commissioned by the applicant (applicant's representative) of the complaint before the complaint declarations.

16. The decision to satisfy the complaint or refusal to satisfy the complaint is sent to the applicant (representative of the applicant) on time no later than the working day following the day of its adoption, by the postal address specified in the complaint. At the request of the applicant, the decision is also sent to the email address specified in the complaint (in the form electronic documentsigned by an electronic signature of an authorized official). In the same order, the applicant (the applicant's representative) is sent to the decision on a complaint, in which only an email address is specified for the response, and the postal address is missing or readable.

17. In case of leaving complaints without an answer in the merits, the applicant (his representative) is sent within a period no later than the working day following the day of registration of the complaint, a written motivated notification indicating the grounds (except in cases where the postal address and the email address are not specified in the complaint Mail to answer or they are not readable). The notification is sent in the manner prescribed to send a decision on the complaint.

18. The complaint filed with a violation of the Rules on the competence established by clause 5.4 of these Regulations, is sent within a period no later than the working day following the day of registration, to the authority authorized for consideration by the complaint, with the simultaneous written notice of the applicant (his representative) on redirection Complaints (except in cases where the postal address and email address for an answer is not specified in the complaint or they cannot read). The notification is sent in the manner prescribed to send a decision on the complaint.

19. The submission of a complaint in the pre-trial (extrajudicial) order does not exclude the applicant's rights (applicant's representative) on the simultaneous or subsequent submitting a complaint against the court.

20. Informing the applicants about the judicial and pre-trial (extrajudicial) procedure for appealing decisions and (or) actions (inaction) committed in the provision of public services should be carried out by:

20.1. Placement of relevant information on the portal of state and municipal services (functions) of the city of Moscow and stands in the provision of public services.

20.2. Counseling applicants, including by phone, e-mail, with personal reception.

21. In the event of an establishment during or by the results of the consideration of the complaint of the signs of the composition of the administrative offense or the crime, an official entrusted to the complaint with the authority to consider the complaint immediately sends the available materials to the prosecution authorities.

2. Termination or suspension of the action of one or more documents required for the provision of public services.

3. The applicant is an incomplete set of documents subject to the applicant's mandatory presentation.

4. The documents submitted contain unreliable and (or) conflicting information.

5. The application is signed and (or) filed by an unauthorized person.

6. Appeal for the provision of state-owned persons who is not a recipient of the state service in accordance with the regulations for the provision of the service.


7. Appeal of the applicant for the state service, the provision of which is not carried out by the Department or is carried out in accordance with other administrative regulations for the provision of public services.

Grounds for refusing services

1. The grounds for refusing to accept the documents required to provide a state service in the event that they are revealed after accepting applications and other documents necessary for the provision of public services.

2. Types of work specified in the application for permission issuance do not correspond to the previously agreed project documentation for the preservation of the object of cultural heritage.

3. Suspension of the activities (liquidation) of the legal entity - the applicant.

4. The applicant's absence of a license for the preservation of cultural heritage sites or types of work specified in the application for permit issuance are absent in the applicant's license for the right to carry out such work.

5. Disclaimer of documents with the requirements of articles 5.1, 36, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 47.3 of the Federal Law of June 25, 2002 No. 73-FZ "On the objects of cultural heritage (historical and cultural monuments) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation."