Our story
LOOK AT THE NUMBERS
What can be done
(In)Valuable Heritage:
The Future of Historic Residential Buildings in Russia
Russia has over 150,000 cultural heritage sites and historic buildings, while almost every sixth of them is in unsatisfactory condition. On top of that, thousands more of valuable historic buildings without cultural heritage site status remain neglected.

Local initiatives by Russian federal and regional authorities merely manage to preserve some of the most significant cultural heritage sites, such as kremlins, palaces, fortresses, and mansions.
While the issue of preserving the historic centers of Russian cities is generally accepted to be focused on the protection of cultural heritage sites recognized by the state as "monuments", we believe that this problem critically needs a broader prespective, as thousands of valuable historic buildings without official heritage status remain overlooked and face the danger of decay.
What awaits Historic homes and How to Address their uncertain future?
Historic City Centers:
More Than Just Cultural Heritage Sites
The character of our historic city centres is shaped not only by widely recognised architectural landmarks, but also by ordinary historic buildings that often lack cultural heritage site status, and yet are valuable.

With this study the DAL.TEAM aims to raise the issues facing historically significant residential buildings that shape the architectural character of the most Russian city centers. We focused mainly on residential buildings specifically, because they are exposed to the greatest risk of loss.

Historically valuable residential buildings are not only those with protected status (cultural heritage sites or historically valuable urban-forming objects), but also those currently lacking protection. The loss of such buildings follows an inertia-driven scenario, posing a serious problem that worsens each year. In this study, we assess the scale of this issue for the first time, using statistical data, and propose possible solutions.

The scale and objects of the study
A detailed analysis of historic buildings was conducted in Samara, Rostov-on-Don, Irkutsk, Tomsk, and Nizhny Novgorod. Not only do these cities possess a unique historical character, but also they draw attention and raise concerns within the expert and preservation communities regarding the degradation of historic environments and the ongoing search for preservation solutions.



Let's take a closer look at the levels of protection for historic buildings in Russia.
  • Cultural Heritage Site has official status as a historic and cultural monument, established by the Federal Register. Demolition is prohibited. The process of repair and restoration is significantly complicated.

    Historically Valuable Urban-Forming Object – it’s a status designated for lesser-valued buildings, confirmed under the protection of historic settlements. Demolition is prohibited. The process of repair and restoration is relatively easier but still requires special approvals.

    Historically Valuable Object has no protected status, yet the building has significant historical value. Not protected from demolition. The process of repair and restoration is the simplest due to the absence of special licenses and documentation requirements.
2009
2022
Archangelsk, Sovetskikh Kosmonavtov Avenue, 64
Cultural heritage site of regional significance
"House of P.N. Grinfeldt"
2015
2023
Tomsk, Mel'nichnaya Street, 29
2021
2023
Samara, Krasnoarmeyskaya Street, 60
Cultural heritage site of regional significance
"House of Merchant Chelyshev"
2019
2022
Nizhny Novgorod, Gruzinskaya Street, 35
Cultural heritage site of regional significance
"House of Shternova"
Hidden Legacy:
the Historical Significance of Housing Stock
Currently, there are more than 30,000 pre-revolutionary era multi-apartment buildings in Russia that potentially hold historical value. This accounts for 5% of the total volume of residential buildings in Russia. Moreover, the process of granting buildings protected status is quite subjective.
Hidden Legacy: the Historical Significance of Housing Stock
Currently, there are more than 30,000 pre-revolutionary era multi-apartment buildings in Russia that potentially hold historical value. This accounts for 5% of the total volume of residential buildings in Russia. Moreover, the process of granting buildings protected status is quite subjective.
In historic cities, valuable buildings can make up 10% to 30% of the city's total residential construction.
Cultural heritage site
Derbent, Pugina Street, 26
Historically valuable urban-forming object
Derbent, Lenina Street, 44
Historically valuable object (nо protected status)
Derbent, Buynakskogo Street, 31
Only a third of historic settlements in Russia have protective designations that include a list of historically valuable urban-forming objects. In the remaining 70% of cities, buildings are left unprotected against the loss of their historical character and demolition.
Most of the valuable buildings in historic centers are not protected from decay and demolition:
Currently, there is no legal framework for preserving such buildings after residents have been resettled. Statistics show that only 2-3% of all decommissioned buildings are reconstructed, while the number of historically valuable buildings deemed unfit for habitation is significantly higher.
If a valuable building without protected status is included in a resettlement or residential renovation program, it will likely be demolished.
Designating a building as a cultural heritage site is
a means of preventing the demolition of historic structures when no other preservation options are available.
Urban-forming historic buildings are often demolished before their historical or cultural significance is officially confirmed.
Nizhny Novgorod
Nizhny Novgorod
Rostov-on-Don
Rostov-on-Don
Samara
Samara
Tomsk
Tomsk
Irkutsk
Irkutsk
Historically valuable housing stock
Houses becoming dilapidated in 20-25 years




In the cities studied, 20% to 60% of historically valuable residential buildings lack legal protection from demolition, risking the loss of the historic character of Russian city centers.
Nizhny Novgorod
Nizhny Novgorod
Rostov-on-Don
Rostov-on-Don
Samara
Samara
Tomsk
Tomsk
Irkutsk
Irkutsk
Irkutsk
Without protected status
With protected status
With protected status
Without protected status
1 house equals 20 real buildings




In the cities studied, 20% to 60% of historically valuable residential buildings lack legal protection from demolition, risking the loss of the historic character of Russian city centers.
Promising Opportunities for Protecting Valuable Buildings
Successful examples of restoring and repurposing historically valuable residential buildings to meet contemporary urban needs already exist. There are currently two perspectives on their future: some buildings can remain as residential properties, restored with improvements to meet the needs of modern city dwellers, while others may be adapted for new uses. For example, certain buildings may be transferred for use by small businesses, with their status changed to non-residential.
Point at the picture
to see transformation.
2017 - 2022
Nizhny Novgorod, Piskunova Street, 37, Cultural heritage site of regional significance "House of F.I. Obzhorin-Korotin", 1910 (Major renovation conducted in 2019)

2015 - 2018
Samara, Frunze Street, 94, Cultural heritage site of regional significance "Pozern Estate", 1862 (Major renovation conducted in 2018)

2018 - 2021
Moscow, Lyalin Lane, 10/14, bldg. 1, Cultural heritage site of regional significance "The Main House of the City Estate of S.G. Popov - P.D. Yelagin", 1840 (Major renovation conducted in 2019)

2018 - 2021
Samara, Brothers Korostelevs Street, 127 (Facade restored in 2020 by volunteers from the "Tom Sawyer Fest" project)

2021 - 2022
Irkutsk, 5th Army Street, 35 (Painted in 2022 by volunteers from the "Facade" project, funded by the "Attention" Foundation)

2021 - 2022
Penza, Chkalov Street, 2 (Facade restored in 2020 by volunteers from the "Tom Sawyer Fest" project, funded by the "Attention" Foundation)
2014 - 2018
Moscow, public transport stop pavilion "Krasnostudencheskiy Passage" (Cultural heritage site of regional significance "Cast Iron Tram Stop Pavilion," early 20th century)

2018 - 2019
Moscow, Khokhlovsky Lane, 10, bldg. 1 (Cultural heritage site of regional significance "City Estate of the 18th-19th centuries - Moscow Land Survey Office")
2019 - 2020
Saint Petersburg, Bolshaya Zelenina Street, 43a, letter B (Cultural heritage site of regional significance "Mansion-office and library building of the F.Y. and N.Y. Kolobovs’ Sawmill Production")
2012
Irkutsk, 130th Kvartal, before and after renovation conducted in 2012

Scroll to see
transformation.
2017-2022
Nizhny Novgorod, Piskunova Street, 37, Cultural heritage site of regional significance "House of F.I. Obzhorin-Korotin", 1910
(Major renovation conducted in 2019)
2015-2018
Samara, Frunze Street, 94, Cultural heritage site of regional significance "Pozern Estate", 1862
(Major renovation conducted in 2018)
2021-2022
Irkutsk, 5th Army Street, 35
(Painted in 2022 by volunteers from the "Facade" project, funded by the "Attention" Foundation)
2014-2018
Moscow, public transport stop pavilion "Krasnostudencheskiy Passage"
(Cultural heritage site of regional significance "Cast Iron Tram Stop Pavilion," early 20th century)
2019-2020
Saint Petersburg, Bolshaya Zelenina Street, 43a, (Cultural heritage site of regional significance "Mansion-office and library building of the F.Y. and N.Y. Kolobovs’ Sawmill Production")
2012
Irkutsk, 130th Kvartal
Before and after renovation conducted in 2012
Enhancing Preservation
Efforts for Historic Structures
The challenges of preserving historic city centers in Russia go beyond the question of whether or not valuable sites and buildings have protected status. They affect various aspects — housing, land, politics, heritage protection. We have compiled recommendations that could improve the situation with historic buildings in our cities and prevent the most pessimistic scenarios we have described. Although generally, more can be done than we suggest, we believe these recommendations to be significant and realistic in the medium term. We see a number of institutional and legislative measures that could enhance the effectiveness of current practices, increasing the chances for the preservation and integration of historic residential buildings into the city’s economy.
This will establish a mechanism to grant preservation status to valuable buildings lacking comprehensive historical significance. Currently, this status reserved only for officially recognized historic settlements.
This will enable official oversight of the preservation of some historic sites while only slightly complicating the renovation or restoration process.
This will enhance the knowledge of municipalities and regional authorities about the procedure, thereby expanding its potential application.
Currently, each region can establish additional criteria for excluding buildings from resettlement programs at their discretion. As a result, buildings may deteriorate for years, caught in a "limbo" between different legal mechanisms.
These management companies can draw public attention to the sites and prepare them for transfer to investors.
3
1
2
Designating protection lists for historic settlements that identify historically valuable city-forming objects
Issuing federal guidelines and explanations regarding the reconstruction of multi-apartment buildings after their conversion to non-residential use
4
7
9
Expanding the legal definition of historically valuable urban-forming objects
Improving the resettlement procedure for dilapidated housing to prevent buildings from falling into a ‘gray zone’
5
Creating local-level operators for the transfer of properties
Increasing transparency and systematic work with data
6
Creating a national agenda for historic preservation with performance metrics for authorities in dealing with historic properties
8
7
Collaborating with urban preservationists and activists
Sharing best practices for creating a community of like-minded individuals who will work together to preserve the historical character of Russian cities
An indirect but critically important measure is to focus on improving and regularly updating data on residential buildings, as well as their level of deterioration.
At present, most examples of successful work with historically valuable sites result from joint efforts between local communities and municipal and regional authorities.
Read the full study in russian here
SHARE
We thank the following for providing and verifying data, expert comments, and supporting the study:


Boris Pasternak, top-tier restoration architect, member of the Federal Council for Cultural Heritage of the Russian Ministry of Culture. Anna Davydova, preservationist, coordinator of the "Tom Sawyer Fest — Nizhny Novgorod" historic environment restoration festival, first deputy director of ANO "ASIRIS." Nikita Kirsanov, Chairman of the Committee for the Preservation of Historical Heritage of the Tomsk City Administration Architecture Department. Vitaly Stadnikov, Chief Architect of Samara (2012-2013), Advisor to the Governor of the Samara Region (2017-2021), member of the Scientific and Methodological Council for Cultural Heritage under the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation. Sergey Mayarenkov, entrepreneur, expert at the Siberian Laboratory of Urban Studies. Roman Shmakov, employee of the "Zaraysky Kremlin" State Museum-Reserve
Research Team

Authors
Alexander Pchelintsev
Artemy Skopin
Ekaterina Ryabinina
Maria Karaselnikkova
Nikita Iskusov
Tatyana Minaeva
Volunteers
Irina Sergeeva
Irina Tyuleneva
Sofya Butorina
Sofya Finoshina

Design and layout
Darya Bartosh
Ksenia Platonova
Mariam Gazizova
Elina Museeva

Editor
Tatyana Orlova
DAL.TEAM – a project-consulting company working with historic areas and individual properties.

Website
dal.team
project@dal.team
+7 (495) 487-32-11