Gift to the opposition: Who needs turmoil in the capital?
In Moscow, passions around the so-called “renovation” continue to heat up.
The list of appetites of supporters of the demolition of Khrushchev buildings is expanding. Just recently, residents of one of the inhabited “Stalinist” microdistricts on Leningradsky Prospekt learned that their strong and architecturally consistent houses in the style of late Stalinist classicism could be demolished, since they were included in the preliminary list. The residents of these houses themselves have not applied to any authorities with requests to improve the quality of their housing and are not planning to move from good Stalin buildings into the unknown. Now they are busy collecting signatures, sending letters demanding to be left alone, and creating initiative groups so that the public process does not stall.
The latest achievement of bureaucratic concern for the residents of strong houses under “renovation” on “tasty” land was the announcement of electronic voting on the Moscow City Council website, which should start on May 15, which in itself can plunge a more or less literate individual into a stupor: essentially, officials offer residents to solve the problem of their property by involving the votes of people who have absolutely nothing to do with this property. Not in court, not at the negotiating table - by electronic voting.
How, with all kinds of electronic voting, skilled people can tweak or reset the vote counters - we have already gone through this joke: take, for example, the recent scandalous vote “Name of Russia”. But that's not even the point. It's a matter of principle.
A good idea - an attack on the sacred cow of capitalism - private property, the inviolability of which is even enshrined in the Constitution. On the other hand, there is a precedent.
Residents of comfortable “Stalin” buildings can be understood. Nowadays they live in houses with thick walls, high ceilings, and their windows look out onto the green belt. They have respectable neighbors, transport, clinics, child care facilities, shops, services and other amenities are within walking distance. Apartments in “Stalinka” buildings are prestigious, not cheap and, as a rule, well renovated.
What in return? This issue worries residents of the Central Administrative District most of all. It's no secret that there is simply no land available for construction in the Central Administrative District. Where and how officials are going to settle the inhabitants of houses in the central districts of Moscow that have fallen under “renovation” is completely unclear. There is a threat that in order to fulfill the obligation “residents will settle within the boundaries of their area,” developer lobbyists will be smart enough to, say, annex some problematic area to the Central Administrative District, build an economy-class ghetto on its territory and busily deport Muscovites from inhabited areas to it. districts.
In addition, the Moscow mayor's office has still not provided the approved designs for new houses and the areas planned for construction to the public.
Can you imagine how many offers there will be for those who are dissatisfied to “be smart” and “thank you” for choosing better options? Klondike! Otherwise, sorry. Your house is located in a quiet area, its windows look out onto a green grove, and you want to stay in the Central Administrative District? - here’s a new house for you in the Central Administrative District, but it overlooks a six-lane highway and an oil depot. Oh, are you still unhappy? Then please move from the Central Administrative District to Tekstilshchiki, and from Moskvorechye to Kurkino. Renovation!
Among other things, no compensation is expected for any repairs done during the move, despite the fact that money for major repairs is carefully collected from citizens, and the money is considerable. Moreover, as you know, a good repair costs time, nerves and a lot of money. The type of interior decoration of apartments in new municipal housing has long been well known. Ceilings, floors and walls that are not always parallel to each other, cheap wallpaper, anti-crisis plumbing and cardboard doors. There is no need to talk about sound insulation and general shortcomings. Usually, it takes a year to a year and a half to “finish” a new home to condition. And again - nerves, time, money.
Fire victims and refugees from disaster sites do not have a choice. But at what point should owners of comfortable housing be forced to change their awl - not even for soap, but for a pig in a poke - that is the question.
As the situation around “renovation” worsens, various anti-Russian mouthpieces are increasingly showing interest in the topic. For example, the odious “Radio Liberty” has already become concerned about the forced resettlement of Muscovites. If the Moscow authorities have gone deaf, then the “voices” and their right-wing henchmen on the grant will burst out with hypocritical groans about unfair relocations, politicizing the fire of discontent.
In the Moscow City Council, it seems, they have recently begun to suspect something similar, but the full danger has not yet been realized, or they consider it greatly exaggerated.
Realizing that if the protest steam is not allowed to escape, the lid will blow off and the mess will fly in all directions, the Moscow authorities agreed to hold a joint rally on the renovation law on May 14. There have been reports that Moscow Mayor Sobyanin is promising to make eight amendments to the renovation law to calm passions.
Fortunately, the Kremlin responded in time to the flaring conflict between the Moscow mayor's office and Muscovites, which threatens to result in large-scale actions of civil disobedience. President Putin, at a meeting of the Russian government, stated unequivocally: “Nothing can be imposed by force and the rights of citizens must be fully respected,” warning Moscow officials that he would not sign a law on the demolition of five-story buildings if the rights of citizens were not taken into account.
This phrase alone should be a cold shower on the heads of the urban planners. On the other hand, city hall officials have already brought the matter to a conflict. The idea of relocating 1,6 million people a year before the elections almost made a gigantic gift to the non-systemic opposition.
What other reaction from Muscovites were the renovation initiators counting on? The housing issue is a matter of principle, a delicate one, and cannot be approached casually. For the majority of the population, an apartment is the most valuable property they have. There is no need to drive people into a corner: the greed of developers will definitely cause a social explosion. And this is in Moscow, where a significant part of the population is politically active and ready to defend their rights. It turns out that little has been done, and someone needs upheaval in the capital again?
English version :: Read in English A Gift to the Opposition: Who Needs Turmoil in the Capital?