City of Prince Vladimir: developers at the gates. Whose side will Themis be on?

A unique national museum or just another residential complex with high-rise buildings?

An ancient Russian fortress city of more than 75 hectares with a princely settlement, roads and an entrance group, hundreds of meters of unique defensive fortifications from the times of medieval Rus' and several hundred burial mounds.

This is a fortress city, which was built by Prince Vladimir to protect Kyiv from nomads. A city in which time stood still after the Mongol invasion, but which has survived to this day and which has not yet been swallowed up by urban development. This is all about the chronicle city of Peresechen, located in the south of modern Kyiv in the area of ​​Kitaev.

But very soon the situation may change catastrophically and irrevocably. Instead of a full-fledged archaeological study of the monument and the creation of a unique national museum, it may soon disappear, and another residential complex with high-rise buildings will appear in this place, because the site is now at great risk of development. And while the Kyiv City Council is renewing land lease agreements, the capital’s courts continue to delay the consideration of cases.

What is the value of the Kitayev tract, at what stage are the court cases and why it is necessary to monitor the future fate of the site, explains the “Honestly” movement.

Archaeological gem

Preserving the Kitayev tract is important for the capital not only because it is another large green area in the city, which risks ending up in the hands of developers. Kitaev is the only surviving ancient Russian medieval fortress within the modern capital, as scientists and activists note.

Historians have repeatedly noted the uniqueness of this territory, because it is an ancient Russian city, which is mentioned in chronicles as Intersection. This fortress city was built together with Vyshgorod, Belgorod (Belogorodka) and Vasily (Vasilkov) during the time of Prince Vladimir. The fortress in the city of Peresechen played an extremely important role in strengthening the defense of Kyiv from the south.

The tract consists of a huge fortress, a settlement, 378 burial mounds of the 10th-11th centuries - none of these have survived even on the territory of Kyiv itself, as well as a long system of caves of the 10th-12th centuries. In addition, more than a kilometer of defensive ancient Russian fortifications, which are not found in the capital, have been preserved, as well as ancient Russian roads, which, according to archaeologists, is extremely rare.

According to historians, Ukrainian cultural figures, including Elena Pchilka, Grigory Skovoroda, Taras Shevchenko, Lesya Ukrainka, Mikhail Drahomanov and many others, once lived in this area.

Therefore, in the future, the territory of the Kitaevsky archaeological complex could serve as a platform for the creation of a separate archaeological museum or a full-fledged park, which is a common practice in Europe.

But for now, this complex can be developed by the KAN Development company, the founder of which is the former deputy mayor of the capital Vitaly Klitschko, entrepreneur Igor Nikonov.

Chronology of events

The Kitaev Nature Reserve again became the focus of public discussion in the spring of 2024. Then a petition appeared with a complex demand for land plots in three nearby tracts - Kitaev, Bolgarskoe and Samburki. The public demanded to protect the territory of the Kitaevsky archaeological complex from development, to terminate lease agreements for these land plots and return them to state ownership. In less than a month, the petition collected 8,692 signatures, but the City Council did not support it.

A few days later, draft decisions on the renewal of lease agreements with PrJSC “Kiev Vegetable Factory” on two land plots in Kitaev with an area of ​​4.82 hectares and 21.61 hectares appeared on the website of the Kyiv City Council. Court hearings continued regarding both territories, which became the main argument for removing the corresponding initiatives (No. 691 and No. 695) from the agenda of the meeting of the Kyiv City Council commission for the preservation of the cultural heritage of the capital.

But the deputy of the Unity faction and the chairman of the commission, Yaroslav Fedorenko, proposed creating a joint working group with the land commission for further monitoring and research of these cases.

However, already on July 4, the Kitaevsky archaeological complex was again at risk of development: the Kyiv City Council decided to extend three lease agreements in the Samburki and Bolgarskoye tracts. Neither the protests that continued under the building of the Kyiv City State Administration, nor the indignation of archaeologists and public activists on social networks stopped the deputies.

In one of the previous materials, “Chestno” examined in detail the course of the scandalous vote, in which the City Council adopted several developments at once that could harm the city’s landscape and the preservation of architectural heritage.

Now more than a month has passed since the vote, and the wave of public indignation has managed to noticeably decrease. At the same time, the situation with tracts cannot be overlooked, and here’s why. Now the Kyiv City Council has not publicly responded in any way regarding the scandalous decisions taken to renew lease agreements in the Samburki and Bolgarskoye tracts, despite the fact that public activists registered relevant petitions and contacted the city prosecutor’s office.

However, we are talking about only three sites out of five, located near the Kitaevsky Monastery and which the media collectively refer to as “Kitaev”. But the other two sites, as noted earlier, are the subject of a legal dispute - and the dynamics here are also still disappointing.

A comprehensive forensic examination will be carried out at the site of the Kitayev tract, within the framework of which they must determine whether an archaeological monument belongs to this territory, as well as whether there are objects and objects of archaeological significance on the site.

Thus, the Northern Economic Court of Appeal granted the request of the current tenant of the site – PJSC “Kiev Vegetable Factory”. At the same time, the request of the Office of the Prosecutor General for the judicial panel to travel to the territory of the Kitayev tract was rejected. These are the results of the court hearings that took place in the case of one of the sections of the Kitayev tract at the end of July.

Progress of court cases

When it comes to land plots in the Kitayev tract and the courts, we are talking about two court cases that were initiated by the Office of the Prosecutor General in September 2023.

Two, since two land plots with an area of ​​21.61 hectares and 4.82 hectares are disputed (court cases No. 910/14450/23 and No. 910/14549/23, respectively)

In fact, the Prosecutor General's claim demands to cancel the decision of the Kyiv City Council of November 29, 2007, according to which the plots were leased to PrJSC “Kiev Vegetable Factory”, and to deprive the city of the right to dispose of them. The main argument is that the territory on which the archaeological heritage is located is state property. That is, the Kyiv City Council did not have the right to enter into any agreements or provide the site for rent, because the Kitaevskoye ancient settlement and the burial mound are indeed included in the list of cultural heritage monuments of national importance.

Thus, the plaintiff’s side is represented by the Office of the Prosecutor General, the Ministry of Culture and the Kyiv City State Administration, and the defendant is represented by the Kyiv City Council and the tenant “Kiev Vegetable Factory”. Hearings of cases in the courts of first instance took place in the winter: in both cases, the judges decided to refuse to satisfy the prosecutor general's claim.

Already in the court of appeal, a hearing on the case of a plot of more than 21 hectares took place on May 21. Based on its results, a comprehensive forensic examination was appointed, which should determine whether the land plot falls within the boundaries of the archaeological monument and whether there are objects of the archaeological monument on it. Accordingly, during the implementation of the examination, all proceedings in the case are terminated.

A few days later, the Deputy Prosecutor General filed a complaint with the Supreme Court with a request to overturn this decision and resubmit the case to the Northern Economic Court of Appeal. However, the Supreme Court refused, and all existing decisions remained in force.

“It already happened”

The consideration of the court case on a smaller plot in the Kitayev tract dragged on, and the appeal hearing took place only on July 17. Then the subject of discussion were two requests from the parties: the Office of the Prosecutor General expressed a request to hold an on-site meeting of the judicial panel, and the tenant demanded to conduct (another) comprehensive forensic examination - identical to the one that should be carried out on a plot of 21 hectares.

The on-site meeting was proposed so that the judicial panel could examine the material evidence of the presence of an archaeological monument and see with their own eyes that there are indeed archaeological objects on the site. The tenant’s side, as expected, opposed it: “Of course, I’m not a big specialist, but I think that archeology is probably something underground. What can you inspect underground? How can you visually inspect underground? We object to this petition,” a representative of PJSC “Kiev Vegetable Factory” noted at the court hearing.

True, in the case of the Kitayev tract, there would be no need to inspect anything underground - archaeological monuments are visible literally on the surface, as the media have repeatedly said. In addition, among the evidence in the cases are scientific reports confirming the presence of a cultural layer on the land plots and emphasizing their location within the Kitaevsky historical area.

The initiative group “Let's Protect the Chinese” noted in the commentary “Honestly”: “There is no sense, no logic, no reason to order a forensic examination. The court has the opportunity to consider the case without ordering an examination. In our opinion, the appointment of an examination will lead to a delay in the consideration of the case, which has already been going on for more than eight months.”

The Prosecutor General also emphasized that the case file contains enough documents and evidence confirming the existence of an archaeological monument. However, this was not enough - the judges rejected the request to visit the site. Instead, the board ordered a forensic examination “for the purpose of a full and comprehensive consideration of this case.”

Oddly enough, the forensic examination sets itself the same goal as in the case regarding another section of the tract - to establish whether its territory overlaps with the archaeological monument and whether there are objects of archaeological significance on it. Just as with the other site, all proceedings are suspended for the period of the said examination.

Now the cases on the Kitayev tract are at a dead end - forensic examinations have been ordered at both sites, although all the necessary evidence and grounds have been provided in order to continue resolving legal disputes without hindrance. But this creates the risk of not only delaying the consideration of the case, but also reducing public attention to the further course of the courts.

Public control and inclusion have repeatedly confirmed their effectiveness in practice, especially in the context of Kyiv, so even now the preservation of the Kitaevsky archaeological complex should not be an exception.