I want to clarify my position on stalls and everything connected with it, otherwise many people ask, but the topic is confusing, and I have spoken out in different places.
Generally
1. I consider one of the important tasks of the mayor’s office to be the search for legal ways to rid the city of buildings that I don’t understand how they arose in the 90s and 2000s. My ideal mayor would deal closely with this issue and personally oversee the disposal process or delegate supervision to a deputy,
Because the appearance of a city is important, and a society that treats its historical cultural objects this way is some kind of wrong society.
2. I believe that small retail trade, cafes, stalls for selling anything, including at metro stations, is good and correct, if it does not spoil the appearance of the city.
In St. Petersburg, they sell newspapers right inside the metro and nothing. In many cities around the world, the exits from metro stations are small shopping centers, and everything is fine. Trading on the streets is a natural part of city life; we need to get rid of ugly buildings, not trade.
3. I consider private property sacred. I think that if a person legally owns a building, then it cannot be demolished without agreeing on compensation with him, even if it is ugly. And yes, sometimes it comes to this (this is in China). The man refused to sell his house and a highway was built around it
4. When resolving such issues, you need to act carefully, because behind them there is a huge tail of problems associated with someone’s property that has arisen inexplicably. From huge shopping centers to coastal cottages - If we now return to the discussion about how this was all resolved, then half of Moscow will have to be demolished.
Based on the events of the night of the long ladles
1. Sobyanin repeatedly appealed to the courts in order to recognize these buildings as unauthorized and regularly lost them - the buildings were built completely in accordance with the law, all permits were obtained. Obviously, through corruption and bypassing the norms, but they were obtained.
But in the summer, the concept of “unauthorized construction” was introduced into the Civil Code. It spells out a procedure that allows long-standing buildings to be recognized as unauthorized constructions. I won’t retell it, it’s better to look at the article yourself.
2. Sobyanin took advantage of the legal loophole that arose and demolished the buildings, but did not care about the fact that this was private property for which there were documents. The legal part of the process was well described on RAPSI.
3. These buildings, of course, are not at all unauthorized - try building something unauthorized on Pushkinskaya near the metro, connecting it to electricity and sewerage. Officials approved them, then they were sold, bought, leased, many years passed and suddenly they became unauthorized. Navalny wrote about this perfectly.
4. I think that the mayor’s office has unraveled a very complex tangle with completely clumsy actions. In my opinion, it was worth negotiating with the owners. Buy these objects and compensate them for their losses.
It's okay to spend taxpayers' money buying ugly buildings for demolition if they're owned. This is much better than simply demolishing them under the cover of darkness and starting a discussion about the legality of all buildings in the city since 1991.
Are Atrium and European legal? Is the Scarlet Sails residential complex legal? Infill developments?
According to the norms, it was allowed to build 5 floors, but 25 were built. Will Sobyanin come tomorrow with a bulldozer to demolish residential buildings as unauthorized buildings, which during the time of Luzhkov were everywhere?
According to media coverage of what is happening
Everyone ran into the hot topic and started throwing in whatever they could. Starting from the fact that people were injured during the demolition, ending with the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church is going to build temples on the site of the demolished stalls
What infuriated me most was the reaction of FBK and Navalny to this - for some reason they decided to involve the vice-mayor for transport Maxim Liksutov in the situation, who, well, has nothing to do with it in any way.
Moreover, they did this on the basis of an anonymous letter, which states that transport hubs with other stalls will be built on the site of the demolished stalls. I wrote about this.
What was even more upsetting was the reaction to the stuffing: people began to demand proof that this was not so, instead of explaining to our political activists that such accusations are not made on the basis of anonymous letters and that the Department of Transport does not supervise the construction of transport hubs, this is done by Khusnullin
1. In my opinion, we need to cover such events more calmly, not throw any nonsense into a heated audience, and if they accidentally throw it in, then refute it in time,
2. Politicians who are trying to bolster their long-standing campaigns with fake news or gain a political point should, in my opinion, be reassured, and not at all supported by the spread of fake news.
Total
I consider these actions to be completely barbaric; problems cannot be solved this way and the mayor’s office is wrong. They are solving the right problem, but instead of adequately solving it with a search for compromises, they took it out of their hands. A good mayor is needed in order to resolve such problems taking into account the interests of the parties involved, and not in order to deprive people of their property behind a piece of paper.
I hope that the owners of the demolished buildings will receive large compensation for themselves.
Sorry for the press release format, but I had to spend all of yesterday explaining my position on different social networks and now I decided to collect everything in one place.
On February 9 this year, the third list of objects for demolition, like , will appear over the next six months.
The press service of the capital’s State Real Estate Inspectorate said: “As of 10:00 on August 29, out of 107 objects, more than 90 objects had been dismantled - this is about 85% of the total. The dismantling of two objects began in the morning so as not to cause disturbance to residents of nearby residential buildings. According to Work continues on nine sites - structures are being dismantled and construction waste is being removed."
“The demolition of objects from the second list will take place in three stages: collapse of the main structure, removal of construction waste and landscaping of the territory. We plan to complete the demolition itself overnight,” Sergei Shogurov, head of the State Inspectorate for Control over the Use of Real Estate in Moscow, previously told TASS.
Work at two sites was temporarily suspended due to design features and increased passenger traffic (on Bolshaya Semenovskaya Street and on Vernadsky Avenue). “The work has been suspended due to an increase in passenger and vehicle traffic; dismantling of structures will resume on the night of August 29-30,” said a representative of the State Inspectorate.
In total, there are 107 objects on the second list, but the owners have already voluntarily liquidated 30 buildings. In total, more than 70 owners confirmed their consent to dismantling, while another 29 “refused to dismantle their buildings voluntarily,” said Alexey Nemeryuk, head of the capital’s department of trade and services. The total area occupied by their facilities was 12 thousand square meters, he added.
The largest objects in the city center are located next to the Ulitsa 1905 Goda metro station. “There are four facilities there with a total area of almost three thousand square meters. 20 units of equipment and 30 dump trucks operate there,” the Central Administrative District prefecture told TASS. Also at night, demolition of the three-story Elektron shopping center on Bolshaya Semenovskaya Street began.
The demolition of two objects from the list - on Kirovogradskaya and Kozhevnicheskaya streets - will begin on the morning of August 29. “At the request of local residents, the demolition of two objects will begin at seven in the morning,” RIA Novosti quotes Shogurov.
The amount of compensation that the authorities will pay to the owners for the demolition will be known later, explained First Deputy Head of the Department of Economic Policy and Development of Moscow Dmitry Presnov. “The amount of compensation depends on how many applications are submitted, we will find out tomorrow,” he said.
According to Nemeryuk, about 85% of retail space tenants from the second list of unauthorized construction have already found premises. According to him, there are now more than two million square meters in shopping centers. m of free space, which offer businesses much more favorable conditions in terms of rent and customer flow: in particular, the rental rate there is 1.5-2 times lower.
First Deputy General Director, Chief Engineer of Mosvodokanal JSC Mikhail Vdovin, commenting on the demolition of objects, said that unauthorized construction near the Moscow metro station Kropotkinskaya could have caused flooding of the metro.
"The specified building is located on existing communications, in this case these are water mains with a diameter of 600 mm, which supply water to the city center. This building is an obstacle to major technical repairs. Due to the fact that the building is located on communications, this leads to an increase in the load on communications and may lead in the future to an accident and a significant drainage of water to the surface. In this case, the water main runs in close proximity to the metro, which can even lead to flooding of the metro," the Moscow agency quotes Vdovin as saying.
As reported, in December 2015, the Moscow government adopted a procedure for dismantling unauthorized construction and approved a list of 104 structures to be demolished. They were dismantled in February. The second list was published on June 28. It included 107 buildings located in zones with special conditions for the use of territories, in public areas or in utility network right of way.
Let us remind you that on August 17, the city authorities approved the methodology for paying compensation for voluntary demolition. According to it, if you demolish it yourself, compensation will be 55 thousand rubles per 1 sq. m. m, using equipment provided by the district prefecture - 51 thousand rubles per square meter.
The owners note that these compensations are small, but many decide not to waste energy on the courts and get at least some money from the city, the media wrote. The owners of the demolished objects in the “first wave” were not promised even that. According to lawyers, of the 104 owners of pavilions demolished in February, 11 tried to challenge the government resolution in the Moscow City Court, but to no avail. The Supreme Court also declared the demolition of unauthorized buildings legal. About a dozen more entrepreneurs have applied to the arbitration court with claims for compensation for damages related to loss of property and lost profits, but so far there have been no cases won.
“The Night of the Long Buckets,” which enriched our law with the “principle of demolition,” became the most discussed legal event of the month and, I am sure, will be discussed for a long time. In discussions, the legal status of demolished objects is often assessed in general terms, saying that they are all “samostroy” or, on the contrary, they have a court decision that “legitimizes” them. Finally, recently the mayor of Moscow said that “these pyramid stalls really threaten your life.”
In law, however, there cannot be general assessments. Each object has its own history. We collected information about all buildings included in Moscow government decree No. 829-PP dated December 8, 2015, which authorized demolition. Detailed information can be found in the tables attached to this post (Zakon.ru editor Yulia Buynaya took part in their preparation). In objects for which there were no court decisions, in - for which there were such decisions. Below are a few observations.
Objects about which the courts did not speak out
Of the 104 objects that went under the bucket, 43 were not the subject of legal proceedings between Moscow and their owners. Moreover, ownership of almost all of these objects is registered. Only two of them were missing from the register (paragraphs 33, 84 in the appendix to the resolution). The basis for the initial registration of rights to the remaining objects, as we found out, were various documents on their commissioning, approved by Moscow officials. As a rule, these were prefects of various administrative districts. The information is shown in the table. Sometimes you can see from the names of documents that the object is temporary or non-capital. However, it was registered as real estate. In some cases, on the contrary, it is directly stated that the construction is capital. There are even two objects registered on the basis of commissioning permits issued in 2008, i.e. during the period of validity of the already modern Town Planning Code.
There are some objects whose origins are unclear. For example, rights to buildings on the street. Taganskaya, 2 (p. 1-8) and Bol. Serpukhovskaya, vl. 17, p. 1 (clause 18) were registered on the basis of certificates issued in 1997 and 1998 on inclusion in the register of property in Moscow - this register apparently replaced the current Unified State Register of Real Estate Rights. There are three objects (clauses 70, 95, 99), the initial registration of rights to which was carried out on the basis of sales contracts. Moreover, in one case the seller was Moscow itself - back in 1992 (paragraph 95).
Objects for which there are court decisions
There remain 61 objects, the legal status of which has already been decided by the courts. They are divided into two groups. One contains cases initiated by the owners of buildings themselves, the other contains cases based on demands made by the authorities.
Owner claims
The owners' claims relate to 11 properties. Obviously, the results of the cases were positive for the plaintiffs. Court decisions either became the basis for registration of the right or allowed it to be preserved. As a rule, the authorities did not go further than the appellate court, trying to prove their case. However, perhaps in vain. In the only case (No. A40-68342/2013), they still went to the end and, as a result, in July 2015, they received a ruling from the Economic Collegium of the Supreme Court (SC) in their favor. The owner of the trade pavilion challenged the refusal to register the right to it. After two rounds of consideration of the dispute, the Supreme Court recognized the refusal as lawful. This conclusion is due to the fact that the site was not provided for the construction of a capital facility and the authorities did not give permission for its construction.
Government claims
The dispute concerns the fate of 50 objects. From this group it is worth immediately excluding cases for which there are no decisions that have yet entered into legal force - there are 6 of them (they are at the end of the table). In one of these cases, the authorities refused the demands. True, this happened yesterday. So the refusal is probably due to the fact that the subject of the dispute has disappeared. The victory was won outside the courtroom.
There remain 44 buildings in respect of which there are judicial acts that have entered into force. The bulk of cases were considered in 2014 and 2015. Until this time, only 4 cases have been completed.
What are the results? Only in three cases were the authorities' demands satisfied. In the rest, the courts refused to recognize the buildings as unauthorized and to authorize their demolition (as a rule, this is how the requirements were formulated) or to recognize the registered right as absent (such requirements were stated much less frequently). Moreover, in this category of cases, Moscow tried to go to the last. Most of the final judicial decisions were made by the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District (in a total of 22 cases, some related to several objects), and five times the correctness of the cassation was confirmed by the Supreme Arbitration Court or the Supreme Arbitration Court. Once the Supreme Court agreed with the decision on demolition. True, the higher courts simply did not refer the case for review and, thus, did not speak out on the results of a full consideration of the case.
It turns out that out of 104 objects listed in the government decree on demolition, the courts, including the highest ones, actually prohibited the demolition of 42. It would be redundant to provide details of each case. The general outline of all matters emerges quite clearly.
As a rule, the disputes were about the demolition of various pavilions built on sites provided by the authorities for temporary facilities. In the late 1990s or early 2000s, the right to such temporary facilities was registered in the Unified State Register. Sometimes, during registration, the temporary nature of the structure was indicated; sometimes, by the time of registration, the objects had already passed into the category of capital on the basis of reconstruction and the examination carried out. At the same time, the city authorities accepted the facilities for operation, coordinated their reconstruction, provided plots for rent and extended the lease period. In the early 2010s, lease agreements stopped being renewed. They began to file claims for the demolition of buildings as unauthorized.
The typical reaction of the courts is that the authorities missed the statute of limitations. They knew very well about the buildings and what these buildings were. There is one exception to the rule on the application of the statute of limitations to claims for the demolition of unauthorized buildings - the statute of limitations does not apply if the building threatens the life and health of citizens. The courts, as a rule, also considered this issue and, based on the expert opinion, came to the conclusion that there was no such threat. Therefore, they had no reason not to apply the statute of limitations. Sometimes the authorities did not even try to state that it was necessary to check whether the construction threatened the life and health of citizens.
A special category is cases in which only a requirement to recognize the right as absent is stated. Here the plaintiffs said: the structure is in fact movable and therefore should be excluded from the register. Such cases ended in failure, since the defendants managed to prove the capital nature of the structures and the validity of registering them as real estate. However, the city managed to win in one case. He made an unusual demand for the demolition of the temporary pavilion (No. A40-21667/2012), not based on Art. 222 of the Civil Code on unauthorized construction. Essentially, this was a claim to vacate the site after the expiration of the lease. The defendant did not say that the pavilion was real estate.
Bottom line
The story of the “night of the long buckets” recalled another story - the vindication of illegally privatized apartments from their current owners. The issue reached the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and ended with a ruling in the case “Gladysheva v. Russia” in 2011. Now the logic of the ECHR in this case is being implanted in the Russian judicial system. Thus, Chairman of the Supreme Court Vyacheslav Lebedev, speaking at a seminar-meeting of court chairmen earlier this week, said that the authorities that authorized privatization and checked documents should not then go to court demanding the return of apartments.
Typologically, this situation is close to the one in which the owners of the demolished retail outlets found themselves. The authorities first allowed them to build something, accepted them for operation (sometimes despite the fact that the resulting object did not meet the conditions of the permit), and then asked them to demolish these objects. It’s one thing if the building is still owned by the person who built it. Here you can try to prove the developer’s dishonesty, as the mayor of Moscow hinted at in another of his famous
Sometimes it happens. You didn’t plan anything and just wanted to sleep, but the story itself came to you. I fell asleep early, then woke up at midnight, wanted to eat, called a friend and colleague, and 15 minutes later we suddenly found ourselves at one of the points of mass demolition of the so-called self-construction in Moscow - on Sokol. So-called, because it turned out to be not self-construction or self-capture. I wouldn’t have woken up, maybe even believed the official Sobyanin media about how everything was legal. I would have believed it before the first attempt to buy at least something from the metro.
The average hipster, who was deprived of the last quickly accessible retail outlets, now thinks something like this: “No, of course, it’s a pity - now there won’t be anywhere to buy anything at all. But how unfashionable this plastic was. And in general, it’s their own fault.” In our country, everyone is to blame. And the average hipster at this moment continues the rhetoric of the girl from the press service of the Moscow Main Internal Affairs Directorate, who told me in well-chosen phrases last night: “The law was broken. Now everything is in accordance with the law."
“Bringing it into compliance with the law” looks like this. I always suspected something like this. Now I know.
We stopped at the demolition of buildings near the entrance to the Sokol metro station from the side of the Church of All Saints. At the central buildings, between the entrance and exit of the metro, their owners stood. They smoked nervously, watching the tractor drive its bucket into the frames. It’s hard not to evaluate the safety of this action for the metro lobby itself, the architectural value of which was seemingly defended last night by “law and order” officers.
- Are you the owners?
- Well, yes. Are you journalists?
- Well approximately.
— Like those from Channel One? The owners from Chistye Prudy just called us. So there they wringed the hands of the owners themselves, and put dummies in the frame so that they would tell how they had no complaints.
On Sokol, Channel One at that moment responsibly filmed the general director of Mosgaz OJSC, Hasan Gasangadzhiev, who reported to the camera that the Mosgaz pipe runs exactly under these buildings, and a hundred meters away the construction of the entire Alabyano-Baltic tunnel is underway, therefore there are no such buildings in this place shouldn't be there. Here the respected Hasan Gizbullagovich got something wrong: the tunnel, not even 15 years have passed, has finally been completed. But the main thing: if buildings are demolished because of a pipe, then, apparently, everything needs to be demolished, including the Church of All Saints, and at the same time the fire station. And don’t forget about the metro line running right under the strategically important pipe.
“We were given a year of time,” the owner of the building continued the story. — On December 8 they said that we have a year for people to slowly adapt and change their places. On February 3, we won a lawsuit against the metro. All documents are available: both for construction and ownership. We sued the metro to allocate land. Everyone won.
On the night of February 9, a tractor arrived to the store owners who won the court case.
- But they don’t have any regulations. None at all. There is the “chief janitor” - he commands the police and the janitors, introduces himself as a janitor - the owner of the building pointed to a man in expensive glasses and a coat, who most actively commanded the demolition under the cover of police and riot police.
“There’s also a colonel there,” says a girl standing next to him. - He doesn’t introduce himself, but we know him - this is the head of the 48th police department (now this department is called the Sokol Department of Internal Affairs. - Open Russia).
On both sides of the lobby there are two buildings. Addresses: Leningradsky Prospekt, 73, building 2, 3. Their owners are much more active. The property rights are in their hands. Arbitration court decisions in 2014 were in their favor too.
Here are excerpts from them:
“As can be seen from the conclusion of the judicial construction and technical examination dated November 7, 2013, the disputed object was erected in accordance with the requirements of the law, the original permitting documentation, is a real estate object, and does not pose a threat to the life and health of citizens or the environment.”
“In this regard, the court of first instance came to the correct conclusion that Valentina 1 LLC acquired ownership rights to non-residential buildings located at the specified address.”
“In this regard, the court of first instance came to the correct conclusion that the disputed object was erected on the basis of the relevant permits from town planning and building codes and regulations, that is, it was erected without signs characterizing unauthorized construction.”
Today the Moscow authorities are informing you that these are unauthorized buildings? This is wrong. The court has more than once sided with property owners. Therefore, the Moscow government decided to make it easier. On December 8, 2015, Resolution No. 829-PP “On measures to ensure the demolition of unauthorized buildings in certain areas of the city of Moscow” was adopted.
According to the resolution, as well as the amendments made to Art. 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on “Unauthorized buildings”, self-government bodies now have the right to make decisions on the demolition of retail outlets without a decision from any court. The prefecture wanted it, period.
But there is still a problem. The retail outlet should be recognized as an unauthorized construction, which was not the case in this case. On the contrary, the arbitrations confirmed the ownership and did not recognize this as an unauthorized construction. Therefore, last night it was decided to come and simply demolish everything under the cover of the police, the Ministry of Emergency Situations and OJSC Mosgaz - in violation of even its own resolution that the State Budgetary Institution "Avtomobilnye Dorogi" should demolish it. I personally didn’t watch Avtodora yesterday, but anything can happen.
What is most striking about this is greed, haste and a complete refusal to set at least some kind of planning horizon. The land lease agreement for the owners of the buildings would have ended in 2020, and then they could do whatever they wanted. But that won’t work. It is not right to wait until the land lease ends. We need it now, urgently, like barbarians. Deal with “these businessmen.”
And hatred, real hatred. State men, who arrived in “kaenas”, full of contempt for any foreign business and with a sense of complete power, command the police. The police and the Ministry of Emergency Situations sometimes make contemptuous comments about “businessmen” who “gave bribes and now will get theirs.” And at the bottom of the food chain is the owner of a just-bankrupt flower shop:
— What was the rush to take the flowers out into the cold and not wait at least half an hour until our car arrived? What's happening to you? Are you completely mad?
“Finish it,” the Channel One producer commands the operator. - Now the woman's squealing will begin.
Women are trying to stack flowers so they don't scatter on the sidewalk.
— It’s good that the temperature is zero. Maybe some flowers will survive,” another woman worries.
And suddenly he abruptly turns to the topic of the Constitution:
- You understand, they violated the Constitution. Article 35 of the Constitution states that no one can be deprived of their property except by a court decision. But they didn’t have any trial. They lost all the trials. A new trial was scheduled for February 25. Yes, just now they took everything and demolished it.
At the moment when the owner of a flower shop, who has just been ruined by the authorities, begins to quote the Constitution of the Russian Federation, I would be very tense if I were in the position of the authorities.
The official SUVs gradually drove away. There wasn't much demolition - more like a pogrom. The owners were left to clean up the mountains of garbage and furniture taken out the next morning. Bring it into compliance with the law. We won another article of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
— Tell me, from what taxes will your salary be paid when you destroy the last source of income for businessmen in the country? — I sadly asked the police officers guarding the pogrom.
“Apparently, the Rotenbergs will pay them,” a completely random passer-by noted.
The period allotted to the owners of 97 dangerous structures, which the mayor’s office considered unauthorized construction, for their voluntary dismantling expired exactly at midnight on February 9. Previously, the owners were sent notices of the need to demolish illegal structures.
All buildings erected without permits in high-risk areas began to be demolished in Moscow on the night of February 9. The areas where they were located will be landscaped soon. In total, all these unauthorized construction projects occupied about 50 thousand square meters of public space in the city.
In December last year, the Moscow government approved a list of 104 objects to be demolished first. It includes buildings erected without permits and posing a real threat. It is alleged that xx was illegally built in places where important city communications pass: gas pipelines, cable lines, water pipes, lighting lines.
2. First of all, I arrived at the Sukharevskaya metro station. There was real movement here.
3. Most of the tenants and owners did not vacate the premises, protests and clashes with the police began.
4. People quickly carried out things and goods, loaded them into trucks and cars.
5. If everyone was notified of the demolition, then why didn’t they vacate the premises themselves? Did you think they wouldn't demolish it?
6. Closer to one in the morning, the police pushed back all the people who had gathered around the round pavilion to begin demolition.
7. The excavator bucket hit the glass of the building with a creak. Thus began the night of dismantling in Moscow.
8. Literally 20 minutes later, the pavilion already looked like this. The structures broke very easily.
9. For some reason, the workers manually broke all the glass before starting to operate the equipment. The fragments flew out onto the roadway; turning cars did not see them.
10. People loaded furniture, cabinets, sofas, food and other goods into their trucks to take them away from Sukharevskaya Square forever.
11. There is devastation inside the pavilion.
12. Near metro stations, unauthorized construction can become a possible source of collapse of vestibules, smoke, and crowding in the event of an emergency.
13. Workers carefully removed the cell stations from the roof of the building.
14. An hour and a half later, after the demolition began.
15. Near the Chistye Prudy metro station are probably the most legendary shopping pavilions. This point has always gathered around itself many different citizens, homeless people, alcoholics and other dubious personalities.
16. Personally, to be honest, I’m really glad that these buildings around the metro exit have finally been demolished.
17. If you do not agree with the demolition of the pavilions on Chistye Prudy, then look at old photographs.
18. A little after one in the morning they began to demolish the right building.
19. They say there was good shawarma here, but I have never tried it here.
20. Self-construction near city communications threatens a gas explosion, burns, electric shock, poisoning and many other accidents.
21. An hour and a half later, the second pavilion was actively demolished. Of course, it all looks epic!
22. But I think these buildings will be demolished for more than one night.
23. A whole era has passed, one might say.
24. Can you imagine that trams will now be visible from the square? This is simply wonderful!
25. Before exiting the Kropotkinskaya metro station, small pavilions were demolished by 2 am.
26. The buildings turned out to be completely fragile, more like temporary ones.
27. There were some minor hiccups with the pavilions outside the exit from the Kropotkinskaya metro station. When I arrived, they had not even begun to dismantle them yet.
28. The doors of some stalls had to be broken first.
29. The fact is that many owners have not even emptied their pavilions of things and goods.
30. But the workers carefully carried all the goods outside, did not throw anything away or break anything.
31. The toilet at the beginning of Gogolevsky Boulevard was also demolished.
33. The building at the exit from the Arbatskaya metro station.
34. It’s amazing how anything was built next to the Ministry of Defense.
35. But this building will be more difficult to demolish than the previous ones, because the building is quite solid, built of brick. There will be a lot of garbage to take out.
36. I arrived at the Dynamo metro station already closer to 4 in the morning. All the stalls here were demolished instantly.
37. Thank you for your attention.