Old Yerevan and Young Voices Clash

In the petition reference is made to the “Old Yerevan Project”: “The developers,” the text reads, “want to take possession of the Little Singers of Armenia choir’s building, to demolish it and use the entire property for their project.” It continues that due to “The authorities’ passivity and the aggressive behavior exhibited by the developers,” the matter will end up in the courts, “most probably in the European courts,” which could “drag on for many years.” To be able to continue their work, the choir would need a new location, which could cost $5,000 a month.

The Old Yerevan Project presents itself as a program of urban development aimed at preserving the historic the old city of Yerevan. Photos on the website www.oldquarter.am document the demolition of those buildings, and the reader is to assume that they will be reconstructed, to conserve the original design and structure. Instead, it appears that a “tourist pedestrian zone” is to come into being, and “comfortable showrooms, cafes, restaurants … exhibition halls and museum-shops, art galleries, small hotels … are expected to be built.” Indeed the name Old Yerevan should not be taken literally; it “is conditional and does not mean the creation of an ethnographic quarter, but the re-creation of the historical and architectural environment. In the architectural interpretation of the project, the harmony of old and new forms is used….”

According to an article in EVN by Lilit Margaryan on April 4, this is not the whole story. (https://www.evnreport.com/raw-unfiltered/chronicles-of-the-old-yerevan-quarter) In the 1970s, architect Levon Vadanyan had the idea of protecting the buildings in the historic area that go back to the pre-Soviet era and are characterized as “black buildings” for the use of black stones, but to no avail. Demolition began in the Soviet period and continued even after independence. By 2005 there was very little left and in that year the Old Yerevan Project was set up. The designated area, enclosed by Arami, Abovyan, Byuzand and Koghbatsi Streets, was divvied up into five lots and auctioned off to three private companies. Years later most of the area was declared to be eminent domain and was taken over by the Old City Company. The plan for restoration was indeed an urban development plan, foreseeing non-residential buildings, cafes, restaurants, galleries, shops, etc. all under a 7,000-square-meter glass dome. The historical monuments originally located on the site had been divided into three categories: those to be restored, those to be rebuilt with what was left of the original stones, and those to be demolished and replaced by new structures.

According to an earlier article by Ani Mshetsyan in ArmInfo, there was an interdepartmental consultation in 2017 in which Vardanyan participated, with Narek Sargsyan, chairman of the State Committee for Urban Development of RA, and employees of the Ministry of Culture and Yerevan City Hall. (https://finport.am/full_news.php?id=31291&lang=3) At that meeting, plans were discussed for implementation, which parts of the area and which buildings were to be restored or reconstructed. Mshetsyan refers in the article to plans by Vardanyan to include a two-story underground parking lot as part of the project.

The home of the Little Singers on 23 Arami Str. fell victim to the construction work. Lilit Margaryan reports that Vardanyan, as author of the project, had slated the building for dismantling and reconstruction at any rate, on grounds that the sidewalks were too narrow and had to be widened to three meters. The building was “on the edge of the street,” he said, and “it would be taken apart and moved back three meters. This means we are keeping the building in the same area,” he is quoted as saying.

Be that as it may. The fact is, construction work on the property where the building stands was carried out, with authorization of the Yerevan Municipality at the time, and in violation of technical requirements related to urban development. Due to the incompetent work, the building suffered massive damage. Reportedly the Ministry of Culture filed a criminal lawsuit with the General Prosecutor’s office. Since then the ministry has been phased out.

An Expert’s Evaluation

Michael L. Sahakian, a technical consultant, examined that matter and issued his findings on March 27, 2019 to the Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, with copies to the Mayor of Yerevan Haik Marutyan and Chairman of Urban Development Vahagen Vermishyan. In introducing his study of the failed excavation, he stated that he himself, “in 50 years of Project Management, Engineering and Construction internationally, … has experienced such a predicament due to natural causes but never seen one with such human incompetence.” He added that a Site Safety Manager, Hamo Hayrapetian, certified by the City of New York, accompanied him in his inspection and shared his conclusions.

Sahakian’s document explains the technical reasons for the disaster deriving from the faulty construction work, which led to accumulation of excessive liquid, aggravated by rainfall, heavy traffic, and other factors. The storm drain catch basin at Arami Street and Byuzand collects surface runoffs, but the water has nowhere to drain except underground. “All four sides may collapse anytime due to various causes,” he writes, and points to the “junction of Arami and Teryan adjacent to the Armenian Little Singers International  Building, a landmark of Armenian architecture.” He forecasts the collapse of the structure, which “may involve loss of human lives and public property not to mention the landmark building.” He specifies that it is not a question of “if” but “when” the disaster would occur, which would necessitate closing the road and entail a huge financial burden for reconstruction.

In his view, this very complex problem requires coordination by the City Building and Safety Department, with the cooperation of experts in foundations soils who have experience in excavation. In addition, “an expert licensed structural engineer is conjunction with the foundations expert jointly need to study and design the remedy” which entails “a complete constructability review.”

The report concludes: “Both the writer and the Safety Manager are American Armenians with Armenian citizenship also. We have supported the Prime Minister from the days of the amazing Campaign and Revolution. We continue to strive for a better Armenia. We think it would be an unfortunate situation if a disaster occurs; it won’t go on the account of the past government but on the watch of the present one in the eyes of the world and the opposition.”

Protecting Architectural History

How should one preserve the architectural heritage of a nation? Since the collapse of the Berlin Wall 30 years ago and the subsequent reunification of Germany, followed by the independence of the former Soviet republics and the regained sovereignty of nations of eastern Europe, enormous efforts have been made to revive the beauty of great urban centers, especially in the capital cities. In Berlin, Warsaw, Budapest or Prague, to name a few, this has come about through careful restoration of architectural wonders that had fallen into decay, or outright reconstruction of those deemed past repair. The results vary in excellence but where the aim has been to recover the past architectural achievements, replicas of the original buildings have come into being that maintain the integrity of the original, to the degree possible.

In the case of the Old Yerevan Project, it appears that the aim of project author Vardanyan was not to restore monuments but to “recreate an environment.” He has compared his vision to the Vernissage open air market in Yerevan, saying that the current one is “in an embarrassing state.” He says one should “imagine a luxurious version of the Vernissage,” where there would be makers and sellers of carpets, or silver jewelry and the like. As for solving the problem of those dismantled buildings, whose stones have disappeared or been severely damaged, he thought the problem was not restoration of monuments but what he calls the recreation of the “environment“ of the old city. “I do not need the sign to say ‘Monument’,” he explained in 2014, “I want my grandchildren to grow up and see that Yerevan looked like this in the 19th century.” (https://www.armenianow.com/society/59183/armenia_old_yerevan_project_presentation)

But did Yerevan look like the drawings of the project? For architect Karen Balyan, the Vardanyan approach is “pseudo-architecture and a theatrical approach to architecture.” One should restore historical structures, in Balyan’s view, as has been done in Tbilisi for example, not build anew. For architect Sashur Kalashyan, a member of the Yerevan City Hall Urban Development Council, Vardanyan’s idea is artificial, and would create not an urban environment, but a public resort zone.

For the Little Singers of Armenia the issue goes beyond aesthetics. On April 15, A. Vardanyan, who is the Head of the Division of the Programs of Special Regulation of Urban Development Activity, responded to the petition issued on behalf of the Little Singers. Welcoming the professional contributions made by the choir, the writer expressed his concern for the situation caused by the construction work associated with the Old Yerevan Project and announced that his office had sent an appropriate letter to the construction companies “Old City” CJSC and “EMC” CJSC, urging them to implement the necessary measures with regard to securing, maintenance and sale of existing property at the designated location.