“If I do something, something works out”: how Dmytro Petrov has protected historic Kyiv for years

In 2017 year, Dmytro Perov, then a third-year student at the Faculty of Law, saw strangers dismantling the roof of a historic house on Korsun Street in Kyiv. He called the police, but the law enforcement officers did not come. Then Petrov went to talk to local residents, gathered people, and together with them went to the district police department.

The house that was being torn down was part of the Dmitriyev estate in Podil. This story became one of Dmitro’s first large-scale experiences in protecting Kyiv’s historical development.

“Are they tearing down some historical landmark again? Oh, right, I’m a lawyer!” — that’s how he recalled his reaction to what was happening.

Perov filed a report with the police, and then began to pursue official protection of the buildings. According to him, activists managed to secure the estate’s protective status and later add heritage status to it. The court case lasted about six years. In April 2023, the entire complex was returned to Kyiv’s communal property.

It was from stories like these that Dmitro’s work as a monument guardian gradually formed. Petrov became a co-founder of the “Brick” community, a volunteer for the NGO “Map of Renovation,” and an adviser to Kyiv City Council deputy Ksenia Semenova. In a few years he helped defend the Barbana estate, Schulz’s brewery, “Flowers of Ukraine,” and other historic buildings.

“I have a genetic love for the city”

Dmytro was born in Kyiv. His parents are also Kyivans, and several generations of his family lived on Voznesensky Descent near Podil.

“I probably have a genetic love for the city. I was born in Kyiv, my parents are Kyivans, several generations of my family lived on Voznesensky Descent. So I’ve always perceived Kyiv as something of my own,” Petrov said in an interview with The Village Ukraine.

According to him, the problem of preserving historic Kyiv isn’t only about individual illegal developments. In his view, the city lacks a system that would quickly determine a building’s value, monitor its condition, and stop illicit work.

One of the main drawbacks is the absence of a complete and convenient list of historic buildings. Perov estimated that Kyiv had about 3 thousand historic structures, yet only about a third held heritage status.

For developers, this creates room for maneuver.

“When a developer tears down a building, he usually asks: ‘Where is it written that this building is historic?’ Then I run to the nearest cafe, take a filter, and in 20 minutes I find the year of construction, the architect, and the style,” the activist explained.

In his view, such manual work should not exist at all. Information about historic buildings should be accessible electronically, and the rules for working with historic development should be clear not only to officials or specialized activists but also to property owners.

Six problems and six solutions for Kyiv

In 2023 year, Dmytro Petrov tried to move from protecting individual buildings to systemic changes. He nominated himself for the position of head of the Department of Cultural Heritage Protection of the Kyiv City State Administration and met with mayor Vitali Klitschko.

“I showed six problems and six solutions. I prepared 12 pictures to make everything as clear as possible. We talked. At the time I wasn’t appointed, but they offered to help with implementing the reform,” the activist recalled.

Among his proposals are a single design code for Kyiv’s historic environment, an electronic list of historic buildings, clear rules for protecting cultural heritage, a separate monitoring service, a city program for preserving mosaics, and changes to the legislation.

Perov believes that the current system too often reacts only after a building has already begun to be demolished.

“I don’t believe we can make it so that Kyiv never tears down another building. It will happen. But there should be a service that sees it, goes to the site, and stops illegal work. Take away tools, remove fences and scaffolding. There must be a technical capability to respond quickly,” he said.

In other words, in his logic, heritage protection cannot be limited to statuses and documents. There must be constant oversight of what is actually happening on the streets.

“We need to engage in education”

Another problem Dmitro emphasizes is Kyiv residents’ attitude toward historic buildings. He believes heritage protection will not work without public demand.

“We need to educate, promote historical and cultural heritage. Explain to people the value of a building, why it is important, what happened in it. If a person understands that this is their history, they will no longer calmly watch as the building is destroyed,” the activist noted.

In his view, Kyiv’s historic development is often perceived as a collection of individual old houses. Instead, the value is in the city environment itself.

Pushcha-Voditsa, mosaics, and buildings that were under threat

One of the stories Dmitro Petrov worked on was a wooden dacha in Pushcha-Voditsa. After a petition gathered about 6 thousand votes, Klitschko tasked preserving the building.

Perov tried to find a practical way to save it: in particular, to obtain permission for the owner to conduct conservation at their own expense. However, according to him, the process hit bureaucratic requirements.

He also advocated for a separate city program to preserve Kyiv’s mosaics. In his view, this is part of the urban environment that also needs systematic protection.

Among other objects he drew attention to were the Barbana estate, Schulz’s Brewery, “Flowers of Ukraine,” and houses on Andriyivskyi Descent and Volodymyrska.

Separately, Dmitro raised the issue of development on territories associated with cultural heritage, including Pirogova. In such cases, in his words, the problem often lies not only in a particular house, but in the city losing a cohesive historic environment.

“The state is the same business”

Dmytro Perov has repeatedly stressed: activists alone are not enough to preserve the city. Civil initiatives can attract attention, mobilize residents, file petitions or lawsuits, but state protection of heritage must be provided by the government.

He suggests looking at public administration practically—as a system that should yield results.

“So is the state: it’s the same business, but not a commercial one. It’s a civil-societal business,” he explained his position.

In this model, a bureaucrat should not merely carry out formal procedures, but understand what result for the city will be achieved.

“If I do something, something works out”

Over the years Petrov has repeatedly found himself in situations where a legal procedure, a petition, or public outcry became the only way to stop a building from being demolished.

At the same time, he does not consider himself a person who merely comments on the city’s problems.

“The secret of my success I’ve already announced: I do something — something works out,” he said.

Having spotted a problem, Dmytro does not wait for someone else to deal with it: he writes a statement, searches for documents, approaches residents, goes to officials, files a petition or looks for a legal mechanism.

But Petrov himself considers his victories only as isolated episodes. If the city does not change its approach to heritage protection, after saving one building another will appear in its place that will have to be protected.

Source materials: /www.village.com.ua