Scandals, Trials, and a Criminal Case: How the Brodsky Family Is Reconstructing the “Himalayas” Cafe on Khreshchatyk

In Kyiv, scandals surrounding the reconstruction of the “former” Himalayas cafe on Khreshchatyk Street continue, 23-B under a shopping center. Recently, a court, at the request of the General Prosecutor's Office, imposed a seizure on this building and the land beneath it as part of a criminal proceeding—the National Police is investigating possible violations in issuing the permit for these works. It concerns the fact that DABI issued approval for the project documentation that had not been approved by the Ministry of Communities. However, the seizure did not last long—after a month and a half it was lifted at the request of LLC “Olymp-LTD,” which owns the building and whose beneficiaries include the family of the infamous businessman Mykhailo Brodsky (in the collage). The basis for this was that the company had challenged in court the orders and fines issued by DIAMB in 2023 year for alleged violations of urban planning legislation. Parallel to this, the General Prosecutor's Office filed a suit to challenge the urban planning conditions and restrictions (MOU) for the design of this reconstruction and the same permit for the works from DABI. In turn, residents of neighboring buildings are sounding the alarm—cracks caused by the construction work, which they complained about three years ago, have not gone anywhere.

As it became known to KV, the head of the public council under the Kyiv City State Administration (KCSA), Hennadiy Kryvoshya, recently on his Facebook page said that the court, in a criminal proceeding on possible violations during these works (this case will be discussed below. – KV), initially imposed a seizure on the aforementioned building and land under it, and then canceled it.

According to the activist, the ruling canceling the seizure referred to a report on geodetic monitoring from 2 July 2026 year, conducted by the State Enterprise “State Scientific-Research Institute of Construction Structures” (State Research Institute of Construction). And in this document, as Kryvoshya emphasized, there is a conclusion about the absence of negative dynamics for neighboring multi-storey buildings. However, according to the head of the public council, geodetic monitoring by benchmarks and settlement marks is one thing, and the real technical condition of the apartments and buildings, where residents continue to report cracks, is quite another.

“According to residents, the apartments with cracks were not properly inspected. The management company for the Pechersky district’s housing fund should have been involved at least. However, residents know nothing about this. So another simple question arises: how can one conclude that there are no risks to nearby buildings without conducting a full independent inspection of those premises where people are recording damage? I do not want to judge the legality of court decisions—that is the competence of the relevant authorities. But as a representative of the public, I have the right to raise a question about the consistency of the judiciary’s approaches. If the court initially sees sufficient grounds for seizure and halting the work, including due to document coordination issues and potential risks to landmarks and neighboring buildings, then society must understand what fundamentally changed when that seizure was canceled. For at the center of this story are not only the developer’s interests,” wrote Hennadiy Kryvoshya.

In connection with the resonance around this development, KV decided to reanalyze its history, which has been ongoing for about a decade.

What preceded the development

As early as 13 February 1996 year, the Kyiv City State Administration (KCSA), by Order No. 196 (not available in public access. – KV), approved the transfer of a plot on Khreshchatyk Street, 23 of area 0,05 hectares to the LLC “Olymp-LTD” for the operation and maintenance of the “Tea-cafe,” which at that time already belonged to it. This refers to the well-known from Soviet times “naively” bar where the city’s bohemia gathered, among other things.

More than a decade later, 5 April 2012 year, by Kyiv City Council decision No. 431/7768, permission was granted for privatization of part of this plot and a change of its designated use. Thus, the city authorities approved selling to the mentioned company 0,033 hectares of land for 2,6 million hryvnias for “reconstruction, operation and maintenance of an establishment of public catering” (current cadastral number – 8000000000:76:032:0040)—from 2008 year it was a restaurant “Himalayas.” The other part of the plot, area 0,016 hectares (current cadastral number – 8000000000:76:032:0003), Kyiv City Council left in perpetual use to LLC “Olymp-LTD.”

Approximate stain of the future development

During the same period, active disputes over this land allotment and potential development of this territory continued.

In particular, against such development, the homeowners association “Center,” created by residents of the residential high-rise at the same address on Khreshchatyk Street 23, actively opposed the land use. Among other things, Kyiv residents accused LLC “Olymp-LTD” of “illegal seizure and construction of non-residential premises on part of the left terrace of a residential building on Khreshchatyk, 23 without permission and without project documentation for construction.” In turn, some Kyiv City Council deputies and public activists criticized that businessman Mykhailo Brodsky, associated with the mentioned company, promised to install a fountain and a monument to Ukrainian and Soviet theatre and cinema actor Bohdan Stupka opposite the Himalayas restaurant in exchange for this land allotment.