BARS / CHURCH / HERITAGE / ISM UNIVERSITY / NEIGHBORHOOD / SENIŪNAIČIAI / VILNIUS ARCHDIOCESE

Tainted permits for renovations by Archdiocese

In 2013 January 10 a meeting was held on Arklių street 18 construction, ISM Campus.

The meeting was attended by Vilnius Archdiocese architect, Aušra Gvildienė, Vilnius Archdiocese department’s Center for Craft, Cultural Heritage Department representative, National Commission for Cultural Heritage Information Analysis Services Senior Specialist, Juozas Lapinskas, Arklių street 16 residents: Oskaras Koršunovas, Ervinas Koršunovas, Linas Sasnauskas ,Old Town Community Council / SENIŪNAITĖ, Asta Baškauskaitė and a tenant of these premises, Aleksandras Pogrebnojus.

It was winter. The meeting was promptly convened by building operators, who themselves did not participate in it. To this meeting, they did not invite Vilnius City Municipal Department of Heritage representative, Jūratė Morkunaitė, although her presence was very much needed. Old Town Community at the last minute found out about this meeting from Arklių street 16 residents. We also invited Mr. Juozas Lapinskas from the State Cultural Heritage Commission to participate in the meeting.

During the meeting, we had a lot of questions. In the construction documentation a project was called “The administrative buildings” although it is obvious that these premises are being prepared for the restaurant – for an entirely different purpose!

Method of construction – reconstruction – cannot be done for administrative buildings. And they were only old storage units…

Technical requirements for the restaurant differ from the requirements for the administrative building.

Clearly you can see that this project has been combined for business purposes.

During the meeting, we listened to the architect of the future restaurant – bar. She said that she did not know anything about the restaurant. Her answer surprised us… In 2012 November Vilnius Archdiocese society representatives had publicly presented their forthcoming restaurant – bar tenant Aleksandras Pogrebnojus … And now the architect said that she had not known anything about that. Then the question rose – why Mr. Pogrebnojus attended this meeting? We heard from a representative of the Archdiocese and the architect a very interesting answer, that perhaps Mr.  Pogrebnojus accidentally came upon this meeting … C’mon! The meeting was held in the constructing building on the second floor, where the passers from the street could not get there without an invitation.

Then, Mr. Pogrebnojus said “we are not tenants yet”, and the architect went explaining that it is a „mixed-use ” building, and there could be a cafe-bar … It was in their thoughts, but it was still unclear….

But the construction is going on. Designers listen to the customer, and if there already are future tenants, they can also easily involve in making the decision.

Residents of Arklių street 16 house raised a question about the glass roof. They strongly opposed to such a sliding roof. Architect’s answer was that it was a beautiful experiment. Our question is: since when Vilnius Old Town heritage decisions are made as experiments?

Why there is such a high demand for the sunroof? What is the purpose of these premises? Now, from one floor storage units we get the building with an attic and planned installation of arrays roof. It is no longer a one-storey building.  And what will be in the attic?

Administrative purpose of the building is different from the restaurant uses. In the construction documents reconstruction is called the administrative building.

Preparing design documents, they had to indicate where the building will be used.

If the Archdiocese designers could describe that this is the “office building”, that would be issued in one form of the conditions, and if – the restaurant-bar, then other conditions would appear. For the administrative building a small kitchen to make coffee or tea is enough. The restaurant already requires all other equipment, such as : furnace, ventilation, a large commercial kitchen, etc. Flow of people in the restaurant is quite different than flow in the administrative building. There are additional technical requirements for kitchen manufacturing process..

It is clear that there is a future restaurant tenant – because there are already requirements from them.

Chimneys went up not for the administration building, but for the future of the restaurant-bar design. New chimney damages architecture of the Old Town…

Obviously, the Archdiocese of project documentation was made ​​only for business purposes.

Signatures against Archdiocese‘s plans to sell alcohol on the ISM campus

Only a sober nation can survive

Archdiocese business plan profits

Church’s business venture

Church priority = profit

Ism University doesn’t care

Brewery and the Church

Storage units, alcohol and the Church

We prevented modern buildings in the Old Town

turbo skylight

turbo skylight

turbo skylight

turbo skylight

new chimneys

new chimneys

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s