The owner wanted to park a valuable part of the building, but declared the rest a monument

The decision applies to the building. p. 100 with no luck, on its demolition was issued a final decision of the building council on the removal of the building in the period before the women were declared a cultural monument. He filed an appeal against this decision. The attacked right decision did not take the first power and the dissolution of women, in which the Minister of Culture will decide (Martin Baxa note ed.)said Ivana Awwadov from the Ministry of Culture.

The breakdown of the commission on the basis of all its recommendations is whether or not to declare the building a cultural monument. the deadline for when a decision must be made has not been set, she added.

The proposal for monument protection was submitted to the Ministry of Culture this year by Martin Krsek (pro st) Its purpose was to enclose the deep bourn of the building.

Therefore, until the minister makes a decision, the object must be looked at as a monument. This means that the owner must prevent damage to it, and not just to its essence. For the time being, we can’t even talk about the falling storm of other hundreds.

Whether or not we will succeed with the decomposition, we don’t want to know at the moment. If the decision were to take effect, it would mean the first limitation of the first defect for any future development, says Jakub Malich, the representative of STZ Development, which owns the property.

If the property will have this limitation, it will become a significant loss for our company without the possibility of further development. So let’s hope for a rational approach by the government, he added. Put into common language: the company does not want monument protection, what would it do with a sheltered house, not yet.

According to its original plans, it wanted to build, among other things, a parking lot on the bridge.

So the question is, what purposes could the building be used for, even with monument protection. Our company has been in discussion with the representatives of Stekov and Stekov’s municipality for more than ten years about the possible use of this set of buildings and its center. As much as there is general will and the effort to find a meaningful use, all attempts have so far failed due to the lack of financial resources necessary for reconstruction, explained Jakub Malich.

The region showed interest in the building this year. The first discussion I can use has passed. According to Jakub Malich, it was an attractive cooperation, in which it would be possible to receive a subsidy for the repair. I’m just on Malich’s side.

The representative of the company was behind them with attacks a few months ago. We have submitted it, and we have it covered so that we can present it to our colleagues for further discussion. It’s been months since the last meeting and we still haven’t received anything. I tried to contact him by phone, but in no rush. It’s at a dead end, said Tom Rieger, regional councilor for property and investment.

At the meeting, we casually talked about joining a joint venture, if the members of the regional authorities agreed. We need to discuss it, but we have not received anything from the owner of the building, the councilor explained.

One of the possible uses of the building was a help center for people returning from prison or an archive. But for the archive, the building does not have sufficient load-bearing capacity, it cannot be taken out, for example, even for a bicycle. At the moment, only the offices are more important, said Tom Rieger.