REGIONAL MONUMENTS OFFICE KOŠICE
Hlavná 25, 040 01 Košice
Ref. No.: KE-05/1-01/3175/ST
Košice, dated: 16 May 2005

Subject: Šaca, Mansion, Šemšianska Street No. 4 – Professional and Methodological Assistance to the Owner and Municipality

The Regional Monuments Office Košice (hereinafter referred to as the administrative authority), which is, pursuant to §1 paragraph 1 of Act No. 49/2002 Coll. on the protection of the monument fund (hereinafter referred to as the Monuments Act), the competent administrative authority, and pursuant to §9 paragraph 5 of the Monuments Act, the locally competent administrative authority in the field of monument protection, based on facts known from official activities and based on notification from the relevant building authority regarding the initiation of zoning proceedings for the construction “IBV Mansion – engineering networks and communication,” which is to be located directly behind the boundary of the protective zone of the national cultural monument – Rococo Mansion on Šemšianska Street No. 4 in Šaca, provides the following professional and methodological assistance to the municipality of Šaca and the owner of the national cultural monument:

Due to the planned construction activity – “IBV Mansion – engineering networks and communication,” the administrative authority issued, pursuant to §39 paragraph 3 of the Monuments Act, a decision on the conditions for conducting research (Ref. No. XR-04/1999-15177/GLDII dated 9 December 2004).

Since this area lies directly adjacent to the boundary of the protective zone of the national cultural monument Rococo Mansion on Šemšianska Street No. 4 in Košice-Šaca, the administrative authority hereby informs the municipality (City District Košice-Šaca), the owner of the Rococo Mansion, and the owners of parcels affected by the protective zone of the national cultural monument that, from the perspective of monument fund protection, it is not possible to consider new construction within this protective zone in the future.

From the perspective of monument protection, building on plots related to the original grounds of the mansion, where no construction existed in the past and which formed a natural landscaped environment for high-quality representative architecture, is undesirable. After assessing the broader context of this area, the administrative authority concluded that building within the protective zone, which has already been defined in the smallest possible extent compared to the original historical area directly adjacent to the mansion, would disrupt important vistas, compositional axes, and the characteristic image of the area, violate the dominance of the mansion in proportion to the surrounding environment, and significantly impair the presentation of the national cultural monument, which is contrary to the provisions of the Monuments Act.

Although any changes within the protective zone will be assessed by the administrative authority in administrative proceedings and decided individually, based on the submitted proposal by the municipality for a new road and engineering networks including connections, which anticipates new construction on both sides of the proposed road – likely also within the protective zone – the administrative authority considers it necessary to alert the municipality to the above requirements concerning the possibility of future construction within the protective zone of the mansion.

The administrative authority also considers §14 of the Monuments Act, which defines the responsibilities of municipalities, as follows:

1. The municipality creates appropriate conditions necessary for the preservation, protection, restoration, and development of the monument fund within its territory.
2. The municipality: a) Ensures that owners of cultural monuments act in accordance with this Act, b) Coordinates the development of technical infrastructure in settlements with monument zones, c) Cooperates in securing modifications of street interiors, pedestrian zones, small architecture, historic greenery, public lighting, and advertising devices to align with the goals of preserving and applying the values of monument zones, d) Supports initiatives of citizens and civic associations in protecting the monument fund, e) Maintains records of the monument fund in its territory based on extracts from the central list.
3. The municipality may establish funds to contribute to the rescue and restoration of cultural monuments located in its territory.
4. The municipality may decide to create and professionally manage a record of local heritage. This record may include tangible and intangible items, as well as combined works of nature and humans, historical events, street names, geographical and cadastral names related to the history and personalities of the municipality. The list of recorded heritage items is submitted by the municipality for professional and documentation purposes to the regional monuments office; if it concerns immovable items, also to the building authority.

The administrative authority also bases its considerations on international documents to which the Slovak Republic has officially acceded, especially the VENICE CHARTER on the conservation and restoration of monuments and sites (Venice, 1964), which states in Article 6:

“The conservation of a monument implies preserving a setting which is not out of scale. Wherever the traditional setting exists, it must be kept. No new construction, demolition, or modification which would alter the relations of mass and color must be allowed.”

The fundamental position of modern monument protection was clearly formulated at the beginning of the 20th century. This is evidenced by the following quote from the work of Gregor Gottfried Dehio:
“Denkmalschutz und Denkmalpflege im neunzehnten Jahrhundert” (1900):

“As soon as the serious intention to protect monuments emerged, it had to be clear that this would not be possible without limiting the rights of property owners, restricting changes and various works, and generally individual benefits. Architecture cannot be isolated; it is not a museum exhibit. A monument can be destroyed not only directly but also indirectly – by disharmony in its surroundings.”

Regional Monuments Office Košice
Ing. Kristína Markušová, Director

For information:

1. City District Košice – Šaca, U.S. Steel Street 9, 040 15 Košice – Šaca
2. Ing. Eva Šoltésová, Stierova 5, 040 11 Košice
3. Ing. Ľubomír Homa, Šemšianska 4, 040 15 Košice – Šaca
4. Regional Monuments Office Košice, for file archiving

Statement of members