Architectural and urban planning features of the restoration of T S Khilinsky’s diocesan buildings lost in the 1930s

In this article the author makes an attempt to identify architectural and urban planning features of the restoration of T S Khilinsky’s diocesan buildings completely or partially lost in the 1930s. This work is impossible without a comprehensive review, analysis and research of the master’s preserved architectural heritage. Some of T S Khilinsky’s diocesan buildings have been preserved nearly in an unchanged form to this day. Most of the objects have been reconstructed and restored. There are also completely or partially lost structures. It should be noted that the main task in restoring lost or ruined diocesan buildings is not only to make a reliable reproduction of the object according to the preserved project, taking into account the creative handwriting, stylistic features and techniques of the master, but also to supplement the lost meaning and significance of the object for history and culture as a whole. In the twenty-first century heritage restoration has become a truly global concern, as heritage is commercialized like never before and threatened like never before. This article questions whether the established theories of restoration are still relevant to an expanding remit and changing demands of building restoration in the global context of the twenty-first century.