Міжвідомчий Науково-методичний збірник
"Криміналістика і судова експертиза"
ISSN: 0130-2655
PDF Криміналістика 65 друк новий 477 485 Завантажень: 8, розмiр: 257.7 KB

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2020.65.47

I. Herasymenko, S. Maksymov

The article analyzes the current state of the regulatory framework governing the valuation of cultural monuments, in particular, the Monetary Valuation of Monuments approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine dated September 26, 2002 No. 1447. The classification of conservation categories by a monument (national and local significance) and types of monuments (archeology, history, monumental art, architecture and urban planning, landscape gardening art, historical landscape, science and technology) is given.

The main problem in determining the value of monuments is to take into account not only the material factors of the monuments and its degree of wear, but also the consideration of its intangible factors, such as its historical, social, artistic value, the presence of objects of decorative art. That is, the cost of buildings-monuments of cultural heritage is formed:

– due to the cost of the material “carrier” (land with improvements in the form of buildings, structures, small forms, etc.);

– due to the value of the contribution of the intangible asset to the carrier. The article also describes the main problems that arise when assessing such objects (the presence of a monument’s status, the lack of an information base on market transactions, high operating costs, the need for restoration work, and high investment risks).

The factors raising and lowering the value of a cultural heritage monument are characterized.

Based on the analysis of the current regulatory framework, it was decided to develop practical recommendations for determining the value of real estate – monuments of architecture and urban planning, in particular built-in premises.

Key words: forensic examination, valuation of architectural monuments, methodology for the monetary valuation of monuments, the value of the monument, cost approach, income approach, comparative approach.