Prague protests against the conclusions of the inspection of Charles Bridge

Prague - The city of Prague objects to the conclusions of the heritage inspection of the Ministry of Culture, which has been monitoring the repair of Charles Bridge since summer. According to the city, the inspection report contains inaccuracies, subjective opinions, and distortions. The city stands by the method of repair and is filing a written objection to the report, the text of which is available to ČTK.
The inspection stated that the work on the bridge significantly compromised the authenticity of this national cultural monument. Minister of Culture Václav Jehlička (KDU-ČSL) said on Wednesday that mistakes were made during the repair, but according to him, these mistakes can still be corrected. However, before he familiarizes himself with the city's opinion, he did not want to draw any conclusions regarding potential responsibility for the mentioned discrepancies. Meanwhile, there is renewed debate among heritage experts themselves about whether, due to the significance of the historical object, a more respectful conservation approach should have been chosen instead of a restoration involving the replacement of parts of the monument with new ones. The entire case, according to them, indicates a division in state heritage care.
The heritage inspection identified two categories of shortcomings in its inspection. The first resides in the preparation and the lack of permits, which the inspection does not consider administrative errors but legal ones. The restoration was initially carried out without notifying archaeologists, which is mandatory. The owner did not have an updated architectural-historical survey and did not ensure the examination of stonemasonry marks. Prague now argues that the repair "is being carried out based on approved documentation according to the issued building permit."
The second category of shortcomings, according to the inspection, concerns the repair itself. Allegedly, more stone blocks were replaced than recommended by the diagnostic survey. "The amount of exchanged stones corresponds to the state of damage of the original masonry, and the replacement is being carried out based on the decision of a competent committee," the city stated. The inspection also labeled the Kocbeřov sandstone used in the repairs as inappropriate. The city claims that stone from this quarry was chosen as the only possible alternative and the most suitable stone for its properties.
Some other voices also question this criticism from the inspection, arguing that the original quarries from which the stone was taken for the construction of the bridge or during some of its past repairs are no longer operational, and opening a completely new quarry, whose stone might better meet the needs of the reconstruction, is problematic.
The perspective on the expertise and quality of the stonemasonry work stated in the report can be regarded by the city as subjective. The conclusions of the inspection are "professionally very problematic, and we hereby submit an objection against the overall findings of the report and the formulations of its partial conclusions," states a representative of the city.