What is more important than a forest?

The problem of developing forest and coastal areas with cottages and villas in the Leningrad region is more acute than ever. Almost every impartial inspection finds cases of violations when construction is carried out on forest fund lands or in a water protection zone. The painful issue was discussed at a round table in the Green Lamp.

Didn't express

“The Internet is full of advertisements advertising the sale of plots on the banks,” says Pavel Ovsyanko, a member of the public chamber under the governor of the Leningrad region. — On regional roads, every hundred meters there are billboards where they write in plain text: “The coastline is for sale.” This violates three federal laws at once, and people give out their phone number - the supervisory authorities completely ignore it. As a result, in another 2-3 years, at a distance of 50 km from St. Petersburg, the problem will be solved by itself - and it will not be solved in our favor: everything will simply be already sold.”

“I, together with representatives of the State Control Committee of the Leningrad Region, went to check the facts on statements from residents about illegal construction,” says Nikolai Kuzmin, Chairman of the Standing Commission on Ecology and Natural Resources of the Legislative Assembly of the Leningrad Region. — On the banks of the Vuoksa, in the Melnikovo region, out of 18 objects we examined, 8 were not on the territory of municipalities - some in the state forest fund, some in the water protection zone. If we extrapolate these figures, it turns out that more than a third of housing projects in the Leningrad region are being built illegally. The scale is amazing. The State Control Committee imposed penalties on the identified objects, and the materials were sent to the prosecutor's office. But for one such departure, according to citizens’ applications, there are 99 unconsidered... I would like the public to have a stronger influence on the executive branch.

The parliamentarian’s words were confirmed by many speaking representatives of public organizations.

Olga Vilenskaya, head of the territorial planning department of the Committee on Architecture and Urban Planning of the Leningrad Region, had to take the rap for all the officials. Neither Mikhail Kozminykh, Chairman of the State Control Committee of the Leningrad Region, nor Natalya Orlova, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources of the Leningrad Region, who had previously accepted the invitation to participate in the round table, honored the audience with their presence, making excuses for urgent matters. The prosecutor's office responded that its participation in the roundtable on forests was "untimely." Therefore, the discussion came down primarily to questions that Vilenskaya could answer: general plans and territorial planning schemes.

In particular, they touched upon the problems of the long-suffering Siversky Forest. According to Vilenskaya, the government of the Leningrad region did not approve the recently submitted draft general plan for the Siverskoye settlement. Including because the objects planned for that very forest could have a “negative impact on the natural environment.” That is, the plans of local authorities seemed to regional officials to be inconsistent with certain standards. Meanwhile, as Vilenskaya states, the regional authorities cannot take any additional measures to their local colleagues: and in the absence of a general plan, they are free to do everything in the forest that is not prohibited by law. That is, as the history of recent years shows, almost anything.

Blind Green Spots

One of the ways to protect forests from the appetites of local authorities and greedy developers should be specially protected natural areas (SPNA). According to Anastasia Filippova, a member of the Public Chamber under the Governor of the Leningrad Region, about 6% of the region’s territory is currently protected. International standards for this indicator are around 17%.

“If those territories that have recently been planned as future protected areas survive to actually being granted this status, then we will get closer to such a desired figure,” says Filippova.

According to the social activist, there are many obstacles on this path. For example, in the current “planning period” it is planned to create about 10 new protected areas, including one natural park, but no one has included money for this in the Leningrad region budget.

There are also legal conflicts: for example, what to do with the creation of local protected areas if they are planned on forest fund lands - that is, federal ones?

According to Filippova, until all these issues are resolved, regional authorities should issue a document on reserving land for future protected areas.

“The term “reservation” is not applicable to protected areas,” Vilenskaya immediately retorts.

- Therefore, such a solution is impossible.

“Not quite like that,” says Alexander Karpov, head of the ECOM Center of Expertise. — The procedure for reserving land for state needs is determined by the Land Code, and there the basis “for the creation of protected areas” is provided. However, the reservation procedure is determined by a decree of the government of the Russian Federation, and in this decree they forgot to indicate protected areas!

Those present did not discuss whether the officials’ forgetfulness could be considered simple inattention, apparently so as not to get upset again.

Meanwhile, Alexander Karpov, using several specific examples of urban planning, tried to present the general view of decision-makers on forests.

In particular, they talked about the now withdrawn general plan of Vsevolozhsk, where it was proposed to build a road through the only pedestrian (and animal) “puncture” under the Koltsevaya. Now this is a favorite route for skiers and cyclists to the Rzhevsky Forest Park, but for planners the forest is just a green spot on the map, and the ready passage under the Ring Road is too tasty a door not to break through. As a result, this will lead to the disappearance of the forest park as an integral area suitable for recreation for city residents. But no importance is attached to this.

Another example is the planning of the federal Tallinn highway in the area of ​​​​the village of Telezi. The project involves expanding the route, which should have entailed the resettlement of some of the houses in the village. Instead, they proposed to build a road further south, bypassing the village itself through the forest. That is, to make a crooked detour in an absolutely straight highway, while again actually destroying the forest.

“These and other examples show us the psychological attitude of designers towards forests: when choosing between a forest and an industrial zone, they choose an industrial zone, since it is the economic development of the territory, etc.,” sums up Karpov. “And so it turns out that industry is more important than forests, roads are more important than forests, housing is more important than forests.” And then the forest is more important than what? As long as the forest remains in last place, it will be difficult to reverse the situation.