Translated material
Decree on land 2007
Moscow is trying to legitimize the forced seizure of land for the needs of the city
The Moscow authorities are openly trying to insure themselves against long-term land disputes with the owners of plots or houses located in the areas required by the mayor's office for development. Recalling the protracted proceedings with the residents of South Butovo , who were not satisfied with the alternative to private houses proposed by the city, the city government, “in order to avoid possible blackmail from the owners with inflated compensation payments,” yesterday adopted a special resolution, which in the future should become the main regulatory act regarding the seizure of land plots for road or housing construction. It is noteworthy that this document was adopted at the time of another surge of protests in Butovo. Yesterday, at a meeting in the Public Chamber, eight families remaining in the village stated that they “categorically reject the possibility of moving to another place of residence.”There is no longer any doubt that such conflicts will continue to arise. Officials do not hide the fact that the city has practically no free resources for development and that in any case the territory will have to be vacated at the expense of the interests of the owners of buildings and structures . “Moscow is developing, growing, and it is cramped within its own borders,” explained the head of the Moscow Department of Land Resources, which developed the document, Viktor Damurchiev. “But we have no other borders, so yesterday’s villages are becoming developed residential areas.” And since altruists who are ready to sacrifice their own interests in favor of public or city interests, according to him, are rare even among film characters, officials consider themselves entitled to use administrative leverage. In particular, if it is not possible to voluntarily agree with the owner of a land plot on its acquisition by the treasury, in “exceptional cases” (including in case of improper use of land), Mr. Damurchiev proposes to use coercive measures.
However, the liberation of the lands needed by the city will in any case be a long process. At the first stage, it is planned to reserve only the plots of interest for urban needs for a period of up to five years. This, according to Mr. Damurchiev, will be the basis for refusing their privatization and will prevent “the purchase of plots at relatively low prices by enterprising citizens.” According to the Chairman of the Moscow Committee for Architecture, Alexander Kuzmin, reservations are especially relevant today, when the city has a lot of projects, such as, for example, the construction of the fourth ring. “But until a specific situation is worked out, it is difficult to determine who exactly the construction will affect and how,” he explained.
However, the opportunity to “stake out” the necessary territories from city officials, according to Viktor Damurchiev, will only appear with the adoption of the federal law on the reservation of land plots for state and municipal needs. And this document is still at the stage of second reading in the State Duma. In addition, it is necessary to “update the general plan of the city” and adopt the urban planning code of Moscow, the development of which the Moskomarkhitektura plans to complete this year.
The five-year reservation can be either liquidated if it turns out that construction projects planned by the city do not affect the site, or extended. If the city really needs the land, its owners will be notified one year before construction begins. During this period, the owner of the land (or the structure on it) will be offered to sell the plot to the city or receive compensation equivalent to the seized premises. Until the moment of seizure, the owners of the site coveted by the municipality will be able to dispose of it at their own discretion, but they risk incurring losses by investing in new construction or reconstruction during this year. The city will not reimburse the costs for this.
But, as the history of South Butovo clearly demonstrates , the amount of basic compensation may become the main cause of future conflicts between owners and city authorities. Citizens and officials tend to value real estate differently, which was also acknowledged by the mayor of the capital, Yuri Luzhkov. In his opinion, in order to smooth out the situation, it is necessary to exclude both interested parties from the opportunity to evaluate the seized property, since “the city seeks to reduce its value, and if the owner does this, then, on the contrary, to inflate its real price.” “Independent structures should be involved in the assessment of confiscated land plots, perhaps these will be state organizations, otherwise everyone will pull the blanket on themselves,” Mr. Luzhkov believes. The mayor demanded that his subordinates quickly amend the capital’s legislation “so that the court and prosecutor’s office would use it as regulations on the basis of which legal proceedings will be carried out.”
In particular, the head of the Moscow government ordered the preparation of a draft city law establishing priority cases for the municipality that could become the basis for the forced seizure of land plots. This, in his opinion, will “limit the city’s ability” to use administrative resources. It will also avoid a conflict with the Land Code, which allows the seizure of plots only for needs related to the fulfillment of Russia’s international obligations and the placement of particularly significant facilities.
Moscow deputies, who have received numerous complaints from citizens about the actions of the executive authorities in relation to their property, reacted to the government decree with great caution. Opposition-minded legislators are concerned about the possibility of arbitrariness by officials, and representatives of the ruling party are concerned about the inevitability of increasing compensation costs. In particular, deputy Ivan Novitsky, who represents the United Democrats in the Moscow City Duma, believes that the document requires clarification in justifying the confiscation of land plots from users. “The facts cited in appeals to the Duma indicate that today the confiscation of plots is sometimes carried out arbitrarily, without determining the necessary circumstances that serve as the appropriate basis,” he explained, “as a result of which, under the guise of state need, land plots occupied by individual houses for commercial construction are confiscated " In turn, the chairman of the budget and financial commission of the Moscow City Duma, Igor Antonov, demanded that officials justify the upcoming budget costs for compensation for those resettled. In his opinion, the “inflated demands” of city residents who are forced to leave their “small homeland” are inevitable, and the metropolitan government must take into account the costs, including compensation for psychological damage.
The chairman of the commission on long-term development and urban planning of the City Duma, Mikhail Moskvin-Tarkhanov, also stated that the authorities will be able to reach a consensus with residents only if they are willing to pay above the market price. He advised city officials to prepare for proceedings in both the Supreme and Constitutional Courts, since “Muscovites are literate people and know the potential of their sites.” According to Mr. Tarkhanov, people’s protests, supported by their associations in public groups with the involvement of human rights activists, are inevitable.