The State Duma may again consider amendments to seize real estate for the integrated development of territories

The Russian authorities did not abandon the idea to introduce the norms on the seizure of real estate among the owners in the legislation for the purpose of the integrated development of territories. Such provisions were originally contained in recently adopted amendments to the Town Planning Code of the Russian Federation, but by the second reading of the bill in the State Duma, these norms were deleted.

As the Kommersant recalls, the document provided for the possibility of forced seizure of housing, including apartments in apartment buildings that were not recognized as emergency, on the initiative of municipalities. The basis for the withdrawal was to include the house in the municipal targeted program, while the justification of the need was not required.

This proposal did not find support in the Ministry of Construction, and in society it reacted negatively to it (activists sent letters to the State Duma to not accept the bill to the State Duma deputies), and as a result, the corrections were adopted without the provisions on seizure. However, soon, Andrei Shevchenko, First Deputy Head of the Federation Council and Regional Policy, stated the intention to develop a separate proposal for the seizure of housing. The State Duma can consider his proposals in the fall.

Currently, the Land Code allows us to withdraw residential real estate. For example, such exemptions were made in the Krasnodar Territory in preparation for the Olympic Games in Sochi, but the details regulated the separate law on the organization and holding of the Olympiad. In total, almost 150 families fell under forced eviction. It is possible that the used model can be enshrined in the legislation for the whole country, but this is fraught with a surge in protests.

According to the head of the Institute of Economics of the city of Nadezhda Kosareva, the project can be successful only with the guarantee of its voluntariness. At the same time, she noted that the Town Planning Code is already the possibility of removing non -emergency housing for the integrated development of territories, but municipalities do not use it, since they fear public discontent. The amendments of the seizure that disappeared from the bill actually duplicated this opportunity and would hardly have earned.

In turn, the coordinator of the National Association of Builders in the Siberian Federal District, Maxim Fedorchenko, emphasized that when withdrawal, we should talk about a voluntary choice of compensation for the owner. This can be new housing, cash payment or other compensation.

“In any case, the owner must receive full -fledged compensation at a price even higher than the market, since the citizen is faced with significant inconvenience,” Fedorchenko noted, adding that the term “seizure” should be replaced with “conciliation procedures for the redemption of land and real estate objects”.