“Provision of land plots with engineering infrastructure for housing construction within the framework of the Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending. Zones of engineering and transport infrastructure

Project

Participants of the "round table" held by the Federation Council Committee on Federal Structure, Regional Policy, Local Self-Government and Northern Affairs with the participation of representatives of federal and regional government bodies, scientific and public organizations, as well as economic entities, discussing the issue of ensuring land plots engineering infrastructure for the purpose of housing construction, implemented in the framework of the activities of the joint-stock company "Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending", note the following.

Legal regulation of the activities of the Housing Mortgage Lending Agency Joint Stock Company (hereinafter - AHML JSC) is based on the provisions of the Federal Law No. legislative acts Russian Federation", In accordance with the provisions of which AHML JSC is a single development institution in the housing sector, carrying out its activities in order to facilitate the implementation of the state housing policy, including by attracting investments in it.

One of the main tasks of AHML JSC is to assist in the provision of land plots provided for housing or other construction with engineering, social and transport infrastructures.

In terms of providing land plots intended for housing construction with the necessary engineering infrastructure, according to information provided by AHML JSC, assistance is provided in the following areas:

1. Analysis of the possibility of connecting to engineering networks at the stage of involving land plots in housing construction, within the framework of which the calculation of connected loads is carried out, as well as interaction with network and resource supplying organizations in order to determine the existing reserves and throughput of engineering networks, to determine approximate points of connection to engineering networks. networks, determining measures for connection (technological connection), determining the approximate cost of connection, obtaining information on tracing networks located within and near the boundaries of land plots, obtaining information on the availability of measures for connection (connection) in the schemes of prospective development and investment programs of network and operating organizations.

2. Preparation of land plots for implementation, within the framework of which an updated calculation of the loads on engineering networks and the direction of applications for connection to them are carried out; interaction with network and resource supplying organizations to determine various options for connecting to engineering networks and further optimize technical solutions for connection; obtaining technical specifications and concluding contracts for connection (technological connection) to utility networks.

3. Maintenance of construction projects in terms of providing methodological and consulting assistance to developers in the preparation of documents at all stages of connection to utilities (analysis of submitted applications, received draft contracts for technological connection, execution of contracts for connection); interaction with network and resource supplying organizations and executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation on the possibility of including measures necessary to provide land plots with engineering infrastructure in the investment programs of such organizations; provision of land plots to network and resource-supplying organizations for the placement of engineering infrastructure facilities as part of the implementation of investment programs, including connection agreements (technological connection).

4. Implementation of systematic interaction with network organizations, including through the conclusion of cooperation agreements (for example, the public joint-stock company ROSSETI (hereinafter referred to as PJSC ROSSETI) and JSC AHML have entered into an Agreement and a Memorandum of Cooperation, within the framework of which interaction to create favorable conditions for attracting investment resources in the development of power supply systems, as well as to ensure technological connection to the electrical network of facilities located on the land plots of AHML JSC).

A clear positive confirmation of the above interaction is the example of the interaction of AHML JSC with PJSC Rosseti, through which the amount of payment for technological connection was reduced by 46 under the project for the construction of economy class housing “New Yaroslavl” (village Gubtsevo, Yaroslavl Region). 6% by optimizing the implementation of the power supply scheme; under the project for the construction of housing for ZhKK “Radiosvyaz” (E. Stasovoy St., Krasnoyarsk), the amount of payment for technological connection was reduced by 62% due to changes in the power supply scheme, while the reduction in the terms of this connection was more than 4 months.

Through the interaction of AHML JSC with the limited liability company Gazprom Mezhregiongaz, measures to reconstruct a high-pressure gas pipeline from the Kudma GDS to Novinki in order to increase the productivity of the gas distribution network were included in the investment program of the said company.

The result of the interaction of AHML JSC with the public joint-stock company NOVATEK was the inclusion in the company's investment program of measures for the construction of GDS-2 in Mitrofanovsky settlement, aimed at gasification of the Sosnovsky District of the Chelyabinsk Region.

It should be noted that these examples are not isolated.

The implementation of the above measures by AHML JSC as a whole serves the general goal of reducing the time required for the development of a land plot, as well as reducing the cost per square meter of housing.

AHML JSC also took part in the implementation of the Housing for the Russian Family program implemented within the framework of the state program of the Russian Federation "Provision of affordable and comfortable housing and utilities for citizens of the Russian Federation", approved by Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 323 dated April 15, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the Program), within the framework of which AHML JSC planned to finance measures to buy out engineering and technical support facilities built as part of the Program, or to acquire mortgages certifying the right of pledge to the designated facilities.

At the same time, the Accounts Chamber stated that the target indicators of this Program had not been achieved, it was indicated that as of January 1, 2017, the construction of economy class housing was not actually provided with engineering and technical support in terms of issues referred to the competence of AHML JSC, including due to the existence of the Program's condition on the provision of financing for the purchase of engineering and technical infrastructure facilities only after the developer confirms the fact of selling residential premises to citizens of the Russian Federation at a price not exceeding the maximum price of economy class housing established by the Program (no more than 35 thousand rubles per 1 square meter).

Despite the fact that by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 393 dated March 31, 2017 No. 393, the Housing for the Russian Family program was excluded from the Program, AHML JSC will continue to fulfill its obligations to finance the purchase of engineering infrastructure facilities with the unconditional fulfillment of obligations by developers.

According to AHML JSC, among the main problems hindering the prompt and high-quality solution of the issue of connecting to the engineering infrastructure networks, the following can be distinguished:

• lack of synchronization of promising schemes for the development of engineering infrastructure and investment programs of resource supplying organizations with territorial planning documents (master plans, territorial zoning schemes, land use and development rules);
• lack of synchronization of investment programs of resource supplying organizations with the timing of construction of facilities housing construction;
• long terms of connection to utility networks as part of the execution of connection agreements (technological connection);
• various prices for the construction of networks when the executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation establish standardized rates for connection (technological connection) to utility networks (NCS, FER, TEP);
• the complexity and duration of procedures for the provision of land plots for the construction of linear infrastructure facilities (registration of easements, allocation and registration of allocated parts of land plots for networks);
• lack of a "single window" and consulting centers for filing applications for connection to all types of resources (such as "My Documents");
• the lack of a procedure for obtaining preliminary information on the timing and cost of connecting to utility networks at the stage of assessing a housing project.

One of the main problems arising in the provision of land plots with engineering infrastructure for housing construction, there is an acute lack of financial resources both for the provision of these land plots directly with the engineering infrastructure itself, and for bringing the main engineering networks to the development areas and the associated impossibility of transposing the solution this issue for the developer in view of the risk of an increase in the cost of housing under construction, and, consequently, a potential decrease in its availability for the population.

Of course, the issue of providing the land plots under consideration with engineering infrastructure is partly solved through the subprogram "Stimulating programs for the development of housing construction of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation" of the federal target program "Housing" for 2015-2020, approved by the Government of the Russian Federation dated December 17, 2010 No. 1050, within the framework of which provides for reimbursement of the costs of paying interest on loans received by the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, municipalities or legal entities in credit institutions for the purpose of providing engineering infrastructure for land plots intended for the construction of economy-class housing, as well as provided to families with 3 or more children, as well as implemented within the framework of the specified subprogram of the priority project "Mortgage and rental housing", for the implementation of which 20 billion rubles were allocated in 2017, part of which will go to finance the construction of engineering infrastructure ry for housing construction.

At the same time, the regions note that these mechanisms (financial resources) are insufficient.

For example, in this regard, the Irkutsk region proposes to provide new land plots from federal ownership for housing construction only after determining the timing and sources of providing such lands with engineering infrastructure.

Also, individual constituent entities of the Russian Federation noted that the existing model of division of large land plots and the sale of their parts to several developers does not allow to fully implement integrated approaches to the development of the territory, including the construction of utility networks. Often, each developer is forced to carry out parallel placement of communications designed exclusively for their own loads and do not provide for the future development of the territory.

AHML JSC notes that one of the factors that can have a positive effect on reducing the costs of providing a land plot with engineering infrastructure is a change in the approach to the formation of payments for technological connection (connection) and strengthening control over the expenditure of funds. In particular, it is proposed to include in the composition of the fee only the costs of capital construction of engineering facilities, excluding the costs of preparation and issuance, as well as the verification of technical conditions, completely excluding profit for given view activities. In addition, to introduce reporting on the part of network / resource supplying organizations and control on the part of regional executive authorities in the field of regulation of tariffs for the expenditure of funds under each technological connection (connection) agreement in order to return to the developer part of the payment for technological connection while saving funds.

In the context of the issue under consideration, the Committee considers it necessary to further improve land legislation and legislation on urban planning activities, including in terms of the construction of linear facilities.

When improving the current legislation, it should be borne in mind that today the cost of 1 running kilometer of the power grid infrastructure is on average 100 thousand rubles, in some regions the cost can reach 180 thousand rubles. The number of approvals required for the provision of a land plot ranges from 3 to 15, depending on the subject of the Russian Federation. At the same time, according to the data of grid companies, the specific indicator of the cost of registration and construction of a linear facility is constantly increasing.

The participants of the round table, positively assessing the work of AHML JSC, aimed at solving the issue of providing land plots with the necessary engineering infrastructure for housing construction, consider it necessary to take a number of additional measures in this area, and therefore recommend:

1. State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to expedite the consideration of the draft federal law No. 187920-7 "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation in Part to Simplify Construction, Reconstruction, Overhaul and (or) Operation of Line Facilities", introduced by the Government of the Russian Federation.

2. To the Government of the Russian Federation:

1. Consider the possibility of creating customer service centers (consumers) on the issues of connection to engineering infrastructure facilities.

2. Consider the possibility of amending the Rules for connection to heat supply systems, the Rules for cold water supply and sewerage, approved by decrees of the Government of the Russian Federation of April 16, 2012 No. 307, of July 29, 2013 No. 644, establishing the specifics of connection (technical connection) of housing construction to the networks of engineering and technical support in terms of reducing the deadlines for connection, revising the grounds for refusing to connect and extending the terms of connection.

3. Consider the possibility of introducing a pre-trial appeal against violations of the established terms of connection to the networks of engineering and technical support and the terms of their execution.

3. To the state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation:

1. To coordinate the programs of socio-economic development of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, territorial planning documents with the investment programs of resource supplying organizations.

2. Ensure prompt coordination of the adjusted investment programs of resource supplying organizations when changing territorial planning documents.

3. Strengthen control over the implementation of investment programs of resource-supplying organizations.

4. Consider the possibility of creating a "single window" system for the purpose of accepting applications for technological connection to the networks of engineering and technological support, providing consulting support, obtaining by the applicant contracts for connection (technological connection) with technical conditions for each type of declared utility resource.

4. Local governments:

1. Agree on social and economic development programs municipalities Of the Russian Federation, documents of territorial planning with investment programs of resource supplying organizations.

2. To take into account in the documents of territorial planning technological corridors for the placement of promising housing projects.

5. Joint Stock Company "Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending":

1. To send to the Government of the Russian Federation a substantiation of the need to establish the specifics of connection (technical connection) of housing construction objects to the networks of engineering and technical support.

2. Provide methodological and organizational support for providing land plots with engineering infrastructure.

Letter of the Joint Stock Company "Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending" dated June 14, 2017 No. 7715-FZ.

Letter of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation No. 44 / 13-03 dated April 10, 2017 projects of integrated development of the territory within the framework of the program "Housing for the Russian family" provided for by the Action Plan of the Government of the Russian Federation, aimed at ensuring stable socio-economic development of the Russian Federation in 2016, approved by the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 1, 2016 No. 1349p-P13) ...

Explanatory note to the project federal law No. 187920-7 "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation in Part to Simplify Construction, Reconstruction, Overhaul and (or) Operation of Line Facilities" The State Duma May 30, 2017 by the Government of the Russian Federation.

Zones of engineering and transport infrastructures are intended for: placement and
functioning of structures and communications of railway, automobile, river, sea, air and pipeline transport, communications, engineering equipment.

To prevent the harmful effects of transport structures and communications,
ligature, engineering equipment on the living environment, compliance is ensured
necessary distances from such facilities to residential, public, business and recreational areas and other requirements in accordance with state
urban planning regulations and rules, as well as with special regulations,
building rules.

Territories within the boundaries of the allotment of structures and communications of transport, communications,
engineering equipment and lx sanitary protection zones are subject to improvement with
"a couple of technical and operational characteristics of such structures and communications.
Responsibilities for the improvement of these territories are assigned to the owners
structures and communications of transport, communications, engineering equipment.

Constructions and communications of transport, communications, engineering equipment,
the exploitation of which has a direct harmful effect on the safety of the population, are located outside urban and rural settlements.

3. Graphically depict the scheme of the "network" regular planning of settlements

1. Features of the planning structure of the Garden City by Ebenezer Howard.

EBENEZER HOWARD AND "GARDEN CITY"

“At the beginning of the 20th century, two great discoveries were born before our eyes, heralding a new era. The first gave a man wings, and the second promised him a better place to live when he returned to earth. " Lewis Mumford, the author of this pathetic statement, is one of Howard's many supporters (1850-1928). “Few ideas have ever influenced so excitingly our thinking about the rational and harmonious reconstruction of existing large cities,” wrote Loyd Rodwin of the garden city concept.

However, Howard's ideas had many opponents. Le Corbusier condemned the wasteful attitude towards space and time associated with urban development in accordance with the English understanding of garden cities, and also argued that this educates residents in an antisocial spirit. Siegfried Gideon attributed the decline of the idea of ​​garden cities to the fact that it did not solve the problems of the present day. “A partial solution,” he wrote, “is impossible. Only thoughtful and comprehensive design covering the entire structure modern life in all its diversity, will allow to solve the problems that Ebenezer Howard had in mind ”. In recent years, Howard's influence on modern urban planning has again been criticized from various points of view. “Howard and his followers ... did not pay the slightest attention to all the central problems that are now a matter of particular concern - the restoration of the center of old cities, and in fact, they were very emotionally engaged in new cities ... No matter how much good they did, harm, which they caused by diverting attention from the urgent need to renew the inner city districts, is tantamount to disaster, "- wrote Edward Carter, considering the problems of the future of London. Jane Jacobe pointed out that Howard's “desntristskis” concepts of modern urban planning have had a very adverse effect on large American cities, contributing to the disintegration of social ties between their inhabitants, as well as the formation of soulless, monotonous areas.

Who was Howard? A modest stenographer who, after the "discovery" of the garden city, unsuccessfully worked on another invention - a stenographic machine? A pioneer of modern urban planning or a false prophet?

His book Tomorrow is a Peaceful Road to Real Reform (Torporgot: apecetuphillo gea! Gebrt) was published in 1898. At this time, the English public was concerned about the “continuous influx of the population into already overcrowded cities and the desolation of rural areas. ". And so Howard proposed a solution to this extraordinarily difficult problem, a solution that, in his opinion, was absolutely reliable and at the same time did not need any extraordinary measures. Given that rural residents flock to big cities, he suggested opposing them with garden-cities, allowing "to combine all the advantages of an active city life with the beauty and all the benefits of the village." “Town and country,” Howard wrote, “must become engaged to each other, and from this happy union a new hope will arise, new life, a new civilization ". The population of garden cities surrounded by a wide belt of agricultural land, Howard limited to about 30 thousand people. These cities, in his opinion, could develop by creating similar villages next to them, which could be reached in a few minutes using high-speed transport. A group of villages was concentrated around a larger city. Thanks to this, the inhabitants of garden cities, in fact, could enjoy the benefits of a large and beautiful city. "Since the entire territory on which these cities would have been built would be collectively owned, public structures would arise ... of such beauty that is impossible in any city in the world where land is in private hands." In industrial factories located on the outskirts of each garden city, its inhabitants could find work, avoiding the tedious ride so characteristic of existing major cities, “Which in their current form are as outdated as stagecoaches in the century railways". It is enough to build an exemplary complex of garden cities, wrote Howard, so that later they would arise spontaneously. The ill-fated slums will disappear, in their place "parks and recreation areas will appear. All this will be achieved by constitutional means without revolutionary legislation, without stirring up passions, without expropriating the interests of the owners. Based on detailed calculations, Howard concluded that the construction of his cities was economically justified: they are created on agricultural land, which is not yet the subject of speculation, and, therefore, will attract residents with cheap apartments and low maintenance costs.

The book contained detailed description models of the garden city, as well as its plans. The Howard writers condescendingly looked at these naive drawings and did not take them too seriously. It's a pity, although Howard himself noted that his drawings are only schematic sketches. To understand Howard's conceptual positions properly, it is necessary to imagine a walk through an imaginary city and carefully study his plans. This is especially important because in practice the city's gardens were very different from the prototype, and in discussions about Howard, his position was repeatedly distorted.

The garden city plan is circular, divided by the main streets into six sectors. The central part of the city is formed by a garden and park complex with free-standing public buildings: a town hall, a concert hall, a theater, a library, a hospital and a museum. The park is surrounded by a wide glazed portico, a covered promenade with shops adjacent to it. A belt about 500 m wide around the city center is intended for residential construction. It is crossed by the "Grand Avenue", which forms an additional park. There are schools and churches on the residential area. A narrow strip bordering residential areas is set aside for accommodation industrial enterprises and warehouses. On the outskirts of the city there are agricultural land, gardens, etc.

Analysis of the implementation of Howard's concept of "combining a city with a village", which found expression in individual building surrounded by greenery indicates a perversion or at least a simplification of Howard's idea. He saw such a combination, first of all, surrounded by the city itself with agricultural land, five times the size of its area. In this city, residential neighborhoods occupy a small area (about 235 m 2); within their limits, it is difficult to make contact between man and nature, even if the garden plots near the houses were organized as single green complexes, and it was this possibility that was allowed in Howard's book. The schematic plan of the city, however, provided for very large areas of public green space. A huge territory was allocated for the central park - almost 60 hectares. The presence of a whole system of public green spaces within the city was to become, along with the preservation of the agricultural environment, a decisive means of providing residents of garden cities with the opportunity to communicate with nature. "Grand Avenue" is a large green area of ​​46 hectares. Consequently, the garden city would have more than 35 m2 of green space common use per inhabitant and almost 20 m 2 for each house.

However, the plan for the first realized garden city, Lechworth, whose construction began in 1904, was significantly different from the city-country combination thus understood. Public parks occupied a very modest area. The strip of farmland in the garden city was also not as wide as Howard had envisioned.

The city, located 35 miles from London, is developing very slowly. By the beginning of the First World War, its population barely reached 9 thousand inhabitants. In 1919, on the initiative of Howard, the construction of another city, located much closer to London, began - Velvin. Its construction also proceeded at an insufficient pace. Instead of the numerous cities that were supposed to arise around London, by the beginning of the world war there were only two garden cities with a total population of 35 thousand inhabitants. Since the publication of Howard's book, the population of Great Britain has grown by 10 million. Two "satellites", which were hardly launched into a distant orbit, despite Howard's promises, could not contain the massive influx of population to London. The number of inhabitants of the metropolitan agglomeration increased from 6 to 8 million people. Howard's basic assumption turned out to be utopia.

The error in his reasoning consisted primarily in underestimating the importance of the influence of the production factor on settlement. True, Howard envisaged the presence of industrial enterprises in his city, but these were objects, the scale of which corresponded to locality with a population of 30 thousand. The role of a powerful magnet that attracts the rural population to the cities is played by a different kind of industry. Large enterprises with thousands and tens of thousands of employees, requiring certain conditions for placement and often having a harmful effect on the surrounding territories, did not fit into the proposed structure. Describing an idyllic, smoke-free city surrounded by grassland, woodland and orchard, Howard sought to counter the powerful economic forces that led to the concentration of industry, management and services, and the emergence of huge urban agglomerations. He tried to achieve this by creating better conditions life.

This was his main, but not the only argument. The garden city was supposed to attract the population also with a lower cost of land plots, and, consequently, a lower rent. However, in this case, Howard's reasoning turned out to be incorrect. He took into account the need to prevent land speculation and demanded that the territory of the city and the surrounding agricultural areas should become public property. According to Howard's concept, a second garden city should arise in close proximity to the first. In reality, however, it was founded where it was possible to find fairly cheap land plots. To avoid the rise in land prices in the territories necessary for the restructuring of multimillion-dollar London in accordance with the proposed recipe, it would be necessary, first of all, to restrain the growth of land rent in the areas surrounding the city. Howard, on the other hand, sought to avoid violating the interests of landowners and to carry out the reform as "calm" as possible.

Equally unrealistic was the assumption that the large-scale construction of new cities, the purpose of which was to modify the existing agglomerations and the proper placement of the population arriving from the villages, could be carried out sequentially without the use of significant public funds. Building new cities with all public services is an innovative solution that is both difficult and costly. At the first stages of implementation, such cities may be unattractive for private investors. And besides, in order for the constructed paintings to contribute to the improvement of overpopulated and uncomfortable cities, they must be accessible to the broad masses of the population. In the specific social conditions in which Howard worked, achieving this goal was not possible without public subsidies.

Howard's concept was utopian because it was a half-hearted solution. Population structure is always a consequence of prevailing socio-economic relations. It cannot be changed without breaking the foundations on which it rests. It is impossible to achieve a radical change in the principles of the placement and construction of cities without the use of radical methods. Howard envisioned that the creation of the first garden city would lead to a revolution in urban planning, just as happened in the field of transportation after the opening of the first railway line. However, this assumption was incorrect. If the invented locomotive could be successfully used within the framework of prevailing socio-economic relations, then the consistent implementation of Howard's principles would require their change.

Despite all the naivety and erroneousness of Howard's reasoning, despite the utopianism of his basic concept, the book on garden cities contained many truly innovative and correct provisions. The understanding of the big city as a system of elements endowed with certain functions and included in turn into larger structural units was innovative. Consequently, Howard, at the end of the last century, put forward the principle of allocating hierarchically subordinate structural units of different sizes, which later played an important role in the theory of urban planning.He also showed the need for a proper connection between place of residence and place of work in order to reduce the time residents have to spend on the road. ... The consequence of this requirement was the opposition to the “bedroom suburbs” that emerged at that time on the outskirts of English cities, urban-type settlements with industrial enterprises and consumer services.

Howard's concept was based on the permeation of the city with a network of interconnected green spaces for various purposes, easily accessible to residents. Her undoubted merit was also an indication of the need to socialize urban and suburban lands.

Howard's activities included not only theory but also practice. Along with writing a book on the cities of the future, he began building the first two cities. On his initiative, rationally designed cities arose, which were not built by capitalists seeking benefits, and not by industrialists creating settlements for their workers, but by public organizations.

Howard's theoretical work, his active advocacy work, and finally, success in the implementation of projects - all this greatly influenced the development of urban planning. The interest in the problems of urban planning has increased. The reports of the creation of a new model city, complemented by data on the world's lowest death rate in Letchworth, gave hope and stimulated further attempts and searches. Even if these searches took a slightly different path, Howard's merits in the formation and development of modern urban planning are undeniable.

Howard's ideas resonated widely in the Polish public. Soon after the publication of the book about garden cities, L. Kzhivitsky reported about it, noting that the project of garden cities aroused great interest among the British public because it did not go beyond the boundaries of the possible. The trade unions supported him and even, moreover, sought from the state authorities to make a decision on the appropriate location and expansion of industrial enterprises. Only the state, rightly argued L. Kzhivitsky, can solve the problem of better placement of the population and industry.

As the popularity of Howard's ideas grew abroad, especially under the influence of reports on the construction of Lechworth, articles written by people of various professional interests appeared in the Polish press. Interest was aroused not only by the book, but also by the implementation of new urban planning solutions in England. Vladislav Dobzhinsky, a hygienist and tireless public figure, was especially active. On his initiative, in 1909, at the Warsaw Sanitary Society, a "Commission for Garden Cities" was created, which was supposed to prepare the conditions for the construction of a demonstration suburb near Warsaw.

Polish supporters of the construction of garden cities often equated with this concept villages, consisting of individual houses surrounded by greenery. Under the conditions of Poland at that time, there was no problem of containing the growth of multimillion-dollar, disorderly urban agglomerations, which worried the British public. Howard's activities could not stimulate the creation of new cities with numerous service and

own industry. However, it aroused interest in the problems of housing construction and design, and partly in the implementation of numerous new settlements in the suburbs, such as the “garden city of Zombka”, “the village of Lyasek Mlosinsky”, etc.

Soria and Howard at the end of the 19th century. suggested two different models of the spatial organization of cities. Almost all later concepts are a development or a variety of their ideas. These two innovators deserve, in our opinion, all the more recognition because in their professional activities they were not directly related to urban planning, but dealt with its problems in the interests of society. There is nothing surprising in the fact that the schemes of cities drawn by them and their descriptions contain rather naive or dubious features. In one of his first speeches on the linear city, Soria wrote that building cities is an architect's task, "much more important than building houses."

The solutions they proposed had, however, many similarities. When Howard's concept became widely known, Soria's supporters argued, not without reason, that the linear city deserved to be called the first garden city. Soria was more radical, as he sought help from the state and especially the right to acquire the necessary territories through expropriation. The correctness of many of Soria's provisions was eventually confirmed in England. Howard's postulated city-building began to yield better results only when, after the Second World War, it received widespread government support, which Soria had vainly sought. English practice showed the inexpediency of building small towns of strictly limited size, which Soria and his followers sharply criticized, drawing attention to the dynamics of urbanization processes. In the 60s, numerous projects of cities with a zonal structure began to appear in England. This, however, does not mean that in the "fight between the linear city and the point city" the first one won.

Howard began building two cities and at the end of his life was crowned with well-deserved laurels. Soria, despite tremendous efforts, was forced to abandon the continuation of his business after the implementation of a small part of the project. Great Britain was significantly ahead of Spain in terms of socio-economic development, and in addition, its climate was more conducive to the implementation of progressive urban planning solutions. The ground for Howard's activities was prepared by numerous writers, public figures, architects and physicians who advocated better living conditions and the systematic development of cities. At the end of the XIX century. in England there were already workers' settlements that differed significantly in terms of the level of improvement from the usual mass construction. And the grain abandoned by Soria fell on uncultivated soil.

2. Purpose of recreational areas.

> Provision of land plots with engineering, utilities, transport and social infrastructure

An important issue arising in the development of territories is the need to provide land plots with engineering, communal, transport and social infrastructure. Infrastructure provision is one of the components of the life support system of the population, and it is the municipality that must plan the necessary volume and resources of infrastructure provision.

To stimulate the provision of land plots with infrastructure, it is necessary:

1. Formation of the market for engineering preparation of land plots for housing construction. The formation of such a market will allow its participants, on the basis of competitive mechanisms, to acquire land plots that are not provided with engineering infrastructure through auction procedures, with the subsequent provision of the plots with engineering infrastructure and the sale of the prepared plots to developers.

It is obvious that activities aimed at preparing land plots for integrated development should become a separate type of entrepreneurial, including exploration, activity. The market for professional deleveraging services must develop. At the initial stage of its formation, an important role should be played by a specialized agency created at the federal level - the Federal Housing Corporation, which will refinance loans issued to developers for preparing land for construction.

2. A clear statement at the legislative level of the obligation of the municipality to finance the construction of engineering and social infrastructure on the areas being developed, or, upon completion of construction, buy out the constructed objects according to estimated cost.

To this end, it is necessary to provide that before holding an auction for the right to conclude an agreement on the integrated development of the territory, the municipality must prepare a feasibility study for the engineering and transport preparation of the territory for construction, and justify the cost of building networks and social infrastructure facilities.

The construction of infrastructure facilities must be carried out on the basis of an agreement concluded by the municipality with the developer (developer).

3. Formation of mechanisms allowing municipalities to buy out engineering and social infrastructure facilities at an estimated cost. The source of funds for municipalities to pay for infrastructure facilities can be:

Funds received from the sale of land plots or the sale of the right to conclude a lease agreement for land plots for housing construction at auctions;

Income from the depreciation component in utility tariffs;

Tax revenues of local budgets.

Payment for the constructed infrastructure facilities can be carried out by offsetting the counterclaims of the municipality and the developer - from the cost of the land plot acquired at the auction, the developer pays the price minus the cost of building the infrastructure. Upon completion of the construction of these facilities, they are transferred to the municipality on account of the final payment for the land plot, with the simultaneous termination of the obligations of the municipality to pay for the contract concluded for the construction of infrastructure facilities.

Also, the mechanism of land mortgage should be considered as a source of financing the costs of municipalities for the construction or acquisition of infrastructure facilities. The duration of the installment plan, provided by mortgage lending, will largely solve the problem of the current budget deficit of municipalities.

4. Revision of the norms of legislation that establish restrictions on debt obligations of municipalities in connection with the obvious need for municipalities to attract credit resources. In particular, it is necessary to provide municipalities with the opportunity not to include in the debt book of the municipality obligations on loans for the provision of land plots with infrastructure secured by the pledge of land in municipal ownership.

5. Changing the tariff setting procedure in such a way that the profitability (fair rate of return) on the invested capital is taken into account when providing land plots with engineering infrastructure.

6. Stimulating the formation of municipal programs for the integrated development of communal infrastructure systems based on medium-term forecasts of housing and other construction. The key instrument for the implementation of such complex programs should be medium-term investment programs of the organizations of the utilities sector.

7. Stimulating the participation of utility grid organizations in providing land plots with engineering infrastructure by developing a system of refinancing loans, as well as widespread use of the depreciation component in utility tariffs.

8. Development of concession mechanisms and mechanisms for leasing infrastructure facilities, providing for long-term investment obligations of the lessee, by improving the regulatory framework and reducing risks in the implementation of concession and lease agreements arising from: lack of registered ownership of infrastructure facilities, lack of practice of their use, and also not until the end of the elaborated regulatory framework governing these mechanisms.

In addition, measures will be taken to improve planning tools at the local level in terms of coordinating plans for the development of communal, social and transport infrastructure. The need to strengthen such coordination at the level of municipalities is associated with the problems that arose in cities with the start of mass housing construction, which was not provided with appropriate infrastructure development.

When planning the construction of infrastructure facilities, issues of construction of a network of treatment facilities should be considered separately. These measures should be carried out before the implementation of projects of mass housing construction, due to the long periods required for the construction of new or reconstruction of existing treatment communications.

According to the deputy head of the Rosstroy department, Sergei Agapitov, unlike others, this subprogram is absolutely new, with new market mechanisms, "which have no analogues in recent history Russia ".

We are talking about ensuring the advanced development of communal infrastructure to increase the supply of housing in the competitive housing construction market that meets the increasing effective demand of the population.

The tasks of the subprogram are, firstly, the implementation of projects to provide land plots with communal infrastructure in various regions, secondly, demonopolization and development of competition in the housing construction market, as well as ensuring the integrated development of communal infrastructure systems, and thirdly, the creation of efficient and sustainable organizational and financial mechanisms for providing land plots with communal infrastructure.

Recall that the first Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, who is responsible for the implementation of national projects in the government, drew attention to monopoly and clannishness in housing construction. Indeed, from a business point of view, a tidbit is offered.

For the implementation of the subprogram in 2006-2010, 285.6 billion rubles will be allocated, including from the federal budget - 22.5, from regional and local budgets - 29.5, plus funds from private creditors - 240.6 billion rubles.

In the federal budget in 2006 for subsidizing interest rates on attracted Russian loans to provide land plots with communal infrastructure for housing construction, 1.7 billion rubles were taken into account outside its framework. We add that the Program of State Domestic Borrowings of the Russian Federation provides state guarantees for bank loans for the provision of land plots with communal infrastructure for housing construction in the amount of 88.5 billion rubles. The volume of guarantees will be increasing: in 2006 - 12.5 billion, in 2007 - 17.5, in 2008 - 18.6, in 2009 - 19.5, in 2010 - 20.4 billion rubles. According to Rosstroy forecasts, the implementation of the subprogram will provide additional commissioning of more than 60 million square meters of housing, including 4.3 million square meters in 2006 (8.5 percent of total housing commissioning); in 2007 - 7.8 (13.9 percent); in 2008 - 11.8 (18.7 percent), in 2009 - 16.4 (23.2 percent); in 2010 - 21.3 million square meters (26.6 percent).

To activate market processes from 2008, the emphasis will be placed on economic entities - builders (developers) or the organization of the communal complex. The subprogram includes two measures of state support: the provision of state guarantees of the Russian Federation and the subsidization of interest on bank loans.

According to Rosstroy, the amount of federal budget funds and the amount of state guarantees of the Russian Federation for the implementation of projects will not exceed the amount of own funds of the regional and local budgets and the amount of state guarantees of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal guarantees for the provision of similar support measures. The subprogram provides for various combinations of measures to support the provision of land plots with communal infrastructure at the regional (local) and federal levels. For example, federal center, regions or municipalities can provide partial guarantees and subsidize interest rates for both the same and different loans.

It is emphasized that the use of guarantees is not for full, but only for partial security of each of the loans. This should induce lending banks to be more picky about the selection of projects. At the request of banks, the borrower can provide additional security for the part of the loan not covered by state or municipal guarantees. Or the risks of returning this part of the loan will be borne by the creditor bank itself.

It was established that the total volume of guarantees for loans provided in 2006 should not exceed 80 percent of the principal amount of the debt, in 2007 - 65 percent, in 2008-2010 - 50 percent. Based on this, interest on loans will be subsidized at the expense of the federal and regional (local) budgets.

The calculation of the amount of subsidies in 2006 is based on a 14% loan rate. Thus, for the borrower, it can be reduced to 2.8 percent. In the future, the subsidized interest rate will also depend on the market. Loans provided at a higher than market interest rate will not be subsidized.

As for the sources of loan repayment, they will be funds from the sale or assignment of the right to lease a land plot provided with communal infrastructure, proceeds from housing built in subsequent periods, tariffs for connection to communal infrastructure systems regulated by local governments.

The procedure for providing state guarantees of the Russian Federation, as well as subsidizing interest rates, is being developed by the Ministry of Finance and will be considered by the government in January.

The selection of participants for the subprogram is made on a competitive basis, subject to the fulfillment of key directions of state policy and the positions of Russian legislation aimed at demonopolizing and developing competition in the housing construction market, as well as comprehensive development of communal infrastructure systems. At the first stage, especially in 2006, only those applications will be considered, to which the obligations of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation or municipal authorities on the implementation of directions in the coming period are attached. For each investment project, trilateral agreements are concluded between borrowers, implementing it by authorized executive bodies of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation and creditor banks.

The project should provide for leading to land plot all life support systems: heat, water, gas and power supply, sewerage and communications. The estimate for these purposes cannot exceed 15 percent of all housing construction costs on this site. Moreover, the authorities have the right and even are obliged to present requirements to developers for the construction of such housing that will meet the level of the population's ability to pay, that is, be accessible to the majority, and not to a limited circle.

According to Sergei Agapitov, the borrowers can be local authorities, organizations of the communal complex or developers. Each of them develops a business plan for the project, in form and content that meets the requirements of the bank for making a decision on lending, including the amount of necessary guarantees, terms, additional conditions.

Banks "at least" three years old, which have no tax arrears to the budgets of all levels, will be able to participate in the subprogram. The next condition is compliance with the standards, established by the instruction Central Bank "On the mandatory standards of banks" from 17.01.2004 N 110-I and the absence of losses for the last reporting year. Finally, the size of the bank's equity capital must be at least one billion rubles, and the authorized capital must be at least 500 million rubles.

To participate in the subprogram, municipalities must prove their ability to demonopolize and compete in the housing construction market, as well as the complexity of the development of communal infrastructure systems. To do this, it is necessary to adopt the main regulatory documents: land use and development rules, planning projects for urban areas intended for housing construction, programs for the integrated development of communal infrastructure systems, determination of fees for connecting to communal infrastructure systems based on the approved tariff. In addition, the selection of projects will take into account the current situation on the territory of the municipality with the use of the facilities of the communal infrastructure, as well as the elimination of dilapidated and emergency housing stock.

As the conditions for participation in the subprogram for a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, the indicators of budget discipline, as well as the volume of housing commissioned in the region per thousand people and the index of affordability of housing, will be used primarily.

Rosstroy notes that applications for participation in the subprogram must be received by him no later than February in order to become applicants in 2006 and no later than March - for inclusion in 2007. Regions with the best values ​​of the criterion - the maximum ratio of the planned commissioning of square meters of housing using federal support funds to the amount of federal support funds - will become participants in the subprogram for the current financial year. Rosstroy believes that the most serious approach to assessing the proposed projects was shown in Tatarstan and Bashkortostan, Tambov, Tomsk, Kursk and Chelyabinsk regions. These regions presented not only balanced proposals, but also preliminarily worked them out with developers and credit organizations.

Unfortunately, there are other examples when, in the wake of the National Project, they are trying to solve the tasks of building engineering networks for cottage plots with far from affordable housing at the expense of the federal budget. In some places, within the framework of the subprogram, they were going to solve the accumulated problems of municipalities in the utilities sector, forgetting about the need for additional housing as such.