Search recommendations
    Big Real Estate Portal, 21 January 2019
    The current legislation in the field of urban planning has contradictions and needs to be adjusted

    Dmitry Medvedev discovered that business is choking on outdated business requirements. The editors of the "Big Real Estate Portal" interviewed market experts about what requirements are completely outdated in the construction industry.

    Kirill Chebakov, Deputy General Director of the Metropolis company: “Construction is a complex process.., the process of implementing design solutions. Having understood this, it becomes obvious that when we say “Obsolete requirements in construction”, in the vast majority of cases we are talking directly about the design. Important aspects, of course, are the stages of obtaining initial permits and commissioning (transfer to the balance sheet), but let's leave this at the mercy of the executive branch.

    As for the design, to be more precise, the current regulatory legal acts... To begin with, I will give an example of the discrepancy between the requirements of the norms and modern realities:

    According to the Code of Practice 30.13330.2012 clause 8.5.2 “Industrial wastewater containing flammable liquids, suspended solids, fats, oils, acids and other substances that disrupt the normal operation or cause destruction of networks and treatment facilities, as well as containing valuable production waste, should be clean before they enter the external sewerage network, for which the building or beside it there should be an installation of local treatment plants. At the same time, clause 8.5.4 - “It is not allowed to install settling tanks inside buildings to trap rapidly decaying impurities, as well as traps for flammable and combustible liquids”.

    First, we see a discrepancy - clause 8.5.2 allows the installation of treatment equipment inside the building, but clause 8.5.4 does not. Secondly, in the modern world, when it is often impossible to divert runoff from catering establishments by gravity, it is necessary to install a grease trap inside the building, which does not meet the requirements of clause 8.5.4. At the same time, equipment is used all over the world (and in our country as well), which allows it to be installed inside buildings. But due to the requirements of the Code of Practice, each time this deviation has to be prescribed in the Special Specifications.

    In fact, there are, unfortunately, thousands of such contradictions. And if in this example one can refer to the incorrect interpretation and / or perception, then there are much more serious contradictions of regulatory legal acts to each other at the borders of contact between adjacent sections, such as VKiPT and OV, for example. Both sections are directly related to heating and, accordingly, each section tries to regulate this area from its own point of view, often contradicting the adjacent one. This is due to the fact that Codes of Practice and other legal acts are created, supplemented and updated by a number of companies, usually ordinary LLCs, which do not always understand the issue.

    Our government, trying to correct the situation of contradictions that have arisen, has issued the notorious Government Resolution 1521, which just says which paragraphs or even entire documents are binding and which are not. This is a good thing, but even here it was not without blunders: SanPiN 2.2.1 / “Hygienic requirements for insolation and sun protection of residential and public buildings and territories” is not in the specified Government Resolution, but it is mandatory, and so on.

    The bottom line is the following: the current regulations are subject to adjustments with enviable regularity, the government updates its regulations like this: do not look there, look here, and the designers are trying to follow all this. It turns out badly, slowly and with errors.

    Drawing a conclusion, I want to say: of course, a number of legal acts are outdated (for various reasons), but the main problem is not in this, but precisely in the fact that the system for preparing, issuing and updating these very documents is faulty in itself and requires a fundamentally different approach. There should be a single state body, existing or newly created, which will be responsible for the entire legal framework and the correlation of all documents with each other.

    Further, it is necessary to restructure the entire system in principle: from a permissive one (the norms describe only what is allowed), everything else is interpreted by experts as “no one did this, I will not agree on it” and switch to a prohibitive one (the norms describe only what is forbidden). This will definitely make it possible to get away from the ambiguity of interpretation of the norms and, most importantly, it will make it possible to apply truly original and modern solutions in projects.

    In other words, only by approaching the problem in a comprehensive, systematic way, we will be able to significantly move forward the building complex of the Russian Federation”.