A year ago, residents of house 12 on Frunzenskaya Embankment noticed that some work had begun in their attic. When asked what was going on there, the workers answered simply: “Roof repair.” Allegedly, the residents of three apartments on the top floor - 18th, 41st and 72nd - decided to repair the roof at their own expense. The management company helped them with this. It quickly became clear that the work here was not limited to roof repairs: workers began to build a two-story attic, from which a breathtaking view of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, Red October and Gorky Park would open. The common entrance to the attic was blocked and it was guarded 24/7 by private security company employees.
The house has a protected status - it is a Stalinist façade, built in the fifties according to the design of the architect Grigory Yakovlev; Apartments in the building were given to military intelligence officers after the war. Employees of the Department of Cultural Heritage found that the apartment owners did not have any permits for the dubious construction, and the piece of paper that the workers were waving had no legal value. The department ordered the work to be stopped and even went to court, but the matter never came to a hearing. Outwardly, the work seemed to have stopped. Only, as it turned out later, all this time they were simply carried out inside the attic: there they demolished the floors and wooden beams supporting the roof.
Photo: “Arkhnadzor”
On July 11, 2014, construction cranes and several trucks with construction materials arrived at the house: despite the department’s order, the owners of three apartments decided to continue work. Day and night, builders brought materials, unloaded trucks, demolished the old and built the new. As local resident Alexey Denisov says, he alone wrote more than 20 statements to the police, and there were also appeals to the Moscow Housing Inspectorate, Mosgorstroynadzor, the prefecture of the Central Administrative District, the state real estate inspectorate and even the Ministry of Emergency Situations. The complaints did not bring any results: officials sent dissatisfied residents from department to department without taking any real action. Meanwhile, the work continued: about 30-40% of the roof had already been dismantled, residents of the upper floors complained of constant roof leaks. There were clashes with workers, even fights. The police shrugged their shoulders and advised local residents to “punch them in the face” themselves.
Scheme: “Arkhnadzor”
Without waiting for help from the authorities, residents of Frunzenskaya Embankment decided to act independently. Together with municipal deputy Alexandra Parushina, Muscovites organized rally in defense of the house, which was visited by the head of the municipal district Dmitry Basharov and journalists from several television channels. The story resonated: the prosecutor's office and the commission on unauthorized construction finally became interested in the superstructure of the house. The mayor's office found out about the attic on Frunzenskaya Embankment. As a result, the construction initiators were ordered to dismantle the superstructure, which the workers completed in three days. Not only the residents of the house, but also the police were finally able to get into the attic. The builders, like their bosses, quickly disappeared. An administrative case has already been opened against the developer, and now there is talk of initiating a criminal case.
As Alexey Denisov told Gorod, all three apartments on the top floor found new owners in 2012. However, no one actually settled there. Nevertheless, according to the documents, the apartments still have owners. Apartment 41 is owned by a certain E.V. Ushakov, from whom representative Elena Ulanovskaya came during the proceedings. According to her, the owner of the apartment is in South America, so he cannot control the process of building the attic. The Bolshakov family is registered in apartment 72 - a husband and wife born in 1936, whom no one has ever seen either. Son Konstantin Bolshakov speaks on behalf of the ghostly old people. The Gazprom Energo Garant company is entirely responsible for the fate of the 18th apartment, although it is owned by a certain I.V. Kononenko.
It is unclear who is actually responsible for construction. According to municipal deputy Alexandra Parushina, the construction managers are not registered as a legal entity. Nevertheless, they spoke of themselves as a big company. “They boasted to us that this was not their first work. That they have attics on Bolshaya Molchanovka, 17, on Leninsky Prospekt and several other objects in the center. They were especially proud of Molchanovka: the house is located on Novy Arbat, on the government highway, and no one even bothered them there,” says Denisov. In addition, according to Denisov, the attackers have repeatedly reported their patrons to Gazprom and the presidential administration. The company also willingly shared its plans: as municipal deputy Alexandra Parushina says, the builders reported that such attics would appear on all houses on Frunzenskaya Embankment.
However, some company names appear in the documents. Thus, on a fake construction permit, Global-Stroy LLC, an office specializing in repairs, is indicated as the contractor.
When talking about attics along the entire embankment, the builders were not lying. In the early 90s, an additional floor in the attic was built near house 36. Over the years, the residents of the building have failed to bring anyone to justice.
At the beginning of August, Mosgorstroynadzor fined SK ProjectSpetsStroy LLC 1 million rubles for an illegal attic on Sevastopolsky Avenue (by the way, the company Gazpromneft-Center LLC, a subsidiary of Gazprom, was also involved there). On September 22, it became known that the authorities had prepared documents for the courts regarding 20 illegal attics on the roofs of residential buildings in the center of Moscow; at three more addresses, district courts had already supported the demolition, and two cases were under consideration. In particular, two houses on Novoslobodskaya Street - 14/19, building 1, and 62 - as well as building 3a, building 2, in Bolshoi Zlatoustinsky Lane will lose their superstructures.
Photo: Alexey Denisov
After a court ruling, owners of illegal rooftop apartments are required to demolish the squatter building within two months. Often this does not happen, and litigation continues.
Is it possible to legally build an attic on the roof of your house in Moscow? Can. To do this, the owner needs to submit a town planning conclusion on the superstructure project, coordinate the project with the BTI, register ownership of the premises where construction is taking place and submit a superstructure project. If the house is considered a historical building, then the project must also be coordinated with the Moscow City Heritage.
Photo: Alexey Denisov
For the residents of the house at 12 Frunzenskaya Embankment, despite the victory over lawlessness, things have not yet improved. Workers dismantled their superstructure on orders from the authorities, but part of the roof was left unroofed. In addition, the attic is filled with construction materials. According to the law, the initiators of construction, that is, the owners of the three apartments, must resolve all these problems, but they are in no hurry. According to Denisov, if the unfortunate neighbors do not put the roof in order in the near future, the city will put their apartments up for auction, and the proceeds will be used to restore the house.
The house on Frunzenskaya Embankment is an architectural monument; it was filmed in a supporting role in the film “Three Poplars on Plyushchikha.” The building was built in 1951, the architect Yakovlev did not plan an attic. But the owners of the upper apartments decided to radically change the design of the house: they removed the roof and exposed the apartments below, now rain is a natural disaster for them.
Three trials against attic invaders - zero progress. However, even a court decision does not guarantee a happy outcome.
The attic in Kalashny Lane was ordered to be demolished more than a year ago. The owner is the famous artist Nikas Safronov, and his brother lives there. The artist brothers were able to insist on a second examination, which recognized the redevelopment as legal and somehow did not take into account the cracks in the ceiling and walls of the neighbors below. Lawyers for the residents of the house have filed an appeal and hope that the court will make a decision in accordance with the law, and not in accordance with the name of the artist Safronov.
The epic continues with the attic in Bolshoi Kozikhinsky Lane. Back in July, the court decided to demolish it at the expense of the owners, giving them three months to do so. However, they filed an appeal, and for some strange reason they scheduled it until the end of February next year. Meanwhile, the cracks in the famous “House with the Lynx” have already reached the foundation.
The owners of the attics obviously never entered an architectural university. Attaching an additional tower to their fortress is not a problem for them; it doesn’t come out from above - it can be from the side. This is how ugly giant balconies arise. This week, even the Supreme Court had to clarify: any redevelopment without documents and the consent of neighbors is illegal. But the slogan “if others can do it, why can’t I” is still invincible.
Lawyers believe that those who don’t give a damn about the court’s decision can only be squeezed by increasing fines and blocking travel abroad.
“There shouldn’t be any pity or attempts to understand these owners. We shouldn’t think about how much this extension or repair cost, how it will affect the financial well-being of people who completed something without permission, without authorization,” says Artem Kiryanov, the first Deputy Chairman of the Commission for Public Control and Interaction with Public Councils of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation.
The most ruthless towards unauthorized architects is in Europe. Demolition at your own expense, no compensation, every day of delay is a fine. In England, you will have to pay 30 thousand pounds to the treasury, which is more than 2 million rubles. Every step needs to be coordinated - in Switzerland you can’t even repaint a window frame just like that.
The boom of illegal balconies and attics occurred in the 90s, as with other unauthorized buildings - stalls and pavilions. And it is not the balconies that need to be rebuilt, but the consciousness of enthusiastic designers.
Now the supervisory authorities are actively discussing a complete moratorium on any changes to houses within the Garden Ring. Ancient buildings may not survive until the end of legal proceedings regarding the next attic.
Recently, the capital's authorities have declared a real war on attic owners. Moscow courts are considering dozens of claims by officials against companies and individuals who reconstructed attic floors located above their premises. However, as an analysis of judicial practice shows, under certain circumstances, attic owners can successfully fight off the claims brought against them.
As a rule, prefectures file lawsuits for the demolition of attics, and less often - the Department of Cultural Heritage (if the attic is located on the roof of a building recognized as a historical monument). Typically, officials demand that an attic created without obtaining the necessary permits be recognized as an unauthorized construction (Article 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), and also oblige the owner to independently demolish the superstructure at his own expense, or to recover from the defendant the costs of dismantling (which costs 13–15 thousand . rub. per sq. m).
Most often, plaintiffs refer to the fact that the attic was built in the absence of permits. This, in their opinion, violates the rights and legally protected interests of other persons or creates a threat to the life and health of citizens. “However, the absence of such a permit does not in itself mean that unauthorized construction poses a threat to the life and health of citizens,” notes lawyer Oleg Sukhov.
Within the meaning of Art. 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as based on judicial practice, the lack of permission is not enough to recognize the construction as unauthorized and its demolition. Dismantling is possible only if specific violations of town planning and building codes were committed during the construction of the disputed building. But officials are often unable to prove this fact. It also matters whether the person who created the unauthorized construction took appropriate measures to legalize it - in particular, to obtain a construction permit or an act of putting the facility into operation, as well as whether the authorized body lawfully refused to issue such a permit or act.
In one of the court cases regarding the demolition of an attic in Moscow, officials attached to the lawsuit the opinion of “pocket” experts about the non-compliance of the disputed building with urban planning and construction standards and even that it poses a threat to the life and health of citizens. However, when interviewing the expert in court, it turned out that conclusions about risks were made only on the basis of the fact that there was no design documentation. A re-examination, carried out at the request of the defendant using instrumental research methods, made it possible to prove the safety of the attic and prevent its demolition.
A strong argument against demolition can be the risk of damage to the building when dismantling the attic. Lawyer Oleg Sukhov cites a specific case from judicial practice. A Moscow entrepreneur built an attic on the roof of a pre-revolutionary building on Taganka without obtaining permits. The prefecture sued him and demanded that the unauthorized construction be demolished, which also allegedly violated the appearance of the façade of the historical building. The judicial construction and technical examination appointed in the case came to the conclusion that the demolition of the attic would cause irreparable damage to the building built in 1830. Namely, the walls will be damaged, including the supporting part of the internal load-bearing walls, and individual elements of the facade. As a result, after listening to experts, the court came to the conclusion that there was no objective need to demolish the attic. Another attic owner, in a similar demolition case, managed to prove that the operation of the building after the demolition of the attic floor would be impossible due to the lack of insulation of the top floor.
According to , a common reason for dismissal of claims for the demolition of attics is the missed statute of limitations. Often, officials try to dismantle attics built in the late nineties and early 2000s, while the general statute of limitations is three years (Article 196 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). “The limitation period begins from the moment when the plaintiff learned or should have learned that the disputed structures were erected without a building permit. However, the officials themselves bring documents to the court indicating that facts of building attics without permission were recorded 8–10 years ago. In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 199 of the Civil Code, the expiration of the limitation period, the application of which was declared by the defendant, is an independent and sufficient basis for refusing the claim.”
The capital authorities have prepared documents for the courts regarding 20 illegal attics on the roofs of residential buildings in the center of Moscow; at three more addresses, district courts have already supported the demolition; two cases are under consideration.. Basically, additional living spaces are equipped in the attics, for example, in one of houses, a toilet, a kitchen and a personal office were made in the appropriated attic. In addition, luxury apartments in attics built more than 10 years ago may be demolished.
As part of the program to identify self-construction in the city, the prefecture of the Central Administrative District has prepared documents to submit to court for 25 illegal attics on the roofs of houses in the city center, said Pavel Bolshunov. According to him, 5 addresses with such buildings are already under construction, of which three decisions have been made in favor of demolition. In particular, superstructures two and no. 62 will be lost, as well as building no. 3A building 2 in Bolshoi Zlatoustinsky Lane.
So, on Novoslobodskaya Street in house No. 62, the owner of one of the apartments equipped a toilet, kitchen and personal office in the attic, occupying 112 square meters. meters of common property
“The owners were given two to three months to dismantle, but they are in no hurry to liquidate their attics,” the site’s interlocutor noted. All three unauthorized buildings must be demolished no later than October 2014. If the buildings are not eliminated within the specified period, they will be dismantled by the State Budgetary Institution "Highways of the Central Administrative District", and the owners of the unauthorized construction will have to compensate for the costs of the work.
At another address on Novoslobodskaya Street, the deadline for self-dismantling expires on September 23, but the owner has not yet dismantled the structure. “There has been a two-meter-high superstructure erected on the roof of the building with skylights. Communications have not yet been connected, which will facilitate the demolition of the facility,” said an official representative of the prefecture.
Also, unauthorized construction sites were identified on Sretensky Boulevard, Myasnitskaya Street, Bolshaya Ordynka, Bolshoy Trekhgorny and Kolokolnikov Lanes, on Frunzenskaya Embankment. “The total number of such buildings in the center has not yet been fully calculated - surveys are ongoing,” said a representative of the prefecture.
In addition, luxury apartments are now being examined, which at one time were built in rooms on the attic floors, converted from non-residential to residential. “The windows of such apartments, as a rule, overlook the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, embankments, the Garden Ring, and so on,” noted Pavel Bolshunov. However, these cases have not yet reached the courts. “It is often difficult to prove the illegality of the equipment of such apartments, they are more than 10 years old, they were created with violations, but at the same time they were purchased by the current owners legally - under sales and purchase agreements. In addition, the owners do not allow any inspections, hiring private security companies for security their attics,” explained Bolshunov.
Illegal attics will be dismantled in sections in order to immediately renew the roof where necessary, Bolshunov said. “In some places we are even considering the possibility of access to the roof using external lifts. It is often impossible to get to the self-built building from the entrance - the apartment owners do not allow workers to begin dismantling,” Bolshunov explained.
It may take about a year and a half to demolish all 25 structures. “For about a year, there are trials on the object, then the owner is given time to dismantle it on his own, then the case is transferred to the bailiffs, after which competitive procedures are held to select an organization that will restore the roof. And only after that can work begin,” the prefecture said. In addition, sometimes the owner begins to submit documents after the fact in order to protect his self-construction. Then the proceedings drag on and the attic cannot be demolished.
Let us note that in order for the attic not to be considered a self-construction, the owner needs to submit a town planning conclusion on the superstructure project, coordinate the project with the BTI, register ownership of the premises where construction is taking place and submit a superstructure project. If the house is a historical monument, then the project must also be coordinated with the Moscow City Heritage.
As noted by the former head of NIIiPI Sergei Tkachenko, the construction of attics on residential buildings has not been welcomed by Moskomarkhitektura since 1995. “Even then it was decided that such a structure as an attic was not typical for metropolitan architecture. Such superstructures were usually not approved by architectural councils,” the expert said.
The expert agrees that the capital does not need attics on the roofs. “But if we are talking about the development of attic space, then you can think about it. Perhaps it is worth giving people the opportunity, according to a simplified scheme, to expand their apartments into attics, so that these empty spaces can be used. People will pay taxes, utility bills, and so on for legal extensions.” , - noted the expert.
“If the owner of an apartment, without the consent of the residents, has erected a superstructure over his apartment, then it is necessary not only to oblige him to demolish the squatter structure, but to assess the damage that such construction could cause to the house,” notes Dmitry Gordeev, leading legal consultant in the Urban Management department of the Institute of Urban Economics. According to him, due to such construction, the water pressure in the house may drop or the temperature of the radiators may decrease. The owner who seized the attic must also compensate for this damage.
As for cases where the owner does not demolish the squatter building by court decision, according to Gordeev, according to the Housing Code, the Moscow Housing Inspectorate has the right to take away the entire apartment from the tenant and sell it at auction at a discount. “And the new owner must promise to return the attic to its original appearance,” he said.
Let us note that this year there was already an illegal attic on Pasternak’s house in Oruzheyny Lane. A Japanese cafe and a French pancake house were organized there, and the building itself appeared in 2002. At the same time, the owners of the superstructure will have to pay 5 million rubles for dismantling and restoring the roof.
It should be noted that at the end of 2013, the capital's authorities ordered unauthorized construction projects to be demolished. The largest number of illegal objects were identified in the North-Eastern District - 108, followed by the North - 106, and the South-East - 105. In the Southern Administrative District, officials will demolish 99 buildings, in the Eastern Administrative District - 79, in the South-Western Administrative District - 62, in the Western Administrative District - 54, in the North-Western Administrative District – 29. Four unauthorized buildings were found in Zelenograd, and 5 in the Novomoskovsk district. Most of the objects were extensions and shopping pavilions. In the Central District, 74 buildings were earmarked for demolition.
Daria Mironova
.jpg)
