Ministry of Fuel and Energy of the Russian Federation
INSTRUCTIONS
FOR PLACEMENT AND OPERATION
CAR PARKING GARAGES,
OWNED BY CITIZENS,
IN SECURITY ZONES OF AIR LINES
POWER TRANSMISSIONS WITH VOLTAGE OVER 1 kV
RD 34.02.201-91
APPROVED by the Main Technical Directorate of the USSR Ministry of Energy on October 27, 1991.
AGREED with the GUPO Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR
Preface
This Instruction contains the basic requirements for the installation of cooperative garages owned by citizens when they are located in security zones of overhead power lines with voltages over 1 kV, as well as additional requirements for the installation of overhead power lines due to the placement of garages in security zones. The requirements of the Instructions are aimed at ensuring the safety of people, preserving property, and reliable operation of lines. Intended for engineering and technical workers of design, research, and operational organizations involved in the design and operation of overhead power lines and garages located in the security zones of the lines.
The requirements of the Instruction are mandatory for all ministries and departments.
Deputy Chief
Chief technical department
Ministry of Energy
and electrification of the USSR K.M. ANTIPOV
1. SCOPE, DEFINITIONS
1.1 The requirements of the “Instructions for the placement and operation of parking garages for cars owned by citizens in security zones of overhead power lines with voltages over 1 kV” apply to newly constructed and reconstructed cooperative ground-based, one-story garages for individual cars* located in security zones** overhead power lines (VL) with voltage over 1 kV.
The requirements of the Instruction also apply to newly constructed and reconstructed overhead lines, in the security zone of which existing garages are located.
* In the future - garages.
** Security zone of an overhead line is a land plot and air space limited by vertical planes spaced on both sides of the line from the outermost wires when their position is not deviated at a distance of: 10 m for overhead lines up to 20 kV; 15m for 35 kV overhead line; 20 m for 100 kV overhead line; 25 m for overhead lines 150, 220 kV; 30 m for overhead lines 300, 500, +400 kV; 40 m for overhead line 750, +750 kV; 55m for 1150 kV overhead line.
1.2 The placement of garages in security zones of overhead lines (see these Instructions) is permitted with the written consent of the owner of the overhead line.
1.3 Garages located in security zones of overhead lines, as well as overhead lines in the security zone of which garages are located, must also meet the requirements of other regulatory documents related to their design and operation.
1.4 Garages must be constructed according to a design agreed upon with the owner of the overhead line.
Before the start of construction and installation work, the customer or owner of the overhead line must notify the nearest fire department in writing about the planned new building.
1.5 The meanings of the terms “should”, “usually”, “should”, “allowed”, “recommended” correspond to those specified in § 1.1.17 of the “Electrical Installation Rules (PUE)”. Sixth ed., revised. and additional (M.: Energoatomizdat, 1985).
1.6 CONSTRAINTED CONDITIONS - territories saturated with above-ground or underground communications, structures, structures, where the independent (without taking into account mutual influence) location of the objects under construction is excluded, and their placement on another territory cannot be technically and economically justified.
2. SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS
2.1 When placing garages in security zones of overhead lines, dangerous electrical potentials caused by electrostatic and electromagnetic induction during operation of overhead lines can be induced on metal car bodies, metal and reinforced concrete fences, and metal pipelines.
Dangerous electrical potentials on overhead power line supports and adjacent areas of the ground can also appear during lightning strikes and insulation failures, as well as near a broken wire lying on the ground. In this regard, in garages located in security zones of overhead lines, it is prohibited:
2.1.1 Approach wires lying on the ground, as well as overhead line supports with broken wires, at a distance of less than 20 m.
2.1.2 Climb onto the roof if there are broken wires on the overhead line.
2.1.3 Take any action yourself to remove a broken wire from a car or garage roof, manually or using any objects.
2.1.4 Touch the supports, climb on them or tie animals to them.
2.1.5 Organize open parking for cars outside garages.
2.1.6 Light a fire, perform work leading to contamination of overhead line insulation, as well as welding and painting work.
2.2 If the distance to a broken wire lying on the ground is less than 20 m, you can only move away from it by jumping on one or two legs closed together.
3. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
3.4 The metal roof of garages located in the security zones of overhead lines must be grounded. For a non-metallic roof, a metal mesh must be laid over it and grounded. The mesh must be made of round steel or steel wire with a diameter of at least 6 mm.
For an overhead line voltage of 110-220 kV, the cross-section of round steel or wire must be tested for thermal resistance taking into account the requirements of § 1.7.77 PUE. The pitch of the mesh cells should be no more than 1.0x1.0 m. The mesh nodes should be connected by welding.
Down conductors from a metal roof or metal mesh must be laid at least every 25 m.
3.5 For garages located in security zones of overhead lines, a grounding device must be installed.
The resistance of the grounding device must be no more than 10 Ohms. The resistance of grounding devices of garages located in the security zone of overhead lines up to 35 kV, except for overhead lines of 35 kV that have protection against ground faults with a shutdown effect, must also meet the requirements of §§ 1.7.57 and 1.7.58 PUE. With an overhead line voltage of 110-220 kV, the grounding device for garages must be made in the form of a circuit covering the perimeter of the garages from the outside, in accordance with the requirements of § 1.7.35 PUE.
Grounding the fence of garages and laying utilities through the fence should be carried out in accordance with the requirements of § 1.7.54 PUE.
Connecting the grounding device of garages to the grounding conductors of overhead line supports and switchgears (RU) of stations and substations is not allowed. The distance from the grounding device of garages to the grounding conductors of overhead lines and switchgear of electrical stations and substations must be at least: 5 m for overhead lines and switchgear up to 35 kV, 10 m for overhead lines and switchgear of 100 kV and above.
3.6 The horizontal distance from overhead line supports, guy wires and foundations to protruding parts of garages must be at least 6.0 m.
3.7 Garage premises should, as a rule, be located across the overhead lines. Entries and exits from garages should be in the direction opposite to the overhead line.
3.8 On the territory of garages, access to overhead line supports must be provided, allowing the use of mechanisms for installation, operation and repair work.
3.9 In the security zones of overhead lines, it is prohibited to set up washing stations, painting stations, or overpasses for car repairs.
3.10 Garages must have fire resistance grades I and II. The fire resistance limit of the coating must be at least 0.5 hours.
3.11 In garages located in security zones of overhead lines, the following must be provided:
3.11.1 Automatic fire alarm in all premises. The signal is output to the premises of the garage attendant and to the control center of the power grid enterprise or to the supply substation if it has personnel on duty around the clock.
Signal transmission points can be specified during specific design, taking into account local conditions in agreement with the power grid company and fire authorities.
3.11.2 Telephone communication with the dispatcher of the power grid enterprise or supply substation if there is staff on duty around the clock.
3.11.3 From the entrance side of mobile fire extinguishing equipment, there are bends from the grounding device, distributed along the length of the garage in increments of no more than 50 m, for grounding mobile fire extinguishing equipment.
3.11.4 In the duty officer’s room there is a place for storing dielectric boots, dielectric gloves, portable grounding for mobile fire extinguishing equipment, mobile fire extinguishers.
3.12 On an overhead line in the security zone of which garages are located, it must be possible to disconnect the line from the control center of the power grid enterprise if the supply substation does not have personnel on duty.
4. OPERATIONAL MEASURES
4.1 Garage owners must comply with the requirements of the current Rules for the protection of electrical networks with voltages over 1000 volts, these Instructions, and fire safety rules.
4.2 To carry out maintenance and repair of overhead lines, line owners must have the right to unhindered, 24-hour access to the territory of garages located in security zones of overhead lines.
4.3 Garage owners must inform the owner of the overhead line about all cases of damage to the overhead line.
4.4 Operational tests of garage grounding devices and protective equipment must be carried out to the extent and within the time limits established by the current Rules for the technical operation of power plants and networks and the Rules for the application and testing of protective equipment used in electrical installations.
4.5 Fire extinguishing in garages located in the security zones of overhead lines is carried out by fire departments with written permission issued by the electric grid company only after the line is disconnected.
4.6 Owners of overhead lines, administration and garage owners must be familiarized with the requirements of this Instruction and the procedure for fire departments when extinguishing a fire.
From now on, parking garages for personal vehicles cannot be located in the security zones of high-voltage power lines. A decree on this was signed by Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev on August 26.
The current procedure for determining the security zones of electrical grid facilities with voltages over a thousand volts (1 kV) prohibited the location of garages and parking lots of all types of machines and mechanisms on land plots located within their boundaries. An exception was made only for parking garages for cars owned by individuals, but now it has been decided to abolish this “benefit”.
According to JSC Lenenergo, in various areas of St. Petersburg there are several dozen overhead power lines (power lines) with voltages of 6, 10, 35 and even 110 kV. The energy company’s press service found it difficult to name their exact number, location, length and area, explaining that lines of different voltage classes have different boundaries of security zones. According to the rules, for 6 or 10 kV power lines it is installed 5-10 meters from the outermost wires on each side, for 35 kV - 15 meters, and so on. In addition to Lenenergo, high-voltage lines are under the jurisdiction of JSC FGC UES, and the urban area occupied by their security zone is estimated at 10 - 27 square meters. km, which is larger than the area of the entire Petrograd region.
Each car owner can find out whether his garage or parking lot is located in a security zone through the Regional Geographic Information System by setting the appropriate conditions (layers “Real Estate Cadastre Information” - “Special Use Zones”). For example, almost the entire Marshal Blucher Avenue is located in the power line zone, including part of the land plots specially allocated for parking along its northern (even-numbered) side. Energy workers threaten parking lots and garages located on Malaya Balkanskaya Street and in other areas of the Northern capital.
Also, the Russian government de facto announced an “electricity amnesty.” From now on, for facilities commissioned before 2009, energy companies may not agree with the supervisory authorities on the boundaries of security zones, and by the end of 2014 they may transfer information about such areas to the cadastral chamber. Thus, the owner of even a new garage, who has taken all the necessary precautions, may not be aware of the dangerous neighborhood and the consequences arising from it.
Let us recall that, according to the cooperation agreement concluded back in December 2010 between JSC FGC UES and the government of the Northern capital, by 2016 the energy company undertook to cable (move underground) 80 kilometers of power lines located on the territory of St. Petersburg with a voltage of 220-330 kV.
Appeal ruling of the Investigative Committee for civil cases of the Belgorod Regional Court dated April 3, 2012 in case No. 33-771
The Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Belgorod Regional Court, consisting of:
presiding Filipchuk S.A.
judges: Gertseva A.I., Bezukh A.N.
under secretary M.A. Yevtushenko
appeal of IDGC of Centre, JSC represented by the branch of IDGC of Centre, JSC - Belgorodenergo
on the decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Belgorod dated December 12, 2011 in the case of the claim of IDGC of Center, JSC, represented by the branch of IDGC of Center, JSC - Belgorodenergo, against S. B. Kulev on recognition of the garage as an unauthorized construction, demolition of an unauthorized building, termination of state registration of the right, exclusion of the record of state registration of the right in the counterclaim of S. B. Kulev for recognition of ownership of the garage,
Having heard the report of Judge A.N. Bezukh, the explanations of the representatives of the branch of IDGC of Center JSC - Belgorodenergo - E.V. Maksimova, V.I. Osetrova who supported the arguments of the appeal, the explanations of the representative S.B. Kulev - A.M. Ukolov, who objected to the satisfaction of the complaint, the judicial panel,
INSTALLED:
IDGC of Center JSC is the owner of the overhead power transmission line structure "data withdrawn" N N. The ownership right was registered on 04/22/2008 on the basis of the connection agreement dated 12/3/2007, the transfer act of JSC Energy and Electrification "Belgorodenergo", reorganized into accession form dated December 3, 2007.
On December 17, 2009, a land lease agreement was concluded between the Municipal District "City of Belgorod" and IDGC of Center JSC, under which IDGC of Center JSC leased land plots for a period of 25 years for the operation of non-residential buildings, structures - overhead lines power transmission
The named air line was put into operation in 1962, which is confirmed by the technical passport of the BTI dated DD.MM.YYYY, is on the balance sheet of the branch of IDGC of Center JSC and is in operation (operated) to the present time.
As a result of repeated inspections carried out since 2008, to ensure safe operating conditions for the overhead power line "data withdrawn" "N" and to exclude the possibility of damage to the power line, the personnel of IDGC of Center, JSC, revealed that in the security zone of the power line between the supports N and N under “data seized” on the land plot at the address: “address” construction of a garage with an area of “data seized” sq.m. was carried out.
The construction of the garage in the security zone was carried out by S.B. Kulev, the land plot under the garage was subsequently given ownership.
The case was initiated by a claim by IDGC of Center, JSC, represented by the branch of IDGC of Centre, JSC - Belgorodenergo (hereinafter referred to as IDGC of Centre, JSC). Taking into account the specified requirements, they asked to recognize the garage erected in the security zone of electrical networks as an unauthorized construction, to oblige S.B. Kulev. carry out the demolition of a garage built unauthorized in the protected zone of electrical networks within 30 days from the moment the court decision enters into legal force, terminate the state registration of ownership of the garage and exclude the entry on the state registration of the right from the unified register of rights to real estate and transactions with it.
In justification they referred to the fact that during the construction by V.B. Kulev. facility in the security zone of power lines, consent was not obtained from the operating organization, construction was carried out without obtaining design and permitting documentation, on a land plot for which restrictions on use were established in the security zone of power lines, which prevents the repair and maintenance of the overhead line, endangering life and health of citizens.
Kulev S.B. filed a counterclaim for recognition of ownership of the unauthorized garage.
The court decision rejected the counterclaim and the initial claim.
In the appeal, IDGC of Center JSC asks to cancel the decision, citing incomplete clarification of the circumstances relevant to the case, incorrect application of substantive and procedural law.
In the filed objections, the representative of Kuleva S.B. - Ukolov A.M. asks the decision to be left unchanged and the appeal to be dismissed.
Having checked the case materials and discussed the arguments of the appeal, the court finds them convincing.
By virtue of the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an unauthorized construction is a residential building, other building, structure or other real estate created on a land plot that is not allocated for these purposes in the manner established by law and other legal acts, or created without obtaining the necessary permits or with significant violation of town planning and construction norms and regulations.
Refusing to satisfy the demands of IDGC of Center, JSC, the court referred to the fact that the ownership of the disputed garage was registered in the prescribed manner; this circumstance, in the opinion of the court, excludes the recognition of this structure as an unauthorized construction and its demolition.
This conclusion was made without taking into account paragraph 23 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 22 of April 29, 2010 “On some issues arising in judicial practice when resolving disputes related to the protection of property rights and other property rights,” according to which, the mere fact of registration of ownership rights in the event that real estate has signs of unauthorized construction, does not exclude the possibility of filing demands for its demolition.
Thus, the court's conclusion in this part is not based on the law.
As can be seen from the technical passport, the disputed garage was erected in January 2008. In allowing the claims, the court referred to the fact that MRS Center OJSC missed the three-year limitation period.
The panel of judges cannot agree with this conclusion, since it contradicts the factual circumstances of the case.
According to the stamp of the incoming correspondence, the statement of claim was received by the court on December 30, 2010, within a three-year period from the date of construction of the garage.
In addition, as grounds for satisfying the demands for demolition, IDGC of Center JSC referred to the fact that this unauthorized construction is located in a security zone and can pose a threat to the life and health of citizens. By virtue of paragraph 22 of the said resolution, the statute of limitations does not apply to these requirements.
In such circumstances, the court's conclusions on the refusal to satisfy the requirements for the above circumstances contradict the norms of substantive and procedural law, the decision is subject to cancellation with the adoption of a new decision.
By virtue of the provisions of Art. 263 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, development of a land plot can be carried out with the permission of the owner, subject to compliance with urban planning and construction norms and rules, as well as requirements for the purpose of the land plot.
Unauthorized construction is an offense that consists of violating the norms of land legislation governing the provision of land for construction, or urban planning norms governing design and construction.
Provisions of Art. 30 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation determine the procedure for providing land plots for construction from lands in state or municipal ownership.
The decision on preliminary approval of the location of the facility is the basis for carrying out design and survey work, preparing design documentation, its coordination with architecture and urban planning authorities, other interested services, as well as the basis for the subsequent decision by the local government body to provide a land plot for construction.
According to Art. 3 of the Federal Law “On Architectural Activities in the Russian Federation”, a developer who intends to carry out construction is required to have an architectural project completed in accordance with the architectural and planning assignment issued at the request of the developer by the architecture and urban planning authority.
The provisions of Art. Art. 47, 48, 51 of the Town Planning Code of the Russian Federation and the provisions of Art. 2, 3 of the Federal Law “On Architectural Activities and the Russian Federation” provide for the fact that during capital construction an engineering survey, preparation and approval of design documentation, and obtaining a construction permit are carried out.
A building permit is a document confirming the compliance of project documentation with the requirements of the urban planning plan of a land plot and giving the developer the right to carry out construction and reconstruction of capital construction projects.
According to paragraph 2 of Art. 48 of the Town Planning Code of the Russian Federation, design documentation is documentation containing materials in text form and in the form of maps (diagrams) and defining architectural, functional-technological, structural and engineering solutions to ensure the construction and reconstruction of capital construction projects and their parts.
By virtue of the provisions of Art. 55 of the Town Planning Code of the Russian Federation, a permit is issued to put a facility into operation, which certifies the completion of the construction of the facility in full in accordance with the construction permit, the compliance of the constructed capital construction facility with the town planning plan and design documentation.
As follows from the case materials, by a resolution of the head of the Belgorod administration dated June 4, 1998, lands with an area of “data withdrawn” hectares were withdrawn from the lands of the limited liability partnership “data seized” and provided for indefinite use to L.I. Bogatyreva.
In 2007, Kulev S.B. with the permission of Bogatyreva L.I. construction of a garage has begun on a plot of land provided for indefinite use.
In violation of the above provisions, the construction of a garage by S.B. Kulev. started and carried out without obtaining permits on a land plot not allocated for these purposes.
During the inspection of the construction site with the participation of a representative of the Verkhne-Donsk Department of Rostechnadzor, it was revealed that the garage is located under the “data seized” wires and is located in a security zone, which contradicts the Rules for the protection of electrical networks with voltages over 1000 Volts approved by the resolution of the Council of Ministers of the USSR of March 26, 1984 N 255, as well as the Rules for the establishment of security zones of electric grid facilities and special conditions for the use of land plots located within the boundaries of such zones approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 24, 2009 N 160.
These rules are applicable to controversial legal relations, since during the period of the start of construction of the garage, determining its configuration and dimensions, the Rules of March 26, 1984 were in force, construction continues after the approval of the Rules on February 24, 2009.
The fact that the garage is located in the security zone is also confirmed by the conclusion of the land management examination of Pulsar Expert LLC (vol. 2 pp. 202-204).
These rules stipulate that in order to ensure safety, create normal operating conditions for electrical networks and prevent accidents, security zones and minimum permissible distances from electrical networks to buildings and structures are established. The protection of electrical networks is carried out by enterprises (organizations) that are in charge of these electrical networks. For 110 kV lines, a security zone is established along overhead power lines in the form of a land plot and air space limited by vertical planes located on both sides of the lines from the outermost wires, with their non-deviated position at a distance of 20 meters.
Thus, the requirements for maintaining the distance of the security zone are established by law, and legal entities and individuals whose land plots are located in the security zone are required to comply with these rules.
It is prohibited to carry out construction, major repairs or reconstruction of any buildings and structures in protected zones of electrical networks without the written consent of the enterprise in charge of these networks.
Position of the representative Kulev S.B. boils down to the fact that the developer at the time of putting the facility into operation was not aware of the existence of a security zone of the land plot under the garage.
This argument contradicts the factual circumstances of the case.
As can be seen from the technical passport, the garage was put into operation in January 2008.
The mere fact of a mark in the technical passport about the commissioning of the garage does not indicate the completion of the construction of the controversial facility.
Based on the presented photographs of IDGC of Center, at the time of filing a claim in court, as of December 2010 (vol. 1 case file 16-30), the construction of the facility was not completed, there were no windows, doors, not completely The roof gable has been installed, the internal and external façade finishing work has not been completed.
As follows from the conclusion of the examination carried out on the basis of the court ruling (vol. 2, pp. 202-204), as of October 12, 2011, the garage is an unfinished construction project.
From the photographs presented to the appellate court, it is clear that during the period from December 2010 to the present, the general condition of the object has changed.
This circumstance confirms the fact that Kulev S.B. Since the filing of the claim, the construction of the facility has continued, despite the fact that when Bogatyreva’s land plot was transformed into three independent ones in June 2009, when the land plot was provided to Kulev S.B. in November 2009, when concluding a contract for the purchase and sale of a land plot in February 2010, orders of the administration of the city of Belgorod and the contract for the purchase and sale of a land plot established encumbrances with the rights of third parties, in particular, the relevant city services were granted the right of unhindered access for repairs and operation Power lines, a security zone has been established.
In April 2008, Bogatyreva L.I. The deputy head of the power transmission line service was warned about the prohibition in the protected zones of electrical networks to carry out construction or major repairs without the written consent of the enterprise (organization) in charge of these networks.
Thus, the court considers it established that Kulev S.B. in the presence of a trusting relationship with L.I. Bogatyreva, he could not help but know that he was constructing a facility in a security zone and continued construction when the security zone was actually established after he was provided with a land plot without the consent of IDGC of Center.
Property right Kuleva S.B. the disputed garage was registered in a simplified manner.
The grounds indicated are: land purchase and sale agreement dated 02/03/2010, order of the Belgorod city administration dated 11/25/2009, decision of the copyright holder dated 07/28/2010.
At the same time, these documents establish restrictions on the rights to use a land plot in the power transmission line security zone, and the intended purpose of the land plot for the operation of a non-residential industrial building.
However, these restrictions are not reflected in the certificates of ownership; the purpose of the land plot is indicated for the operation of the existing garage.
These circumstances, in the presence of restrictions, failure to provide evidence of a change in the intended purpose of the land, could not serve as the basis for registering ownership of the garage in a simplified manner due to the provisions of Art. 25.3 Federal Law of July 21, 1997 “N 122-FZ “On state registration of rights to real estate and transactions with it.”
In this situation, according to Art. 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the disputed garage is an unauthorized construction, since it was erected on a land plot not allocated for these purposes, without obtaining the necessary permits or approvals from the energy supply organization in accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation.
The demolition of an unauthorized building, by its legal nature, is a way of protecting civil rights by restoring the situation that existed before the violation of the right (Article 12 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). By introducing legal regulation of unauthorized construction, the legislator established paragraph 1 of article 222 The Civil Code of the Russian Federation has three signs of unauthorized construction, namely: the building must be erected either on a land plot not allocated for these purposes in accordance with the procedure established by law, or without obtaining the necessary permits or in significant violation of town planning and construction norms and rules, (and to determine it the presence of at least one of these signs is sufficient), and established in paragraph 2 of the same article the consequences, that is, a sanction for this offense in the form of refusal to recognize the property right of the developer and the demolition of an unauthorized building by the person who carried it out or at his expense (Decision of the Constitutional Court RF dated July 3, 2007 N 595-O-P).
Kulev S.B. did not prove that he built the garage in compliance with the law and other legal acts, which serves as the basis for obliging the developer to demolish the unauthorized structure.
Recognition of the garage as an unauthorized construction and its demolition serve as the basis for making an entry in the Unified State Register of Entries about the termination of the defendant’s ownership of the unauthorized construction and the exclusion of the record of state registration of the right to the garage.
The court considers it necessary to establish Kuleva S.B. thirty-day period for demolition of unauthorized construction.
Based on the essence of the violations listed in paragraph 1 of Art. 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, claims for the demolition of unauthorized buildings can be filed by state authorities, local governments and other persons authorized to issue appropriate permits.
Such powers of IDGC of Center JSC are confirmed by paragraphs 11 of the above rules dated March 26, 1984 and February 24, 2009.
Therefore, the representative’s argument that the Belgorod branch of IDGC of Center JSC is an improper defendant in the case is not substantiated.
The objections to the appeal contain a reference to the fact that the stated demands are disproportionate to the established violations.
However, no relevant admissible evidence has been presented to support this argument.
As representatives of IDGC of Center JSC explained at the court hearing, it is impossible to eliminate the violation of the rights and legitimate interests of third parties in any other way, since the garage was almost completely built in a security zone.
Refusing to satisfy the demands for recognition of the ownership of the garage as an unauthorized building behind S.B. Kulev, the court referred to the fact that the latter’s ownership was registered in the prescribed manner.
Since the judicial panel came to the conclusion that the garage was recognized as an unauthorized construction and its demolition, there are no legal grounds for recognizing the ownership of it.
In addition to the provisions of Art. 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation excludes the possibility of recognizing the right of ownership of an unauthorized construction if its preservation poses a threat to the life and health of citizens.
The panel of judges believes that since power lines are a source of increased danger, their operation must be carried out in strict accordance with current legislation. Violation of the rules established for the operation of power lines can lead to adverse consequences, including harm to third parties. In this connection, there is a threat to residents living and owning non-residential premises in the area of unauthorized construction, since as a result of unacceptable proximity of an unfinished garage to the wires, including for reasons of a short circuit in the garage, ignition of fuels and lubricants, a fire may occur in the building, wires burn out and fall to the ground. When approaching fallen wires, electric shock may occur.
This conclusion was made taking into account the position of the Verkhne-Don Directorate of Rostechnadzor of the Federal Service for Environmental, Technological and Nuclear Supervision (vol. 1 pp. 241-246). The powers of this body in accordance with clause 5.3.1.6 of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 30, 2004 N 401 include checking compliance with safety requirements in the electric power industry.
At the same time, the essentially correct decision regarding the refusal to satisfy counterclaims must be left unchanged.
Based on the meaning of the provisions of Art. 98 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the state duty paid by IDGC-Center OJSC is subject to recovery from S.B. Kulev.
Guided by Art. Art. 327, 328-330 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, judicial panel,
DEFINITION:
Decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Belgorod dated December 12, 2011 in the case of the claim of IDGC of Center, JSC, represented by the branch of IDGC of Center, JSC - Belgorodenergo, against S. B. Kulev on recognition of the garage as an unauthorized construction, demolition of the unauthorized structure, termination state registration of rights, exclusion of the record of state registration of rights under the counterclaim of S.B. Kulev. on the recognition of ownership of the garage - to cancel in part of the refusal to satisfy the requirements of IDGC of Center, JSC.
In this part, make a new decision.
Recognize a garage built in the security zone of electrical networks (“data seized”) with a total area of “data seized” sq.m., cadastral number N, located on a land plot with cadastral number N at the address: “address” as an unauthorized construction.
Oblige S.B. Kulev to demolish an unauthorized garage built in the security zone of electrical networks with a total area of “data seized” sq.m. with cadastral number N located on a land plot with cadastral number N at the address: “address” within 30 days.
Terminate state registration of the right to a garage with a total area of “data seized” sq.m. with cadastral number N, located on a land plot with cadastral number N at the address: "address", excluding the record of state registration of rights from the unified register of rights to real estate and transactions with it.
Oblige S.B. Kulev to pay a fee in favor of Interregional Distribution Grid Company of Center OJSC represented by Belgorodenergo, a branch of IDGC of Center OJSC, in the amount of “data seized” rubles.
The rest of the decision remains unchanged.
Presiding
Case No. 2-223/2015
SOLUTION
IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Charyshsky District Court of the Altai Territory composed of:
presiding judge Chuchuiko Yu.I.,
under secretary Serebrennikova K.Yu.,
Having considered in open court a civil case based on the claim of IDGC of Siberia OJSC, represented by the Altaienergo branch, against V.A. Popov. and Popova N.V. on the demolition of a garage located in the security zone of a 10 kV overhead line,
U S T A N O V I L:
IDGC of Siberia OJSC, represented by the Altaienergo branch, filed a lawsuit against V.A. Popov. on the demolition of a garage located in the security zone of a 10 kV overhead line. In support of the stated requirements, it indicated that IDGC of Siberia OJSC, represented by the Altaienergo branch, is the owner of the power grid complex No. YUS-8 “Charyshsky”, located on the territory of --- and ---. The power grid complex No. YUS-8 includes 10 kV overhead line No. 52-9 from PS-52 village. --- south along the village. --- to s. --- with wiring along the village. ---, which has been in operation since 1974. *** When inspecting the security zone of this power line, it was found that in the spans of supports No. at the address: --- p. --- --- there is a garage, the owner of which is the defendant, which indicates a violation of the requirements of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 24, 2009 No. 160 and served as the basis for filing this statement of claim in court. The plaintiff asks the court to impose on the defendant the obligation, within a month from the moment the court decision enters into legal force, to demolish the unauthorized garage located in the security zone of the 10 kV overhead line No. 52-9 from PS-52 in spans No. 66-67 at the address: --- With. --- ---, as well as to recover the costs of paying the state duty.
*** at the court hearing, N.V. Popova was brought to participate in the case as a co-defendant.
Representative of the plaintiff Karkavin A.V. at the court hearing, he insisted on satisfying the stated demands due to the circumstances set out in the statement of claim.
Representative of the plaintiff Golovin A.V. at the court hearing, he insisted on satisfying the stated demands due to the circumstances set out in the statement of claim.
Defendant Popov V.A. did not appear at the court hearing, was properly notified, in a statement received by the court, he asked the court to consider the case in his absence, objecting to the satisfaction of the stated demands.
Defendant Popova N.V. did not appear at the court hearing, was properly notified, in a statement received by the court, she asked the court to consider the case in her absence, objecting to the satisfaction of the stated demands.
Representative of the defendant Ivanov D.V. at the court hearing, the plaintiff’s demands were not subject to satisfaction in full and indicated that the defendant V.A. Popov. in *** he built a garage on a plot of land that belonged to him. During the flood in ***, this garage was partially destroyed, but Popov V.A. in *** years he restored it without changing the location of this garage. At the time of construction of the garage in ***, the cadastral passport for the site did not contain information about the presence of security zones, as well as the defendant V.A. Popov himself. I did not know that this power line belongs to the 10 kV category. In addition, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 160, as amended in force as of ***, did not contain any prohibitions on the construction of garages under power lines over 10 kV. Since the land plot to the defendant V.A. Popov allocated for personal farming, it was planned to build on it. To build a garage, you do not need a permit, since current legislation allows construction without a permit on land plots intended for private household plots. In addition, due to the movement of the support by the plaintiff, the high-voltage line ended up on the defendant's land above the garage. When inspecting the land, he found out how the pillars stood earlier, before the flood of the *** year. The power line only touched the corner of the defendant's garage. After the flood, the location of the power lines changed, due to the fact that the plaintiff placed a pole at the intersection (at the junction of the secondary road with the main one). It was believed that this support was installed temporarily. When the pole was installed, the village residents were told that it would be removed later. If a high-voltage wire falls to the ground, the affected area will be wider, especially in hot, dry weather when fire is possible. And if the wire falls on the garage, the affected area will be smaller. The location of the defendant's garage does not impede in any way the maintenance of the power line, including the use of equipment (tower).
Representative of the defendant Astashenko D.A. at the court hearing, the plaintiff’s demands were not subject to satisfaction in full. The representative substantiated her position in written statements submitted to the court regarding the stated requirements, in which she pointed out the following circumstances.
According to the legal position of the European Court of Human Rights, judicial proceedings must be carried out through a mechanism that provides the most effective judicial protection for the purpose of full restoration of violated rights - and interests protected by law; the creation of excessive legal obstacles in resolving a dispute is unacceptable.
DECIDED:
In satisfying the claims of IDGC of Siberia OJSC, represented by the Altaienergo branch, against V.A. Popov. and Popova N.V. the demolition of the garage located in the security zone of the 10 kV overhead line is refused in full.
The decision can be appealed to the Altai Regional Court through the Charyshsky District Court of the Altai Territory within a month from the date of the reasoned decision.
The reasoned decision was made by ***.
Chairman: Yu.I. Chuchuiko
Court:
Charyshsky District Court (Altai Territory)Plaintiffs:
OJSC "IDGC of Siberia" represented by the branch "Altaienergo"Defendants:
Popov V.A.Popova N.V.
Judges of the case:
Chuchuiko Yu.I. (judge)Judicial practice on:
Abuse of rightJudicial practice on the application of Art. 10 Civil Code of the Russian Federation