In one of his last speeches Tihipko sounded interesting for real estate market benchmarks, which should be followed by reforming the system of permits for construction. The main of them is called the shortening of obtaining permits to 60 days.
It is difficult to resist the positive evaluation of the aspirations of a new team to simplify the domestic bureaucratic maze, make life easier for the investor. However, in my opinion, not the pursuit of a formal reduction of terms should be the basic idea of modernization. Complexity and, at the same time, the simplicity of the question lies in the need to change the business model for public administration, a measure of effective action, which should become possible as quickly, transparently and affordably meet the needs of the applicant (whether a citizen or legal person).
Here is a simple example of a modern licensing practices. Nearly a half years ago our profile legislation (I mean the Law of Ukraine "On the Planning and Development of Territories") suffered a revolution: the two usual stage permits (building permit and receipt of architectural-planning assignment (APZ) were merged into one - to " urban conditions and restrictions on land development. "It would seem that there is a simplification. However, parallel to the law introduced the requirement for the development of so-called town-planning study for all objects (with the rare exception of the construction sites of the individual building!) outside the settlements, or when in the absence of such local rules of building. Note that this category is the vast territories of most of the settlements of the country.
At its core, urban planning study - an element of planning documentation, which is designed to provide the customer of construction on the conditions that must be met in the design and construction, site-specific (see DBN B.1.1.-4-2009). One of the challenges of urban studies - to fill a gap in the planning documentation of those territories in which such documentation in the form of master plans, schemes and country planning, etc., for various reasons, is missing. An interesting approach to solving the problem - instead of hard work on the development of master plans (ie, functions that should make public administration, acting for the common good) the duty to develop planning documentation is assigned to a particular developer, and therefore the burden of the investor. And this despite the fact that before such a task (in the form of issuing APL) or less performed by the authorities (Department of Architecture). All of the above - an obvious example of the construction and operation of the administrative system, the main problem which has nothing to do with the needs of the applicant (developer and investor). Unfortunately, the published draft Development Code did not dare to approach this problem.
Time limits for issuing permits (even before the fantastic 60 days), while maintaining the status quo in the principles of operation of the permit system, in my opinion, will not bring the desired positive result. Change the concept of functioning of the state permitting system by expanding its face to the needs of the market - that is, indeed, a worthy task for the scale of representatives of the new power team. Let`s hope that this time, the cosmetic changes for the worse, get rid fail.
Vladislav Kisil Efficiency Consulting Partner