Features of joint development of specially protected natural areas and adjacent settlements of the Leningrad region

Veretennikova Kseniia Vadimovna PhD in Architecture Associate Professor, Department of Urban Planning, Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering 190005, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Saint Petersburg, 2nd Krasnoarmeyskaya str., 4 xenyaver@gmail.com Other publications by this author

Dmitriev Ivan Sergeevich Postgraduate student, Department of Urban Planning, Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering 190005, Russia, Saint Petersburg, 2nd Krasnoarmeyskaya str., 4 ivandmitriev97@gmail.com

Specially protected natural territories (hereinafter referred to as protected areas) — "these are areas of land, water and air on which there are natural objects and complexes of special value for environmental protection." These territories are completely or partially exempt from economic activity and have a special protection regime that ensures their preservation in their original form ^[1]. The law establishes six categories of protected areas, taking into account the peculiarities of the established regime: state nature reserves, including biosphere reserves; national parks; natural parks; state nature reserves; natural monuments; dendrological parks and botanical gardens ^[2]. Due to the accelerated process of urbanization, such territories are beginning to play an increasingly important role in maintaining ecological balance on the planet.

The conflict between the goals of the development of natural and anthropogenic landscapes is a significant problem that arises as a result of the interaction of human activity with the natural environment.The process of formation of anthropogenic landscapes is associated with the placement of residential and industrial facilities, the construction of a road network, the development of infrastructure. These transformations lead to a significant change in natural systems, disruption of their structure and functions, as well as to the rupture of links between natural objects and their fragmentation. One of the most destructive anthropogenic impacts on natural territories is the so-called "erosion of edges" ^[3], which leads to the appearance of individual cottages, parking lots, recreation, technical facilities and service institutions along the edge of natural territories.

The establishment of protected areas, although it is an indisputable boon for the preservation of natural ecosystems, the issue of property relations and the restrictive regime for the use of land plots by the local population living on the lands of protected areas remains an urgent problem. The proximity of specially protected areas to small urban or rural settlements preserves their development and can negatively affect the rights and comfort of local residents. The relevance of this problem is confirmed by amendments to Federal Law No. 33-FZ of March 14, 1995 "On Specially Protected Natural Territories" (hereinafter — the Law on Protected Areas), introduced in 2020, designed to mitigate the restrictive regime of land use of settlements under the influence of the regime of specially protected areas ^[4]. Thanks to the changes made, it is now allowed to include settlements in a specially protected area without the seizure of land plots and other real estate located on their territories from right holders; the turnover of land plots on the territory of a settlement included in a protected area is not limited. However, law enforcement practice shows that due to insufficient regulation, the concept of a special protection regime for protected areas leads to its diverse interpretation, there is no uniform practice of applying norms on this issue ^[5]. Also, from September 1, 2023, new amendments to the Law on Protected Areas will come into force ^[6], an article about tourism in specially protected natural territories will be added, which emphasizes the relevance and topics of the tourist load on protected areas and its impact on the surrounding territories.

Special regulation of the lands of settlements under the influence of protected areas to maintain environmental sustainability is relevant for the Leningrad Region, in particular. On the one hand, the ongoing expansion of the largest city of St. Petersburg - large—scale housing construction, the expansion of zones of intensive urbanization in the first and second zones of agglomeration, an increase in the number and density of the population entails a reduction in the area of natural territories and an increase in anthropogenic load on existing natural objects. On the other hand, giving territories the status of protected areas complicates the regulation of the development of nearby settlements and requires the development of sustainable approaches to their development. Also, indigenous small-numbered peoples live on the territory of the Leningrad Region: Veps, Vod, Izhora, as well as peoples from among the old-time Finno-Ugric population: Tikhvin Karelians and Ingermanland Finns ^[7], and often the creation of protected areas limits the possibility of their traditional nature management, which generates conflicts between representatives of communities and administrations of protected areas. The object of research in this article is the settlements of the Leningrad region, located in the immediate vicinity and under the influence of the special regime of specially protected areas.

Historical aspects of the development of urbanized and specially protected natural territories of the Leningrad region

In the late XIX-early XX centuries, the formation of the nature reserve system began in Russia, which took place against the background of the intensification of the world conservation movement and the formation of the first Yellowstone State National Park in the USA. In 1872, the US Congress approved its creation on the basis of the Yellowstone Manifesto, which defines the goals and objectives of the park: the territory was to be protected from settlement, adverse use or damage, excluded from commercial purposes, intended for the benefit and joy of people and considered as a repository of natural and historical resources in their natural state ^[8].

By the beginning of the XX century, 19 national parks with a total area of 4.6 million hectares were created in six countries ^[9]. Their main task was to preserve the unique nature and use it for tourism purposes. In 1913, the First International Conference on Nature conservation was held in Bern, Switzerland. A few years later, in 1916, the First national act "On the establishment of rules on hunting reserves" was adopted in Russia, and soon the first state reserve was created — Barguzinsky.

Further, the Board of the People's Commissariat of Education of the RSFSR of February 22, 1929 approved the first model provision on nature reserves: nature reserves are forever subject to being left untouched or their economic use restricted; economic use of the protected area is not allowed; a protected area is formed around the entire reserve, serving as a natural fence.

By the beginning of the 30s, two mutually exclusive tasks were set before nature reserves: on the one hand, to protect typical areas of nature, on the other, to enrich and improve them by acclimatization of economically useful species of animals and plants ^[10].

In the 1950s, two-thirds of nature reserves were liquidated — over a decade their area decreased by more than 10 times (Fig. 1). Researchers associate this period with the onset of "mature" Soviet suburbanization, when mass construction of dachas began on land provided by the state for the creation of garden associations. This was undertaken as part of solving the country's food problem. In the 1950s and 70s, the total number of second homes increased 3-5 times ^[11].

Fig. 1. Change in the area of nature reserves in Russia ^[12].

In the 1960s, the second stage of the reduction of reserves took place: 16 were closed again, 9 were transformed into branches, 8 had their area cut. Soon, extensive continuous logging unfolded on them ^[9]. Only by 1982 it was possible to restore the area of the USSR reserves after their reductions.

By 1970, scientifically sound proposals for the creation of a network of protected areas of the Leningrad region were developed. In the mid-1970s, the first period of creation of protected areas began, which is still the most massive in its entire history: 25 protected areas appeared at once, and 22 of them in 1976 by the Decision of the Leningrad Executive Committee No. 145 of March 29, 1976 "On the creation of nature reserves and the recognition of valuable natural objects as natural monuments on the territory of the Leningrad Region". In 1980, the first of three protected areas of federal significance was created - the Nizhne–Svirsky Nature Reserve.

1981-1990. regarding the creation of protected areas in the Leningrad region can be characterized as a period of "calm". In 1982, only one protected area was created – the nature reserve "Mshinskoe swamp".

From 1991-2000, 13 protected areas were created. In 1994, 8 protected areas of the Leningrad region were granted the status of wetlands of international importance (on the basis of the signed convention of 1994) ^[13]. In terms of urbanization at this time, the processes of uncontrolled cottage and suburban development are taking place. Since 1991, garden houses on garden and country plots have been transferred to the category of capital construction and garden partnerships continue to develop, providing an opportunity for the construction of cottages on their plots.

In the period from 2001-2010, 6 protected areas were created. Since 2011-2020, 9 specially protected natural territories have been created. On November 30, 2012, 15 protected areas of the Leningrad Region were nominated for inclusion in the "Emerald Network of Europe", an ecological network consisting of territories of special environmental significance ^[14]. In 2017, the third protected area of Federal significance was created – the nature reserve "East of the Gulf of Finland (Ingermanland)" on the border with Finland.

Since 2021, 2 protected areas have been created, the last of them - on February 28, 2023 – is a natural monument "Yellow Bay".

As of 2023, there are 56 complexes in the list of protected areas of the Leningrad region. The total area of specially protected areas occupies about 7% of the entire territory of the region — about 6000 km2 ^[15].

Mutual location of specially protected natural territories and settlements of the Leningrad region

The study examined protected areas of the Leningrad region and nearby settlements for their mutual location and features of legal regulation. As a result of the analysis, 7 types of their mutual arrangement were identified (Fig. 2):

1. Included: characterized by the complete inclusion of the locality within the boundaries of the protected area. This type includes 12 protected areas in the Leningrad Region, including the Vepsian Forest Nature Park, the Syabersky and Shalovo-Perechitsky nature reserves.

2. Excluded: the territory of the settlement is surrounded by a protected area, but is not included in its composition. With this type of location, the protected area has a composite border that excludes the territories of settlements. For example, the nature reserves "Kurgalsky", "Lisinsky".

3. Surrounding: The protected area is surrounded on all sides by the territory of the settlement, but is not included in it. For example, the natural monument "Toksovsky heights", the protected natural landscape "Haapala".

4. Adjacent (with a common border): the most common type of mutual arrangement is the immediate neighborhood of a locality and a protected area. The boundaries of localities coincide with the boundaries of protected areas. For example, the Toksovsky Nature Park, the Lammin-Suo Swamp Nature Reserve, the Krasnoe Lake nature monument.

5. Overlapping: The protected area is located entirely on the territory of the settlement. For example, the natural monument "The Museum-Estate of N. K. Roerich", the protected natural landscape of Lake Veroyarvi and "Bianchi Glade".

6. Partially imposed: characterized by the partial inclusion of the contour of the boundaries of protected areas in the boundaries of the settlement. For example, the natural monuments "Geological outcrops of the Devonian on the Oredezh River near the village of Yam-Tesovo" and "Staroladozhsky", the nature reserve "Kivipark".

7. Separate: the protected area and the locality do not border, are located at a distance from each other. For example, the nature reserves "Anisimovsky Lakes" and "Rakitinsky", the nature reserve "East of the Gulf of Finland", such natural monuments as "Lake Yastrebinoe", "Gustoy Island" (located on the islands).

Fig. 2. Types of locality location in relation to protected areas

a) protected areas; b) locality;

1) Included; 2) Excluded; 3) Surrounding; 4) Overlapping; 5) Partially superimposed; 6) Adjacent (with a common border); 7) Separate.

Thus, all seven types of mutual location of protected areas and settlements can be divided into two groups: with overlap (included, overlapping, partially superimposed) and without overlap (excluded, surrounding, adjacent, separate).

Features of legal regulation depending on the type of location of a settlement in relation to a specially protected natural area

Only 9% of the protected areas of the Leningrad region are located at a distance (more than 5 km) from settlements and do not feel the need for special regulation of such interaction. In turn, 21% of protected areas contain settlements within their borders, which are subject to the special protection regime. The purpose of the legal regulation of such joint development is to balance the conservation of nature with the needs and interests of the local population, ensuring sustainable development with the conservation of natural resources. Restrictions on economic activity in a protected area should not lead to its complete prohibition, primarily for citizens living there. The concept of sustainable development implies a triad, where the ecological, economic and social spheres are in balance. The search for ways of sustainable development of settlements within the boundaries of protected areas consists not only in the maximum preservation of natural territories, but also in the creation of "favorable conditions for human activity" ^[1]. In the remaining 70% of cases, protected areas and settlements are located in close proximity to each other and the question of their harmonious co-development is open.

A group with an overlay:

According to article 83 of the Land Code, the boundaries of urban and rural settlements separate the lands of settlements from lands of other categories. Lands classified as "lands of settlements" are used and intended for the development and development of settlements ^[16]. Urban planning conflicts began when, when imposing a specially protected natural territory on the lands of settlements, its regime conflicted with the rights of land owners, there were problems with both the acquisition of land rights and the conduct of economic activities. The amendments of 2020 ^[4] to the Law on Protected Areas are designed to solve this problem and establish the features of land and urban planning relations in settlements located within the boundaries of specially protected natural territories. Now, when creating protected areas, settlements can be fully included in their composition without the withdrawal of land plots and other real estate located on their territories (with the exception of state nature reserves) ^[2]. The types of permitted use of land plots and the maximum parameters of permitted construction, reconstruction of facilities on them are established by the rules of land use and development (hereinafter — the PZP). At the same time, environmental requirements and control by environmental protection structures are preserved: the Regulations on Protected Areas may establish requirements for urban planning regulations, and the draft PZP, in relation to the territory of a locality completely located within the boundaries of a protected area, is subject to coordination with the executive authority in charge of which the specially protected area is located, for compliance of the urban planning regulations with the special protection regime. security guards.

A differentiated regime of special protection may be established on the territory of a protected area, taking into account natural, historical, cultural and other features, according to which a zoning project has been developed, then such settlements are included in the functional zones, the regime of which allows for economic activity.

Group without overlay:

When a locality is surrounded by a protected area, surrounds a protected area, has an adjacent border with it, is located at a distance from it, no restrictions of economic activity are imposed on the locality. The exception is cases when a protected area is established in a protected area.

Now the document regulating the establishment of protected zones is the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 138 dated February 19, 2015 "On approval of the Rules for the creation of protected zones of certain categories of specially protected natural territories, the establishment of their borders, the definition of the regime of protection and use of land and water bodies within the boundaries of such zones" ^[17]. It is important to note that the legislation allows the establishment of protected areas around not all protected areas, but only in relation to state nature reserves, national parks, natural parks and natural monuments. As follows from the above Resolution: the minimum width of the protected zone of the state nature reserve or national park is 1 kilometer. The current legislation does not require the mandatory establishment of a protected area around a protected area — the appropriate decision is made based on a number of factors.

The manual on the functional organization of protected areas from the ANO Agency for Strategic Initiatives for the Promotion of New Projects and SETIMAKERS LLC introduces such a term as "adjacent territory" — "a piece of terrain located in close proximity to the border of a protected area, which may include its security zone." The settlements considered in the article, located in the immediate vicinity of protected areas, fall under the definition of this term. It is emphasized that the legal regime of such adjacent territories is extremely variable in practice and is established in each case based on a number of factors, as in the case of the protected area itself ^[18].

Fig. 3. Boundaries of protected areas of the Vepsian Forest Nature Park and the Kurgalsky Nature Reserve

When comparing the legal regulation of two protected areas of regional significance: the Veps Forest Nature Park and the Kurgalsky Nature Reserve, it can be noted that in the first case, settlements located on the territory of the park are included in the protected areas, in the second case they are excluded (Fig. 3). It is advisable to include settlements in the protected areas, where small ethnic communities that are agents of traditional nature management and part of the socio-ecosystem of a specially protected area live. An interesting fact is that both considered protected areas are the place of residence of small indigenous peoples. The Veps forest covers part of the territory of the traditional settlement of Veps. The Kurgalsky Peninsula is the area of residence of other Finno-Ugric peoples: Izhora and Vodi. The regime of special protection of both territories (the state nature reserve and the natural park) allows their creation both with and without withdrawal from users, owners and owners of land plots.

Having analyzed the boundaries of specially protected natural territories in the Leningrad region, it can be concluded that the variability of decisions taken and the non-systematic exclusion of settlements from the boundaries of protected areas of the Kurgalsky Nature Reserve. This decision was most likely due to the absence at the time of the establishment of the boundaries of the reserve of relevant amendments to the legislation regulating land and urban relations in settlements falling under the regime of specially protected natural territories. This approach made it possible to preserve the possibility of further development for such settlements. If settlements that are part of a protected area and are influenced by its regime undertake to coordinate their urban planning documentation with environmental protection structures, then settlements that are part of the "no overlap" group can develop, ignoring the neighborhood with a specially protected area. Environmental expertise in the development of such territories, as a rule, is not really required, and remains the responsibility of research activities to develop regulations on protected areas. But for the harmonious development of settlements nearby to the protected areas, aesthetic and urban-environmental principles should be developed that will ensure organic coexistence with the surrounding protected area. An example of such a situation, when it is necessary, can serve as the village of Barabash in the Khasansky district of Primorsky Krai. This village is "cut out" from the borders of the national park "Land of the Leopard", that is, by its location it belongs to the excluded settlements within the protected areas. Barabash is a typical village, most of which was built in Soviet times using industrial housing construction methods, perhaps for this reason it was excluded from the specially protected natural area. Nevertheless, the village plays an important role as a key transport hub for tourist flows, being a kind of "gateway" to the national park. Since it is not subject to a special regime of protected areas, its development strongly contrasts with the surrounding protected area.

It is necessary to further search for tools and solutions for urban planning regulation of settlements nearby to protected areas for their joint balanced coexistence and development. Possible tools that contribute to the consolidation of aesthetic and urban-environmental principles can be: the creation of a master plan of a protected area, including not only the protected area itself, but also the zone of its influence on the surrounding territories with the development of recommendations for conflicting neighboring settlements that affect the perception of protected areas; the creation of an urban planning standard of settlements adjacent to specially protected areas; development of models that take into account current trends and environmental challenges, features of the place, which in the future can be taken into account when developing rules for land use and development of such settlements nearby to protected areas.

Conclusion

            Specially protected natural territories of the Leningrad Region play an important role in the conservation of biological diversity and the creation of ecosystem services. But when the protected areas are located in the immediate vicinity of settlements, conflicting urban planning situations between the economic use of the territory and nature protection are revealed.

As a result of the analysis, seven types of mutual location of settlements and specially protected natural territories in the Leningrad region were identified: included, excluded, surrounding, overlapping, partially superimposed, adjacent (with a common border) and separate. The features of their legal regulation are considered, a number of problems of their joint development are formulated. In such a neighboring location of settlements and specially protected territories, a balance must be maintained between the preservation of natural values, the existing biodiversity in specially protected natural territories and taking into account the interests of residents of settlements located in close proximity and under mutual influence. Legislatively, such nearby settlements that are not included in specially protected natural areas can now develop without taking into account the neighborhood with protected areas (the exception is settlements that fall into the protected area of specially protected areas). For harmonious sustainable development and prevention of urban development problems, within the framework of an integrated approach, it is proposed to develop master plans for co-development or standards of settlements nearby specially protected areas.