1 Kamynina N.R.

Moscow State University of Geodesy and Cartography (MIIGAiK)

The article presents a comparative analysis of the design and implementation of urban construction of smallscale projects in areas where land ownership entities are represented in scattered form; author uses an example of the four countries. The first two countries considered a large and extensive experience in the private construction on fragmented plots of land, while the other two are in the process of transition from centralized regulation to a market economy: one of them is in the territory of the European Union, and the second is a candidate for membership EU. The first two countries under review - this is England and Sweden. England - a country with a discrete projection system, focused on the landowner or developer, who must submit a detailed project plan of construction to get the so-called resolution of the design. Local authorities, or grants the right to the design in accordance with the documents, which implies the right to continue the design in accordance with the required conditions, or refuse to design. Of all the British territories, it was decided to focus on England, not to delve into the study of the various options for the legislation on which the procedure for the design and construction in accordance with the different jurisdictions of the United Kingdom. Sweden can be explored strict design a system in which municipalities require compliance with strict enough, detailed plans for the design rights and imposes obligations for landlords. This preliminary plan contains additional regulatory requirements relevant to the different parts of the project. The two countries are in a transitional period - is Macedonia and Poland. Both countries have a common history of the development in a planned economy, but in both countries described the rural area could belong to individuals. However, the processes of design and construction before 1989 are not focused on the construction activity is dispersed in urban areas. Currently, the conditions for the design and implementation of the project are gradually changing due to the new political situation, and perhaps in part due to improving economic conditions for some groups of people.
1.   Aleksander E.R. Teoriya tranzakcij: stoimost' planirovaniya zemlepol'zovaniya i kontrolya razvitiya: na puti institucional'nogo analiza obshchestvennogo planirovaniya. Gradostroitel'nyj obzor, 2001, no. 72, pp. 45–75.
2.   Verburg P.H., Ehjsaut B., Van Mejil H. Mul'ti-masshtab; mul'ti-model'nyj podhod k analizu budushchej dinamiki evropejskogo zemlepol'zovaniya. Annaly regional'noj nauki, 2008, no. 42, pp. 57–77.
3.   Gavronski K., Van Ashshe K., Hernik J. Prostranstvennoe planirovanie v SSHA i Pol'she. Infrastruktura i ehkologiya, 2010, 11 p.pp. 53–70.
4.   Gallent N. Budushchee domov i zhilishch. Politika ispol'zovaniya zemel', 2009, no. 26, pp. 93–102.
5.   Kamagni R., Gibelli M.S., Rigamonti P. Gorodskaya mobil'nost' i gorodskaya forma: social'nye i ehkologicheskie izderzhki raznyh form rasshireniya gorodov. Ehkologicheskaya ehkonomika, 2002, no. 40, pp. 199–216.
6.   Mattsson H., Hagander S-G. Spravochnik po nedvizhimosti i prostranstvennomu planirovaniyu. Stokgol'm, 2011,
7.   Munton R. Sel'skie zemli v Soedinennom Korolevstve: izmenenie modelej, vozmozhnosti i perspektivy . Politika ispol'zovaniya zemel', 2009, no. 26, pp. 54–61.
8.   Svngedouv E., Mulaehrt F., Rodrigez A. Neoliberal'naya urbanizaciya v Evrope: krupnomasshtabnye proekty gorodskogo razvitiya i novaya politika gorodov. Antipod, 2006, no. 34, pp. 542–577. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8330.00254.
Kamynina N.R., 
(2016) Particularities of land cadastre for regulation if small construction in small urban areas in the European Union. Geodesy and cartography = Geodezia i Kartografia, (12), pp. 36–44. (In Russian). DOI: 10.22389/0016-7126-2016-918-12-36-44
Publication History
Received: 18.11.2016
Accepted: 07.12.2016
Published: 29.12.2016


2016 December DOI:

QR-code page

QR-код страницы