China Naming Network - Eight-character Q&A - Why was Tongli Lake demolished?

Why was Tongli Lake demolished?

I have a real estate license, why should I tear down my villa? Sorry, this is a scenic spot. "

It happened in Suzhou, and the demolished villa belonged to the original project of COFCO. Built in the core of Taihu Lake Scenic Area, it is adjacent to Jiuli Lake in the north and Tongli Lake in the south, only 2 kilometers away from Tongli Ancient Town. The beauty of lakes and mountains is like a dream, but I didn't expect it to be like a dream. 165438+1October 12, the owner suddenly received a letter of notification, and was told that in order to protect the core scenic spot of Taihu Lake, some houses were at risk of demolition. 165438+1On October 23rd, the owner received a notice that the house needed to be demolished. Unexpectedly, the owner had no time to negotiate with relevant departments and developers, and the compensation price was not negotiated. The villa was demolished on June 24th, 2008+065438+1October 29th. The reason for the forced demolition is that these houses do not conform to the Master Plan of Taihu Lake Scenic Area (200 1-2030) approved by the State Council on July 2, 2006, which belongs to the scope of inventory and rectification. However, the owner felt very wronged: when buying a house, the developer clearly provided five certificates approved by the government department. According to media reports, before the master plan of Taihu Lake Scenic Area was announced, COFCO Origin Project had obtained the construction project planning permit and construction permit. In other words, the owner's real estate license is indeed legal and valid, but the villa is indeed located within the planning scope of the scenic spot, occupying public resources, which is indeed a dilemma. The case of COFCO's origin project is not a special case. Some houses in Suzhou's local green space Taihu City and Tongli Yunshuiyao were also demolished.

On the one hand, it is public interest, on the other hand, it is private residence. How to choose?

In the past two years, China has placed environmental protection ecology in a very high position, such as the familiar garbage sorting. What many people don't know is that the same is true of the development of urban agglomerations closely related to real estate. For example, the full name of the Yangtze River Delta integration is actually the Yangtze River Delta Green Ecological Integration Demonstration Zone, including the development of all cities along the Yangtze River adhering to the concept of ecological protection. This is the top-level consciousness of the country, so as long as it impacts the environment and destroys the ecology, it will definitely be stopped.

This is the background of the original project villa demolition of COFCO. What we need to think about is, how are these houses allowed to be sold and get pre-sale certificates and real estate licenses? This phenomenon may occur all over the country, similar to the legal but illegal land transfer model. I think these lands have been included in the scope of ecological protection before, restricting or controlling development. However, local governments and developers can always find similar loopholes and let the plots enter the compliance development stage, which is why they finally got the pre-sale certificate and real estate license.

Personally, I suggest that at this moment, the local government should take responsibility and cooperate with the developers to do a good job in housing replacement or compensation.

In this case, the villa project obtained the construction project planning permit in 2006, and the decision to demolish these villas was the Taihu Master Plan issued on 20 16. After the master plan was approved, the construction permit of the Housing and Construction Bureau was also obtained, and some owners also obtained real estate licenses. The demolished villa was completely legally built with the approval of relevant government departments.

Nowadays, because of environmental protection rectification, it is considered as "illegal construction", which is far-fetched and meaningless from the perspective of "legitimacy".

In this case, the relevant administrative department violated an important principle in administrative law-"trust protection principle". The relevant government departments can't regard the legal houses that have been approved for construction and the houses that have issued real estate licenses as illegal because of policy changes. Environmental protection reform can not be "one size fits all", but should be comprehensively considered from historical factors, legal factors and factors affecting the environment. The "high pressure" of environmental protection does not mean that we can not talk about methods, let alone pursue simple and rude law enforcement. Forced demolition violates the principle of "due process". For houses that have been legally built and need to be demolished due to environmental factors, it is necessary to fully communicate with the owners and negotiate the compensation amount after obtaining the consent of the owners. Protecting citizens' private property rights according to law is of great significance, which is related to social and economic development and social harmony and stability, and also reflects the respect and protection of citizens' individual rights.

In this case, the villa was demolished. In the incident, some administrative organs had a weak sense of administration according to law, did not abide by national laws, and were "across the board" in law enforcement activities, treating "legal houses" as "illegal buildings" and ignoring the protection of citizens' private property rights. It is a serious illegal act to demolish the villa legally acquired by the owner. In addition, in this incident, the owner did not have any fault, and the losses caused by the forced demolition should be borne by the government. For the legal villas that have been demolished, compensation cannot be made according to the price at the time of purchase, but should refer to the current market transaction price of similar villas around.

First of all, we should judge whether the master plan of Taihu Lake Scenic Area can be traced back to the house of COFCO's original project. According to media reports, when the owner buys a house, the developer has five certificates. Before 20 16 Master Plan of Taihu Lake Scenic Area was approved, the project had obtained the construction permit. If so, it can't be traced back, that is, these houses can't be demolished as illegal buildings. But we should look at the detailed original documents, not just the news reports.

Assuming that the answer to the above question is "when the owner buys a house, the developer has completed the five certificates", then the next second question is, how to compensate and dismantle it?

According to Article 42 of the Property Law, collectively owned land, houses of units and individuals, and other immovable property can be expropriated in the public interest in accordance with the authority and procedures prescribed by law.

The overall planning of Taihu Lake Scenic Area is in line with the needs of public interests. Relevant departments can expropriate the land where COFCO's original project is located, but the premise is to strictly follow the expropriation process: issuing expropriation announcement, conducting relevant evaluation, signing expropriation agreement with the owner, making resettlement compensation for the owner, changing the land nature into public land, and finally demolishing the house. According to news reports, the current expropriation does not follow the formal process and is regarded as "illegal building". If the owner's real estate license is legal and valid, then the owner can bring an administrative lawsuit to the court.