Public at a Distance – Democracy in Crisis
/ research
Analysis of planning procedures in Belgrade in the period of the COVID-19 pandemic, March 2020 – March 2021
Analysis of planning procedures in Belgrade in the period of the COVID-19 pandemic, March 2020 – March 2021
Is participation under serious threats, or the modified procedures nevertheless allow for full participation of the interested public? In other words, was the changed procedure of participation in a way formality and not a real possibility to openly discuss the proposed solutions, to have them amended and harmonized?
The analysis encompassed the period from March 12, 2020, when the first Order on prohibition of group gathering in indoor public places on the territory of the Republic of Serbia came into force, until March 12, 2021 – i.e. a period of exactly one year. Within that time frame only information published and still available on the official web site of the City of Belgrade under the rubric „City ads, competitions and tenders“ was analyzed, namely:
- Information on the sessions of the Planning Commission of the Belgrade City Assembly which made conclusions pertaining to the procedure of preparation of plans – referring to early public inspection, public inspection, public session, or breach, prolongation, change of terms etc.;
- Official announcements of early public inspections (RJU);
- Duration of early public inspections;
- Official announcements of public inspections (JU);
- Duration of early public inspections;
- Official announcements of public sessions (JS);
- Venues of public sessions;
- Change of duration of early public inspections, public inspections or public sessions;
- Adoption of plans at the sessions of the Belgrade City Assembly.
In the same period, in accordance with the developments surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, various measures regulating the possibilities of group gathering and free movement of citizens were adopted – from the declaration of a state of emergency on March 15, 2020 to different orders restricting the number of people allowed to gather indoors. These decisions made at the state level were followed by various decisions of the Planning Commission of the Belgrade City Assembly, which had implications on the procedures of preparation of urban plans, and organization of public inspections and public sessions.
Analysis of the procedures of Early public inspection and Public inspection based on selected examples in the period of the COVID-19 pandemic, 2020-2021
Based on the previous general analysis of the planning procedures in the period of the COVID-19 pandemic, two topics for detailed analysis were selected: early public inspection of the Detailed regulation plan for the Avala Film complex in the township of Čukarica, and public inspection / public session for the Draft of the Detailed regulation plan of a part of Makiško polje in the same township. These plans were selected because of the great public attention dedicated to them – through citizens’ interest and objections, and numerous media statements by officials, experts and other persons.
We analyzed the following:
- General indicators of subjects and intensity of interest for the plan;
- Public reactions – by experts, citizens, organizations of civil society – communicated in the media and official announcements;
- Official statements by highest city officials – chief urbanist (who is at the same time president of the Planning Commission of the Belgrade City Assembly), mayor and deputy mayor of Belgrade – published primarily at the official web site of the city of Belgrade;
- Minutes of the sessions of the Planning Commission of the Belgrade City Assembly – which refer to the procedures and processes of preparation of these plans (references to RJU/JU, Report on RJU/JU etc.)
Based on the results of the analysis, conclusions were drawn about the planning procedures in the period of the pandemic (relating to transparency and quality of informing the citizens) and, subsequently, general conclusions about the overall discourse of participation and decision-making in urban planning.
Participation and recommendations provided by law
The existing legislative framework allows for citizens’ participation in the process of shaping their environment exclusively in the phase of preparation of planning documents (early public inspection and public inspection). Afterwards, the role of the interested citizens is reduced to observation. There is a limited range of mechanisms of asserting citizens’ control over the implementation of plans. However, even in the segment guaranteed by law, citizens’ participations in these processes is fairly limited by the ways in which the public inspections are announced and conducted. The real effects of thus conceived participation are reflected in the fact that the citizens most often find out about the planned changes in their street (neighborhood, settlement, wider community) only when they hear the construction machinery at work. Subsequently, the real effects of thus organized participation are even more clearly reflected in the (increasing) number of citizens who get organized in the struggle against the unwanted changes.
It is important to note that regulations provide the basic framework for citizens’ participation in the planning process, but they do not sanction violation of existing regulations in a way that would improve the efficiency of this process. The actual readiness of the administrative authorities to make additional efforts, make use of the existing and conceive new tools, is proof of real commitment to improving the possibilities of positive results in managing spatial development.
The following recommendations are formulated with a view to reducing the chances for citizens’ rejection of the planned solutions. They can be implemented within the existing legal frameworks or with minor changes of the local regulations (rules of procedure of the Planning Commission of the Belgrade City Assembly). The proposed tools aim at increasing citizens’ inclusion in conceiving of the planning solutions. However, having in mind the complexity of urban planning and the issues of real citizens’ participation, it would be naïve to assume that increase in number of interested citizens would automatically result in higher quality of the prepared planning documents. Moreover, because the design of this process does not treat the interests of all concerned parties equally and privileges the investors, increase in number of interested citizens definitely implies escalation of the expected conflicts. Nevertheless, such escalation adds pressure on the institutions in charge to rethink their concepts of management of spatial development. In an adequate scenario, this would include and reconcile the interests of all social actors, as a step towards an essential understanding of the processes of development of a city.
