On March 12, 2019, the citizens of Belgrade were surprised by the sight of JKP Zelenilo cutting down trees in Ušće Park and at the Kalemegdan Fortress. It was explained that the preparatory works for the construction of the cable car (better known as the gondola) are underway and that the citizens should be thanked for the development of the tourism and traffic infrastructure in Belgrade. Soon, thousands of citizens expressed dissatisfaction with the cutting of trees, the reduction of green areas in the city center and the endangerment of the Kalemegdan Fortress, as one of the features of the cultural landscape of Belgrade. The deputy mayor told the citizens: "If you had participated in the process of adopting the plan, some of your remarks might have been accepted." ... since you did not participate in the adoption of the plan because you were not interested in it then, I am sorry, but the plan was adopted.... The gondola will be built. You had the opportunity to take part in the discussion, we are not interested in the subsequent intelligence. "

Were the citizens really smart afterwards and disinterested in goods of public interest? Or they just did not have relevant information?

Public space, public interest and green areas?

Citizens have often raised their voices over the past year due to the degradation of green spaces, expressing that they are important for the quality of life and the environment in cities. The Constitution of the Republic of Serbia gives citizens the right to a healthy environment, and he also says that everyone is obliged to protect and improve the environment. Citizens, it seems, instinctively understand their right and often fight for it, and it also often seems that in the fight for the public interest, citizens oppose private, individual interests. When we talk about green areas in the city, which are one of the basic determinants of a healthy environment, we are interested in whether they are recognized in the existing legal framework as a good of public interest? The legal framework that would give green spaces the status of a common good and/or public interest (and give citizens specific tools to protect their environment) is not fully defined.

The Law on Environmental Protection defines the public interest indirectly, for certain aspects of the environment - protected and public natural good. A protected natural asset, an area with special natural values, is considered a good of general interest because it has ecological, scientific, cultural, educational, health and other significance, which is why it enjoys special protection. A public natural good is an arranged or unregulated part of natural resources, such as air, water, coast, underground goods, forests, landscapes or space, which is equally accessible to all. It is therefore a good of public interest, which can be used while ensuring its preservation. Nature, by a special law, has been declared a common good on the territory of the whole of Serbia, which enjoys special protection.

The Law on Planning and Construction does not define the public interest and the common good as terms as separate categories, but expresses them through various aspects of planning and construction of space. For example, changing the purpose from forest to construction land is considered a general interest. In the context of urban development, the Law on Planning and Construction of Green Areas does not recognize as a public interest or public good, but as an integral part of housing complexes and blocks, without further elaboration.

The Spatial Plan of the Republic of Serbia, as the most important strategic document that defines spatial development, also does not explicitly define the common good and public interest. Although one of the basic goals of the Spatial Plan is the sustainable use of natural resources and an improved and healthy environment, the Plan does not recognize green areas as a public good in urban development. However, the Plan recognizes the phenomenon of "investor urbanism", which threatens the identity of the settlement, the public good and the public interest. And green areas are usually the first to disappear before the onslaught of "investor urbanism". The General Urban Plan of Belgrade defines the urban greenery of the city as a common good. The citizens themselves, obviously, recognize green areas as a common good. And they represent that public interest through protests and initiatives that were formed both in Belgrade and the rest of Serbia.

Why do citizens care about green areas?

Urban greenery provides ecosystem services that represent multiple benefits to city residents and through many aspects increases their quality of life. Green infrastructure improves water and land quality, helps adaptation to climate change, biodiversity conservation, psycho-physical health of urban population, economic prosperity, and successfully performs the function of revitalization of abandoned areas, as well as ecological connection of urban and rural areas. The key effects of green areas on the quality of the environment in cities are related to mitigating the effects of climate change, local heat islands, mitigating the effects of wind, reducing pollution, and regulating the regime of atmospheric waters. Thus, for example, the forests along the Danube around Belgrade, like sponges, absorb large amounts of water at high water levels, thus reducing the risk of flooding in the area located downstream. Green orchards play a very important role in reducing noise in the city, because they prevent the spread of sound waves, which is why settlements with more greenery are quieter and more pleasant to live. Green areas have positive effects on the economy through environmental and energy savings, increased land value in commercial and residential areas depending on the proximity of the green area, as well as preventing the negative impact on human health.

The green areas of Belgrade are divided into several categories, and each has a number of specific functions that together create a harmonious whole for a better quality of life and preservation of natural values. Parks, squares and special green complexes such as the botanical garden, arboretum and zoo, are elements of nature that form the green infrastructure and ensure the preservation of the environment and biodiversity of the city, have a cultural, educational and recreational function, and are spaces for citizens. Forests on the territory of the city are larger green areas that contribute to the protection and improvement of the environment, preservation of biodiversity, prevention of torrents and flood waves, water purification, protection from wind and snow, and protect settlements and infrastructure from erosion and landslides. Their importance for rest and recreation is widely known and often used by citizens.

Urban greenery is of immeasurable importance for increasing the quality of life in the city, which is why it has the status of a good of general interest. Preservation of the green areas of the city, as a whole, with all their functions, is in the public interest of all citizens who have the right to fight for that interest by participating in decision-making processes.

How can citizens participate in decision-making spatial development?

Public participation, transparency in decision-making on spatial development, protection of public interest, public goods and public space, protection of natural and cultural heritage and reduction of harmful effects on the environment are the principles on which Serbia's spatial development policy is based. Planning documents are adopted on these principles. Or at least that's how it should be. The drafting of these documents is of public interest for the Republic of Serbia.

Several regulations provide a framework for citizen participation in decision-making processes on spatial development (and indirectly, on green spaces). The Law on Planning and Construction provides a framework for the adoption of planning documents and public participation, as one of the basic principles for the arrangement and use of space. The basic instrument for public participation is the institute of early public insight and public insight. First, the decision to draft a planning document must be made available to the public. Early public insight is the initial phase of the plan development, during which the plan holder informs the public about the content of the plan, its goals and effects. The public must be informed about the early public insight, and during 15 days, citizens can give written comments, which can influence the final planning decisions. All comments are recorded by the lead of the development of the planning document, and then he prepares a report on the performed early public insight, in which all comments are recorded, as well as the explanations of the decisions made. However, there is no obligation to inform the public about the preparation of the report on early public insight, so that citizens can access information on the course of early public insight and the fate of their comments only by sending requests for access to information of public importance.

The draft planning document, after expert control, is presented to the public for at least 30 days. During the public insight, citizens can get acquainted with the content of the planning document and give their written comments. Upon completion of the public insight, the Planning Commission holds a public insight during which the objections received during the public inspection are considered. At this stage, citizens can only get involved if they have sent their comments in writing during the public insight. For this reason, it is important that the notice of public insight be published as required by regulations, at a minimum. During the public insight, the plan processor states his/her position on each submitted objection, and the citizens can additionally explain their objections. After the public insight, the plan commission makes the final decision on each received remark and suggestion. The competent authority shall make a report on the performed public inspection of the planning document, which shall contain data on the performed public insight, with all remarks and decisions on each remark. There is no obligation to publish this report either, so citizens can be informed about the results of public insight using the right of access to information of public importance. Some local self-government units have the practice of sending a report on the conducted public insight to the submitters of objections, which is a positive step in relation to the legal minimum.

What about the environment in the process of adopting planning documents?

Aspects of environmental protection should be taken into account from the very beginning of the adoption of the planning document. Before making a decision on the development of a planning document, the holder of the development of the plan obtains the opinion of the competent authority for environmental protection on the need to prepare a strategic environmental assessment. The national legislation of the Republic of Serbia, as well as the legislation of the European Union, envisages the need to adjust spatial planning to the conditions of environmental protection, which is regulated by the Law on Strategic Environmental Assessment. This law refers to plans and programs in the field of spatial and urban planning or land use, agriculture, forestry, energy, industry, transport, waste management, water management, tourism, conservation of natural habitats and other areas, which establish a framework for approving future development projects determined by regulations governing environmental impact assessment. The law stipulates that already in the process of preparation of plans and programs, their potential impact on the environment will be examined, which would, ideally, eliminate the possibility of negative effects on our environment as a consequence of the implementation of the plan. The assessment takes into account various environmental factors such as air, water, climate, noise, biodiversity and others, and the report contains an assessment of possible impacts with a description of measures envisaged to reduce negative impacts on the environment.

What about public participation?

Strategic impact assessment on plans is performed through several phases, which, in addition to the preparation of strategic assessment reports, include the participation of interested bodies and organizations, as well as public participation. The principle of publicity is one of the basic principles of strategic impact assessment, and implies that the public must have access to information on plans and programs and their possible impact on the environment, before making any decision, as well as after the official adoption of these documents. Interested bodies and organizations - otherwise professional bodies and organizations of the Republic, autonomous provinces and local self-government units operating in the field of environmental protection - are involved in this procedure on two occasions. The first time, during the preparatory phase, when they give an opinion on the decision to make a strategic assessment, ie the decision not to make a strategic assessment, and the second time, during the decision-making process on the correctness of the strategic impact assessment report, when assessing the content of the report. The general public has only one opportunity to express its opinion, in the last third phase when the final decision on the plan is made. The public can then comment on the strategic environmental assessment report of the plan, together with the plan itself, in a public review process organized in accordance with the Law on Planning under Construction. Here again, the situation arises that the public does not receive answers to its objections until it requests them, which illustrates the complicated and insufficiently transparent process in which it is often difficult for experts to follow the beginning and the end.

How do citizens really participate in decision-making on spatial development?

 The "gondola case" is a process of making plans and decisions about the environment, which during 2019 attracted the attention of the public and in which citizens participated en masse. How did the process result in a mass public uprising? Let's start from the beginning.

The beginning is the General Urban Plan of Belgrade (GUP), adopted in March 2016. The GUP defines the strategic directions of the city's development, and the integrative protection of cultural heritage as a driver of economic development are among the goals of the GUP. The natural core of Belgrade (the confluence of the Sava and the Danube with the Great War Island) is recognized as a capital symbol of the city's identity. Green areas are defined as a good of general interest, due to the multiple positive impact on the environment and the quality of life of citizens. GUP further says that the protection of non-renewable cultural heritage should be taken into account during the construction of traffic and communal infrastructure, and that the planning of new and reconstruction of existing traffic infrastructure must primarily be adjusted to the conditions of protection of cultural goods. In public transport planning, GUP provides an opportunity, if it proves to be efficient in the traffic sense and economically justified, to develop on the Sava and Danube, with the development of complementary modes of transport such as funiculars, elevators ... and cable cars. According to the GUP, these strategic directions in the development of the city need to be elaborated in more detail for the needs of implementation through general regulation plans with guidelines for mandatory development of detailed regulation plans, as planning documents of a lower order. So, the GUP set wide strokes with a brush, and the shapes had to be filled with the General Regulation Plan.

The development of the General Urban Plan of Belgrade coincided with the development of the General Regulation Plan for the construction area of ​​the seat of the local self-government unit - the city of Belgrade (PGR). Therefore, during the drafting, these two planning documents were mutually harmonized and both were adopted at the same session of the City Assembly on March 7, 2016. The PGR is further developing strategic directions from the GUP. And for the area of ​​the Belgrade Fortress, he explicitly states: "The Belgrade Fortress is the historical core of Belgrade, which has been declared a cultural asset of exceptional importance. Although greenery is not the main purpose of this space, it is its characteristic and specific framework for fortifications and in this context it should be treated in the future landscaping as public, mostly undeveloped, with the possibility of compatible public purposes and accompanying commercial facilities, especially in existing buildings. .. It is prohibited to install transmission lines, wire cables for alternative transport and recreation, especially in the area of ​​the Belgrade Fortress and in its wider views and aquatorium coverage.”

In September 2017, the Belgrade City Administration announced the beginning of an early public insight into the Detailed Regulation Plan for the Kalemegdan - Ušće gondola. The public had 15 days to get acquainted with the content of the Plan and react. The text of the draft PDR states the GUP and PGR as the planning basis for the development. And adds: "In case the provisions of the plans that make up the planning basis are mutually inconsistent, the provisions of the higher order plan apply, in accordance with Article 33 of the Law on Planning and Construction, which prescribes the obligation to harmonize planning documents with the wider area." The report on the conducted early public inspection is not publicly available, so we do not have an answer to whether the citizens responded.

In February 2018, the City Administration announced the beginning of a public insight into the Draft Detailed Regulation Plan for the Kalemegdan-Ušće gondola with the Report on Strategic Environmental Assessment. The PDR draft, with an explanation of the planning basis, adds an excerpt from the GUP and states: "The General Urban Plan of Belgrade 2021 emphasizes the development of complementary modes of transport such as funiculars, elevators, escalators, cable cars, etc ..." - However, there is no emphasis, but the possibility for such development is left, if it is efficient and economically justified.

The public had 30 days to express their position on the construction of the gondola. Whether the public did that, it is written in the report on the conducted public insight (which should be requested by the request for access to information of public importance).

In July 2018, the Belgrade City Administration announced in the Official Gazette that the Detailed Regulation Plan had been adopted.  Reports on the conducted early public insight and public insight are listed as part of the plan, but were not published with the text of the PDR.

Were the citizens really uninterested in this process? Or did the information reach the citizens through a complicated and bureaucratized procedure, through which the meaning of the information was lost? The answer was given by the citizens themselves, when public companies started cutting down trees and preparing the terrain for the construction of the gondola in March 2019. Tens of thousands of citizens signed the petition, protests were organized, the professional and academic community united and opposed the construction of the gondola, explaining that such an endeavor endangers the common good of public interest - the cultural heritage of Belgrade Fortress and the green area of ​​Friendship Park and Kalemegdan.

Citizens on guard: preserving green areas in cities

This and numerous other examples show us that citizens rarely react during the adoption of planning documents and decision-making. However, the park on Banovo brdo, the green area in Čingrijina, the park in Block 19, initiatives in Inđija, Vranje, Kikinda, Šabac, preservation of the forest in Košutnjak, prevention of construction on Makiško polje - all show the interest of citizens in preserving green areas as a good of public interest. Practice shows that citizens often do not have all the information on time, do not understand the implications of planning solutions or do not have the capacity to participate in the bureaucratized decision-making process. Therefore, it is not surprising that numerous initiatives are emerging in Serbia in response to decisions made by the authorities. Citizens really understand such decisions only when they face the consequences of those decisions: with felled trees, concreted and built parks, fragmented forests and disappearing rivers.

Towards 2100?

We are already feeling the effects of climate change today, and we do not have to wait for the year 2100. In cities, these effects are particularly pronounced: high temperatures, torrential floods, air pollution, less and less open space and lower and lower quality of life are becoming everyday for city dwellers. Spatial and urban development planning must take into account the reality of climate change and rely on green infrastructure as a powerful tool for improving the resilience of cities. Citizens, who are already living with these changes, recognize the importance of preserved green systems for the quality of life. And they are looking to participate in managing the development of cities.

Mirjana Jovanović and Milica Radanović, Belgrade Open School

* The text was developed within the project of the Center for Cultural Decontamination "Interactive Urbanism: A Platform for Understanding Spatial Development" supported by the Line through the initiative #CitizensHave Power, which is implemented within the long-term project "Towards Collaborative Management".

Photo source: canva.com