SUSTAINABLE TOWNS OF CROATIA
Program for the Development of Urban Public Spaces in Croatia FINAL RESEARCH PAPER
Submitted on April 15, 2003
I. BACKGROUND ON URBAN SPACES IN CROATIA "Croatian towns were historically served as cultural, economic and social
centers, and were a part of the rich European history. The spatial organization of some important Croatian towns as an integral part of the European network of cities has proven critical for the survival of
Croatia through the history, especially during the last war. Considering the rich architectural, historical and cultural heritage, the important emphasis is on protection and preserving that heritage for the
future generations to come. The spatial and urban planning strategy thus needs to take that in consideration when preparing sound instruments for urban planning and development." In order to understand the urban environment and the state of public spaces in Croatia, it is important to give a brief overview of the urban
network consisting of four large cities, around 20 medium size towns (between 20,000-100,000 inhabitants) and around 100 small towns with less than 10,000 inhabitants -- see the map of Croatia in Annex I.
The latest data collected by the Ministry of Spatial Planning, Construction and Housing (1991) has shown that 51% of the population lives in 117 towns and cities, of which 20% in the four largest cities of
Zagreb, Rijeka, Split and Osijek . It is also important to mention the differences in population density – in
some areas like the north-west, the density is 140 inhabitants/km2 while in more mountainous areas of Lika, Gorski kotar and islands, the density is less than 20 inhabitants/km2. In the continental part of
the country there are 67% of inhabitants with 100.5 inhabitants/km2, while in the coastal areas there are only 33% with 64 inhabitants/km2. On the 3300 km2 of island territory in 303 towns there were 120,000
inhabitants in 1991 with the density of 39 inhabitants/km2. In Croatia there are still 46% of towns that have distinctly agrarian/rural character. Some of them will with time become more or less urban and
most of them will most likely keep their rural character. Differences can be also seen between the coastal and continental urban regions. For example, urban areas of Rijeka, Pula, Split and Sibenik have
more urbanized areas than those of Zagreb, Varazdin and Sisak. In Istria and Kvarner, the region of Opatija has more urbanized character because of a close proximity to Rijeka. More urbanized character is
visible, also between Rijeka and Crikvenica connecting towns of Kostrena, Bakar, Bakarac and Kraljevica). In Dalmatia, the elements of urbanization are also more visible along the coast than in the more
continental area of Dalmatia, especially around Zadar, Sibenik, Split and Dubrovnik. Towns that were damaged or destructed during the war currently require special attention in legal, financial and other
aspects of development especially towns of Vukovar, Ilok, Beli Manastir, Zupanja, Virovitica, Glina, Hrvatska Kostajnica, Gospic, Slunj, Knin, Dubrovnik and others. The research will try to take these challenges and differences in consideration when selecting target towns and identifying public spaces. Towns will be selected
according to their location, character (coastal, mountainous or continental), size, historical or other characteristics paying attention to their regional location. According to the current regional
division, Croatia is divided into twenty counties therefore at least half of the counties will be covered by the research.
In Croatia today, planning and development of public spaces is still conducted at the national and local government level without an active
citizens' involvement. Spatial development, which also includes a category of public space is regulated by two national documents -- the "Law on Spatial Development" from 1998 (revised version of the
'94 law) and the "Act on Public Discussion in the Spatial Development Process", and the city/county plans on a local level. Croatia has also ratified and adopted several international treaties and
conventions including the UN Habitat Agenda 21 and recommendations prepared by the Council on Europe. In the last thirty years, urban and
spatial planning in Croatia has been regulated by top-down, technocratic and city-centric methods which focused mainly on rapid de-agrarization of rural areas, increased urbanization and industrialization,
without taking in consideration community needs, the real pace of urbanization and sound environmental practices. Some of the challenges facing Croatian towns are typical in today's urbanized world: traffic,
pollution, overpopulation and crowding, crime, destruction of natural and cultural resources and many others. Years of war and economic devastation has only added to those problems and caused further
degradation in both urban and rural areas. Urban policies in Croatia are still based on old, inflexible and inadequate urban plans that
contribute to already high levels of pollution and health problems, inadequate transportation solutions and a lack of appropriate public spaces, including streets safe for pedestrians, playgrounds adequate
for children, green areas, waterfronts, sport and recreational facilities, and other public spaces necessary for the overall healthy and sustainable urban living. Local government officials, overwhelmed with
too many problems are lacking skills and motivation important for reaching out to citizens and building partnerships. According to the
National Strategy on Spatial Planning developed by the Ministry of Spatial Planning, Construction and Housing, Croatian space has a great diversity and all elements needed for the integration into European
development systems. Among those elements are a favorable geographic position and easy access to Western and Central Europe a diverse mix between rural, mountainous, coastal and urban areas. Among major spatial development problems, the most pronounced ones identified by the Ministry are "irrationality of space use,
uncontrolled growth of large cities, neglected rural areas and areas along the state border, the occupancy of large areas for building purposes, low quality mass construction at the coast with an extremely
large share of illegal construction, underdeveloped infrastructure in some segments and generally unsolved questions of waste disposal" . Among the areas that require special attention and
adequate planning approach and measures are areas of large cities that need to be systematically researched and integrally planned because of strong urbanization impacts to the wider areas around.
Strategic objectives identified by the Ministry for Spatial Planning, Housing and Construction are taking all of the above challenges in consideration.
Objectives include developing links between urban and rural areas, spatial development of cities with large concentration of population, developing conditions for cultural and historic preservation of towns
especially those in remote areas and on the islands, and focusing on small and medium size towns as key centers of urban development. In the process of planning and development of spatial areas, urban planners are required to respect the "Act on Public Discussion in the Spatial Development Process
" and present their plans at public hearings. Specifically, the process includes the initial phase, which identifies the scope, goal and timeline for the development of a specific urban/spatial plan.
Public has 30 days to respond to city plans except for the City of Zagreb and the county plans (60 days). According to the article 9 of the Act, citizens and NGOs can participate at the public forum by
reviewing the draft project plans and giving their comments; asking questions about the proposed solutions and options; giving recommendations and advice or sending written recommendations by regular or
electronic mail. All the comments need to be reviewed, and relevant government representative sends written explanations on why some comments were not or were partially taken in consideration. The final
decision is announced in all the official government publications and local media. However, considering a long tradition of
government-subsidized social, education, health and other programs, and the top-down approach to urban planning, citizens are still not used on interacting with local government, questioning their
decision-making and participating at public forums. Even when citizens decide to participate, they often don't know how to respond in constructive fashion focusing on a bigger picture rather than details –
e.g. design of a park bench. In addition, the attitude toward the government is still of mistrust in the government's credibility, efficiency and transparent policies. The citizen's response is low and the
urban plans are thus implemented without their real involvement. The citizen's response is low and the urban plans are thus implemented without their real involvement. Despite the requirements posed by the Act, therefore the real question lies in the effectiveness of public hearings where low attendance and understanding of complex
city plans makes it difficult for citizens to challenge expert opinions and influence the planning and implementation process. In Croatia
today, there is very little if any secondary data available specifically on public spaces or alternative approaches to their development. My research will thus mostly rely on the primary data that will be
collected from interviews with different sector representatives, questionnaires, and analysis of the city plans and cultural and historical documents relevant for a specific town or a public space.
III. APPROACHES TO PUBLIC SPACE DEVELOPMENT
"Public places are a stage of our public lives. They are the parks where celebrations are held, where marathons end, where children
learn the skills of a sport, where the seasons are marked and where cultures mix"…"When cities and neighborhoods have thriving public places, residents have a strong sense of community; conversely, when they
are lacking, they may feel less connected to each other."
One of the organizations focusing specifically on the community-based approach to the development of public spaces is a New York–based Project for Public Spaces (PPS) and its partnership
organization in Brno, the Czech Republic. For over twenty-seven years, PPS/NY has worked with over 1000 communities offering education, training, mentorship and their unique set of tools on how to create and
sustain public spaces. In their "Bible": "How to Turn the Place Around: a Handbook on Creating Successful Public Spaces, PPS offers practical advice and not ten but eleven commandments on
building great public spaces, e.g. the community is the expert; you can't do it alone; they always say it can't be done; you can see a lot just by observing; and you are never finished. PPS is advocating a community-based approach as an alternative to the current, more widely used "project-driven" one. The
project-driven approach is usually imposed on citizens – the city usually introduces the new project to community and asks them their opinion (typical of the Croatian approach). PPS argues that this approach
usually doesn't work when creating great public spaces. Why? Because the project is not need driven and did not come out based on dialogues with citizens, but from a political or some other agenda.
Basically, what happens is "professionals develop alternative design schemes and take them to the "community", which reviews the project and provides input". This top-down approach doesn't allow citizens to
bring their needs and issues at the table at an early phase but only to respond to already make plans – this is a reactive rather than a proactive approach. As a result, many issues remain unheard and spaces
are not used nearly as much as they should be when/if discussed and planned together with communities. The
community-based approach
on the other side starts with a dialogue with community in the early, planning stage through workshops, forums, questionnaires and other means of communication. This approach allows citizens to express their concerns, offer their vision of the space and evaluate it together with experts. The result, often a compromise of all positions, can be a lively, creative space that offers more sustainable alternative and creates partnerships between professionals and community.
"To successfully design an urban space, it is essential to see the space from the viewpoint of all the groups that are using
it and then find a balance between their needs. This approach is ideally suited to the partnership approach as it allows all sides to state their opinions and often to make a compromise." Urban Institute/Croatia is currently implementing the "Local Government Reform Project" funded by the Unites States Agency for
International Development. The program also aims at building greater citizen participation through training and technical assistance offered to local government officials, especially those on a very local,
citizen council's level. Through its project, the Urban Institute advocates the importance of citizen participation and partnership building, and offers different tools for citizen participation such as the
use of information boards to learn more about local government activities, public forums to discuss specific issues related to the city, meetings between council members and citizens, and talk shows on local
TV stations to meet and talk to different local government representatives. Some of these practical tools have been already explored and practiced in Rijeka, the city that aims at achieving greater citizen
participation. However, more outreach to citizens and not just experts need to be done in order to attract greater citizens attention and grab their interest. As explained by the Urban Institute, "citizen participation is critical in developing and strengthening local democracy". However, citizen participation also has
a broader meaning – "it is a very important management tool that improves the effectiveness of management in local government and, if understood widely, can lead to a real and valuable public-private
partnership." Community has every right to participate in building their own vision of the space where they live, work and
socialize. Citizen participation also contributes to major improvements in local government, including better decision-making process that takes different views in consideration, stronger partnerships with
local community which leads to better understanding of local government policies and trust necessary to implement those policies. As Urban Institute argues, it is difficult to implement various policies
without citizen support and the results might be devastating and long-term. Involving community in decision-making can help local government officials in prioritizing scarce local resources, making better
and more sustainable choices and bringing access to different local resources through the community participation. "The meaningful citizen participation is to involve citizens in decision making process,
where they also commit their own resources to justify choices and also which provides platform to real dialogue enabling authorities to explain the situation and make the right choice of using scarce
resources". Participation in the process, including objective setting and delivery and ensuring that the community has sufficient skills
and resources to contribute constructively, may be an effective way of developing self-sustaining community structures and giving community real empowerment. It may also foster social cohesion and trust and
contribute to better decision making in a variety of ways. Local people understand the problems and needs of their areas or group and may generate ideas for tackling these problems, which would not have been
thought of otherwise. They may also have their ideas of priorities for expenditure so that maximum benefit is achieved. "
The design or redesign of public places requires a participatory process where the eventual users, or representatives of the same, are involved in the design process. Research –based recommendations cannot
substitute for public participation". Many other professionals in urban planning and development, architects, engineers, professors, NGO
and community leaders, prominent academics and government officials are promoting the community-based approach to urban planning and advocating for greater and more livable cities and public spaces as the
necessary component of healthy urban life. The "Urban White Paper" developed by the U.K. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is
for example presenting a "new vision to urban living" that includes people shaping the future of their community supported by strong local leaders; people living in livable, attractive towns and
cities, which offer good quality services and promote more sound sustainable environmental practices -- less noise, traffic and pollution, and ultimately deliver "an urban renaissance". In his
article "European Cities – First Sow, then Reap, Joost Smiers says: "The dangers imposed on public spaces are seen all over the world. Cities have always been characterized by the existence of a variety
of places where people could meet and congregate on their own terms: collectively we call this the public space".Although vital for freedom of communication, including artistic communication, this
phenomenon is endangered agrees Franco Bianchini: "Many local councils, tempted with promises of increased rateable values and income from land sales have allowed the development of privately owned and
controlled indoor shopping malls in the town or city centre. Arts that used to find a welcome place on streets and squares are thus crossed out from public life." Miklos Marschall, former mayor of Budapest and former director of Civicus, resource organization on civil society and proponent of livable cities:
"no high quality culture can exist without innovation at the grassroots. Cultural organizations are needed to stimulate and accommodate new artistic developments…We are very much aware of the necessity of supporting alternative and innovative groups
."
IV. QUESTIONNAIRE FINDINGS
In order to identify a preliminary state of public spaces in Croatia and NGOs and citizen involvement in the planning and design
process, a number of NGOs and local government representatives have been identified and contacted through the questionnaire specifically designed for NGOs and local government. Out of a total number of 50
questionnaires sent, only15 people responded (7 NGO representatives and 8 local government officials). As many as 10-15 people among those contacted promised to send their response but even
after several remainders failed to do so although they expressed an interest in future cooperation. Summary of responses:
Total number of questionnaires sent: 50 Number of NGO representatives that responded: 7
Number of local government representatives: 8 ________________________________________ Percentage of written responses: 30% Analysis of the questionnaire: 1. On the question of
how much do you know about the process of design and development of public spaces in your town/region/county/national level (what is applicable), out of 7 NGOs answered to the questionnaire, 5
answered with: not informed, and two answered with very little informed. 2. On the question of how much do you know about citizen participation in the process of planning
and decision-making especially related to public spaces and how can the current situation be improved, answers were the following:
>
Citizens are not informed and are not included in decision-making process, the situation could be improved with better education of citizens about their rights on making decisions and education of local government.
>
To some extent, e.g. through local citizen councils (mjesne odbore) and local self-government, e.g. on the local park development, putting benches, parking etc but it seems that the process is not very clear and transparent. Citizens are not clear on how they can influence the design, planning and implementation of the projects.
>
In some larger cities like Zagreb, Osijek and Split, citizens are invited to the open forums where they can give their comments and ideas in the certain time frame. Those comments are taken in consideration, and the competition is announced. Best projects are selected by the committee and the second round of public forums is organized where citizens have an opportunity to give their comments. The final project is then selected. In smaller towns the process is less transparent and citizens don't have that many opportunities for participation.
> Citizen involvement is very limited. There could be some initiatives at the local citizen council level but it is probably very limited and sporadic. >
Public forums should be reintroduced wherever possible. Some old practices were actually very good and proved to be very efficient. Through public forums and discussions, some citizen initiatives succeeded in blocking some unsound projects, e.g. Zelena Akcija initiative to prevent the burning of waste in Zagreb and some others.
> Not informed; there should be a broader citizen questionnaire on this subject.
3. On the question of cooperation with local government and self-government, out of seven answers from NGOs, three answered with – very limited
cooperation, one -- good cooperation with different towns in the greater area but not with local government officials on the city level because they lack interest. Three responses were – very
good cooperation with different local government offices on various topics such as infrastructure development in rural areas, youth programs and clubs, community clubs, day care centers, eco-initiatives in
towns and counties organized by youth and children.Among the local government officials, out of eight written responses, six of them answered that they have at least occasional cooperation with
citizens and local groups, especially environmental groups and Architectural Societies. Two graded the cooperation with high and one with medium. Groups are invited to participate and give their opinions and
participate at the public forums, which are at the interviewees' opinion, the best way to include citizens in the process of urban and spatial planning. 4. On the question to NGOs about
participation in the planning and development of certain public spaces, out of seven answers, six answered with NO. One group participated in several projects including the city park development,
clean-up and maintenance of the public beach and river banks, and setting of benches and garbage cans.Local government officials have identified NGO and citizens interest in public space
planning and development
as low (five responses); high (one response) and low for citizens and medium-high for NGOs (one response) and medium (one response). The last interviewee explained that the low citizen response could still be attributed to citizens' sense that nobody will listen to their ideas as well as to their primary interest in spaces immediately surrounding their houses. It seems that citizens still don't have a sense of belonging to and ownership of public spaces.
5. On the question to NGOs to identify examples of public spaces that are developed with citizen/NGO participation, seven out of seven answered with DON'T
KNOW ANY SUCH EXAMPLES. 6. On the question to local government officials about methods to improve citizen/NGO participation, the following were responses:
>
Improve the quality of work and level of information of the local self-government, especially through city councils that should be responsible for communicating with public and transmitting public comments to the Offices for urban planning and other offices responsible for public spaces. Another good example would be a free newsletter (free) that would inform the public about upcoming projects, ideas and would give the public an opportunity to respond. Some experiences in different towns proved that this method works and increased the level of public participation. Also through the web site, although those who would be potentially more interested (e.g. land owners etc) usually don't have access to Internet while those who have are less interested because they own any property (youth e.g.). One alternative would be to install info-centers in accessible public places and entrances to public buildings, e.g. banks, post offices etc.
>
Increase the level of awareness about the importance of public participation at the local government level but also demonstrate in practice that public opinion is important and will be taken in consideration.
>
The Act on public participation is enabling citizens to actively participate in the process on planning and decision-making. However, public media could contribute to the better information level among citizens, which would increase public interest and participation.
> Inform citizens about the importance of participation in urban planning process in general, not just during a specific planning process. >
Some ideas would include citizen questionnaires, public forums and discussion with citizens, workshops etc.
All of the above respondents were helpful in identifying new contacts especially on the city level rather that county level and were interested in
future cooperation. CONCLUSION The 21st
century will be urban. Despite numerous problems that cities are facing today, city is and should remain the best form of organized people's life. City is offering a future--economically, culturally, socially and ecologically. The focus in the future will be on strengthening key sectors of urban lives by achieving balance between rural and urban areas and creating public-private partnerships.
Urban /spatial planning is thus increasing in its importance for a number of reasons – it is contributing to socio-economic
development, it brings harmony to the community development and is decreasing differences among different regions in the country bringing them closer together in all aspects of development. According to the
Agenda 21, "in the future, the quality and pleasantness of living will be the most determined criteria for people's inhabiting. Every single human activity requires a certain space and there is almost no activity that could not be improved without improvements in the space. The challenges
related to the space are a global phenomenon and need to be resolved on a global as well as on a local level. In this multi-dimensional and cross-sectoral process, all segments of society need to be
involved, especially citizens who have the most interest and stakes put into the process. The purpose of this research is to help identify
the current state of public spaces in Croatia and identify those towns and key people/groups interested in promoting the "community-based" approach as a healthy and more sustainable alternative to the
current "project-driven" urban and spatial development practices that are imposed on community without offering opportunity for their views and creative ideas. This research will also help explain that the absence of effective community organizations is one of the key problems of current urban and spatial planning and that
increasing public participation should be one of the main objectives of urban revitalization with a specific focus on underrepresented groups such as youth, women and elderly. The research will also try to address two main challenges, which if successfully addressed could open new solutions for more effective participation of local people:
1. How to increase the capacity of the community to respond to its problems; and 2. How to get local authorities to change their current practices by involving community in decisions
that will have an affect on their lives.
The ultimate position of this research paper is that the new urban areas need to become spaces for communication, emotional and
social connectedness, where people exchange ideas, experiences, and live without any fears and where they can express their individual styles and way of living. Urban areas should develop in such a way that
all necessary segments of peoples' lives are available and grouped within a short distance (housing, work, social life and recreation), where people can encounter other people and "help build a sense of communality and tolerance that in turn provides the underpinnings for thriving urban life in an increasingly diverse, multicultural world".
|
