Suchergebnisse

IN ENGLISH: Urban planning, renewal and their actors are always closely connected with the sociopolitical changes and therefore the transitional post- socialist Croatia provides an interesting context for the analysis of spatial changes. This paper is a comparative study of urban transformations in Croatia (the City of Zagreb)in three important time periods: (a) socialism in the 1970s and the 1980s, (b) period during and immediately after the Homeland War and the beginning of transition from 1990 to 2000 and (c) period since 2000 and the acceleration of processes which started in the previous period. These periods of time have been chosen because of major changes in the socio- political system and consequently in spatial planning and management. Also in each of them we can observe the changing power of different types of actors and the appearance of new actors. The main aspects of urban planning are determined as well as the power of various urban actors throughout each period. Since 1990 and especially since 2000 urban planning has been given little attention in Zagreb resulting in the disappearance of system or method and thus in sporadic, random building. --- IN CROATIAN: Urbano planiranje i obnova kao i njihovi akteri uvijek su bili usko povezani sa sociopolitičkim promjenama stoga tranzicijska post-socijalstička Hrvatska pruža zanimljiv kontekst za analizu prostornih promjena. Ovaj rad je komparativna studija urbanih transformacija u Hrvatskoj (gradu Zagrebu) u tri važna razdoblja: a) socijalističko: 1970-ih i 1980-ih, b) razdoblje tijekom i odmah nakon Domovinskog rata te tranzicija od 1990-2000. c) razdoblje nakon 2000. u kojem dolazi do akceleracije procesa koji su započeli u prethodnom razdoblju. Ova vremenska razdoblja odabrana su s obzirom na velike promjene u socio-političkom sustavu i posljedično u prostornom planiranju i upravljanju prostorom. Također, u svakom od njih možemo promatrati promjene u moći kod različitih tipova aktera kao i pojavu novih aktera. Ustanovljeni su glavni aspekti urbanog planiranja kao i moć različitih urbanih aktera u svakom razdoblju. Od 1990, a pogotovo nakon 2000. godine urbano planiranje bilo je slabije zastupljeno u Zagrebu što je rezultiralo nestankom sustavnog planiranja te sporadičnom i slučajnom izgradnjom.

In the post-socialist and transition period, Croatia and especially its capital city Zagreb have experienced many physical transformations of space but, most of all, remarkable social changes. For example, socially-oriented housing construction planned and co-financed by towns in Croatia is in a very unfavourable position compared to private housing construction, especially on the outskirts of towns. This benefits neither towns nor their residents, but rather only those urban actors interested in the development of capitalism. In recent years, there has been a lot of building in the city core and on the outskirts of Zagreb, which is not well integrated into the existing urban structure, image or skyline of the city. There is also a major problem of insufficient primary and secondary infrastructure in the new housing estates. The current situation in the planning process is characterized by conflict and lack of balance between powerful political and economic actors and less powerful professional and civil actors. Experts of various profiles often point out that ignoring the process of planning means irreparable long-term damage to the space. Such incongruous transformations show the absence of comprehensive urban planning and urbanism. (IN CROATIAN: Cjelokupni je prostor Hrvatske u postsocijalističkom i tranzicijskom razdoblju doživio brojne i značajne promjene, i u smislu fizičkih transformacija, ali ponajviše onih socijalnih. Primjerice socijalna stanogradnja koju planiraju i sufinanciraju gradovi u Hrvatskoj u vrlo je nepovoljnom položaju prema stanogradnji privatnog tipa, pogotovo na rubovima gradova. Takva situacija nije povoljna za građane i grad, već samo za one urbane aktere koji podržavaju kapitalistički razvoj grada. Posljednjih godina pojavljuje se izgradnja u centru i na rubovima grada koja se ne uklapa u postojeću urbanu strukturu i njegovu vizuru. Prisutan je i problem neadekvatne primarne i sekundarne infrastrukture u novim naseljima. Trenutačnu situaciju u procesu planiranja karakteriziraju sukobi i neravnoteža između političkih i ekonomskih aktera na jednoj strani te stručnih i civilnih aktera na drugoj. Stručnjaci različitih profila upozoravaju kako ignoriranje procesa planiranja dugoročno ostavlja nepopravljivu štetu u prostoru te kako takve transformacije grada govore o nepostojanju urbanizma.)

In the post-socialist and transition period, Croatia and especially its capital city Zagreb have experienced many physical transformations of space but, most of all, remarkable social changes. For example, socially-oriented housing construction planned and co-financed by towns in Croatia is in a very unfavourable position compared to private housing construction, especially on the outskirts of towns. This benefits neither towns nor their residents, but rather only those urban actors interested in the development of capitalism. In recent years, there has been a lot of building in the city core and on the outskirts of Zagreb, which is not well integrated into the existing urban structure, image or skyline of the city. There is also a major problem of insufficient primary and secondary infrastructure in the new housing estates. The current situation in the planning process is characterized by conflict and lack of balance between powerful political and economic actors and less powerful professional and civil actors. Experts of various profiles often point out that ignoring the process of planning means irreparable long-term damage to the space. Such incongruous transformations show the absence of comprehensive urban planning and urbanism. ; Cjelokupni je prostor Hrvatske u postsocijalističkom i tranzicijskom razdoblju doživio brojne i značajne promjene, i u smislu fizičkih transformacija, ali ponajviše onih socijalnih. Primjerice socijalna stanogradnja koju planiraju i sufinanciraju gradovi u Hrvatskoj u vrlo je nepovoljnom položaju prema stanogradnji privatnog tipa, pogotovo na rubovima gradova. Takva situacija nije povoljna za građane i grad, već samo za one urbane aktere koji podržavaju kapitalistički razvoj grada. Posljednjih godina pojavljuje se izgradnja u centru i na rubovima grada koja se ne uklapa u postojeću urbanu strukturu i njegovu vizuru. Prisutan je i problem neadekvatne primarne i sekundarne infrastrukture u novim naseljima. Trenutačnu situaciju u procesu planiranja karakteriziraju sukobi i neravnoteža između političkih i ekonomskih aktera na jednoj strani te stručnih i civilnih aktera na drugoj. Stručnjaci različitih profila upozoravaju kako ignoriranje procesa planiranja dugoročno ostavlja nepopravljivu štetu u prostoru te kako takve transformacije grada govore o nepostojanju urbanizma.

IN ENGLISH: In the post-socialist period and within the current social transition context, urban and rural Croatia has, just like other transition countries, experienced many changes in the social structure and space. One example is the housing quality which is a replica of the situation in the Croatian society and has also undergone some major changes. Socially oriented housing construction co-financed by the state and the cities is in an unfavourable position compared to private housing construction. In the last twenty years the amount of the social housing construction has been only a minor part of the total contruction work in the country. For instance, out of nine newly planned residential housing developments in Zagreb, the capital city, only three have been completed and the work on the rest of them has stopped and is unlikely to continue. Private construction work prevails especially on the edge of the city and is characterised by high density housing. This type of housing construction doesn't benefit the majority of citizens in search of accommodation (price per square meter is too high, low-quality building). There is also a big problem of the community facilities (primary and secondary infrastructure, schools, kindergartens, playgrounds, green areas, sidewalks, public transport etc.). The existing globalisation-transition circumstances of the Croatian society corroborate the fact which experts of various profiles often point out: ignoring the process of (urban) planning will irreparably damage the space. The city transformation shows the absence of comprehensive urban planning which results in an ever increasing number of random buildings which do not fit in the surroundings. This leads up to yet another important issue – the shrinking and, in some cases, disappearance of public space which becomes the "lost space". In recent years there has been a lot of building in the city core and on the edge which does not quite fit in the existing urban structure, image or the skyline of the city. The current situation in the process of planning can be characterized as a conflict and imbalance between the powerful actors (mostly political and economic) and less powerful actors (mostly professional and civil). The actors who have the political power and influence and the ones who possess the capital are forming an "alliance" between two important layers of the social structure. The lack of civil and professional actors, "lost spatial actors", and therefore of civic aggregation is also present and that is also the cause of public space "disappearance" and undermined process of public participation. --- IN CROATIAN: U postsocijalističkom razdoblju i trenutnom tranzicijskom kontekstu urbana i ruralna Hrvatska su, kao i ostale tranzicijske zemlje, doživjele mnoge promjene u društvenoj strukturi i samom prostoru. Na primjeru kvalitete stanovanja kao replike stanja u hrvatskom društvu mogu se vidjeti značajne promjene. Društveno usmjerena stambena izgradnja sufinancirana od strane države i gradova je stoga rjeđa i u nepovoljnijoj je situaciji prema privatnoj stanogradnji. Zadnjih dvadeset godina udjel socijalne stambene gradnje je zanemariv u ukupnoj izgradnji na razini zemlje. Primjerice, od devet planiranih stambenih naselja izgrađenih po modelu POS-a u Zagrebu samo su tri i završena. Na ostalima je proces gradnje zastao i ne čini se da će se privesti kraju. Privatna je gradnje prisutnija, posebno na rubovima grada, a obilježava je visoka gustoća gradnje. Ovakav tip gradnje ne odgovara većini stanovnika koji su u procesu potražnje stambene nekretnine (visoka cijena kvadratnog metra, a slaba kvaliteta gradnje). Postoji također i problem nedostatne opremljenosti susjedstva (primarna i sekundarna infrastruktura, škole, vrtići, igrališta, zelene površine, pješačke staze, javni transport itd.). Navedene globalizacijsko-tranzicijske okolnosti hrvatskog društva potvrđuju ono što eksperti različitih profila ističu, a to je da će ignoriranje procesa (urbanog) planiranja nepovratno uništiti prostor gradova. Ovakve transformacije pokazuju nedostatak sustavnog urbanog planiranja što rezultira sve većim brojem zgrada koje se ne uklapaju u neposrednu okolinu. To nadalje dovodi do drugog važnog aspekta – smanjivanja i u nekim slučajevima, nestanka javnog prostora koji postaje "izgubljeni prostor". Posljednjih je godina izgrađen velik broj zgrada, i u središtu i na rubovima grada, koje se ne uklapaju u postojeću urbanu strukturu, izgled ili vizuru grada. Ovakvu situaciju obilježavaju sukob i neravnoteža između moćnijih društvenih aktera (većinom političkih i ekonomskih) i onih manje moćnih (većinom profesionalnih i civilnih). Politički i ekonomski akteri se često povezuju u "savez" dvaju najjačih u društvenoj strukturi. S druge strane nedostatak utjecaja civilnih i profesionalnih aktera kao "izgubljenih prostornih aktera" dovodi do "nestanka" javnih prostora te smanjenja važnosti procesa participacije (sudjelovanja javnosti).

Slučaj planirane gradnje stambeno-poslovnog kompleksa na Cvjetnom trgu u Zagrebu zanimljiv je na više načina, a analizom diskursa triju dnevnih novina (Jutarnji list, Večernji list i Vjesnik) istražilo se aktere uključene u taj projekt u 2007. godini i početkom 2008. godine. Ukratko se slučaj Cvjetnog trga može objasniti planiranjem projekta gradnje od strane investitora T. Horvatinčića, predstavljen javnosti krajem 2006. godine. Predstavljeni projekt izazvao je iznimno burnu raspravu oko načina gradnje i planiranog rušenja na prostoru uz Cvjetni trg, te su se isprofilirale dvije suprotstavljene strane, oni koji su podržavali cjelokupni projekt i oni koji od početka protiv njega. Zagovornici ovog projekta često su se pozivali na nužnu promjenu zapuštenih donjogradskih blokova i time naglašavali njegov javni interes kao interes građana Zagreba. Protivnici su pak naglašavali ugroženost javnog prostora i javnih interesa, prometnu zagušenost koja će nastati, te narušavanje kulturne i povijesne baštine ovog mjesta. Ovako polarizirana situacija istaknula je glavne aktere uključene u slučaj Cvjetni trg, a mogu se izdvojiti prema sljedećoj tipologiji: politički, ekonomski, stručni i civilni akteri. Planirano rušenje izazvalo je otpor civilnog sektora (Pravo na grad i Zelena akcija i dr.), dijela stručnjaka (arhitekata, urbanista, glumaca, sociologa i drugih) i dovelo do više ili manje organiziranih prosvjeda. U javnosti je od samog početka projekta stvoren dojam izrazite podrške određenih institucija grada Zagreba i osobno gradonačelnika M. Bandića za nastavak projekta jer je u više navrata mijenjan GUP Zagreba (Generalni urbanistički plan Zagreba). Na kraju je projekt, zahvaljujući stvorenim reakcijama u javnosti i medijima, ipak doživio neke preinake, a glavni investitor je čak « prijetio» odustajanjem od projekta. Bez obzira na mogući krajnji scenarij, pitanje je koliko će, ovaj projekt, ako se završi, biti inkorporiran u ovaj dio središta grada. (IN ENGLISH: The case of the residential – business complex in Flower Square in Zagreb is interesting in many ways. Actors involved in the project in 2007 and at the beginning of 2008 are analysed in the discourse analysis of three daily papers (Jutarnji list, Večernji list and Vjesnik). Briefly, the investor Tomo Horvatinčić presented his building project to the public at the end of 2006. The project immediately generated a heated discussion about the building and demolition in the square and two opposing parties emerged: those who supported the whole project and those who were against it from the very beginning. Those in favour of the project claimed that it was necessary to take care of the run-down buildings in the centre of Zagreb and the project was in fact in the best interest of all citizens. Those against emphasized a threat to the public space and public interest, traffic congestion, disregard of cultural and historical heritage of the place. This polarization brought out the main actors involved in the case of Flower square: they are political, economic, professional/expert and civil society actors. The civil sector (Pravo na grad, Zelena akcija etc.) and some professionals (architects, town planners, actors, sociologists and others) opposed demolition in the square and organized protests. The impression prevailed in public that certain town institutions and the Mayor of town Milan Bandić himself, strongly supported the project from the start since the Master city plan changed several times. Eventually, the project was somewhat modified due to the public and media reactions and the main investor even "threatened" to give it up. Regardless of the final case scenario, the question remains: how will this project, if finished, be incorporated into the centre of the city?)

In this paper, space and landscape will be understood as naturally predefined and socially created. The sociological approach relies on the analysis of the social context (transition and neoliberalism) as well as on the analysis of the types of social actors and their actions which have their effects in Croatia. In a new social system also new actors appear: political, economic, professional and civil actors. The first three actors form a triangle of power and the fourth appears as a weaker one. The basic approach of this paper is the interest in sustainable development, which is followed by the valorisation of the actors and the actions relating space and landscapes. Several examples of the actors' influence on landscape in the Mediterranean part of Croatia are being analysed. They show a negative attitude towards landscape and its drastic devastation through concreting and apartmentizing of the coast.