Kamenzind No.6 by Camenzind Redaktion

МЕЂУНАРОДНИ ЧАСОПИС ЗА АРХИТЕКТУРУ INTERNATIONAL ARCHITECTURE MAGAZINE

КАМЕНЗИНД БЕОГРАД - КРАЉЕВИЋА МАРКА 8 - САВАМАЛА

Uspon i pad Savamale - The Rise and Fall of Savamala -Princip proizvoljnosti - Principle of Arbitrariness - Urban inkubator:Domino efekat - Urban Incubator: Domino Effect - Grad, investitor i javni interes - The City, the Investor, and Public Interests - Ne da(vi)mo Beograd - The Belgrade (Water) Front -Srđ je naš - Srdj is Ours - Zašto „Skopje 2014“ uopšte nije projekat - Why Skopje 2014 Isn't a Development Project - Novi grad za starog kralja - A New City for The Old King

IMPRINT No.6 May, 2015. PUBLISHED BY: Camenzind Belgrade EDITORS: Ana Djordjevic-Petrovic Ljubica Slavkovic Leila Peacock Jeanette Beck Benedikt Boucsein Axel Humpert Tim Seidel Design concept and layout: Ana Djordjevic-Petrovic Leila Peacock Illustrations: Luka Tilinger TRANSLATED BY: Dina Miovic Matija Milivojevic Edited by: Kaya PRINTER: 'DMD' stamparija RUN: 500 CONTACT: vickava@gmail.com www.camenzindbelgrade.com ADDRESS: КАМЕНЗИНД Belgrade, Kraljevica Marka 8 Beograd, Serbia

KAMENZIND

Sadržaj

Contents Re-animation

Re-animacija

The Rise and Fall of Savamala

Uspon i pad Savamale

Principle of Arbitrariness

Princip proizvoljnosti

Urban Incubator: Domino Effect

Urban inkubator: Domino efekat

The City, the Investor, and Public Interests

Grad, investitor i javni interes

The Belgrade (Water) Front

Ne da(vi)mo Beograd

Srdj is Ours

Srđ je naš

Why Skopje 2014 Isn't a Development Project

Zašto „Skopje 2014“ uopšte nije projekat

A New City for The Old King

Novi grad Za starog kralja

CAMENZIND

REANIMACIJA

REANIMATION

Dobar odnos investitora, vlasti i građana je sveto trojstvo u razvoju grada. Svakom činiocu ovog sistema je u interesu da pravac razvoja bude rezultat saradnje, s pogledom u budućnost.

A city's holy trinity is a good working relationship between investors, the authorities, and its residents. It is in every one of these actors' interests to form a relationship based on mutual respect and cooperation. A disinterested populace disengaged from its surroundings; authorities who unilaterally represent investors' interests; investors who focus solely on short term gains...these are all factors which throw the ideal out of balance, often times, with abysmal consequences. Accountability should also be divided equally.

Nezainteresovanost građana za svoje okruženje, vlast koja isključivo zastupa interese investitora i investitor koji u fokusu ima jednokratnu dobit dovode do poremećaja ravnoteže u tom odnosu, što vremenom neumitno dovodi do katastrofalnih posledica u okruženju. Odgovornost se takođe deli podjednako. U Srbiji je ovaj odnos već godinama ozbi ljno poremećen i disfunkcionalan. Ljudi više nemaju osećaj bilo kakvog učešća u onome što se oko njih gradi, potrebe građana se sve više zanemaruju, a bilo kakva interakcija ili obrazovanje radi boljeg razumevanja arhitekture i grada kao sprege uzročno-posledičnih veza, ne postoji. Ovakva paradoksalna situacija, u kojoj građani gube šansu da promišljaju prostore u kojima provode život, ukazuje na pomanjkanje svesti o sopstvenom životu i gubitak interesa za istinske vrednosti ljudskog duha.

In Serbia, this relationship has been grossly unbalanced and dysfunctional for many years. People no longer feel as if they have any control over what is being built around them, residents' needs are increasingly ignored, and awareness or education concerning architecture and its cause-and -effect impacts on the environment, are almost non-existent. This paradox, wherein the populace has no chance to influence the surroundings in which they live, exemplifies

KAMENZIND

Stoga je ovaj broj Kamenzinda u celosti posvećen re-animaciji odnosa građana prema gradu i okolini.

a lack of self-consciousness or even an interest in some of the most intrinsic aspects of human nature.

Otvaramo sa primerom bottom-up prakse, starim preko sto godina. Vera Pavlović Lončarski govori o tome kako su pridošli trgovci stečeno bogatsvo uložili u razvoj svoje četvrti. Udružili su se i nastupili kao odgovorni investitiori, čime su uzdigli Savamalu od močvare do secesije. Taj sjaj, nažalost, nije potrajao i u decenijama koje su usledile... O principu proizvoljnosti, odnosu prema troškovima realizacije projekta, kao i višestrukoj povezanosti između političkih interesnih grupa i urbanista/planera i bezuslovnom isključivanju javnosti i građana iz pro cesa izrade urbanističkih i drugih razvojnih projekata, piše dr Ksenija Petovar. Sledi impresija Beograda iz očiju strankinje koja ga odabira kao mesto za život: Constance A. Dunn, kroz razgovor sa ljudima iz projekta Urban Inkubator otkriva poteškoće naučnog metoda merlji vosti promena grada i donosi nam uvid koliko je percipiranje grada subjektivna pojava. Da je budućnost grada zavisna upravo od tog stalnog balansa između subjektivnog i objektivnog, privatnog i javnog, i da njegova održivost zavisi od te finoće štelovanja, čitamo u tekstu Ljubice Slavković koja smatra da je neosporno da su svakom gradu investitori potrebni, ali se i pita zašto je svakom investitoru i gradu potreban urbanizam i koja je njegova uloga. Svedoci smo velikih promena u gradovima regiona, što za posledicu ima kreiranje tzv novog identiteta. Promišljamo kome je zaista potreban novi identitet, te čitamo stavove žitelja gradova regiona kod kojih su ove promene najizraženije. Saznajemo kako zainteresovani građani reaguju na promene u Beogradu, Dubrovniku i Skoplju i šta je u srži njihovih reakcija i želja. Ovaj broj zaključujemo sa fikcijom Paula Curriona koji elemente bajke smešta u sadašnjicu. Kroz konflikt, herojski obrt i bajkoviti kraj u kome se „živi zauvek srećno“ poziva nas da ponovo promislimo šta se u našem okruženju dešava i kakva bi naša uloga u tome mogla biti.

It is for these reasons that this issue of Kamenzind is dedicated, in its entirety, towards re-animating the relationship between the city and its inhabitants.

CAMENZIND

We begin with an example of the trickle up principle. Vera Pavlovic Loncarski writes about how immigrant merchants invested their hard earned wealth back into their community. They pooled together their efforts and resources and built up, if even for a relatively short time, the Savamala District from a swamp into a lap of luxury. Dr. Ksenija Petovar writes about the four main themes marking the low level of urbanism in Serbia's cities - arbitrariness, the cost-effectiveness of development projects, graft and corruption, and the unconditional exclusion of the general population from urban development and planning. We then transition to an article about the Urban Incubator project, and a foreigner's perspective on Belgrade as a city she chose to make her home. Constance A. Dunn, through a series of interviews with member of the UI project, reveals the difficulties in quantifying "change" in a city, and enlightens us on the very subjective nature of perception. That a city's future is very much based on the balancing of the subjective and objective, of the public versus the private, and that its very sustainability is the constant pursuit of equilibrium, are but a few of the topics in Ljubica Slavkovic's essay, which states that undoubtedly, every city needs investors, but what makes urbanism a necessity for every investor and every city? We are all witness to the momentous changes occurring in this region, and the consequences these have on shaping a new identity. But the question arises then: "who is it that needs a new identity?" and we read the opinions of residents of some of the region's cities where these changes have become most prominent. We find out how 4

Tokom dvogodišnjeg rada na časopisu uredništvo Kamenzinda je nastojalo da kroz kvalitetne tekstove zainteresovanima ponudi bolje razumevanje arhitekture i time inspiriše širu javnost da zauzme aktivniji odnos prema izgrađenoj sredini. Kada bismo mogli da izmerimo intenzitet odjeka koji je naša aktivnost imala u društvu i samim tim uradimo tu čuvenu ‘procenu postignutih rezultata’, verujemo da bi rezultati bili poražavajući. Međutim, prolazeći kroz istraživački proces, i mi smo kao naš šegrt iz bajke doživeli herojski obrt od kritike i zapadanja u malodušnost do konstruktivnog promišljanja. Umesto da odustanemo, mi smo ustali i potrudili se da pronađemo moderniji i kreativniji način da ipak dopremo do šire publike. Tako će uz ovaj broj Kamenzinda u javnost biti puštena i white board animacija u kojoj je sublimirana višemesečna analiza aktuelnog projekta Beograd na vodi. Uprkos impozantnosti, važnosti i uticaju koji bi, sa svim izvesno, izvođenje ovog projekta imao na živote svih nas, većina stanovništva glavnog grada ostala je nema i nezainteresovana. Prvobitni cilj nam je bio da se prosečnom građaninu bez predznanja iz oblasti urbanizma, arhitekture, prava i ekonomije omogući razumevanje glavnih aspekata projekta. Međutim, kako to uglavom biva kada je proces stvaran, tokom izrade animacije cilj se transformisao u realnu potrebu da se, mimo politike i polemike, film lansira kao prvi poziv svim zainteresovanima za stvaranje zajedničke platforme za konstru ktivno, stručno i kreativno promišljanje naj boljeg pravca razvoja naše metropole. Za naš lepi i autentični Beograd na ušću dveju reka!

the residents of Belgrade, Dubrovnik and Skopje perceive and react to the changes occurring around them. The issue closes with a fictional piece, written by Paul Currion, who transposes the fairy-tale medium on the present. Through conflict, a hero's journey, and a not-so-classic "happily ever after" ending, he beckons us to again reevaluate what is going on around us, and what is it that we truly want. During two year's worth of work, the staff of Kamenzind has endeavored to provide the general public with a better understanding of architecture and its impacts, as well as inspire them to take a more active role in shaping the building environment around them. If we were to somehow measure the intensity and repercussion of our combined efforts, and were we successful in compiling the famed "assessment of achieved goals", the results would, undoubtedly, be rather disparaging. But, much like our fairy-tale hero, we too have undergone a journey by which we transformed our apathy and malevolence into constructivism and contentment. Rather than give up, we decided to get up, to try to find a different, creative, way in which to reach out to the public. And so, along with this issue, we will also be releasing a short white-board animation, the culmination of our analysis of the Belgrade Waterfront project. Despite its imposing nature and the importance and sheer impact that this project might have on our lives, the vast majority of the public has remained aphasic and indifferent. Our primary goal was to explain, in layman's terms, the main aspects of the project. However, as time went on, our goal transformed into a greater, and very real, need to create a platform, independent of politics and rhetoric, to constructively, creatively and professionally re-evaluate the path our city is heading down. We hope this is but one of the steps in the beginning of our journey towards a better city.

KAMENZIND

Uspon i pad

The Rise and Fall of

Savamale SAVAMALA by Ljubica Slavkovic

Ljubica Slavković „Na ovome tako golemom prostoru ovoga kva rta nalazi se stanica Dunavskog parobroda rskog društva. Tu je i stanica sviju lađa koje Savom i Dunavom plove, tu je pijaca savska, tu su baštovandžijnice, štampara i nekoliko nadležatelstva. Nigde šarenijeg sveta do u ovom Kvartu, nigde više sklonih ljudi na nerede do što su ljudi koji se u ovom kvartu nastanište. Tu su došljaci iz belog sveta, tu su skitnice, probisveti, amali, lađari, prodavci, prekupci, špekulanti, trgovci, radenici, panduri, sve sami razni staleži sa raznim navikama, raznim okolnostima, odati svemu što vlasti poso zadaje i što policiju izaziva da večito budnim okom na njih motri.“1

"Within this district's wide area, you will find the Danube Steamboat Society's docks. There are also docks for all manner of boats traversing the Sava and Danube. You will also find Savska's green market there, as well as greeneries, printers, several local government offices. You will nowhere find a morecolorful mix of people than than those who have settled in this neighborhood, nor people more prone to various disturbances. These are all manner of foreigners, vagabonds, tramps, dockworkers, steam boaters, merchants, wholesalers, speculators, laborers, beat cops, all different classes of people with their differing habits and varied circumstances, committed to all that which employs the powers of law and order, and which begs the police to constantly keep its ever watchful eyes upon them." 1

Ovaj dopis Kvarta savamalskog upravi Varoši beogradske od 4. aprila 1875. godine predsta vlja najbolju ilustraciju Savamale.

This official account from the Savamala District Local Office to Belgrade's City Ad-

1 Živeti u Beogradu, Dokumenta Uprave grada Beograda, istorijski arhiv Beograda, Beograd 2006, 57-58

CAMENZIND

1 "Living in Belgrade", Documents from the Administration of the City of Belgrade, The Historical Archives of Belgrade, Belgrade 2006, 57-58 6

Priča o Savamali počinje knez Miloševom odlukom, da tridesetih godina 19. veka iseli siromahe, lađare, ribare, Rome... poruši njihove trošne kuće, i da nalog da se po planu odgovarajućeg novoplaniranog statusa područja uz Savu izgrade nove. Usled trgovine koja počinje da se odvija sa Austrijom i potrebe da se roba carini na samom pristaništu, 1835. godine podiže se Đumrukana, prva reprezentativna građevina u zoni priobalja, a državni institut podstiče pridošlice da se nastane u neposrednoj blizini. Kako etablirani trgovci već žive u trgovačkoj zoni u ulici Kralja Petra, u Savamalu dolaze oni koji tek započinju svoju karijeru i beogradski život.

ministration dated the 4th of April, 1875, is perhaps the best illustration of that neighborhood's vivid composition.

Sredinom 19. veka stižu ljudi koji stvaraju ono što mi danas prepoznajemo kao Savamalu. Dolaze iz više pravaca: rekom Savom stižu Krsmanovići, a sa njima i Rista Paranos koji je u njihovoj tuzlanskoj radnji bio šegrt, dok drumom dolaze porodica Vučo i Luka Ćelović. Trgovina kao žarišno mesto privlači ljude i zbivanja. Otvaraju se kafane, podižu kuće, sa trgovačkim radnjama ili magazama u prizemlju, dok Kovačev han (iz perioda kad i Đumrukana) živi kao mali grad. Magacine smeštaju uz ulicu Braće Krsmanovića, i oko njih počinje da se okuplja svet kome nema mesta gore u gradu. Ugledni trgovci, kao što je Miša Anastasijević čije je veliko stovarište soli tik uz Brankov most, takođe imaju u Savamali svoje prostore, ali žive u gornjem delu grada. Prema došljacima sa strane Beograd nije uvek bio blagonaklon, što je čest slučaj kada starosedeoci osete da neko nov želi da zauzme mesto koje su oni gradili dugi niz godina.

Savamala's story begins with Duke Milos' decision, in the 1830's, to evict all the beggars, dockworkers, fishermen, Roma, etc., and demolish their haphazard transient housing in order to build up a newly planned and designed river district. In lieu of the ongoing and developing trade with Austria, and the ensuing need for a customs and trading house, 1835 sees the erecting of the first official and symbolic shore line building, the Djumurkana. This state establishment encourages newcomers to settle within its immediate area. As already settled merchants have established themselves in nearby Karlja Petra Street, Savamala now sees the influx of a new, vibrant merchant class, just beginning their lives and careers in Belgrade. The mid-nineteenth century sees the arrival of people which will make up what we can now recognize as the Savamala District. They come from various directions: The Krsmanovic family comes by way of the Sava river route, accompanied by Rista Paranos, then merely an apprentice from their store in Tuzla. By way of the eastern road, the Vuco family arrives with Luka Celovic. The burgeoning mercantilism of the area attracts a multitude of people and institutions. New restaurants and cafés go

Krajem veka trgovci Savamale dostižu značajan nivo bogatstva, a otprilike u isto to vreme, podižu se najreprezentativnije zgrade Savamale. Krsmanovići od Miše Anastasijevića otkupljuju veliko imanje Liman na Savi, i postaju većinski vlasnici placeva pored reke. Prolaze i dolaze brodovi i gomila sveta, i upoznaju i evropski način života. Paranos, uporedo sa životom Hana, unajmljuje poznatog arhitektu Aleksa ndra Bugarskog i renovira hotel evropskog tipa, hotel„Bosna“. Pristanište je važna karika u vezi 7

KAMENZIND

up all over the place, as well as new houses with incorporated street front stores and basement storage areas. The Kovacev Han area (built at the same time as the Djumurkana), is virtually a bustling city in and of itself. Storage spaces are built along Brace Krsmanovic Street, attracting a slew of people who seemingly have no place "up in the City". Respectable merchants, like Misa Anastasijevic, whose salt barn is right alongside Brankov Bridge, also have spaces in the Savamala District, but live in the upper areas of Belgrade. Belgrade has not always been kind to newcomers, especially when the "old guard" feels young upstarts want to occupy an area they have been cultivating and developing for a long number of years. By the end of the century, Savamala's merchants have accumulated considerable wealth. Accordingly, during this period, Savamala sees the construction of equally emblematic buildings. Their wealth is so vast that in the 1870's, the Krsmanovic's buy a huge area along the Sava river (Liman), and become majority owners of the ensuing lots. Ships from all across Europe sail through, along with their throngs of people bringing with them the "European" life style. Paranos, parallel to his Han, hires out the famous architect, Aleksnadar Bugasrski to design and build a European style hotel, Hotel Bosna. The docks of Savamala become an indispensible link to trade with Austria, and Duke Mihailo shortens the connection between the district and the city above it with the building of the Great Stairs.

sa Austrijom, a Knez Mihailo gradi Velike stepenice, čime se ostvaruje bolja veza sa gradom. Trgovci postaju svesni da su sada pokretačka energija. Imaju novca i žele da grade što privlači renomirane arhitekte. Kako bi lokacija dobila na reprezentativnosti, Mali Pijac je izmešten, i na tom mestu trgovci 1862. godine postavljaju krst, javni spomenik i hričćansko obeležje da su osvojili Savamalu. Železnička stanica iz 1884. godine priznanje je statusa Savske varoši i podsticaj njenom razvoju. Luka Ćelović, i svi oko njega, shvataju potencijal. Bogatstvom koje su stekli od tog prostora mogu da naprave mnogo više.

Famous architects descend upon the area, seeing as how the wealthy local merchants have both the means and desire to build and expand. There is a sense that the area represents a new, forward moving force, and accordingly, in 1862, Mali Pijac ("the Little Market" - the central market/square) is removed from Savamala, and in its place there is erected a monument consisting of a red marble cross (today standing within a nearby park, and is assumed to have been

Ćelović je imao njuh i za nešto drugo, pa je veći deo bogatstva stekao iz deonica Beogradske Zadruge osnovane 1888. godine. Zadruga za potpomaganje i štednju koja je ranije bila u užem delu grada, u Delijskoj ulici, počinje da se razvija jer osim Narodne Banke nije postojalo više drugih novčanih zavoda. Druži se sa imućnim ljudima koji novac ulažu u trgovinu i grad, a ostatak ubacuju u zadrugu kako bi se novac plodio. CAMENZIND

bought and transported whole from Hungary), a clear showing that Savamala has been "tamed" and occupied. The railway station, built in 1884, is further proof of Savamala's importance, and encourages even greater development. Luka Celovic, and those directly around him, understand the area's potential, and realize that they have built up great wealth, and can do even more. Celovic has a sense for the future, and gained the vast majority of his wealth later on, buying shares in the Belgrade Cooperative, established in 1888. This cooperative was established for finance and development funding, since aside from the National Bank, heretofore reserved for projects in a very limited area of the city's center, no other sources of capital existed. He befriends merchants and investors who greatly develop their trade and invest within their areas of interest while simultaneously expanding the coop's financial ventures and capabilities.

Istovremeno, Beograd se modernizuje na svim stranama. Početkom 20.veka trgovci okupljeni oko Beogradske Zadruge su sakupili novac, otkupili imanje od Paranosa i srušili han. Reprezentativna Zadruga, Vučina kuća, kuća Krsmanovića ili hotel „Bristol“ koji se zvao Hotel Beogradske zadruge - središte je koje govori da se živi u potpuno drugom svetu. Ruši se Hotel Bosna i Ljubomir Krsmanović planira da podigne zgradu na četiri sprata, što je za to vreme neuobičajeno velika građevina. Namera je bila da se ispred Zadruge podigne trg sa fo ntanom. Moć okupljenih trgovaca je već dovoljno velika da traže uređenje od Beograske opštine, koja je uvidela da je dobila nešto u prilog, iako nije učestvovala.

At the same time, Belgrade itself is modernizing on all fronts. By the beginning of the 20th century, local merchants buy off the Han from Paranos, and in its place erect the Hotel Bristol (then called the Belgrade Cooperative Hotel), proof of radically changing values and ideals. Hotel Bosna is also torn down, a four story building meant to take its place - an unusually tall structure at the time. There was also a plan to build a plaza with a public fountain in front of the coop building. The financial wealth of the district is so formidable that it is befitting of its own local regulative body, Belgrade's overarching city administration feeling as it will have gained much without actually doing anything.

Dok je ostatak grada bio uređen od strane vlasti, Savamalci su sve radili sami, sopstvenom orga nizacijom. Sticajem okolnosti, pomenuti trgovci nisu mogli u postojeći trgovački deo grada, ne zato što im je bilo zabranjeno, već zbog nedostatka prostora i veza. Došli su sa strane i bili prepušteni sebi, a imperiju su izgradili svojom inventivnošću u trgovini (npr. kurentna roba – šljive, koje su isprva Krsmanovići doneli sa sobom, da bi po tom pravili zasade po Srbi ji, dok su suve šljive i koža, koju su skupljali trgovački putnici po Srbiji, stigli preko Trsta čak do Amerike). Držali su se skupa i radili jedni kod drugih, zajedništvo kakvo Beograd do tada nije video. Povezani istom energijom i svežom

Whereas the rest of Belgrade was being developed by governmental bodies and administrations, Savamala's residents do everything for and by themselves - independent of the city's management. Just by happenstance, the Savamala merchants could not set up their operations within Belgrade's al9

KAMENZIND

ready established central merchant district - not by strict decree, mind you - but due to a lack of space and/or proper affiliation. They arrived by themselves, independently, and without much assistance built up their own empire through innovative ideas (as an example, the Krsmanovic's main capital, plums imported during their move to Belgrade, later planted on properties bought all across Serbia, were exported by way of Trieste even as far as the United States). Savamala's merchants worked together, alongside each other and for each other, a solidarity never before seen in Belgrade. Intertwined by complementary ideals and gusto, they managed to build up an expanding empire, in contrast to Belgrade's other merchants, whose work and profit were slowly stagnating.

Držali su se skupa i radili jedni kod drugih, zajedništvo kakvo Beograd do tada nije video. Po vezani istom energijom i svežom krvlju, uspeli su da naprave izvrsnu podlogu za sopstveno na predovanje, za razliku od drugih trgovaca u gradu koji su pomalo stagnirali. krvlju, uspeli su da naprave izvrsnu podlogu za sopstveno napredovanje, za razliku od drugih trgovaca u gradu koji su pomalo stagnirali. Bogatstvo su sticali tokom čitavne jedne ge neracije. Za starosedeoce u gradu, Savamala je predgrađe koje ih nije mnogo zanimalo. Kod onih koji donose odluke o razvoju grada i koji vrše vlast - kao da ostaju bez ideja i inovacija, za razliku od Savamale koja postaje sedište kreativnih ljudi čija se energija tka u njeno urbano tkivo.

Entire generations passed by. For the old timers up in the city, Savamala was simply a suburb, not to be paid much heed to. Similarly, Belgrade's decision makers, ossified in their ways, do not accept this invigorating change, and do not see Savamala as the burgeoning center of new innovative principles and people, woven as they were into the very fabric of the neighborhood they created and lived in.

Ćelović je morao da se bori da postane predse dnik zadruge, ali je dokazao da su njegove moći veće. O njemu ima kako epologijskih, tako i tekstova koji ga opisuju kao čangrizavog starca koji prelazi preko leševa da bi uspeo u životu, jer nije imao porodicu i ceo život mu je bila zadruga, ali je činjenica da je razvoju Savamale doprineo više nego bilo ko drugi. Za vreme Prvog Svetskog rata uspeo je da evakuiše zadrugu u Marsej i da je vrati, i ona nastavlja, nakon četiri ratne godine, da radi kao da ništa nije bilo.

Celovic had to fight both tooth and nail to be nominated president of the coop, proving in the end that his will was the strongest. Anecdotes and stories describe him as willing to crawl over people's graves to accomplish something, as a surly embittered old man willing and capable of doing just about anything to succeed (as he did not have a family, the coop became his whole life...), but the fact remains, he did more for Savamala's development than any other one person. During World War I, he managed to evacuate the coop to Marseille, then move it back to Belgrade after the War was over, ensuring it continued to operate as though not a thing had happened.

Ipak, nakon Velikog rata, kao i posle svakog, sledi zamah i napredak. Industrijalizija dostiže drugi nivo, menjaju se propisi i trgovci Savamale nalaze se u nezgodnom položaju. Kralj Aleksandar neguje modernizaciju tj. vezu sa svetom i panslavizam i dolaze Rusi i Česi koji grade Beograd. Grad između dva rata biva preporođen. Stižu avioni, a pristanište prestaje da bude najvažnije. Trgovci Savamale ili nisu CAMENZIND

Nevertheless, after the Great War, as any other, there follows an inevitable change. 10

Industrialization reaches new heights, regulations and laws are rewritten, and the Savamala merchants find themselves in an unenviable predicament. King Aleksandar nurtures the new modernization trend, namely Panslavicism and Serbia's connection to the rest of the outside world. Accordingly, the Russians and Czechs amass into reconstructing and building Belgrade. In the interwar period, Belgrade is reborn. Within this, there comes the advent of airplanes and air transportation, and the docks, obviously, lose their prominence. Savamala's merchant class, is left either without heirs, or with heirs who want to educate themselves and live and work abroad, or simply want to engage in activities other than trading and mercantilism. To these children, Belgrade becomes an open launching board to the rest of Europe and the world. The Krsmanovic family grants its vast land holdings to the state and the military. The Paranos and Vuco families undergo financial ruin. The Belgrade Cooperative, although still operating, is no longer the sole financial and insurance institution, as new ones start sprouting up. It is no longer just Serbia - it is now greater Yugoslavia, and Belgrade sees the influx of a myriad new banks, institutions and merchants. Savamala fails to incorporate itself with the new trends. Although not unique in this respect, no one can quite guess as to why and how this happened - turbulent circumstances and changes which saw Savamala achieve its meteoric rise to glory, have now sowed the seeds of its demise.

imali naslednike ili su ti naslednici želeli da se obrazuju, da studiraju u inostranstvu i bave se drugim zanimanjima. Deci savamalskih trgovaca Beograd postaje „otvoren“. Krsmanovići svoju imovinu zaveštavaju vojsci i državi, Paranosi i Vučo ekonomski propadaju, Beogradska zadruga nastavlja da radi ali podižu se i drugi novčani zavodi i osiguravajuća društva. U Beograd se slilo mnoštvo banaka i novih trgovaca, dok Srbija postaje deo Jugoslavije. Iz ko zna kojih razloga, Savamalska četvrt nije u novoj podeli dobila svoje zasluženo mesto. Splet okolnosti i turbulentne promene, koje su bile zaslužne za uspon Savamale do njenog punog sjaja, su dovele i do njenog neslavnog pada.

This text came about as a result of conversations with Vera Pavlovic – Loncarski, art historian and conservationst, who, through several respectable and official institutions, is actively engaged in the restoration, protection, study and cultural heritage awareness, and is the recipient of the highest award of The Society of Conservators of Serbia for her contribution to the preservation of cultural heritage.

Tekst je nastao u razgovoru sa Verom Pavlović – Lončarski, istoričarkom umetnosti – konzervatorkom, koja kroz niz priznatih institucija i pu blikacija aktivno radi na polju proučavanja, va lorizacije, zaštite i promocije kulturnog nasleđa; dobitnica je najznačajnije nagrade koju dodeljuje Društvo konzervatora za doprinos zaštiti ku lturnog nasleđa priznanja. 11

KAMENZIND

Princip

THE Principle proizvoljnosti of Arbitrarii neautonomna profesija ness and a Profession Lacking Autonomy

- Okvir urbanog razvoja Beograda i pristup planiranju projekta ’’’Beograd na vodi’’

Urban Development in Belgrade and the Approaches to Planning the “Belgrade Waterfront” CZKD*, October 23, 2014

CKZD 23. oktobar 2014.

Ksenija Petovar, PhD in Sociology (Retired) Professor at the University of Belgrade Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering

Dr Ksenija Petovar, sociolog Profesor (u penziji) Arhitektonskog i Geografskog fakulteta Univerziteta u Beogradu

*Center for Cultural Decontamination, Belgrade CAMENZIND

Moj polazni stav je da projekat ’’Beograd na vodi’’ nije neka slučajnost ili izuzetak u beogradskom urbanizmu, niti nešto što do sada nije praktikovano u planiranju ovog grada. Ipak, velika razlika između ranijih politika i praksi je u (1) veličini/obimu projekta, (2) privatizaciji centralnog gradskog prostora koje je javno dobro i javni interes svih građana Beograda, i (3) gotovo izvesno ogromnim troškovima (tzv. aktivacija lokacije) koje će građani Beograda i Srbije uložiti u korist privatnog investitora. Ranije su se ovakvi projekti radili na znatno manjim područjima, i konsekventno sa manjim troškovima, sa slabijim negativnim učincima na urbanu strukturu i na socijalni, ekonomski, prostorni i kulturni razvoj grada, i na sreću građana Beograda, veliki broj ovih, mogu reći megalomanskih projekata, nije realizovan. U ovom slučaju, radi se o centralnom gradskom području, bukvalno o jezgru grada, koje može imati integrativnu ulogu u gradskom pro storu samo ako bude planirano i građeno kao multifunkcionalno područje sa dominantnim namenama kulturnih, obrazovnih i drugih javnih aktivnosti koje uvećavaju javna dobra i unapređuju javnu dobrobit i kvalitet života većine građana Beograda.

My main thesis is that the ‘Belgrade Waterfront’ project represents no accident or exception in the urban planning of Belgrade, i.e. it is not something that has never been practiced before in the history of Belgrade’s urban planning. Nonetheless, there is a significant difference compared to the past policies and practices, in 1) the size of the project 2) the privatization of the central city space that represents the public good and public interest of all citizens 3) an almost certainly enormous investment made at the expense of the citizens of Belgrade and Serbia for the benefit of the Investor (for the so-called ‘activation of the site’). Projects like this one used to be planned on a much smaller scale in the past, implying lower expenses, lower impact on urban structure and on social, economic, spatial and cultural development of the city. And, luckily for the citizens of Belgrade, the majority of these, if I may say, megalomaniacal projects, eventually never got implemented. In this case, however, the very central city area is in question, literally the core of the city that has the potential to play the role of the connective tissue for the entire city if only planned and built as a multifunctional space with cultural, educational and other social activities as its dominant purpose, consequently increasing the public good and contributing to the well-being and quality of life of most Belgraders.

Da bi se razumela teza zašto projekat Beograd na vodi nije izuzetak ili slučajnost u beogra dskom urbanizmu, treba reči da su četiri obeležja dominirala u planerskoj praksi u našoj državi u poslednjih nekoliko decenija, praktično od Drugog svetskog rata, i sva četiri su ključni uzroci niskog nivoa urbaniteta u gradovima u Srbiji, uključiv i Beograd.

In order to fully explain my position that the ‘Belgrade Waterfront’ project represents no precedent in the history of Belgrade urban planning, I must stress that four characteristic features have marked the urban planning in our state in the past decades, practically since the Second World War, and all four are the key causes of poor urban development in the cities and towns throughout Serbia, including the city of Belgrade.

Prvo obeležje je dominacija principa proizvoljnosti, kojim su se rukovodili planeri i urbanisti, a još više političari i interesne grupe koje su imale ili imaju njihovu podršku.

The first feature is the principle of legal arbitrariness, by which decisions of spatial and urban planning experts are 13

KAMENZIND

Prvo obeležje je dominacija principa proizvoljnosti, kojim su se rukovodili planeri i urbanisti, a još više političari i interesne grupe koje su imale ili imaju njihovu podršku. Planeri/ urbanisti su imali (imaju) pravo (koje je bilo potvrđivano od strane brojnih stručnih komisija za planove, skupština koje su te planove usvajale itd.) da utvrđuju planske propozicije koje su na više nivoa ugrožavale kako imovinska prava građana, tako i tradicionalne urbanističke matrice, ambijentalne vrednosti prostora i stečena prava građana i lokalnih zajednica.

guided, and even more so the ones of political decision-makers and the interest groups who enjoy their support. Spatial and urban planners were (and still are) granted the right (confirmed by various urban planning expert committees and city council sessions at which the plans are adopted) to define and adopt the planning criteria that violate not only the citizens’ rights to property but that also traditional urban planning patterns, environmental properties of the planned space, and other acquired rights of citizens and local communities.

Paradigmatičan primer za ovakvu vrstu proizvoljnosti ili bahatosti jeste redefinisanje (’’ispravljanje’’) regulacionih linija parcela i granica između privatnih parcela u regulacionom planu prostorne celine Dedinje – Topčidersko brdo – Senjak, iz 1999. godine, kojim je preko hiljadu privatnih parcela izgubilo pravni status odnosno poništen im je legalni status koji su imale decenijama unazad.

CAMENZIND

A typical example for this arbitrary, or, rather, arrogant, attitude towards urban planning was the case of redefining (“rectifying”) regulation lines and borders between private-owned cadastral lots within the Regulation Plan for the Dedinje – Topcidersko brdo – Senjak zone in 1999, when over one thousand lots were deprived of their legal status, i.e., the legal status the 14

Drugi primer je praksa probijanja sobraćajnica i menjanja namene izgrađenih površina, čime su van legalnog statusa stavljana naselja i imovina koja je na tim prostorima postojala desetinama godina (primer brisanja sa urbanističke karte Orlovskog naselja u Mirijevu, urbanističkim planom iz pedesetih godina, koje je delegalizovano i stavljeno van pravnog sistema zbog novoplanirane saobraćajnice (Mirijevski bulevar i javne zelene površine). Naselje je izgubilo pravni status, ali je ostalo da traje, a sve građevinske intervencije su dobile obeležje ’’bespravne izgradnje’’. I tako smo imali situaciju da, istovremeno dok je reprezentativni objekat ’’Sava centra’’ gradjen bez urbanističke i građevinske dozvole, u Orlovskom naselju u Mirijevu dvojica vlasnika su prekršajno kažnjenja novčanom kaznom zbog toga što su bez dozvole u sopstvenim kućicama izgradili kupatila. Pošto nisu imali novca da plate prekršajnu kaznu, obojica su odrobijala po 60 dana u Padinskoj skeli. Orlovskom naselju je, inače, posle 30 godina vraćen pravni status sredinom 90-tih godina.

lots had enjoyed for decades had simply been annulled. Another typical example of this practice in Serbian spatial planning is the practice of building traffic roads directly through inhabited areas and changing previously adopted land purpose. Entire neighborhoods and all property on them, even if they had already existed for dozens of years, were deprived of their legal status this way. A notorious example from the 50's is the case of the Orlovo Naselje residential neighborhood in the Belgrade municipality of Mirijevo, when the entire neighborhood was erased from the existing urban plans to allow for the construction of a new road, the Mirijevo Boulevard, with surrounding communal green areas. Thus, the neighborhood that happened to be around the planned new boulevard lost its legal status of a residential zone. The houses were left standing, but all and any construction work on the lots in question was declared illegal. And so, while in other parts of the city, authorities were building the grand ‘Sava Center’ conference center without any urban plan or construction permit, two residents of the Orlovsko naselje in Mirijevo were made to pay big fines for building a bathroom in their own houses without prior obtaining a construction permit. In fact, since they could not afford to pay the fines, they each had to spend 60 days in the Padinska Skela Penitentiary. Ironically, 30 years later, in mid-90s, the legal status of the Orlovsko naselje was restored.

Brojni primeri proizvoljnih i neobrazloženih izmena i dopuna generalnih i regulacionih planova mogu da potvrde iznetu tezu: od pomenute izgradnje ’’Sava centra’’ bez urbanističke i građevinske dozvole, koji su uslovili naknadne promene saobraćajne mreže, planiranog ’’probijanja’’ Unutrašnjeg magistralnog poluprstena (čitaj: autoputa) kroz izgradjeno gradsko tkivo, izmene GUP-a i manipulacije tokom priprema i izrade projekta i izgradnje Mosta na Adi, pa sve do projekta o kome danas govorimo.

There are numerous other examples of arbitrary changes and amendments having been made to already adopted general and regulation plans without legal justification that confirm my thesis - from the earlier mentioned construction of ‘Sava Center’ without urban planning or construction permits, which caused making changes to the previously built road infrastructure, to the planned construction of the Belgrade Inner Semi-Ring Road (practically, a high-

Drugo obeležje, koje je u direktnoj vezi sa principom proizvoljnosti jeste odnos prema troškovima realizacije projekta.

KAMENZIND

mihajlo anđelković

way) by breaking directly through developed city infrastructure, to alterations made to the Belgrade GUP and various other manipulations that took place during the preparation and implementation of the ‘Ada Bridge’ project, and, finally, the ‘Belgrade Waterfront’ project, the subject of our present discussion. The second characteristic feature is directly linked to the principle of arbitrariness, and it concerns the attitude towards the costs of the implementation of a project. We are witness to the decades long established practice of falsely representing costs, and covering the real costs of construction and implementation of projects. Such malpractice was made possible by the fact that, in this country, one single person has never been held accountable for having exceeded the planned budget, often multiple times with respect to the originally defined price. As a rule, all overbalance expenditure would be ‘socialized’, which meant it would be covered from the public budget and public funds. Consequently, numerous project designs were/ are adopted without any preliminary cost calculations, even approximate ones. This is, for example, the case with the planning of the Belgrade Inner Semi-Ring highway currently constructed across three central municipalities, that foresees the construction of a number of tunnels, among other.

Drugo obeležje, koje je u direktnoj vezi sa principom proizvoljnosti jeste odnos prema troškovima realizacije projekta. Decenijama smo svedoci ustaljene prakse prikazivanja fingi ranih troškova i prikrivanja realnih troškova realizacije objekta ili projekta. Takva praksa je moguća zato što niko nikada u ovoj državi, nije odgovarao za probijene troškove, odnosno za višestruka prekoračenja prvobitno utvrđenih cena. Ta prekoračenja su, po pravilu, socijalizovana i prebacivana na budžet odnosno na javne fondove. Za brojne (usvojene) projekte uopšte i nisu utvrđeni čak ni orijentacioni troškovi, kao na primer, za planirani Unutrašnji magistralni poluprsten, kroz tri centralne gradske opštine, uključiv i izgradnju nekoliko tunela itd.

When 30 storey-high buildings started being constructed in Belgrade (the East Gate and the West Gate, the high-rises in Banjica, etc), no one involved in the projects ever thought of, let alone raised the question of how much the construction would cost, both concerning the costs of the construction itself, and, more importantly, the costs of maintenance of such buildings (calculated by taking into account the building’s amortization period). No one - not the licensed engineer, nor the City Urban Planner, nor the (state-owned) construction company, and even less those endless

Kada su u Beogradu građeni objekti od gotovo 30 spratova, (Istočna i Zapadna kapija, soliteri na Banjici) niko od aktera nije ni mi slio, a kamoli postavio pitanje koliko će takav objekat da košta (troškovi izgradnje plus troškovi održavanja računati na amortizacioni vek objekta ) - ni projektant, ni urbanista, ni građevinsko preduzeće ni razne komisije koje su ove projekte odobravale. Troškovi izgradnje objekata (u koje su bile uračunate čuvene klizne skale, odnosno pravo na višestruko povećanje proizvođačkih cena zbog navodnog uticaja inflacije i drugih, tzv. nepredviđenih troškova, sve dok se ne završi izgradnja), kvalitet izveCAMENZIND

denih radova (garantni rok bio je utvrđen na čitave DVE godine, isto kao i danas), kao i troškovi održavanja (investicionog i tekućeg) su bili nečija druga briga. Drugim rečima, ti troškovi su bili ’’socijalizovani’’, odnosno plaćani iz zajedničkih fondova i budžeta, ili su, što je mnogo češće bio slučaj, zgrade prepuštane propadanju. Samo da podsetim da je pre nekoliko godina licitaciona ponuda za prodaju zgrade Geneksa (tzv. Zapadna kapija) bila oko 350 eura/m2, u zoni gde su se cene stanova kretale između 1400 i 1600 eura/m2.

‘expert committees’ that just kept adopting the projects. Worrying about the costs of the construction (including the popular ‘sliding scale’, i.e. the right to calculate costs of production several times higher in order to, allegedly, anticipate for the impact of inflation and ‘unforeseen expenses’ that can occur prior to a project's completion), the quality of the finished product (the guarantee period was, astoundingly, no longer than a mere TWO years, as it re-mains today), as well as worrying about regular maintenance costs, was simply left to someone else. In other words, these costs would either be ‘socialized’, that is, paid for from the general funds and budgets, or, more often, once constructed, the buildings would simply be left to decay. Just think that the starting bidding price for the GENEKS building (the West Gate of Belgrade) when it was put up for sale a couple of years ago was a paltry 350 euro/m2 in a zone where average real estate prices ranged between 1400 and 1600 euro/m2.

Iako je Srbija napustila socijalističko planiranje i otisnula se u kapitalističke vode, zastupam tezu da je odnos prema planiranju i gradskom prostoru ostao isti. Postoji bezbroj primera proizvoljnosti kako u izradi planova tako i u njihovim izmenama, dopunama, tumačenju i samoj primeni.

Treće obeležje je višestruka sprega/povezanost između političkih interesnih grupa i urbanista/ planera kao profesije.

Although Serbia did eventually abandon this socialist style of urban planning and has since set sail in capitalist waters, I maintain that the overall attitude towards urban planning and urban space has not changed at all. There are countless examples of arbitrariness found at every corner, both in the creation of urban plans and in the changes, amendments, interpretation and implementation thereof.

Treće obeležje je višestruka sprega/povezanost između političkih interesnih grupa i urbanista/planera kao profesije. Kako možemo objasniti čvrstinu, trajanje i neupitanost te sprege. Po mom sudu, suštinski razlog je što u našem društvu ne postoje autonomna profesionalna/strukovna udruženja, koja su uslov za delotvorno funkcionisanje profesije, zaštitu profesionalnih standarda i zaštitu članova profesije od pritisaka sa strane. Osnovna misija profesionalnog / strukovnog udruženje je organizovanje i unapređenje profesije, zaštita interesa pripadnika profesije odnosno članova udruženja, kao i zaštita javnog interesa u sferi profesionalnog delanja. Profesionalna udruženja nastoje na unapređenju standarda, profesionalnog delanja i etičkih principa struke, s jedne strane, i zaštite interesa, profesionalnog integriteta i egzistencijalnih potreba pripadnika profesije, s druge. Prvi i najvažniji uslov

The third typical feature of Serbian urban planning are the interlaced ties between political interest groups and urban/spatial planners as a professional group. These ties are solid, stand the test of time, and are never questioned. How is that possible? In my opinion, the key reason for this lies in the fact that, in our society, independent expert-professional associations do not exist, whereas they should be a prerequisite for the proper functioning of any profession, for the protection of professional 17

KAMENZIND

za kvalitetno funkcionisanje profesionalnog udruženja je autonomija u odnosu na državu, upravljačku strukturu i političke partije. Samo autonomno profesionalno udruženje može da se bavi pitanjima od suštinskog značaja za unapređenje profesije, njeno kvalitetno delanje, građenje i zaštitu integriteta i dostojanstva profesije. Profesionalna udruženja u demokratskim državama podržavaju javni stručni di skurs i inicijative građana u oblasti planiranja i korišćenja prostora i podstiću lokalne vlasti na aktivnu saradnju sa udruženjima građana u gotovo svim pitanjima od važnosti za kvalitet života u gradu. Komunikacija sa građanima je od posebnog značaja zato što je dužnost profesionalnih udruženja da stručno artikulišu inicijative građana i na taj način pomognu da se pokrenute ideje bolje obrazlože i razumeju.

standards and protection of practitioners of one profession from outside pressure. The main mission of a professional association is to organize and advance that profession, protect the interests of its members, and protect the public interest within the domain of their professional activity. Professional associations strive to improve a profession’s standards, activities, and ethical principles on the one hand, and to protect the interests, professional integrity, and existential needs of the members of the profession. The first and foremost condition for a professional association to function properly is autonomy from the state, from administrative structures and from political parties. Only a fully independent professional association can tackle the issues that are of key importance for the progress of the profession, its proper functioning, its development and for the protection of its integrity and dignity.

Professional associations in democracies across the world support public expert discourse and citizen initiative in the domain of spatial planning and use of public space, 18

phil kerber

and encourage local authorities to actively cooperate with citizen's associations on nearly all issues essential for the quality of life in a city. Communicating with the public is of special importance as it is the professional associations’ duty to articulate citizen initiatives in a professional manner and help ideas be better presented and explained to the public. The fourth feature typical of urban and spatial planning in Serbia is the absolute, unconditional exclusion of citizens and the public from the process of preparing urban plans and development projects. Citizen participation is supposedly taken care of through so-called ‘public insight’, basically consisting of an a posteriori presentation of a project's already completed preliminary design for a project to the public, extending the right to them to leave comments and suggestions, to be subsequently reviewed by a committee.

Četvrto obeležje urbanističkog i prosto rnog planiranja u Srbiji je apsolutno i bezu slovno isključivanje javnosti i građana iz procesa izrade urbanističkih i drugih razvo jnih projekata. Učešće građana je utvrđeno tz. javnim uvidom, odnosno ex-post prikazivanjem Nacrta projekta građanstvu i pravom građana da stavljaju komentare i daju predloge koje komisija razmatra. Prilikom donošenja Generalnog plana Novog Sada, sedamdesetih godina 20 veka, održano je oko 800 tribina i sastanaka u vezi plana. Naravno, ni jedna ključna primedba ili sugestija nije bila usvojena. Tako fingirano učešće građana kroz javni uvid održalo se do dan danas. Poslednjim izmenama Zakona o planiranju i izgradnji, obaveza javnog uvida pomerena je u fazu Koncepta plana, ali nije promenjen neobavezujući karakter javnog uvida.

On the occasion of the adoption of the General Urban Plan for the City of Novi Sad in the 70s, some 800 public panels and encounters were held regarding the Plan. Of course, there has not been one significant citizen remark or proposal that has ever been accepted. This make-believe citizen participation, pretendedly carried out under the name of ‘public insight’ has remained in practice to this day. True, in the recently adopted amendments to the Urban Planning and Construction Act, the mandatory public insight has been moved to an earlier stage, to the conceptual design phase, but its ultimately non-binding character has remained the same. Full article:

Tekst u celosti možete pročitati na:

http://www.czkd.org/princip-proizvoljnostii-neautonomna-profesija-okvir-urbanog-razvoja-beograda-i-pristup-planiranju-projektabeograd-na-vodi/

http://www.czkd.org/princip-proizvoljnosti-ineautonomna-profesija-okvir-urbanog-razvojabeograda-i-pristup-planiranju-projekta-beogradna-vodi/ 19

KAMENZIND

Domino efekat Urban Incubator: “Urbanog inkubatora” Domino Effect Konstans A. Dan

by Constance A. Dunn

Svi smo mi subjektivna bića, i ova se činjenica donekle ublažava primenom naučne metodologije, ali malo lične predrasude iz ugla neutralnog posmatrača možda može da dâ novi osvrt na proces koji se onima koji se dugo bave određenom aktivnošću podrazumeva. Nisam naučnik, ali sam pisac i svojevrstan kulturni radnik, i kao takvoj mi je naoštrije oružje koje posedujem - moja sopsvena moć zapažanja. Zato će ovo biti jedan pre svega lični tekst, baziran na kratkim intervjuima koje sam napravila sa Nikolom Markovićem iz Urbanog inkubatora i Kolektivom Karkatag, kao i na mom ličnom iskustvu života u Beogradu. Svrha članka nije ni da dâ kritiku niti da ulazi u dublje naučno istraživanje, već isključivo da predstavi stanovište osobe koja je istovremeno i pisac, i stranac, i veliki zaljubljenik u gradove, a koja je odabrala da živi upravo u ovom.

We’re all bias, the moderating effect of scientific methodology helps us overcome this somewhat, but occasionally a little prejudice from an outsider helps to cast light on aspects of work that those entrenched in the process take for granted. I am no scientist, only a writer and a culture worker of sorts, and as such the sharpest tools in my shed are my own powers of observation. Therefore this is ultimately a personal essay, supported by a short interviews with Nikola Markovic of the Urban Incubator and the Karkatag Collective, as well as my own experience of Belgrade. The article is not intended to critique or offer new in-depth research, but merely to present the perspective of a writer, a foreigner and a lover of cities who chose to live in this one. ‘Impact assessment’, one of those buzz phrases that cultural organizations come across in grant applications and final reports that makes their skin crawl and their eyes roll, occasionally escalating into a full on face palm and an audible growl. But all their grumbling aside, every organizer knows that tracking their work is not only necessary but an inevitable part of the process. However, with the pragmatism of organizations like Urban Incubator (UI) the resources to chart their many arteries of influence simply aren’t at the disposal of the group during the interim of their existence. So, often what constitutes the ‘assessment’ part of the work comes in a report of the number of participants, projects and spin-off groups. Is this a true reflection of impact? Let’s take Urban Incubator as a case study. While there is a core set of organizers, the many collectives and individuals that

„Procena postignutih rezultata” jedna je od tih predobro poznatih fraza na koje organizatori kulturnih delatnosti redovno naleću kada popunjavaju prijavu za donaciju za projekat, odnosno prilikom pisanja Završnog izveštaja, od koje im se diže kosa na glavi, oči počinju da kolutaju, da bi katkad sve eskaliralo i do zagnjurivanja glave u šaku uz glasno ispuštanje krika nezdovoljstva. No, gunđanje na stranu, svaki organizator dobro zna da je merenje postignutih rezultata ne samo neophodno, već predstavlja i neizbežan korak u realizaciji svakog projekta. Ali organizacije poput Urbanog inkubatora (UI) koje moraju da racionalno raspolažu svojim sredstvima, je dnostavno nemaju dovoljno sredstava na raspolaganju da bi mogle da isprate efekte rada svake od svojih mnogobrojnih arterijskih grupa. Iz tog razloga se famozna „evaluacija postignutih rezultata” najčešće sastoji od jedog izveštaja u CAMENZIND

bike kitchen

kojem se navede broj ljudi koji su učestvovali u projektu, broj realizovanih projekata, kao i broj novoformiranih aktivističkih grupa. Ali, da li ovi brojevi zaista predstavljaju pouzdanu sliku postignutih rezultata, odnosno da li se njima stvarno može izmeriti uticaj koji odrađeni projekat može da ima na društvo?

work with the group slowly split and divide like osteoblasts in the marrow of a growing skeleton, or at least this what the organization hopes will happen. Often individuals and groups benefit from UI, and others like it, without even knowing it’s there, in the same way that the human body benefits from the nutrients in food. When it comes to assessing impact for their projects, there is little else these grassroots groups can do besides count numbers of attendants and report them to the people who write the check. Even though both parties, UI and the funders, know that the domino effect of urban activism topples through many groups and individuals that may never make it to the impact numbers, a two or three digit number means accountability achieved everyone is happy to have contributed to a discussion and not upset the taxpayers. Nikola Markovic, one of the organizing managers of the Urban Incubator, says they track numbers in attendance at events and the number of projects that were completed, that’s all they can do, be-

Uzmimo primer Urbanog inkubatora. Od grupe koja predstavlja jezgro, stvaraju se mnogobrojni manji kolektivi i individualni saradnici, kao osteoblasti razdvajanjem ćelija u koštanoj srži kičmenog stuba u razvoju - ili je barem to ono ka čemu organizacija teži. Brojni pojedinci i društvene grupe imaju koristi od akcija koje sprovode UI i njima slične grupe a da nikada toga i nisu svesni, kao kad telo tek neko vreme posle jela iskoristi pojedine hranljive sastojke iz hrane. Zato ne postoji drugi način da ove spontane lokalne grupe izmere učinak svojih projekata na društvo osim da uzmu i pobroje učesnike, i dobijeni rezultat dostave ljudima koji su napisali ček. Iako obe strane, i UI i njihovi donatori, vrlo dobro znaju da se „domino efekat” urbanog 21

KAMENZIND

karkatag

cause to track meaningful impact would be impossible as the results of a project may not reveal themselves for years. Even though these numbers are dutifully reported, it is always with a sense of the absurd futility that comes with trying to measure the impact of your work for the peace of mind of people who will most likely never know about it, such as the average German taxpayer. In this light, it appears to be more like paperwork placation than actual assessment. Paradoxically, I asked both the Urban Incubator and Karkatag Collective 1 (a frequent collaborator with UI) if their work was meant for the moment or for the long term. Both said it was meant for the moment and immediacy was key. According to Markovic the point is “you need a space, and to use it.” This implies presence and constant activity. Indeed, Karkatag echoed this commitment to participation in the moment, “We find participation a key point of changing the perception of places, activities, values.” Even with recognizing

„Verujemo da je aktivno učešće ključ za promenu doživljavanja nekih mesta, aktivnosti, i vrednosti.” aktivizma širi po sistemu akcije i reakcije kroz mnogobrojne grupe i pojedince koji nikada neće biti uračunati u tu cifru „postignutog rezultata”, neki dvocifreni ili čak trocifreni broj učesnika bi, eto, značio da je projekat opravdan i da su svi srećni što su doprineli razvoju nekog diskursa a da pritom nisu oštetili poreske obve znike. Nikola Marković, jedan od organizatora menadžera projekata Urbanog inkubatora, kaže da oni vode urednu evidenciju o broju učesnika na događajima koje su organizovali i o broju sprovedenih projekata, i da je to sve što mogu da urade, budući da merenje onih zaista važnih posledica njihovih projekata ne bi bilo moguće sprovesti imajući u vidu da se istinski efekti takvih projekata najčešće pokažu tek godinama kasnije. Iako se ove brojke redovno dostavljaju donatorima u izveštajima, ovo se uvek radi CAMENZIND

1 http://www.karkatag.org

uz osećanje izvesnog apsurda i beskorisnosti pokušaja da se izvrši bilo kakvo numeričko merenje efekata realizovanog projekta, koje se radi samo da bi bili mirni tamo neki ljudi koji o tome najverovatnije nemaju pojma, kao što je slučaj sa, na primer, prosečnim poreskim obve znikom Nemačke. U tom smislu, ovo brojanje više služi hranjenju administrativnog aparata nego što je to istinska procena rezultata.

Space, a valuable commodity in any city, is a cornerstone issue in urban activism. the importance of participation, Karkatag makes a point of trying to overcome grantors obsession with the ubiquitous participant numbers, “It is of big importance to try to avoid ever growing 'touristy' or have consumerist tendencies within audience/observers/visitors/participants...” So, projects that are participatory, live in the moment, and contribute to a specific moment in time are reviving spaces that are meant to last forever. That’s the twist in this story, what does all this have to do with architecture? The most permanent and functional of all arts? Perhaps a building is the final impact assessment for urban activism. A real legacy set in stone, mortar, steel and wood, not for us, but for generations like us, who will fill it and change it to suit their needs. But for now UI’s impact spreads like ripples from

Ispostavilo se da sam i u intervjuu sa Urbanim inkubatorom i u onom sa Karkatag kolektivom1 (stalnim saradnicima UI-a) postavila pitanje upravo da li je njihov rad pravljen za sadašnji trenutak, ili je više dugoročnog karaktera. Obojici je odgovor, paradoksalno, bio da su njihovi projekti namenjeni baš sadašnjem trenutku i da je za njih neposrednost ključ svega. Prema Markoviću, poenta svega je da vam je „samo potreban prostor, i da ga nekako iskoristite”, što podrazumeva fizičko prisustvo i konstantno aktivno delanje. Karkatag je kao eho ponovio da je neophodna posvećenost učestvovanju u datom trenutku, „Verujemo da je aktivno učešće ključ za promenu doživljavanja nekih mesta, aktivnosti, i vrednosti.” Iako prepozna1

http://www.karkatag.org 23

KAMENZIND

je važnost aktivnog učestvovanja učesnika u projektima, Karkatag insistira na tome da se prevaziđe opsesija donatora nepotrebnim brojanjem učesnika. „Izuzetno je važno da se izbegne da naši projekti prerastu u „turističke”, ili se okrenu konzumerizmu u smislu insistiranja na privlačenju što većeg broja učesnika-posetilacagledalaca...” naglasio je. Zanimljivo je da projekti kojima je suština u učestvovanju i življenju u sadašnjem trenutku zapravo oživljavaju prostore čija je namena da traju zauvek. U tom neočekivanom raspletu događaja posta vlja se pitanje kakve sve to veze ima sa arhite kturom, najtrajnijom i najfunkcionalnijom od svih umetnosti? Možda bi idealno rešenje za merenje finalnog rezultata projekta urba nog aktiv izma i bilo u nekoj zgradi. Da se na taj način iza sebe ostavi zadužbina trajno ovekovečena u kamenu, malteru, čeliku i drvetu, ne za nas same, već za generacije poput nas koje bi ušle u njen prostor i prilagodile ga sopstve nim potrebama. Do tada, uticaj Urbanog inkubatora širi se poput krugova na površini Save kada se u nju baci kamen koji, dok tone ka dnu, nije ni svestan uzburkanosti koju je stvorio na vrhu.

a stone thrown in the Sava, never aware of the disturbance it caused on the surface as it sinks towards the bottom.

Prostor je dragocen luksuz u svim savremenim gradovima i kao takav predstavlja temelj urba nog aktivizma. Ako prostor postoji, on mora biti iskorišćen. Ali prostor kao takav sam po sebi ne znači ništa dok postoji samo u opažanju. Marković Urbani inkubator vidi i kao fizički i kao mentalni prostor. A za Karkatag se fizičko i mentalno spajaju u zajedničkoj izradi predmeta koji ispunjavaju prostor između imaginacije i realnosti. Najnovija saradnja između UI i Ka rkataga, Praksa Makerspace, podstiče pravljenje konkretnih objekata koji ne moraju nužno da imaju upotrebnu vrednost. Poput nekakve umetničke parodije na pokret razbijanja mašina pokrenut protiv industrijalaca u Engleskoj u 19. veku, oni smišljaju i prave mašine koje ništa ne proizvode i pozivaju zanatlije-amatere da im se u tome pridruže. Nije važno ni gde ni kako, bitno je da se prostor koristi i da se nešto pravi.

Space, a valuable commodity in any city, is a cornerstone issue in urban activism. If space is available than it must be used, but space means nothing in and of its self - it is only perceived. Markovic considers UI both a physical and mental space. And with Karkatag the physical and mental work together to make new things that fill space somewhere between imagination and reality. The Praksa Makerspace, a new collaboration between UI and Karkatag, encourages making things, concrete things that don’t necessarily have a purpose, like an artistic parody of the battle between the Luddites and industrialists, they invent machines that don’t produce and ask amateur craftsmen to join them. It doesn’t matter what or how, but make things and use the space. The lifespan of this imaginative work cannot be measured in the same way as the life of

Životni vek takvog kreativnog rada ne može se meriti istim aršinima kojima bi se merilo CAMENZIND

uspešno poslovno trajanje nekog preduzeća. Jer, za razliku od preduzeća, ovi prostori ispunjeni su idejama koje se zgušnjavaju u oblak iz kojeg ih korisnici udišu i izdišu nazad. U tom je smislu Marković u pravu kada kaže da, dokle god imate prostor i u njemu nešto radite, sve ostalo će se već samo po sebi dogoditi. Vek trajanja umetničke kreacije je skoro potpuno nemoguće izmeriti, a često ga opštinske vlasti i donatori podrazumevaju. U trećem broju Kamenzinda Dr. Matthias Müller-Wieferig izjavio je da će program Urbanog inkubatora izvesno „ ... ostaviti tragove, ali mi ne možemo znati koje. Kako bih mogao ja sada da predvidim te tragove?”2 Na neki način, rekao je očiglednu istinu. Beograd je, kao u Nevidljivim gradovima Itala Kalvina, jedan san, a dokumentovanje sna koji nastaje iz toliko različitih umova, i to na papiru, je prosto nemoguć zadatak. „Talas sačinjen od sećanjâ izliva se na grad, grad ga upija i širi se kao sunđer.” (Italo Kalvino, Nevidljivi gradovi)3.

a business, for in a space like this, ideas form a cloud that is breathed and out. In this way Markovic is right, as long as you have a space and do something with it the rest will happen of its own accord. The longevity of creativity is near impossible to track and is often taken for granted by municipal officials and grantors. Dr. Matthias Müller-Wieferig stated in issue three of Camenzind that the Urban Incubator program “...will leave some traces. We don’t know what those traces are, how can I predict traces?“2 In a way, he is stating the obvious. Belgrade, like the Invisible Cities of Italo Calvino, is a dream and to track a dream from so many disparate minds proves an impossible task on paper, so it must be tracked in people, and people are an unstable element. “As this wave from memories flows in, the city soaks it up like a sponge and expands.” (Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities)3. Years ago, before Belgrade’s sponge soaked me in, I remember waking at night with the image of a city in my mind’s eye. One with a crumbling glory where plaster was flaking off edifices and stones were falling on passersby. I dreamt of the city regularly and each time it was more fantastic. I can’t explain this dream through concrete data, the number of participants in my life to that point, the number of projects I had completed. Yet, here I am years later, on the other side of the world, in a city very much like the one from my dream. But I’m not a spiritualist, and the fates may have had less to do with my being here than this dream implies, but it isn’t coincidence either. I remember watching a newscast as an adolescent and seeing the Belgrade crowds rush the parliament building. I remember the building vividly, and I remember marveling at the people climbing the Romanesque columns that flank the entrance. Maybe they didn’t

Sećam se da sam se, godinama pre nego što je Beograd i mene upio u sebe, noću često budila sa slikom jednog grada koji sam jasno videla u svom umu. Bio je to neki grad čija se slavna prošlost krunila, u kojem su gipsani ukrasi otpadali sa fasadâ i kamenje padalo sa zgrada na slučajne prolaznike. Redovno sam ga sanjala, i svaki put je bivao sve fantastičniji. Zaista ne bih bila u stanju da taj svoj san objasnim putem konkretnih brojeva, npr. koliko je ljudi do tog trenutka bilo kao učesnika u mom životu, ili broj projekata koje sam do tada uspešno završila. A ipak, evo me danas, toliko godina kasnije na drugom kraju sveta, upravo u gradu koji podseća na taj iz mojih snova, i, iako nisam previše spiritualni tip i ne mislim da je moj san o gradu „sudbinski” doprineo mom bivanju ovde, ne mislim ni da je u pitanju puka koincidencija. Sećam se takođe i da sam, kada sam bila srednjoškolka, na vestima gledala masu ljudi koja provaljuje u zgradu Skupštine u Beogradu. Jasno se sećam zgrade i svoje zadivljenosti lju2 Kamenzind br. 3, 2013., www.cazmag.org, 3 Italo Kalvino, Nevidljivi gradovi, str. 10, izdavačka kuća Harcourt)

2 Kamenzind No. 3, 2013 www.cazmag.org, 3 Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities, pg. 10, Harcourt) 25

KAMENZIND

dima koji se penju na neoklasicističke stubove na njenom ulazu. Možda se čak uopšte nisu ni peli, ali u slikama iz mog sećanja jesu. Sećam se i drugih kadrova Beograda iz te reportaže: fasada zgradâ, novih i starih, neudobno smeštenih jednih uz druge. Kada mi je bliska prijateljica iz Srbije, dizajnerka koja živi u dijaspori, godinama kasnije pričala o Beogradu, podsetila sam se tih snimaka, i tada su počeli snovi. Tek sam sada, dvadeset godina kasnije, u stanju da procenim jačinu utiska koji je jedna obična vest na televiziji ostavila na mladi um tinejdžerke. Isto tako sam nekada i svoja urbana otkrića po Beogradu pripisivala sopstvenoj snalažljivosti i kreativnosti. Ali, čak i u tu, kada premotam film unazad na vreme kada sam tek stigla u Beograd, moram da priznam da se sećam da sam u BIGZ prvi put otišla tako što me je tamo odvela cimerka, umetnica koja je sarađivala sa nekom grupom odande. A zatim sam po preporuci nekog koga sam upoznala u BIGZ-u otišla u Savamalu. Na mestima gde sam odlazila pričalo se da postoje grupe koje rade razne ‘lude’ stvari po gradu: prave radionice na zarđalim zaglibljenim brodovima, vajaju skulpture od recikliranog metala, otvaraju nove galerije. Osluškivala sam kolektivni žamor i, vođena njime, stizala do tih ponovno osvojenih mesta po gradu, od skvota u napuštenom magacinu Inex Filma, raznih neformalnih kafića u nečijim stanovima, te tako najzad i do „Urbanog inkubatora”. Na svakom od tih mesta sretala sam poznata lica. Mora da su upravo oni ti „tragovi” o kojima je govorio Dr. Müller-Wieferig. Izgleda da, što se oni češće susreću jedni sa drugima, to se više povećava mogućnost da će se opet negde sresti, da će im onda ubrzo sâmo ispijanje piva ili kafe prestati da bude dovoljno da održava prijateljstvo, te da će se ovi susreti polako pretvoriti u diskusije, a diskusije u projekte. I onda će jedne večeri ti ljudi opet završiti u Savamali, osetiti miris paljenog metala iz Karkataga, ili čuti smeh i zvuk električne bušilice koji stižu iz Biciklističke Kuhinje. Provirivši kroz staklena vrata, na zidovima će videti okačene šablone za street art. Pomisliće: „Znači, ovo je to mesto gde rade te stvari, ono mesto o kojem mi je pričao taj-i-taj”. I onda se možda čak i dogodi da odluče da neki CAMENZIND

climb those columns at all, but that’s how I remember it. I remember other shots of the city in that newscast: the building facades, the old and the new living uncomfortably near each other. When a close Serbian friend, a designer and part of the diaspora, told me about Belgrade years later, I remembered these images and that’s when the dreams started. It is only now, two decades later, that I am assessing the impact a single news broadcast had on the developing mind of a teenager. Likewise, I once accredited my urban discoveries in Belgrade to my own resourcefulness. But once again when I rewind to when I first arrived in the city, I recall that I was led to BIGZ by an artist roommate who had collaborated with a group there. Then to Sava Mala by a recommendation by someone who I had met at BIGZ. In conversations at these locations there was mention of groups that worked in the city doing “crazy” things: working on rusted out ships, making sculptures out of reclaimed metal, opening galleries. I listened to the whispers in these places and the collective hum led me to reclaimed spaces all over the city: Inex Film the warehouse squat, or hidden cafes in uninhabited apartments, and eventually to Urban Incubator. I saw the same faces everywhere. These people must be the traces that Dr. Müller-Wieferig talked about. It seems that the more these people meet, the more likely they are to meet again. Soon beer and coffee isn’t enough to sustain their relationships and meetings will turn into discussions, and discussions will turn into projects. And some night they’ll find their way back to Sava Mala and smell the burnt metal from Karkatag, or hear the laughter and power tools emanating from the Bike Kitchen. They’ll take a peek through the glass doors and see street art stencils on the walls. They’ll think to themselves, “here is where people make things.That place I heard about from so and so.” They may even find themselves taking their unre26

karkatag

od tih svojih nerealizovanih projekata odnesu u Urbani inkubator, i time se završava ceo krug - na mestu odakle je i počeo, sa malom grupom aktivista u Savamali.

alized projects to Urban Incubator and completing the cycle back where it begun - with a small group of organizers in Sava Mala. This organizational cycle is something that cannot be tracked, scratch that, it should never be tracked, for it is organization in its purest form: seeds from the beak of a bird that fall to the ground and start to grow, motivated by personal choice and mutual conviviality. The longevity of creativity requires faith: an unpopular noun in a world where security is top priority. Faith is something that most institutions can neither afford nor risk, but neither can they risk losing it.

Ovo „kruženje aktivizma” se ne može tek tako ispratiti i izmeriti, niti treba uopšte ikada da se meri. Ono se odvija u svojoj najčistijoj formi kao kad ptica ispusti iz kljuna seme pa ono padne na plodno tle i počinje da klija zalivano ličnim izborom i zajedničkim boravljenjem na istom prostoru. Trajanje umetničkog dela kroz vreme iziskuje veru, tu imenicu tako nepopularnu u današnjem svetu u kojem je izvesnost najveći prioritet. Vera je rizik koji većina insti tucija ne može sebi da priušti. Niti mogu sebi da je dozvole, a opet ne smeju sebi ni da dozvole da je izgube.

Rebecca West sums it up nicely with a reference to Marcel Proust: “Proust has pointed out that if one goes on performing any action, however banal, long enough, it automatically becomes 'wonderful'”4 , and so Urban Incubator’s small acts of regeneration will eventually, and automatically, become wonderful.

Rebeka Vest je to odlično formulisala kada je napisala da je „Marsel Prust ukazao na to da, ako neko uporno neku radnju, ma kako banalnu, dovoljno dugo ponavlja, ta radnja će automatski postati „genijalna”4. Te tako i ja verujem da će i ovi mali projekti regeneracije prostora koje realizuje Urbani inkubator na kraju automatski postati genijalni.

4 Rebecca West, Black Lamb and Grey Falcon, part 1, from Atlantic Magazine January 1941, https:// www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/unbound/flashbks/ west/west1.htm, accessed on April 20th, 2015

4 Rebeka West, Crno jagnje i sivi soko, 1 deo, iz Atlantic Magazine, januar 1941., https://www.theatlantic.com/past/ docs/unbound/flašbks/west/west1.htm, stranici pristupljeno 20. aprila 2015.g. 27

KAMENZIND

philipp kerber

Grad, investitor i

The City, the Investor,

javni interes AND PUBLIC INTERESTS Ljubica Slavković

By Ljubica Slavkovic

Bez inovacije dolazi do stagnacije što vodi ka potpunoj stagnaciji. Svakom gradu potrebna su ulaganja. Može se reći i da ne postoji budućnost grada, pa tako ni grad, bez investitora. Ako je svaki urbanizam u srži investitorski, čemu sintagma investitorski urbanizam? I šta je njena antiteza?

Lack of innovation invariably leads to stagnation, which in turn leads to a complete wasting away. Every city needs investments. One can reasonably argue that a city's future, and indeed the city itself, cannot exist without investors. If every urban development project is, at its core, an investment, then why is there a need for the phrase investor-led urbanization? And what is its antithesis?

Na Evropskom kontinentu period tranzicije savremene države (ili države u savremenu) označava vreme potrebno za razvoj tržišne privrede, privatnog sektora i demokratije. U političkom smislu taj period se odnosi na pre laz u demokratsko društvo, dok u ekonomskim vodi ka uspostavi slobodnog tržišta, transfo rmaciju iz državnovlasničkog i državnoplanskog u tržišni koncept, zasnovan na privatnoj svojini.

In Europe, the transition to the modern state is marked by the period needed to develop investment markets, the private sector, and democracy. From a political perspective, this period is defined by the transition to a democratic society, while from the economic perspective, this period is defined as a transition to a free market

Tranzicija na našim prostorima označila je i privatizaciju društvenog stambenog fo CAMENZIND

nda i promenu vlasništva nad građevinskim zemljištem. Primerice, pre toga a nakon Drugog svetskog rata samo su državna/društvena preduzeća mogla da grade višespratice što je omogućilo monopolsku poziciju i postizanje visoke cene novosagrađenih stanova, dok je odsustvo konkurentnosti i tržišnih kriterijuma snižavalo standarde kvaliteta i upotrebnu vrednost izgrađenih objekata.1 Ukidanje monopo lske pozicije države i omogućavanje privatnog preduzetništva u izgradnji imalo je za cilj da, između ostalog, uvede i (ekonomsku) održivost u razvoj gradova.

economy and the transformation from a state-owned/public sector to privatelyowned/private sector markets based on the concept of private property ownership. The transition period in the former Yugoslavia was marked by the privatization of the Social Urban Development Fund (most comparable to today's Housing and Urban Development Departments...), and the change in ownership of commercial and residential plots of land. Before this, it was only the state which had the sole discretion or right to build multi-storied housing complexes, effectively amounting to a complete monopoly of the housing market with, of course, the accompanying price-fixing of property values. Concurrently, the complete lack of competition, or any market place guidelines, resulted in the predictable degradation of standards and quality, as well as an inevitable loss of value of all constructed units.1Busting up the state's monopoly by introducing private entrepreneurship had, amongst other goals, the intent of introducing economic responsibility and sustainability in urban development and construction.

Grad, odnosno gradsko zemljište, prisutno na tržištu, postaje izvor potencijalno velike i konti nuirane dobiti. Kao takav, postaje privlačan različitim interesnim grupama. U srži privatne investicije je profit i razumljivo je da je u interesu strane koja investira da iskoristi maksimum zemljišta, pa i da sagradi i proda što više kvadratnih metara. U načelu, zakon (slobodnog) tržišta nalaže da najbolji proizvod uzrokuje i najviši mogući profit, te da je takođe u interesu investitora da uloži u isplativost objekta ili parcele u koju investira time što će obezbediti kvalitet i biti konkurentan na (slobodnom) tržištu.

The city, namely the development and construction opportunities therein, became a potential of vast and continuing gains, and as such, of interest to various groups of investors. As the basis of private investment is profit, it is entirely understandable that investors are keen to capitalize on their yields by maximizing the amount of developmental and marketable areas. In principle, the law of the free marketplace states that superior products should yield the highest profits, making the investor's interest to endow their holdings' profitability by ensuring the highest possible standards and maintaining competitiveness.

U interesu privatnog investitora je u načelu dobit koja je ostvariva u relativno kraćem vremenskom roku, a interesovanje ograničeno na onaj prostor do kog dosežu granice privatnog vlasništva. Grad funkcioniše kao celina i kao organizam koji se stalno menja i razvija, i to u neprekidnoj sprezi uzročno – posledičnih veza. Svaka intervencija u gradskom tkivu se u većoj ili manjoj meri odražava na funkcionisanje celokupnog gradskog organizma, i to kroz vreme. Urbanizam je naučna i društvena disciplina koja istražuje, proučava i primenjuje principe i odnose na kojima treba oblikovati, uređivati i koristiti prostor. Urbanističko planiranje podrazumeva osmišljavanje rešenja za efektivnu, efikasnu i estetski zadovoljavajuću organizaciju

The private investor's main sphere of interest lies within projects whose gains can

1 Grad bez građana – tako se gradi(lo) u Beogradu i Srbiji, K. Petovar, Republika, 2010

1 "A city without citizens - building in Belgrade and Serbia" K. Petovar, Republika, 2010 29

KAMENZIND

i eksploataciju urbane sredine u dinamičnom socio-ekonomskom i kulturnom okruženju. U prirodi urbanističkog planiranja je dugoročnost, pogled i priprema za budućnost i osmišljavanje mehanizama koji će razvoj grada postaviti i održati na uzlaznoj putanji, kao i regulativa i normi koji to neće urušiti. U osnovi urbanizma je grad, viđen kao celina.

be recouped in a reasonably short amount of time, and focuses solely on areas under private ownership. A city functions much as an organism constantly changing and adapting, as a whole, entwined in a web of cause and effect. Every involvement within the city's fabric will, with time, invariably have greater or lesser consequences on the whole. Urban planning is a social science committed to the study and application of principles which should be employed in the use, maintenance and shaping of public space. It entails the adoption and discovery of efficacious, proficient, and aesthetically pleasing solutions to the organization of public space in dynamic cultural and socio-economic surroundings. In its nature are sustainability, an orientation towards the future, and the implementation of various mechanisms which will instigate and maintain a city's development by way of principles and normative values designed to remove obstacles along that path. The city, seen as a whole, is at the very heart of urban planning.

Ključno je usklađivanje javnog i privatnog interesa. Upravo tu sponu između zemljišta i pro stora, privatnog i javnog interesa, nosi urbanizam i urbanističko planiranje. Grad po meri čoveka čini prostor koji obezbeđuje kvalitet života koji se u njemu odvija. Prostor je jedan od najvažnijih resursa i svaki zahvat smanjuje raspoložive resurse za nove namene. Greške i njegovo neadektavno iskorišćavanje društvo skupo plaća, pre ili ka snije. Može se reći da je urbanističko planira nje prvorazredni nacionalni interes, te zahteva mudru politiku i niz interdisciplinarnih zna nja da bi se određeni prostor, za koji ima više različitih interesa, najbolje koristio.

A city, as characterized by its inhabitants, is defined as an area which assures a certain quality of life. Space is one of the most valuable resources available, and every development invariably diminishes this finite resource for future endeavors. Inadequate uses of space, and mistakes made, are dearly paid for by its inhabitants sooner or later. One could indeed say that urban planning is an utmost national interest, requiring shrewd political acumen and interdisciplinary knowledge so as to ensure that any particular space, for which there are many viable options and interests, be used to its best and full potential.

Urbanističko planiranje gradova je u rukama javnih preduzeća, te (bi trebalo da) je njihova nužnost da sprovode, tj. brane javni (zajednički, opšti i sl.) interes. Utvrđivanje javnog interesa je poseban izazov jer „javni interes nije prosti zbir niti rezultat pojedinačnih interesa, već postoje drugi suštinski uslovi u definisanju pojma javni interes, a naročito je značajna uloga planske komunikacije za konstituisanje javnog interesa iz interakcije individualnih.“2 Ipak, utvrđeni javni interes predstavlja javnu tehničku i društvenu infrastrukturu, ono što omogućuje osnovne uslove života i rada - snabdevanje vo-

Urban planning in cities is in the hands of public enterprises, which (in theory) means that their necessity is to implement, that is, protect, the public good. Determining what constitutes said "pub-

2 “Koncept javnog interesa i javnog dobra u urbanističkom i prostornom planiranju”, K. Petovar, M. Vujošević, Sociologija i prostor, Vol.46 No.1 (179), 2008.

CAMENZIND

donna

dom i energijom, zbrinjavanje otpadnih voda i otpada, kao i ono što je potrebno čoveku kao društvenom biću - obrazovanje, zdravstvo, kultura i dr. Ključno je usklađivanje javnog i privatnog interesa. Upravo tu sponu između zemljišta i prostora, privatnog i javnog interesa, nosi urbanizam i urbanističko planiranje.

lic good" is particularly challenging since "the 'public good' is not a simple sum or calculation of individual interests - rather, it is composed of a multitude of essential determinants, where communications planning used to crystallize and define public opinion, is of particular import." 2 Nevertheless, determined public interest delineates municipal infrastructure, necessities which allow for being able to live and work in an area - water, energy, sewage, etc. - as well as certain social necessities - education, health, entertainment, etc. It is exactly that link between land and space, between private and public interests, that urban planning provides.

Uloga urbanističkog planiranja je i da predvidi na koji način intervencije u izgrađenoj strukturi posledično utiču na razvoj grada i da ih u skladu sa tim usmeri u najboljem mogućem pravcu, da postavi okvire najboljeg mogućeg razvoja grada kao celine u koje će se svaki pojedinačni projekat uklopiti i na taj način tom razvoju doprineti, kao i da štiti pojedinačne interese građana i javne interese grada kao zajednice.

One of the roles of urban planning, is to try to predict the consequences that any involvement in already established structures might have on the city's development, and in accordance with those, steer any changes in the right direction and implement a viable framework wherein any future individual projects would com-

Nije retka pojava da se iz ugla investitora urbanističko planiranje, odnosno njegova primena kroz niz normi i regulativa, vidi kao niz ograničenja i „kočnica“. Te „kočnice“ (bi trebalo da) postoje upravo da bi razvoj, odnosno inve sticije, usmerile u održivom pravcu i u što većoj meri omogućile privatni interes, radi stalnog i što boljeg ulaganja, ali uz njegovo neprestano usklađivanje sa javnim interesom, a nikako i nikada ne na uštrb.

2 "The concepts of public interest and the public good in urban planning", K. Petovar, M. Vujosevic, Sociology And Space, Vol.46 No.1 (179), 2008

KAMENZIND

Urbanistički planovi su alati kojima se urbanističko planiranje sprovodi i sa protokom vremena potrebno je preispitivati ih i osa vremenjivati, kao i mehanizme i načine primene.

marko tanasković njuz net

Sintagma investitorski urbanizam ne odnosi se na urbanizam iza koga stoji investicija, već na praksu prilagođavanja i potčinjavanja gradskog prostora interesima investitora gde se oni uspo stavljaju kao osnovni kriterijum u definisanju planskih rešenja, bez obzira na posledice po okolni prostor i kvalitet stanovanja i življenja u zoni izgradnje.3 Gradovi Srbije su u tranzicione vode ušli sa profesionalno osmišljenim planskim osnovama dugoročnog razvoja, u kojima je dominantno bio zaštićen javni interes grada i najširi opšti interesi građana. Imali su jasno diferencirane prostore za sve gradske funkcije, sa potrebnim prostorom za razvoj svake od njih u planskom periodu prema očekivanom rastu potreba i standarda.4 Njihova primena je ipak, sasvim drugi list.

plement the city's structure as a whole, thus spurring future development as well as preserving public interests. It is not uncommon, from a purely investment perspective, to consider urban planning - or more importantly, its conglomerate of rules and regulations - as "constraints" and a hindrance to progress. These "constraints" are in place, however, precisely to ensure that future developments and investments are guided along a sustainable path, where private interests are, in view of increasing profitability, protected in accordance with, and never against, the public good.

Period tranzicije u Srbiji obeležile su i brojne špekulacije i zloupotreba urbanističkih normi i mehanizama. Tako je dozvoljeno da, “izlazivši u susret investitoru” zahvaljujući principu i praksi „dopuna i izmena“ urbanističkih planova svih nivoa, se potpuno izmeni urbana konfiguracija, koliko u visinu i širinu je dozvoljeno graditi, što za posledicu ima i da se stambeni fond puni stanovima koji ne ispunjavaju osnovne uslove kvaliteta života i grade se na udaljenosti koja ne obezbeđuje minimalnu privatnost, osunčanost i vidik. Na pitanje isplativosti takvih postupaka

The term investor-led urbanization does not refer to a type of urban planning based on investment, but rather on the concept that urban planning be primarily based on, and subject to, investors' interests, where their profit motive becomes the guiding principle in devising planning solutions regardless of the broader consequences on, or the impact on, the quality of life of surrounding areas.3

3 Grad bez građana – tako se gradi(lo) u Beogradu i Srbiji, K. Petovar, Republika, 2010 4 Mihailo Medvedev : „Kako nam je tranzicija pojela razvoj gradova”, http://www.ekapija.com/website/sr/ page/66102/Letnja-%C5%A1kola-urbanizma-MihailoMedvedev-Kako-nam-je-tranzicija-pojela-razvoj-gradova CAMENZIND

3 "A city without citizens - building in Belgrade and Serbia" K. Petovar, Republika, 2010 32

usled zakona tržišta može se primetiti da su „zanimljivi navodi iz izveštaja Stejt departmenta da se „novac stečen trgovinom drogom najčešće pere na tržištu nekretnina, što je jedan od najpopularnijih načina legalizacije prihoda od kriminala u Srbiji i Crnoj Gori“. 5

The cities of Serbia began their journeys in transition-period waters with professionally coordinated and conceived longterm urban development plans, where dominant protection was granted to the public good, as well as the broad and general interest of the public as a whole. There were clearly delineated and differentiated public and municipal areas, accompanied by the necessary space for their growth and expansion in accordance with projected future needs and changes in standards.4 Their application, however, is another story entirely.

U Srbiji su urbanistički normativi i njihova primena široko zloupotrebljivani kroz kriminalizaciju državne uprave i različitih službi i blisku povezanost vlastodržaca i ekonomski potentnih pojedinaca. Nije retkost ni da se uredbe ili planovi namerno donose nerealno, što dalje ciljano stvara prostor za izmene i zloupotrebu. Urbanistički planovi su alati kojima se urbanističko planiranje sprovodi i sa protokom vremena potrebno je preispitivati ih i osavremenjivati, kao i mehanizme i načine primene. Grad je živ organizam čije se potrebe stalno menjaju i mora se obezbediti efektno odgovaranje na njih i na dinamiku razvoja gradova. Legitimno je i preispitivati u budućnosti da li je urbanističko planiranje neophodno, kao i u kojoj meri i obimu je najefikasnije.

The transition period in Serbia was marked by a number of speculative bubbles and abuses of developmental rules and regulations. Swathes of residential development projects were re-designed in their entirety, glutting the housing market with units lacking basic quality of life standards ensuring minimal privacy, access to daylight and vistas, and all under 4 Mihailo Medvedev: "How transition ate up development", http://www.ekapija.com/website/sr/ page/66102/Letnja-%C5%A1kola-urbanizmaMihailo-Medvedev-Kako-nam-je-tranzicija-pojelarazvoj-gradova

anderwald+grond

5 Grad bez građana – tako se gradi(lo) u Beogradu i Srbiji, K. Petovar, Republika, 2010

KAMENZIND

Koji god da je odgovor, jedno je izvesno: urbanističko planiranje ne može biti u službi investitora pre nego javnog interesa. Ukoliko su planovi zastareli, ne odgovaraju na potrebe grada ili njihova (ne)primena ne uspeva da obe zbedi prosperitet koji je od značaja za dalji ra zvoj, potrebno je menjati ih i/ili tražiti nove mehanizme donošenja i sprovođenja. Prilagođavati ih željama investitora bez potrebnih provera i uvida o opravdanosti takvih postupaka, me njanje planova kako bi se prilagodili projektu umesto prilagođavanja projekta planovima, je izvrtanje logike i obesmišljavanje planiranja. Obaveza planiranja je da se želje investitora prilagode planovima i grade u okviru para metara zadatih na osnovu istraživanja i stručnih provera. Obrtanje procesa nije ništa do legalizacija divlje gradnje, a takav čin simbol sunovrata pravne države.

Whatever the case may be, one thing is for certain - urban planning and development cannot be in the service of investors above the needs of the public. the guise of "accommodating investors' needs" through ample use of the "minimal substitution and amendment of existing projects" principle. As to concerns with regards to the long term profit potential of such projects (or more specifically, the blatant lack thereof...), there are a number of "interesting quotes from State Department reports which state that: 'most often, profits from the sale and trafficking of drugs, are laundered through the real-estate market...' at the time the most popular and profitable manner of legitimizing criminal profit in Serbia and Montenegro."5

U osnovi demokratije je uključivanje javnosti u procese donošenja odluka. Iskustvo je pokazalo da pokušaj da se definiše i kontroliše javno dobro, kao i javni interes, od strane samo jednog aktera (na primer države) je doživeo neuspeh. Demokratska praksa je da se pozitivno utiče na jačanje različitih oblika građanskih inicijativa i udruživanja građana, koji će se pored nastojanja ka zaštiti pojedinačnih interesa u sve većoj meri rukovoditi idejom javnog dobra, kao uslova za poboljšanje kvaliteta življenja i ostvarivanja prava. Jačanje uticaja građana na planiranje i uređenje prostora, odnosno na obavezivanje vladajuće elite da primenjuje standarde i norme i da preispituje načine donošenja odluka jedini je vidljivi put ka tome da urbanističko pla niranje i njegova primena zaista budu u službi razvoja grada i brane javnog interesa, pa tako i obezbeđivanje stvaranja i očuvanja održivih gradova.

In Serbia, urban development directives and their applications were grossly abused through systemic administrative corruption and close ties of land and deed owners to individual moguls and magnates. It was not uncommon that regulations be purposefully drafted as non-viable, allowing for further corruption and graft in the process of "fixing" them. Urban development and planning are instruments which need constant re-evaluation and adaptation with the passage of time. A city, much like a living organism, is in a state of constant change to which one has to constantly be finding effective solutions. One could even legitimately concern themselves with whether urban planning should even be a necessity in the future, as well as in what form or general scope it would be most effective. 5 "A city without citizens - building in Belgrade and Serbia" K. Petovar, Republika, 2010

CAMENZIND

Whatever the case may be, one thing is for certain - urban planning and development cannot be in the service of investors above the needs of the public. In cases where any particular development project becomes outdated, or no longer meets the city's needs, or where its implementation (or lack thereof) fails to achieve projected profits, it is time to change it, or bring about innovative solutions in its application. Modifying such projects to solely meet the needs of investors without implementing the necessary checks and balances, or changing designs simply to fit the project instead of re-evaluating the project based on designs is contrary to logic, and makes the whole idea of planning worthless. Planning obliges that investors' wishes be appropriately reigned in to workable parameters based on research and professional, expert analysis. Reversing this process is nothing more than legalizing illegal and unconsented building, which is in itself a clear symbol of the downfall of the legal state.

m.metz

At the heart of democracy is the inclusion of the general public in the decision making process. Experience has shown, time and again, that attempts to define and control the public good to a single perspective (for example, to that of the state), has resulted in nothing but failure. Democracy in practice is to positively influence various forms of civil initiatives and public associations, which, in addition to strengthening efforts to protect individual interests, will also be increasingly guided by the idea of the public good as a necessary condition for improving the quality of life and the exercising of rights. Amplifying the public's influence in urban planning and development, namely binding the ruling elite to apply normative standards and to constantly re-evaluate the decision-making process, is the only viable way in which urban planning and its application will be at the service of city development while protecting the public interest, thus ensuring the true creation and preservation of sustainable cities. 35

KAMENZIND

Ne da(vi)mo BG/Kamerades

Ne da(vi)mo

Beograd

THE BELGRADE (WATER)FRONT

Ljubica Slavković i Tamara Ognjanović

Ljubica Slavkovic & Tamara Ognjanovic

Najveći infrastrukturni projekat Vlade Srbije, "Beograd na vodi", koji bi trebalo da finansiraju arapske kompanije i u čijem opisu stoji potpuna izmena skoro dva miliona kvadratnih metara centralne zone Beograda smatra se projektom od nacionalnog značaja. Projekat je prvi put najavljen građanima Srbije u toku predizborne kampanje 2012. godine, da bi dve godine kasnije, u toku nove predizborne kampanje, bio predstavljen investitor čime „Beograd na vodi“ staje na ekspres traku i galopirajući krči put svim preprekama njegovoj realizaciji.

The largest development project in Serbia's history, the "Belgrade Waterfront", funded by Arab companies and in whose description is the complete restructuring of nearly 2 million square meters of land in the city's center, is considered a project of national importance. It was first announced during the 2012 election campaign, only to have its investors revealed two years later (during the course of yet another election campaign), and the project was put on a fast track course, effortlessly paving the way forward regardless of any obstacles.

Žurba za pripremanje terena i izlaženje u susret željama investitora kako bi se „što pre otpočelo sa gradnjom“ podrazumevala je višemesečno predstavljanje projekta javnosti isključivo preko CAMENZIND

The rush towards laying the groundwork and meeting investors' needs in order to "begin building as soon as possible", en36

niza propagadnog materijala, a koji je ujedno poslužio i kao osnova za donošenje zakona iznad zakona, za izmene urbanističkog „ustava“ Beograda, donošenje novih planova najvišeg reda i raseljavanje stanovništva, odnosno za ekspresnu legalizaciju nelegalnog projekta. Za to vreme ugovor o „Beogradu na vodi“ i sve što se tiče realizacije ovog poduhvata paradigma su pojma “javna tajna”. Trud vlasti (i republičke i gradske) da ga izreklamiraju na sva zvona proporcionalan je trudu koji ulažu u sakrivanje informacija u vezi sa “poslom milenijuma”, čiji nacionalni značaj nikada nije predočen javnosti u čije ime je i određen.

tailed several months' worth of public announcements based solely on promotional materials which became the framework for drafting new extra-legal legislation, the changing of Belgrade's urban "constitution" - Belgrade's Master Plan - the adoption of new urban developments of the highest order, as well as the displacement of residents. In other words, it was a rush job to legalize an otherwise illegal venture. At the same time, the Waterfront contract itself, and everything connected to its implementation and application, fell under the paradigm of an open secret. Efforts on the part of both local and state authorities to sing the project's praises, was equally proportional to their efforts in hiding any information related to the "deal of the millennium", the national importance of which was never illustrated to the public in whose name it was specified.

Proces legalizacije projekta prati i odsustvo kritičkog stava medija, koji u najvećoj meri umesto izveštavanja projekat propagiraju, odsustvo reakcije većeg dela stručne i šire javnosti, odgovornih institucija i upravljačkih tela da stanu u odbranu javnog interesa, kao i obezvrednjivanje demokratskih proc esa uključivanja javnosti u odluke koje se tiču budućnosti grada i građana.

The project's path to legalization is also complimented by the lack of media's critical attitude, who more often than not simply promote the project instead of bothering to actually report it, as well as a lack 37

KAMENZIND

kamerades

U leto 2014. godine, održan je javni uvid u izmene Generalnog urbanističkog plana Beograda 2021. Nakon šest sati u prepunoj sali i sa preko 1200 podnetih primedaba od kojih praktično ni jedna nije usvojena, niti zaista razmatrana, započela je sa aktivnim delovanjem Građanska Inicijativa Ne da(vi)mo Beograd.

of a reaction from professionals, experts, or institutions and public bodies responsible for protecting the public's interest. It is a general erosion of the democratic principles of involving the public in matters related to their future. During the summer of 2014, changes to Belgrade's General Urban Plan were made public. During a six hour, packed public hearing, during the course of which more than 1200 separate grievances were brought forth, and promptly not implemented or even acknowledged, the public initiative "Ne da(vi)mo Beograd" began.

Nakon što vlast nije htela da uključi javnost u proces “planiranja” i legalizacije projekta, javnost se uključila sama. Inicijativa “Ne da(vi) mo Beograd” nastala je iz protivljenja projektu, njegovim ciljevima, posledicama, dobiti privatnog investitora na uštrb javnog interesa i osiromašivanjem budžeta, netransparentnim radnjama koje su ga pratile, i opšteg utiska da se radi o lovu u mutnom. Grupa ljudi različitih profila, zanimanja i uverenja okupila je činjenica da smo sami odgovorni za sadašnjost našeg grada i za ono što ćemo ostaviti za budućnost, kako svojim delovanjem, tako i nedelovanjem.

After authorities refused to include the public in the project's "planning" and legalization phases, the public decided to include itself. The "Ne da(vi)mo Beograd" initiative sprang up in opposition to the Waterfront project, its means and consequences, its private gain at the expense of general public interest and public funds as well as its complete lack of transparency. A varied group of people from different walks of life, professions and differing opinions were drawn together by the fact that we are the only ones responsible for what happens to us and the future we will leave behind, as by our actions, so by our inactions.

Razvoj, funkcionisanje grada i njegov novi identitet ne mogu biti proizvod investitorskih želja već isključivo potreba samog društva. Inicijativa je u svoje aktivnosti uključila, i nastavlja da uključuje, široki krug građana različitih profila, zanimanja i uverenja, kao i organizacija zainteresovanih za budućnost Beograda, održivi razvoj grada, pravično korišćenje zajedničkih resursa i prekid obesmišljavanja pravne države. Zаjednički cilj jeste dа se zаustаvi degrаdаcijа i pljаčkаnje Beogrаdа u ime megalomanskih urbаnističkih i аrhitektonskih projekаtа, pre svega “Beograda na vodi”, a njena ambicija je da se svest o tome gde i kako živimo proširi na najširoj skali. CAMENZIND

Belgrade's growth, its daily functioning and its rapidly forming future identity cannot be the product of investors' desires, but must, instead, be in the sole discretion of its inhabitants. The initiative has included, and continues 38

miloš stošić

to include, a diverse group of people and institutions invested in Belgrade's future, its sustainable growth, the legal use of public goods, as well as the discontinuance of the erosion of state law and order. The common goal is to stop Belgrade from being plundered and degraded in the name of private interest public works projects, first and foremost the Belgrade Waterfront, while the broader intent is to raise the general awareness of where and how we live to the highest levels possible. The initiative's members have undertaken various public awareness projects, ranging from protest during the project's signing ceremony, to staging events in front of Serbia's parliament during extra-legal draft legislation hearings, to informing the public of the project's various controversial and dubious claims, as well as highlighting the whole process' procedural flaws and economic pitfalls. As to the ambition of informing the public, local authorities filed complaints against individual members for disseminating newsletters, despite the fact they had officially issued licenses to do so.

Članovi ove Inicijative pokrenuli su čitav niz akcija, od protesta u vreme potpisivanja ugovora, preko akcije ispred Skupštine Srbije tokom sednice o leks specijalisu za ovaj projekat, do objavljivanja glasila u kojem su pobrojane mnogobrojne kontroverze i sporne tačke projekta sa urbanističkog, saobraćajnog i društvenog aspekta, u cilju da se upozori i na prekršene procedure i njegovu ekonomsku nei splativost.

At the contract's signing ceremony in April 2015, in front of Belgrade's Geological Survey building, local authorities gathered paid party protesters to seemingly portray broad social consensus for the project, while an invisible hand seems to have mysteriously stopped all street cars in their tracks, auspiciously much like a screen blocking hundreds of protesting opponents gathered by the initiative, from view.

Na ovu težnju inicijative da građane što bolje informiše o projektu aktuelne vlasti reaguju podnošenjem prijave protiv više aktivista zbog deljenja glasila, uprkos tome što su posedovali urednu dozvolu za svoju akciju koju je izdala policija.

Even after the public signing of the wholly secretive contract took place, the general population was still denied any access to details contained therein. However, some surprising facts managed to leak out, such as the fact that the project's initial estimated investment value is now ten times smaller, and that the completion deadline has been moved up to three times faster than originally reported. The

U vreme potpisivanja ugovora aprila 2015. pred zgradu Geozavoda dovedeni su partijski roboti da stvore sliku opšteg društvenog konsenzusa oko ovog pitanja, a nevidljivom rukom zausta vljeni tramvaji da, poput paravana, prikriju više stotina protivnika projekta koje je okupila Inicijativa “Ne da(vi)mo Beograd”. 39

KAMENZIND

CAMENZIND

miloš stošić

Ne da(vi)mo BG/Kamerades

I nakon što je javno potpisan tajni ugovor sa investitorom, građani su ostali uskraćeni za obe lodanjivanje tog dokumenta, ali su se saznale neke potpuno neočekivane informacije. Vre dnost investicije deset puta je manja, a rok za završetak projekta je utrostručen. Šta zapravo predviđa ugovor o ovom projektu, za javnost je i dalje nepoznato, kao i koji su rizici koje preuzima i posledice koje treba da snosi.

actual terms of the contract still remain a complete mystery, as well as any of the potential risks or consequences invariably contained in the project itself. The core operating principles of the initiative "Ne da(vi)mo Beograd" aren't solely contained to the Belgrade Waterfront project and the future directly dependant on its outcome, but rather, to the complete changing of the structures and mechanics which allow for such blatant miscarriages of justice to be carried out against the people of this city. There is also hope that, along this path, genuine public involvement is inevitable.

Suština delovanja Građanske inicijative Ne da(vi)mo Beograd nije sadržana samo u korelaciji sa projektom „Beograd na vodi“ i budućnosti Beograda koja direktno zavisi od sudbine ovog projekta. Motiv je i promena mehanizama koji omogućavaju ovakvo vršenje nasilje nad gradom, a vera da je na tom putu neizbežno istinsko uključivanje javnosti.

KAMENZIND

Srđ je naš

SRDJ IS OURS

Đuro Capor

by Djuro Capor

Koncem prosinca 2014.godine građani Dubrovnika okupljeni u Inicijativu Srđ je naš su imali dobar razlog za slavlje. Nakon osam godina spora Viši upravni sud poništio je odluku Povjerenika Vlade RH Želimira Bosnića iz 2006. godine o donošenju Izmjena županijskog prostornog plana kojom se obuhvat golf resorta na Srđu povećao sa 100 na 310ha. Što će se dalje događati s statusom projekta nije lako predvi djeti. Županija Dubrovačko –neretvanska će do kraja godine donijeti nove Izmjene županijskog plana u koje bi trebali ugraditi obuhvat od 100ha za golf resort kakav je bio prije nezakonitih Izmjena iz 2006. godine

By the end of December 2014, Dubrovnik's citizens involved in the Srdj Is Ours initiative had much reason to celebrate. After eight years of legal battles, the Supreme Administrative Court reversed Commissioner Zelimir Bosnic's 2006 decision to change district zoning regulations increasing the Srdj Golf Resort area from 100 to 310 hectares (roughly 250 to 750 acres). What lies in store for the project's future is hard to determine. Dubrovnik-Neretva county will propose new zoning changes by the end of the year, which should reflect the pre-2006 golf resort area of only 100 hectares. For years, Srdj was a metaphor for all speculative real-estate projects on the

Srđ je godinama bio metafora za sve nekretninsko-špekulativne projekte na jadra nskoj obali gdje su se jednim potezom pera neke pitome uvale ili kako to developeri kažu CAMENZIND

Adriatic coast wherein, with one fell swoop of the pen, some dreamy cove - or as developers would say, some worthless heap of stones overlooking a UNESCO heritage sight - would be transformed into real-estate's new El Dorado. For these types of investment opportunities, zoning and spatial planning projects were illegally amended, new legislation hastily drafted (like the here applicable Regulation on Golf Resorts), or incredulous coalitions of disparate leftists, rightists, liberals, criminals and fascist assembled within the political bordello of the city council, lest there appear to be a "political" imperative behind such vainglorious ventures. The Srdj is Ours initiative was supported by a multitude of local and professional associations such as the Dubrovnik Architects Association, The Croatian Association of Architects, scientists from the Institute of Tourism and The Ivo Pilar Institute, GONG, Green Action, Green Istra, and many others. Among the arguments they used in opposition to the proposed real-estate development, were that such a project would inevitably restrict the city's access to invaluable space for strategic planning and recreation, how it would disturb the city's iconic and historical ambiance, and how the project would be largely dependent on locally funded, tax payer, infrastructure development. The company Razvoj Golf, Ltd. (Golf Park Dubrovnik) went about changing popular opinion with a slew of publicly minded donations to various city cultural and sports associations, universities, Dubrovnik's historical "Blunderbuss Brigade", local a capella clubs, and most importantly, local media and political parties.

bez vrijedni kamenjar iznad UNESCO-vog grada bisera pretvarali u nekretninski Elodorado. Za ovakve projekte nezakonito su se mije njali prostorni planovi, donosili posebni zakoni poput Zakona o igralištima za golf ili sklapale dotad neviđene koalicije lijevih desnih, liberala, kriminalaca i fašista u političkom bordelu gradskog vijeća grada Dubrovnika ne bi li se političkim odlukama pogurala ovakva megalomanska investicija. Inicijativu Srđ je naš podržavale su brojne građanske i stručne udruge poput Društva arhitekata Dubrovnik, Udruženja hrvatskih arhitekata, znanstvenici s Instituta za turizam i Instituta Ivo Pilar, GONG, Zelena Akcija, Zelena Istra, Pravo Na Grad i mnogi drugi. Argumenti kojima su se protivili projektu su bili da se gradu kroz anti-urbanistički pristup amputira vrijedni prostor za strateški razvoj i rekreaciju, kako se njime zatiru osnovne ambijentalne i povijesne vrijednosti koje čine Dubrovnik i kako se planiranje ovog projekta zasniva na velikim kontribucijama za infrastrukturu koje bi trebali platiti građani. Tvrtka Razvoj golf pristupila je osvajanju javnog mnijenja sponzorstvom i donacijama brojnim gradskim kulturnim i sportskim društvima i udrugama, institucijama poput dubrovačkog sveučilišta, vaterpolo kluba Jug, dubrovačkim trombunjerima, klapama, a prije svega medijima i političkim strankama. O projektu Projekta golf resorta obuhvaća 310ha platoa Srđa i još 20ha turističke zone Bosanka, od čega je 250ha namijenjeno zatvorenom golf resortu s vilama i apartmanima za prodaju na tržištu nekretnina te malim hotelom. Svega 60ha je dostupno građanima i to su tzv. okrajci - rubovi platoa Srđa gdje se zbog vizualne izloženosti po odredbama GUP-a ionako ne smije graditi. Iako se u prostorno – planskoj dokumentaciji navodi da će u resortu i turističkoj zoni će biti svega 2800 kreveta ove odredbe su izigrane planiranjem izgradnje što veće kvadrature vila i apartmana neovisno o propisanom maksimalnom broju kreveta i bilo kakvoj turističkoj kategorizaciji. Tako se vile od 1200m2 vode kao smještajna jedinica za svega 4 kreveta.

About the Project The golf resort project encompasses the 43

KAMENZIND

310ha Srdj plateau, as well as an additional 20ha of the adjacent tourist zone Bosanka, of which 250ha is dedicated as a private, closed to the public, golf resort, replete with villas and apartments (available for sale on the real estate market), as well as a quaint hotel. Only 60ha is earmarked as public access space, located on the very edges of the plateau itself, land already determined as not commercially viable under the provisions of the General Urban Plan. Although the spatial planning documentation states that the resort and tourist zone should provide 2,800 beds, these provisions are circumvented by planning and designing ever larger villas and living spaces, regardless of the prescribed minimum number of beds necessary, or any other tourist categorization. In this manner, a 1200m2 villa is classified as only having accommodations for a total of four beds. In reality, what is at stake is the sale of roughly 300,000m2 of residential space. According to estimates of members of the Srdj is Ours initiative and the Dubrovnik Architects Association, that amount of residential space could accommodate around 20,000 inhabitants. Investment in the actual golf courses amounts to a paltry 5% of the total estimated value of 1.2 billion euros, the rest going to real-estate development.

Zapravo se radi o izgradnji i prodaji stambenog prostora od oko 300.000m2. Procjene članova Inicijative Srđ je naš i Društva arhitekata Dubrovnik pokazuju da na toliko kvadrata stambenog prostora u golfogradu na Srđu može živjeti 20.000 stanovnika . Investicija u same golf terene iznosi svega 5% od ukupne vrije dnosti investicije koja se procjejuje na 1.2 milijarde eura koja otpada uglavnom na nekretnine. Troškovi javni, profit privatni Posebno pitanje na koje tri javne rasprave o projektu nisu dale odgovor jest: „Tko će platiti infrastrukturno opremanje golf resorta?“ Gradonačelnik Vlahušić je uvjeravao Dubrovčane da će svi troškovi infrastrukture biti podmireni iz komunalne naknade koju će platiti investitor. Dosadašnja praksa pokazala je da to nije istina. Hrvatska elektroprivreda je iskopala tunel ispod Srđa i u njemu sagradila preskupu trafostanicu vrijednu 180 milijuna kn koja prvenstveno služi golferima. Vodovod Dubrovnik sam priprema skupe projekte zacjevljenja vodoopskrbnog tunela za grad koji prolazi ispod Srđa da se u njega ne bi slijevale onečišćene vode s golf terena. Pristupne ceste do CAMENZIND

Public Debt, Private Profit One burning question, which three separate public hearings never seemed to have managed to answer, is - who, exactly, will pay for the resort's infrastructure development? Dubrovnik's mayor Vlahusic assured his constituents that all developmental funding would be settled by way of public remittances and utility payments to be covered by the investors. However, experience has shown this not to be the case. Croa44

platoa Srđa također bi trebali platiti građani bilo kroz gradski proračun ili kroz budžet javnog poduzeća Hrvatske ceste. Tu je i pitanje obnove tvrđave Imperial koje podrazumijeva uklanja nje odašiljača radio i tv signala kao i uređaja za navođenje aviona na aerodrom Čilipi. Nejasno je tko bi to od državnih tvrtki trebao platiti, u ugovoru o koncesiji nad tvrđavom jasno stoji da to Razvoj golf ne plaća.

tia's National Electric Company (HEP) has to date dug a tunnel underneath the plateau housing a substation worth upwards of 180 million kn (approx. 24 million euros), which is almost exclusively utilized by golfers. Dubrovnik's Water Supply is planning projects to shore up supply tunnels running underneath the plateau lest they be contaminated by the golf course runoff above. Construction and expansion of access roads to the plateau are also earmarked to be paid from the city's budget, or the public company Croatia Roads' budget. There is also the issue of reconstructing the Fortress Imperial, which involves, among other things, the removal of radio and TV transmitters and antennas, as well as guidance systems used by Cilipi Airport. Although unclear which state-owned companies are to finance this project, one thing is absolutely clear - in the Fort's concession contract, Razvoj Golf, Ltd. is exempt from all payments.

REFERENDUM 2013. Usprkos činjenici da su imidž projekta brusile najveće PR agencije u Hrvatskoj koje su na dnevnoj bazi hranile javnost projekcijama s tisućama radnih mjesta koje samo čekaju zeleno svjetlo, građevinskoj mehanizaciji koja će imati posla bar 10 godina ili milijardama koje će se sliti u naše proračune, građani Dubrovnika se u to nisu dali lako uvjeriti. Kada su 2013. godine Urbanistički plan uređenja za Srđ i Studija utjecaja na okoliš bili pred usvajanjem, Dubrovčani su se organizirali, prikupili dovoljno potpisa za raspisivanje referenduma o projektu na Srđu i izazvali veliku glavobolju gradonačelniku Vlahušiću. On je 2009. godine u predizbornoj kampanji protiv tadašnje gradonačelnice Šuice obećao referendum o projektu golfa na Srđu da bi se nakon pobjede premetnuo u glavnog pristalicu i glasnogovornika projekta negirajući da je ikad išta obećao. U agitaciji za tvrtku Razvoj golf otišao je još i dalje; iznoseći sumnje u zakonitost referendumskog pitanja i neutemeljenim prijetnjama odštetom u ime investitora pokušao je opstruirati referendum.

Referendum 2013 Despite the fact that the project's public image has been meticulously polished by some of Croatia's largest PR agencies, bombarding the public on a daily basis with various forecasts of the thousands of potential jobs, a development project ensuring at least a decade's worth of employment opportunities, or the billions in revenue sure to flow into local coffers, the local population would not be so easily swayed. When the Urban Development Plan for Srdj and the Study of the Effects on Surrounding Areas was up for adoption in 2013, Dubrovnik's populace got organized, and accumulated enough signatures to call a referendum regarding the Srdj project, causing a big headache for Mayor Vlahusic. He himself, after all, promised, during his 2009 election campaign

Zanimljiv nedemokratski fenomen tijekom referenduma bio je slučaj kada su PR agencije Razvoj golfa i gradonačelnik Vlahušić simu ltano pozivali građane da ostanu doma i neizlaskom na referendum podrže projekt. Vrhunac medijske manipulacije dogodio se nakon proglašenja rezultata gdje su golferi ustvrdili da su svi koji su ostali doma pristalice projekta golf resorta. Referendum koji se održao 28. travnja 2013. godine nije uspio zaustavit projekt, da bi neki referendum zakonski uspio tj. bio obvezujući za gradsko vijeće potrebno je da 50% upisanih 45

KAMENZIND

birača izađe na glasanje. Izašlo je 32% glasača Dubrovnika od kojih je 84% bilo protiv projekta. Paradoks Zakona o referendumu je da se referendumska volja 10.000 građana nije uvažila, a na lokalnim izborima 2015. 9.400 glasova je bilo dovoljno da osigura kandidatu za gradonačelnika Vlahušiću pobjedu u drugom krugu i povjeri mu se upravljanje nad gradskim budžetom od 400 milijuna kn.

against former Mayor Suica, a referendum on the golf project, only to do a complete about face after his victory, becoming the project's main proponent and mouthpiece, and vehemently denying he had ever made promises for a referendum. He went even further in his claims of obstruction on behalf of Razvoj Golf, Ltd., expressing doubts about the very legality of the referendum, and making unfounded threats about awarding damages to investors. An interesting and particularly nondemocratic incident occurred during the course of the referendum, when both the PR agency representing Razvoj Golf, Ltd. and the mayor, simultaneously made an appeal that people not turn out to vote, and that they support the project by non-participation. The height of media based manipulation occurred right after announcing the result of the vote, where "golfers" were quoted as saying that everyone who stayed at home for the vote supported the development project. The vote which took place on April 28th, 2013, was not able to halt the development project. In order for a referendum to be successful, that is legally binding to the city council, a minimum of 50% of eligible voters must turn out. Only 32% of eligible voters turned out, and of those, 84% voted against the project. Paradoxically, laws regulating public ballot initiatives ensured that 10,000 citizens' votes were not enough to pass the legal threshold for adopting a measure, whereas during the local elections in 2015, only 9,400 votes were enough to guarantee Mayor VlahuSic's second round run-off victory, giving him control over the city's 400 million kn ( 53 million euro) budget... The political elite, dead-set in its support of private interests, has no intention of allowing the general public to

Politička elita u upregnuta da zastupa interes kapitala nema namjeru dopustiti građanima da ometaju njihove dogovore i sheme. To pokazuju primjeri najvažnijih tema za upravljanje javnim dobrima poput bušenja Jadrana radi eksploatacije nafte i plina, referenduma o Zakonu o radu, outsourcingu ili monetizaciji autocesta, politička elita jednostavno nije spremna građanima prepustiti odlučivanje.

CAMENZIND

disturb its arrangements. This is also exemplified by control over some of the most prominent public goods issues such as natural gas and oil drilling in the Adriatic, referendums on Labor Law, outsourcing or monetizing public roads, etc. - the political elite simply isn't ready to allow its citizens the right to choose. UNESCO's Concern In June 2014, the World Heritage Committee (WHC) in Doha, discussed the possible impacts Srdj development projects might have on the historical center of Dubrovnik, as well as the effective management of "cruiser" tourism with its steadily increasing number of visitors threatening the very values for which Dubrovnik was determined to be placed on the list of World Heritage Sites. A freeze of all development projects on Srdj was sought, as well as a comprehensive study of the effects development might have on World Heritage. The discussions in Doha starkly illustrated the Ministry of Culture, supportive of all of Mayor Vlahusic's ideas as well as the golf project itself, turning a deaf ear to all inquires coming from Paris, as well as failing to properly inform them with regards to development projects above Dubrovnik, as is its responsibility. Documents in support of the development project, as furnished by Razvoj Golf, Ltd. and the local administration, were not completed according to UNESCO's mandated standards and guidelines. Dubrovnik now awaits the arrival of UNESCO's commission of inquiry to establish what the Republic of Croatia has done in terms of obligations it adopted in Doha so as to avoid potentially being placed on the list of Endangered World Heritage Sites. As of June of last year, not a single thing has changed.

Zabrinutost UNESCO-a U lipnju 2014. je Svjetski odbor za baštinu (WHC) u Dohi raspravljao o utjecaju izgradnje na Srđu na povijesnu jezgru Dubrovnika kao i na stihijski pristup upravljanju cruiserskim turizmom čija brojnost posjetitelja ugrožava vrijednosti radi kojih je Dubrovnik stavljen na listu spomenika svjetske baštine. Zatraženo je zamrzavanje svih aktivnosti vezanih za projekt na Srđu i izrada Studije koja procjenjuje utjecaj projekta na svjetsku baštinu. Rasprava u Dohi pokazala je da se Ministarstvo kulture kao veliki navijač za sve Vlahušićeve ideje kao i za golf projekt , oglušivalo odgovoriti na upite WHC-a koji su stizali iz Pariza i izvijestiti ih o planiranju proje kta iznad Dubrovnika što je bila njihova obveza. Dokumentacija koju je Razvoj golf i grad Dubrovnik proizveo za projekt na Srđu nije rađena po UNESCO-vim standardima i smjernicama. Dubrovnik iščekuje dolazak istražnog povjere nstva UNESCO-a koje bi trebalo ustanoviti što je poduzeto po pitanju obveza koje je Republika Hrvatska preuzela u Dohi da bi izbjegla stavljnje Dubrovnika na listu ugroženih spomenika svje tske baštine, a da se stvari od lipnja prošle godine nisu pomakle s mjesta.

KAMENZIND

rašo

Zašto „Skopje 2014“ WHY SKOPJE 2014

uopšte nije projekat

ISN'T A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Leonora Grčeva

By Leonora Grceva

Projekat Skoplje 2014 u suštini je projekat samo zato što je tako bio spontano nazvan od strane medija, široke publike i konačno, od strane njegovih tvoraca, koji su ga inicijalno najavili jednostavno kao „vizuelizaciju“. Projekat je prvi put najavljen istog dana kada je i prezentovan, a prosleđen je uz sledeće saopštenje:

The development "project" Skopje 2014, was accidently so labeled by the media, the general public, and finally by its creators who originally unveiled it simply as "a Visualization". It was only announced on the same day as it was made public, and was accompanied by the following statement:

„Povod za izradu ove vizuelizacije je da se predstavi postavljanje skulptura i spomenika, tačnije podacima o lokacijama i njihovim gabaritima. Znači sa ovom vizuelizacijom prvenstveno želimo da javnost upoznamo sa lokacijama postavki, kao i njihovim veličinama u odnosu na okruženje. U realnosti izgled ovih skulptura i postamenata je mnogo lepši, s obzirom na to da je vizuelizacija pravljena na osnovu maketa i fotografija, a ne na osnovu izrađenih vajarskih modela. Da bi sve to postigli CAMENZIND

"The purpose of this presentation is to showcase a set of proposed sculptures and monuments and present certain aspects concerning their locations and dimensions. This Visualization, in essence, is a way for us to familiarize the public with the proposed settings and locations, as well as models' sizes in relation to their environment. These sculptures' appearance will, in reality of 48

bilo je potrebno da se sačini vizija i da se ra zviju projekti za više objekata koji će formirati tu Arhitektonsko Urbanističku celinu“.

course, be much more attractive, given that this Visualization was compiled only on the basis of moulds and photos, and not on the basis of scaled models. This is only a preliminary step prior to completing the many necessary designs which will highlight, in great detail, the look and feel of this architectural urban landscape."

Nepismeno saopštenje bilo je upotpunjeno nepismenim propagandnim pamfletom, u kome se neskriveno izražava prezir prema kulturnom nasleđu iz vremena jugoslovenskog socijalizma – istinski prezir koji će dovesti do urušenja velikog broja zgrada moderne koje nose istorijsko značenje za Makedoniju.

This verbal statement was followed by a poorly written brochure which made no attempt at concealing its disdain for the inherited Yugoslav-Socialist legacy - a disdain which would eventually become the motivating force behind the destruction of many of Macedonia's historically significant modern buildings.

Iako je vizuelizacija bila javno prezentovana februara 2010. godine, pravi, ali tihi počeci projekta Skopje 2014., antikvizacija i „barokizacija“ Skoplja pomereni su u davnu 2006. godinu, kada su u Opštini Centar donesene odluke za „započinjanje postupka za podizanje spomenika Aleksandru Makedonskom na Trgu Makedonija i za očuvanje autentičnosti objekata saglasno sa DUP Malog Ringa“. Ovim odlukama se prvi put u makedonskoj istoriji „zadužuju investitori da bez obzira na izgled i namenu objekata na njima grade fasadne ljuske u istom stilu kao na objektima koji su tu postojali pre zemljotresa 1963. godine“ (uz prikaz parcela bivših zgrada Narodne banke, Oficirskog doma i starog Narodnog teatra), a za objekte tzv. letnjikovca, hotela Meriot i Muzeja makedonske narodne borbe se nalaže da se „uklope u fasadni ambijent trga“.

Although this presentation was first made public in February 2010, the actual, covert, beginnings of Skopje 2014 - the antiquating and "Baroque-ing" of Skopje - began in 2006, when Skopje's Centar District brought forth plans to "begin works on raising a monument to Alexander the Great in Macedonia Square, as well as works preserving the authenticity of various edifices in accordance with the Mali Ring Detailed Urban Plan." It is with these decisions that, for the first time in Macedonia's history: "investors were allowed to modify existing structures in a style complimentary to that existing prior to the 1963 earthquake, without regards to those structures' look or purpose." (purpose."(highlighting lots of the former nation-al Bank, Officer's Barracks, and the old national Theater -A.N.), and the so called "Summer Resort", the Marriot Hotel, and Museum of Macedonia's National Struggle are to be "aesthetically integrated with the Square's surrounding facades."

Celokupnu viziju – za koju je pamflet, gledano iz današnje perspektive, bio mala najava – smo videli 2010. godine u prethodno spomenutoj, sada već legendarnoj „Vizuelizaciji centra Skoplja u 2014.“. Međutim, i pored toga što nam je danas svima dobro poznato šta je „Skoplje 2014“, četiri i po godine kasnije još uvek ne postoji zakonska dokumentacija ovog „projekta“. Vizuelizacija dela grada ne postoji kao posebna zakonska definicija u Zakonu pro stornog i urbanističkog planiranja, pa se tako projekat zakonski sprovodi samo preko izmena i dopuna detaljnih urbanističkih planova za Mal Ring, a zatim se provlači i proširuje kroz niz drugih planova (CRC Kale Blok 1, Sudska Palata 2, Golem Ring – Istok, Golem Ring – Zapad itd.). To znači da se projekat „Skoplje 2014“ svodi na niz neobrazloženih i opskurnih

The overarching vision - for which the brochure, looking it at it from today's perspective, was a minor announcement - was made apparent in 2010, in the now 49

KAMENZIND

izmena i dopuna urbanističkih planova centra lnog dela Skoplja iako je, pored važećeg Gene ralnog urbanističkog plana Skoplja 2002-2012, za sve promene van obima DUPa Malog Ringa, bilo obavezno sprovođenje anonimnog javnog međunarodnog konkursa.

legendary, aforementioned, "Visualization of Central Skopje, 2014". However, despite the fact that we are all familiar with Skopje 2014, four and a half years onwards, there is still no official documentation pertaining to this "project". Since there is no legal definition or standing for the "Visualization of part of the city" within legislation governing spatial and urban development, Skopje 2014 has become a conglomeration of ex post facto amendments to already existing urban renewal projects and spatial plans (CRC Kale Blok 1, Judicial Palace 2, Golem Ring East, Golem Ring West, etc.). In effect, this means that Skopje 2014 is basically a collection of ill-defined and obscure revisions of already existing development projects, and in direct contravention to a clause of Skopje's General Urban Plan 2002-2012 which states that any changes made outside the scope of DUP Mal Ring must first be vetted by way of anonymous, independent, and international public bids.

S obzirom na to da javni urbanistički konkurs nije bio sproveden ni za jednu izmenu i dopunu DUPa Malog Ringa, jasno je da su svi ti dokumenti kojim se „legalizuje“ Skoplje 2014 bili protivni zakonu. Konkursi ne samo što se nisu sproveli, već oficijalni autori svih izmena i dopuna od 2006. do danas – urbanisti proje ktantskog biroa IN-PUMA iz Skoplja, nisu se ni jednom pojavili u javnosti niti su ikad dali izja vu o svojoj ogromnoj ulozi u istorijskoj transformaciji centra Skoplja. Uz sve to sakrivanje, samo su potvrdili ono što smo svi znali – da su oni samo izvršitelji, a ne i autori ove vizije.

Projekat „Skoplje 2014“ je ništa drugo do divlja gradnja koja treba da bude temelj falsifikovanog novokomponovanog nacionalnog identiteta.

Considering there was not one single public bid issued for any amendment or change to the Mali Ring DUP, it is obvious that any attempts at "legalizing" Skopje 2014 were unlawful. On top of a complete lack of the public bidding process, all official personnel responsible for authoring changes and amendments to the DUP, have yet to make any official or public statement regarding their roles and responsibilities in this monumental and historical transformation of Skopje. But then again, this only confirms what we have known all along - they are only following orders, not calling the shots.

Pošto se „projekat“ Skoplje 2014 sprovodi kroz izmene detaljnih urbanističkih planova bez da uopšte bude spomenut, a kamoli obrazložen jedinstveni pisani dokument gde se delimično definiše opseg projekta bio je predstavljen ove godine kao „Izveštaj za Skoplje 2014“. Ovaj izveštaj je sastavljen na brzinu, u panici, dan posle trećeg izbornog kruga lokalnih izbora, kada je gubljenje mesta gradonačelnika Opštine Centar bilo već izvesno, a revizija projekta „Skoplje 2014“ najavljena. Razgledajući „Izveštaj“ posle duge liste zgrada, fasada, spomenika... dolazimo do liste projekata definisanih kao „Fontane i spomen obeležja koji nisu u projektu Skoplje 2014 i nisu prikazani u vizuelizaciji, a neko bi mogao da pokuša da ih poveže sa projektom“ gde, između ostalih, spadaju i Vojnik na Trgu, Karpošev ustanak, spomenici Đorđu Pulevskom, Dimitriju Čupovskom itd. CAMENZIND

Since Skopje 2014 is simply an amalgamation of various existing projects' amendments and changes, there is no central plan or document detailing the breadth and reach of the venture 50

as a whole. This year saw the issuance of the only text addressing this issue - "The Report for Skopje 2014". The report was hastily assembled, in a panic, coming only a day following the third round of local elections - when loosing the Centar Districts' support for the mayoral campaign was a foregone conclusion - and following an announcement to proposed revisions to the project. Reading the "report", following a long listing of buildings, facades, monuments, etc., we finally arrive at a section entitled "Fountains and Monuments not Mentioned in 'Skopje 2014' Nor Shown in the Visualization, Which One Could Attempt to Incorporate Into the Project", including, among others, The Warrior, Karposev's Uprising, the Djordje Pulevski and Dimitrije Cupovski monuments. rašo

Even though during the course of previous years, backers of the project have apparently not determined exactly what falls within the project's scope ( Skopje 2014 is...the reconstruction and building of the southern and northern bleachers, Kale Fortress, the public zoo...the erecting of hundreds upon hundreds of structures throughout Macedonia." ), we have finally, this year alone, been shown - by way of the one and only official document - that Skopje 2014's scope entails only those structures observable within the Visualization. The Report for Skopje 2014, other than being a poor attempt at transparency, was published in order to surreptitiously diminish the amount of stolen millions, with the caveat that everything absent from the Visualization is not part of the "project".

Iako promoteri projekta u toku prethodnih godina očigledno nisu rešili između sebe šta zapravo obuhvata projekat Skoplje 2014 („Skoplje 2014 je... izgradnja Severne tribine, Zapadne tribine, tvrđave Kale, rekonstrukcija Zološkog vrta... izgradnja stotine, stotine drugih objekata širom Makedonije“), ove godine iz jedinstvenog zvaničnog dokumenta projekta konačno smo naučili da je „Skoplje 2014“ sve ono što može da se vidi u vizuelizaciji. Izveštajem, u suštini, glumeći transparentnost pred širokom javnošću, bio je napravljen pokušaj da se drastično umanji suma pokradenih miliona, uz objašnjenje da sve ono što se ne vidi u vizuelizaciji – ne spada u „projekat“. Četiri i po godine i mnogo miliona evra ka snije, svi znamo da Skoplje 2014 nije projekat za očuvanje kulturno-istorijskog nasleđa, niti za poboljšanje kvaliteta života Skopljanaca. Projekat „Skoplje 2014“ je ništa drugo do divlja gradnja koja treba da bude temelj falsifikovanog novokomponovanog nacionalnog identiteta.

Four and a half years on, and millions of euros later, we have all figured out that Skopje 2014 is not a project intending to preserve cultural heritage, nor improve the quality of life of Skopje's residents. It is, in fact, nothing more 51

KAMENZIND

Ipak, htela bih da podsetim da „projekat“ na koji je potrošeno 500 miliona evra iz državnog budžeta, koji uzrokuje duboke unutrašnje podele i tenzije na etičkoj, verskoj i partijskoj liniji, i ujedno doprinosi obezvređivanju makedonskog zakonodavstva i urbanističko – arhitektonskog esnafa... je u suštini nikad najavljena, nikad diskutovana, nikad planirana ili revidirana, niti odobrena 3D vizuelizacija, nepoznatog autora.

CAMENZIND

than the developmental boondoggle of a newly-invented false national identity. In the end, this "project", which has already claimed 500 million euros of public funds, which has caused deep internal divisions along ethnic, religious and political lines, which has undermined Macedonia's legal and architectural/urban development frameworks... is in essence nothing more than a never-announced, never-discussed, neverplanned, never-approved, 3D visual aid of unknown authorship.

NOVI GRAD A NEW CITY THE ZA STAROG FOR OLD KING KRALJA Pol Kurion

by Paul Currion

JEDAN.

ONE.

U Belom gradu postojao je jedan Glavni Zidar čija je briljantnost bila samo blago umanjena njegovim lošim vidom. Jedno oko je plakalo, dok se drugo smejalo i bilo je veoma lako prepoznati njegove građevine zbog toga. Jednog dana, Kralj je pozvao Zidara u tvrđavu na brdu. Kraljeva čelična glava je svetlucala na suncu dok su stajali na zidinama tvrđave i on zamahnu rukom preko Belog Grada.

In the White City there was a Master Builder, whose brilliance was only slightly diminished by his poor eyesight. One eye wept, while the other smiled; and it was a simple thing to identify his buildings because of this. One day the King summoned the Builder to the fortress on the hill. The King's steel head glinted in the sunlight as they stood on the fortress wall, and he swept his hand out over the White City.

KAMENZIND

„Ja vidim stari grad“, reče Kralj. „Šta ti vidiš?“ Zidar je oklevao, iz očiglednih razloga, a zatim odgovori: „Vidim istoriju zapisanu u ulicama.“ „Želim da moj grad bude nov“, reče kralj: „jer me stari ne zadovoljava.“ „Ako napravimo novi grad, šta će se desiti sa starim?“ upita Zidar. „Da budem iskren“, reče kralj: „nije me baš mnogo briga. Želim nešto fensi da pokažem svojim bogatim prijateljima.“ „Ne želim da uništim grad čiju sam izgradnju pomogao“, reče Zidar.

“I see an old city.” asked the King, “What do you see?” The Builder hesitated, for obvious reasons, and then replied, “I see history written on the streets.” “I want my city to be new,” said the King, “for the old does not please me.” “If we make the city new, what will happen to the old?” asked the Builder. “To be honest,” said the King, “I don't much care. I want something fancy to show my rich friends.” “I don't want to destroy the city that I helped to build,” said the Builder. The King laughed and gave the Builder a bag of gold. “Make my city anew, and you'll never want for anything again.” They took a selfie of themselves standing on the fortress wall, and then the Builder went down to the river.

Kralj se nasmeja i dade Zidaru vreću zlata. „Napravi moj grad iznova i nikada više nećeš ni u čemu oskudevati.“ Njih dvojica snimiše jedan selfi dok su stajali na zidinama tvrđave, a zatim Zidar ode niz reku. DVA. Zidar je sedeo na obali reke sa svojih troje šegrta. „Moja starost mi nije donela mudrost koju sam želeo. Šta da radim?“

TWO. The Builder sat at the river's edge with his three apprentices. “My old age has not brought me the wisdom I desired. What should I do?”

Prvi šegrt odgovori: „Moraš da poslušaš Kralja.“ Zidarevo plakajuće oko zaplaka jer nije mogao da podnese da živi kao rob i on otpusti šegrta.

The first apprentice replied, “You must obey the King.” The Builder's weeping eye wept, because he could not bear to live as a slave, and he dismissed the apprentice.

Drugi šegrt odgovori: „Moraš da napustiš grad.“ Zidarevo plakajuće oko zaplaka jer nije mogao da podnese da živi kao kukavica i on otpusti šegrta. Treći šegrt odgovori: „Trebalo bi da pitaš narod.“ Zidarevo smejuće oko se nasmeja i on beše zadovoljan ovim Šegrtom.

The second apprentice replied, “You must leave the city.” The Builder's weeping eye wept, because he could not bear to live as a coward, and he dismissed the apprentice.

„Ne mogu jer će Kralj saznati za to“, reče Zidar: „da li bi ti da odeš i pitaš narod?“

The third apprentice replied, “You should ask the people.” The Builder's smiling eye smiled, and he was pleased with this Apprentice.

„Naravno“, reče Šegrt: „čim popravim ovu ispumpanu gumu na svom biciklu sa jednom brzinom.“

“I cannot, or the King will know of it,” said the Builder, “Will you go and ask the people?” CAMENZIND

TRI.

“Sure,” said the Apprentice, “as soon as I change this flat tyre on my fixedgear bike.”

Šegrt postavi svoj problem na društvenoj mreži i dobi hiljadu i jedan odgovor. Suzila ih je na troje ljudi za koje se činilo da predstavljaju autentičnost i raznovrsnost grada. Prva osoba kojoj Šegrt ispriča Kraljev plan beše Pralja.

THREE The Apprentice posted her problem on social media, and got a thousand and one responses. She narrowed them down to three people who seemed to represent the authenticity and diversity of the old city.

„Kako ja to da zaustavim?“ upita Pralja, a Šegrt reče: „Ispričaj mi stare priče da bih mogla da razumem svog neprijatelja i da shvatim kako da ga pobedim.“

The first person the Apprentice told about the King's plan was a Washerwoman. “How can I stop this?” said the Washerwoman, and the Apprentice said, “Tell me the old stories, so that I can understand my enemy and how to defeat him.” The second person the Apprentice told about the King's plan was a Hunter. “How can I stop this?” said the Hunter, and the Apprentice said, “Teach me how to trap a man, so that I can put an end to his madness.”

Druga osoba kojoj Šegrt ispriča Kraljev plan beše Lovac. „Kako ja to da zaustavim?“ upita Lovac, a Šegrt reče: „Nauči me kako da uhvatim čoveka u zamku da bih mogla da prekinem ovo ludilo.“ Treća osoba kojoj Šegrt isrpiča Kraljev plan beše Drvodelja. „Kako ja to da zaustavim?“ upita Drvodelja, a Šegrt reče: „Pokaži mi kako da napravim pozornicu, toliko stvarnu da bi mogla da prevari svakoga.“ Nedelju dana kasnije, Šegrt se vrati Zidaru i reče mu: „Stekla sam nove prijatelje i naučila sam nove trikove. Znam kako možemo da sprečimo Kralja da uništi stari grad i da ga zameni novim.“

The third person the Apprentice told about the King's plan was a Carpenter. “How can I stop this?” said the Carpenter, and the Apprentice said, “Show me how to build a stage so real that it could deceive anybody.”

„Bila si najslabija od mojih troje šegrta, ali pokazala si mi da je tvoje srce veće od tvoje veštine. Ispričaj mi svoj plan.“ Šegrt ispriča Zidaru svoj plan. Zidar ga je pažljivo saslušao, a zatim reče: „Ti si j*beno luda.“

One week later the Apprentice returned to the Builder, and told him, “I've made some new friends, and I've learnt some new tricks. I know how we can stop the King from destroying the old city and replacing it with the new.” “You were the least of my three apprentices, but you have shown me that your heart is greater than your craft. Tell me your plan.” The Apprentice told the Builder her plan. The Builder listened to her plan carefully, and then said, “You're f*cking crazy.”

ČETIRI. Kralj se sledećeg dana probudio i video novi grad na mestu starog. On strča sa tvrđave i srete Zidara kod gradske kapije. „Predivno je“, reče Kralj pružajući Zidaru još jednu vreću zlata.

KAMENZIND

FOUR. The King woke the next day, and found a new city in place of the old. He ran down from the fortress and met the Builder at the city gate. “It's wonderful,” said the King, handing the Builder another bag of gold. “Unfortunately the project went over budget,” said the Builder, and the King handed him one more bag of gold. The King rattled the city gate. “And the key to the city will cost you extra.” “But I have given you all the gold that I have, unless I cut state pensions,” said the King. “I don't believe you,” said the Builder, “for this very morning you posted that your rich friends were backing this whole venture.” The King cursed his own boasting, and held out a single bag of gold. “This is my last bag of gold, and in return you will give me the key.”

„Nažalost, projekat je probio budžet“, reče Zidar, a Kralj mu dade još jednu vreću zlata. Kralj prodrma gradsku kapiju. „I ključ ćete dodatno koštati.“ „Ali dao sam ti svo zlato koje imam, jedino da smanjim državne penzije“, reče Kralj. „Ne verujem ti“, reče Zidar: „jer si upravo jutros postovao da tvoji bogati prijatelji podržavaju ceo ovaj poduhvat.“

“This makes no sense,” said the Builder, “If you give me all your gold, then you will have none. How will you provide basic services for the people who live in the new city, such as schools?” “If I build a new city, then I will receive more gold through the eldritch magic of foreign direct investment.” “You're a madman!” cried the Builder, “You will never have your new city!” “Then I will destroy you!” shouted the King, drawing his sword and striking his own steel head in anger. Yet at the very moment that the King killed the Builder, the Apprentice stepped out from the city gate – which was a stage built by the Carpenter, in a twist that the King really should have seen coming.

Kralj opsova sopstveno hvalisanje i pruži još jednu vreću zlata. „Ovo mi je poslednja vreća zlata, a zauzvrat ćeš da mi daš ključ.“ „Ali to nema nikakvog smisla“, reče Zidar: „ako mi daš svo svoje zlato, onda ti ništa neće ostati. Kako ćeš obezbediti osnovne usluge ljudima koji će živeti u tvom novom gradu, kao na primer škole?“ „Ako sagradim novi grad, dobiću još zlata tajnovitom magijom direktnih stranih ulaga nja.“ „Ti si ludak!“ vrisnu Zidar: „nikada nećeš dobiti svoj novi grad!“ „Onda ću te uništiti!“ povika Kralj dok je CAMENZIND

izvlačio svoj mač i udarao se u svoju čeličnu glavu iz besa. Ipak, baš u trenutku kada je Kralj ubio Zidara, Šegrt se pojavi iza gradske kapije – koja je ustvari bila scena koju je sagradio Drvodelja u obrtu koji je Kralj zaista trebalo da predvidi.

FIVE. “The people of the city have spoken,” said the Apprentice, “and they do not want your new city.” The King laughed at this. “The people do not know what is best for the city! The people do not even know what they want!” The Carpenter, Hunter and Washerwoman joined the Apprentice. “We want affordable housing,” said the Carpenter. “We want better transport infrastructure,” said the Hunter. “We want accessible public spaces that allow for the casual interaction between strangers that is the foundation of any community,” said the Washerwoman. “You've been reading too much Jane Jacobs,” said the King, “and the new city will provide all of those things!” “Really?” said the Apprentice, “Until a few moments ago, you thought this elaborate stage that we built was the new city. You're not so interested in the people who live in the city, as you are interested in how the city looks.” “This dialogue is a bit on-the-nose,” said the King, “You're fired! Plus I'm going to kill you, as I did your master.” “Not if I kill you first,” said the Apprentice, as trubaci played dramatic music in the background.

PET. „Narod je rekao svoje“, reče Šegrt: „i oni ne žele tvoj novi grad.“ Kralj se na to nasmeja: „Narod ne zna šta je najbolje za grad! Narod čak ni ne zna šta želi!“ Drvodelja, Lovac i Pralja se pridružiše Šegrtu. „Želimo pristupačno stanovanje“, reče Drvode lja. „Želimo bolju infrastrukturu prevoza,“ reče Lovac. „Želimo dostupne javne prostore koji omogućavaju opuštenu interakciju među ljudima koji se ne poznaju što je osnova svake zajednice,“ reče Pralja. „Previše ste čitali Džejn Džejkobs,“ reče Kralj: „a novi grad će omogućiti sve te stvari!“ „Zaista?“, upita Šegrt: „Do pre nekoliko trenutaka si mislio da je ova detaljna pozornica koju smo izgradili ustvari novi grad. Tebe ne inte resuju toliko ljudi koji žive u gradu, koliko te interesuje kako grad izgleda.“ „Ovaj dijalog je malo previše očigledan,“ reče Kralj: „Otpuštena si! Plus ću da te ubijem kao što sam ubio tvog učitelja.“ „Ne ako ja tebe prvo ubijem,“ reče Šegrt dok su trubači svirali dramatičnu muziku u pozadini.

SIX.

ŠEST.

The King laughed, and spread his wings. “You cannot kill me, because my heart is in a bird that is in a fox that is in the thickest forest on a high mountain.” “I guessed as much, and I sent my friends to find your heart. The Carpenter cut down the trees of the forest; the Hunter caught and killed the fox; and the Washerwoman sung to the bird so sweetly that it opened its mouth to reply and coughed up your heart.” The Ap-

Kralj se nasmeja i raširi svoja krila: „Ne možeš da me ubiješ jer je moje srce u ptici koja je u lisici koja je u najgušćoj šumi na visokoj pla nini.“ „Pretpostavila sam i poslala sam svoje prijatelje da nađu tvoje srce. Drvodelja je posekao drveće u šumi; Lovac je uhvatio i ubio lisicu; a Pralja je pevala ptici toliko nežno da je ova otvorila usta kako bi joj odgovorila i iskašljala je tvoje srce.“ Šegrt ispruži Kraljevo srce dok se muzika trubača pela u krešendo toliko intenzivan, da ga je bilo nemoguće podneti. 57

KAMENZIND

prentice held up the King's heart as the music of the trubaci rose to a crescendo that was so intense, it was impossible to bear. “You did all this in one week?” shouted the King over the music, “You have dynamic management skills and an impressive work ethic. I could use a woman like you in the construction of my new city.” “Have you not listened to a word that I have said?” cried the Apprentice. “That's kind of the point of this story, isn't it?” said the King, “I don't listen to a word that anybody says!” “And that will be your downfall,” said the Apprentice, crushing the King's heart in her hand as the trubaci abruptly ceased to play.

„Sve ovo si uradila u jednoj nedelji?“ povika Kralj preko muzike: „Poseduješ dinamične upravljačke veštine i impresivnu poslovnu etiku. Koristila bi mi žena poput tebe pri izgradnji mog novog grada.“ „Jesi ti slušao išta od ovog što sam upravo rekla?“ zavapi Šegrt. „Pa to je nekako poenta ove priče, zar ne?“ reče Kralj: „Ja ne slušam ni reč od onoga što ljudi pričaju.“ „I zbog toga ćeš propasti,“ reče Šegrt drobeći Kraljevo srce u šaci, a trubači naglo prestaše da sviraju.

SEVEN. The people celebrated, because the King was dead. Yet the Apprentice wept, because her master the Builder was dead. The Hunter came to the Apprentice, and said “I have heard that if you put the King's heart into the mouth of your dead master, he will return to life.” “I think that's a different story,” said the Apprentice, “It sounds gross and I'd rather not risk it. Let us simply honour his memory by building the city as he would have wanted.” “We need a new King,” said the Carpenter, “How would you feel about that?” “I don't think I'm right for the job,” said the Apprentice. “Yeah, and I'm just a carpenter,” said the Carpenter. They both looked at the Hunter, who said, “Don't look at me. I'm going back to the forest.” And then they all looked at the Washerwoman, who had not been listening carefully. Imagine her surprise when

SEDAM. Narod je slavio Kraljevu smrt. Međutim, Šegrt je plakala jer je njen učitelj Zidar bio mrtav. Lovac priđe Šegrtu i reče: „Čuo sam da ako staviš Kraljevo srce srce u usta svom mrtvom učitelju, da će se on vratiti u život.“ „Mislim da je to neka druga priča,“ reče Šegrt: „zvuči odvratno, a i radije ne bih da rizikujem. Hajde da mu jednostavno odamo počast tako što ćemo izgraditi grad onako kako je on hteo.“ „Treba nam novi Kralj,“ reče Drvodelja: „Šta ti misliš o tome?“ „Mislim da ja nisam prava osoba za taj posao“, reče Šegrt. „Da, a ja sam samo drvodelja“, reče Drvodelja. Oboje pogledaše u Lovca koji reče: „Ne gledajte u mene. Ja se vraćam u šumu.“ CAMENZIND

I onda svi pogledaše u Pralju koja nije pažljivo slušala. Zamislite njeno iznenađenje kada su – u predvidivom podrivanju žanrovskih očekivanja – oni izglasali da bi umesto novog Kralja trebalo da bude nova Kraljica! Šegrt postade novi Glavni Zidar, ali nikada nije zaboravila svog sirotog mrtvog učitelja, čak ni u najsrećnijim trenucima. Zbog toga, tokom ostatka njenog života, njen vid nikada nije bio isti kao pre. Jedno oko je plakalo, dok se drugo smejalo i bilo je veoma lako prepoznati njene građevine zbog toga.

– predictably subverting genre expectations – they voted that, instead of a new King, there should be a new Queen! The Apprentice became the new Master Builder, but she never forgot her poor dead master, even in her happiest moments. That was why, for the rest of her life, her eyesight was never the same. One eye wept, while the other smiled; and it was a simple thing to identify her buildings because of this.

KAMENZIND

This issue was made possible with the help of:

Potraži, pogledaj i pridruži se:

NAŠ BEOGRAD NA VODI

Ovaj film je poziv svim zainteresovanima za stvaranje zajedničke platforme za konstruktivno, stručno i kreativno promišljanje naj boljeg pravca razvoja naše metropole. Poziv važi za sve: donosioce i izvršioce odluka, građane, studente, stručnjake i naravno, investitore! KAMENZIND & friends

ISSN 1663 - 3350

9 771663 335006