Policy paper summary - Citizens in City Development: State, Experience and Recommendations

During 2014th Mikro Art has conducted the research of national and local policies, legal framework which defines the process of urban and spatial planning and experience of citizens in relation to the urban planning. The research has been conducted in several cities of Serbia: Subotica, Belgrade, Kragujevac and Novi Sad. Policy paper Citizens in City Development: State, Experience and Recommendations was created on the basis of the research findings and it confirmed an initial hypothesis of the research that citizens can be an efficient corrective of urban planning and that they can help in defining and protecting a public interest. With this summary of the policy paper we want to offer a few systematic recommendations for including public into spatial and urban development.

Importance of citizens’ participation in decision making and the need for creating a framework which enables it are recognized in strategic documents of Republic of Serbia. Among the others, Spatial Plan of Republic of Serbia from 2010 th

to 2020th states: „Elementary postulate of this strategy is that the benefits should be on the side of the citizens as a conscious and active participants in the development of the area in which they live, which implies both the territory of the local community and the state where the local community is located. Therefore, it is essential that citizens have the opportunity, the right and responsibility to make decisions on spatial development of their territory (settlement and associated area), but also to participate in decision-making on the spatial development of their region and their state. “

However, the legislation that regulates the spatial and urban planning, as well as associated practice, does not reflect the strategic commitment to transparent and participatory decision-making of (sustainable) spatial and urban development. Mechanisms provided by existing legislation show that the role and effective impact of citizens are negligible and serve more to fulfill the form than genuinely involve the people in the process which directly shapes their environment. The problems of citizen participation in urban planning can be detected in all structural requirements for recognizing interests of all stakeholders and actively engaging citizens:

1. Citizens are not duly and timely informed: In the current procedure, the public is informed with the process of making urban plan only twice (through an official gazette and an ad in local newspaper): when a decision for a development of the plan is made (which suggests very little about what is a planned direction of the development) and when the plan comes to public review (meaning that the plan has been mostly completed and is subject only to minor changes). To have information on public review online or in the area covered by the new plan is a rare practice. In such circumstances, the people who are most directly affected by the approved changes learn about them only when implementation of the plan and construction begins. An additional problem is that public review and public hearings take place only on weekdays during working hours and in space which can be located far from the subject area or a workplace of the person who would come to the hearing.

2. C itizens do not understand the planned development and its consequences: Urban plans are composed of drawings and texts that are strictly professional so general population cannot easily grasp the planned changes. For this reason, the Rulebook on the Content, Manner and Procedure for the Preparation of Planning Documents states that the local government authority in charge of spatial and urban planning provides the necessary information and technical assistance to all interested individuals and legal entities in regards to presented documentation and writing of complaints on proposed solutions. However, the effectiveness of these measures in practice depends solely on the willingness of public officials to guide interested parties in the details of the plan and to explain them what developments of the subject area may occur.

3. Citizens are consulted only pro forma in the final stage of making planning documentation: The experience of successful initiatives shows that the impact citizens can have on the final version of an urban plan is not guaranteed through mechanisms provided by the law (written complaints on a draft of the plan). Instead, pressure on the institutions through mobilization, media and direct contacts with stakeholders is necessary. Public hearings, as a form of communication with citizens within the plan-making procedure, allows only the elaboration of already filed complaints and responses and thus does not open a space for a true public discussion. In addition, the conclusions of Commission for plans are not available to the public so citizens are not aware of the final version of the plan which goes to an assembly for adoption, although this is also the instance in which they could react through the members of the municipal assembly.

Citizens’ involvement in defining the public interest is also important because, without public control, planning professionals are under pressure to make decisions that are not in accordance with the professional standards and are against the interests of the community. Greater involvement of citizens supports experts in making professional decisions, which enables the necessary balance of interests in the process of urbanization.

Recommendations for improving the involvement of citizens in the urban planning decision-making

A general recommendation to public authorities in the Republic of Serbia is to harmonize the Law on Planning and Construction and the by-law documents (above all, the Rulebook on the Content, Manner and Procedure for the Preparation of Planning Documents) with the Spatial Plan, the National Strategy for Sustainable Development and other strategic documents and thus effectively enable public participation in spatial and urban development.

1. The process of informing citizens about urban development should be improved: Duly and timely information allows citizens not only to be familiar with the process, but also to collect additional information that will help them to understand it, articulate their interests and constructively engage in planning.

1.1. Providing information in the subject area: It is necessary to physically present the information in the area covered by a plan in the making, as soon as the process begins, similar to information provided on construction sites. Information on the development of a plan and the possibilities of participation can be submitted directly by mail to citizens living in the subject area. Public review should also be organized outside of standard working hours, allowing access to more citizens. Additionally, public hearing may be organized physically closer to the location to which the plan refers, while public presentations of the draft of a plan should be mandatory. This is an opportunity for citizens to get familiarized with the content and effects of planned development. Also, discussion of proposed solutions allows a better understanding of the plan and articulating opinions of a wider circle of people.

1.2. Providing information via the Internet: Urban plans at all stages of their creation (concept and draft) and with complete documentation (textual and graphical parts) should be made available online, to give citizens an easier insight not only into the final solution but also in the course of development and thus provide better understanding of the planned changes and its effects. The reports of commissions for plans should also be available to guarantee the public control of their work and insight into the decisions relevant to the planning process.

2. Citizens should be consulted in all stages of urban development decision-making: Only citizens’ involvement in all phases of making urban plans enables a real participation and inclusion of the interests of all stakeholders. Public discussion which allows a dialogue between investors, workers, representatives of local government and citizens should be introduced to guarantee a better articulation of public interest. Also, it is necessary to introduce an active participation of citizens through the Internet, at least by enabling electronic submission of complaints to the draft planning documents.