Language

DISCOVER
SHARE YOUR EXPERIECE
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Translation Disclaimer

Stop the construction of a building in the courtyard! Ljubović - Stop gradnji zgrade u dvorištu! Ljubović

Initiative Category: SubmittedInitiative Tags: (Local) Development and Planning Consultation CSO Dialogue Environment General Affairs Information Public Ethics
Current status


Submitted

Discover more

After a contribution is submitted to BePART Forum, the initiative is marked as “Submitted”; as other partners involved in the initiative submit information from their side, the initiative is marked as “Under review” and goes through the validation process; twice a year, initiatives are validated by the BePART Working Group at the Council of Europe. Successful initiatives are marked as “Validated”. Do you want to learn more – click here

 

Contributor(s)

First contributor: KANA / Who if not an architect?

 

Summary
This initiative was started by a group of residents in the Podgorica neighborhood of Ljubović. They opposed the construction of a new building in their courtyard (the small space between four newly constructed buildings) because it meant taking away valuable open space that was sorely lacking in the neighborhood. Our organization, KANA/Who if not an architect, supported this initiative and contributed to it with expert analysis and public comments on the low quality of the spatial plan for this neighborhood. Additionally, we put a spotlight on the investors’ and builders’ widespread disregard for the limitations the plan is attempting to impose, as well as on the regulators’ lack of power to control the construction process and enforce the plan. 
Administrative level

Local (Podgorica, City Capital of Montenegro)

 

Year of implementation

2019 – 2020

 

Policy area(s)
  • (Local) Development and Planning 
  • Environment 
  • Public Ethics 
Details
The aim of the initiative was to improve the living environment in one of the new neighborhoods of Podgorica by halting the construction allowed by the existing spatial plan and to draw the public attention to the problem of ethical decision-making in matters related to spatial planning and development.

KANA

Civil society organisation

Contact info

KANA /Who if not an architect?

Tipology of involvement in the initiative
  • Organising 
  • Participating with a direct involvement 

Stop the construction of a building in the courtyard! Ljubović

Public Authority

Deputy Mayor od Podgorica

Contact info

 

Tipology of involvement in the initiative
  • Participating with a direct involvement 

Level of Participation

  • Information 
  • Dialogue 

Discover more

By level of participation we refer to the type of involvement in the decision-making process. The levels are identified by the intensity of participation: going from “information” to “consultation” to ” dialogue” to “partnership”. Do you want to learn more – click here

 

Developed practice(s)
The local government did not want to hear what we (citizens’ initiative and an expert NGO) had to say, it did not willingly and wholeheartedly enter the dialogue. However, as our arguments were strong and media coverage of this case was wide, the local government had to start listening eventually. In the end, it accepted the demands brought forward by the initiative. However, it is important to say that it would be much more difficult to succeed if we didn’t have the information which the authorities are obliged by law to make public, such as spatial plans and projects approved for construction.  

 

Step(s) of the political decision-making process at which the practice was implemented
  • Monitoring of policy implementation
  • Re-formulation of policy

Discover more

There are six different steps of the political decision-making process: agenda setting, drafting of policy, decision-making, implementation of policy, monitoring and reformulation of policy. Each step offer opportunities for CSOs and public authorities to interact. Do you want to learn more – click here

 

How the initiative was implemented
Situation
The citizens started organizing because they wanted to stop the construction of a building that would lower the quality of life in their neighborhood: it would take up the much-needed open space between the existing buildings, lower the insolation, increase the traffic congestion, and worsen the problem of insufficient parking space. They submitted a petition to the local government in December 2019 but got no response. The construction works (preparatory phase, digging the ground to lay the foundation, etc.) started in May 2020. The civic initiative of neighbors against the construction became more vocal and earned some media coverage. At the same time, the civic initiative contacted our organization, KANA/Who if Not an Architect, asking for help in assessing the merits of the existing spatial plan for this area, appealing to public authorities, and stopping this construction.
Activities performed

When preparatory work on the disputed location began in May 2020, citizens took decisive action: a number of media reports were published, signatures for a new petition were collected, and our association conducted and published a survey in which more than 250 citizens participated. Through their answers to survey questions, citizens expressed great dissatisfaction with the quality of public space in this part of the city. Our organization published these results and promoted these findings via social media. Apart from this, we also performed an analysis of the project for the new building. We found that the planned project does actually violate the provisions of the Detailed urban plan because it does not meet the requirements regarding the maximum number of residential units which, according to the plan, should be 46 on this urban plot. The project was planned for 16 apartments on 4 floors and 12 apartments in the attic – so, a total of 76, which is 30 more than prescribed by the Detailed urban plan. Not long after we discovered and published this information, the Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism announced that, due to this violation, the Ministry will initiate the process of revoking the license of the project auditor. In addition to this, at the beginning of June 2020, our organization published a short analysis of the planned and implemented state of the Detailed urban plan for this area (the title of the plan is “Zabjelo-Ljubović”). This analysis showed the sheer scale of violations against this Detailed urban plan, and we sent it to all the competent institutions at the local and the state level. In summary, we found issues in policy implementation and submitted information about it, thereby engaging with the work that should have been done by the project auditor and urbanism inspection.

Tools and mechanisms applied
As described above, the tools and mechanisms included petitions, protests, a media campaign, a survey, an analysis of an architectural design project, and a policy analysis.
Goals of the civil participation initiative
At community level
Stopping the construction of a building that would lower the quality of life in their neighborhood and turning the plot into a common green space instead.
From Civil society organisation’s perspective
Helping to improve the living environment in one of the new neighborhoods of Podgorica by examining the circumstances of a potentially harmful new construction; pointing out the weaknesses of the design and implementation of policies related to spatial planning and construction; encouraging public participation in decision-making processes at the local level.
From Public Authority’s Perspective
To minimize criticism aimed at the local government and sanction the violations against planning regulations, which we uncovered in our analysis of this case.. 
Results expected prior to the implementation
Prior to the implementation, civic initiative and our organization expected to prove that this construction project is harmful to the entire neighborhood and should be stopped. We did not necessarily expect that our requests and demands will be met by the public authorities (because they don’t often respond to civic initiatives favorably), but we worked to make our case anyway
Immediate results achieved after implementation
After repeated requests from the citizens for the project to be halted and after our extensive research and communication of our findings, the local government decided to negotiate with the investor. The agreement was reached in August 2020, and the investor agreed to swap the original location of the building for a plot in a different neighborhood, leaving the original location empty and in the ownership of the local government. Moreover, in October 2020, the local government of Podgorica announced that the entire Detailed urban plan “Zabjelo-Ljubović” will be put out of force (i.e. it will not be implemented in the future, due to the poor quality of the planning policy the plan embodied and to the numerous instances in which the plan has already been breached). This meant the hyperproduction of the newly built environment in this neighborhood would be stopped until the new detailed urban plan is adopted. We consider both of these outputs to be directly related to the civic initiative and the support our organization provided, in the form of research, policy analysis, and public campaign through which our findings were promoted amongst the general public.
Long-term impact
After the construction was stopped, the local government accepted citizens’ requests to use the empty lot for creating a neighborhood park. Although neighbors were not invited to participate in the process of designing this park (it was designed by the public authorities instead), they are the ones taking care of it now. Three years later, the park is blooming, contributing to a better living environment in this neighborhood and connecting the neighbors looking after its trees and flowers. The long-term impact, hence, is an improvement in the neighborhood’s quality of life. Apart from this, another long-term impact is the lack of spatial planning documentation for this neighborhood: almost three years later, the new plan has still not been developed. This underlines the deeper issues related to the creation and implementation of spatial planning policy in Podgorica.   

 

Practice lessons learnt (obstacles and solutions)
Agency (i.e., political conditions/power structures) Obstacles
The lack of instruments for effective civic participation in the local governance processes.
Solutions
Persistent public action and pressure aimed at the local government and the competent Ministry, in order to get the authorities to respond to the initiative’s demands.
Legislative Obstacles
The difficulty of changing and updating spatial plans, due to the division of competencies between different levels of governance.
Solutions
The solution turned out to be pressuring the local government into putting the detailed spatial plan out of force, thereby stopping the new construction in the area until the new plan is adopted. This might take a while and can cause delays in developing not only private construction but also public services and spaces in this part of the city.
Administrative Obstacles
The difficulty of reaching public servants whom the initiative could engage in the conversation with; the long time it took for the authorities to respond to the initiative’s arguments and requests.
Solutions
Being persistent and engaging with the media, so that the general public is informed about the initiative and about the problems it’s trying to address.
Socio-cultural Obstacles /
Solutions /
Economic Obstacles
The work we did here, and the work of the civic initiative as a whole, was unpaid. We didn’t engage in fundraising as we didn’t have the time nor the capacity to engage in both this analytical and advocacy work and in the fundraising.
Solutions
The solution for our organization was to do the work without financing – for free, as we do most of our consulting and activist work anyway. We have other jobs to support ourselves. However, it would be great to have some public funding available for the development and support of participatory programs and practices in local governance.
Human capital Obstacles
We had all the human resources we needed inside this initiative; however, the public authorities lacked both the personnel (for example, inspectors in urban planning) and skills needed to engage in working with the local community.
Solutions
Offering expert support to the public authorities (e.g. the analysis of the spatial plans, the survey on public attitudes towards the quality of the built environment, etc.).
Other Obstacles /
Solutions /

 

Self-assessment

The self-assessment presents the opinion of the contributor about on what extent the following principles for Civil Participation have been reflected in the implementation of the initiative/practice/case-study, ranging from 1 (min) to 4 (max) (N/A: not applicable, do not know)

Openness 4
 Explanation
Trust 4
  Explanation
Independence 4
  Explanation
Participation 4
  Explanation  
Transparency 4
  Explanation
Accessibility 4
  Explanation
Non-discrimination 4
  Explanation
Inclusiveness 4
  Explanation  
Accountability 4
   Explanation
Screenshot-2023-06-27-alle-15.53.06.pngScreenshot 2023 06 27 alle 15.53.06 300x166

Thank you for wanting to share your experience on the BePART platform!

Learn more about the submission process, or just fill the form below.

Consultation, CSO, Dialogue, Environment, General Affairs, Information, (Local) Development and Planning and Public Ethics