Regulating Market-Led Urban Expansion in the New Master Plans of Sofia and Belgrade
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
SPATIUM UDC 711.24(497.11) No. 39, June 2018, pp. 38-46 711.24(497.2) 338.23:330.35 Review paper DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/SPAT1839038S REGULATING MARKET-LED URBAN EXPANSION IN THE NEW MASTER PLANS OF SOFIA AND BELGRADE Aleksandar D. Slaev1, Varna Free University, Faculty of Architecture, Varna, Bulgaria Slavka Zeković, Institute of Architecture and Urban & Spatial Planning of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia Atanas Kovachev, Varna Free University, Faculty of Architecture, Varna, Bulgaria; Tamara Maričić, Institute of Architecture and Urban & Spatial Planning of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia University of Forestry, Sofia, Bulgaria Tanja Bajić, Institute of Architecture and Urban & Spatial Planning of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia Like most European cities, cities in South-east Europe (SEE) have been growing throughout the 20th century, however, since the end of the 1980s, the mechanisms of urban growth and expansion have changed radically: from development fully determined by central planning to market-led urban development. This paper examines how planning in large SEE cities is coping with the challenge to balance the action of the market and achieve planning goals relating to the form of urban growth and expansion. As case studies we analyse the master plans of Sofia and Belgrade and their implementation. We have two research questions: first, whether planning in the two cities has considered the role of the market when defining its objectives, measures and solutions regarding the forms of urban growth and the development of in suburban areas, and, second, whether planning has been able to influence the market or cooperate with it in order to achieve its objectives in suburban development. Key words: Post-socialist development, suburbanisation, urban growth, market-led urban development, market- planning relationship. INTRODUCTION planning can steer urban development towards sustainable et al., 2016). For Urban growth, expansion and suburbanisation have been this purpose, planning should study the market processes, powerful development trends in Europe throughout the forms of growth (EEA, 2006; Nedović-Budić 20th century, particularly since WWII. Such trends have cooperate with the market, and then regulate and mitigate also been observed in South-east Europe (SEE), however, it.analyse Unfortunately, their drivers as authorsand find have mechanisms pointed outand (Bertaud, tools to because most SEE countries were communist until the 2003; Holcombe, 2013; Anderson et al., 2012; Slaev, 2016a, end of the 1980s, the mechanisms of urban growth and 2017, among others), planners often ignore the role of the expansion have changed substantially in the transition market in urban development. In this respect, planners in et al et al., 2015; post-communist SEE countries face even bigger problems Kovachev et al period (Nedović-Budić ., 2012, Zeković because of the lack of experience with planning in a market environment. ., 2016). As researchers have foundet al(Nedović-., 2012; DaskalovaBudić and Tsenkova,and Slaev, 2006; 2015), Hirt, the 2007; new Zekovićtrends areand in Maričić, many The objective of this study is to examine how planning aspects2008; Maričić similar andto suburbanisationPetrić, 2008; Vujošević in western countries. in SEE cities is coping with the challenge to balance the Western type suburbanisation is usually associated with action of the market and achieve planning goals in a market urban sprawl, which is, generally, considered a negative environment. As case studies we analyse the master plans trend. Researchers regard sprawl as a form of expansion generated by the market, but also determined by planning these plans have been adopted with a particular focus on factors (e.g., Gong and Wheeler, 2002). While the market is, of Sofia and Belgrade and their implementation, since in principle, the leading force in suburbanisation, successful studies for this research, because as typical SEE capital cities theysuburban have development. experienced Sofiahigh andrates Belgrade of growth are suitable throughout case 1 Chaika Resort, 9007 Varna, Bulgaria the 20th century (Kovachev et al., 2017) and accelerated [email protected] market-led development in the period of transition. In 38 spatium Slaev A.D. et al. : Regulating market-led urban expansion in the new master plans of Sofia and Belgrade The second theoretical issue, which is important to this and that of Belgrade was 1,659,440 (SORS, 2014). Both study, is whether planning is able to balance and “co- cities2011, preparedthe population new master of Sofia plans was at1,291,591 the beginning (NSI, 2012)of the operate” with the market. Holcombe (2013) maintains that 2000s: the plan of Belgrade was adopted in 2003 (changed to properly cooperate with the market, local governments should not interfere much with the affairs of market 2007 (changed in 2009). In 2000, the urbanised area (UA) participants, but should focus on planning their own ofin the2006, compact 2014) city and of amended Belgrade inwas 2016 18,880.56 and that ha andof Sofia that inof activities – primarily, the development of the infrastructure the suburban settlements in the city region was 18,198.91 (see also Slaev and Kovachev, 2014; Slaev, 2016b). Bertaud 16,408.06 ha and the city’s suburban UA was 7,806.31 ha; in comparison,et al., 2014; the Slaev UA of et the al .,compact 2018). cityThe oftwo Sofia capital was of(2003) primary defined infrastructure, three main components2) zoning of andplanning planning that cities had already faced substantial problems relating to the define its relationship with the market: 1) the development processes(Krunić of market-led suburbanisation, and the form of this paper, when discussing issues of the performance and urban expansion was a topical issue that the master plans regulations, and 3) local fiscal tools, e.g., taxes and fees. In had to deal with. of zoning regulations and the transport network patterns. efficiency of planning, we focus on the elaboration and use Therefore, our research questions are: economic discourse and political pressure, the existing 1. rightsUnder havethe influence been replaced of different by the contextual rules of factors,new urban like globalorder. The urban order has a legal basis that arises from dynamism andHas solutionsplanning inregarding Sofia and the Belgrade forms of considered urban growth the roleand and contextual demands, and urban society phenomena. theof the development market when of its defining suburban its areas? objectives, measures Banzhaf et al. (2017) state that land use is always under 2. pressure due to the impact of different factors, and that urban cooperate with it in order to achieve its objectives in planning has limited impact on land consumption. Urban suburbanHas planning development? been able to influence the market or development is under the strong impact of international through city branding. The urban land market is imperfect andTo answer how planning the first aims question to achieve we examine them and,what also objectives in this companies, global financing and international institutions regard,are identified whether in theplanning master analyses plans regarding the role suburban of the market areas Knaap, 1998), while land use is determined by the market and the actions of the market forces. To answer the second mechanismand subject ofto supplygovernment and demandinterventions (Harvey (Begović, and Jowsey, 1995; research question we evaluate whether planning has been 2004). way to achieving its objectives. We do that by examining the REGULATING MARKET-LED SUBURBANISATION courseable to ofinfluence the implementation the market orof thecooperate plans using with statisticalit on the PROCESSES IN THE MASTER PLAN OF SOFIA information and data about processes in suburban areas since the adoption of the two master plans. Preparation of the new General Urban Development Plan THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY For two major reasons, the initial phases of the plan were developed(GUDP) of Sofiaalong started with preliminary in 1998 and socio-economic was completed instudies. 2003. One reason was the slowdown in socio-economic planning issue is related to the factors determining the performance of planningTwo theoretical – its ability issues to areeffectively important direct to urbanthis study. development The first need to develop a new master plan, since the previous plan to the desired form of urban growth. Planning performance hadin Sofia been in adopted the 1990s, 37 andyears the previously. other reason Thus, was the the Regional urgent is assessed through performance-based and conformance- based criteria (Faludi, 1989). The former criterion evaluates a plan’s outcomes and impacts, whereas the latter measures technicalDevelopment assistance Plan of of the World Sofia Bank Region “Cities 2000-2006 Alliance” andexperts the the conformance between the plan’s goals and the actual Development Strategy of Sofia, were prepared with the outputs. Relevant to our study is the latter criterion. Slaev the Forecasts for Socio-economic and Spatial Development in theparallel period with 1998-2001. the first stage of the new master plan, i.e., depends on the phase of the planning cycle. According and Nedović-Budić (2017) argue that a plan’s performance to Taylor (1998), a cycle of planning (developing and Accounting for the action of the market Studying the market processes and market forces was an systemimplementing of objectives, a plan) comprisessub-objectives five phases:and priorities, 1) situation 4) important goal