In Belgrade, urban planning must protect the public interest, which has not been the case since the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) came to power, it was concluded at a panel organised by the Vreme weekly.
At the discussion titled “What is being built and what is being demolished in Belgrade”, participants spoke about how Belgrade has changed over the past ten years and what the current relationship looks like between construction, public interest and the profession, as well as what these changes mean for the city’s identity and quality of life.
In its article “Ten years since the demolition in Savamala: Is Belgrade a city of private investors or citizens?”, Vreme reported that participants discussed what these changes mean for the city’s identity and the quality of life within it.
Architect Branislav Mitrović said that the construction of Belgrade Waterfront resulted in the loss of high-quality urban space.
“There should have been a public competition where the professional community could, through broad consensus, determine how that area should be developed,” said Mitrović.
He pointed out that the profession had succeeded in persuading decision-makers to abandon plans to demolish the Belgrade Fair and the former Army General Staff building.
The president of the Belgrade board of the Party of Freedom and Justice (SSP), Mila Popović, said that decisions on urban development in the city are made through ties between SNS and investors close to them.
“It is as if this is a city that caters only to investors, not people. In the past, kindergartens were being built. We haven’t had any new schools opened,” she said, adding that there isn’t a single high school on the left bank of the Danube.
“For the 13 years that SNS has been in power, construction only suits investors’, not citizens’ interests,” Popović said.
The Chairman of the Belgrade board of the Movement of Free Citizens (PSG), Stefan Simić, said that he speaks with people about real problems such as sewage systems, wastewater treatment plants and enrolment of children in kindergartens.
According to him, a major problem is corruption and the decline in citizens’ trust in institutions. He added that he has nothing against private initiative, but that it must not be allowed to take precedence over the public interest. “We should nurture private initiative. After the change of government, we will have to work transparently in order to restore people’s trust in institutions,” said Simić.
Activist of the association Belgrade Remains, Marko Jakšić, pointed out that urban planning must protect the public interest. “The title of this discussion is what we build and what we demolish. In short: construction follows the interests of private investors, while the public interest is being demolished,” he said.
Planning documents, he added, are adopted by political bodies without consultation with professionals. “The urban planning professionals have been reduced to mere executors. We have good architects whom no one consults,” he said.
During the discussion on the construction of the Natural History Museum and an aquarium at Ušće, Mitrović noted that his company had won first prize in the competition for the conceptual design of these facilities.
“The Natural History Museum and the aquarium are grounded in science and culture; they are not about private interest, but public-purpose facilities and the public good,” he said and noted:“This is not some dolphinarium or attraction, but part of the city’s scientific infrastructure.”
Popović asked him: “Do we really need an aquarium in Belgrade when parts of the city do not even have sewage systems?”
(Beta, Naslovi.net, 23.03.2026)