Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

You are here: Home » Conferences » Myth of the City 1995 » Days in Chania » Tuesday in Chania: planners and poets » Second session - part a) nine questions put to planners » Answers to the nine questions by Anna Arvanitaki

Answers to the nine questions by Anna Arvanitaki

 

1) level and type of city planning

The (approval of) General (Structural) Urban plan for the Greek cities is still competence of the Minister of Public Works and Environment.

The respective local authority (Municipality) can only decide to start the process of elaboration of the Urban Plan.

Their influence upon the final version of the Plan is mainly exerted through lobbying and not through legal channels (which are limited to the simple expression of opinion by them to the Minister). Anyhow, the G.U.P. is a new planning instrument, introduced since 1983.

The detailed land-use plan of the city has been attributed to the Competences of Municipalities only after 1983 (L 1337), but again, only to certain Municipalities.

So, a first question for Greek municipalities is:

1.a Since when, if at all, they involve in the elaborating and approving the Land-Use Plan? What has been the experience from the involvement of the Local Authority in Planning vis-à-vis the outcome of totally centralized process of land-use planning?

As for the General Urban Plan, a number of questions can be addressed, like:

1.b When the G.U.P. of the city has been approved?

What are the main good and bad elements of that Plan according to the Municipality?

How has public opinion been shaped during and after the finalization of the G.U.P.?

How have public participation processes taken place during elaboration?

Which have been the main conflicts expressed during the elaboration of the Plan?

2) Evaluation of planning

Critical approach to the content and results of planning up to now.

Generally speaking, spatial planning has been seen as ineffective (the situation in Greece is described – i.e. by Pavlos Delladetsima – as a “non planning” situation).

In what particular aspects planning has been ineffective in the specific city?

3) Technical options available to the City

Usually, spatial planning has to do with land-use regulation and not with technical solutions for city’s problems (infrastructure, etc.). So, this question should not be addressed to the Town planning departments / experts but to the Prefecture / Municipality, Local Development Agencies and the like which might have taken notice of similar initiatives in the context of European programs involving local agents and hence not known to central authorities.

4) What constraints (positive or negative) are to be faced when taking or applying decisions about the cities

The interpretation of Sue Tilden of this question is very good!

Indeed, the question cannot be answered in a general manner by the Local Authorities or, at least, their answer cannot be fully reliable.

When an organization / administration is taking / applying a decision (at least in the Greek context), it is rarely aware of what factors played the mayor role etc.

So, this is a matter of empirical research to establish, by examining actual decision processes, what/which have been the “decision-drivers” for particular problems in particular cities.

5) Problems of the city which have remained unresolved

Agree with Sue Tilden (see her answers to the same nine questions)

I consider that out of the total questions 6 – 9 and particularly 6 and 7 should be given priority during the Chania Conference.

For the analysis of these questions I agree with Sue Tilden.

They don’t require a special adjustment to the Greek reality, as is the case with questions referring to planning and policy.

I propose the following (quite convention) categorization of urban issues against which the 9 questions or the focus of the Conference should be checked:

 

 

 

 

 

^ Top

« Nine questions to be handled by the analytical group by Hatto Fischer | Hatto's nine questions - a response by Pavlos Delladetsima »