Eco-urbanism department
This web site was opened in the second decade of the 21st century in Serbia in order to promote 3D vision and role of ECO-URBAN AND SPATIAL PLANNING, a scientific discipline created after the first and the second industrial revolution. Ever since its origin date, it has been changing slowly throughout the new socio-cultural architectural urban history of the 20th century.
In the 19th century unlimited production became its own purpose, but in the end of the 20th and in early 21st century the boundless power of technological era started to dominate, which led to increasing social instability and chaotic situation and provoked social and economic differences. It initiated various problems in planning and construction of settlements and cities, leading to the appearance of various 2D theories that used to idealize the images of cities based on the hierarchy of needs in the second half of the 20th century. Afterwards, they caused the hierarchy of physical structures that made up the city agglomeration. Such idealized 2D images remained until today. Certainly, the priority was put on social needs - providing a necessary 'shelter', which added new priorities in terms of high and low built structures in relation to the importance of potential presence of landscape –urban structures in environmental living residence and habitats.
This attitude and beliefs were dominant in the period after the World War II, because many cities were torn down. In that way, the social issues were the most important problems that were supposed to be solved in the second part of the 20th century. As for the period of establishing priorities, the hierarchy of needs was not based on the principles of eco-reciprocity between the high, low and landscape built physical 3D structures. Moreover, the implementation of the integrative urban and spatial planning in the 1970s was a pure unsustainable combination of 2D and 3D urban doctrines.
Such concept and context of urban planning was promoted in many European countries. It was implemented in Serbia as well. Still, the efficiency of local government in the field of spatial planning, building and arranging settlements and urban environmental residence in Serbia and elsewhere, does not depend only on the legal regulations in that field, but on many other qualitative solutions in laws and by-laws directly connected to their functioning and activities. It is specially related to planning and controlling urban and regional space and settlement development in the conditions of evident climate changes on local and global level.
It should be pointed out that socio-economic and technical-technological changes are very influential, especially unsustainable combination of 2D and 3D urban doctrines and terminology, which refelect harmfully through 2D education on spatial and urban concept of eco-urban or sustainable planning and development of urban-environmental residence or settlement. Thus, local government, designers and urbanists have great responsibility in the sphere of strategy planning and space management based on sustainable eco-reciprocity between the social needs, high and low built structures as well as on rational usage of natural resources and on environmental protection.
However, due to the lack of available space, piled negative effects of development, irrational exploitation of land resources, it is necessary to stop applying 2D doctrines in order to eliminate their specific and unsustainable pseudo-urban activities in urban-environmental habitat and environmental residence.
The first obvious signs of encouragement were made by Boery studio from Milan – the projects of this studio are made for two skyscrapers in Milan that have been in the process of construction since 2011, under the name of 'vertical forest' ("bosco verticale"). Each skyscraper includes about 10.000 м2 for vertical gardens. These are inspirational and specific skyscrapers meant for both people and garden sceneries, which means that each residential unit has its own garden.
Of course, the media publish some unfounded articles about 2D greening, although it is about a serious and complex integrative project, containing understandable and clear associations linked to the gardens of Babylon (hanging gardens), and they certainly were not planned, designed or built as 2D green space. In this case, we might discuss the issue of the elaborate project of Le Corbusier's vertical forms that originally freed part of the land for parks and roof gardens. In the beginning of the 2-th century Le Corbusier obviously did not have any solution to vertical gardens; therefore, in the second decade of the 21st century the solution was reached by Stephen Boeri's Design Studio in Milan.
Finally, sustainability of this project is based on the first serious scientific – expert effort, focusing on carrying out a system of skyscrapers construction based on vertical gardens in order to establish a significant as well as a spiritually, psychologically, socially, functionally and aesthetically refined garden-ambient atmosphere meant for citizens and other users of urban-environmental residence. When it comes to high built structures, as a qualitative complement, the vertical gardens of the French botanist Carl Blanc from Paris may be usefully applied, although they have not been promoted enough in the countries all over the world.
Still, such good intentions at various levels of self-government are endagered by 2D urban terminology, speculative '2D-patents' that have been included unsustainably in urban-planning documents, and by powerful investment urbanism and mighty corporatocracy with the profiteering interests that ignore and disturb the purpose of urban continuity, sustainable development, eco-reciprocity, subsistence, development and spatial management. Their greed and thirst for profit maximization, regardless the consequences, inspire and subtly support, impose, promote and implement mimicry speculative-urbanistic '2D-patents' that contribute to spatial pseudo-urbanization, provoking a cataclysmic 'turning point' and a no-return journey. It is done very skillfully and almost under the guise since it is about the uninformed and uneducated citizens and their unawareness or avoidance to read the legends within urban-planning documents.
It means that modern architecture has not made better cities yet, and urban planning is suddenly in the labyrinth of speculative and unsustainable mixture of 2D and 3D regulation, ignoring and neglecting creative activities, while spatial planning is invisible in the process of theoretical research. Thus, the problem analysis has been stopped as well.
Also, the above-mentioned facts reveal that planners and urbanists have been casting about their profession and politics, as if they had not been aware of increasing problems in relation to unsustainable mixture of 2D and 3D regulations, planning, design and spatial management. Or maybe, they find it easier to ignore the fact in the design process, which suits speculative interests of corrupted strongmen!?
This context shows that transition is not the only cause and problem. Since there the number of endangered and polluted cities is growing as well as harmful effects of negative ecology heritage and the greenhouse, it is obvious that the roots and cause of the problems the countries in transition have been coping with, at both local and globa level, come from the speculative and unsustainable 2D terminology and regulation and consequential pseudo-urbanization in the field of planning and urban and regional spatial management.
Therefore, harmful effects of 2D patents and consequential pseudo-urban activity are not grounded in themselves - this is about significantly deeper causes and unsustainable reasons coming from academic education of the young in Serbia and its environment, knowing that the second half of the 20th century included the accredited educational programs in this field.
So, only in the case of planning, design, construction and landscape-urban structures management, their third dimension is totally ignored and avoided, which leads to unsustainable quasi-scientific patent where 3D equals 2D and vice versa. Also, we are still dealing with the process of planning quasi-scientific and unsustainable 2D so-called green space as an anti-system instead of planning, design and construction of the exact and only possible and sustainable 3D system of landscape-urban structures, objects and artifacts based on the principles of sustainable eco-reciprocity.
These facts have revealed enough for making certain decisions – the existing problems of negative ecology heritage cannot be solved by the same way of thinking and doing as at the moment of their creation. Therefore, a new and redesigned academic education is inevitable. It is neccesary to have a scientific-expert principles and rules, Christian culture and wisdom in relation to the significance of God-given environmental residence, which is to lead to the 'turning point' or transformation, that is - the presented and actually revised activity as the opportunity for a newly sustainable life experiment in a much better, more professional, city oriented, essential and human environemntal residence.
Urban and regional planning and landscape architecture has been for quite a lot of time a in the labyrinth of speculative and unsustainable combination of 2D and 3D doctrines, terminology, education, regulations and spatial management. According to the opinion of Dobrivoje Toskovic (2006) we are in transition between 2D and 3D planning and spatial management.
This is the problem situation because of the consequential mimicry and speculative '2D-patents'. This means that the quasy-patent 2D equals 3D and vice versa initiates speculations and unsustainable pseudo-urbanizations and spatial management. It is a speculative method of unsustainable and quasi-scientific equalization of 3D landscape architecture structures to 2D green space, undeveloped, free space, surfaces and urban discontinuity pillars.
Furthermore, when we take a look at urban-planning document, it is clear that instead of 3D structures there are green surfaces unsustainably balanced as the surface area. Also, instead of a 3D system of landscape urban structures, a 2D virtual anti-system of the so-called green space is being promoted. As Maldini says, this is directed toward a planned construction of chaos (horror) and if it is continued, the cities will keep being pseudo-urbanized for a long time.
Therefore, in the 21st century there is no longer a sustainable objective in terms of creating 2D virtual forms of urban structures within a so-called virtual, dispersed or greenish-stained alleged greenery, which would supposedly be more resistant to climate changes and keep making a virtual impression and image of planning, construction and strengthening an unsustainable 2D image of the climate changes resistance.
The earlier implementation of '2D-theories' and practice of '2D-patents' enabled a 2D playing with 2D so-called green space; even today, in both urban and spatial planning they are classified and designed in accordance with the virtual or imaginary 2D picture or vision of spatial management. This situation is the consequence of the untenable Law on planning and construction that does not comprise 3D structures of landscape architecture and it equalizes 2D horticulture planting plan and the so-called greening with the project 3D park structure. Thus, 3D landscape architecture structures do not need any preliminary or master plan.
It is especially visible when there is eco-reciprocity between high, low and landscape built structures and when it is about planning, design and building the landscape architectural urbanistic structures and artifacts. Therefore, virtual 2D theories of urban and spatial planning are not sustainable because they are not urban-formative, eco-formative and environmentally formative, which means that 2D spatial planning does not have any more and cannot be implemented in both theory and practice of sustainable integrative and eco-urbanistic 3D planning.
Whoever works in this way in the field of planning and design, he actually creates an urban-planning documentation based on quasi-expert grounds. It is clear today that such speculative and unsustainable 2D law regulation promoted pseudo-urbanization, which is contrary to the principles of sustainable eco-reciprocity between high, low and landscape built structures. In this way, the mentioned 2D planners and urbanists and such 2D urban – planning documentation do not create healthy but ill cities where there is too much of negative ecological heritage, which means that such institutions and such 2D documents are not necessary for the users of a space.
Those are logical consequential effects because urban-planning speculative 2D patents about the so-called green space enable pseudo-urbanization, just like the case of the Fifth Little Park (Peti parkic) at Zvezdara. In this case, the citizens were self-taught and they independently became even better urbanists than the urbanists who took part in the process of creating the leveled plan for the Fifth Little Park, as well as the main architect of Belgrade, who said that it was not a park but a 2D green space.
And a varying and metalinguistic understanding of this 2D 'patent' clearly reveals that a 2D so-called green space, in accordance with urban-planning documents, has been redefined in a speculative way and transformed into a construction land meant for the pseudo-urbanization requirements of a newly built or inherited pseudo-urban substance.
The 21st century constructors should focus on creating 3D paradigms, structures and artifacts, which would contribute to establishing the only possible, energetic, aesthetical, functional and ecologically sustainable 3D landscape architectural urban system of familiar 3D structures of the landscape architecture, as well as sustainable, environmental and management activities and effects, which will gradually lead to decreasing negative ecological heritage and its inevitable elimination. Finally, this eco-sustainable 3D vision of the coming activities in the process of eco-urbanistic and spatial planning, will certainly contribute to sustainable spatial management, local community existence as well as city and biodiversity survival.
Hegemony korporatocracy, pseudodemocracy and subsequent contamination and degradation of space
A special problem and obligation is seen in regional planning, which is strongly influenced by corporatocracy and capital hegemony. It is about a huge complex of 600 ha, subordinate to the construction of unsustainable suburban pseudo-creation with a militant structure of the Bondsteel military base near Urosevac. This indicates huge construction ventures that deregulated and degraded landscape-scenery and suburban structures meant for imperial, corporative and militant institutions and activities. It is performed and carried out under the guise of ostensibly humanitarian goals and support to the development of 'civil' society, with the help of militant base installations as well as odly enthroned local corrupted elite that is a typical example of unsustainable pseudo-democracy and pseudo-culture and also an instructed advocate of imperial and corporative profiteering interests regardless the potential environmental and local communities consequences, and a creator and suitable, involved and protected implementator of pseudo-procedures, pseudo-urbanization and other pseudo-activities and pseudo-forms.
One is clearly aware of the 'new military humanism' that prefers supranational hegemony, which is in contrast to the basic moral, human, democratic, legalistic and ecological principles of sustainable management and development of local landscape-scenery values and communities.
Instead of respecting historical and familiar and competent state-building community, everything is subordinated to its deregulation and elimination. In such complex situations, domestic corrupted elite becomes an ally of foreign corporative and geostrategic interests. Therefore, in case of location selection meant for building a militant structure and corporative interests protection, a corrupted hegemony reduces or completely eliminates the respect and analyses of strategic interests of state-building communities. Actually, it is about the real ignoring of the Spatial Pland of that community, especially related spatial and urban documents, legislative and law regulations dealing with planning and construction, environmental protection, strategic analysis or study on environmental impacts as well as the assessment of ecological risks and risk management.
All the typical features of supranational corporatocracy hegemony are visible here as well as a very precise imperial threat to a local, regional and wider-eatablished peace and democracy in the target environmental area. A special problem if the military weapons storage, radioactive and other explosives as well as construction and visually unattractive physical structures contaminating immense areas. Besides, these militant formations with long-lasting, physical structures, are shaped and limited by combined and visually depressing fences, such as ugly and depressing prison pillars and other similar obstacles, watchtowers, bunkers, armed guard and so on. It resembles the concentration camps in the World War II.
These physical structures reflect an unsustainable aesthetics, military design and anxiety psychosis, strengthened by depressing military determined morphology, memory, geography, identity and structure of a newly created military humanism. Certainly, such form of humanism is not oriented toward sending optimistic messages for local communities welfare. Nor it is focused on creating better and more humane cities because it reflects pseudo-urban forms that represent the foundation for pseudo-democratic imposition of imperial corporative interests and activities.
In this context, a corporative hegemony is recognizible and it shapes identity, capacities and urban structures forms. That is why it is often given the role of political and other manipulative goals al both local and geo-strategic interests on global level. These direct influences of corporative hegemony through strength and logic of corporative capital reflect both urbanism and architecture, revealing and directing its pseudo-democratic, pseudo-urban and one-sided profiteering concept and context. Its wealthy purchasers and interest-selected designers have gathered together in order to form a group oriented toward a specific articulation and affirmation, especially in terms of corporative-business architecture in the headquarters of corporation, especially a corporative-militant pseudo-architecture at a remote site outside the headquartes of its client. Both are generated by the profit logic and peculiarities imposed by their investors.
Therefore, the mentioned architecture and pseudo-architecture is manifested in various forms having imperialistic-corporative subtext, through a wide range of technological activities and possibilities. It is evident in the earlier examples of the city construction in the French colonies during 1900-1930. As for the context of geo-strategic interests of the French colonial politics, it is visible that its intervention destroys local economy, increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. While trying to stop the development of local culture, the French technocrats led to the French service, market and technology dependency, as Nann Elin says.
The example of Bondsteel as a military formation under the guise of the so-called humanity reveals that such military units appeared ad hoc (15.06.1999 - 15.10.1999) as a hegemonious reaction to before planned and chosen and seized part of the state area that is beyond the reach of outer imperial purchasers, protectors and executors. As this is about pseudo-formations representing residential capacities for larger military formations and weapons, for chemical and other ammunition and explosive devices, it is clear that this is immense and deadly threat and ecological challenge for the environmental area.
Certainly, when it comes to sustainable aspirations while overcoming the existing problems, it is obvious that these emphasized and apparent problematic issues of pseudo-formations being harmful surrogate of industrial, urban and imperial post-industrial society must make the constructors avoid taking part in legalization of pseudo-democratic, pseudo-urban and anti-ecologcial formations. Their obligation is to do their best and strive for establishing the modern 3D urban terminology and legal regulation in order to find the proper way to stop such pseudo-marginalization of human rights and freedom as well as consequential pseudo-urban harmful activities. They are supposed to reveal the cause of this crime and resist the increasing growth of such threat, just as Constantin Doxiadis stated in his works and at Delos symposium in the 1960s.
