community shared similar thoughts, but focused on the consequences that
will occur during and after the realization of the project in the domains of the
quality of living, gentrification, urban appearance of the capital, participation,
continuity of urban development, etc. In general, both indicated that the
project seriously is endangering the public interest.
Considering the competitive identity communication model and Anholt’s
3-segment tool the project has its primary communication only in the domains
of organisation and behaviour as a part of substance that could be analysed.
The behaviour can be characterised as reflected positively in the administration
apparatus when meeting the demands of the investors. The organisation
can be seen on the other side as negative concerning the treatment of the
public interest and participation. The landscape strategy is missing because
the development is still in a project phase and can be characterised only as
secondary communication of the city’s future identity. Except the size of the
project and its strategic position and considering that the project author is still
unknown as well as the average quality of the architectural and urban design,
the project can not be characterized as a symbolic action. In accordance with
this, the plan can be currently marked as spin, because it is based on a strategic
and planning document, but is still missing main parts of the substance as well
as a symbolic action.
ConclusionThe analysis of the five on-going projects shows, that just the Ada Bridge
project can be characterized as a successful achievement. The Beko Master
Plan and Beton Hall can be classified as propaganda, the Belgrade Waterfront
Milena Vukmirović
Fig. 18, 19
A future vision of the Belgrade
Waterfront.
(Belgrade Waterfront)