TALLINN
UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Department
of International Relations
CLOSING KALARAND FOR PUBLIC.Essay
in Expository Writing
Supervisor:
Tallinn
2015
Kalarand
is a
part of
Kalamaja district in Tallinn, it is a
unique beach in
the city centre, only few hundred meters from the Old Town.
While being close to the city centre, it
still has a remote area atmosphere
to it where people
could enjoy the seaside and
views in a car-free
environment. While not officially a public beach, the locals have
still put in great effort into
keeping it a
clean and enjoyable
public area (Klementi, 2011). In August 2015 historic Kalarand beach
was fenced by Pro
Kapital and public was denied
access despite
laws against
such conduct. The
action of Pro
Kapital , one of the
leading real
estate developers in Estonia, is reminiscent of Soviet times
when citizens where denied access to seaside. In
order to solve the
situation, both lawfully and justly, the city
council should go to
court against Pro Kapiatal.
Tallinn
is
known for its picturesque seaside silhouette, surrounded by
multitude of
beaches , but Kalarand was the only beach
within the city
and closest
place to the seafront next to the Old Town. Over the
years Kalamaja district has become a popular cultural district of
Tallinn where people enjoy their free time. Kalarand has played a big
role in it. Both Kalarand and
Kalasadam (Fish market) have been a
car-free city
space for over twenty years, where people can go to
spend their free time and enjoy the views of the sea. Kalarand has
become a popular bathing spot
among local people. It provides an
oasis far away from the hum of cars and from the
tourist crowd,
granted the seldom adventurous tourist lost enough to
find it have
learned to appreciate its charm. It is a meeting place where you can
interact with people, go for a
swim in
sandy shore and have picnics.
Open -air art installations have been put up for the people to enjoy
and the traditional
summer solstice celebrations have taken place
there . Despite the lack of maintenance of the area Kalarand is
already one of the
best places to spend time by the sea, by
emphasizing its values it can be made
even more pleasant.
Over
the years a sense of community has been created. People of Kalamaja
have organised summer beach
parties and sauna parties there, with
temporary sauna tents. In 2011, when Tallinn was a European Capital
of Culture, the authors of
Urban Intervention
built changing cabins,
benches and terraces to Kalarand. The beach area was cleared, the
scrub trimmed and dustbins were provided for the summer season. The
seabed of the bathing site was cleared of rubbish and pieces of
concrete, water samples were taken and
analysis results were posted
on a notice board. (Lift11, 2011) All of this was made by initiative
of locals. While the site was cleaner and more in order, Kalarand
still remained as a non-public bathing beach and it was not
included in the list of the Tallinn official beaches.
Therefore there was no
lifeguard present and
swimming was strictly at own responsibility.
It
is
clear that locals of Kalamaja value Kalarand and Kalasadam as a
place where to spend their free time, to relax and recharge by the
seaside. People of Kalamaja are not against renewing Kalarand and
having buildings built there. The
idea is not unwelcome but losing
the flat and sandy coastline is definitely a no-go. People of
Kalamaja wish that Kalarand would stay as a public space, at
least 50meters from the coastline, where everyone has access to any time
convenient, and that
current swimming and picnic opportunities would
stay the same. People believe that Kalarand should not belong to any
residential plot composition, and demand that Kalarand would be
accessible even
during the
developing period.
The
developer of Kalasadam, Pro Kapital, is a leading Estonian real
estate
development company who operates in the capitals of Estonia,
Latvia and Lithuania. Since its establishment in 1994, it has
completed 20 development projects and focuses mainly on the
development of large-scale residential and commercial real estate
projects in prime locations of the capitals of the
Baltic States. In
the second half of the 1990s, Pro Kapital aquired several unique
properties in its portfolio,
including two attractive
coastal sites in Tallinn and Riga. One of
these properties was Kalarand in Tallinn.
Pro Kapital bought property next to the Kalarand seaside in 2001 and
announced that they will make Kalarand into a residential and
business district. From thereon there has been a heated debate
between the locals and Pro Kapital over the developing
plans .
The
detailed plan of Kalaranna neighbourhood expands on more
than 7
hectares and it has been processed for over a decade. Pro Kapital
believes that the area of Kalaranna should be one of Tallinn’s
gateways and landmarks. Currently Pro Kapital sees it as an epoch of
desolate wasteland which is located in the heart of Tallinn. Pro
Kapital believes that the future of Kalaranna should be as a
promenade open to the sea, a harmonious
whole of the greenery and
buildings shaping the urban space. People of Kalamaja overall
agree with the views of Pro Kapital but they are not fond of the idea of
losing natural sandy coastal line, which by the detailed plan will be
replaced by a promenade.
This
year in August tensions between the Kalamaja community and the
developer had hit a high when Pro Kapital decided to
build a
fence around its property. Not only did they enclose their own property,
but also fenced the entire seaside preventing public access. Pro
Kapital said that they are
allowed to build a fence around the port
while it is developed. (Kuusk, 2015). They believe that they have no
obligation to
provide public access to the beach or the sea, as there
is a harbour adjacent to the beach. Not surprisingly, the locals and
the residents of Tallinn did not approve this kind of action. Locals
disagree with Pro Kapital idea of a port as Kalasadam harbour is
separate from Kalaranna beach.
Knowing
that the City Council would not have
given the
permission to build a
fence around the property, Pro Kapital dug their fence only about
30cm into the
ground . This not qualifying the structure as a fence,
they did not need any permission from the city to put it up. A
really questionable
move , as putting up over 100m fence should still count
as a
construction work . Within two
days , the new fence around the
Kalaranna beach, was torn out by unknown activists. Kalamaja
community was disappointed by Pro Kapital action and the dispute only
escalated. Pro Kapital ordered a new fence around the beach and
ordered a security company to watch over the property. Within next
few days complaints were surfacing that there is a group of men in
unmarked cars and civilian clothing that are protecting the area and
if anybody dares to move closer to the fence the men threaten
them with violence. Pro Kapital denies that they have
hired an underground
group to
protect their property, but the situation has not changed.
There is still an older Mercedes, or a van, standing by the fence
round the clock, with a muscular man inside it, patrolling the area.
Pro Kapital activity in Kalarand raises questions about lawfulness of
their
actions and how society’s interests and consensus on the
matter can be overruled.
The
situation in Kalarand has not changed from August. Pro Kapital has
not got the permission from the City Council to start the
construction
work . The fence is still up and an unmarked car is still
parked next to the property. One of Estonian parties Vabaerakond has
turned to Chancellor of Justice in this matter but with no effect to
the situation. The Estonian Chancellor of Justice responded only that
in this situation it is
important to have an open discussion and the
developer has to provide clear developing plan.
Similar situation has happened
before in Estonia. Former
president of
Estonia,
Lennart Meri, bought a peninsula
peak Armuneeme, in
Viimsi ,
in 1997. President Meri agreed with the
conditions , set to the
property, to
keep the surrounding beach clean and ensure the passage
to the beach for people. (
Äripäev , 1997) The new owner also had to
agree that the peak of the peninsula is a landscape- and a bird
sanctuary. President announced that he wants to spend a calm
retirement in Armuneeme and promised that anyone can
come and
visit the
cape whenever they wish. After finishing the construction work on
his villa, access to the seaside was denied for public. At
first there was just a police car patrolling the area, but soon Lennart
Meri built there a guard booth and the area was closed with a fence.
With
this move president Meri violated the property conditions. As
Armuneeme is a landscape sanctuary then it was allowed to build only
one house on the property, but Lennart Meri did not
account it. In
total he built there five buildings and only one of them was lawful.
Other four buildings were built without permission and got their
premissions after they were
finished . Up
until 2001 the property was
closed for public as Lennart Meri was Estonian president and
apparently this was the only way to ensure his welfare. After leaving
the presidential seat, people were allowed to visit the sight but
only if they identify themselves before. The whole Armuneeme
case was
really ugly and what made it worse was the
fact that it was the
president who acted unlawfully and did not care about the conditions
made for this landscape sanctuary. Some ministers did try to stop his
actions but their efforts did not work.
It
is known fact that larger companies can get away with their unlawful
acts and act out by their own
ideas , which is why Kalaranna insident
has grown big interests in public. It is important to
control Pro
Kapital’s actions on the site and keep the whole process as clear
as possible, and open for discussions. Companies, like Pro Kapital,
need to understand that laws are there for a reason and having
money does not excuse them from following them. Which is why the Tallinn
City Council should go to court with Pro Kapital, in order to solve
the situation lawfully and justly. Tallinn City Council should
protect the views of the locals and
stand for their interests.
Telliskivi Selts itself do not have enough resources to sue Pro
Kapital.
Currently
the City Council has not
done anything to solve the situation. It is
sad to see that the repesenter of public voice has not stepped out
for the people and taken any actions. The City Council has not given
any clear response what their opinion is on this case nor have they
approved the Kalaranna developing plan. Pro Kapital has gone against
the law with installing the fence and it is clear that they
themselves are
aware of their unlawful action. It is easy to read out
from their conduct with the installation of the fence. They
clearly did not want to include the City Council as they did not ask for
their approval to build the fence. The company was aware that they
will
never get the permission to build a fence around the property,
while closing the access to the seaside. Suing the company would be
the only rightful act and the only way to make Pro Kapital take
responsibilities for their action. Otherwise we will end up with
similar situation like Armuneeme, where five buildings are built
instead of one and natural shore
path is changed without any legal
permission.
If
Tallinn City Council would sue Pro Kapital for its unlawful acts on
the property then the illegal fence would be taken down and the whole
developing progress would be more open. This would
send a sign to the
Pro Kapital that this property is valuable to the community and they
have to take it into account. It is not professional from the
developer side to block out public if it there is clearly high public
interest . Tallinn City Council would do the right thing if they would
represent the Kalamaja community in the court and this would send out
sign that City Council stands for their people and all the future
developing plans should be opened and clearly stated.
Kalarand
is an important seaside for locals and there is a very high public
interest. Kalamaja community and Telliskivi Selts have organised
petitions against Pro Kapital’s developing plans and have tried to
reach out to the City Counsil and Chancellor of Justice in order to
solve the situation. Since closing the seaside to public there has
been no change in it. The best way to solve it is sueing the company
and City Council should be the one who would stand for the public
interest. Armuneeme case is a good example how doing nothing can
escalate the situation from bad to the worst. If Tallinn wants to be
known as a maritime town, then the City Council should fight for
keeping the seaside open for public, as required by the Estonian law.
References:
Garlick,
S. (2015) “The battle for the Estonian coastline” The Baltic
Times, 5.August
ETA.
(2001 ) “Pro Kapital ostis Kalaranna ASi” Delfi, 18.May
Accessible:
http://arileht.delfi.ee/news/uudised/pro-kapital-ostis-kalaranna-asi?id=50881531 Klemeni,
K. (2011) “Kalarand, the sea and the public interest.” Estonian
Art, Vol. 27, Issue 2, p. 36-39.
Kuusk,
H.(2015) “
Rand või sadam? Tallinna Kalaranna ujumiskoht suletakse
sadama nime all.” Eesti Päevaleht, 07.August.
Lift11
Urban Installations Festival Tallinn 2011. (2011) “Kalarand”
Accessible:
http://www.lift11.ee/installatsioon/kalarand.html
MTÜ
Telliskivi Selts board. (2014) “Kalaranna arendajatel on targem
rahvast kuulata.”
Postimees , 16.July.
Pro
Kapital homepage
Accessible:
http://prokapital.co m
Äripäev.
( 1997) “President on Armuneeme ära ostnud.”Äripäev, 16.March
Accessible:
http://www.aripaev.ee/uudised/1997/03/16/president-on-armuneeme-ara-ostnud
Kõik kommentaarid