LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR TBILISI ... - LED

Law project on “privatization of housing” published in September of the same
year, basically was responding to the international practice, mainly, because
of working out of the housing reform economic aspects and was giving hope
for successful urban management under the modern social-economic
conditions.
But at the edge of 1991-1992 as a result of the state overturn the direction
was taken on unaccounted, populist solutions. Yet on the 1st February of
1992 decree of the ministers’ cabinet of the republic of Georgia #107 on “
privatization of housing (giving for free) in the republic of Georgia”. it was
underlined in the document, that “the objects of privatization maybe house
(flat) of state and public fund, among them damaged, reconstructional or
uninhabited flat in the house, that required capital repair. In the document
insufficiently was worked out organizational forms of multi-flat houses and
financial-economic mechanisms. With one hand wave in Georgia was created
new multi number class of real estate proprietors, who immediately made
familiar with their rights, without having any imagination on proprietors duties.
Thus, for “homo soveficus” the psychology of common dependant was not
only eliminated, but was even enhanced in terms of requirement of the “new
proprietors” from government to lead the repairment activities in really
damaged houses.
The results of the 25 April earthquake in 2002 emphasized the complaints of
the poor proprietors of the damages houses in the direction of government.
Simultaneously with the lack of care rapid degradation of housing fund, in one
trace with political and economic stabilization, commercial housing
construction began development; social (municipal, public) housing fund was
not being built in Tbilisi even till nowadays – despite the necessity, societal
requirements and international recommendations.
Explosion of commercial housing construction naturally emphasized its
territorial development issue. Distribution of lands according to the group and
private interests was followed by the deliberated discrimination of the last
Soviet Tbilisi reconstruction and by development of the general plan,
accounted on 2000. Assimilating and using of the city lands’ scheme was
activated reflecting the corruptive or group interests. According to the
evaluation of international organizations, at that time , by the volume of
bribing, issuance of construction permissions was on the second place in
rating after the bribery rate in police.
Commercial housing construction mainly was intending to concentrate on
historically formed, most prestigious districts such as Vake, Vera, Mtatsminda.
Prestige category, characteristic for Georgian culture, and which finally, is
reflected in the prices of real estate, acquired commercial meaning and was
also reflected in some normative acts. New multi-storied houses were often
built without accounting accurate city constructive situation, sanitary-hygienic
or housing norms, despite the protests of residents. Today its already evident,
that such tightening of building in prestigious districts caused ecological
problems, surplus of individual transport, overloading of social-cultural and
engineering-technical infrastructure, and finally, decline of urban environment
quality.
Most grave situation was created in Old Tbilisi, which acquired remarkable
monument defensive status yet in the Soviet period. Scandal housing
construction in the defensive zones led to the fact, that Tbilisi application in
2002 on inclusion in the UNESCO list of world heritage, was delayed till
legislative, institutional and in terms of practical improvement of the situation.