The quarry in Lasinja remains, the court has decided. The question is until when

I am reading the ruling of the High Administrative Court (VUS) of the Republic of Croatia which annulled the Decision on the adoption of the III Amendments and Supplements to the Spatial Plan of the Municipality of Lasinja (Karlovac County) at the end of October last year. The legality assessment was submitted by the small company Kamen-Psunj from Okučani (which had around six million euros in revenue last year), and although I do not wish to delve into the motives of the municipal authorities and although this decision has been annulled, entrepreneurs should be concerned that their plans are so easily disregarded to satisfy certain political goals.

These goals are certainly legitimate (the closure of the quarry and the construction of sports and recreational facilities), but let us not trample over the dead. In short, Kamen-Psunj received a concession from the Ministry of Economy back in the summer of 2019 for the exploitation of the technical-construction stone field Kremešnica – Lasinjska, and it was granted permission to conduct additional exploratory works in the relevant exploitation field. A series of positive decisions followed from the responsible ministries (listed in the ruling) that were made in the following years, the last being from the Ministry of Environment and Nature Conservation on October 29, 2024, which determined that the intended exploitation of technical-construction stone is acceptable for the environment.

Procedural Error

Thus, a lot of time has already passed while all these various permits were obtained, but last year’s amendment and supplement to the municipal Spatial Plan provided for the deletion of the mineral raw material exploitation field planned over an area of 9.9 hectares, which is intended for rehabilitation and repurposing. Furthermore, it was determined that an urban planning development plan (UPU) would be created for the rehabilitation of the quarry, and the relevant Conservation Department of the Ministry of Culture would provide its opinion on the guidelines for the rehabilitation and revitalization of the former quarry area. Finally, the mandatory preparation of an urban planning development plan for the area of the Municipality of Lasinja for the social purpose zone ‘Lasinjska kultura’ was determined, for which guidelines were prescribed according to which the quarry would be rehabilitated and transformed into a publicly accessible and organized space with sports-recreational and public facilities and other similar contents.

The court annulled the aforementioned decision, not because potential damage was inflicted on one company, but due to procedural errors in its adoption. The council referred to the Spatial Planning Act, but to the wrong provision, so the VUS ruled as it did, without discussing whether the company was harmed or not. Thus, it is a common error of our authorities at all levels, as we have already written in ‘Pravda’, but this time it helped one company.

But let us disregard that ruling and ask ourselves whether the amendment and supplement to the Spatial Plan actually indicate how uncertain investors are about implementing their business plans in our country, regardless of the fact that they do not face an obvious threat at the outset. Let us just take a look at the decisions of various ministries. Even five decisions over five years had to be obtained by the leaders of Kamen-Psunj to gain the right to exploit, and we know that this is not easy.

Call for Discussion

Nevertheless, it is evident that the company had an interest in that construction material, so its leaders persistently prepared documentation for all those decisions. On the other hand, it can be assumed that this company did not consider that at some point the project could be jeopardized by the authorities’ decision to repurpose the quarry.

Therefore, this is not a good message to investors in our country, regardless of the fact that in this case it is a small company. However, the danger did not cease with the annulment of the disputed decision of the Lasinja municipal council, as the authorities, having learned from experience, could better study the Spatial Planning Act they refer to (which would be normal) and repeat the adoption of the same decision. And again, I state that the political goals are legitimate, but it would be correct for the authorities to invite the company leaders for a discussion and find a solution that would cause the least damage to the company’s operations.

POST SCRIPTUM

The Lasinja municipal council may repeat the annulled Decision on the adoption of the III Amendments and Supplements to the Spatial Plan, but it would also be useful for the state to adopt regulations in such cases that would provide companies with compensation. In this case, it concerns preparatory actions (obtaining decisions, perhaps even purchasing some machinery) and the future profit of the company which, by transforming the quarry into a space for sports and recreation, loses what it had planned. Thus, both the state and local self-government units assume responsibility for the losses that companies would be exposed to.