Former Latvian defense and foreign minister Artis Pabriks has publicly criticized the Riga City Council‘s urban planning decisions, sparking debate over the balance between ideological goals and practical infrastructure needs. Pabriks argues the council’s focus on superficial fixes-such as recent bollard installations following a car entering the Daugava River-demonstrates a lack of long-term vision and may alienate residents as the capital navigates ongoing renovations to key areas like Dzirnavu Street and the vanšu Bridge. The critique comes as Riga, a city accounting for 30% of Latvia’s economy, faces increasing scrutiny over its approach to traffic management and public space improvements.
A former Latvian defense and foreign minister has sharply criticized the Riga City Council’s approach to urban planning and infrastructure, arguing that its focus on ideology over practical solutions is alienating residents and potentially bolstering support for alternative political figures. The comments come amid ongoing debate over several city projects, including traffic management and public space improvements.
Artis Pabriks, director of the Northern European Policy Centre and head of the Military Technology, Drone and Robotics Association, said he wasn’t particularly moved by a recent incident involving a car driving into the Daugava River, stating such events “will always happen and need to be addressed in a different way.” His primary concern, he explained during a TV24 “Press Club” discussion, lies with the broader methods employed by the Riga City Council.
Pabriks characterized the council’s problem-solving as deeply unprofessional, comparing it to “scratching your left ear with your right hand or building a house starting from the roof.” He argued that the immediate response to the river incident – installing bollards to prevent future occurrences – is a superficial fix that avoids addressing underlying issues.
“Politically speaking, if an accident happens and you don’t know what to do, you try to solve the obvious thing,” Pabriks said. “Now someone drove into the Daugava, so let’s put up posts. But maybe the Riga City Council could have gathered its intellectual resources and managed the city economically, rather than ideologically.” He suggested prioritizing the redirection of traffic flow around the city, a measure he believes is currently neglected.
Pabriks also voiced concerns about the ongoing renovations of Dzirnavu Street, acknowledging the improvements but criticizing the aesthetic choices. He described the street’s patchwork of asphalt and different types of cobblestone as resembling “Turkmenistan,” questioning the practicality of creating a visually appealing space without adequate consideration for parking. “We want to live like Copenhagen, but where will we put the cars?” he asked.
The planned repairs to the Vanšu Bridge, which will narrow the roadway by 2.5 meters on each side to accommodate a bicycle lane, also drew criticism. While acknowledging the value of promoting green initiatives, Pabriks questioned the impact on a crucial transportation artery. “It’s good that we live in such a green, ideological world, but what will happen to the strategic transport hub – the bridge, where the flow of cars will not decrease, but we will reduce this flow by a third?” he said.
Pabriks lamented a pattern of short-sighted solutions, pointing to the shift from colored posts to metal barriers along the embankment. He believes the city lacks a conceptual, long-term vision. “We want to make the city greener, which is beautiful. We can paint a zebra crossing and make TikToks to say: look how well we solved the problem, now there is a place for people to cross, but we are not structurally solving Riga’s problems,” he stated.
Looking ahead, Pabriks envisions a future where Riga becomes increasingly inaccessible by car, forcing drivers to park outside the city center. While acknowledging that some may welcome this change, he cautioned that Riga accounts for 30% of Latvia’s economy and is home to nearly half of the country’s population. He questioned how residents would travel between regions, such as from Kurzeme to Vidzeme, without relying on Brīvības Street.
Pabriks warned that if the current “non-economic, but ideological” approach to city governance continues, voters may increasingly turn to alternative candidates like Šlesers, simply due to the perceived lack of practical solutions. A. Pabriks’s comments underscore growing frustration with the direction of urban development in the Latvian capital.
