In this article
The National Theatre and the partnership model
On 17 May, it was six years since the demolition of the National Theatre. At the time, the government’s entire propaganda effort was invested in the idea that #Albania had no money to build the theatre itself, so a “partnership” with the private sector was needed.
The company #Fusha, out of nowhere, would finance the new theatre and in return receive the right to develop towers on part of the public land.
That model was sold as modernisation and a good deal for the public, because the new theatre would be built for “Zero money!” In reality, it marked the moment when the idea that major public works could be built through urban development bargains, giving away land and issuing blank-cheque permits for towers, was publicly legitimised.
Today, six years later, the theatre does not exist and nobody can say what the total bill for this investment is.
According to the sign at the construction site, #AgiKons should have completed the first phase of works, with a deadline of 27 calendar months, in September 2025. But only after an inquiry from the Citizens.al newsroom was the completion deadline extended to 19 August 2026 through a contract amendment, protocol No. 32188/3, dated 14 October 2025.
The authorities maintain that the works are within the construction permit’s deadline, which is 72 months, rather than the 27 stated on the site sign.
But beyond these procedural aspects, the Theatre model not only survived; it became more sophisticated, for the worse, of course. It was replicated at the Pyramid and at every public building with “spectacular” importance in the architectural narrative.
The Library and negotiations over the towers
In the case of the National Library, which I have been investigating recently, we no longer even have a special law, parliamentary debate or open public conflict, as we did with the theatre.
We have something more complicated and, I think, more problematic: vague Council of Ministers decisions bringing in the Albanian Investment Corporation, which operates with opaque regulations, direct negotiations and behind-the-scenes agreements, following a plan that appears elaborate and premeditated.
In January 2025, the Albanian Investment Corporation opened a call to build the Library with private partners.
The incentive was clear: whoever undertook to build the library would gain the right to develop a tower of up to 60 thousand m² at the former German villas.
But the call failed. So did the second.
At the same time, the Corporation turns out to have been negotiating with the company #XOne over another project: “Grand Park Skyline”, three towers of up to 71 storeys near the Lake Park.
Here the story becomes just as interesting as the one involving the National Theatre.
Part of the towers’ footprint fell on around 2,700 m² of public property (#SmallPlots) that the private company did not own when it obtained development permission for the project back in 2024.
Despite this fact, the National Council for Territory and Water (#KKTU) and the Territorial Development Agency (#AZHT) had granted X-One the permission.
To enable the “deal” transferring these small plots, there was no special law or public debate, only a Council of Ministers decision and direct engagement between the Corporation and X-One.
The Corporation negotiated with the company and, in the end, the National Library emerged as the public justification for the agreement to give away this land, which was clearly the obstacle preventing the company from obtaining a construction permit. It received that permit in July 2025.
The chronology and questions about public planning
After this, the question that remains is: was the Library conceived so the towers could be built, or did the tower project already exist and the Library serve to legitimise the agreement?
The chronology leaves very little room for interpretation. Development permission for #GrandParkSkyline had been approved as early as July 2024.
Negotiations over the “small plots” began afterwards. This means the agreement with the Corporation was not a condition for the project, but the mechanism for closing its gaps.
And this is where we see how far “urban planning” has deteriorated.
With the Theatre, there was at least public conflict, an opportunity for a civic response.
With the Library, everything happens in administrative silence, and citizens still wake up to a concept design by XDGA, selected through an unknown procedure. Yet even at this stage, it allows the Corporation to calculate what the project will cost.
In the end, the question is no longer only why Albania still lacks a worthy National Library. Why does every public project of particular importance have to go through with a tower behind it?
Faced with this picture, do we have public planning at all, or only negotiations around private plans for the city?