Expo 2027 Housing in Surcin: CINS Cites 270+ Design Errors
CINS reports more than 270 errors in the design of the Expo 2027 housing complex, the biggest in the slab above the underground garage. The state directorate did not answer questions.
Civil engineer Dragan Dingarac and his firm Dingrakon reviewed the design documentation for the Expo 2027 housing in Surcin and found more than 270 errors, according to an investigation CINS published on October 22. Construction of the residential complex is supervised by the Construction Directorate of Serbia (GDS).
The biggest error, according to the investigation, concerns the calculation for the slab above the underground garage. Dingarac estimates that the real load on that slab is 266 percent higher than the design assumed.
What is disputed at the Surcin complex?
A complex of 1,500 apartments is being built for Expo 2027. It has a dual purpose: the apartments are meant to house exhibition participants, and afterward they go on sale and become an ordinary neighborhood, as happened with Belville after the 2009 Universiade. A little under a third, 460 apartments, is being built by SMB-Gradnja, owned and run by Predrag Petricevic. The rest is built by other firms in the consortium.
Dingrakon, CINS writes, was first hired to work on one part of the complex. Soon after the canopy collapse in Novi Sad, it was given an unusual task: to check all the documentation the buildings are being built from, even though such documents are not normally reviewed once construction is under way. Dingarac’s relationship with SMB-Gradnja and the subcontractors grew more tense, and the contract was terminated in under four months.
According to correspondence CINS obtained, Dingarac sent SMB-Gradnja 270 objections to the construction design, and emails show that most of the flaws were corrected.
What does the garage slab calculation show?
Above the garage is a plateau with planters, benches and a children’s playground. In a fire, a fire truck would also drive across it. Dingarac found that the calculation did not account for a large enough load from the layers above the slab, such as the planters, accumulated snow and the fire truck.
Radomir Folic, a former dean of the Faculty of Technical Sciences and a structural expert, told CINS: “This is a serious error that can lead to the complete collapse of the entire building.”
Civil engineer Edin Drljo explained to CINS what such a deviation would mean:
“If the load is as much as 266 percent higher than the design anticipated, there is a serious risk of significant cracking, deformation, and in the worst case the collapse of the structure.”
Dingarac informed GDS and the other firms in the consortium of the flaws. They checked their own plans and, according to CINS, found the same error, because the calculation for the ground-floor slab had been off everywhere. The design was therefore changed for the entire complex, and the slab was thickened from 25 to 28 centimeters.
Is the fix enough?
The experts CINS spoke with believe it is not. Drljo says that increasing the slab thickness “by just three centimeters, without additional reinforcement, does not significantly increase its load capacity.” Folic agrees that thickening the concrete does not settle the question of load capacity.
Dingarac himself voices doubt about the new load analysis, in one of the emails CINS obtained:
“Again, whether this is enough reinforcement… nobody knows anymore, given how thin the new load analysis is that they produced while adopting my objections.”
The GDS engineer in charge of supervision, Jasna Zdravkovic, told a CINS reporter that the slab was thickened to make it easier to install reinforcement, and that an independent review approved the changes. In her words: “Technical control looked at everything and agreed with the changes that were made.”
What do those involved say, and what did the Interior Ministry say?
GDS answered neither CINS’s request for an interview nor the questions it sent. Zdravkovic answered part of the questions by phone and referred the rest to the Directorate’s email. Petricevic did not want to comment in a brief conversation with the reporter. According to the Danas report, his answer was: “Excuse me, but it is not appropriate for someone to introduce themselves as a journalist and talk to me about that.” Dingarac declined to talk.
Documents CINS gathered from the Interior Ministry (MUP) show that its Sector for Emergency Situations had an objection to the design precisely because of the garage slab calculation, since it had not been sent along with the rest of the documentation. The complete documentation arrived only a year after Dingarac found the deficiencies.
The investigation goes on to describe problems at the construction site itself, among them poor quality of work, missed deadlines and parts that had to be demolished and built again.
