Why Wasn’t it Possible to Build? Nobody Knew

Jan Dohnal says Ostrava is changing. The city is moving away from its industrial focus, diversifying its economy, and seeing the rise of projects that are attracting international attention.

He explains how decisions are made on major developments, why two electoral terms should be the limit, and what people truly sacrifice when holding public office. He also reveals how the myth emerged that it was impossible to build a stadium at Bazaly.

How are major political projects decided?

Decision-making is always a combination of personal conviction and hard data. There is a certain degree of intuition and instinct involved, but at the same time we have to rely on economic indicators, analyses, and overall costs. With large-scale projects that take many years to prepare, I am fully aware that I may not even be there to see them completed. I may become enthusiastic about something and help move the project forward, but the final result may ultimately be delivered by someone else.

That is why strong political support is crucial for any project. Ideally, there should be agreement not only within the governing coalition, but across the opposition as well. Otherwise, there is always the risk that a political change will come and the project will be brought to a halt.

Shortly after taking office, you had to make a decision about the construction of the VOX concert hall. How did that process unfold?

The idea of a concert hall in Ostrava had been resurfacing repeatedly for roughly the past fifty years. However, concrete steps only began around 2012, when the city was bidding to become a European Capital of Culture. That was when the decision was made to build a concert hall for the Janáček Philharmonic Orchestra so it could finally have facilities worthy of its standing.

The project subsequently went through an international architectural competition, and the final design is based on a proposal by architect Steven Holl. Today, the project carries the name VOX.

When I became mayor, one of the very first decisions I had to make was whether to continue with the project. It was already prepared, although with certain shortcomings, but the construction contract had not yet been formally signed. We had to clearly decide whether we were going ahead with it or not.

For me, however, it was quite a straightforward decision, because I had been part of the previous coalition that had supported the project.

The New Bazaly project appears to have been more complicated – Why was that?

Bazaly was a different story. For years, there had been a belief that it was impossible to build a stadium on that site because of the subsoil conditions and other technical issues. But we knew that Ostrava needed a new football stadium.

The current multi-purpose stadium in Vítkovice is a quality venue, but it was built as a compromise. Its capacity is insufficient both for top-level football and for athletics. At the same time, Ostrava has the best athletics facilities in the country, so we want a stadium that truly reflects that standard. It also fails to meet the requirements for top-tier competitions – for example, UEFA Champions League matches would require hospitality facilities, appropriate partner and media infrastructure, and VIP areas that the current stadium simply does not provide.

At first, we considered a reconstruction. But once the projected cost approached CZK 1.5 billion, it became clear that it no longer made sense. We decided that building a completely new stadium would be the better option.

Then came the question of where to build it. Staying in Vítkovice was an obvious possibility because the infrastructure is already there – sports halls, hotels, and supporting facilities. But Bazaly is a unique location, which is why we reopened the discussion about returning there.

And that was when we discovered something crucial: there were no documents proving that construction at Bazaly was impossible. No relevant geological assessment actually existed. So we commissioned new surveys. They confirmed that the site is not straightforward – it is located on a slope and has certain limitations, particularly regarding parking capacity. And at that point, we said it openly: if football returns to Bazaly, there will not be a large car park there, simply because there is no room for one.

Honestly, though, that approach makes perfect sense to me. It is a model commonly seen in countries such as Spain – people travel to football matches using public transport and stay in the city afterwards. Fans do not have to drive somewhere outside the city limits just to watch football.

There are 22,000 university students in Ostrava, compared to 70,000 in Brno. How do you perceive that difference?

The difference is enormous. One of the missing pieces, in my view, is a law faculty that could potentially be established under the University of Ostrava. That said, it is important to acknowledge that creating a new faculty is far from simple. It is influenced both by competition and by decisions made at the state level. Universities in the Czech Republic compete with one another for students as well as funding, which means new programmes often face resistance from outside institutions.

Even so, I believe it makes perfect sense. Without developing education, the city will not move forward. Young people who leave to study elsewhere often never return, because they build both their personal and professional lives there. That is why it is crucial for us not only to retain our own students, but also to attract new ones.

What kind of investors does Ostrava need?

A turning point for the region was the arrival of Hyundai Motor Company, which brought with it an entire supply chain. However, such a one-sided focus also carries risks – if the automotive industry were to weaken, the impact on the region would be significant.

That is why diversification is not just a vision, but a necessity. I see inspiration, for example, in Katowice, which chose to focus on e-gaming and successfully attracted programmers and technology talent.

What surprised you most about being mayor?

I did not enter the role without experience. I had already been involved in local politics for quite some time and had also served briefly as Deputy Mayor, so I knew the city well. I was responsible for sport and transport, I understood the agenda, and I knew how to organise my day and week effectively.

But once I became mayor, it was suddenly no longer about just two areas – it became about absolutely everything. In the morning I might be dealing with a retirement home, then a hospital, transport, the public transport company, somewhere in between the zoo, and in the afternoon I could be sitting down with a developer discussing where a new street should be built. The scope is enormous.

That part I expected. What I did not expect, however, was to completely lose control over time. There were moments when I genuinely did not know what day of the week it was – whether it was Saturday or Tuesday. That was something I truly had not anticipated.

Is it possible to maintain that pace in the long term?

I believe that two electoral terms are the absolute maximum a person can handle while still preserving their mental – and perhaps physical – health. You can simply “sit out” the role, but then the city would never move forward. I want to do the job properly.

I have also looked quite closely at the performance of my predecessors, and I think they experienced it in a very similar way. Two terms are essentially the limit.

Have you sacrificed anything for your role?

I try to maintain some sort of private life, but it is difficult. I cannot imagine going through this period while raising small children.

I make a conscious effort to keep my family completely out of the public spotlight. I know some politicians build their image around that, but that is not my approach. In my view, private life should remain separate.

And then there is the general loss of privacy. Not long ago, I finally managed to get away for a skiing weekend after quite some time. I take my skis off, go for lunch, and the first thing I see is a pub full of people from Ostrava. Sometimes it is pleasant, sometimes amusing, but it is simply the reality of the role.

How do you prevent the position from disconnecting you from reality?

Being mayor can be dangerous in that respect. If you do not establish honest feedback around you very quickly, you can easily end up in a situation where everyone simply says yes to everything. That is a road to disaster.

I have a group of people around me whose opinions I value and who are capable of telling me the opposite viewpoint as well. At the same time, I live a normal life in this city – I spend time among people, attend ordinary events, go to pubs. That connection with reality comes naturally to me, and I think it is perfectly normal to change your opinion. If I speak with several people and they convince me, then I will change my view and take something valuable away from it.

What advice would you give to a young person considering a career in politics?

For me, the most important thing in politics is to enter it with a clear vision. A person has to know what they want. Many people enter politics as though it were a lift to power or influence. In my opinion, that is the wrong motivation.

I entered local politics because I live in this city and wanted it to be a good place to live. At the time, it never even crossed my mind that I might one day become a mayor. That original motivation – the place where I want to live and where I want my children to live – has remained the same.

Read the full interview at positiv.cz