Is the pilot flying with us?

Mariusz Ścisło architect and president of the Association of Polish Architects (SARP): What proportion of public space should be reserved? And how can we establish this? Where is the equilibrium point between the investors’ and the city’s needs? How can the local zoning plans allow us to do this? What are the legal implications resulting from this? Is the obligation to provide public space to be taken on by the city? Or should it be the right or the obligation of the local community that lives in a given area?

Krzysztof Domaradzki architect and urban planner: It seems that the basic issue in creating public space is finding the right balance between the project and the city, because public space forms the structure of a city, a certain setting that is both functional and spatial. It should not be done at random. However, urban planning is starting to be treated as a kind of set of indicators on the basis of which an architect can but does not have to design something that will be better in spatial terms… or worse. Of course public space should be created through local zoning plans, because this would be to legally sanction it, but unfortunately this option does not exist in such plans. It is only mentioned in the spatial study, but the local zoning plan only includes provisions for transport space. The space designated for transport can be purchased by the city as a public purpose project. In Poland local zoning plans omit something that is actually the essence of spatial planning, namely the creation public space. They focus on the legal issues related to the ownership structure, adequate conveniences, transport, parking, etc., etc. Meanwhile, the spatial element in urban planning is entirely neglected. It is worth citing a few Scandinavian examples. I do not know whether Polish architects would like them – probably not, but I will say that when a project is being prepared in an architectural studio in Stockholm you draw up a local zoning plan which is actually an architectural concept rendered as a plan. Next, in the tender procedure, the architectural team is chosen to develop the documentation needed for the construction project. Of course, negotiations are still possible, but everyone knows what the new project will look like. You make models on a scale of 1:500 to 1:50 for urban designs! This makes urban development a highly predictable process.

Mariusz Ścisło: We have observed a trend for laying down instructions in local zoning plans which reduce the need for local government interference. This has been motivated by the self-interest of local authorities, who in this way can avoid the obligation of taking over and purchasing roads and communal areas, under the assumption that if the roads are within a given area they are internal roads and spaces. Is this a positive phenomenon or merely the authorities’ abdication of their responsibility for creating the city?

Krzysztof Domaradzki: It seems that cities have too many responsibilities and financial obligations imposed on them. According to our law, the city is obliged to purchase the entire public infrastructure, install pipes/sewers/power lines along the streets, and prepare it in a way that will make it possible for companies to build on the plots. Every mayor and borough leader’s dream is to have something that could be called a plan without roads, to draw a brown patch and to leave the rest – the roads, access roads and communal areas – to the investor. In order to get a grip on the situation it would be necessary to change the law and introduce a provision that says that on a newly-urbanised area the owner is obliged to hand over a certain percentage of the land – about 20–30 pct – for public use: transport, greenery, a school or a nursery school. After all, they obtain the right to build there in the local zoning plan, so it should ultimately be profitable for them. Charging the city with these costs encourages it to defend itself against them.

Mariusz Ścisło: What do the developers think?

Marek Poddany, Association of Polish Real Estate Developers (PZFD), board member: I am a little concerned at the theoretical and academic tone of the discussion. However, I am glad it has been said here that unless we reconcile the interests of all the parties, we will end up in a tug-of-war and those who are stronger at any given time will win. This is a road to nowhere. The essence of the problem only transpires when the financial aspects are made clear. You cannot take anything from the city by force – this is not the way. I hear that cities do not want to fulfil their obligations. This can be explained by a lack of funds – and I share this view. However, I do not agree that the city’s obligations should be limited. Perhaps the city should have more funds to fulfil its obligations to a broader extent than it does now. Developers do not agree to make their areas open to the public in a mere fit of good will. I would go further, and say they would be glad to hand over the space. In such cases it is difficult to understand the city’s objections when it says ‘no’. ‘No’ – because the city does not want to bear the costs related to the purchase or the costs related to the operation of the public area prepared? But when it obtains a finished area prepared without charge, I find this attitude surprising.

Witold Sielewicz, deputy mayor of Żoliborz district, Warsaw: In order to create an interesting area, it is necessary to bring together the relevant parties in terms of the investors, architects and the local authorities. We have now managed to achieve something that has probably not existed in Warsaw before: meetings of all the developers investing in south Żoliborz district, as well as utility operators, architects and local authorities. We have been meeting and wondering what to do in actual terms when it comes to which body is responsible for, and in what order, the pipes/sewers/ power lines are laid in the area. We have also insisted that all ground floors should be designated for services – not only for shops, but also for kindergartens. This can already be seen in the first few projects that have been completed. I hope that in a few years, when the digging up of ul. Rydygiera is completed, we will finish the street including a connection to ul. Powązkowska. I think that in a few years’ time, when people come to Żoliborz they will particularly admire the Żoliborz Artystyczny and Żoliborz Oficerski estates, which are currently under nstruction. The developer has created an even bigger square for the project than was provided for in the plan. We do not have anything against making the public space developed there the property of the city and available to citizens. The eveloper has also applied for the extended part of the square to be taken over by the city. We are now debating how to prevent the extended part from ultimately becoming the property of the housing association – even though, at first sight, it would be most convenient for the city. And here we come upon a major problem.The city considers that it would be better if it stayed as private property for two reasons: the housing association would pay taxes for the property and it would operate the area. No headaches at all. This is the case not only in Warsaw but in the majority of its satellite towns. However, if we are saying that the city should have both private and communal elements, and the communal ones are in the form of streets and parks, these should, in principle, make up app. 30 pct of the area of project and we should do everything we can to take possession of them. According to my information, even with our full acceptance this can be just the beginning of quite an ordeal. We also have a real estate office and other institutions [at the city level – editorial note] and even if we submit anything there, you need to wait two years for the reply. And in this period the developer could already have given the area to the housing association. What do we need such consent for if the plot is already sold? Such procedures should take perhaps not weeks but they should be processed in two, three, four or at most six months. We shoul not have to tolerate a situation where we complain about something all the time when a way exists to improve it. So this is an obstacle created by the city, which at the same time is blaming developers for the lack of public space.

Krzysztof Domaradzki: It seems to me that we could be on the verge of stumbling upon an epoch-making discovery – that projects should be built according to plans. I think it is better to make such plans during the negotiations with developers and utility providers at the permitting stage. This is when a specific undertaking should be made and put down in a legal form.

Witold Sielewicz: But this isn’t done because it is not profitable. When there is no plan, an investor comes along and applies for site development conditions, so clearly they need to plan the roads, provide access and do it all at their own cost. Then the borough enters the game. It might be kind enough to take over the roads for free or for a symbolic one złoty, or it might not. If they do not do it, the road remains private property and the housing association will have to maintain it, clean it, etc. When a local zoning plan is passed entailing that it is a public road, it automatically becomes the property of the city or the borough when it is built, and the city or borough has to pay for it. The investor can give up on it, but they do not have to. The city normally pays app. PLN 400–600 per sqm for such land. I am not surprised that investors do not want to give it away for free. In my opinion we are still not able to think 20 years ahead. We only think as far ahead as the term in office and the next elections. And this is where the problem lies. But there are more and more people who are starting to view urban planning differently, as attested to by the growing involvement of residents.

Mariusz Ścisło: Our urban planning environment has seen the creation of local zoning plans for the development of cities taking into account a possible increase in the Polish population up to 80 mln people. This has imposed obligations on local government estimated at PLN 90–120 bln for the purchase of the roads and public areas included in these plans but that might not even be developed over the next few dozen years. This is a kind of speculative bubble which requires us to take another look at the legal system – the way planning is approached and the decision makers’ responsibilities. It is supposed to be included in the new building code, according to which decisions for the inclusion of given areas in zoning plans will be conditioned by the economic consequences of doing so, because the obligations resulting from this directly impact the local government.

Tomasz Zemła, deputy director of Warsaw’s architecture department: Making the city happy with some fragment of a road that leads to nowhere and does not connect interesting places only opens up the space between the buildings, so it is not really the best solution from the point of view of city management. You could just as well say that the housing association should manage it and not put fences around it. This phenomenon does not only occur with newly-built projects – after all, there are also estates that were open for a long time and later started fencing themselves off. Should these people separate plots at a push and hand over the fragments they do not need? There is probably no single, universal approach. There are many positive examples – such as, for example, an office building in Warsaw’s Wola district that has some open space. But how else should an office building be like that is visited by many people and which serves formal functions? I do not think that this is a miraculous solution. We have reached the point where the ideal solutions we are citing are those that surprise us with their innovative approaches, whereas the actual state of affairs is much more unpredictable.

Bohdan Szułczyński, former deputy mayor of Warsaw’s Bemowo district (private opinion in the discussion): Warsaw has signed an agreement with the Association of Polish Real Estate Developers based on which people representing land owners, investors, developers, utility operators and those responsible for passing plans as well as civil servants sit at a round table to discuss the solutions that need to be implemented for a given section of the city to be developed in a decent way without disrupting its basic functioning. However, cities are charged billions of złoty in claims resulting from the provisions included in the plans. So there is the practice of transferring the obligation of constructing a road onto the investor, according to article 16 of the act on public roads. A solution to this problem could be the alteration of legal provisions on the zoning fee owed to the borough if the owner whose plot benefited from the zoning plan sells the plot within five years of adopting the plan. If we introduced a provision which says that the fee is simply owed to the local authorities, we would direct the money to the local government, which would be a way of creating public space through these funds.

Marek Poddany: The situation in which new entities are set up based on site development conditions, means that we all have to pay. Developers’ customers also pay for the construction of roads in the prices of their apartments, when this is actually the obligation of the city. Should it be the case that a narrow group finances things that are really the obligation of the city?

Krzysztof Domaradzki: This raises some constitutional issues. The problem is, to put it in very simple terms, that in the countries of the so-called ‘old Europe’, ownership rights are of course sacred, and yet what you can do with your property depends on what the local government allows you to do. Generally this is done through a local zoning plan. The opposite approach is used in Poland. In principle the owner has the right to build unless there are regulations that forbids them from doing so.

Marek Poddany: If a developer plans to build something, they raise the money to do so. Whereas the city does not build, it does not have the money in place, and yet it goes ahead with the planning. Going through this detailed planning, which developers repeatedly come across, often leads to the necessity of questioning such plans because the urban planner who drew them up only had a vision. The vision does not survive the confrontation with those who want to build – as they in turn have the money. I am not saying that money should decide everything, but it is the cases where developers have met with the municipality and together agreed upon what could be built that bear fruit.

Dariusz Hyc, Warsaw Architectural and Urban Planning Committee: Nothing will change as long as there is neither the will nor a vision for the development of Warsaw’s public space in the approach of the authorities. The current set up copes very well with infrastructure, but Warsaw does not have a vision for public space. One politician has explained it in this way: “Architecture is not sexy and public space is certainly not sexy when it comes to politics.” So we need to make politicians aware that you can build your political career based on issues related to public space. The city needs the creation of public space and connections between its different elements. The plans that are being worked on have an inventorising character. Urban communities are not built on such a basis.

Debate participants:

Marek Poddany

vice-president of the Association ofPolish Real Estate Developers (SARP). Since 1994 he has been in charge of Sedno – one of the development companies that have operated in Warsaw for the longest period of time. He participated in the drafting of a new resolution on spatial planning and development on behalf of SARP, as well as in many other initiatives, including the Development Programme for Residential Construction in Poland.

Bohdan Szułczyński

former deputy mayor of Warsaw’s Bemowo district. He has supervised the work of the following departments: administrative and economic, architecture and construction, real estate management, investment, environment protection and public procurement. He has been employed by the city of Warsaw since January 2000.

Tomasz Zemła

born in 1956, graduated from the faculty of architecture at the Silesian University of Technology in Gliwice. He has been working with the city of Warsaw since 1993 and has been an active participant in many competitions, including for the development of the Wilanów Zachodni new district (formerly known as Miasteczko Wilanów). Tomasz is now deputy director of Warsaw’s architecture and spatial planning department.

Dariusz Hyc

architect, member of Warsaw architectural and urban planning commission, vice-president of the Warsaw branch of the Association of Polish Architects responsible for external affairs.

Witold Władysław Sielewicz

since 2007 he has been the deputy mayor of Żoliborz borough council in Warsaw. Between 1998 and 2003 he was the deputy director of the board of Ochota District. In his local government activities he has been involved in urban planning, architecture and investment.

Krzysztof Domaradzki

architect and urban planner. He is the author of such concepts as the redevelopment of ul. Nowy Świat and ul. Krakowskie Przedmieście in Warsaw (both implemented). He has been the co-author ofspatial development plans for Warsaw and the designs of estates in the city’s satellite towns, including: the areas along Trasa Siekierkowska and ul. Bartycka, the Politechnika underground station, Żoliborz Przemysłowy, the centre of Praga district, Dworzec Zachodni station, Pod Skocznią park, Plac Europy, Chopin Airport, Szczęśliwice Północne and the New Belgrade masterplan (equal first prizea, 1986). He is also a lecturer in the applied urban planning department of Warsaw University of Technology’s faculty of architecture.

Mariusz Ścisło

architect, president of the FS & P Arcus architectural studio, and president of the Association of Polish Architects. Mariusz is a graduate of the faculty of architecture at Warsaw University of Technology, and has 35 years of experience in the design and construction of buildings.

Stanisław Rewski

is an architect and the co-owner of the Hermanowicz Rewski Architekci architectural studio.

Maciej Mąka

is a co-owner of the Mąka.Sojka.Architekci architectural studio. He is a member of the management board of the Warsaw branch of the Association of Polish Architects.

Piotr Żabicki

associate architect of the Kuryłowicz & Associates architectural studio. The winner of several competitions (in a team of architects): Ochota Campus of the University of Warsaw (first prize), the Campus of the University of Bydgoszcz (first prize) and for an office building in Szczecin (first prize). He is the co-author of such designs as the A17 Dworzec Gdański underground station and the Wolf Marszałkowska and Wola Center office buildings in Warsaw, as well as the Silesia Towers skyscrapers in Katowice.