For years Poland has been characterized by a
significant housing shortage. The total number
of flats amounts to 12,9 million, that is over
1,5 million lower than the number of separate
households.

The average number of apartments per one
thousand inhabitants constitutes a further
evidence of this shortage: 338 in Poland, while
the EU average is 452 flats per one thousand
inhabitants. The right to have a roof over one’s
head constitutes a fundamental right of a
human being. In Poland, already from the
beginning of the transformation
period, apartments have been considered a
merchandise as any. The fact that most people
cannot afford to purchase an apartment, has
not been taken into consideration at the time.
The green diagram demonstrates the
ownership structure of Polish housing. The
majority of apartments is owned by
individuals, followed by the number owned by
housing cooperatives. The municipal, so-called
communal apartments hold the third position.
It is worth noting that the social tenements
constitute only 0,5% of the country’s housing
resources.

The results of construction sector call for
abandoning all hopes for significant
improvement of the housing situation in
Poland. The number of apartments completed
in 2006 has been lower than in 2005, and in
2007 the result has been increased merely by a
fraction of a per cent. This number would have
been even lower if it hadn’t been for the rise in
the sector of developer construction for
wealthy clients in major cities. The most
significant change is the
appearance, particularly in major cities, of the
segment of high standard apartments. In
Warsaw for example, the common apartments
constitute almost 52% of the new apartment
market, the high standard apartments
approximately 40%, and the suites penthouses
8% of the total supply. It means that 48% of
the built apartments are purposed for the
persons with a very high income, while merely
52% common apartments are purposed for the
persons with a good or average income, with a
necessity of contracting a credit.

Since the beginning of Polish
transformation, both the experts and the
politicians have maintained that the residential
construction should be an engine of the
economy. The problem is, this engine has not
been started yet. Mere 0,1% of the gross
national product is allocated to subsidies for
the construction sector – the lowest number
since the World War II. The diagram shows
since 10 years the direct budgetary expenses
for the housing sector have been decreasing
constantly. Only since two years they have
been showing a minimal upward tendency In
the western countries a thesis has been
accepted, that the investment of public funds
in housing constitutes a long-term
policy, profitable to the society and to the
country. In Poland, after 1989 the opposite
process has started: the country has
commenced to withdraw from active
construction policy.

Over the recent years the systemic support
amounted to the possibility of benefiting from
personal income tax relief, available to all
taxable individuals notwithstanding the
income. The so-called renovation relief has
been the most popular; in the record year
2005 the 8,7 million taxable persons deducted
over 3,5 billion PLN (1 billion Euro). Such form
of funding have caused growing strain on the
budget and not always favored the
accomplishments of social objectives regarding
the construction sector; therefore for the last
two years the renovation and housing relieves
have been recalled in favor of different forms
of support, such as TBS and thermal
modernizations. On diagram we can see that
only these two values are growing. After this
general summary of Polish reality I would like
to outline several particular problems. Hidden
behind the chart figures are, after all, real
issues. Let us begin with the indigent.

The indigent are the ones that should profit
from the communal housing. This is the low-
cost residential construction, of worst
localizations, often raising objections with its
low standard. The communal housing
resources continue to decrease, and because
the reprivatisation the apartments located in
technically unfit buildings are systematically
demolished for safety reasons. The number of
new communal apartments is minimal. Most
such initiatives only serve the promotion of the
authorities. These are isolated events, often
arousing ambivalent sentiments. The Warsaw
developments pose a good example: the
authorities have on one hand put an
architectural project out to tender, on the
other hand they have proposed an unattractive
and inconvenient localizations for the
buildings. The communal housing
estates, isolated from the boroughs and
therefore from the social infrastructure, are
doomed to become ghettos.

In 1995 the Public Building Society (TBS) was
grounded, with its purpose being the
development of tenements for persons with
lower income. This initiative, however
commendable, proved to be a complete fiasco.
What were the reasons: the buildings have
been developed with the lowest budget
possible – unfortunately, at the cost of the
standard; these buildings do not have any
spatial or architectural value, and the savings
on materials and contracts resulted in a series
of a continuing technical problems despite
the granted subsidies, the commercial credits
proved more cost-effective contrary to the
adopted postulates, the overpriced
apartments were being sold, which resulted in
a reaction of commercial developers and
accusations of unfair competition (the plots of
land, and in some instances the shares in
apartments, came from the municipalities) 
due to the corruption scandals and financial
embezzlements this initiative lost public
confid.

The number of the TBS apartments is not
high, and still hypothetical, as it reflects the
total of the apartments completed by the
TBS, not the apartments used in accordance
with their purpose. Majority of the TBS
apartments have been, under various
conditions, sold to the tenants.

Approximately 3 millions apartments in Poland
are owned by the housing cooperatives. It is
safe to say, that every third Pole and every
second city inhabitant lives in the blocks. The
problem therefore is not trivial. The following
has been observed in large project housing
estates: - high apartment rotation factor, -
significant rent arrears: 40 to 70% inhabitants
are past due, - high unemployment, higher in
such estates than in the city center, The social
problems, heretofore typical rather for the
inhabitants of communal apartments, tend to
occur more often:
• uncertain life situation,
• isolation to the family circle,
• increase of juvenile crime,
• marginalization, a feeling of social seclusion,
• decreasing participation,
• increasing passivity of the inhabitants.

The only answer of the government to the
issue of the projects so far is the thermal
renovation. The insulation of the existing
apartments constitutes one of the most
important goals of the housing policy . The
thermal modernization act is being broadly
implemented in practice. Due to its
transparent procedures and public funding it
allows to achieve the significant savings in the
exploitation of buildings. The development of
technical threads, however, is not enough to
change the direction of transformations and
remedy the situation. Even the renovated
estates, thermally isolated buildings and
repainted elevations cannot hold the residents
who aspire to a higher quality life and work
standards. Easily accessible resources and the
general public support for thermal
modernization have resulted in a series of
realizations that are questionable in the least.
The type and value of the elevation
notwithstanding, the buildings are covered
with Styrofoam and plaster on a massive scale.

The architects’ remuneration is most often
based not on the value of the investment, but
on the usable floor area (PUM), that is the
building floorage exclusive of
communication, technical support etc. It does
not come as a surprise, that such solution
results in the development of more projects –
modern in form, but of even denser coverage.
The buyers are in most cases young persons
purchasing their first or second apartment.
Most important to them are the price and
accommodation plan (small footage, more
rooms for children). Asked about the
importance of the architecture, they place it at
the far end, behind the safety of the
environment, privacy, developer’s
reputation, access to green area and public
transport. The architecture is followed only by
the underground park place.

The need for green areas is witnessed mostly
in the names of the new estates: Green
Valey, Green Terraces, Forest Estate, Oak Park –
the estates that unfortunately do not have
much in common with the actual green areas
other than preempting them. In many cases
the price of land and market necessity of
lowering the prices of apartment floorage
leads to the drastically densing built-
up, excessive height of the buildings and
limiting (or liquidation) of biologically active
areas. The green – originally and according to
advertisement – area gradually becomes a
location of dense built-up.

On one hand, there are the average
buyers, doomed to live in concrete deserts, on
the other – the wealthy group that builds the
new residences at the cost of public green
areas This is the example of Eko-Park has been
developed on the land acquired from the
MPRO (City Enterprise of Garden Works), on
the border of the popular Warsaw park – the
Mokotów Fields. The complex contains over 2
thousand apartments and has a capacity of 8
thousand inhabitants. The estate is
complemented by shops and restaurants, but
there is no school, kindergarten, or health
station, which already constitutes a standard in
the new built Polish estates. In extreme
situations (Smalltown Wilanów) it comes to
the necessity of purchasing a piece of land
from the investor for building a school.

In the beginning of the 90’s the first fenced
and guarded estates are developed in Poland.
In Warsaw there is already over 200 guarded
communities, and the numbed drastically
grows. The fencing tendency is not limited to
new estates anymore, the already existing
streets and previously developed
apartments, buildings and whole estates of
older buildings are being walled off. The
estimate number of private security guards in
Poland is over 200 000, comparable to the
number of combined forces of the military
(149 937) and the Police (96 635).

These guarded communities are something of
the controversy. The supporters are of the
opinion, that every human has a right to
safety, and when the state is unable to secure
this right for the citizens, the citizens
themselves must secure it. The contestants of
gates and walls call for alarm They refer to the
severance of the city architecture, the growing
social divisions, the „ghettos for the wealthy”
of sorts.

Marina Mokotów estate , opened in 2005, is
not only one of the biggest but also most
controversial urban projects of recent years. A
complex of multi-family buildings, duplex
houses and residences has been constructed
site between the prestigious residential district
of Mokotów and economic zone around the
airport. It is complemented by more then 20
stores, restaurants and services, two
parks, and an artificial lake; all this is enclosed
by a two-kilometer-long steel fence. Two
guarded gates provide the only connection
with the city. Not only was the entire area
fenced off, but also individual blocks and
buildings were surrounded with fences. This is
the largest gated community in Poland. The
opening of first customer services, such as the
smallest in Poland Wedel chocolate room
, located inside the Marina wall but available
to the public, met with a violent opposition of
the residents. Fearing the invasions of
outsiders the residents threatened to boycott
the services opened to the outside clientele.

The America has its Manhattan, the Near East
– Dubai, East Asia– Hong Kong. What is the
tower capitol of Europe? The football fans
coming to Euro 2012 will see one in the heart
of Poland. In five years time Warsaw will have
20 new skyscrapers. They will complement the
17 objects already in existence.
Interestingly, most Warsaw towers are
residential buildings offering suites over
viewing the city. The demand for such
apartments and public support for such
architecture could be an attempt to remedy
our complexes. Naturally, I do not venture to
criticize the development of high buildings in
general, only to underscore the problems
related to the localization of towers in the city
tissue unfit for increased traffic, without
anticipating the services for new residents
(publicly accessible green
areas, schools, kindergartens).

The total lack of adjustment of new buildings
to their surrounding also raises a certain
unrest. The towers of futuristic shapes are
being located completely at random. Their
design is, unfortunately, in no way related to
the localization. The same building could easily
be developed in Dubai, Hong Kong or
Moscow, and it becomes rather a calling card
of the designer, than of the city. On the icture
we can see the examples of Daniel Libeskind’s
projects.

The observation of development of
architecture in Poland allows for the
conclusion of progressing, escalating standard
stratification – separation of the relatively
large area of \"residences and high standard
estates\" and the construction of limited and
very limited investment outlays. An apartment
evolved from a common good to a
merchandise, with both positive and
dangerously negative consequences. The part
of the apartments in the more expensive
segment are nothing but financial investments.
The most common way of perceiving the
housing problems in Poland is the call for
reduction of backlog. We continue to suffer
from feelings of peripherality and fear of falling
behind. I would venture to propose an
alternative approach and perceive the Polish
reality as an area of clearly visible global
tendencies and transformations. Should one
assume, that the new world order is of
neoliberal nature, then Warsaw – forepost of
the all-Poland tendencies– becomes its
material incarnation.