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.