Unsustainable?
Both parties in the dispute will undoubtedly be giving the seven-page document their undivided attention before making further statements. One such from developer ING Real Estate is impending.
However the matter is now taken forward, the debate on the wider implications of the scenario will continue beyond any settlement. For the organization responsible for the current inactivity between the Holiday Inn and the city's main train station provokes scorn from many in the local media and business community. Others, however, are prepared to acknowledge that it does perform a useful role, despite the havoc it can bring to a project with its eagerness to find fault with many a developer's desire to build fast and big on Warsaw's soil.
"It's because we are effective," says Michał Zyga, a prominent member of the association, of the negative publicity it attracts. Of certain elements in the Polish press he adds, "we disturb them, that's why they're always telling lies about us. They want to push us away from this market." A recent hostile report appeared in the newspaper Życie Warszawy which 'revealed' that Przyjazne Miasto (PM) had tried to wrestle a payment of zł.50 million from Złote Tarasy in return for a more conciliatory stance towards the project. Zyga denies this claim "totally" and calls it a "complete lie." He continues: "Życie Warszawy attacks us in the strongest and most dishonest way," and suggests that the paper is pursuing a vindictive agenda against his organization because of the impact it has had on certain developments in the city.
Accusations that Przyjazne Miasto tries to extort money from unwitting investors are not new, however. The association was involved in a similar case with the Arkadia retail center some one and a half years ago. This development, which is to open in October this year and will become the city's largest shopping mall, with 110,000 square meters, was deemed by PM to be in "an area which had featured in some environmental studies of Warsaw and was considered to be one of its fresh air corridors," says Zyga. "We based our appeal to the court on the fact that there had been a decision by the Warsaw local authority on how local masterplans should proceed in the area surrounding Gdański train station [which is in the vicinity of Arkadia]. It was written that 50 percent of the green area there should be conserved." As in their view the Arkadia development would prevent this from occurring, the organization brought the matter to the attention of the court, but the issue was dealt with at a much earlier stage of construction than has happened at Złote Tarasy. And after four months of intense negotiation, the two parties, developer Cefic Polska and Przyjazne Miasto, agreed on a settlement which allowed the developer to press ahead with the scheme. But according to a number of reports in the Polish media at the time, this came to pass because the former had paid off the latter to the tune of some zł2 million. Zyga insists, however, that this interpretation of events is way too simplistic and claims that PM had suggested to Cefic that they both cooperate to establish a foundation which would conduct research into the impact Arkadia would have on the environment and then make suggestions as to how this might be lessened. "We also wanted to register the foundation but after the attacks in the press the commercial court was unwilling to do this," says Zyga. The developer was anyway uninterested in such a foundation, he adds: "they just decided to give the money to the association."
Such pledges of innocence don't wash with others, however. Jakub Wygnański of Forum Inicjatyw Pozarzadowych (The Forum for Non-Governmental Initiatives in Poland), an umbrella organization which is "a Poland-wide, apolitical civil movement that was formed in 1993... to fulfilly the need that began to develop in Poland for a non-governmental sector [besides the national and economic]," according to its website, believes that groups such as Przyjazne Miasto tarnish the image of other non-government organizations by their actions. He would like to see legislation introduced which would regulate the behavior of such bodies and ensure that they remain firmly within the non-profit category. Describing PM as a "Robin Hood" outfit, which is however disinclined to re-distribute the bounty it extracts from developers, Wygnański believes that it and "two or three" others "corrode the public's trust in non-profit organizations," as a whole, though they number some 50,000 across the country. Przyjazne Miasto is, in his view, a body which "presents itself as an ecological organization but which feels it is entitled to use ecological blackmail," to achieve its ends. Adding that the association "has little control over its members," he firmly questions whether it has the right to present itself as non-profit because it runs "a related company [Ekoplan, the body Wygnański says acts as PM's enforcer], which means there is an obvious conflict of interest here." Insisting that he does not hold to a "good investor/bad NGO" dichotomy, he is nonetheless adamant that PM is a "completely cynical" organization.
Damning words indeed, but these are not sentiments shared by all who have had dealings with the association, including developers who one might assume would be more than happy to denounce them. Cefic Polska's general manager, Grzegorz Pękalski, for one, is far less outspoken on the organization's activities than Wygnański.
The agreement which was ultimately thrashed out between Cefic and Przyjazne Miasto has been implemented, he says. This entails "adding two sections of green roof to the top of Arkadia. To do this we had to change the structure of the roof and create a few new layers of isolation, as well as a layer of top soil which will allow this grass to survive over the years," he explains. From his perspective, Cefic "agreed to improve Arkadia according to Przyjazne Miasto's targets and requirements," though at the beginning the association weren't aware of the "technical possibilities" in affecting changes to the project. It wanted "us to create a regular park with trees and bushes etc., but this was impossible because it would have meant that the whole 5-floor structure [of the building] would have had to have been changed and not just the roof," says Pękalski.
Negotiations between the two parties led to the discovery of a technology called 'Suprema', which is used in France, Switzerland and Canada and which enabled Cefic to adapt PM's "requirements into the technical conditions [of the project], without changing the entire structure of the building," adds the general manager.
The agreement to the above effect that was signed between the two bodies has become ever more cordial with the passage of time, according to Pękalski. Arkadia now has "a very detailed design and we know more and use Przyjazne Miasto as consultants all the time. Now we are approaching the completion of the center, we hope everyone will be satisfied," he says.
Pękalski's general attitude to PM can be summed up as philosophical. He accepts that such bodies will inevitably play a role in large-scale developments in a democracy. "There's nothing unusual about this. If you look at Europe as a whole you'll see that projects do require some sort of consultancy with different kinds of organization and the state has given them the right to get involved." Acknowledging that without Przyjazne Miasto's intervention, Cefic probably would not have incorporated the green roof into its project, he adds nonetheless that among organizations of its kind, PM is "probably the most efficient. The guys are smart and know the sorts of mistakes investors and administrators can make."
Przyjazne Miasto themselves, of course, believe that the developers at Złote Tarasy are not without fault when it comes to the sustainability of their project. This despite the fact that ING Real Estate commissioned consultant engineers Arup to carry out one of its SPeAR (Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine) analyses to the development's scheme design, design development and tender design stages. SPeAR, Arup's Paul Geeson has elsewhere* claimed, "is a way of measuring the sustainability of a project or business and it's probably the first method being developed to try and objectively measure all the things that make a project sustainable or unsustainable." The report that Arup produced for ING, was, however, for the developer's eyes only and remains beyond public scrutiny.
Michał Zyga, not unexpectedly, is highly skeptical of any claims anyone might want to make for the "sustainable" status of Złote Tarasy and points to the "very high" concentration of buildings on a relatively small plot as being just one of the ecologically unfriendly features of the development. And he refers to another: "According to the masterplan it was stipulated that there would only be 800 parking spaces [at Złote Tarasy]. In fact, there are 1,600, so the development is not in accordance with the masterplan." Of Arup's efforts to modify the project so that it causes minimal harm to the environment, he adds, "I do not consider this investment to be a model of sustainable development. I have read about Arup's other achievements but I wouldn't consider this to be one of them."
"We are employed by clients who want us to meet their business needs and within that framework, we do our best to pursue objectives of sustainable development," responds Paul Geeson. "As engineers commissioned to take part in a team to construct a very complex new building in the center of the city, everything we do has to be done within that framework."
At time of writing, ING Real Estate themselves had not yet made any further comment on the issue bedeviling their development, wishing instead to wait until they had perused the court's written verdict. Paul Geeson, however, makes the following claim on their behalf: "I think that it would be wrong to assume that the client [ING Real Estate] has little or no interest in sustainability. They have to meet requirements commercially and functionally but within these constraints I'm sure that they would make decisions that are as sustainable as possible."
Grzegorz Pękalski, however, insists that organizations such as Przyjazne Miasto are justly in a position to influence the end-product of a shopping center, or any other scheme for that matter. "Of course," he says, "the municipality can attempt to get investors to modify their projects but it has to take care of the city's development as a whole, so there is a gap for other organizations to become involved in this process. Don't count on developers - it's not their job to take care of the environment."
*Interview with Eurobuild Poland, January 2004?
However the matter is now taken forward, the debate on the wider implications of the scenario will continue beyond any settlement. For the organization responsible for the current inactivity between the Holiday Inn and the city's main train station provokes scorn from many in the local media and business community. Others, however, are prepared to acknowledge that it does perform a useful role, despite the havoc it can bring to a project with its eagerness to find fault with many a developer's desire to build fast and big on Warsaw's soil.
"It's because we are effective," says Michał Zyga, a prominent member of the association, of the negative publicity it attracts. Of certain elements in the Polish press he adds, "we disturb them, that's why they're always telling lies about us. They want to push us away from this market." A recent hostile report appeared in the newspaper Życie Warszawy which 'revealed' that Przyjazne Miasto (PM) had tried to wrestle a payment of zł.50 million from Złote Tarasy in return for a more conciliatory stance towards the project. Zyga denies this claim "totally" and calls it a "complete lie." He continues: "Życie Warszawy attacks us in the strongest and most dishonest way," and suggests that the paper is pursuing a vindictive agenda against his organization because of the impact it has had on certain developments in the city.
Accusations that Przyjazne Miasto tries to extort money from unwitting investors are not new, however. The association was involved in a similar case with the Arkadia retail center some one and a half years ago. This development, which is to open in October this year and will become the city's largest shopping mall, with 110,000 square meters, was deemed by PM to be in "an area which had featured in some environmental studies of Warsaw and was considered to be one of its fresh air corridors," says Zyga. "We based our appeal to the court on the fact that there had been a decision by the Warsaw local authority on how local masterplans should proceed in the area surrounding Gdański train station [which is in the vicinity of Arkadia]. It was written that 50 percent of the green area there should be conserved." As in their view the Arkadia development would prevent this from occurring, the organization brought the matter to the attention of the court, but the issue was dealt with at a much earlier stage of construction than has happened at Złote Tarasy. And after four months of intense negotiation, the two parties, developer Cefic Polska and Przyjazne Miasto, agreed on a settlement which allowed the developer to press ahead with the scheme. But according to a number of reports in the Polish media at the time, this came to pass because the former had paid off the latter to the tune of some zł2 million. Zyga insists, however, that this interpretation of events is way too simplistic and claims that PM had suggested to Cefic that they both cooperate to establish a foundation which would conduct research into the impact Arkadia would have on the environment and then make suggestions as to how this might be lessened. "We also wanted to register the foundation but after the attacks in the press the commercial court was unwilling to do this," says Zyga. The developer was anyway uninterested in such a foundation, he adds: "they just decided to give the money to the association."
Such pledges of innocence don't wash with others, however. Jakub Wygnański of Forum Inicjatyw Pozarzadowych (The Forum for Non-Governmental Initiatives in Poland), an umbrella organization which is "a Poland-wide, apolitical civil movement that was formed in 1993... to fulfilly the need that began to develop in Poland for a non-governmental sector [besides the national and economic]," according to its website, believes that groups such as Przyjazne Miasto tarnish the image of other non-government organizations by their actions. He would like to see legislation introduced which would regulate the behavior of such bodies and ensure that they remain firmly within the non-profit category. Describing PM as a "Robin Hood" outfit, which is however disinclined to re-distribute the bounty it extracts from developers, Wygnański believes that it and "two or three" others "corrode the public's trust in non-profit organizations," as a whole, though they number some 50,000 across the country. Przyjazne Miasto is, in his view, a body which "presents itself as an ecological organization but which feels it is entitled to use ecological blackmail," to achieve its ends. Adding that the association "has little control over its members," he firmly questions whether it has the right to present itself as non-profit because it runs "a related company [Ekoplan, the body Wygnański says acts as PM's enforcer], which means there is an obvious conflict of interest here." Insisting that he does not hold to a "good investor/bad NGO" dichotomy, he is nonetheless adamant that PM is a "completely cynical" organization.
Damning words indeed, but these are not sentiments shared by all who have had dealings with the association, including developers who one might assume would be more than happy to denounce them. Cefic Polska's general manager, Grzegorz Pękalski, for one, is far less outspoken on the organization's activities than Wygnański.
The agreement which was ultimately thrashed out between Cefic and Przyjazne Miasto has been implemented, he says. This entails "adding two sections of green roof to the top of Arkadia. To do this we had to change the structure of the roof and create a few new layers of isolation, as well as a layer of top soil which will allow this grass to survive over the years," he explains. From his perspective, Cefic "agreed to improve Arkadia according to Przyjazne Miasto's targets and requirements," though at the beginning the association weren't aware of the "technical possibilities" in affecting changes to the project. It wanted "us to create a regular park with trees and bushes etc., but this was impossible because it would have meant that the whole 5-floor structure [of the building] would have had to have been changed and not just the roof," says Pękalski.
Negotiations between the two parties led to the discovery of a technology called 'Suprema', which is used in France, Switzerland and Canada and which enabled Cefic to adapt PM's "requirements into the technical conditions [of the project], without changing the entire structure of the building," adds the general manager.
The agreement to the above effect that was signed between the two bodies has become ever more cordial with the passage of time, according to Pękalski. Arkadia now has "a very detailed design and we know more and use Przyjazne Miasto as consultants all the time. Now we are approaching the completion of the center, we hope everyone will be satisfied," he says.
Pękalski's general attitude to PM can be summed up as philosophical. He accepts that such bodies will inevitably play a role in large-scale developments in a democracy. "There's nothing unusual about this. If you look at Europe as a whole you'll see that projects do require some sort of consultancy with different kinds of organization and the state has given them the right to get involved." Acknowledging that without Przyjazne Miasto's intervention, Cefic probably would not have incorporated the green roof into its project, he adds nonetheless that among organizations of its kind, PM is "probably the most efficient. The guys are smart and know the sorts of mistakes investors and administrators can make."
Przyjazne Miasto themselves, of course, believe that the developers at Złote Tarasy are not without fault when it comes to the sustainability of their project. This despite the fact that ING Real Estate commissioned consultant engineers Arup to carry out one of its SPeAR (Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine) analyses to the development's scheme design, design development and tender design stages. SPeAR, Arup's Paul Geeson has elsewhere* claimed, "is a way of measuring the sustainability of a project or business and it's probably the first method being developed to try and objectively measure all the things that make a project sustainable or unsustainable." The report that Arup produced for ING, was, however, for the developer's eyes only and remains beyond public scrutiny.
Michał Zyga, not unexpectedly, is highly skeptical of any claims anyone might want to make for the "sustainable" status of Złote Tarasy and points to the "very high" concentration of buildings on a relatively small plot as being just one of the ecologically unfriendly features of the development. And he refers to another: "According to the masterplan it was stipulated that there would only be 800 parking spaces [at Złote Tarasy]. In fact, there are 1,600, so the development is not in accordance with the masterplan." Of Arup's efforts to modify the project so that it causes minimal harm to the environment, he adds, "I do not consider this investment to be a model of sustainable development. I have read about Arup's other achievements but I wouldn't consider this to be one of them."
"We are employed by clients who want us to meet their business needs and within that framework, we do our best to pursue objectives of sustainable development," responds Paul Geeson. "As engineers commissioned to take part in a team to construct a very complex new building in the center of the city, everything we do has to be done within that framework."
At time of writing, ING Real Estate themselves had not yet made any further comment on the issue bedeviling their development, wishing instead to wait until they had perused the court's written verdict. Paul Geeson, however, makes the following claim on their behalf: "I think that it would be wrong to assume that the client [ING Real Estate] has little or no interest in sustainability. They have to meet requirements commercially and functionally but within these constraints I'm sure that they would make decisions that are as sustainable as possible."
Grzegorz Pękalski, however, insists that organizations such as Przyjazne Miasto are justly in a position to influence the end-product of a shopping center, or any other scheme for that matter. "Of course," he says, "the municipality can attempt to get investors to modify their projects but it has to take care of the city's development as a whole, so there is a gap for other organizations to become involved in this process. Don't count on developers - it's not their job to take care of the environment."
*Interview with Eurobuild Poland, January 2004?
