Is the term concretosis being used correctly? How has our approach to this phenomenon changed? Is it exclusively a sign of our times? We talk to Ewa Twardoch, landscape architect and co-founder of the 44STO studio, about adaptation to climate change, the size of trees that should be planted and when we should refrain from using the term concretosis.
Wiktor Bochenek: It is worth starting our conversation with the definition of concretion. Is it used correctly and does it accidentally appear too often?
Ewa Twardoch: Betonosis is the concreting of biologically active surfaces. It seems to me that this term is used correctly. The word concretosis made a career after the publication of Jan Mencwel's book with this title. I must admit that I am delighted with this phenomenon, because I have been dealing with the topic of concretosis in the city for a very long time.
This topic was already emerging in the early 2000s among landscape architects. It was clear to me that treating greenery in housing as a problem to be gotten rid of would lead us to disaster. We knew as an environment how irreversible changes are made by irresponsible management of the natural resource in the city. However, none of us were able to break through to a wider audience, get out of our bubble and tell the problem in a way that a wider audience could understand.
This was done for us by the book Concreteosis, written not by an expert, but by journalist and social activist Jan Mencwel. This book started discussions about concretosis in wide circles. I am particularly pleased that the discussion has also moved to the architectural community.
Has the assessment of the phenomenon itself gone too far? I have some doubts. Looking through the accounts of urban activists, it seems to me that they are currently criticizing the creation and existence of every urban square. And yet it is not the case that suddenly every square should lose its urban function and be transformed into a green area.
Ewa Twardoch
© Ewa Twardoch
Wiktor: I decided to start the conversation with the correctness of the definition, because I encountered comments about concretization under a post presenting a project for a housing development with rental apartments built by the city. Hence, my question arose as to whether we were misusing the term.
Ewa: I haven't encountered the exact example you're referring to, but I agree that the slogan betonosis is currently being used as a buzzword to criticize many developments that have nothing to do with it. But maybe it has to be that after years of ruthless sniping, we have to, as a society, "overuse" the word a bit.
Victor: As a working landscape architect, do you notice this societal shift in thinking about concretions and the role of greenery in the city?
Eve: Yes, and to a huge extent. The social change on this topic is gigantic. We landscape architects were taught the importance of trees in the city, but at the beginning of my career I was met with absolute incomprehension from people outside the community.
It was a battle with officials, residents, but also with other planners. Trees were the enemy, and my industry explanation didn't help. For several years now, there has been a huge turnaround on the subject, at least in some part of the public. The problem is that in individual cases this turnaround takes on too radical a character. Some people would now like to deconstruct everything and a 100% ban on logging. This, however, is impossible. As with everything, greenery in the city must be approached with reason and, above all, with factual knowledge.
Wiktor: Will this "green revolution" in thinking at some point not proverbially start "eating its own children"? Won't certain projects that organize space and greenery well begin to be accused of concretism?
Ewa: I see two separate problems of concretosis here. The problem of scale and the problem of technical solutions. The problem of scale relates to the perspective of large cities and the uncritical way in which one looks at pictures of small towns that pave plazas or markets. It seems to me that from this perspective the spatial context is not visible, and all one has to do is check on google maps what is happening in the immediate vicinity of such concreted markets and it will turn out that the entire neighborhood is green and the town square is the only paved space. Often it will be the only square that will allow organizing urban life - important local events. This criticism is then very metropolitan, without understanding the problem. These small towns should have the right to paved spaces. There are, of course, extreme and bad examples, but nevertheless, as always, you can not lump everyone into one set of "bad concrete."
At the level of technical solutions, the problem of "eating one's own children" was recently evident when addressing the Five Corners Square in Warsaw. As far as I know, this criticism was largely unfounded. It really could be a good project, even though the trees appear to be concreted to the trunk, they are planted in special systems that allow the root ball to grow properly, and covered with permeable paving. There are already technical solutions that allow planting trees under concreted pavements. Such solutions use a skeletal system filled with fertile substrate, which prevents excessive compaction, the biggest enemy of urban trees. The root ball can develop properly under the concrete pavement by maintaining optimal air and water conditions. This is a tailor-made solution for the city. By knowing how trees grow and what they need, we are able to design urban spaces that reconcile the needs of users. The criticism of this particular square, in my opinion, stems from the ignorance of people who are involved in concretization "activistically" rather than professionally. Some do not see what is underneath and that it has actually been thought through. And this is what can lead to the inhibition of such projects, because investments requiring such a large amount of money as is needed for such projects will not bear the weight of bad PR.
Five Corners Square in Warsaw (proj. WXCA)
Photo by R. Motyl, source UM Warszawa
Wiktor: Isn't it a problem of lack of communication in which Architects and Landscape Architects could defend their projects?
Ewa: I don't know to what extent the Five Corners Square project was publicly consulted. In our own backyard, we had a similar situation with the design of the trees in the Market Square in Gliwice. There were historically no such trees in the market, but the city decided that in order to counteract the formation of a heat island and, most simply, to improve the living conditions of the residents there, it would introduce trees on the square's slab. The whole process of agreeing with the preservationist and the reception of the investment by residents showed us how important proper communication is. Both to us in the studio and to the investor it seemed that this particular investment would be positively received by the residents. However, the criticism was largely related to a lack of knowledge of what is under the Market Square slab. The primary objection, of course, is that trees don't grow in concrete, and another is that much larger trees should have been planted to achieve the shading effect right away. However, trees need time to adapt, and the larger the tree, the chances of adoption decrease. We must learn to look at greenery in the city differently than we look at architecture, more long-term.
Installation of solutions to maintain better tree condition in built-up space
© Ewa Twardoch
Victor: Taking this into account that trees require several or even several years of adaptation, how do you avoid heat islands during the transformation process?
Ewa: Greenery and water are the most important for reducing the effect of heat islands. In cities where this problem exists, it is important to start by stopping cutting down trees and retaining rainwater.
Landscape architect Halina Szczepanowska wrote in the 1980s, about how a tree with a large crown gives more shade than any other technical solution, i.e. umbrellas, for example. In 2001, her book Trees in the City was published, which should be a textbook for those involved in urban greening. It's fascinating that we've had a scientific basis for why trees in cities are so necessary for a very long time, and only now are we starting to address the subject very slowly. Concrete blight is not something that was invented now. The process itself and its effects were already described last century. Now we can say that these predictions have come true.
In addition to stopping logging, plantings are of course necessary. Not necessarily large and old trees, as this is economically unjustifiable. Trees that are young and adapted to urban conditions should be planted, and perhaps we should already start thinking about adapting species selection to climate change. It is very important to prepare sites for their proper development. This is a very important aspect, often financially exceeding the cost of the plantings themselves.
Victor: In that case, why are we just returning to such solutions? Why have we forgotten about them?
Ewa: I have been wondering about this for a very long time. Why something so, for the landscape architecture community very obvious, had to wait so long to pass to the general public. The answer should probably be sought in philosophical reflections on the place of man in the natural environment. The discussion on the causes and effects of climate change has been very difficult and radicalized from the beginning. I have a feeling that it will only become simpler since extreme weather events will be felt on our own skin.
Victor: Can you imagine a situation like this, where at some point this trend against concretization breaks down, and we as a society return to the love of concrete squares?
Eve: I don't think so. What awaits us in a short while, due to climate change, doesn't allow for that. At the moment, urban activists are able to fight for every tree. A good direction would be to catch the balance between sustainability for humans and for nature. A city that is resident-friendly must be green.
Wiktor: Thank you for the interview!
Additional tree plantings in Gliwice's market square, which were introduced after discussions with residents and the conservationist
© Ewa Twardoch
