Interview with Lukasz Maślona - city councilman and community activist- from issue 12/2021
New Wesoła - the city planning process should be reversed. As part of the process of shaping the post-hospital area of Wesoła, a centrally located part of Krakow that is undergoing a process of transformation, an urban planning workshop was held with the participation of Krakow and non-Cracow architects, planners, officials and researchers. Among the guests at the International Architecture Biennale in Krakow were Bartlomiej Kisielewski, an architect from Horizone Studio, Lukasz Maślona, an urban activist and councilor of the City of Krakow, Kuba Snopek, an urban planner and urban researcher, and Jan Pamula, president of ARMK, the company established to manage Wesoola. I talk to them about their reflections from the workshop work during the Biennale and their personal vision for Wesoła.
Katarzyna Jagodzinska: You took part in the work of the workshop group, whose members were almost all architects. As a city activist and councilman, you have a different perspective. What reflections came to you after the Biennale?
Lukasz Maślona: It was certainly an interesting experience for me, both as a councilman and as a social activist. Although the task was the same for everyone, each of the three groups approached the topic differently. The first group focused very much on what is already in the draft development plan "Wesoła - region of Kopernika Street," and made minor adjustments to the office's proposal there. Our group, led by Professor Romuald Loegler, focused on the desire to create a good, healthy piece of the city, and we bracketed the conditions of the draft plan. We recognized that there were many elements there that we didn't quite like, and as a result, we treated the area from scratch, as it were, as unencumbered by the urban planner's vision. The third group, on the other hand, focused more on the functional sphere, giving the office the know how to manage the space that the city became the owner of. And it became that owner somewhat by accident, as the purchase of Wesola was not a planned action on the part of the mayor, rather it resulted from political necessity. When, prior to the local elections, every mayoral candidate proposed buying out Vesola, President Majchrowski, who was running for re-election, also agreed to it. It is apparent, however, that the city was not prepared to buy the area, had and still has no idea what to do with it. The voices of social activists, who both during the consultations and earlier postulated that, since the city owns the land, it should not rush to develop it by erecting more buildings, are now confirmed. This resonated strongly with every project group - above all, don't build.
What is interesting is what the third group proposed, which is to divide the space into smaller sections to encourage small entities to use it. Of course, this is more difficult to manage, certainly the Krakow City Development Agency would prefer to lease the entire building and get the constant care of this space out of the way, while for the sake of the public interest it seems that such a more experimental approach to the matter regarding the functions to appear in the buildings is justified. When residents heard the word "experiment," they strongly protested against too much experimentation with this open public space, because it has a bad connotation in Krakow - makeshift solutions have a long shelf life. An idea that reconciles many extreme opinions about the future of church buildings came from our group - it concerned locating a day care center for seniors in the convent building on Wesola Street, which is best suited for a community of some sort. If there was still the option of a kindergarten nearby, we could animate social integration. The idea of open art studios was also alive.
It is worth mentioning that the public consultations on the future of Wesola were held at the request of NGOs, the city office did not flinch. I also get the impression that the leading demand of the consultation, i.e. the slow decoration of Vesola, was used to do nothing there. This is my complaint as a councilman, that for the whole of last year, except for one cultural event that took place there in the meadow, this space has been dead. And it could, in my opinion, have long served at least an integrative function, especially for local residents. I have the impression that it's mainly the wind that's blowing there, while various social and cultural initiatives should be blowing. Of course, we are not talking about event functions, but various others that do not need specially equipped buildings and could serve a temporary function.
Above all, I'm glad that the vision of architects and urban planners coincides with the outcome of the public consultation, that the voice of residents, the vast majority of whom are not educated in the direction of spatial or architectural development, has met the voice of experts.
The city does not want to add to Wesola, so there was an idea to lease one or two buildings for medical purposes very quickly, but this did not work out. Since we haven't managed to get any income for a year, it's worth considering raising funds from outside - from the new EU perspective. Our workshop group came up with ideas for adapting Wesoła to climate change, showing that historic buildings can be adapted for rainwater retention, used later to irrigate the green zones that will be created here, and which would reduce the local flooding we face in Grzegórzki.
Here we have a reference to the main idea of the Biennale: re-use, that is, to reuse water, including that which is pumped out of the drainage barrier at the Mogilskie traffic circle, just so that a streetcar can run there. It is simply let back into the Vistula in huge quantities, and it could be introduced in the form of some watercourses into Wesoła so that it could also be used by the botanical garden.
Huge housing developments are springing up in Grzegórzki, which, except for one Grzegórzec Park, have no public space. The idea of building a Music Center in Grzegórzki fell through, so we need to try to create a new local center for residents, but it certainly can't be the concrete plaza that is written into the design. Of course, one can think about allocating part of the buildings for possible apartments, but it seems that we have a very strong residential function in the area, and now the residents lack a place for local meetings. Not so much a market, but some kind of agora, where they could just hang out and meet.
Wesoła development project proposed by Group II
Katarzyna: Do you think Krakow is ready to hold off yet, wait and really take an experimental approach to this large, centrally located area?
Luke: First of all, the important thing is when we get the right to all the buildings we bought. We have just a few of them, and there is a willingness on the part of the Jagiellonian University to delay the move. This may be an opportunity for us in a way, because it seems to me that it would be a mistake to rush and try to forcefully develop this space quickly. The city has neither a cell within its official structure nor experience in developing such a large area in the inner city. Simply put, as a municipality we have never owned such land - it is easy to make mistakes, but later it will be very difficult to correct them. Maybe instead of making them, it would be better to try through experimental activities to try to introduce some solutions and constantly subject them to feedback and evaluation by residents, especially local ones. Hence the idea came to our group to create a local center for residents, where there would be a room for several hundred people, where in a modern way residents could express their opinions on specific solutions that are currently being proposed. It took the form of a graduation tower, where there would be a meeting space inside and a space for art outside, so that these worlds would intermingle. For example, if outdoor exhibitions are organized, so that residents can leave their opinion not only online, but also on the spot, even on the basis of a very simple vote: yes I like / no, I don't like. So that the process of consultation with residents does not stop, and so that the habit of continuous co-determination is developed in residents. There was hope for this after the public consultations, as there was an announcement of a series of meetings about Wesola, but unfortunately the topic died. Residents have already forgotten about it, unfortunately nothing has happened with it, and it is clear that Wesoła is falling into oblivion.
It is good that the guardian of this process should be named. The question is to what extent does the City Development Agency want to take over this role, or do we need to look for another solution. In order not to duplicate costs, however, it would be good for the ARMK to take responsibility for this space, but not on the basis of: let's wait and see what happens on its own, but to try to animate this process more actively. What is happening now is a de facto languor. What's more, the consultation process related to the development of Wesola is mixed up with consultations on the development plan, and these are completely different levels. I think it would be a good idea to suspend work on the plan and wait until the final functions are finally crystallized, in line with the expectations of the residents. Here we are not in danger of development, because the city is the developer.
Katarzyna: Do you think there is enough consultation with the urban planning and architectural community for now, that there are enough ideas and now they need to be processed?
Lukasz: No, absolutely not, we should not remain at the stage of three concepts. This should evolve into one concept. If the groups drew common elements from their ideas, we would already have a core around which we could build the target concept for Wesola. There were many points that converged, and it is primarily the divergent issues that need discussion. The method by which we will arrange our Wesoola should also be defined. I think we can also try to activate NGOs more, which have the most experience in working with residents. This has been lacking so far, but there is nothing to prevent this from happening.
Catherine: Thank you for the interview.
Workshop participants during design work
photo by Patryk Czornij
