Warsaw's landscape resolution will not go into effect. On December 18, the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw rejected a complaint by Warsaw City Hall against the decision of the Mazovian Governor. The document, which was rejected in February by Konstanty Radziwill, was to regulate issues concerning the aesthetics of the capital's public space the form and size of advertisements or the way signs are placed on buildings.
Warsaw Landscape Resolution
© Adrian Grycuk / WIkimedia CC BY-SA 3.0
The LandscapeResolution, which covers the entire city, is a document regulating the appearance and location of advertisements, signs, landscaping and fences. Elements that often arouse controversy among those concerned with the aesthetics of public space are already regulated in this way in Krakow and Gdansk, among others. In the latter city in particular, we have recently seen spectacular effects of the provisions coming into force.
The document was passed unanimously by the Warsaw City Council in January. After a two-year transition period in the capital, it would no longer be possible to place large-format ads obscuring windows, and other ads on buildings were only possible for the duration of renovations. The distances and sizes of the various types of media (poles, billboards) were established, and signboards were also to be subject to strict regulations. The resolution included a number of provisions on the formation of small architecture, its forms and stylistic consistency. It was also the intention of the city authorities to significantly limit the possibility of fencing off space on its territory.
Annulment of the resolution
© Adrian Grycuk / WIkimedia CC BY-SA 3.0
By decision of the Mazovian Voivode in February, the landscape resolution was repealed in its entirety. The provincial governor declared it invalid, noting procedural violations and alleged overstepping of the powers and limits of the law established by the so-called Landscape Act. The verdict of the Provincial Administrative Court of December 18 admits the governor's right and dismisses the city's complaint. The content of the justification for the verdict has not yet been published. However, this is not a good decision from the point of view of the city's interests.
In the current situation, the city authorities will be able to follow two paths. Neither of them, however, guarantees that the legislation will go into effect in the near future. The first option is to file a cassation complaint with the Supreme Administrative Court. This would entail a second, this time much longer court proceedings. The second way out of the ystuation is to prepare a completely new resolution, in accordance with the governor's guidelines, so as to avoid the procedural errors pointed out. A shorter transition period could then be considered, but in the end the provisions of the new resolution would still come into effect later than planned.
Kacper Kępiński
