Presentation showed at RC21 Conference in Berlin "Resourceful cities" in session about spatial exclusion. More details: http://www.rc21.org/conferences/berlin2013/prog-05.php

1. Public space that excludes.
A case study from Warsaw
Adam Piotr Zając
University of Warsaw
RC21 Conference, Berlin 31/08/2013

2. Plan of presentation
1. Accessibility of public space
2. Theoretical framework
3. Warsaw’s historical background
4. Findings from project Warsaw Map of Barriers
5. Universal design – constraints
6. Conclusions and recomendations

3. 1. Accessibility of public
space

4. Defining the problem
Users have similiar needs regarding to
public space:
• Safety
• Accesibility
• Attractivity etc.
Answer to these needs must meet the
specificity of different users.
Users of space need to come into
various interactions, like observing one
another, in order to avoid a collision (Conley
2012: 220). The interest of the group they
represent becomes one of identity
determinants,. Common needs of space
users are today recognized to a very small
extent.

5. Groups of users of public space
• Pedestrians
• Passengers (also with luggage)
• Turists
• Parents with trolleys
• Bikers
• People with physical
disablities
• People with sensory
disablities (blindness,
deafness)
• People with mental disablities

6. Social movements
Trolleys’ Critical Mass,
source: http://www.chustomania.pl
Crazy wheelchairer,
Source: http://warszawa.gazeta.pl
Warsaw Critical
Mass,
source: masa.waw.pl

7. 2. Theoretical framework

8. Ali Madanipour - spatial exclusion
• 3 dimensions of social exclusion:
– economical
– political
– cultural
• Access as major aspect of defining social
exclusion
• Oposition: triple excluded vs. completely
integrated
• Space is an arena of exlusion and fighting for
access. Designing public space require
providing access and possiblity of existence
for groups exposed to marginalization.
• Marginalization brings the danger of
alienantion of system from life of the people
Source: www.mimdap.org

9. Right to the city concept
• David Harvey (2012): Not only have citizens right to access all
resources and supplies in the city, but they can also change
them and use in a new way. Citizens should have collective
power on urbanisation processes and influence others actors’
actions.
• If everybody has right to the city, how can we provided
enough voice for exluded (weaker) groups?
• Different groups of urban activists legitimazing their actions
with Harvey’s concept.

10. Ewa Kuryłowicz (2005): 3 ways of
designing space and objects
Isolation in
private space
Specific
solutions just
for disabled
people
Universal
design
• 3 different historic approaches to problem of
designing space for disabled people:
• Shift from complete exclusion to complete inclusion
• From different to universal design for all users
• From pure vision of designer to consultations and
standards

11. Universal design approach
The design of products and environments to
be usable by all people, to the greatest
extent possible, without the need for
adaptation or specialized design.
1. Equitable use
2. Flexibility in use
3. Simple and intuitive
4. Perceptible information
5. Tolerance for error
6. Low physical effort
7. Size and space for approach and use
NC State University, The Center for Universal Design,
Version 2.0 - 4/1/9

12. 3. Warsaw’s historical
background

13. WWII and Warsaw uprising
Source: www.naszawarszawa.com
Source: www.kultura.wp.pl/

14. Towards modernistic vision of city
• After WWII: ambition to
build modern city
• New vision: Car oriented city
(Autogerechte Stadt)
• Multilevel intersections
• Multilane, wide streets
• Underground passages in
city centre
• Functional division of city,
industrial and residential
zones.
• High block of flats, free green
space – longer distances

15. Reclaiming the streets for people
• Traffic calming in
residential areas
• Pedestrians zones,
• nobody critize univeral
accesibility idea
• Still many inaccessible
places (old
infrastructure)
• Hearable voice of
citizens (but not
everybody and always
accepted by designers)

16. 4. Findings from project
Warsaw Map of Barriers
1000 obstacles in Warsaw

17. Some statistics…
• 6 categories of barriers
• 6% of fixed places
• Each groups of points
has it’s own
characteristics…
35%
28%
12%
7%
7%
6%
5%
SHARE OF CATEGORIES IN TOTAL
NUMBER OF COLLECTED BARRIERS,
N=935
pedestrian crossings bus and tram stops
stairs underpasses
others fixed places
overpasses

18. 1. Pedestrian crossings
291

19. 2. Stairs without ramps
113

20. 3. Flyovers/viaducts for pedestrians
46

21. 4. Underground passages
69

22. 6. Bus and tram stops
238

23. 5. Other obstacles
61

25. Accessibility of railway
stations in Warsaw
• 49 stations
• 29% accessible for physic
disabled passengers. Other
groups have worse results.
• Main problems: entries
with stairs, unworking
elevetors, too steep ramps
• No reliable information for
passengers.
• Source: SISKOM (2013)

26. Reasons of inaccessibility
Architectural
Barriers
Infrastructure which
has never been
accessible
Infrastructure which
was meant to be
accessible
Infrastructure in
bad condition
Infrastructure
designed in wrong
way
Infrastructure bulit
in wrong way

27. 5. Universal design –
constraints

28. Universal design: why not?
• Not important problem or to big problem to solve
• Additional economical costs
• Need of consultation with users
• There is no possibility to solve all of the problems
• Expert knowledge vs. knowledge of users
• Against strategic documents or common interest

29. 6. Conclusions and
recomendations

30. Questions to consider
• Who occupies public space? Who has right for
equal access?
• Who has power to fight for equal access?
• What assumptions lay behind design of public
space? For whom we design public space?
• Is spatial exclusion in architecture an universal
experience for contemporary cities?
• Is bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly city the ultimate
vision of the city?

31. References
• Conley Jim. 2012. A Sociology Of Traffic: Driving, Cycling,
Walking. IN: Vannini Philip (ed.) Technologies of Mobility in
the Americas. Oxford & Bern: Peter Lang.
• Harvey David (2012) Bunt Miast. Prawo do miasta i miejska
rewolucja, Warszawa: Fundacja Bęc Zmiana.
• Kuryłowicz Ewa. 2005. Projektowanie uniwersalne.
Uwarunkowania architektoniczne kształtowania otoczenia
wybudowanego przyjaznego dla osób niepełnosprawnych.
Warszawa: Stowarzyszenie Przyjaciół Integracji.
• Madanipour Ali: Social Exclusion and Space. In: The City
Reader. 5th edition, Routledge New York 2011
• The Centre of Universal Design .1997, The principles of
universal design, Version 2.0 - 4/1/97. North Carolina State
University. [WWW document]. URL:
http://www.ncsu.edu/www/ncsu/design/sod5/cud/about_u
d/udprinciples.htm (accessed 12/06/2013)

32. Thank you for your attention
adampiotrzajac@gmail.com
twitter.com/adampiotrzajac
mapabarier.siskom.waw.pl
facebook.com/adampiotrzajac
www.slideshare.net/mapabarier
Adam Piotr Zając
Centre for European and Regional
Studies (EUROREG),
University of Warsaw
Member of the board in SISKOM