For high-stakes spatial decisions
— from data to strategy to design.
Cities are complex systems shaped by disconnected decisions across multiple domains.
Most spatial decisions fail not because of missing data — but because of how people process it.
Policy, urban planning, development, architecture and engineering each operate with their own rules, tools and timelines. They all focuses on what it defines as a successful outcome.
As a result, the same site is understood differently by each discipline — making shared understanding difficult, not just inconvenient.
Without a common approach, critical decisions are made in isolation — at every stage of a project.
The result is predictable: fragmented outcomes, misaligned priorities, and built environments that fail to satisfy stakeholders.
FIG. 01
Spatial Decisions Fragmentation
SpatialMore was founded by architect
Bartosz Kołodziej to connect
decision-making and spatial design
for developers, cities and organizations.
Real estate development is defined by decisions made early, when uncertainty is highest and reliable analysis is often missing.
SpatialMore's approach brings structure and data into those critical moments. The result is faster decisions, reduced risk, and capital deployed with greater confidence — grounded in spatial reality rather than assumptions.
What the location can deliver — assessed against market reality, spatial context and development constraints.
How the choice is structured — so analysis, scenarios and stakeholder perspectives converge into a clear direction.
Decision translated into form — the architectural argument that makes the strategy visible and communicable to everyone involved.
Cities face high-impact decisions with fragmented data, competing interests and limited time for analysis.
SpatialMore's approach brings structure and clarity to that complexity. Better urban decisions require better tools — enabling cities to act with confidence, align stakeholders and shape more coherent urban outcomes.
Where the city performs and where opportunity lies — mapped across mobility, services, environment and economic activity.
How competing priorities become a shared, defensible decision — structured so stakeholders align around the same evidence.
Direction translated into urban form — structure, density and public space aligned with strategic intent.
Organizations face spatial decisions when adapting existing sites, upgrading buildings or planning new locations. These decisions are complex, long-term and difficult to reverse.
SpatialMore brings structure and clarity to this process. Better spatial decisions enable organizations to use space more effectively, adapt to change and invest with greater confidence.
How your locations and spaces work — and where targeted change delivers the greatest impact.
How complex, long-term spatial choices are structured — with clarity on trade-offs, risks and the conditions for confident investment.
Selected direction translated into spatial and architectural form — aligned with feasibility, quality and long-term performance.
Three interconnected domains — Spatial Intelligence, Decision Intelligence and Spatial Translation.
FIG. 02
Domain Architecture
Spatial decisions span multiple domains — from data to strategy to design.
Spatial Intelligence turns location data into decision-ready intelligence.
Decision Intelligence structures how that intelligence becomes a decision — aligning stakeholders and making choices defensible.
Spatial Translation turns strategy into spatial form.
Each layer informs the others. None operates in isolation.
Every spatial challenge moves through a structured process — from raw data to spatial form.
Spatial decisions are shaped as much by measurable evidence as by cognitive patterns.
Our process is built to bridge this gap — structuring what is known, challenging how it is interpreted, testing what is uncertain, and turning decisions into clear spatial forms.
It is built for developers, cities and institutions facing decisions that are too consequential to get wrong.
FIG. 03
Integrated Spatial Process
Latest updates — milestones on SpatialMore's path.
We're honored to be among 80 semifinalists selected for the @EEC Startup Challenge at the @European Economic Congress in Katowice, Poland.
The @EEC Startup Challenge is a major international platform connecting innovative young companies with investors and industry leaders seeking new opportunities and inspiration.
The grand finale will take place on April 23, 2026 at the International Congress Centre in Katowice.
SpatialMore was founded by Bartosz Kołodziej — an architect working across Poland, Germany and France on residential, commercial and infrastructure projects.
Bartosz Kołodziej studied Architecture and Urban Planning at Cracow University of Technology, graduating in 2014. His early experience includes work at Nicolas Laisné Architectes in Paris on competition-winning residential developments, followed by projects in Poland across commercial interiors and office developments, including at nsMoonStudio in Kraków.
In 2017, he moved to Germany and joined netzwerkarchitekten in Darmstadt, where he worked on large-scale public infrastructure — metro stations in Munich and Hamburg — across all project phases, from concept to execution.
Across these contexts, he observed that critical spatial decisions — about where to build, what to build and how to prioritize — are shaped by multiple stakeholders and constraints, making structured decision frameworks increasingly important.
To explore this further, he expanded his work beyond architecture, completing postgraduate studies in management at Warsaw School of Economics (SGH), focusing on the application of behavioral economics to decision-making in spatial practice. His research received recognition in the 2025 Scientific Award Competition of the Polish Chamber of Architects (IARP).
SpatialMore was founded as a response — bringing together spatial analysis, decision-making and design into one coherent process.
Founder's profile on LinkedInSpatial decisions shape places for decades. They determine what gets built, where, and for whom — and are made under conditions of real complexity: multiple stakeholders, incomplete data, and competing priorities.
SpatialMore brings structure to this process — integrating Spatial Intelligence, Decision Intelligence and Spatial Translation into a single practice that connects data, decisions and spatial form.
We work with developers, cities and organizations facing high-impact spatial decisions — from large-scale investments to the transformation of existing spaces. In each case, the outcome depends on the quality of the decision process behind it.
SpatialMore is built to make these decisions with greater clarity, coherence and confidence — and to ensure that what is decided translates into what gets built.
Artificial Intelligence has mastered the digital world. What comes next — as Fei-Fei Li, AI pioneer and founder of World Labs, argues — are Large World Models (LWMs): systems that understand the physical environment. Space, not just text. Context, not just content. This marks the emergence of Spatial Intelligence as an infrastructural capability.
At the same time, the challenge is no longer access to data, but knowing what to do with it. Decision Intelligence — the structured design of how choices are made — is becoming as critical as the analysis that informs them.
Architecture, meanwhile, is under pressure to redefine its role. As Reinier de Graaf — architect, writer and partner at OMA — argues in Architecture Against Architecture: Manifesto, the authority of the profession is eroding and its methods are no longer tenable.
The boundaries between technology, strategy and design are dissolving. SpatialMore is built for this shift — working at the intersection of Spatial Intelligence, Decision Intelligence and Spatial Translation, where data becomes strategy and strategy becomes space.
The role of the architect is changing with it. From designing objects to structuring processes. From producing form to defining problems and directing how they are solved.
In this environment, human judgment becomes more critical — not in competing with machines, but in directing them. Filtering signal from noise. Maintaining coherence across systems no single tool can resolve. Machines generate. Humans decide what matters.