24 [2016] 1 [51]
ZNANSTVENI ÈASOPIS ZA ARHITEKTURU I URBANIZAM A SCHOLARLY JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN PLANNING
SVEUÈILIŠTE U ZAGREBU, ARHITEKTONSKI FAKULTET UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE
ISSN 1330-0652
CODEN PORREV
UDK | UDC 71/72 24 [2016] 1 [51] 1-130 1-6 [2016]
ZNANSTVENI »ASOPIS ZA ARHITEKTURU I URBANIZAM A SCHOLARLY JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN PLANNING
1 [51]
SVEU»ILI©TE U ZAGREBU, ARHITEKTONSKI FAKULTET
UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE
ISSN 1330-0652
CODEN PORREV
UDK | UDC 71/72
GOD. | VOL. 24 [2016] BR. | NO. 1 [51]
STR. | PAG. 1-130
MJESECI | MONTHS 1-6 [2016]
ZnaËenja Meanings
Cijena pojedinaËnog broja Price per issue
Hrvatska: 75 kn Europa | Europe: 24 Eur Izvaneuropske zemlje | Outside Europe: 27 Eur U cijene su ukljuËeni troškovi poštarine. | Postage and handling included in the price.
Narudžbe Ordering Info
UPI-2M
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Meduliæeva 20 Tel. +385/1/4921-389 Fax. +385/1/4921-390 www.upi2mbooks.hr info@upi2mbooks.hr
Besplatan pristup internet izdanju Ëasopisa Free On-line Access to Internet Edition
Dostupni su svi Ëlanci publicirani u svim dosad izašlim brojevima u PDF formatu. All published articles in previous issues are available in PDF format.
EISSN 1333-9117
PROSTOR Online: www.prostor.hr
PROSTOR m space, room; (površina) area; (zona) tract; (prostranstvo) extent, expanse; (za kretanje/ manevriranje) elbow-room, playroom, leeway, scope; (prostorije, smještaj) premises, accomodation | životni ~ living space; stambeni ~ housing; školski ~ school space; poslovni ~ office space/premises; ~ za noge legroom; prema raspoloživom ~u on a space available basis; fig pružati ~za offer/give scope for; posvetiti (pokloniti) ~ (u novinama) devote (give) space to; zbog pomanjkanja ~a because of limited space; radi uštede na ~u to save space; povreda zraËnog ~a violation of airspace, aerosp; istraživanje ~a space exploration
ŽELJKO BUJAS (1999.), Veliki hrvatsko-engleski rjeËnik | Croatian-English dictionary, Nakladni zavod Globus, Zagreb
»asopis PROSTOR objavljuje znanstvene Ëlanke iz svih grana arhitekture i urbanizma, ali i radove iz drugih znanstvenih podruËja (povijesti umjetnosti, arheologije, etnologije, sociologije, geografije, graðevinarstva, geodezije, šumarstva, dizajna...), ako su sadržajem vezani za problematiku arhitekture i urbanizma. PROSTOR je primarni znanstveni Ëasopis i tiska samo neobjavljene Ëlanke, koji istodobno i u istom obliku ne mogu biti ponuðeni drugom izdavaËu. Osim znanstvenih priloga koji podliježu recenziji, decimalnoj klasifikaciji i kategorizaciji (izvorni znanstveni Ëlanci, prethodna priopæenja, pregledni Ëlanci, izlaganja na znanstvenim skupovima), iznimno æe se objavljivati i struËni Ëlanci analitiËkog karaktera. U skladu s navedenim, u PROSTORU se neæe objavljivati recentni projekti ni ostvarenja, osim u sluËajevima kada je posrijedi visokostruËno, odnosno primijenjeno znanstveno rješenje nekoga posebnog pitanja ili problema u sklopu projekta, uz uvjet da je sadržaj prikazan na znanstveni naËin (koncepcijski, tehniËki, tehnološki ili metodološki problem, a ne projekt ili zgrada kao takvi).
U prateæim rubrikama publiciraju se prijevodi, bibliografski prilozi, recenzije i prikazi (Ëasopisa, knjiga, izložaba, znanstvenih skupova), vijesti i aktualnosti iz struke, kronika Arhitektonskog fakulteta te sažeci obranjenih doktorskih disertacija i magistarskih radova.
• »asopis PROSTOR prijavljen je Ministarstvu znanosti i tehnologije RH kao primarna znanstvena publikacija za podruËje tehniËkih znanosti: znanstveno polje: arhitektura i urbanizam.
• »asopis PROSTOR upisan je u evidenciju periodiËnih tiskovina pri Ministarstvu informiranja RH (sada Ministarstvo kulture RH) pod prijavnim brojem 38 (Potvrda o prijavi periodiËke tiskovine od 12.05. 1992, kl. 104, ur. br. 523-021/92-847/38).
• PROSTOR izlazi polugodišnje (dva broja u godištu). U godištu 1 (1993) i 2 (1994) Ëasopis je izlazio tromjeseËno (Ëetiri broja u godištu).
• Predajom potpisanoga primjerka rukopisa autor jamèi da je iskljuèivi nositelj autorskog prava predmetnoga djela te pristaje na objavu èlanka u tiskanom i elektronskom izdanju èasopisa (Prostor Online), kao i na referiranje u sekundarnim bazama.
• Rukopisi prihvaæenih Ëlanaka ne vraæaju se.
• Objavljeni se prilozi ne honoriraju.
• Za znanstvene stavove i iznesena mišljenja u Ëlanku, toËnost podataka, te pravo objave tekstualnih i ilustracijskih priloga odgovorni su autori.
• Sva prava umnožavanja i komercijalne reprodukcije pridržava nakladnik. Korištenje podataka dopušteno je, uz obvezno citiranje potpune reference PROSTORA.
Izlaženje Ëasopisa financijski potpomaže Ministarstvo znanosti, obrazovanja i športa Republike Hrvatske.
The journal PROSTOR publishes scientific papers from all branches of architecture and urban planning as well as texts from other fields of science (art history, archaeology, ethnology, sociology, geography, civil engineering, geodesy, forestry, design...) if their content relates to architectural issues.
PROSTOR is a primary scientific journal and accepts only previously unpublished papers which cannot be simultaneously offered in the same form to another publisher. In addition to scientific contributions, which are subject to evaluation by reviewers, decimal classification and categorisation (original scientific papers, preliminary communications, reviews, conference papers), professional papers of analytical character will be published exceptionally. In accordance with the above, design projects will not be published in PROSTOR, except in cases that display a highly expert or applied scientific solution for a particular issue or problem within a project, unless the content is presented in a scientific manner (a conceptual, technical, technological or methodological problem, but not a project or a building itself).
The accompanying sections include translations, bibliographies, evaluations and reviews (of journals, books, exhibitions, conferences), the latest news and topical issues in the field, chronicle of the Faculty of Architecture as well as summaries of defended doctoral disertations and master’s theses.
• The journal PROSTOR is registered with the Ministry of Science and Technology, RC, as a primary scientific publication in the area of technical sciences: scientific field: architecture & urban planning.
• The journal PROSTOR is registered as a periodical publication with the Ministry of Information, RC (now the Ministry of Culture, RC) under the entry number 38 (Registration of a Periodical Publ. Certif. from May 12, 1992, class 104, Reg. No. 523-021/92-847/38).
• PROSTOR is a half-yearly publication (two issues a year). In vol. 1 (1993) and 2 (1994) the journal was published quartarly.
• By delivering his / her signed paper, the author guarantees that he is the sole copyright holder of his work and grants his consent to its publishing in hardcopy or electronic edition (Prostor online) as well as to its abstracting / indexing in secondary data bases.
• Typescripts of accepted papers are not returned.
• The author does not receive any payment.
• Responsibility for scientific attitudes and opinions presented in the paper, the accuracy of data and the right to publish the text(s) and illustrations rests with the author(s).
• All rights (copying and commercial reproduction) reserved by the Publisher. The use of data is permitted with obligatory citation of full reference to PROSTOR.
The journal is financially supported by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports of Republic of Croatia.
ZNANSTVENI »ASOPIS ZA ARHITEKTURU I URBANIZAM
A SCHOLARLY JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN PLANNING
OsnivaË i nakladnik Founder & Publisher
SveuËilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet
HR - 10000 Zagreb, KaËiæeva 26 www.arhitekt.hr
Za nakladnika For the Publisher
Prof.mr.sc. Boris Koružnjak
Dekan fakulteta | Dean of the Faculty
Glavni i odgovorni urednik Editor-in-Chief
Doc.dr.sc. Zlatko Karaè
SveuËilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet
Zamjenica glavnog urednika Deputy Editor
Prof.dr.sc. Ariana Štulhofer
SveuËilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet
Uredništvo Editorial Board
Prof.dr.sc. Aleksandar Homadovski
SveuËilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet
Prof.dr.sc. Zlatko Juriæ
SveuËilište u Zagrebu, Filozofski fakultet
Prof.dr.sc. SreËko Pegan
SveuËilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet
Dr.sc. Tomislav Premerl Zagreb
Izv.prof.dr.sc. Karin Šerman
SveuËilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet
Doc.dr.sc. Zoran Veršiæ
Sveuèilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet
Izv.prof.dr.sc. Feða Vukiæ, prof. SveuËilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet, Studij dizajna
Meðunarodno uredništvo International EB
Prof.Arch. Nezar AlSayyad, Ph.D. University of California, Berkeley, USA
Prof. Joan Busquets, Ph.D. GSD, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA
Prof.d.d. Alberto Darias Principe Universidad de la Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
Prof. Rudolf Klein, Ph.D. Ybl Miklós Építéstudományi Kar, Szent István Egyetem, Budapest, Hungary
Prof.dr. Fedja Košir Univerza v Ljubljani, Slovenia
Prof. Ákos Moravánszky, Ph.D.
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule [ETH], Zürich, Switzerland
Prof.Mag.Arch. Boris Podrecca Technische Universität, Stuttgart, Germany
Izvršno uredništvo Managing Board
Izv.prof.dr.sc. Damir Krajnik
Paula Šimetin
Urednica sažetaka doktorata i magisterija |
Editor in charge of summaries of doctoral dissertations and master’s theses
Doc.dr.sc. Lea Petroviæ Krajnik
V.asist.dr.sc. Zorana Sokol Gojnik
Tajnice uredništva | Editorial Secretary
StruËni i tehniËki suradnici
Professional and Technical Staff
Mirjana Ostoja, prof. Lektura | Croatian Language Editor
V.pred.dr.sc. Neda Boriæ, prof. Prijevod na engleski | English Translation
Mirjana ©ah, prof.
Korektura | Proof-reader
Ljiljana Loina-Hohnjec
Prijepis | Typing
Saša StubiËar, dipl. dizajner
Oblikovanje | Design
DENONA d.o.o., Zagreb
Grafièka priprema, tisak i uvez | Lay-out, Print and Binding
Povjerenstvo za nakladništvo Fakulteta
Publishing Council of Faculty
Prof.dr.sc. Tihomir Jukiæ
Prof.dr.sc. Andrej Uchytil
Prof.dr.sc. Ariana Štulhofer
Izv.prof.dr.sc. Feða Vukiæ
Doc.dr.sc. Zlatko Karaè
Doc.dr.sc. Mia Roth-Èerina (predsjednica)
Asist.mr.sc. Roberto Vdoviæ
Pred. Tajana Jaklenec
Doc.dr.sc. Luka Korlaet
SVEU»ILI©TE U ZAGREBU, ARHITEKTONSKI FAKULTET
UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE
ISSN 1330-0652
CODEN PORREV
UDK | UDC 71/72
24 [2016] 1 [51]
1-130
1-6 [2016]
Doc.dr.sc. Mia Roth-Èerina
Izvršni urednici | Managing Editors
Asist.mr.sc. Roberto Vdoviæ
Urednik internet izdanja | Internet Editor
Doc.dr.sc. Iva Muraj
Urednica Fakultetske kronike | Faculty Chronicle Editor
Adresa uredništva Editor’s Office Address
PROSTOR
Sveuèilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26 Hrvatska | Croatia
Tel. +385/1 4639 382
Fax. +385/1 4828 079
E-mail: prostor@arhitekt.hr
Prilozi objavljeni u PROSTORU referiraju se u: PROSTOR is abstracted or indexed in:
• Academic Search Complete EBSCO Publishing, Ipswich, MA, USA
• Architectural Publications Index
Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), The British Architectural Library, London, England
• Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals
Columbia University in the City of New York, Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library, N.Y., USA
• CAB Abstracts
CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, United Kingdom
• Catalogue, Index of Periodicals
The Library of Congress, Washington D. C., USA
• Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) Lund University Libraries, Sweden
• Hrèak - Portal znanstvenih èasopisa Republike Hrvatske
Sveuèilišni raèunski centar Zagreb i Hrvatsko informacijsko i dokumentacijsko društvo, Zagreb, Hrvatska
• Hrvatska bibliografija: niz B - prilozi u èasopisima i zbornicima; niz C - serijske publikacije Nacionalna i sveuèilišna knjižnica, Zagreb, Hrvatska
• SCOPUS
Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherland
• ULRICHSWEB
Proquest, Cambridge, United Kingdom
• Web of Science® [WoS] - Arts and Humanities Citation Index® [A&HCI]
Thomson Reuters, Philadelphia, PA, USA
• Žurnale Geografija
Akademija nauk Rusije, Institut nauènoih informacii, Moskva, Russia
Znanstveni prilozi Scientific Papers
IZVORNI ZNANSTVENI ÈLANCI ORIGINAL SCIENTIFIC PAPERS
2-13 IVO VOJNOVIÆ
14-31 BORIS DUNDOVIÆ
32-47 ZORANA SOKOL GOJNIK
IGOR GOJNIK
MLADEN OBAD ŠÆITAROCI
48-61 DARKO KAHLE
Palaèa Jakša u Hvaru
UDK 72.033.5:728.03(497.5 Hvar)”14/20”
The Palace of the Post and Telegraph Administration Office in Jurišiæeva Street, Zagreb
Architectural and Stylistic Features
UDC 725.161 (497.5 Zagreb) ”18/19”
Urbanistièka obilježja liturgijskih graðevina u Zagrebu u 20. stoljeæu
UDK 711.4:726(497.5 Zagreb)”19”
Residential Buildings of Neues Bauen in Zagreb between 1928 and 1934
UDC 728:72.036(497.5 Zagreb)”19”
PRETHODNA PRIOPÆENJA PRELIMINARY COMMUNICATIONS
62-73
SVETISLAV G. POPOVIÆ
NENAD LIPOVAC
SANJA VLAHOVIÆ
Planning and Creating Place Identity for Podgorica as Observed Through Historic Urban Planning
UDC 711.4-122 (16.16 Podgorica) ”19/20”
PREGLEDNI ZNANSTVENI ÈLANCI SUBJECT REVIEWS
74-89 FLAVIO STIMILLI MLADEN OBAD ŠÆITAROCI MASSIMO SARGOLINI
90-101 MOJCA SMODE CVITANOVIÆ MARINA SMOKVINA ANDREJ UCHYTIL
Turin, Sochi and Krakow in the Context of Winter Olympics
Spatial Planning and Territorial Impact of the Games
UDC 71:796.03(4)”20”
Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko
Afrièki radovi hrvatske arhitektice
UDK 72.01:72.036 D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (6) ”19”
Jakša Palace in Hvar
UDC 72.033.5:728.03(497.5 Hvar)”14/20”
Palaèa Ravnateljstva pošte i brzojava u Jurišiæevoj ulici u Zagrebu
Odlike arhitekture i stilskoga rješenja UDK 725.161 (497.5 Zagreb) ”18/19”
Urban Features of the 20th Century Liturgical Buildings in Zagreb UDC 711.4:726(497.5 Zagreb)”19”
Stambene zgrade Novoga graðenja u Zagrebu izmeðu 1928. i 1934. godine UDK 728:72.036(497.5 Zagreb)”19”
Planiranje i stvaranje Prepoznatljivosti mjesta grada Podgorice oèitano kroz povijesne urbanistièke planove
UDK 711.4-122 (16.16 Podgorica) ”19/20”
Torino, Soèi i Krakov u kontekstu Zimske olimpijade
Prostorno planiranje i utjecaj igara na teritorij
UDK 71:796.03(4)”20”
Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko
Croatian Architect and her Approach in African Context
UDC 72.01:72.036 D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (6) ”19”
102-113 LJILJANA ALEKSIÆ VESNA KOSORIÆ
Building Revitalization and Integration of Solar Systems in Sustainable Rural Tourism
UDC 725.025.4:728.6:379.8:910.4 (4)”19/20”
Obnova zgrada i ugradnja solarnih sustava u održivom razvoju ruralnog turizma
UDK 725.025.4:728.6:379.8:910.4 (4)”19/20”
117 MIA ROTH-ÈERINA
118 LENKO PLEŠTINA
119 VELJKO ŽVAN
120 DUBRAVKO BAÈIÆ
121 MIA ROTH-ÈERINA
122-123 MELITA ÈAVLOVIÆ
124 ZLATKO KARAÈ
125 JASENKA KRANJÈEVIÆ
126 ZLATKO JURIÆ
127 ZLATKO KARAÈ
Znanstveni simpozij o arhitektu
Borisu Magašu
Zbornik radova
Radionica interijera
Izbor studentskih radova akademske godine 2014./2015.
[ur. Dina Vulin Ilekoviæ]
Automobil
Jedna povijest
Feða Vukiæ
Dobroviæ in Dubrovnik
A Venture in Modern Architecture
Krunoslav Ivanišin, Wolfgang Thaler, Ljiljana Blagojeviæ
Bernardo Bernardi
Dizajnersko djelo arhitekta 1951.-1985.
Iva Ceraj
Ernest Weissmann
Društveno angažirana arhitektura, 1926.-1939.
Tamara Bjažiæ Klarin
Arhitektonski natjeèaji u Splitu 2006.-2010.
Darovan Tušek
Izgradnja Splita u XIX. stoljeæu
Stanko Piploviæ
Katekizam zaštite spomenika
Max Dvořák
Arhitektura rimokatolièkih crkava
Vojvodine od 1699. do 1939.
Dubravka Ðukanoviæ
Scientific Symposium on the Architect
Boris Magaš Conference Proceedings
Interior Design Studio
Selection of students’ works in academic year 2014/2015
[ed. Dina Vulin Ilekoviæ]
The Car A History
Feða Vukiæ
Dobroviæ u Dubrovniku
Pothvat moderne arhitekture
Krunoslav Ivanišin, Wolfgang Thaler, Ljiljana Blagojeviæ
Bernardo Bernardi
The Design Work of an Architect 1951-1985
Iva Ceraj
Ernest Weissmann
Socially Engaged Architecture, 1926-1939
Tamara Bjažiæ Klarin
Architectural Competitions in Split 2006-2010
Darovan Tušek
Building up Split in the 19th Century
Stanko Piploviæ
Catechism of Monument Preservation
Max Dvořák
Architecture of Roman Catholic Churches in Vojvodina from 1699 to 1939
Dubravka Ðukanoviæ
128 IVA MURAJ
129 ALEKSANDAR KADIJEVIÆ
Traktat o detajlu v arhitekturi
Vladimir Brezar
Serbien. Stadt als Regionaler Kontext für Architektur
Serbia. The City as a Regional Context for Architecture
Bojan Kovaèeviæ, Adolph Stiller [editors]
Treatise on Detail in Architecture
Vladimir Brezar
Srbija. Grad kao regionalni kontekst arhitekture
Bojan Kovaèeviæ, Adolph Stiller [ur.]
Za sve znanstvene Ëlanke objavljene u Ëasopisu PROSTOR Uredništvo je, iz kruga uglednih naših i inozemnih znanstvenika, osiguralo najmanje dvije neovisne recenzije.
The Editorial Board provides at least two independent reviews by prominent Croatian or foreign scholars for all the scientific contributions published in the journal PROSTOR.
Ured Vojnoviæ d.o.o. HR - 21000 Split, Mihaljeviæa 1 ivo.vojnovic@st.t-com.hr
Izvorni znanstveni èlanak
UDK 72.033.5:728.03(497.5 Hvar)”14/20” Tehnièke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam
2.01.04. - Povijest i teorija arhitekture i zaštita graditeljskog naslijeða Èlanak primljen / prihvaæen: 17. 2. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
Groda Hvar
kasna gotika palaèa Jakša
U èlanku se donosi prostorni razvoj palaèe Jakša u Hvaru poèevši od izgradnje ranogotièke kuæe, njezine transformacije u kasnogotièku palaèu, renesansne adaptacije, pa do temeljite rekonstrukcije koja se na palaèi dogodila u 19. stoljeæu. Rad se temelji na istražnim radovima koje je proveo sam autor, a koji su bili temelj za obnovu tog povijesnog sklopa.
Ured Vojnoviæ d.o.o. HR - 21000 Split, Mihaljeviæa 1 ivo.vojnovic@st.t-com.hr
Original Scientific Paper UDC 72.033.5:728.03(497.5 Hvar)”14/20” Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning 2.01.04. - History and Theory of Architecture and Preservation of the Built Heritage Article Received / Accepted: 17. 2. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
Groda Hvar
Late Gothic Jakša Palace
This paper analyzes the spatial development of Jakša Palace in Hvar from its origin as an early Gothic house followed by its transformation into a Late Gothic palace and its remodeling at a later date with Renaissance alterations and additions until its thorough rehabilitation in the 19th century. The research conducted by the author served as a basis for the rehabilitation treatment.
sklop palaèe Jakša (Giaxa) u Hvaru, pod kojim je imenima poznata u literaturi, nalazi se u jugoistoènom dijelu Grode, prostora srednjovjekovnoga grada unutar gradskih zidina. Na austrijskom katastru iz 1834. godine vidi se obris palaèe Jakša. Neposredno su uz nju, sa zapadne strane, parcele prikazane kao vrtovi, a zapravo se radi o urušenim kuæama.1 Cijeli je sklop odnedavno temeljito obnovljen.2 Istražni arheološki i konzervatorski radovi rezultirali su nizom spoznaja koje su bacile novo svjetlo na srednjovjekovnu graditeljsku baštinu grada Hvara.
POVIJESNI PREGLED
HISTORICAL REVIEW
Zaèetak Hvara kao naselja poèinje izgradnjom ilirske gradine na mjestu današnje utvrde Fortice. Naselje se u antièko i kasnoantièko doba postupno spušta do mora, gdje je na mjestu današnje Pjace, u nekadašnjoj, dobro zaklonjenoj uvali, bila luka. A grad, Lisina kako se tada naziva, svoj je procvat dosegao u 5. i 6. stoljeæu, kada zbog ponovno valoriziranoga morskog prometa i svoje dobre luke dobiva na važnosti.3
U kasnijim stoljeæima Hvar, tadašnja Lesina, spominje se i dalje kao važan grad i luka. Grad je tada bio na prostoru Burga (Burak, kako ga Hvarani nazivaju), smješten na padinama brda Sv. Nikole.4 Na tome se prostoru spominju ostaci kula i zidina.5 Osnutak bisku-
pije 1145./1147.6, u doba prve venecijanske uprave7, takoðer potvrðuje njegovu važnost.
A za druge venecijanske uprave 1278. godine podiže se Civitas nova - novi grad (Groda) na drugoj strani hvarske uvale, na mjestu kasnoantièkog naselja koje se u povijesnim izvorima spominje kao civitas quae aliis temporibus fuit, dakle grad koji je nekad postojao.8 Groda se opasava kulama i zidinama, poviše kojih se, na mjestu nekadašnje ilirske gradine, podiže kaštel.9
Treæa venecijanska uprava zapoèinje 1420. god. i u graditeljstvu donosi stil cvjetne gotike. Uz južni gradski zid nižu se plemiæke palaèe poput Hektoroviæeve, Gazaroviæeve, Paladiniæeve, Jakšine. Upravo to razdoblje, a radi se o drugoj polovici 15. stoljeæa, kljuèno je za nastanak graditeljskog sklopa obitelji Jakša.
MJESTO I VRIJEME NASTANKA
PALAÈE JAKŠA
SITE AND ORIGIN OF JAKŠA PALACE
Palaèa Jakša nalazi se u jugoistoènom uglu Grode, blizu gradskih vrata koje se nazivaju Vrata sv. Marije ili Vrata Biskupije. Palaèa se najranije spominje u dokumentima 1504. godine kao vlasništvo Marina Jakše pa se stoga može pretpostaviti da je kuæu podigao njegov otac Jakša Petrov u drugoj polovici 15. stoljeæa. Sklop kuæa sa sjeverne strane takoðer je bio u vlasništvu Jakšinih 1553. godine, a veliki zdenac iz 1475. godine, koji se nalazi uza sjeverno proèelje tog sklopa, naziva se 1623. godine „pozzo detto del Giaxa”.10
Palaèa Jakša pripada skupini gotièkih graðevina koje su u 15. stoljeæu podignute nad južnim gradskim zidinama. Gradnja plemiækih kuæa uz južne gradske zidine bila je, izmeðu ostalog, predmet spora izmeðu vlastelina i puèana koji se 1446. godine rješavao pred mletaèkim senatom u Veneciji. Puèani su se naime oslanjali na odredbe Statuta iz 1331.
1 Danas je taj sklop vlasnièki objedinjen. Novi je vlasnik Josip Antoniæ koji je 2000. godine kupio prvo palaèu Jakša od obitelji Dujmoviæ, a nakon toga i sklop kuæa zapadno od nje od obitelji Bracanoviæ.
2 Arhitektonsku snimku postojeæeg stanja, konzervatorski elaborat i sve projekte izradio je arhitekt Ivo Vojnoviæ. Arhitektonsku snimku zapadnog dijela sklopa izradilo je poduzeæe GEOdata, dok su istražne arheološke radove proveli i organizirali struènjaci Konzervatorskog odjela iz Splita sa suradnicima, arheolozi dr. Franko Oreb i Marinko Tomasoviæ. Sve radove u ime Konzervatorskog odjela iz Splita nadzirala je arhitektica Anita Gamulin.
3 Katiæ, 2003: 523-528
4 Rajèiæ, 2006: 92, 98
5 Petriæ, 1975: 28
6 Petriæ, 1977.a: 158
7 Dubokoviæ, 1960: 164
8 Petriæ, 1973: 178-179
9 Dubokoviæ, 1960: 165
10 Kovaèiæ, 1987: 31
11 Petriæ, 1977.b: 447-453
12 Kovaèiæ, 1997: 83-84
godine koji je tražio da zidine budu slobodne od gradnji, kao i prostor od 20 koraka uz njih, kako bi gradska straža imala dobar pregled. No usprkos tome mnogi su plemiæi, poput Paladiniæa, Užižiæa, Gazaroviæa, Jakšinih, podigli svoje palaèe zaposjevši pritom gradski zid. Stoga se može zakljuèiti da je podizanje kuæa nad gradskim zidinama starija praksa koja je 1446. godine doživjela puèki prosvjed kod mletaèke vlasti, ali ona nije poduzela znaèajnije korake za njeno sprjeèavanje.11
U dokumentu iz 1463. godine Nikola Užižiæ traži od hvarskoga kneza Franceska Justa dozvolu za podizanje luka na istoènom dijelu svoje kuæe u visini prvoga kata, a u prilog svome zahtjevu navodi èinjenicu da su knezovi Hvara dopuštali podizanje i veæih lukova.12 Luk svoda, uolto roman, na kuæi Užižiæ (tzv. Hektoroviæ) identièno je oblikovan kao i lukovi koji povezuju palaèu Jakša s gradskim zidom pa su stoga jedan od glavnih uporišta za dataciju kasnogotièke faze Jakšine palaèe. Ima više razloga zbog èega su plemiæi tako ustrajno željeli izgraditi svoje palaèe uz grad-
13 Fiskoviæ, 1977: 459
14 Arheološka je istraživanja u organizaciji Konzervatorskog odjela iz Splita proveo arheolog Marinko Tomasoviæ u svibnju i lipnju 2001. godine. Istražna sonda izvedena je po sredini ranogotièke kuæe i bila je velièine 4´3 m koja se prema dubini sužavala. Razina poda (rustiènoga kamenog poploèenja) bila je oko 30 cm niža od razine glavne ulice. U prvih 70 cm dubine nalazio se ispremiješani sloj šuta, kamenog materijala i ulomaka kupa kanalica. Ispod toga nalazio se kulturni sloj s nalazima majolike iz 14. i 15. stoljeæa. Na otprilike 2 m dubine pojavio se sloj antièke i kasnoantièke keramike, najviše sjevernoafrièke. Pronaðen je i ostatak kasnoantièkoga kamenog zida. Taj kulturni sloj potjeèe iz 4. i 5. stoljeæa. Sonda je došla do dubine od 2,85 metra i pri njezinu su dnu pronaðeni ostaci željeznodobne keramike.
15 Pretpostavljena ulica mogla je biti odraz antièko-kasnoantièkoga uliènog rastera kojeg crtež donosi N. Petriæ u: Petriæ, 1977.a: 155. Ostaci te ulice, kao ni skalinade, arheološkim radovima nisu pronaðeni, nego samo ostaci proèelja srednjovjekovnih kuæa koje su nekad bile prislonjene uz ulicu. Stoga je postojanje te ulice još uvijek pretpostavka. Moguæi izgled i profil ulice prikazan je u grafièkim prilozima ovoga èlanka.
ski zid. U veæ dobrano izgraðenoj Grodi taj se prostor èini izuzetno povoljan za proširenje postojeæih kuæa, zbog bolje osunèanosti, a kiæena proèelja njihovih palaèa bila su tako svakomu vidljiva. Donekle slièan primjer izgradnje palaèa na gradskom zidu susreæemo i na palaèama Luciæ i Vitturi u Trogiru.13
PROSTORNI RAZVOJ PALAÈE JAKŠA
SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT OF JAKŠA PALACE
Ranogotièko razdoblje: 13.-14. stoljeæe - Za razumijevanje najstarije poznate razvojne faze palaèe Jakša potrebno je opisati tadašnju urbanistièku situaciju toga dijela Grode. Ranogotièka kuæa, koja je bila zametak kasnogotièkoj palaèi, i cijeli niz kuæa zapadno od nje tvorili su prvu ulicu uz gradski zid. Sljedeæa gornja ulica bila je od nje udaljena oko 18 metara i bila je viša za oko 2,5 metra. Okomito na njih vodile su popreène ulice u nagibu i sa stubama. Na taj su naèin stvorene stambene insule, u kojima su kuæe bile razlièito orijentirane. Najniža insula, tj. ona najbliža južnomu gradskom zidu, imala je pored popreènih ulica sa stubama i nekoliko slijepih ulièica (kaleta) koje su završavale u unutrašnjosti bloka i omoguæavale su boène ulaze u kuæe. Taj urbanistièki detalj, s ulièicama koje prodiru duboko u stambeni blok poput èešlja, osobito je dobro saèuvan u neposrednoj blizini palaèe Jakša.
Palaèa Jakša nastala je adaptacijom i proširenjem ranogotièke kuæe koja je podignuta krajem 13. ili poèetkom 14. stoljeæa. Kuæa je vjerojatno podignuta vrlo brzo nakon što je 1278. godine izdan nalog o izgradnji Civitas Novae.14 Bila je to uobièajena stambena kuæa onoga doba, velièine 10,5´6,2 metra, paralelnoga zapadnog i istoènog zida, sa skošenim južnim zidom koji je pratio potrebnu udaljenost od gradskoga zida. Zapadno od nje tekla je ulica i stubama išla dalje prema sjeveru.15
Sl. 2. Austrijski katastar Hvara (detalj): palaèa Jakša vodi se pod brojem 120 i 121.
Fig. 2. Austrian cadastre of Hvar (detail), Jakša Palace registered under numbers 120 and 121
Sl. 3. Palaèa Jakša u Hvaru, stanje prije obnove Fig. 3. Jakša Palace in Hvar before rehabilitation
Sl. 4. Pretpostavljeni tlocrt palaèe u 14. st. Fig. 4. Presumed palace layout, 14th century
Sl. 5. Pretpostavljeni tlocrt palaèe u 15. st. Fig. 5. Presumed palace layout, 15th century
Sa sjeverne strane bio je prolaz, a s istoène dvorište koje se koristilo zajedno sa susjednom istoènom i sjevernom kuæom. Ono je veæ tada moglo biti zidom ograðeno od ulice.
Zapadni i sjeverni zid saèuvali su se u visini prizemlja i prvoga kata. Na zapadnom zidu, uza sjeverozapadni ugao kuæe bila su manja vrata kojih su vertikalni kameni pragovi bili sastavljeni od više komada.16 Južno je od njih prozor skošenih stranica, karakteristièan za konobu ili gospodarski prostor. Na prvomu je katu ranogotièki šiljasti prozor, kao i na sjevernom proèelju, od kojeg je ostao saèuvan samo donji dio, dok je gornji, luèni, naknadno uklonjen. Istoèni zid saèuvao se samo u visini prizemlja, na kojem su prema dvorištu bila veæa vrata, oèito predviðena za gospodarske potrebe. Nažalost, podatke o izgledu južnoga proèelja nemamo jer je ono uništeno temeljitom obnovom u 19. stoljeæu.
Ne možemo sa sigurnošæu utvrditi izvornu katnost ove kuæe, buduæi da su mnogobrojne adaptacije, nastale tijekom sljedeæih stolje-
æa, promijenile njezin izgled. Najvjerojatnije je da je kuæa bila visine prizemlja i kata te da je bila pokrivena dvostrešnim krovom. U prizemlju je bila konoba ili duæan. Prvome katu kuæe prilazilo se vjerojatno vanjskim kamenim stubištem koje je moglo biti smješteno uz južno proèelje. Na mnogim hvarskim kuæama ta su vanjska stubišta uèestala pojava i njihova se izgradnja proteže tijekom cijeloga srednjeg vijeka, pa i poslije. Kat je korišten kao stambeni prostor, o èemu nam svjedoèi saèuvano pilo i zidni ormar na zapadnom zidu. Poznavajuæi razmještaj prostorija srednjovjekovnih kuæa može se pretpostaviti da je kuhinja s ognjištem bila u potkrovlju.
Kasnogotièko razdoblje: 15. stoljeæe - Preureðenje ranogotièke kuæe u kasnogotièku palaèu dogodilo se sredinom druge polovice 15.
16 Ta su vrata pronaðena u tijeku arheoloških istražnih radova kada je uklonjen zemljani nasip iz vrta kuæe ex Bracanoviæ.
17 Tudor, 1998: 51-52
stoljeæa, kada se postojeæa ranogotièka kuæa nadograðuje za jedan kat, a s dva luka koja nose drvenu podnu konstrukciju premošæuje ulicu na južnoj strani.
Izgradnjom trijema u dvorištu širi se i prema istoènoj strani. Za dataciju tog zahvata imamo uporište u veæ spomenutom dokumentu iz 1463. godine u kojem se spominje gradnja ‘rimskog svoda’ na palaèi Užižiæ (Hektoroviæ).
Može se pretpostaviti da je nova palaèa zadržala ranogotièki raspored s vanjskim stubištem na južnoj strani, kojim se prilazilo prvomu katu.
Dvorišni trijem imao je tri luka na istoènoj strani i jedan na sjevernoj, a iznad njega gradi se novo proèelje. Dekoracija kapitela trijema u obliku je mesnatoga lista, od kojih oni na uglovima tvore blagu volutu. Ova je dekoracija blago skošenom pasicom odvojena od pravokutnog abaka, a identièan detalj prisutan je i na kapitelima bifore i trifore, pa po tome možemo pretpostaviti da ih je izradila ista radionica.
Kasnogotièki otvori na proèelju ugraðuju se u razini novopodignutoga drugoga kata. Južno proèelje nad gradskim zidom zauzelo je otprilike treæinu njegove širine, èime je obrambeni ophod bio sužen, ali ipak prohodan za gradsku stražu. Novo južno proèelje, koje strši izvan kruništa gradskog zida, dobiva reprezentativnu kiæenu triforu. Doprozornici, stupovi i lukovi oslonjeni su na istaknutu, gotièki profiliranu klupèicu. Uski šiljasti lukovi, trolisno oblikovani, zakljuèeni su lisnatim akroterijima i grbom Jakšinih iznad središnjeg luka. Doprozornici se istièu motivom uvijenoga konopa, dok su kapiteli i akroteriji ukrašeni motivom povijenog lišæa, što ih svrstava meðu kasnogotièku kamenu plastiku izraðenu pod utjecajem radionice Jurja Dalmatinca.17 Zapadno od trifore nalaze se ranogotièka vrata kroz koja se izlazi na ophod gradskog zida. Ta su vrata oèito prenesena s donjih katova kuæe. Moguæe je da se radi o vratima prvoga kata južnog proèelja ranogotièke kuæe, umjesto kojih se izvodi nov kasnogotièki portal.
7. Tlocrt palaèe u 19. i 20. st., stanje prije nedavne obnove
Fig. 7. Palace layout in the 19th and the 20th century before recent restoration
Sl. 8. Razvojne etape zapadnog proèelja
Fig. 8. Development stages of the west facade
Sl. 9. Razvojne etape istoènog proèelja
Fig. 9. Development stages of the east facade
Sl. 10. Razvojne etape južnog proèelja
Fig. 10. Development stages of the south facade
Na istoènom proèelju, u razini drugoga kata ugraðuje se bifora koja je, za razliku od trifore, u detalju nešto skromnijeg izraza. Obje imaju jednako profiliranu prozorsku klupèicu, dok se po obradi pletenice doprozornika i lišæu kapitela donekle razlikuju. Meðutim, dekoracija boène strane kapitela doprozornika trifore identièna je oblikovanju prednje strane kapitela doprozornika bifore, što upuæuje da ih je izradio isti majstor ili ista radionica.
Na zapadnom proèelju ugraðena je monofora koje su kapiteli dekorirani bogatom profilacijom, ali bez motiva povijenoga lišæa. Zanimljiv je i detalj stilizirane dvostruke lavlje glave koja je postavljena na vanjskom uglu zida dvorišta i fizièki pripada ulaznomu dvorišnom portalu. Po nekim detaljima ta glava, janusovskih obilježja, podsjeæa na lavlje glave gotièkog umivaonika iz kuæe Kaèiæ-Dimitri, a koji je danas uzidan u gradski zid pored glavnih vrata.18
Lukovi koji spajaju istoèno odnosno zapadno proèelje s gradskim zidinama daju posebnost cijeloj palaèi. Prije je veæ spomenuto da se isti lukovi nalaze i na kuæi Užižiæ (tzv. Hektoroviæ), koji su datirani u sredinu 15. stoljeæa. Posebno je zanimljivo da ih citirani dokument naziva uolto romano, dakle rimski svod, što upuæuje na uvoðenje novoga renesansnog stila u hvarsko graditeljstvo.
U tom razdoblju u Hvaru, kako navodi Cvito Fiskoviæ, djeluju brojni domaæi klesari, zidari,
stolari i uopæe zanatlije. Gotovo sve graðevine 15. i 16. stoljeæa stilom pokazuju da su djela majstora koji su potekli s otoka Hvara ili iz ostalih dalmatinskih gradova.19 Prisutan je utjecaj cvjetne gotike Jurja Dalmatinca, Andrije Alešija i dubrovaèkih majstora cvjetne gotike, ali se u osrednjosti njihovih radova, rustiènosti i pomalo nespretnosti osjeæa lokalna znaèajka. Nekolicina od brojnih majstora radi u radionicama Jurja Dalmatinca i Andrije Alešija pa svoja iskustva i znanje prenose na hvarsko tlo.20 Vjerojatno je netko od tih majstora izveo radove na palaèi Jakša.
Funkcionalna organizacija i raspored unutarnjega prostora kasnogotièke palaèe nije nam poznat. Možemo ipak pretpostaviti da se prizemlje i dalje koristi kao konoba. Na prvomu su katu vjerojatno bile sobe, dok je na drugomu katu reprezentativni salon. Razlog pretpostavci da je salon bio na drugome katu nalazimo u postojanju bogato dekorirane bifore
18 Tudor, 1998: 53-57
19 Fiskoviæ, 1962: 184-200
20 Fiskoviæ, 1962: 184,186,188
21 Ove sam grede uoèio u stropu prizemlja, a koje su tu postavljene prilikom obnove kuæe u 19. stoljeæu. Buduæi da su tijekom dugoga razdoblja dobile progib, ondašnji graditelj koji je obnovio palaèu postavio ih je u suprotan položaj kako bi poništio utjecaj progiba. Utor za letvicu, koji je izvorno bio na gornjoj strani grede, tada je, okretanjem grede, bio vidljiv s njezine donje strane. To je inaèe prilièno uèestala pojava prilikom obnove povijesnih graðevina kada se želi veæ prije korišten graðevinski materijal ponovno upotrijebiti.
i trifore, iznad koje je grb obitelji. Na ovome je mjestu omoguæena najbolja osunèanost i pogled na sve dijelove grada. Tu se nalazi i pristup ophodu po vrhu gradskog zida pa se èini logiènim da je najreprezentativniji dio palaèe bio upravo na ovoj razini. Kuhinja se vjerojatno nalazila u potkrovlju, gdje je na sjevernomu zabatnom zidu ostala saèuvana kamena konzola nape kamina. Unutarnjem drvenom stubištu, kojim se prilazilo drugom katu, položaj možemo pretpostaviti uz istoèni zid, buduæi da na njemu, u razini prvoga kata, nije bilo prozora. Toj pretpostavci ide u prilog i nepostojanje kamenih kasnogotièkih konzola meðukatne konstrukcije na tome mjestu, a koje postoje na zapadnom zidu. Konzole tu nisu izvedene jer zbog stubišnog otvora u podu drugoga kata ne bi bile ni u kakvoj funkciji, dapaèe - njihovo eventualno postojanje samo bi stvaralo smetnju penjanju uza stube. Iz sjeveroistoènog ugla palaèe prilazilo se prostranom, reprezentativnom salonu drugoga kata. Strmim stubištem, vjerojatno položenim uza sjeverni zid, penjalo se dalje u potkrovlje. Vjerojatno je upravo zbog toga zabatni prozor u potkrovlju pomaknut u odnosu na sredinu krovišta prema zapadu kako bi se dobilo mjesto za stubište.
O izgledu unutrašnjosti, pogotovo reprezentativnog salona, nemamo dovoljno podataka. Na drugomu katu, neposredno uza zapadnu monoforu, postojao je kameni zidni ormar koji je zazidan tijekom adaptacije kuæe u 19. stoljeæu. Drugih ukrasa, poput kamenih pila, nije naðeno. Možda su ti elementi uklonjeni kada su se u 16. stoljeæu na palaèi ugradili novi renesansni prozori i kamini. Iz vremena gradnje palaèe ostale su mjestimièno saèuvane drvene stropne grede u sekundarnoj upotrebi. To su grede s karakteristiènim utorom na gornjoj strani, u koji se umetala drvena letvica što je pokrivala spoj podne dašèane oplate, a stropu je davala dekorativan, kasetirani izgled.21
Sredina 15. stoljeæa je doba intenzivne gradnje u Hvaru, kada se podižu mnogobrojne kasnogotièke kuæe i palaèe. Sklop kuæa zapadno i sjeverno od palaèe Jakša takoðer se preureðuje. Najveæa promjena, koja æe u bitnome odrediti kasnije adaptacije i dogradnje na palaèi Jakša, dogodila se krajem 15. stoljeæa
22 Fiskoviæ, 1977: 458
23 Novak, 1974: 108
24 Kako je vidljivo na austrijskom katastru iz 1834. godine, nekadašnje kuæe pretvorene su u vrtove, koji su još donedavno postojali. Nedavnom obnovom tog sklopa zemljani je materijal uklonjen. Tom su prilikom provedena arheološka istraživanja koja su rezultirala pronalaskom mnogobrojnih ulomaka graðevnog materijala i kamene plastike, koju možemo datirati u 15. stoljeæe. Pronaðena je i jedna topovska kamena kugla, što ide u prilog pretpostavci da su kuæe ošteæene i urušene vjerojatno 1579. godine kada je došlo do eksplozije barutane na Fortici. 14.
kada se u prijelaznom gotièko-renesansnom stilu u sjevernoj polovici nekadašnje popreène ulice podiže nova kuæa. Time je ukinuta javna komunikacija koja je povezivala donju i gornju ulicu. Uklonivši uliène stube, nova je kuæa zauzela dio prolaza sjeverno od palaèe Jakša. Istoèni zid te kuæe podignut je na mjestu koje omoguæava da sjeverni ranogotièki prozor na prvomu katu palaèe bude i dalje u funkciji. Nova je kuæa na svojoj južnoj strani zaklonila dio zapadnog proèelja palaèe Jakša, što je rezultiralo zazidavanjem njenih ranogotièkih vrata u prizemlju.
Renesansno razdoblje: 16.-17. stoljeæeHvar je 1571. godine u ratu s Turcima poprilièno stradao22, kao i 1579. godine kada dolazi do eksplozije barutane na Fortici.23 Izmeðu ostalog, teško su ošteæeni i porušeni neki stambeni sklopovi, pa vjerojatno i sklop kuæa u neposrednoj blizini palaèe Jakša. Teško je ošteæena i kuæa koja je podignuta na mjestu popreène ulice. Ostalo joj je saèuvano u cjelini tek sjeverno proèelje, dok su se istoèno i južno saèuvali do razine prvoga kata, odnosno prizemlja. Urušena je i srednjovjekovna kuæa u južnom dijelu sklopa.24 Nije iskljuèeno da je tom prilikom ošteæena i palaèa Jakša, što je moglo biti razlogom njene renesansne obnove u drugoj polovici 16. stoljeæa. Palaèa je zadržala svoj kasnogotièki volumen. Ugraðuju se novi prozori renesansnih obilježja, i to dva na istoènom proèelju i jedan na zapadnom. Uz njih se grade i dva kamina
Sl. 11. Razvojne etape južnog i sjevernog proèelja Fig. 11. Development stages of the south and north facades
kojih su ložišta i dimnjaci izvedeni s vanjske strane zida. Ti novi elementi na proèeljima morali su rezultirati i premještanjem unutarnjega drvenog stubišta s istoènog na sjeverni zid, koji je jedini ostao nepromijenjen. Otvaranje novih prozora i izgradnja vanjskih dijelova kamina bilo je moguæe jer se rušenjem susjednih kuæa otvorio novi slobodni prostor. Vjerojatno se tom obnovom uklanjaju unutarnja dekorativna kasnogotièka pila, koja su zasigurno morala postojati, a na njihovim se mjestima izvode novi prozori i kamini. Prilikom istražnih arheoloških radova koji su provedeni neposredno uza zapadno proèelje palaèe Jakša, na mjestu nekadašnje ulice, pronaðeni su pored ostataka srednjovjekovnih kuæa i mnogobrojni kameni ulomci kasnogotièke kamene plastike. Svakako je najznaèajniji nalaz kasnogotièko pilo s dekoracijom u formi povijenoga lišæa.25 To bi se pilo, prema sliènosti s onim iz velike Papaliæeve palaèe u Splitu, a koje D. Keèkemet pripisuje opusu Jurja Dalmatinca26, moglo takoðer pripisati njegovoj radionici. Možemo pretpostaviti da je i dio kamenog namještaja pronaðen u nasipu mogao pripadati nekadašnjem kasnogotièkom salonu palaèe Jakša, no koji je iz nje uklonjen, možda i zbog ratnog stradanja, te baèen u nasip tijekom renesansne adaptacije palaèe. Cisterna za vodu, koja je prislonjena uza sjeverni zid kuæe, vjerojatno je izgraðena tijekom te obnove.
Razdoblje 19. i 20. stoljeæa - Veliku preobrazbu palaèa doživljava potkraj 19. stoljeæa, kada se pretvara u stambenu kuæu s potpuno novom organizacijom unutarnjeg prostora. Glavni je razlog tadašnje obnove bila, po svemu sudeæi, njezina statièka stabilnost. Tijekom vremena došlo je do slijeganja i ošteæenja dvorišnog trijema iznad kojeg se uzdizalo istoèno proèelje palaèe. Najveæa ošteæenja bila su vidljiva na ispucanim i teško ošteæenim kapitelima. Iz tih je razloga trijem u cijelosti zazidan kamenom kako ne bi došlo do urušavanja kuæe. Iznad dvorišta podiže se plitak svod od opeke, iznad kojeg je otvorena terasa, pa se na taj naèin nekadašnje dvorište u potpunosti zatvorilo. Najveæe promjene palaèa je dobila na uliènome južnom proèelju. Ono se u cijelosti ruši i ponovno zida
istim graðevnim materijalom. U visini prizemlja i prvoga kata izvedeni su novi prozori i vrata s karakteristiènim rasteretnim lukom od opeke. Temeljitim preoblikovanjem glavnoga proèelja uklonjeni su tragovi ranijih etapa pa æe nam zbog toga prvobitan izgled kuæe vjerojatno zauvijek ostati tajnom. Nad južnim proèeljem palaèa dobiva velik, središnji luminar.
Na sjevernoj se strani iznad cisterne podiže još jedan kat, iznad kojeg je bio jednostrešni krov. Njegovi se ostaci strehe i konzole meðukatne konstrukcije, kao i dio kamenog zida na istoku, još uvijek vide. Ta je gradnja porušena u 20. stoljeæu, kada se u tom dijelu kuæe izvodi nova betonska terasa u razini drugoga kata sa stubištem.
Temeljita obnova kuæe odigrala se i u unutrašnjosti. Nestaju tako reprezentativni saloni, a prostor je razdijeljen sobama. Novo dvokrako stubište postavlja se u jugozapadnom dijelu kuæe. To je razlog premještanja kasnogotièkog prozora sa zapadnog proèelja u relativno velik južni luminar potkrovlja. Kuhinja se iz potkrovlja premješta na prvi kat, gdje se gradi novi dimnjak i krušna peæ. Kamini su zazidani, dimnjak i ložište uklonjeni, pa je tako na istoènom proèelju od kamina ostala saèuvana tek jedna kamena konzola, danas vidljiva na proèelju iznad luka trijema. Izvedene su nove drvene meðukatne konstrukcije i krovište, ali se pritom djelomièno koristi još uvijek uporabljiva drvena graða kasnogotièke palaèe.27
25 Istražni arheološki radovi obavljeni su neposredno uza zapadno proèelje palaèe Jakša, na mjestu nekadašnje ulice. Arheološke radove u ime Konzervatorskog odjela iz Splita provodio je od listopada 2002. do ožujka 2003. godine arheolog Franko Oreb. Zemljani nasip visine oko 3 m u potpunosti se uklonio. Istraživanja su utvrdila da taj nasip nema kompaktnoga zemljanog sloja ni jasne arheološke stratigrafije. U njemu su pronaðeni brojni tragovi ljudskog življenja, od prehrane do predmeta svakodnevne upotrebe. Pronaðena je fina keramika s premazom cakline i majolika, oèito donesena kao import iz talijanskih radionica u rasponu od 15. do 17. stoljeæa. Mnogo su znaèajniji nalazi - pronaðeni ulomci arhitektonske plastike, kao i ostaci ranosrednjovjekovnih kuæa.
26 Keèkemet, 1988: 29-30
27 Godine 2003. takvo je stanje palaèe doèekalo obnovu i konstruktivnu sanaciju. U grafièkom prilogu prikazano je postojeæe stanje iz 2001. godine, neposredno prije radova obnove. Izvršena je statièka sanacija graðevine, obnovljen je i ponovno otvoren dotad zazidan trijem u prizemlju, obnovljena je kamena plastika i žbuka s proèelja te izvedena nova meðukatna i krovna konstrukcija. Prilikom arheoloških istražnih radova uklonjen je zemljani nasip uza zapadno proèelje graðevine pa se pritom djelomièno rekonstruirala popreèna ulica. To je omoguæilo ponovno otvaranje zazidanih ranogotièkih vrata na zapadnomu proèelju palaèe Jakša.
U izvornim tlocrtnim gabaritima rekonstruirana je i susjedna sjeverna kuæa, urušena još u 16. stoljeæu. Nad saèuvanim ostacima južnog zida ponovno je podignuto kameno proèelje nekadašnje graðevine. Ruševni ostaci krajnje južne kuæe ostali su u zateèenom stanju. Ispražnjen je tek zemljani nasip, a novi pod prizemlja doveden je na izvornu ranogotièku razinu pa se kao dvorišni prostor povezao s nekadašnjom popreènom ulicom.
CONCLUSION
Analizom prostora dijela hvarske Grode u kojem je smještena palaèa Jakša mogu se donijeti odreðeni zakljuèci. Tu se još uvijek saèuvala najranija matrica Novoga grada podignutog 1278. godine. Na nekim mjestima saèuvana je izvorna razina i sustav ulica i kuæa na koso položenom terenu. Interesantan je tako odnos graðevina prema donjoj i gornjoj ulici. Slijepe ulièice, kalete, kao i uska dvorišta uvlaèe se duboko u stambenu insulu, povezujuæi tako meðusobno preko vertikalnih komunikacija kuæe donje i gornje ulice. Ti se prostori koriste i kao gospodarska dvorišta u funkciji obavljanja uobièajenih poslova stanovnika. Ranogotièke su kuæe skromnih dimenzija, tipološki vrlo sliène. U prizemlju je bio gospodarski prostor, bilo da su to konobe ili duæani. Stanovanje je organizirano na katu, do kojeg se èesto dolazilo vanjskim stubištem.
Ta se ranogotièka urbana struktura vrlo uspješno transformira u sljedeæim stoljeæima.
Razvojem društvene i politièke moæi pojedine obitelji okrupnjuju svoj posjed gradeæi nove palaèe na još uvijek staroj urbanoj matrici. Na primjeru Hvara i povijesnom razvoju palaèe Jakša vidjeli smo da prostor za širenje nalaze u povišenju i proširenju postojeæe graðevine, a premoštenjem ulice prislanjaju se i na gradski zid. Uzurpira se javni prostor grada, suzuju i ukidaju ulice. Na primjerima ostalih velikaških obitelji grada Hvara vidimo da je to sredinom 15. stoljeæa veæ redovita praksa. U izgradnji tih palaèa stasaju nove generacije hvarskih majstora, zidara, klesara i drvodjelaca koji stilu cvjetne gotike u Hvaru daju svoju posebnost. Za razliku od drugih hvarskih palaèa, na primjeru palaèe Jakša možemo prepoznati utjecaj radionice Jurja Dalmatinca, koji se oèituje na nekim detaljima ukrasa otvora, a osobito na kamenom pilu s karakteristiènim Jurjevim povijenim lišæem. Pa i izvedba trijema u relativno malom prostoru dvorišta, koji nije èest u stambenom graditeljstvu Hvara, daje nam s razlogom pretpostaviti prisutnost Jurjeva koncepta u organizaciji kasnogotièke palaèe Jakša.
1. Dubokoviæ, N. (1960.), O graðevinskom razvoju grada Hvara polovinom XV stoljeæa, „Prilozi povijesti umjetnosti u Dalmaciji”, 12, Split
2. Fiskoviæ, C. (1962.), Ljetnikovac Hanibala Luciæa u Hvaru, Anali Historijskog instituta u Dubrovniku, Dubrovnik
3. Fiskoviæ, C. (1977.), Graditeljstvo grada Hvara u XVI stoljeæu, „Radovi Instituta za hrvatsku povijest”, 10, Zagreb
4. Katiæ, M. (2003.), Nova razmatranja o kasnoantièkom gradu na Jadranu, „Opvscvla archaeologica”, 27, Zagreb
5. Keèkemet, D. (1988.), Juraj Dalmatinac i gotièka arhitektura u Splitu, Književni krug, Split
6. Kovaèiæ, J. (1987.), Kroz stambeno graditeljstvo grada Hvara, Iz hvarske kulturne baštine, Hvar
7. Kovaèiæ, J. (1997.), O kuæi tzv. Hektoroviæ na gradskom zidu u Hvaru, „Prilozi povijesti otoka Hvara”, 10, Hvar
8. Novak, G. (1974.), Hvar kroz stoljeæa, Zagreb
9. Petriæ, N. (1973.), Civitas quae aliis temporibus fuit (Grad koji je nekad postojao), Hvarski zbornik, 1, Hvar
10. Petriæ, N. (1975.), O gradu Hvaru u kasnoj antici, „Prilozi povijesti umjetnosti u Dalmaciji”, 20, Split
11. Petriæ, N. (1977.a), Ranosrednjovjekovna civitas srednjodalmatinskih otoka, „Starohrvatska prosvjeta”, III: 24, Split
12. Petriæ, N. (1977.b), Sukobi plemiæa i puèana kroz izgradnju grada Hvara, „Radovi Instituta za hrvatsku povijest”, 10, Zagreb
13. Rajèiæ, A-M. (2006.), Urbanistièki razvoj grada Hvara, „Prostor”, 14 (1 /31/), Zagreb
14. Tudor, A. (1998.), Prilog poznavanju utjecaja Jurja Dalmatinca u Hvaru, „Peristil - zbornik radova za povijest umjetnosti”, 41, Zagreb
Izvori ilustracija
Illustration Sources
Sl. 1., 3., 12., 13., 15. Foto: autor
Sl. 2. Državni arhiv u Splitu - Arhiv mapa
Sl. 4.-11. Autor
Sl. 14. Foto: A. Tudor
Sažetak Summary
Jakša Palace in Hvar is situated in the southeastern part of Groda near the town gate called St Mary’s Gates or Bishop’s Gates. The history of the town Hvar can be traced back to an Illyrian fortress that stood at the site of the present Fortica fortress which in Antiquity and Late Antiquity gradually descended towards the seashore where there was a port at the site of today’s Pjaca. In the early Middle Ages a Burg (Burak) was built on the opposite side of the port. By order of the Venetian authorities a new town was built in 1278 on the ruins of a town from Late Antiquity. The New town (Civitas Nova) or popularly called Groda was walled by fortresses and curtain walls with a castle built at the site of the former Illyrian fortress.
The area inside the walls was occupied by residential houses built in the manner of the ancient insulae. The street layout was based on a series of horizontal streets following the configuration of the terrain and the sloping streets perpendicular to them which most commonly had stairways. The area within this street grid was built up with Early Gothic houses.
There had been an early Gothic house at the site of Jakša Palace dating probably from the late 13th or the early 14th century. It was a modest two-storey building consisting of the ground-floor and the first floor levels with a gable roof. Its south facade, whose original appearance is unknown, was oriented to the lower town street. The west facade was oriented to a transversal street linked with the upper street by stairs. From the north and east, the house was separated from the adjacent buildings by a courtyard. It is assumed that there was an external stone stairway on the south side which provided access to the first floor as it was common practice in Hvar’s medieval architecture.
In 1420 the town was seized by Venice. As a result a new cultural influence was felt especially in the architecture of floral Gothic style. It was in this period (the second half of the 15th century) that Jakša Palace was built.
In the first half of the 15th century aristocratic palaces began to spring up along the city walls. This was contrary to the 1331 statute which stipulated
that houses had to be built at least 20 steps away from the city wall for security reasons. In 1446 the plebeians launched a protest against it but the authorities made no effort to put an end to this practice.
The Late Gothic Jakša Palace originated from a former Early Gothic house which was remodeled with parts added or altered. Another storey was added and the porch built in the courtyard to extend the house eastwards. With its arches spanning across the street towards the south, the building spread over a part of the city wall in the same way as did the palaces of families Užižiæ, Paladiniæ and Gazaroviæ. A document from 1463, which gives information on the construction of the arches on Užižiæ (Hektoroviæ) Palace, is also relevant for the exact dating of Jakša Palace since both buildings had identical shapes of the arches. It can thus be assumed that the palace retained the original Early Gothic layout with the external staircase on the south side giving access to the first floor. A new south facade was built over a part of the city wall making a passage for the city guard more narrow but still serviceable. A biforis and a triforium are richly decorative with their capitals and acroteria designed in the shape of bent leaves.
Hvar could boast highly developed crafts at the time. Some craftsmen used to work in the workshops of Juraj Dalmatinac and Andrija Alešija so it seems reasonable to assume that some of these masters were actually engaged in the works on Jakša Palace.
Hvar was severely damaged on two occasions: in 1571 during the war against the Turks and in 1579 by a powder-magazine explosion on Fortica. Since the explosion wrecked several houses west from Jakša Palace, it is quite possible that the palace might have been damaged on this occasion as well which later led to its rehabilitation in the second half of the 16th century. It was then that new window openings with Renaissance characteristics were built in and new fire-places installed. It is highly probable that decorative stone basins were then removed from the drawing-room where they had presumably been before.
IVO VOJNOVIÆ roðen je u Splitu 1959. Diplomirao je 1984. na Arhitektonskom fakultetu u Zagrebu. Godine 2002. osniva svoj arhitektonski ured. Glavno podruèje svoga djelovanja nalazi u istraživanju i projektiranju u povijesnim sredinama Splita, Kaštela, Trogira, Hvara, Visa i Korèule. Poseban interes posveæuje Dioklecijanovoj palaèi i srednjovjekovnom graditeljstvu srednjodalmatinskih gradova.
IVO VOJNOVIÆ, born in Split in 1959. He graduated in 1984 from the Faculty of Architecture of the University of Zagreb. In 2002 he established his own architectural practice. His main professional interests lie in research and design in the historic areas of Split, Kaštela, Trogir, Hvar, Vis and Korèula. He has keen interest in Diocletian’s palace and medieval architecture of central Dalmatian towns.
The palace underwent a major transformation in the late 19th century. From a palace with a medieval character it was transformed into a residential building with an entirely new layout. Due to a dilapidated porch threatening to collapse, the space between the arches was filled up with a new wall. Likewise, the former courtyard was completely closed by a new shallow vault with a terrace above it. The south facade covering the ground-floor level and the first-floor was completely rebuilt leaving no visible traces of the earlier stages.
In 2001 work began on the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the palace. A detailed architectural survey was followed by archaeological investigation works and conservation analyses. After the design stage structural repair work was undertaken, the walled-in porch on the ground-floor level was reconstructed and reopened, and stone sculpture and facade plaster were renovated. New floor structures and a new roof structure were made. After removing the earth embankment the west facade became entirely visible.
Archaeological investigation works were conducted in the interior and on the west side of the palace where the ruins of the medieval houses (previously lined up along a transversal street) were found including the ruins of a Late Gothic house demolished during the Turkish siege of Hvar and the explosion of the powder-magazine. Many fragments of Late Gothic stone sculpture were found as well. Some of these decorative pieces might have been on Jakša Palace.
The most significant finding was a stone basin featuring a decoration in the form of bent leaves whose striking resemblance to the one in the courtyard of Great Papaliæ Palace in Split leads us to assume that it was carved in Juraj Dalmatinac’s workshop. Unlike other palaces in Hvar, Jakša Palace is recognizable by this workshop’s influence particularly in some decorative details of the opening on the palace front. Moreover, building the porch in a relatively modest courtyard (quite uncommon in Hvar’s housing construction), indicates that it might have been Juraj Dalmatinac’s workshop that left its stamp on the layout of the Late Gothic Jakša Palace.
University of Zagreb
Faculty of Architecture
HR - 10000 Zagreb, 26 Kaèiæeva Street boris.dundovic@arhitekt.hr
Original Scientific Paper
UDC 725.161 (497.5 Zagreb) ”18/19”
Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning
2.01.04. - History and Theory of Architecture and Preservation of the Built Heritage
Article Received / Accepted: 5. 5. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
Sveuèilište u Zagrebu Arhitektonski fakultet
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26 boris.dundovic@arhitekt.hr
Izvorni znanstveni èlanak
UDK 725.161 (497.5 Zagreb) ”18/19”
Tehnièke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam
2.01.04. - Povijest i teorija arhitekture i zaštita graditeljskog naslijeða Èlanak primljen / prihvaæen: 5. 5. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
Odlike arhitekture i stilskoga rješenja
Ernő Foerk and Gyula Sándy
Fin-de-siècle
General Post Office
Hungarian Architecture Zagreb, Croatia
The palace of the General Post and Telegraph Administration Office in Jurišiæeva Street, designed by Ernő Foerk and Gyula Sándy in 1901, is an outstanding example of Hungarian architectural and technical achievements in the urban fabric of fin-de-siècle Lower Town Zagreb. This paper aims to determine the main identity factors of the building by elucidating its architectural and cultural history, as well as its previously unknown stylistic genealogy.
Ernő Foerk i Gyula Sándy prijelaz 19. i 20. stoljeæa Glavna pošta maðarska arhitektura Zagreb
Palaèa Ravnateljstva pošta i brzojava u Jurišiæevoj ulici, koju su 1901. projektirali Ernő Foerk i Gyula Sándy, istaknut je primjer maðarskih arhitektonskih i tehnoloških dostignuæa u tkivu zagrebaèkoga Donjega grada na poèetku 20. stoljeæa. Ovim su radom odreðeni glavni èimbenici identiteta zgrade, ponajprije putem njezina povijesno-prostornoga razvoja, kulturne povijesti, ali i dosad nepoznate geneze njena jedinstvenoga stilskog izraza.
Oneof the most significant examples of Hungarian architectural and technical achievements in the urban fabric of fin-de-siècle Zagreb, the palace of the General Post and Telegraph Administration Office in Jurišiæeva Street, has always been unjustifiably neglected. Its architectural value has never been properly considered and determined - initially due to its symbolic suggestiveness of Hungarian domination over Croatian lands in the Dual Monarchy, and later due to numerous interventions that conclusively resulted in a slight diminishment of its original monumentality. In consequence, apart from several short newspaper and professional articles, no comprehensive study or paper on the building has been published so far. In this paper, the original design of the building and its later architectural alterations are discussed by analysing both Croatian and Hungarian archival and other sources. In its aim to elucidate the identity factors of the General Post Office building, and based on the exhaustive analyses of authors’ oeuvres and tendencies in architecture theory at the turn of the twentieth century, this research1 for the first time ever brings to light the architectural and cultural significance of the building, as well as its specific stylistic genealogy. The importance of the General Post Office building lies primarily in its relevance to the urban fabric of the historical city centre. In the second half of the nineteenth century, Zagreb
commenced an expeditious development of its Lower Town (Donji grad). During that time, the main post office was impractically located in the Upper Town Gradec, in a building owned by Counts Oršiæ2, situated in the suitably named Poštanska (Post) Street (Fig. 2). Countess Julija Oršiæ was the last postmaster of Zagreb before Count Josip Jelaèiæ founded the national postal service (with a post office director in charge) in 1852.3
At that time, the post-dispatch building was located on Harmica, the main town market (Fig. 4), east of which flowed Medvešèak, a meandering stream that served as the border of church estates on Kaptol and Nova Ves. A short street leading from Harmica to the pathway along Medvešèak was called Puževa Street.4 In manuscripts dating from that time, Puževa Street was often described as putrid and unpleasant. In 1898, the stream Medvešèak flooded a large number of streets in the Lower Town, only a year after it was regulated by Mayor Adolf Mošinsky.5 It became evident that the stream needed to be covered and connected to the town sewer system, which was carried out in the following year. Also in 1899, former Puževa Street was levelled and elongated to the east border of the Lower Town, the Draškoviæeva Street6 (Fig. 3). The new street that replaced the old Puževa Street was named after Baron Nikola Jurišiæ in 18787, and set a new axis towards east parts of Zagreb.8
The new Jurišiæeva Street soon became the new business centre of Zagreb, particularly after the perpendicular Palmotiæeva Street was opened in 1900, boasting boldly with several three-storey buildings.9 Less than a decade later, other three-storey buildings rapidly followed in Jurišiæeva Street as well, setting a strong height criterion for the future architecture for that part of Lower Town.
At the end of the nineteenth century, Lower Town Zagreb started to take the shape of a
1 The research is a part of the scientific project ”Heritage Urbanism - Urban and Spatial Planning Models for Revival and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage”. It is financed by the Croatian Science Foundation [HRZZ-2032] and carried out at the University of Zagreb, Faculty of Architecture, under the project leadership of Prof. Mladen Obad Šæitaroci, Ph.D, F.C.A.
2 Kolveshi, 1996: 52
3 Sokol, 1978: 83-84
4 Named after the abundant population of terrestrial gastropods (Cro. puž - snail, slug) inhabiting the incessantly humid gardens adjacent to the steam.
5 Sokol, 1978: 148-149
6 Szabo, 1941: 238-239
7 Mirkoviæ, 2001: 51-52
8 For a more detailed account on the development of Jurišiæeva Street, consult: Szabo, 2012, and Galoviæ, 2013.
9 Hirc, 2008: 230-231
10 Concluded through comparison between two plans of Zagreb: the first by Dragutin Albrecht dating from 1864,
strict grid system of streets and blocks. Accordingly, Ružièna Street, which served as a connection between Jurišiæeva Street and Vlaška Street, was slightly altered to fit the envisioned orthogonal system.10 Palmotiæeva Street was later elongated to lead to Vlaška Street. Those four streets thus surrounded the rectangular lot (in the immediate vicinity of the building used at the time for dispatching the post chaise) that became the future location of the General Post Office building (Fig. 5).
POBJEDNIÈKI RAD NATJEÈAJA
ZA PALAÈU GLAVNE POŠTE
The three decades leading to the First World War were crucial for the modernisation and growth of Zagreb. From 30,830 residents in 1880, the population doubled to 61,692 inhabitants at the very turn of the century.11
During that time, Count Károly Khuen-Héderváry, infamous for his fervent attempts at
scale 1:5,760 [MGZ, inv. no. 5676], the second by City Construction Bureau from 1878, scale 1:11,520 [MGZ, inv. no. 2952]. For a more detailed account of the plans and the first cadastral survey of Zagreb in the second half of the 19th century, see Škalamera, 1994: 78-95.
11 Szabo, 1941: 241
12 Grljak, Goldstein, 2012: 352, 355-357
13 In 1889, major changes occurred in economy and administration of the Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen: the Ministry of Agriculture separated from the Ministry of Industry and Trade, and the latter joined the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, thus becoming the Ministry of Commerce. Since 8 November of that year, all the transport means and issues, state railways, traffic tolls, post and telegraph offices, major construction works, state roads, ship and shipping industry, and all the agriculture branches related to commerce and industry were put under the jurisdiction of the new Ministry. [Baždar, 2004: 316]
14 Kneževiæ, 1996: 147, 201-203 (the author refers to the architect as Alexander von Aigner)
15 Damjanoviæ, 2011: 40
16 Laslo, 2003: 26
17 Kneževiæ, 1996: 494, 526
magyarisation, was the Ban of Croatia. But while he frequently disrupted and disrespected the self-governing autonomy of Croatia, he also provided Zagreb with numerous public services. By the year 1910, the increase of the number of residents to 74,000 was a result of the city modernisation process that started during his governance.12
Magyarisation attempts were often visually manifested in architecture, primarily through buildings of mutual interest to both countries. Accordingly, Hungarian architects did not delve much in the residential architecture of Zagreb, and designed only administration or transport buildings and facilities that celebrated Hungarian cultural and technological advancement.13 In the stylistically diverse late historicist period, several notable Hungarian architects contributed to such architecture: Sándor Aigner designed the Forestry Society Palace in Vukotinoviæeva Street and the State Forests Administration building in Katanèiæeva Street (both built in 1898)14, Lajos Zobel designed the Financial Directorate building (1901-1902) in Gajeva Street15, and Ferenc Pfaff, the leading Hungarian State Railways architect of the period, designed the Central Train Station (1891-1892) located south of King Tomislav Square (then Emperor Franz Joseph Square)16, and the Hungarian Imperial State Railways Administration building in the nearby Mihanoviæeva Street (1901-1903).17
Fig. 2 Peter Hailler’s Plan of Zagreb, 1825 [A - Upper Town; B - Lower Town; 6 - the former main post office in Poštanska Street; 11 - the post-dispatch building]
Sl. 2. Plan Zagreba Petera Haillera iz 1825. godine [A - Gornji grad; B - Donji grad; 6 - glavni poštanski ured u Poštanskoj ulici; 11 - zgrada za prijam i ekspediciju pošte]
Fig. 3 The view of the town slaughterhouse, Medvešèak, and Puževa Street around 1898
Sl. 3. Pogled na gradsku klaonicu, potok Medvešèak i Puževu ulicu oko 1898.
Fig. 4 Harmica town market and the beginning of Petrinjska and Puževa streets, around the year 1850, view from the north Sl. 4. Gradska tržnica Harmica i poèetak Petrinjske i Puževe ulice, snimljeno oko 1850., pogled sa sjevera
Fig. 5 The lot prepared for the future General Post Office palace, around 1900
Sl. 5. Zemljište pripremljeno za buduæu palaèu Glavne pošte, snimljeno oko 1900.
In 1900, the Austro-Hungarian Minister of Commerce18 saw the need to establish new general post offices in growing centres of provincial parts of Dual Monarchy as part of the new regulation system. The Ministry decided to invest two million krones in those projects.19 Considering the rapid expansion of Zagreb and its position as the new urban centre of the autonomous region of Croatia, the competition for the new postal palace in Jurišiæeva Street was to be carried out along with those in Bratislava (then Pozsony), Pécs, and Sopron. Of these three, the General Post Office building in Zagreb was built first.
The competition announcement issued by the Minister of Commerce in Budapest for a new, two-storey postal palace appeared in every relevant newspaper in the days following 22 May, 1901. The competition was open exclusively to architects and engineers within the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The admissions were required to consist of all the usual preliminary design drawings in a scale 1:200, including technical description and a budget approximation (the highest budget allowed was 440,000 krones). The first prize was 1,500, the second 1,200, and the third 600 krones. It was also agreed by participating that any other design apart from awarded ones could be bought by the Ministry for 300 krones.20
The competition concluded on 30 June. In August, a jury of ten secret members declared Gyula Sándy and Ernő Foerk’s as the winning design. Their plans were innovative and quite eccentric, but at the same time very reasoned and balanced; their entry was comprised of floor plans and sections characterised by strict functionality, accompanied by a curious
and - at least for Zagreb - somewhat uncommon stylistic approach to elevation designs. One of the elements that fulfilled the criterion of technological innovation and ensured the first place in the competition was a dominant detail in the building’s façade - a 50-metre tall tower designed to include the telegraph wire system in its spire21 (Fig. 6). With the exception of the telegraph tower, the 82-metre long main façade was otherwise symmetrical and divided in five parts similar in width. In the central axis of the building’s frontispiece, the two-storeys high portal consisted of a neo-Gothic arc and pediment adorning the wrought iron entrance gates, appropriately indicating the position of the central foyer and the main staircase. In a similar manner, just above the cornice of the central part of frontispiece, there were three larger pediments with stained-glass windows (the central window wider and more ornamented than the remaining two). The two avant-corps flanking the frontispiece also had wrought iron gates; they were designed as pairs, serving as clearly marked accesses to the letter transaction hall on the left and the parcel transaction hall on the right. The two entrance foyers (vestibules) were easily approachable directly from the street (Fig. 7).22
The delivery entrance to the inner courtyard of the General Post Office was thoughtfully placed in the side Ružièna Street to avoid traffic congestion in Jurišiæeva and Palmotiæeva streets. The entrance was accentuated by wide gates that are part of a two-windows-wide avant-corps ending with a pediment similar to the one on the frontispiece. On the other side, from the Palmotiæeva Street, the courtyard was separated only by fencing with a single wrought-iron pedestrian gate. As the initial building plans show, the fence was considered only temporary already in Foerk and Sándy’s original design, as an addition of a third wing was intended to close the courtyard.
18 The first Minister of Commerce was Gábor de Bellus Baross (from 1889 to 1892), who unified enormous Austro-Hungarian railway system network and laid the foundations of the Empire’s post and telegraph service network [Spicijariæ Paškvan, 2011: 14]. From 1899 to 1902, Baross’ work was continued by Sándor Hegedüs who built 197 new post offices, 112 new telegraph offices, and 177 telephone centres during his ministership. In that short period, 16 cities and towns got their first telephone service [Gaál, 2012: 19].
19 Bene, 1992: 33-34
20 *** 1901.a: 8
21 *** 1901.b: 3
22 MÉM, ”Foerk Ernő hagyatéka”, inv. no. 91.09.20.9
23 DAZG, fund ZGD 1122, inv. no. 155 / 475, 485, 487, 489, 491
24 No unified stylistic features of art nouveau existed, not even within a single country. [Moravánszky, 1998: 107]
25 Moravánsky points out that the architects with historicist background, including Josip Vancaš and the Hönigs-
The narrow side avant-corps on the edge of the building facing Palmotiæeva Street was the entrance to the apartments on the first and the second storeys. The director’s office and the main hallway of the post and telegraph administration offices were accessible from the director’s apartment on the first storey. The second storey had a similar scheme, consisting of the head of the office’s apartment and accountant offices, as well as a lengthy room for telegraph machines and a telephone centre.23
The winning design for the future Postal Palace of Zagreb represented a modern and sustainable idea of spatial disposition due to the practical flexibility of rooms that could accommodate the rapidly developing aforementioned telecommunication systems in the future. Clearly, it was a well though-out symbiosis of technology and architectural design.
POJAVA, UTJECAJ I PRAVCI MAÐARSKOGA NACIONALNOG STILA
The aberration in style was exactly what ensured the first place in the competition - the new Postal Palace was very Hungarian and represented a clear stylistic break from the otherwise uninterrupted line of historicist and art nouveau edifices of Lower Town Zagreb. The majority of other contemporary secessionist buildings, as Ákos Moravánszky points out, were built in the ”synthetic version” of art nouveau24, which became the supranational style of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy.25 Accordingly, despite the abundance of historicist neo-styles or the unlimited variety of extremely eclectic art nouveau, those styles were perceived as ”Viennese”26 and therefore not suitable for the new Post Office building, which aimed to represent Hungarian
berg&Deutsch atelier in Zagreb, with numerous realisations in the Lower Town, ”could easily adopt the items of the new orthodoxy, which appear so frequently that one wonders if they came right from a building supplier’s catalog”. [Moravánszky, 1998: 118]
26 Moravánszky, 1998: 125
27 Keserü, 1990: 142
28 Moravánszky, 1998: 218
29 Gerle, Kovács, Makovecz, 1990: 8-9, 13
30 In his most influential article Magyar formanyelv nem volt, hanem lesz (There Was No Hungarian Language of Forms, but There Will Be), published in 1906, Ödön Lechner paraphrases Count István Széchenyi’s concluding sentence of the 1830 book Hitel (Credit): ”Many people think: Hungary ‘was’; but I like to believe it - ‘will’!” [Lechner, 1906: 1; Széchenyi, 1830: 270]. Moreover, in 1838, Count Széchenyi straightforwardly proposed the idea of creating a national style for the first time [Moravánszky, 1998: 218].
31 Gerle, Kovács, Makovecz, 1990: 9
advancement and the efforts of the Hungarian Kingdom to modernise all of the provinces under the Crown of Saint Stephen equally. However, owing to the fact that the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia maintained an internal autonomy and separate identity in the Transleithanian part of Dual Monarchy, Hungarian representational intentions were swiftly recognised and dismissed as symbols of their pretensions over Croatian lands. This kind of perception of the project cast a shadow over the building for the next hundred years.
A break away from Viennese and German styles and a quest for an authentic Hungarian artistic idiom began much before the emergence of art nouveau. It was the Hungarian Reform Era and the travel accounts written by liberal politicians and leaders that stimulated primarily a language reform, which in turn started gradually drawing attention to the reform of aesthetic design.27 The language of the Hungarian rural population was ”rediscovered by urban intellectuals as a ‘maternal’ language” and, seen as both ornamental and wild, it became a ”powerful instrument to support a modern national culture”.28 One of the most prominent politicians of the first reform generation was Count István Széchenyi, whose writings encouraged Hungarian architect Frigyes Feszl to deliberate upon the question of national style.29 His work later influenced young architect Ödön Lechner to devise his own recognisable style, in due time labelled ‘the Hungarian national style’.30 Lechner spent three years from 1876 to 1879 in France, aiming to construct a basis for a new style31, and in the 1890s he spent a considerable time touring England, during which
Fig. 8 Béla Lajta’s interpretation of Ödön Lechner’s idiom, the General Postal Palace competition submission
Sl. 8. Béla Lajta, interpretacija jezika oblikovanja Ödöna Lechnera, natjeèajni rad za palaèu Glavne pošte u Zagrebu
he became thoroughly introduced to the Arts and Crafts movement.32 At the South Kensington Museum, he studied Oriental ceramics with Vilmos Zsolnay33, who later became the most prominent Hungarian pottery and ceramics manufacturer.34
In order to devise an authentic Hungarian artistic idiom, it was evident that one had to experiment with the most isolated and intact vernacular sources. An obvious solution appeared in 1881, when József Huszka began to collect and publish home-crafted designs of the Székely (Szekler) population that lived in the Transylvanian mountains and therefore remained ”more secluded and better protected against outside influences” than the remainder of the Hungarian people.35 A great ethnographical collection of dwelling houses with their interiors from a number of different geographical regions was presented at the Millenial Exhibition in Budapest in 189636, which was also the most exhaustive display of folk architecture and applied art of the territories connected to the Kingdom of Hungary. From the 1880s onwards, Ödön Lechner also turned to folk motifs, and the Millenial Exhibition served as the ultimate confirmation for his stylistic deliberations. Today, despite Feszl’s earliest ambitions in creating a typically Hungarian architectural style37, it is Lechner who is considered a pioneer of the Hungarian national style, ”the first Hungarian architect who attempted to create a national style based on a renewed ornamental language.”38
One of the submitted designs for the General Post Office in Zagreb came directly from Lechner’s atelier; it was a plan by young Béla Lajta (then still Béla Leitersdorfer), who later became a prominent architect and one of the leading figures of early modernist architecture in Hungary.39 In its spatial disposition,
the layout was similar to Foerk and Sándy’s, but the building’s elevations strongly emanated Lechner’s stylistic idiom40 (Fig. 8). The design of the façades was critiqued as possibly inappropriate even by the Hungarian press and was uncomplimentary labelled a lechneriad. Elaborate critiques were also directed at other designs of the competition, including those without a single trace of the Hungarian national style.41 Ostensibly, the jury did want a Hungarian building, but Lechner’s idiom was extremely provocative and with no semiotic depth in a non-Hungarian built environment, and thus deemed unsuitable for Zagreb. The jury clearly sought for a cunning solution which at first glance implied reconciliation with the surrounding architecture, granted it did not lose its dominant appearance in Jurišiæeva Street.
UTJECAJ MAÐARSKOGA NACIONALNOG STILA NA FOERKA I SÁNDYJA
Gyula Sándy and Ernő Foerk apparently met the exact criteria of the jury by using a more essential and not blatantly apparent architectural vocabulary (Fig. 1). For them, the building was not a glaring representation of Hungarian national style, but their own artistic interpretation of the idiom. The task of the
32 Péteri, 2005: 186
33 Keserü, 1990: 151
34 Vilmos Zsolnay gained world recognition after his factory in Pécs introduced pyrogranite, a new durable material of ornamental ceramics, and the revolutionary technological process of eosin glazing. After the glazing process, ceramic appears iridescent metallic and reflects different colours depending on the viewing angle. It quickly became one of the favourite cladding materials of Hungarian architects of the period. [See: Sinkó, 2002: 52-53]
35 Moravánszky, 1998: 219
36 Gerle, Kovács, Makovecz, 1990: 11
37 ”Feszl sought to prove in practice that a specifically Hungarian idiom could fit into the framework of the romantic style.” [Kovács, Gerle, Makovecz, 1990: 8]
38 Moravánszky, 1998: 223
39 Lechner’s office employed three of the leading figures of early Hungarian modernism: Béla Málnai, Béla Lajta, and József Vágó. [Moravánszky, 1998: 239]
40 Gerle, Csáki, 2013: 80
41 The other non-winning submissions covered in the press were by György Kopeczek, Zoltán Bálint and Lajos Jámbor, Alfréd Wellisch, and Sándor Aigner. [*** 1901.b: 3]
42 In his architectural guide of Zagreb, Aleksander Laslo describes the building as ”the only example of Hungarian folkloristic import” [Laslo, 2011: B/K7, 7]. In 1983, Olga Maruševski mentions that the Post Office seems like the ”foreign body” among the Germanic Central European architecture and, as a prominent example of technological advancement of the period, it ”enriched the modernist architecture of Zagreb” [Maruševski, 1983: 30].
43 Sometimes referred to as Ernesti Förk or Ernő Förk.
44 His father was Károly Gusztáv Förk, a reputable publisher at the time. [Hadik, 1998: 13]
building was, simply put, to evoke a strong feeling of ‘hungarianness’. Moreover, it seems that, even after all the subsequent interventions in its physical appearance, it still evokes much the same impression, as can be read from several contemporary observations of Croatian art historians.42 However, apart from those occasional and short mentions, there were no attempts of more detailed analysis in order to detect the original identity factors of the building.
Before delving into analysis of Foerk and Sándy’s stylistic tendencies, it is crucial to determine the earliest influences on the two architects - those coming from their personal backgrounds and professional paths. Ernő Foerk43 (1868-1934) was born in Temesvár (present-day Timișoara in western Romania) to a Lutheran family of German origins44, which may have had a considerable impact on Foerk’s numerous church designs during his architectural career. More so, one ought not to discount the particular vernacular surrounding of his hometown, which is the centre of the historic region of Banat, located in close proximity to the region of Transylvania. After graduating from the State Hungarian Royal School of Applied Arts (Országos Magyar Királyi Iparművészeti Iskola) in Budapest, Foerk continued his studies in Vienna and soon after studied from the great historicist architect Friedrich von Schmidt.45
45 In 1889, Foerk was awarded with a grant for continuation of his studies under the mentorship of Victor Luntz, at the Friedrich von Schmidt’s Special School for Architecture (Spezialschule für Architektur), where he was often rewarded as an exceptional student. [*** 1892: 398; Hadik, 1984: 5]
46 His father Gyula Károly Sándy was a painter and a teacher first in Eperjes, and later in Buda. [Sándy, 2005: 220]
47 Known as Royal Joseph Polytechnic until 1862.
48 Imre Steindl (1839-1902) was a Hungarian architect, author of the Hungarian Parliament building in Budapest, completed in 1904. During his studies in Vienna, Steindl was one of the Friedrich von Schmidt’s finest students at the Academy of Fine Arts [*** 1902: 574]. Ernő Foerk also participated in the Parliament building design by drafting several interior plans [Hadik, 1984: 5-6; Hadik, 1998: 13].
49 MÉM, ”Sándy Gyula”, inv. no. 1015/1, 1015/2
50 Samu Pecz (1854-1922) was a Hungarian historicist architect and academic. He studied at the Vienna Academy of Fine Arts under Theophil Hansen, whose influence we can see on his most recognized work, the Great Market Hall in Budapest (1897). Its pyrogranite façade and the colourful ceramic roof tiles were both made in the Zsolnay factory in Pécs.
51 See: Sándy, 1999
52 Moravánszky, 1998: 217
53 In this case, the phrase ”technical arts” serves as another term for applied arts and crafts.
54 Moravánszky, 1998: 217
55 The wall was one of the elements described in Gottfried Semper’s work The Four Elements of Architecture (1851), the other three being hearth, terrace, and roof [Semper, 1989: 102]. Harry Francis Mallgrave explains that elements are in fact technical operations based in the applied arts [Semper, 1989: 24].
Gyula Sándy (1868-1953) was born in Eperjes (present-day Prešov in eastern Slovakia) in an artistic Lutheran family.46 After graduating from the Royal Joseph University (Királyi József Műegyetem) in Budapest47 in 1891, he worked with Imre Steindl on the design for the Hungarian Parliament Building, together with Foerk who returned to Hungary in 1892.48
Sándy tirelessly travelled to numerous European countries, and from the journals he kept49, we can discern an inexhaustible inspiration he gained from those travels for his later works. Sándy’s determining influence was a historicist architect Samu Pecz, who worked as lecturer at the Royal Joseph University and in whose atelier Sándy worked early in his career.50 Both Foerk and Sándy participated in the 1896 Millennial Exhibition in Budapest. Ultimately, Foerk became a teacher at the Hungarian Royal Public Higher Architectural Industrial School (Magyar Királyi Állami Felső Építő Ipariskola), while Sándy taught at the aforementioned Royal Joseph University, both in Budapest. During their professional careers, they published numerous research studies; Foerk on the history of Hungarian architecture and built heritage, and Sándy51 mostly on architectural structures and construction details.
Both born in the year the Croatian-Hungarian Settlement was signed, which was preceded by the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867, Sándy and Foerk grew up and studied in a monarchy where issues of national identity and territoriality rapidly became the main burning issues of intellectuals and politicians. Coexistence of numerous nations under a single monarch led to a special awareness of ethnicity and religion. However, the main ”cultural and political artefact” was language52, and being a catalyst of problems in the Empire, it became a matter that had to be carefully dealt with on several levels, even within prominent artistic circles.
Acutely aware of the importance of (architectural) language, fin-de-siècle builders of the Dual Monarchy were greatly influenced by Gottfried Semper’s comparative analyses of architecture, published in the 1850s, in which he claims that ”architecture is not an original endeavour but borrowed an already developed language from the technical arts”.53 ”Semper viewed elements of language as forms that undergo transformations.”54 One of those forms is a wall55, an element of enclosure, which was in primitive milieus initially made of mats and carpets, and later with embroidered carpets. Solid structures ensued from the need for load support or permanence were only secondary functional elements, whereas woven textiles, as Semper convincingly claims, remained the ”original
Fig. 9 Red and white geometric pattern of the traditional Székely homespun
Sl. 9. Crveno-bijeli geometrijski uzorak tradicionalnoga narodnog tkanja plemena Székelya
Fig. 10 The traditional carved wooden grave markers handcrafted by the Protestant Székelys in Transilvania
Sl. 10. Tradicionalni ruèno izrezbareni nadgrobni spomenici protestantskih Székelya u Transilvaniji
means of separating space.”56 Ultimately, Semper’s far-reaching deduction was that the ornamentation of the outer wall of the buildings could be traced to its origin in textile motifs.57
presumably have their origins in carved wooden grave markers called kopjafa, commonly used as handcrafted funerary monuments among majority of all Hungarian tribes, and especially among Protestant Székelys (Fig. 13). To those familiar with the symbolism of kopjafa shapes, the ornaments forming the shaft of the grave marker usually tell the life story of the deceased, its top revealing their gender.59 The top element of pilaster strips on the Post Office building uses this kind of a geometrically simplified male symbol in the form of a square pyramid.
Fig. 11 The Mediaeval Castle of Turin, built for the General Italian Exposition of 1884 Sl. 11. Srednjovjekovni burg u Torinu izgraðen za Opæu talijansku izložbu 1884. godine
Fig. 12 The women’s priory in Martonoš by Ernő Foerk and Gyula Petrovácz
Sl. 12. Ženski samostan u Martonošu koji su projektirali Ernő Foerk i Gyula Petrovácz
Following Semper’s conclusions in the analysis of Sándy and Foerk’s design for the Postal Palace in Zagreb, the origin of its elevations can be found in the motifs of Hungarian folk woven textiles. The geometric pattern of the common red and white homespun is clearly recognisable in the disposition of visible red bricks on the white plastered façades (Fig. 9). Moreover, it is known that, in historic Hungary, woven carpets were produced exclusively by a minority of Magyars - the already mentioned Székelys/Szeklers of Transylvania.58
Just above the cornice of the postal palace, we can see intriguing merlon-like elements at the upper ends of pilaster strips dividing the façade (Fig. 10). Those ornamented endings
Throughout the nineteenth century, the origin of Székelys was debated at great length and, due to their preserved and characteristically crafted tangible heritage, they were often associated with the historic cultures of the Middle East.60 Sándy and Foerk’s romantic reflection on that discourse is visible in the ornaments found between the windows of the ground level; they resemble the Oriental pyramidal merlons, very much like those on the crenellation of the Ishtar Gate and the walls of Babylon (Fig. 14). However, we can find almost identical ornaments on the façades of the Mediaeval Castle in Turin (Fig. 11), built for the General Italian Exposition in 188461, which doubtlessly inspired numerous other Foerk’s as well as Sándy’s designs.62 In addition, the late mediaeval and Renaissance architecture of northern Italy served as a great inspiration to architects of modern bank and post office buildings of the period63, a great number of them built in the style or shape of Italian Renaissance palaces.64
Ornamental solutions used for the design of the façade and the cornice of the Postal Palace in Zagreb can also be found in the earlier works of Ernő Foerk, before his collaborations with Gyula Sándy, for example in the design for the Lutheran grammar school in Brașov (1901).65 He remained faithful to his language
56 Semper, 1989: 103
57 Semper, 1989: 137; Jäger, 2002: 118-119
58 Balassa, Ortutay, 1980: 384-387
59 Szinte, 1901: 117
60 In his work Pesti por és sár (Dust and Mud of Pest, 1866), Count István Széchenyi mentioned Scythians to be such culture, which resulted in influencing a great number of architects debating on Hungarian national style. [Gerle, Kovács, Makovecz, 1990: 8]
61 The Mediaeval Castle (Borgo medioevale) was based on an idea by architect Alfredo d’Andrade (with the help of a group of artists, historians and literates) and built from 1882 to 1884 for the General Italian Exhibition (Esposizione Generale Italiana) in Turin. The burg consists of numerous architectural reproductions of representative historic buildings in Piedmont and Valle d’Aosta. [For further information, see: Boito, 1884: 250-270; Bartolozzi, Daprà, 1981: 189-213]
62 In 1904, simultaneously with the construction of the General Postal Palace in Zagreb, Foerk and Sándy designed a small country house for Princess Sayn-Wittgenstein (the widow of Alajos Tüköry) and her three children in Dioš near Daruvar, Croatia. The Tüköry Mansion, located in cen-
of woven-like ornamental forms, most notably in a project for the seminary institute in Timișoara (1912)66, as in collaborations with their mutual colleague Gyula Petrovácz, for instance in a design for the women’s priory in Martonoš (Fig. 12), a village in Vojvodina (1908).67 Gyula Sándy embraced Foerk’s language of forms during their collaborations, and can be seen in his later projects for various churches and, even more notably, in his secular buildings, such as Grünewald House in Oradea (1906), Co-op House in Mester Street (1907), and Heinrich Warehouse in Mária Street (1910) in Budapest.68
In a similar manner, Sándy designed and built his most renowned secular architectural work - the Postal Palace on the Krisztina Boulevard in Budapest (Fig. 15).69 Although its ornaments are more elaborated, the building not solely bears a remarkable resemblance to the Post Office Building in Zagreb in its typology, brickwork solutions of the façade, and the upper endings of its pilaster strips, but it also includes the same geometry of ornamentation elements on the wall surrounding the round arch of the window. The only difference is that in Zagreb those elements were more sculptural and made of limestone (Fig. 16)70, while in Buda they are made in bas relief and are in colour. The use of colour as additional ornamentation on the Buda Postal Palace elevations marks a significant difference from the design for the Postal Palace in Zagreb.71 The origins of such coloured floral pattern can be found, not in the homespun of Transylvania, but in Hungarian traditional embroideries handcrafted all over the Great Plain. In the General Post Office building in Zagreb, we can find those patterns in the interior design of letter and parcel transaction halls, but in more abstract and geometricised forms, as a variation in the manner of the more common art nouveau. The main entrance portal follows the same
tral Slavonia, also features arts-and-crafts ornaments and elements comparable to those of late mediaeval architecture of northern Italy (or of the aforementioned Mediaeval Castle in Turin). [Sándy, 2005: 88-89]
63 Modern banking originated in mediaeval and early Renaissance northern Italy. The first modern banks were established by grain merchants in Lombardy.
64 Jäger-Klein, 2010: 183
65 Hadik, 1998: 71
66 MÉM, ”Foerk Ernő hagyatéka”, inv. no. 91.09.23.2
67 Valkay, 2010: 128
68 Sándy, 2005: 249-251
69 For more detailed account on the postal palace in Buda, consult: Fehérvári, Prakfalvi, 2015.
70 HDA, fund no. 905, inv. no. XII-7
71 At the time of its building in 1924/25, twenty years after the postal palace in Zagreb, when modernist architecture was in full swing, the Buda Postal Palace was stylistically anachronistic. Its anachronism can be ascribed to the political situation in Hungary at the time (Horthysm).
72 Szabo, 1941: 273
transformation pattern: in Zagreb, the iron doors are wrought in the usual art nouveau manner (Fig. 18), and in Buda - although consisting of similar elements - the doors are wooden in a wrought-iron frame, ornamented with carved motifs from Hungarian embroideries (Fig. 19).
The roof of the Postal Palace in Zagreb with its turrets was beyond question the most appealing element of the building. When built, the height of the turrets doubled the height of the building itself, and their roofs with finials became quite the presence in the silhouette of Zagreb. Because of the turrets’ intimidating appearance, Gjuro Szabo later adversely described it as an obnoxious building in ”Attila’s style with horn-like turrets”72, perceiving the building as a diabolical and barbaric urban gesture. Once again, the origin of this kind of high roof can be traced to folk houses built by the Magyars of Transyl-
Fig. 13 An ornament between the windows on the ground level resembling the merlons of the Ishtar Gates in Babylon
Sl. 13. Ornament koji nalazimo izmeðu prozora na razini prizemlja, a koji oponaša elemente kruništa Ištarinih dveri u Babilonu
Fig. 14 Ishtar Gate of Babylon, exhibited in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin
Sl. 14. Babilonske Ištarine dveri, izložene u Pergamskome muzeju u Berlinu
Fig. 15 The Postal Palace on the Krisztina Boulevard in Budapest by Gyula Sándy (1926)
Sl. 15. Poštanska palaèa na Kristininu bulevaru u Budimpešti, projektirao Gyula Sándy (1926.)
Fig. 16 The architectural plastic of the façade, cornice and roof of the General Post Office in Zagreb, photographed by V. Horvat in 1926
Sl. 16. Arhitektonska plastika proèelja, vijenca i krova Glavne pošte u Zagrebu, snimio V. Horvat 1926.
vania (Fig. 20). Aside from its height, the roof of the Postal Palace consisted of additional comparable details, including small dormer windows with a sloping roof, containing two small openings.
Sl. 18. Danas jedini preostali izvorni portal Glavne pošte u Zagrebu
Fig. 19 The carved decoration inspired by folk ornaments of Kalocsa village, the gates of the Buda Postal Palace
Sl. 19. Rezbarena dekoracija nadahnuta narodnim ornamentima sela Kalocse, portal budimske poštanske palaèe
Sl.
In 1903 Sándy and Foerk designed a very similar roof for a Post Office building in Pozsony (Bratislava), but at that competition their design lost to historicist designs.73 At the Turin International Exhibition in 1911, the Kingdom of Hungary was represented with the pavilion by Móric Pogány and Emil Tőry, whose high roof resembled Attila’s canopied dwellings74, and the edifice itself was often referred to as Attila’s Tent. The roof became a powerful element of Hungarian architectural discourse, actualised in the work of many prominent Hungarian fin-de-siècle architects such as Béla Lajta, Károly Kós, and others, followed even by the post-modernist architecture of Imre Makovecz in the second half of the twentieth century.
The present-day remodelled roof of the General Postal Palace in Zagreb no longer bears resemblances to the abovementioned ideas.
Sándy and Foerk’s skilful integration of folk motifs in the building elevations prevails as its most distinctive feature and identity factor. Therefore, it remains unceasingly recognised as a part of the Hungarian architectural idiom.
At the turn of the nineteenth century, the architects’ anxiety triggered by the rapid advance of industry in the last fifty years reached its peak, and a new demand for architecture - the one that challenges potentials in technical engineering - emerged. Necessity for such solutions was even more highlighted in architecture that followed the traditional or vernacular styles. Conclusively, architecture that relates arts and crafts with industry, engineering and new technical solutions became not just welcome, but indispensable.75
The construction of the General Post Office started as early as spring 1902, but the reali-
sation of the building proceeded slowly. The main reason lay in the Post Office Administration’s requirement that a part of the contractors be local, resulting in many misunderstandings between Hungarian architects and Croatian craftsmen.76 Also, in between the end of the competition and the beginning of construction, Sándy became familiar with the newly discovered possibilities of load-bearing structures, primarily considered for the wide span of the letter and parcel transaction halls. Apparently, the two transaction service halls had to be bigger due to the predicted amount of mail and parcels. Lacking the freedom with the budget provided by the Ministry, those changes were built in the project only after multiple revisions in which Sándy and Foerk unfortunately had to give up the originally designed third wing of the building.77 After they won the first prize, they also consulted their colleague Károly Stegmüller, an iron structures specialist, who referred to the telegraph tower as unnecessary, since the technology of that time already distributed those cables under the ground.78 Therefore, they gave up the tower as well, and planned most of the wires underground via Hultmann’s blocks79, except for a few that fit into the considerably smaller, but still tall alternative roof tower.
In the final design, the main façade of the Postal Palace was completely symmetrical, the frontispiece roof and the railing on its ridge still much higher than the rest of the surrounding buildings. All parts of the front roof were flanked with identical roof towers on both sides - more than two storeys tallmarking the frontispiece, and somewhat lower ones on the side avant-corps (Fig. 17). Fortunately, the palace from design to realisation did not lose much of its striking appearance and its high roof towers were still the predominant elements not just of Juriši-
73 Fejér, Ritter, 1903: 16-17, 33
74 Gerle, Kovács, Makovecz, 1990: 13
75 Giedion, 1969: 214-216
76 Sándy, 2005: 206
77 Sándy, 1903: 95
78 Sándy, 2005: 205
79 The city planned to distribute the main cable from the Postal Palace through Jurišiæeva Street, Ban Jelaèiæ Square and Ilica. From there, it would branch out and lead to certain buildings that housed hubs placed in the attic, each of those hubs serving a hundred households. [*** 1903: 4]
80 Jäger-Klein, 2010: 184-185
81 HDA, fund no. 905, inv. no. XII-7: Toronytetők lekötése
82 HDA, fund no. 905, inv. no. XII-7: Palmotiæeva utcai homlokzat részlete
83 Mikac, Laslo, 1982: 19; *** 2006.b: 210
84 According to Sándy, Foerk enjoyed a great popularity among the professors and lecturers. Because of its joyful atmosphere, Foerk’s cabinet was where everybody would meet to work on a difficult task. [Sándy, 2005: 205]
Fig. 21 The Telephone Exchange Building, a three-storey annex by the construction firm Josip Dubský & Co.
Sándy and Foerk devised detailed construction plans, including typical details such as stairs or the roof. The first detailed construction drawings were for a skylight roof for both letter and parcel transaction halls. Those roofs were designed as modern steel trusses panelled with glass. A similar concept of such a court-like hall can be found in Otto Wagner’s Post Office Savings Bank in Vienna, built in the coinciding period from 1903 to 1908.80 As Sándy’s field of expertise were architectural structures, he was the sole author of the detailed plans for the tower structure.81 On the other hand, they co-signed the detailed disposition of elements on the façade.82 Even though Sándy and Foerk supervised the building process, it was essential to comprehensively draw all detailed plans, because the construction work was actually carried out by Greiner and Waronig, a construction company from Zagreb.83
At the stage of construction supervision, Foerk’s significant trait was his sociability84
Sl. 21. Zgrada Telefonske centrale. Nadgradnju u obliku trokatne zgrade projektiralo je i izvelo poduzeæe Josip Dubský i drug
Fig. 22 Former lateral entrances remodelled into windows
Sl. 22. Bivši boèni ulazi preoblikovani u prozore
Fig. 23 Appearance of The General Postal Palace in Jurišiæeva Street before 1930
Sl. 23. Izgled Jurišiæeve ulice s palaèom Glavne pošte prije 1930. godine
Fig. 24 C.B. type switchboards in the Telephone Hall and manual operators
Sl. 24. Ruèni operateri za prikljuècima tipa C.B. u dvorani za telefon
and his passion for work. Although we cannot conclusively say that all the communication with the contractors was entrusted to Foerk, we can read from Sándy’s memoirs that he efficiently dealt with the communication issues during the construction. A great deal of the difficulties were letters from Croatia to Foerk’s cabinet, often not addressed in Hungarian and thus failing to arrive, which embittered the locals. There was also an episode during the stonework, when a stonecutter surnamed Pašiæ arrived to Budapest complaining the ornaments were too complex to cut. Foerk insisted that the ornaments be cut exactly as designed, aptly solving the situation.85
It was Foerk who designed the Hungarian coat of arms placed on the central pediment above the main entrance. It was produced in majolica style at the aforementioned renowned Zsolnay factory in Pécs.86
The interior of the new building was equipped with modern telecommunication technology. The telephone exchange system was relocated from Baron Nikoliæ’s house in Teslina Street to the new Postal Palace, where modernised C.B. type manual switchboards (Fig.
24) for 1200 users were installed. That system was used until 1928.87
On 31 August, 1904, the construction was finalised and the certificate of occupancy was issued by the building inspection office within days.88 On Monday, 12 September, the building was opened to the public.89 The new postal, telegraph and telephone service affected public transport as well. Owing to residents popping on and off trams in front of the General Postal Palace on the opening day, the press proposed the addition of another tram stop, which was promptly arranged two days later.90 After Jurišiæeva Street was paved in the following months, and Palmotiæeva and Ružièna Street in 1905, the Post Office finally seemed to be settled and its surrounding regulated.
Even in their initial design for the Postal Palace in 1902, Gyula Sándy and Ernő Foerk were extremely aware of the ever-expanding field of technology, and especially of development of telecommunication systems. In September 1912, they proposed a plan for the addition of the third wing facing Palmotiæeva Street.91 Its main feature was a great hall for the Morse machines on the first storey, but it was never built.
The actual preparations for the new Telephone Exchange Building (the third wing) began and several projects were proposed in the period from 1920 to 1924.92 From 1925 to 1926, the final proposition for the annex93 was designed by the prominent Zagrebbased construction firm Josip Dubský & Co.94, and the three storey high building soon filled the void of the aforementioned pedestrian entrance to the courtyard, thus perfecting the continuity of buildings in Palmotiæeva Street (Fig. 21).
85 Sándy, 2005: 206
86 The original drawing was in scale 1:2. [Sándy, 2005: 206]
87 Šutalo, 1997: 11, 59; *** 2006.b: 210
88 *** 1904.a: 4
89 *** 1904.b: 4; *** 1904.c: 4
90 *** 1904.d: 6; *** 1904.e: 5
91 MÉM, ”Foerk Ernő hagyatéka”, inv. no. 91.09.20.1, 91.09.20.2, 91.09.20.3, 91.09.20.4, 91.09.20.5, 91.09.20.6
92 DAZG, fund ZGD 1122, inv. no. 155 / 500-526; HDA, fund no. 905, inv. no. XII-8
93 HDA, fund no. 905, inv. no. XII-9: Nacrt dogradnje; inv. no. XII-10: Telefonska centrala
94 Josip Dubský was the most active construction engineer of the period and the pioneer of the reinforced concrete constructions in Croatia, most famous for the silo building of the Steam Mill (Paromlin) complex in 1908, in Zagreb.
95 *** 2006.b: 211
After the end of the First World War and the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Hungarian coat of arms on the Post Office’s central pediment was removed on the 1 November, 1918 by the National Council of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs. It was replaced by an inscription that read The Royal State Post Office - Croatia, and which stood there until 1922.95
At that time, the post office management started to contemplate the idea of the addition of the third storey to the main building, which resulted in a preliminary design by Pavao Jušiæ in April 1920.96 His design proposed the removal of the recognisable roof structure by Sándy and Foerk, replacing it with a simpler roof solution with mansardroofed turrets (Fig. 25). The façade of the proposed third storey lacked the lavish ornamentation of the storeys below.97 A new plan for the third storey (Fig. 26), designed by Stanko Kliska98, emerged almost a decade later in March 1929.99 The main criteria for the design of the simple pyramid roof in three parts (higher above the frontispiece) and which had no turrets, were to keep three of the original central pediments corresponding
96 DAZG, fund ZGD 1122, inv. no. 155 / 498; HDA, fund no. 905, inv. no. XII-8: Novogradnje, nadgradnje i adaptacija zgrade Kr. poštanskog ravnateljstva
97 The design was not built, as we can see from the perspective drawing of Zagreb, 1926, which can be found in the personal fund of Ivan Peršiæ. [DAZG, fund ”Ivan Peršiæ”, inv. no. 110]
98 Damjanoviæ, 2014: 213 [in reference to: *** 1929: 6]
99 DAZG, fund ZGD 1122, inv. no. 155 / 529, 531; HDA, fund no. 905, inv. no. XII-12: Nadogradnja zgrade Direkcije Pošta i Telegrafa u Zagrebu
100 *** 2006.b: 211
101 DAZG, fund ZGD 1122, inv. no. 156 / 1-32; Cekol, 2004: 35
102 HT Museum of Post and Telecommunications was founded in 1953 and held exhibitions until 1958. After several decades of only collecting and publishing, it became open for public again in 1997. [*** 2006.a: 387, 389]
103 *** 2006.b: 211
104 Kisiæ, 2001: 108
to the surrounding building heights and for the third storey façade and its cornice to follow the original ornamentation of the earlier storeys. Even the material, a special kind of red brick, was for that reason imported from Hungary.100 This unifying solution with a great formal change of the General Post Office was built promptly in the following year.
Although it greatly changed the urban appearance of the building, the roof removal was a bland alternation compared to radical interventions of architect Marijan Haberle that affected the user’s perception of the original spatial design. His design from 1955 proposed the closure of lateral entrances to the letter and parcel transaction halls (Fig. 22).101 The only entrance left was the central opening, which was widened at the time to adapt to its newly projected user capacity (Fig. 29) and was simplified in a modernist manner by removing its original adornment. His design also transformed the interior: the removal of the hand-made majolica ornamentation, the covering of the columns, and the negation of the skylight function left the two transaction halls completely bare. Only the letter transaction hall kept its original function, becoming the main transaction hall, while the former parcel transaction hall became an exhibition area for the Museum of Post and Telecommunications.102 Carried out in 1958103, Marijan Haberle’s changes of the spatial disposition have been retained until today.
An ambition for the re-evaluation of the building’s historical idiom emerged in 1997, when architect Nenad Kondža was entrusted with the task of ”optimising the technical and aesthetic aspect of the existing content”.104 A project for the main transaction hall and the surrounding working areas along with the archive was designed in collaboration with Bogomir Hrnèiæ and Irena Vitasoviæ in 2001. The main criterion was to restore the original
Fig. 27 The letter transaction at the beginning of the 20th century
Sl. 27. Dvorana za pismovnu poštu na poèetku 20. stoljeæa
Fig. 28 The main transaction hall after the reconstruction carried out in 2000-2001
Sl. 28. Glavna poštanska dvorana nakon rekonstruiranja izvedenog od 2000. do 2001. godine
Fig. 29 The main entrance designed by Marijan Haberle in 1955
Sl. 29. Glavni ulaz kojega je projektirao Marijan Haberle 1955.
atmosphere of the interior and its reconcilement with contemporary needs. The original light concept was appraised by the reconstruction of the original steel frame, only this time it was with the use of white glass (and not the original historicist stained coloured glass), carried out by Ante Žaja. All of the original stone plastic elements - the chequered marble floor tiling, the columns of the bossed Bizek stone, the arches, and the vaults - were reconstructed from old photographs (Fig. 27), which was supervised by Mijo Jerkoviæ of the Croatian Conservation Institute. With specially designed counters and glass panels produced by Marko Murtiæ of the AAG Studio, the space got its final contemporary touch. The final phase of Kondža’s reconstruction saw the approximate restoration of the majolica motifs, carried out by Antun and Pavao Vuksan’s atelier.105
While retrieving the building’s origins, Nenad Kondža elegantly met the requirements of contemporary interior design (Fig. 28), which brought him the prestigious Bernardo Bernardi Award.106
Even though Kondža’s harmonious intervention in the Post Office interior provided fertile ground for a comprehensive re-evaluation of the Post Office’s architectural design and appearance, in 2013 the Croatian Post closed the exhibition hall of the Museum of Post and Telecommunications, and rented it to a supermarket chain, thus changing its functional and spatial role once again.
The close surroundings of the General Post Office experienced major transformations as well. Even though originally conceived as the main business street of the Lower Town Za-
greb, Jurišiæeva Street is today a calm street with only public and pedestrian traffic, and the Postal Palace building is visible behind a row of high vegetation forming a promenade (Fig. 30), itself a result of urban design proposed Mihajlo Kranjc in 1994.107 In 2014, a reconstruction of present-day Kurelèeva Street (former Ružièna Street) flanked the Postal Palace with a clear space which provides a complete view of the building’s south elevation.
ZAKLJUÈAK
The Palace of the General Post and Telegraph Administration Office is a rare example of a technical building integrated in the centre of the urban fabric of Lower Town Zagreb, while all the other technical and industrial buildings of the period were specifically located at the borders and fringes of the city. The main criterion for building Hungarian buildings in Zagreb of that period was that the buildings be either directorates or administration buildings, facilities dependent of Hungarian ministries. Anticipating the new epoch of technology and advancement, the building surfaced as a unique block in the nineteenth-century downtown grid - both functionally and stylistically. This deliberate dual emphasis of the Postal Palace was one of the last attempts to represent the advancement and the primacy of Hungarian Kingdom, which was already in its decline.
In the transition from late historicist to modern architecture characterised by the secession of this new style from historic styles, Ernő Foerk and Gyula Sándy designed a building that indicated a need for a different historical basis. The Post follows the criterion of contemporary trends in technology, but also considers the tumultuous discourse of the national style and the origin of Hungari-
105 Data obtained from the City Institute for the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Heritage.
106 For a more detailed account on the project and the award, see: Kisiæ, 2001; Križiæ Roban, 2002; Mrduljaš, 2011.
107 Kneževiæ, 2013: 12-13
108 In his work, Rudolf Klein discusses the typology of Hungarian styles in various periods, and marks this one as a ”Kós Line”. In their work, János Gerle, Attila Kovács and Imre Makovecz put Sándy and Foerk between ”Provincial Rennaissance” and ”Hungarian Folk Applied Art”. For a more detailed account, see: Klein, 1997; Gerle, Kovács, Makovecz, 1990 (a chart on the inside of the dust jacket).
109 There are several names without which this extensive research would not be possible. The author’s highest gratitude goes to David Edel who assiduously discussed and tirelessly proofread each version of this research. The author also wishes to thank Prof. Pál Ritoók, Prof. Rudolf Klein, Prof. Dragan Damjanoviæ, Prof. Mladen Obad Šæitaroci, Tamás Csáki, and Iva Prosoli for their generous help and guidance during this research.
ans. We may argue that it deliberately made a double operation - a secession from Secession - in order to return to the roots of the idea in need of transmission. By analysing the building’s formal elements, we can notice that it relies on the original sources found among the Magyar tribes, in the authentic Hungarian villages,108 thus making a clear distinction from the Viennese styles of the period. Influenced by the British Arts and Crafts movement and the provincial Renaissance of northern Italy, it found its theoretical basis in the hand-crafted arts of the Székely people of Transylvania. After this collaboration, an application of this kind of motifs became the stylistic criterion of both Foerk and Sándy’s future designs. Moreover, in its potential to coexist with the most advanced technology of the period and assimilate it, the new stylistic idiom acquired certain integrity.
After the dissolution of the Empire, the apparent displacement (and deterritorialisation) of Transylvanian and Banat folk motifs became questionable, which became evident in the removal of the original roof structure. Although numerous alternations that followed in the twentieth century brought changes to its outer appearance as well as to the manner of use, it survives as the only example of Hungarian national style (sometimes called the Hungarian Secession or Hungarian Art Nouveau) in the architecture of Zagreb.
However, despite the complexity of factors that lead to its construction and later alterations, as well as the building’s multiple significant historical, cultural and technological factors, the present-day General Post Office building is not protected as an individual building, but only as part of the historic urban ensemble of the Lower Town Zagreb. To secure the better protection as well as the proper active use of the building, future architectural and conservation methods ought to consider the building’s main identity factors: its specific stylistic idiom, semiotics of its elements, and its functional features. Conclusively, this research109 hopes to elucidate the need to legally protect the General Postal Palace as the important monument of technical heritage and substantial architectural proof of cultural and building history of finde-siècle Zagreb.
[Proofread by: David Edel, BA]
1. Balassa, I.; Ortutay, Gy. (1980), Magyar néprajz, Corvina, Budapest
2. Bartolozzi, C.; Daprà, C. (1981), La Rocca e il Borgo Medioevale di Torino (1882-84): Dibattito di idee e metodo di lavoro, in: Alfredo d’Andrade: Tutela e restauro, exhibition catalogue [eds. Cerri, M. G.; Biancolini Fea, D.; Pittarello, L.], Vallecchi: 189-213, Florence
3. Baždar, Z. (2004), Gospodarske veze Hrvatske i Ugarske u razdoblju od 1868.-1918., in: Hrvatsko-maðarski odnosi 1102.-1918. (ed. Kruhek, M.), Hrvatski institut za povijest: 313-318, Zagreb
4. Bene, G. (1992), Postaépítészetünk a századfordulón (1867-1918), in: Postaépítészet Magyarországon [eds. Bakos, J.; Kiss, A.; Kovács, G.], Távközlési Könyvkiadó: 28-48, Budapest
5. Boito, C. (1884), Il Castello medioevale all‘Esposizione di Torino, ”Nuova antologia”, 47 (77): 250-270, Rome
6. Cekol, S. (2004), Stoljeæe poštanske palaèe, ”Vijenac”, 13 (278): 35, Zagreb
7. Damjanoviæ, D. (2011), Beèka Akademija likovnih umjetnosti i hrvatska arhitektura historicizma: Hrvatski uèenici Friedricha von Schmidta, Gliptoteka HAZU, Zagreb
8. Damjanoviæ, D. (2014), Zagreb: Arhitektonski atlas, AGM, Zagreb
9. Fehérvári, Z.; Prakfalvi, E. (2015), A budai Postapalota, ”Ars hungarica”, 41 (1): 48-63, Budapest
10. Fejér, L.; Ritter, I. (1903), Pozsonyi posta- és távirda-épület, ”Magyar Pályázatok”, 1 (1): 1-35, Budapest
11. Gaál, Gy. (2012), Kolozsvár közgazdász-politikus szülöttje: Hegedüs Sándor (1847-1906), ”Közgazdász Fórum”, 15 (2): 3-29, Cluj-Napoca
12. Gerle, J.; Kovács, A.; Makovecz, I. (1990), A századforduló magyar építészete, Szépirodalmi könyvkiadó / Bonex, Békéscsaba
13. Gerle, J.; Csáki, T. (2013), Lajta Béla, Holnap Kiadó, Budapest
14. Giedion, S. (1969), Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition [5th edition], Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
15. Grijak, Z.; Goldstein, I. (2012), Na vratima 20. stoljeæa, in: Povijest Grada Zagreba, Knjiga 1.: Od prethistorije do 1918. [eds. Goldstein, I.; Goldstein, S.], Novi Liber: 350-411, Zagreb
16. Hadik, A. (1984), Foerk Ernő, az építész, in: Foerk Ernő (1868-1934) építész emlékkiállítása, exhibition catalogue [ed. Raffay, R.], O.M.F. Magyar Építészeti Múzeuma: 3-12, Budapest
17. Hadik, A. (1998), Foerk Ernőről és a Magyar Építészeti Múzeumban lévő dokumentumanyagáról, in: Lapis angularis II (Források a Magyar Építészeti Múzeum gyűjteményéből), OMvH Magyar Építészeti Múzeum: 13-19, Budapest
18. Hirc, D. (2008), Stari Zagreb: Kaptol i Donji grad (Svezak drugi), Matica hrvatska (Redovita izdanja za èlanstvo, Vol. XV/II), Zagreb
19. Jäger, C. (2002), Europäische Architekturtraditionen: Ideen und Konzepte, Neuer Wissenschaftlischer Verlag, Vienna
20. Jäger-Klein, C. (2010), Österreichische Architektur des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts (2., aktualisierte Auflage), Neuer Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, Vienna/Graz
21. Keserü, K. (1990), Art Contacts Between Great Britain and Hungary at the Turn of the Century, ”Hungarian Studies”, 6 (2): 141-154, Budapest
22. Kisiæ, D. (2001), Nenad Kondža: Redizajn pomirenja / Redesign of Reconcilement, ”Oris”, 3 (10): 106-116, Zagreb
23. Klein, R. (1997), A mai magyar építészet és gyökerei: Szellemtörténeti vizsgálódások, in: XX. századi műemlékük és védelmük: A 26. Egri Nyári Egyetem előadásai, 1996. július 1-9., Egri Nyári Egyetem Intéző Bizottsága / Országos Műemlékvédelmi Hivatal: 15-40, Budapest
24. Kneževiæ, S. (1996), Zagrebaèka zelena potkova, Školska knjiga, Zagreb
25. Kneževiæ, S. (2013), Izmeðu vizije i stvarnosti, in: Javni prostori Grada Zagreba iz arhiva arhitekta Mihajla Kranjca, Gradski ured za strategijsko planiranje i razvoj Grada: 11-14, Zagreb
26. Kolveshi, Ž. (1996), Zgrada pošte u Poštanskoj ulici u Zagrebu, ”HPT: List Hrvatske pošte i telekomunikacija”, 6 (1): 52-53, Zagreb
27. Križiæ Roban, S. (2002), Godišnja nagrada ‘Bernardo Bernardi’ za najuspješnije ostvarenje na podruèju oblikovanja i unutrašnjeg ureðenja u 2001., ”Èovjek i prostor”, 49 (3/4): 32-33, Zagreb
28. Laslo, A. (2003), Lica moderniteta 1898.-1918.: zagrebaèka arhitektura secesijske epohe, in: Secesija u Hrvatskoj, exhibition catalogue [ed. Galiæ, A.; Gašparoviæ, M.], Muzej za umjetnost i obrt: 23-41, Zagreb
29. Lechner, Ö. (1906), Magyar formanyelv nem volt, hanem lesz, ”Művészet”, 5 (1): 1-18, Budapest
30. Magyar, A. (2007), Magyar építőízlés, Ráday Galéria, Budapest
31. Maruševski, O. (1983), Poslovna zgrada - tema 19. stoljeæa, ”Èovjek i prostor”, 30 (3): 30, Zagreb
32. Mikac, N.; Laslo, A. (1982), Arhitektonski vodiè I: Zagreb - Donji grad, 19. i 20. stoljeæe, ”Èovjek i prostor”, 29 (9): 19, Zagreb
33. Mirkoviæ, M. (2001), Hrvatski gradovi na starim planovima i vedutama, AGM, Zagreb
34. Moravánszky, Á. (1998), Competing Visions: Aesthetic Invention and Social Imagination in Central European Architecture, 1867-1918, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
35. Mrduljaš, M. (2011), Kuæe smo valorizirali kroz oštru kritiku, in: Nagraðena hrvatska arhitektu-
ra 90-09 [eds. Bernfest, M.; Mrduljaš, M.], Školska knjiga: 372-376, Zagreb
36. Péteri, É. (2005), Pre-Raphaelitism in Hungary, in: Worldwide Pre-Raphaelitism [ed. Tobin, T. J.], State University of New York Press: 185-214, New York
37. Sándy, Gy. (1903), A zágrábi pósta- és távirdaépület, ”Építő Ipar”, 27 (15): 95-108, Budapest
38. Sándy, Gy. (1999), Épületszerkezettani táblák (Az 1932. évi kiadás utánnyomása), Gyorsjelentés Kiadó, Budapest
39. Sándy, Gy. (2005), Hogyan lettem és hogyan voltam én templom-építő, -tervező és művezető építész?, in: Lapis angularis VI (Források a Magyar Építészeti Múzeum gyűjteményéből), Magyar Építészeti Múzeum: 13-218, Budapest
40. Semper, G. (1989), The Four Elements of Architecture and Other Writings, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
41. Sinkó, K. (2002), The Creation of a National Style of Ornamentation at the End of the Nineteenth Century, in: Hungarian Ceramics from the Zsolnay Manufactory, 1853-2001, exhibition catalogue [eds. Csenkey, É; Steinert, Á.], Yale University Press: 45-53, New Haven
42. Sokol, V. (1979), 450 godina pošte u Zagrebu: 1529-1979, Radna organizacija PTT prometa, PTT muzej, Zagreb
43. Spicijariæ Paškvan, N. (2011), Prilog biografiji Gábora de Bellusa Barossa (Pružina, 1848.Budimpešta, 1892.), ”Problemi sjevernog Jadrana”, 11: 7-19, Zagreb/Rijeka
44. Szabo, Gj. (1941), Stari Zagreb, Knjižara Vasiæ i Horvat, Zagreb
45. Szabo, Gj. (2012), Šetnja u stari Zagreb: Od Puževe do Jurišiæeve ulice, in: Gjuro Szabo: O Zagrebu [ed. Kneževiæ, S.], AGM: 114-119, Zagreb
46. Széchenyi, I. (1830), Hitel, Petrózai Trattner J. M. és Károlyi István, Pest
47. Szinte, G. (1901), Kopiafák (temető-fejfák) a Székely földön, ”A Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Néprajzi Osztályának Értesítője”, 2 (7): 115-121, Budapest
48. Škalamera, Ž. (1994), Zagreb na zemljovidima 19. stoljeæa, in: Zagreb na geodetsko-katastarskim zemljovidima i u zemljišnim knjigama [ed. Škalamera, Ž.], Gradski zavod za katastar i geodetske poslove: 71-101, Zagreb
49. Šutalo, K. (1997), Manualne telefonske centrale i telefonski aparati iz zbirke HPT muzeja: Izložba u povodu 110 godina javne telefonske mreže u Hrvatskoj, exhibition catalogue, Hrvatska pošta i telekomunikacije, Zagreb
50. Valkay, Z. (2010), Martonos főbb építészeti kérdései a XX. század elején, ”Helyismereti Almanach”, 5: 117-143, Senta
51. *** (1892), Ausstellungen, ”Allgemeine KunstChronik”, 16 (16): 397-398, Vienna
52. *** (1901.a), Natjeèajni oglas za stavljenje osnova dvokatne sgrade, što no se ima izgraditi za kr. ug. poštansko i brzojavno ravnateljstvo u Zagrebu, ”Agramer Zeitung”, 76 (124): 8, Zagreb
53. *** (1901.b), Három tervpályázat: Eredmények, ”Vállalkozók Lapja”, 22 (35): 3, Budapest
54. *** (1902), Steindl Imre: 1839-1902, ”Vasárnapi Ujság”, 49 (36): 573-574, Budapest
55. *** (1903), Das Neue Agramer Telephonnes, ”Agramer Zeitung”, 78 (214): 4, Zagreb
56. *** (1904.a), Das neue Post- und Telegraphenamtsgebäude, ”Agramer Zeitung”, 79 (198): 4, Zagreb
57. *** (1904.b), Von der Post, ”Agramer Zeitung”, 79 (206): 4, Zagreb
58. *** (1904.c), Vom neuen Postpalais, ”Agramer Zeitung”, 79 (207): 4, Zagreb
59. *** (1904.d), An die Adresse der Tramway, ”Agramer Zeitung”, 79 (208): 6, Zagreb
60. *** (1904.e), Von der Tramway., ”Agramer Zeitung”, 79 (209): 5, Zagreb
61. *** (1929), Izgled zagrebaèke glavne pošte nakon dogradnje treæeg kata, ”Novosti”, 23 (162): 6, Zagreb
62. *** (2006.a), HT muzej, in: Zagrebaèki leksikon (Vol. I) [eds. Biliæ, J.; Ivankoviæ, H.], Leksikografski zavod ”Miroslav Krleža” / Masmedia: 387-389, Zagreb
63. *** (2006.b), Pošta, in: Zagrebaèki leksikon (Vol. II) [eds. Biliæ, J.; Ivankoviæ, H.], Leksikografski zavod ”Miroslav Krleža” / Masmedia: 209-211, Zagreb
Sources Izvori
Archival Sources
Arhivski izvori
1. Budapesti Műszaki és Gazdasádtudományi Egyetem [BME], Budafoki út 4-6, BudapestOrszágos Műszaki Információs Központ és Könyvtár
2. Državni arhiv u Zagrebu [DAZG], Opatièka 29, Zagreb - HR-DAZG-ZGD 1122 Zbirka graðevinske dokumentacije Poglavarstva Grada Zagreba
3. Knjižnica Filozofskog fakulteta Sveuèilišta u Zagrebu [FFZG], Ivana Luèiæa 3, Zagreb
4. Hrvatski državni arhiv [HDA], Maruliæev trg 21, Zagreb - HR-HDA-905 Zbirka graðevinskih nacrta
5. Budapest Főváros Levéltára [BFL], Teve utca 3-5, Budapest - Lajta Béla Virtuális Archívum
6. Muzej pošte i telekomunikacija [MPT], Jurišiæeva 13, Zagreb
7. Magyar Építészeti Múzeum, Forster Gyula Nemzeti Örökséggazdálkodási és Szolgáltatási Központ [MÉM], Táncsics Mihály utca 1, Budapest: - Foerk Ernő hagyatéka - Sándy Gyula hagyatéka
8. Muzej Grada Zagreba [MGZ], Opatièka 20, Zagreb:
- Zbirka fotografija, fotografskog pribora i razglednica
- Zbirka planova i regulacija grada Zagreba - Zbirka zagrebaèkih fotoreportera
9. Ministarstvo kulture Republike Hrvatske [MKRH], Runjaninova 2, Zagreb - Dokumentacija Središnjeg arhiva Odjela za INDOK poslove kulturne baštine, Fototeka
10. Néprajzi Múzeum [NM], Kossuth Lajos tér 12, Budapest
11. Postamúzeum [PM], Benczúr utca 27, Budapest - Fotótár
12. Arhitektonski fakultet Sveuèilišta u Zagrebu [SAAF], Kaèiæeva 26, Zagreb - Studijski arhiv
13. Osobna zbirka arhitekta Nenada Kondže [ZNK]
Internet Source Internetski izvor
Galoviæ, K. (2013), Od Puževe do Jurišiæeve ulice: Hommage Gjuri Szabi, ”Panoptikon” (personal blog), http://kgalovic.blogspot.hr/2013/02/od-puzeve-do-jurisiceve-ulice.html [accessed: 28/5/2016]
Illustration sources Izvori ilustracija
Fig. 1 MGZ, inv. no. 5056
Fig. 2 MGZ, inv. no. 3165
Fig. 3 MGZ, inv. no. 912-III-1169 a,b; 912-II-16057
Fig. 4 MKRH, inv. no. 952, neg. III-268
Fig. 5 MGZ, inv. no. 4098
Fig. 6 MÉM, inv. no. 91.09.20.9
Fig. 7 Sándy, 1903: 97
Fig. 8 BFL, Pályatervek 462: A zágrábi posta- és távírda-igazgatóság épületének pályaterve, homlokzat és távlati kép, 1901
Fig. 9 Balassa, Ortutay, 1980: Plate LXIII (between pages 672 and 673)
Fig. 10, 18, 19, 21, 22, 28-30 Photos by author, taken in 2013 and 2014
Fig. 11 Photo by Enrico Ciampolillo, 2014 (detail)
Fig. 12 Valkay, 2010: 126-127
Fig. 13 Photo by Viktor Nagy, 2010
Fig. 14 Photo by Maximilian Meisse, 2010 (detail)
Fig. 15 PM, inv. no. 25-1997-2966
Fig. 16 MKRH, inv. no. 191, V-191
Fig. 17 Sándy, 1903: 96
Fig. 20 Magyar, 2007: 19
Fig. 23 MGZ, inv. no. 16167
Fig. 24 PM, inv. no. 25-1993-2056
Fig. 25 DAZG, fund ZGD 1122, inv. no. 155/498
Fig. 26 DAZG, fund ZGD 1122, inv. no. 155/531
Fig. 27 PM - inv. no. 25-1993-2055
Summary Sažetak
Iako palaèa Ravnateljstva pošte i brzojava u Jurišiæevoj ulici predstavlja jedan od najznaèajnijih primjera maðarskoga arhitektonskog i tehnološkog dostignuæa u Zagrebu na poèetku 20. stoljeæa, njezin nastanak i znaèenje ostali su do danas neistraženi. Kako bi se utvrdili èimbenici identiteta koji grade njenu posebnost, ovim su istraživanjem prvi put obuhvaæeni i hrvatski i maðarski arhivski te drugi izvori, provedena je analiza graditeljskoga opusa njenih autora, ali i onodobna kulturna i teorijska kretanja.
Jedan od najznaèajnijih èimbenika identiteta poštanske palaèe jest njezin smještaj u gradskome tkivu. Nakon ujedinjenja Gradeca i Kaptola u jedinstveni grad Zagreb 1850. godine, grad se poèeo ubrzano širiti prema jugu u obliku blokova smještenih u ortogonalni raster ulica Donjega grada. I nekadašnja Puževa ulica istoèno od Trga bana Jelaèiæa, uz koju je tekao potok Medvešèak, postala je 1899. godine Jurišiæevom ulicom, svojevrsnim poslovnim nastavkom Ilice prema istoènim dijelovima grada, a koji se skladno uklapa u planirani raster. Tom je prilikom na sjevernoj strani Jurišiæeve ulice nastalo prazno zemljište, zamišljeno kao smještaj nove zagrebaèke Glavne pošte.
Natjeèaj za novu, dvokatnu poštansku palaèu objavljen je 22. svibnja 1901. godine. U kolovozu iste godine pobjednièkim je proglašen rad maðarskih arhitekata Ernőa Foerka i Gyule Sándyja. Jedan od elemenata koji je ispunio kriterij tehnološke inovativnosti u Foerkovu i Sándyjevu projektu bio je pedeset metara visok telegrafski toranj, primijeæen i hvaljen u struènome tisku. S druge strane, funkcionalni kriterij bio je ispunjen simetriènim prostornim razmještajem, s glavnim ulazom u sredini proèelja uz Jurišiæevu ulicu te dvostrukim boènim ulazima, od kojih je jedan bio za listovnu poštu, a drugi za pošiljke. U unutrašnje je dvorište poštansko vozilo ulazilo kroz vežu na boènome krilu zgrade iz pokrajnje Ružiène ulice (danas Kurelèeve). Veæ tim prvim projektom planirano je proširenje u obliku
treæega krila zgrade, a koje bi udomilo telefonsku centralu. Tijekom izgradnje, zbog tehnološkog napretka, odustalo se od telegrafskoga tornja, a po otvorenju 1904. godine palaèa Glavne pošte bila je dvokatnica simetriènoga proèelja, s krovom koji je njezinu visinu udvostruèavao.
Tijekom 20. stoljeæa Glavna se pošta u Jurišiæevoj ulici veoma rijetko spominjala u struènoj literaturi. Aleksander Laslo spominje ju u svome Arhitektonskome vodièu tek kao „maðarski folkloristièki import”, a Olga Maruševski u jednome broju èasopisa „Èovjek i prostor” zgradu naziva „maðarskom secesijom”, no jasniji kriteriji za njezine stilske odrednice nisu postavljeni. Maðarski napor u izgradnji reprezentativne arhitekture Donjega grada nije mogao biti predstavljen beèkom secesijom kao veæina zagrebaèke stambene arhitekture toga doba. Veæ u drugoj polovici 19. stoljeæa u maðarskoj arhitekturi nalazimo stilske tendencije koje ugraðuju maðarske cvjetne i mitološke motive u arhitekturu i obrt. To su veæinom bili arhitekti i obrtnici okupljeni oko imena arhitekta Ödöna Lechnera. Arhitekt Béla Lajta, koji je tada kao nauènik-pripravnik radio kod Lechnera, takoðer je ponudio rješenje za Glavnu poštu u Zagrebu, ali ono je i u maðarskome tisku bilo kritizirano zbog doslovnoga apliciranja maðarskih motiva na proèelja. Bolji semiotièki sustav nudilo je proèelje Foerkova i Sándyjeva rješenja. Korijene njihova arhitektonskoga jezika moramo najprije potražiti u maðarskome plemenu Székelya, a za koje se na prijelazu stoljeæa smatralo da svojim tradicionalnim obrtom i arhitekturom predstavljaju izvorne maðarske elemente. Upravo te elemente Sándy i Foerk ugraðuju u zagrebaèku poštansku palaèu i oni ostaju vidljivi do danas. Slijedeæi teorijsku potku Gottfrieda Sempera, motive sliène ciglenim ornamentima proèeljâ Glavne pošte možemo pronaæi u motivima narodnoga tkanja u Transilvaniji, dok završeci lizena na krovnome vijencu sadrže piramidalne elemente sliène nadgrobnim spomenicima tamošnjih prote-
stantskih Székelya. Zbog kulturno-teorijskih kretanja i promišljanja podrijetla Maðara na prijelazu stoljeæa, na proèelju nalazimo i elemente arhitekture Mezopotamije (Ištarinih dveri u Babilonu), a veoma znaèajan uzor na cjelokupan autorski opus Foerka i Sándyja bio je srednjovjekovni burg u Torinu, izgraðen za Opæu talijansku izložbu 1884. godine u Torinu, kao i mnoge talijanske palaèe izgraðene u doba renesanse.
Veæ 1912. godine Foerk i Sándy izradili su projekt proširenja poštanske palaèe treæim krilom uz Palmotiæevu ulicu, ali je ono u konaènici izvedeno tek od 1925. do 1926. godine prema projektu Josipa Dupskoga i njegovih suradnika. Godine 1920., projektom koji potpisuje Pavao Jušiæ, prvi je put predložena nadogradnja Glavne pošte još jednim, treæim katom, kao i preoblikovanje proèelja. Ipak, Glavna je pošta nadograðena tek deset godina poslije, prema projektu Stanka Kliske iz 1929. godine. Od 1955. do 1958. godine zatvoreni su boèni ulazi u zgradu, a glavni je ulaz proširen i njegova je arhitektonska plastika uklonjena pa je novi portal izveden prema projektu arhitekta Marijana Haberlea. Redukcija izvorne ornamenture provedena je i u interijeru. Tek je 2001. godine izvorni historicistièko-secesijski interijer rekonstruiran prema projektu arhitekta Nenada Kondže i suradnika. Unatoè svim pregradnjama tijekom 20. stoljeæa, palaèa Glavne pošte u Jurišiæevoj ulici zadržala je svoje glavne èimbenike identiteta: prostorno-funkcionalni razmještaj koji se temelji na tehnološkim i arhitektonskim dostignuæima Austro-Ugarske Monarhije na poèetku 20. stoljeæa, ali i jedinstven jezik oblikovanja temeljen na povijesno-mitološkom predlošku maðarskoga nacionalnog stila i tradicionalnog obrta Transilvanije. Zgrada pritom radi dvostruku operaciju - secesiju od secesije - kako bi stvorila nov reprezentativni arhitektonski jezik kojim bi prenosila poruku napretka i znaèenja maðarskoga graditeljstva za urbano tkivo zagrebaèkoga Donjega grada na poèetku 20. stoljeæa. BORIS DUNDOVIÆ
Biography
Biografija
BORIS DUNDOVIÆ, B.Arch., is a graduate student and an UTA at the Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb. Within the Heritage Urbanism [HERU] project, he is collaborator on the research of country house building in continental Croatia. His area of interest are architectural and cultural connections between fin-de-siècle Hungary and Croatia. He is author and co-author of several scientific and other papers and co-editor of three books for which he received the Special Rector’s Award of the University of Zagreb in 2013.
BORIS DUNDOVIÆ, univ.bacc.ing.arch., student je diplomskoga studija i demonstrator Arhitektonskoga fakulteta Sveuèilišta u Zagrebu. U sklopu projekta Urbanizam naslijeða [HERU] suradnik je na istraživanju dvoraca i kurija kontinentalne Hrvatske. Njegov istraživaèki interes jesu maðarsko-hrvatske arhitektonske i kulturne veze na prijelazu 19. i 20. stoljeæa. Autor je i suautor nekoliko znanstvenih i drugih radova te suurednik triju knjiga, za koje je 2013. godine dobio posebnu Rektorovu nagradu Sveuèilišta u Zagrebu.
1 Sveuèilište u Zagrebu Arhitektonski fakultet
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26 2 Arhitektonski ured „Siloueta”
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Širolina 8 zorana.sokol@arhitekt.hr igor.gojnik@siloueta.com mos@arhitekt.hr
Izvorni znanstveni èlanak
UDK 711.4:726(497.5 Zagreb)”19” Tehnièke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam 2.01.02. - Urbanizam i prostorno planiranje 2.01.04. - Povijest i teorija arhitekture i zaštita graditeljskog naslijeða Èlanak primljen / prihvaæen: 3. 5. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
1 University of Zagreb Faculty of Architecture
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26
2 Architectural office ”Siloueta”
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Širolina 8 zorana.sokol@arhitekt.hr igor.gojnik@siloueta.com mos@arhitekt.hr
Original Scientific Paper
UDC 711.4:726(497.5 Zagreb)”19” Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning
2.01.02. - Urban and Physical Planning
2.01.04. - History and Theory of Architecture and Preservation of the Built Heritage Article Received / Accepted: 3. 5. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
liturgijska arhitektura
urbanizam
Zagreb
20. stoljeæe
Èlanak govori o urbanistièkim obilježjima liturgijskih graðevina u Zagrebu u 20. stoljeæu, a rezultat je istraživanja provedenog prema prethodno postavljenim kriterijima. Istraživanje je provedeno na temelju obilaska terena, analize zateèenog stanja i analize smještaja liturgijskih graðevina na Hrvatskoj osnovnoj karti. Rezultati istraživanja pokazuju da su liturgijske graðevine u 20. stoljeæu u Zagrebu prestale biti gradotvorni element kakav su bile u prethodnim povijesnim razdobljima, te da se pred njima formiraju javni prostori dominantno privatnog karaktera.
liturgical architecture urbanism
Zagreb 20th century
This article examines the urban features of the 20th century liturgical buildings in Zagreb on the basis of the previously established research criteria. This research is the result of field work, the analysis of the existing liturgical buildings in terms of their condition and their position on the Croatian base map. The research results show that the 20th century liturgical buildings in Zagreb ceased to play a role in the formation of the urban fabric as they did in the previous historical periods. In front of them public spaces of predominantly private character have been formed.
liturgijska arhitektura u 20. stoljeæu zadobila je novi urbanistièki identitet jer je u urbanizmu grada izgubila dominantnu ulogu oblikovatelja gradskoga tkiva, a to je osobito vidljivo u slijedu zagrebaèkih urbanistièkih planova koji su obilježili 20. stoljeæe.1 Povijesne liturgijske graðevine graðene do 20. stoljeæa predstavljale su snažan gradotvorni i simbolièki element gradske strukture. One su smještene na znaèajnim trgovima, na križanjima važnijih prometnica i element su vrijednih gradskih vizura. U slijedu urbanistièkih planova grada Zagreba druge polovice 19. i poèetka 20. stoljeæa odražava se kontinuitet povijesnog strukturiranja grada, posebice je to èitljivo u Prvoj regulacijskoj osnovi iz 1865. godine, Drugoj regulacijskoj osnovi iz 1887. godine i Lenucijevim planovima koji su obilježili razdoblje 1891.-1918. godine.2 To svjedoèe liturgijske graðevine izgraðene u tom razdoblju. Bazilika Srca Isusova u Palmotiæevoj ulici (arhitekt Janko Holjac, godina projekta 1901.) monumentalnim proèeljem i visokim zvonicima dominira u dalekim gradskim vizurama, a crkva sv. Blaža na Prilazu Ðure Deželiæa (arhitekt Viktor Kovaèiæ, godina projekta 1909.) smještena je na križanju reprezentativne gradske prometnice. Prilaz je u ono doba bio zagrebaèka avenija kojom se od kolodvora prilazilo središtu grada.
U urbanistièkom planu iz 1938. godine3 liturgijske graðevine još uvijek imaju važnost u
urbanoj strukturi. Urbanistièki pristup sastoji se od postavljanja nove urbane matrice s jasno definiranim predjelima stanovanja, industrije i prometa.4 Toj se strukturi, dosljedno simbolièkoj hijerarhiji oblikovanja, pridodaju odgovarajuæi javni sadržaji. Okosnicu plana èini jak vertikalni perivojni potez koji je nastavak niza donjogradskih trgova Zrinjevca, Strossmayerova i Tomislavova trga prema Savi i jak horizontalni perivojni potez koji presijeca ovaj vertikalni i u kojem su smještene važne liturgijske graðevine. Liturgijske graðevine predviðene ovim planom gotovo se u cijelosti i realiziraju. Meðutim, buduæi da sam plan ne doživljava provedbu, ove graðevine daljnjim razvojem grada nemaju urbanistièku snagu koju im je predvidio plan, nego postaju dio drukèije urbane strukture. Razvoj grada Zagreba po tom planu zaustavio je Drugi svjetski rat, a poslije rata nova društveno-politièka i socijalna situacija.
Urbanistièki planovi poèetka druge polovice 20. stoljeæa temelje se na funkcionalistièkim naèelima, što je posebice èitljivo u urbanistièkom planu iz 1949. godine. Liturgijske graðevine nisu element plana zbog oblikovnog principa plana u kojem struktura proizlazi iz potreba zoniranja, a princip bilo kakve oblikovno-sadržajne hijerarhije nestaje. Meðutim, one nisu element plana i zbog novoga društveno-politièkog ureðenja nesklonog izgradnji religijskih graðevina.
Dok je urbanistièki plan iz 1949. godine obilježio cjelovit funkcionalni koncept, u planovima druge polovice 20. stoljeæa sve više dominira fragmentalno i funkcionalno planiranje, što je oèito u GUP-u iz 1971. godine. Takav pristup planiranju nije mogao stvoriti preduvjete za naglašavanje simbolièkog znaèenja bilo kojeg tipa javnih graðevina. Kraj 20. stoljeæa obilježit æe Generalni urbanistièki plan iz 1986. godine. U tom se planu oèituje težnja za sanacijom i rekonstrukcijom grada u postojeæim okvirima, respekt prema toposu - povijesnoj podlozi, prirodnoj sredini, ambijentu, tolerancija prema zateèenom, razlièitom, pa i privremenom, shvaæanje urbanizma kao neprekidnog procesa, a ne zbroja važeæih dokumenata. Meðutim, u provedbi ove ideje nisu doživjele svoju primjenu.5 Liturgijske graðevine izgraðene u tom razdoblju, iako su sada legitimni javni sadržaji, nemaju urbanistièku važnost, nego one u nedovoljno
1 Èlanak je nastao na temelju doktorskog istraživanja provedenog u sklopu znanstvenog projekta Urbanistièko i pejsažno naslijeðe Hrvatske kao dio europske kulture, pod mentorstvom dr.sc. Tomislava Premerla i akademika Mladena Obada Šæitarocija, te je dopunjeno istraživanjem provedenim u sklopu projekta Heritage urbanism [HERU2032] Hrvatske zaklade za znanost.
2 Dokumentacija o planu iz 1865. nalazi se u DAZG-GO, Omot 1-7, sign. 50/1. Druga regulacijska osnova iz 1889. èuva se na planu u MGZ, inv.br. 2944 i 2945. O prvoj i drugoj regulacijskoj osnovi vidjeti: Frankoviæ, 1981: 54; Kne-
artikuliranom urbanitetu postaju znak samo svojim oblikovnim osobitostima.
Urbanistièki planovi kojima je promišljan prostor Zagreba u 20. stoljeæu ostavili su svoj trag u tkivu izgraðenoga grada, a ovaj èlanak istražuje koja su urbanistièka obilježja okarakterizirala sagraðene liturgijske graðevine ugraðene u urbano tkivo Zagreba. Istraživanje je provedeno na temelju obilaska terena, analize zateèenog stanja i analize smještaja liturgijskih graðevina na Hrvatskoj osnovnoj karti.
CRITERIA FOR THE ANALYSIS
Za analizu urbanistièkih obilježja liturgijskih graðevina u Zagrebu u 20. stoljeæu postavljena su dva kriterija. Prvi kriterij jest identitet liturgijskih graðevina u slici grada (makrourbanistièki aspekt po kojem se analizira na koji su naèin liturgijske graðevine postale urbanistièki akcent gradske strukture), a drugi je kriterij identitet vanjskih prilaznih prostora ispred liturgijskih graðevina (mikrourbanistièki aspekt kojim se analizira na koji je naèin formiran prilazni prostor ispred liturgijskih graðevina).
1. kriterij: Èimbenici identiteta liturgijskih graðevina u slici grada - Klasifikacija liturgijskih graðevina napravljena je na osnovi prvoga kriterija, gdje se iz presjeka svih izgraðenih liturgijskih graðevina u Zagrebu može vidjeti da su doprinos slici grada i naglašavanju dijelova urbanoga prostora liturgijske graðevine ostvarile trima znaèajkama: smještajem na glavnim prometnicama, smještajem na topografski istaknutim mjestima i smještajem unutar pregnantne gradske strukture. Stoga æe izgraðene liturgijske graðevine biti klasificirane kako je prikazano u Tabl. I.
Daljnja analiza unutar postavljene klasifikacije temeljit æe se na drugom kriteriju, gdje je analizirajuæi osobitosti prilaznih prostora ispred liturgijskih graðevina moguæe išèitati nekoliko razlièitih osobitosti tih prostora (Tabl. II.).
2. kriterij: Èimbenici identiteta vanjskih prilaznih prostora ispred liturgijskih graðevina - Ovim je istraživanjem utvrðeno pet tipova vanjskih prostora liturgijskih graðevina prema kriteriju javno-privatno. Ti tipovi identifi-
ževiæ, 1996.; Kneževiæ, 2003.; Laslo, 1984/85: 172; Sokol Gojnik, 2010. O Lenucijevim planovima vidjeti: Frankoviæ, 1983.; Frankoviæ, 1988.a; Frankoviæ, 1988.b; Jukiæ, 1997.; Sokol gojnik, 2010.
3 Urbanistièki plan iz 1938. èuva se u AGZPU. O tome vidjeti: Laslo, 1984.; Jukiæ, 1997.; Sokol Gojnik, 2009.
4 Uredba o izvoðenju generalnoga regulacionog plana za grad Zagreb [DAZG-GPZ-GO, Generalni regulacioni plan grada Zagreba 1931.-1938., sign. 59,60,61, kut. 72, str. 7-11]
5 Jukiæ, 1997: 111
ciraju urbanistièka obilježja liturgijskih graðevina Zagreba u 20. stoljeæu. Èimbenici identiteta liturgijskih graðevina u pet razlièitih tipova razlikuju se ovisno o tome je li liturgijska graðevina ’u funkciji grada’, ’strukturalni dio šireg urbanog prostora’, ’ima naglašeno odvajanje svog vanjskog prilaznog prostora od širega urbanog prostora, ali nije prekinuta povezanost s njim’, ’položajem graðevine na parceli jasno odvojena od šireg urbanog prostora’ ili je ’fizièki odvojena od ostaloga javnog prostora grada (zidom ili ogradom)’.
Prilazni prostor izrazito jakog javnoga, a izrazito slabog privatnoga karaktera: Ovo obilježje ima prilazni prostor ispred liturgijskih graðevina koji je u potpunosti u funkciji grada. Primjer takva prilaznog prostora meðu povijesnim trgovima jest Trg sv. Marka na Gradecu (Sl. 5.).
Prilazni prostor jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnoga karaktera: Ovo obilježje ima prilazni prostor ispred liturgijskih graðevina kojeg je privatnost samo naznaèena (npr. blagim izdizanjem prilaznog prostora pred liturgijskom graðevinom, drvoredom ili urbanom opremom), èime je oznaèena granica javnoga prostora grada i prostora pred liturgijskom graðevinom. Pretprostor ispred liturgijske graðevine ipak je strukturalni dio širega urbanog prostora. Primjer takva prilaznog prostora jest trg ispred crkve sv. Blaža u Prilazu Ðure Deželiæa 64 (Sl. 6.).
Prilazni prostor javno/privatnog karaktera: Ovo obilježje ima prilazni prostor ispred liturgijskih graðevina u kojem liturgijska graðevina ima naglašeno odvajanje svog vanjskog prilaznog prostora od širega urbanog prostora, ali nije prekinuta njegova povezanost s njim. Prilazni je prostor ispred liturgijskih graðevina ovih osobina najèešæe snažno deniveliran od okolnoga urbanog prostora pa se u nj treba s namjerom pristupiti. Primjer takva prilaznog prostora jest trg ispred crkve sv. Antuna Padovanskog u ulici Sv. Duh 31 (Sl. 7.).
Prilazni prostor slabog javnoga, a jakog privatnoga karaktera: Ovo obilježje ima prilazni prostor ispred liturgijskih graðevina gdje je vanjski prilazni prostor položajem graðevine na parceli jasno odvojen od šireg urbanog prostora, ali je ipak ostavljena moguænost da se u taj prostor pristupi s namjerom (npr. nije postavljena ograda). Primjer takva prilaznog prostora jest trg ispred crkve sv. Ivana apostola i evanðelista u Utrinama u ulici Hrastin prilaz 1 (Sl. 8.).
Prilazni prostor izrazito slabog javnoga, a izrazito jakog privatnoga karaktera: Ovu karakteristiku ima prilazni prostor ispred liturgijskih graðevina koji je fizièki odvojen od ostaloga javnog prostora grada (zidom ili ogradom). Primjer takva prilaznog prostora
Tabl. I. Prvi kriterij analize urbanistièkih obilježja liturgijskih graðevina
Table I. The first criterion for the analysis of urban features of liturgical buildings
1. kriterij: Liturgijske graðevine u slici grada
A - Liturgijske graðevine koje su postale element slike grada
A1 - Liturgijske graðevine uz glavne prometnice
A2 - Liturgijske graðevine na topografski istaknutim mjestima
A3 - Liturgijske graðevine koje su element pregnantne gradske strukture
B - Liturgijske graðevine koje nisu postale element slike grada
Tabl. II. Drugi kriterij analize urbanistièkih obilježja liturgijskih graðevina
Table II. The second criterion for the analysis of urban features of liturgical buildings
2. kriterij: Formiranje vanjskog prilaznog prostora pred liturgijskim graðevinama
Prilazni prostor izrazito jakog javnoga karaktera, a izrazito slabog privatnoga karaktera
Prilazni prostor jakog javnoga karaktera, a slabog privatnoga karaktera
Prilazni prostor polujavnoga, a poluprivatnoga karaktera
Prilazni prostor slabog javnoga, a jakog privatnoga karaktera
Prilazni prostor izrazito slabog javnoga, a izrazito jakog privatnoga karaktera
Nije formiran vanjski prilazni prostor
jest trg ispred crkve Sv. Obitelji u Držiæevoj ulici 31 (Sl. 9.).
Analiza liturgijskih graðevina prema postavljenim kriterijima provedena je prema kronološkom slijedu.
A. LITURGIJSKE GRAÐEVINE KOJE SU POSTALE ELEMENT SLIKE GRADA
A. LITURGICAL BUILDINGS THAT HAVE BECOME A COMPONENT OF THE IMAGE OF THE CITY
A1 - LITURGIJSKE GRAÐEVINE UZ GLAVNE PROMETNICE (primjer Sl. 2.):
Bazilika Srca Isusova, Palmotiæeva 33, arhitekt Janko Holjac, god. projekta 1901. - Cjelokupni se sklop svojim glavnim proèeljem nalazi na istoènoj strani Palmotiæeve ulice. Graðevina je urezana u donjogradski blok koji je omeðen Palmotiæevom, Hatzovom, Draškoviæevom i Boškoviæevom ulicom. Crkva6, koja je uvuèena unutar uliènog platna, zauzima središnji položaj cjelokupnog sklopa koji se sastoji od crkve i samostana. Oblikovanjem arhitekt je pokušao istaknuti volumen crkve koliko mu je to omoguæavala urbanistièka i programska zadanost. Crkvu je blago uvukao, èime je stvorio pretprostor ulaska jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnoga karaktera vezanog za Palmotiæevu ulicu. Proèelje je izrazito naglašeno proporcijom i dvama visokim zvonicima. Premda u tkivu grada nije ostvarena nikakva ulièna vizura prema crkvi, ona visinom svojih zvonika dominira nad urbanom matricom koju obilježava pretežito èetverokatna izgradnja donjogradskih blokova pa ona u dalekim vizurama pridonosi slici grada. Crkva samo svojim proèeljem sudjeluje u slici grada jer je njeno ‘tijelo’ skriveno u tkivu bloka. Crkva sv. Blaža, Prilaz Ðure Deželiæa 64, arhitekt Viktor Kovaèiæ, god. projekta 1909. - Arhitekt Kovaèiæ ispred crkve7 oblikuje trg jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnoga karaktera, èime proširuje križanje i stvara reprezentativan ulaz u crkvu sa strane Prilaza. Prostor trga arhitekt blago izdiže u odnosu na kotu uliènog nogostupa. Time istièe crkvu, ali i razdjeljuje funkciju trga od funkcije ulice. Sa zapadne strane crkve smješta župni dvor koji oblikuje istim jezikom kao i crkvu, koristeæi kameni ‘postament’ crkve kao poveznicu oblikovanja. Time se cjelovitim oblikovanjem s jasnim razlikovanjem glavnoga i sporednih sadržaja uoblièuje prostor trga. Kovaèiæev arhitektonski jezik odnosi se prema tkivu grada kao prema cjelovitom organizmu i svojim se izrazom uklapa u taj organizam. Pritom se ne ugraðuje u zadano tkivo bloka, nego ga nagriza i formira trg - javni prilazni prostor ispred crkve. Stereotomsko oblikovanje crkvene graðevine u suglasju je sa strukturom donjogradskih blokova pa crkva, premda osobnoga arhitektonskog jezika, ‘izrasta’ iz
tkiva grada. Takav interpolacijski pristup osobito naglašava peta fasada crkve, gdje se èitaju stereotomski komponirani volumeni harmonizirani s donjogradskom matricom. U složenoj urbanistièkoj zadanosti kvalitetnim proporcijskim odnosima širine i visine crkve te velièine trga Kovaèiæ stvara harmoniènu arhitektonsko-urbanistièku cjelinu. U njegovoj urbanistièkoj spretnosti zanimljiva je i pozicija zvonika prislonjenog uz crkvu, i to u njezinu zadnjem planu u odnosu na ulazno proèelje, èime Kovaèiæ izbjegava podjelu trga te ostvaruje njegovu cjelovitost i naglašava njegov javni, a ne privatni karakter.
Crkva Majke Božje Lurdske, Vrbaniæeva 35, arhitekt Jože Pleènik, god. projekta 1935.; arhitekti Zvonimir Vrkljan i Valdemar Balley, god. projekta 1970. - Crkva Majke Božje Lurdske8 svojim je sjevernim proèeljem dio uliènog platna Zvonimirove ulice. Svojim volumenom ona je ugraðena u necjeloviti blok omeðen Zvonimirovom, Vrbaniæevom, Fišerovom i Tuškanovom ulicom. Sjeveroistoèni dio bloka neizgraðena je površina. Ulazno je proèelje blago uvuèeno u odnosu na regulacijski pravac Zvonimirove ulice pa je time stvoren pretprostor ulaska u crkvu jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnoga karaktera, ali malih dimenzija. Oblikovno, crkva graðena bez zvonika prilagodila se uliènom platnu Zvonimirove ulice slijedeæi vijenac uliènih zgrada, a sakralni sadržaj tek je naznaèen rasterom križeva koji oblikuju prozore. Vjernici za ulaz djelomièno koriste i stražnji ulaz iz Vrbaniæeve ulice preko samostanskog dvorišta, koji je izrazito privatnoga karaktera.
Crkva Sv. Obitelji, Držiæeva ulica 31, graditelj Ðuro Kahn, god. projekta 1935./36. - Križanje na kojem je izgraðena crkva9 nije arhitektonskim zahvatima dobilo veliku urbanistièku snagu. Sjeverno od Ulice grada Vukovara nalazi se predio niske, guste stambene izgradnje, zapadno je od Držiæeve predio rahle izgradnje, a istoèno je od crkve rahli predio male izgraðenosti, koji istoènije prelazi u gustu i nisku stambenu izgradnju. Okolna izgradnja ne degradira percepciju parcele na kojoj je crkva, ali ona nije osobito uoèljiva na raskrižju zbog svoga skromnoga arhitektonskog izrièaja i neizgraðenih ostalih crkvenih i javnih graðevina. Pred crkvom se nalazi ulazni trg kojem je ogradom naglašen izrazito jak privatni, a izrazito slab javni karakter.
Crkva Uzvišenja Sv. Križa u Sigetu, Brodograditeljska 2, arhitekti Matija Salaj i Emil Seršiæ,
6 Premerl, 1994: 582; Maruševski, 1991: 343; Karaè, Žuniæ, 2013.
7 Juriæ, 1987.; 1993: 124-139; 1997.; Premerl, 1998.; 1994: 51-69; Radoviæ Maheèiæ, Laslo, 1997.; Sokol Gojnik, 2012.; Karaè, Žuniæ, 2013.
8 Domljan, 1977.; Kreèiæ, 1992.; Prelovšek, 1992.; Dobroniæ, 1993: 176-187.; Malekoviæ, 2000.; Uchytil, Barišiæ, Štulhofer, 2004.; Sokol gojnik, 2009.
9 Gjilas, 1987.; Premerl, 1994.; 2010.
god. projekta 1968./69. - Crkva10 se nalazi u modernistièkom urbanistièkom kontekstu grada. Sa sjeverne i zapadne strane okružena je visokim višestambenim zgradama, a s južne strane neizgraðenim predjelima koje urbanistièki planovi tretiraju kao perivojni potez. Crkva se nalazi u vizuri jake prometnice južnog ulaza u grad. Kao takva ona je markantan i vidljiv znak u prostoru. Svojim oblikovanjem arhitekti se nisu pokušavali referirati na novodefinirani kontekst, veæ su oblikovali crkvu kao ekspresivan volumen i urbanistièki akcent. Javni prostor pred crkvom arhitekti su graduirali uvoðenjem triju deniveliranih razina. Na koti terena prilazni je prostor jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnoga karaktera. Trg ispred crkve izrazito je jakog privatnoga karaktera i deniveliran u odnosu na kotu terena pa je intimiziran s obzirom na okolni neizgraðeni kontekst prema kojem je trg okrenut. Napokon, ulaz u crkvu je deniveliran i najviše intimiziran.
Crkva Bezgrešnog zaèeæa Blažene Djevice Marije u Dubravi, Avenija Gojka Šuška bb, arhitekt Ivan Antoliæ, god. projekta 1993.Buduæi da je predio sa zapadne strane Avenije Gojka Šuška neizgraðen, a istoène predjele od crkve obilježava niska izgradnja obiteljskih kuæa - crkva i samostan11, te zvonik na spoju dvaju volumena, dominiraju prostorom. Ispred crkve je formiran trg izrazito jakog privatnoga, a izrazito slabog javnoga karaktera, jasno odvojen od ulice visokom ogradom i živicom. Monumentalno oblikovani volumeni crkve, samostana i zvonika naglašavaju graðevinu u širemu urbanistièkom kontekstu.
Svetište Sv. Mati Slobode na Jarunu, Hrgoviæi 1, arhitekt Nikola Bašiæ, god. projekta 1994. - Crkva se nalazi u stambenom predjelu Jarun, na križanju jakih prometnica - Horvaæanske ceste i Hrgoviæa. Širi urbanistièki kontekst odreðen je izgradnjom višestambenih zgrada srednje katnosti i obiteljskih kuæa. Crkva12 se nalazi na križanju dviju jakih prometnica. Položajem razlièitih sadržaja svetišta na parceli stvoreni su vanjski pretprostori razlièitog karaktera. Cjelokupni sklop sastoji se od volumena crkve, volumena kenotafa, stambenog dijela i pastoralnog centra - objedinjenih u cjelinu dijelom natkrivenu monumentalnom krovnom konstrukcijom. Ulaz u crkvu ostvaren je sa strane Horvaæanske ceste i sa strane Ulice don Petra Šimiæa. Ulaz
10 Premerl, 1987.; 1994.; 2010.
11 Špoljariæ, 2005.
12 Jendriæ, 2004.; Maroeviæ, 1994.; Premerl, 2010.
13 Premerl, 2010.
14 Ibeling, Ivanišin, 2009.; Mrduljaš, Mimica, Rusan, 2009.; Premerl, 1996.; 1994.; *** 2007: 76-77; *** 1993: 15-16; *** 2009.; Karaè, Žuniæ, 2013.
15 *** 2009: 114-115 (Župni sklop sv. Ivana evanðeliste)
sa strane Horvaæanske ceste je naglašeniji jer je pred njim formiran velik, dijelom natkriven ulazni trg polujavnoga, a istodobno i poluprivatnoga karaktera, blago izdignut od razine ceste. Unutarnji atrij djelomièno je otvoren prema ulaznom trgu i ima intiman karakter te služi kao proširenje liturgijskoga prostora. Ulaz iz Ulice don Petra Šimiæa je utilitaran i ima privatni karakter.
Crkva sv. Jeronima, Maksimirska 128, arhitekt Ivan Antoliæ, god. projekta 1994. - Širi urbanistièki kontekst crkve sv. Jeronima u Maksimiru13 definiran je sa zapadne strane gustom izgradnjom obiteljskih i niskih višestambenih zgrada, a s istoène strane perivojem Maksimir. Oblikovno i mjerilom crkva je nepretenciozna i nije naglašena u prostoru iako se nalazi u blizini križanja dviju jakih prometnica Bukovaèke i Maksimirske ceste. Položajem na parceli crkva je uvuèena u odnosu na Bukovaèku ulicu, a u vizuri je naglašena vertikala zvonika. Pred crkvom je formiran prilazni trg izrazito jakog privatnoga, a izrazito slabog javnoga karaktera, intimiziran okolnim nasadima i ogradom.
Crkva Predragocjene Krvi Isusove u Kozari boku, 2. Radnièki put 1b, arhitekt Krešimir Cimprešak, god. projekta 1993. - Crkva se nalazi u blizini Slavonske avenije prema istoènom izlasku iz grada. Svojim je oblikovanjem postala uoèljiv znak u prostoru. Pred crkvom nije formiran prilazni trg, nego je prostor parcele odvojen od ulice ogradom, a ulazni pretprostor u crkvu dobio je privatni i intimni karakter deniveliranjem od razine terena.
Crkva sv. Ivana apostola i evanðelista u Utrinama, Hrastin prilaz 1, arhitekti Andrej Uchytil i Renata Waldgoni, god. projekta 1991.Crkva sv. Ivana apostola i evanðelista u Utrinama14 smještena je na rubu zagrebaèkog naselja Utrine uz Aveniju Dubrovnik, prema kojoj je i orijentirana. Naselje Utrine èini niz linearnih, u pravilnom ortogonalnom rasteru postavljenih, slobodnostojeæih višestambenih zgrada. Slobodnim oblikovanjem crkva je metodom kontrasta uklopljena u zateèeno ortogonalno urbano tkivo. Svojim položajem na važnoj prometnici crkva sv. Ivana apostola i evanðelista ostvarila je odnos sa širim gradskim prostorom pa ona postaje element slike grada percipiran vizurom s Avenije Dubrovnik i širih gradskih vizura. Dispozicijom izgraðenih volumena crkve i pastoralnog centra te trga nije ostvaren jak javni odnos sa stambenom èetvrti. Ispred crkve formiran je prilazni trg slabog javnoga, a jakog privatnoga karaktera, voðen idejom graduacije prostornih cjelina od „javnog, posveæenog, sakralnog do svetog”.15 Crkva bl. Augustina Kažotiæa u Volovèici, Ivaniægradska bb, arhitekt Boris Magaš, god. projekta 1997. - Crkva bl. Augustina Kažoti-
Sl. 3. Liturgijske graðevine na topografski istaknutim mjestima - primjer: Crkva Srca Isusova i kapela sv. Antuna na Šalati
Fig. 3. Liturgical buildings on topographically prominent places - example: Basilica of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Chapel of St Anthony in Šalata
æa16 nalazi se u stambenom predjelu Volovèica, na križanju dviju jakih prometnica Ivaniægradske i Ulice grada Vukovara. Širi urbanistièki kontekst odreðen je izgradnjom višestambenih graðevina velike i srednje katnosti. U zadanomu urbanistièkom kontekstu arhitekt reagira na naèin da orijentira crkvu prema križanju, a oblikovno ekspresivnom formom u kontrastu prema zateèenome modernistièkom urbanizmu redefinira kontekst i simbolièki naglašava graðevinu. Položajem na parceli crkve, župnog dvora i zvonika pred crkvom kreiran je prostor trga orijentiran prema križanju jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnoga karaktera. Trg definiraju volumen crkve, volumen župnog dvora, a prema ulici decentno oblikovana vertikala zvonika koja naznaèuje prostornu granicu.
pristupa monumentalnim stubištem, te koji ima javno/privatni karakter. S lijeve, zapadne strane crkve formirano je proširenje i veza s ranije izgraðenom kapelom Sv. Duha, koja je do kraja artikulirana tek izgradnjom vertikale zvonika izvedenog 2008. godine prema Denzlerovu projektu, èime je ostvarena cjelovita Denzlerova prostorna zamisao. Svojim monumentalnim proèeljem usmjerenim prema ulici crkva je uoèljiv znak kako u širemu tako i u užemu gradskom okruženju.
Sl. 4. Liturgijske graðevine ugraðene u pregnantnu gradsku strukturu - primjer: Crkva Krista Kralja na Mirogoju
Fig. 4. Liturgical buildings built in an impressive urban fabric - example: Church of Christ the King on Mirogoj
A2 - LITURGIJSKE GRAÐEVINE NA TOPOGRAFSKI ISTAKNUTIM MJESTIMA (primjer Sl. 3.): Crkva Srca Isusova i kapela sv. Antuna u sklopu Meðubiskupijskoga djeèaèkog sjemeništa, Voæarska 106, arhitekt Juraj Neidhardt, god. projekta 1926. - Uz desnu stranu Voæarske ceste, na bregovitim dijelovima Šalate smješten je impozantan sklop Djeèaèkog sjemeništa.17 Odvojen od grada, intimnog karaktera, aksijalno komponirani sklop sastoji se od šest meðusobno povezanih graðevina koje tvore mikrourbanistièku cjelinu. Iako je cjelokupni sklop intimnog karaktera i odvojen od glavnih prometnih tokova i gustoga gradskog tkiva, svojom arhitektonskom strukturom naglašenom zvjezdarnicom i crkvom te svojim mjerilom on sudjeluje u slici grada iz dalekih vizura i postaje pregnantna graðevina. Crkva kao žarišna toèka cijeloga sklopa svojim je ulazom orijentirana prema gradu, a ne prema sjemeništarskom sklopu. Crkvi se pristupa i iz sjemeništarskog sklopa te izravno s gradske prometnice - Voæarske ulice. Pred crkvom nije ostvaren prilazni trg, a ulaz u crkvu izdignut je od razine terena pa se u crkvu pristupa dvostrukim stubištem.
Crkva Majke Božje Kraljice Hrvata na Sljemenu, arhitekt Juraj Denzler, god. projekta 1931. - Crkva18 se nalazi na sljemenskom planinarskom šumskom putu. Do crkve vode stube, a cijeli je brežuljak kao otvoreni prostor u funkciji liturgijske graðevine, pogotovo kada se u njoj odvijaju sveèaniji obredi. Prostor oko crkve je javno/privatnog karaktera i do njega vode planinarski šumski putovi.
Crkva sv. Antuna na Sv. Duhu, Sv. Duh 31, arhitekt Juraj Denzler, god. projekta 1931.Crkva19 je smještena na brežuljku, glavnim je proèeljem okrenuta gradu, a zvonikom dodatno naglašena u širemu gradskom prostoru. Pristup crkvi graduiran je od malog proširenja - trga jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnoga karaktera, koji se nalazi u podnožju brežuljka, do trga pred crkvom kojemu se
Crkva sv. Antuna Padovanskog u Sesvetskim Selima, Voæinska 1, arhitekt Ivan Antoliæ, god. projekta 1990. - Crkva sv. Antuna u Sesvetskim Selima20 na rubu je stambenog predjela Sesvete. Predio Sesvetska Sela odreðen je srednje gustom urbanom matricom obiteljskih kuæa. Na topografski uzvišenom dijelu smješten je sklop crkve, župnog dvora i pastoralnog centra sv. Antuna Padovanskog. Crkva se nalazi na istaknutom i malo izdvojenom povišenomu prostoru Sesvetskih Sela pa je stoga uoèljiv znak u prostoru, vidljiv iz dalekih vizura (èak i sa Zagrebaèke obilaznice). Cjelokupni sklop nije ostvario izravan odnos sa stambenim predjelom zbog smještaja u prostoru i topografije. Pred crkvom je oblikovan velik pristupni trg izrazito jakog privatnoga i izrazito slabog javnoga karaktera.
A3 - LITURGIJSKE GRAÐEVINE UGRAÐENE U PREGNANTNU GRADSKU STRUKTURU (primjer Sl. 4.): Crkva Krista Kralja na Mirogoju, Aleja Hermana Bolléa 27, arhitekt Herman Bollé, god. projekta 1913. - Crkva Krista Kralja21 nalazi se u sklopu mirogojskih arkada koje su pregnantna gradska struktura. Crkva se nalazi na spoju dvaju krila monumentalnih arkada, u središnjoj ulaznoj osi groblja. Svojim položajem crkva naglašava ritam arkada. Ona je akcent i središnja tema polukružno formiranog proširenja ulaznoga trga kojim se naglašava toèka ulaza u grobljanski perivoj. Pred crkvom je formiran trg izrazito jakog privatnog karaktera, naglašenog visokom ogradom koja ga odvaja od kolnoga pristupa. Trg nas svojim intimnim karakterom uvlaèi u prostor groblja. Kapela Ranjenog Isusa u Ilici 1, arhitekti Antun Ulrich, Franjo Bahovec i Ivo Juranoviæ, god. projekta 1932. - Kapela Ranjenog Isu-
16 Premerl, 2010.; Sokol Gojnik, 2016.
17 Èorak, 2000.; Juraèiæ, 1987.; Laslo, 1995.; Matiæ, 1998.; Premerl, 1979.; 2003.; Razum, 2004.; Radoviæ Maheèiæ, 2007.; Karaè, Žuniæ, 2013.
18 Dobroniæ, 1993.; Premerl, 1967.; 1977.; 1984.; Jakšiæ, 2007.; Radoviæ Maheèiæ, 2007.; Karaè, Žuniæ, 2013.
19 Jakšiæ, 2007.; Hanièar Buljan, Jakšiæ, 2009: 101-105; Sekuliæ Gvozdanoviæ, 1978.; 2000.; Premerl, 1977.; 1981.; 1984.; 1990.; 1994.; 2003.; 2008.; 2010., 2015.
20 Premerl, 1994.; 2000.
21 Èorak, 1976: 56; Fuèiæ, 1987.; Kolacio, 1978.; Kosiæ, 1974.; Malekoviæ, 1974.; Maroeviæ, 2003.; Premerl, 1987.; 2000.; Vereš, 1974.; Karaè, Žuniæ, 2013.
sa22 nalazi se na poèetku ulice Ilica, uz Trg bana Josipa Jelaèiæa, ugraðena u pregnantnu strukturu uliènog platna Ilice. Kao element uliènog platna najstarije gradske ulice ona je i prepoznatljiv znak u prostoru. Ulazno proèelje kapele blago je uvuèeno u odnosu na proèelje zgrade i naglašeno dvama stupovima, decentnim bijelim križem i staklenom stijenom, a metalnom je ogradom pretprostor ulaska u liturgijski prostor dobio privatni karakter.
B. LITURGIJSKE GRAÐEVINE KOJE NISU
POSTALE ELEMENT SLIKE GRADA
B. LITURGICAL BUILDINGS THAT HAVE NOT BECOME A COMPONENT OF THE IMAGE OF THE CITY
Kapela Majke Božje Kraljice Hrvata u Remetincu, Karlovaèka 9a, arhitekt Juraj Denzler, god. projekta 1934. - Kapela Majke Božje Kraljice Hrvata23 nalazi se na križanju Karlovaèke i Brezovaèke ceste u Remetincu. Kapela je malih dimenzija i skromnog oblikovanja te nije istaknut element križanja. Parcela kapele ogradom je odvojena od ceste. Pred kapelom je formiran manji prilazni trg izrazito slabog javnoga i izrazito jakog privatnoga karaktera.
Crkva sv. Josipa na Trešnjevci, Trakošæanska 47, arhitekt Marijan Haberle, god. projekta 1935. - Crkva sv. Josipa24 na Trešnjevci nalazi se unutar gustoga i niskoga gradskog tkiva. Dvorana sagraðena po projektu arhitekta Haberlea i prilagoðena za liturgijski prostor skromna je po svome mjerilu i izrièaju, gotovo se utopila u gradsko tkivo, pa nije uoèljiva s okolnih prometnica. Pred crkvom je formirano skromno proširenje - trg slabog javnoga i jakog privatnoga karaktera, blago deniveliran od razine ulice. Pretprostor ulaska odreðuje volumen crkve, župnog dvora i volumen zvonika. Prema Ozaljskoj ulici pred crkvom je sagraðen trgovaèki centar, tako da crkva nije akcent križanja Ozaljske i Trakošæanske ulice, kako je to predviðao urbanistièki plan iz 1938. godine, za koje je arhitektonsko rješenje ponudio arhitekt Jože Pleènik.
Crkva sv. Marka Križevèanina, Selska cesta 91, arhitekt Marijan Haberle, god. projekta
22 Ivanèeviæ, 1983: 30-34; Mikiæ, 2002.; Premerl, 1990.; 1994.; Radoviæ Maheèiæ, 2007.; Štulhofer, 1991: 129-135.
23 Dobroniæ, 1993.; Jakšiæ, 2007.
24 Premerl, 1994.; 2010.; Sokol Gojnik, 2009.
25 Premerl, 1979.; 1990.; 1994.; 2003.; 2010.; Sokol Gojnik, 2009.; Zagorac, 2008.
26 Premerl, 1990.; 1994.; 2003.; 2010.; Uchytil, Štulhofer, Barišiæ, 2007.
27 Babiæ, 1986.; Deanoviæ, 1962.; 1986.; Perše, 1962.; Piploviæ, 1983.; Premerl, 1994.; 2010.; Sokol Gojnik, 2009.; Uskokoviæ, 1980.
28 Bašnec, 1992.; Premerl, 1994.
1939. - Crkva sv. Marka Križevèanina25 jako je uvuèena u dubinu parcele. Prostor odreðuje gusta izgradnja industrijskih sadržaja pa je crkva slabo uoèljiva na jakoj Selskoj cesti. Njena uoèljivost dodatno je umanjena decentnim modernim oblikovanjem. Pred crkvom je formiran ulazni trg izrazito slabog javnoga i izrazito jakog privatnoga karaktera, odvojen od okolnih industrijskih sadržaja ogradom. Ulaz u crkvu je izdignut od razine pristupa parceli snažnim stubištem i naglašeno oblikovanim ulaznim trijemom.
Crkva sv. Ivana Bosca u Podsusedu, Vinobreška 2, arhitekt Zvonimir Požgaj, god. projekta 1939. - Crkva sv. Ivana Bosca26 nalazi se u gustome stambenom predjelu obiteljskih kuæa. Crkva je smještena na vrhu manjeg brežuljka, ali zbog bregovitog oblièja toga gradskog predjela crkva ne dominira okolnim vizurama. Crkvi se pristupa monumentalnim stubištem. Pred crkvom je formiran trg javno/ privatnog karaktera. Monumentalnim stubištem naglašena je veza trga s gradskim predjelom u kojem je crkva smještena, a denivelacijom je postignut njegov djelomièno privatan karakter. Svojom dimenzijom trg je stvorio snažan ulazni pretprostor crkve. Crkva Krista Kralja na Trnju, Trg kardinala Franje Šepera 1, nezavršena; arhitekt Ivan Meštroviæ, god. projekta 1936. - Crkva Krista Kralja na Trnju27 trebala je u cjelini biti izgraðena prema projektu kipara Ivana Meštroviæa. Prema Regulacionom planu iz 1938. godine crkva je trebala biti središnja tema sklopa graðevina na jakomu perivojnom potezu. Meðutim, od ambiciozne vizije ostvarena je samo kripta crkve, a buduæi da plan nije zaživio, okolno gradsko tkivo razvijalo se stihijski, pa izvedena kripta nije element slike grada. Ispred kripte pretvorene u bogoslužni prostor formiran je ulazni trg izrazito jako privatnoga karaktera, naglašenog ogradom koja ga odvaja od javnoga gradskog prostora.
Crkva sv. Mihaela Arkanðela u Dubravi, Kapucinska 47, nepoznati autor, god. projekta 1940. - Crkva28 je smještena na uglu dviju ulica u gustome urbanom tkivu donekle pravilnog uliènoga rastera i malih parcela s obiteljskim kuæama. Svojim smještajem crkva prati regulacijsku crtu ulice te pred njom nije stvoren prilazni trg. S južne strane crkve nalazi se kapucinski samostan koji je uvuèen u odnosu na pojas ulice. Pred samostanom je formiran trg izrazito jakog privatnoga karaktera, odvojen od javnoga prostora ogradom. Crkva svojim smještajem ne sudjeluje u dalekim vizurama niti je ostvarila odnos prema širemu urbanistièkom okruženju. Dom Božje providnosti i kapela Corpus Domini na Trešnjevci, Mošæenièka 3, nepoznati autor, god. projekta 1938. - Crkva je element niske i guste urbane matrice Trešnjevke
pretežito stambene izgradnje. Crkva nema posebnost arhitektonskog oblikovanja pa nije uoèljiva u prostoru iako se nalazi uz jaku Slavonsku aveniju. Pred crkvom nije formiran ulazni pretprostor, a crkvena je parcela ogradom odvojena od ulice.
Crkva sv. Nikole Taveliæa u Kustošiji, Sv. Nikole Taveliæa 2, inž. Jaromir Dubsky, god. projekta 1941. - Crkva sv. Nikole Taveliæa u Kustošiji29 nalazi se u urbanistièki gustom i niskom tkivu grada, kojeg obilježava izgradnja pretežito obiteljskih kuæa. Jednim je dijelom element uliènog platna kojemu se pokušava prilagoditi visinom vijenca, dok je cjelokupna kompozicija proèelja naglašena vertikalom zvonika. Pred ulazom u crkvu nije formiran ulazni pretprostor jer se crkva svojim proèeljem nalazi na regulacijskoj crti. Neposredno uz crkvu nalazi se župni dvor pred kojim je oblikovan trg jakog javnog, a slabog privatnog karaktera koji se koristi kao pristupni prostor crkve.
Crkva Marije Pomoænice na Knežiji, Omiška 2, arhitekt Zvonimir Požgaj, god. projekta 1942. - Crkva Marije Pomoænice na Knežiji30 okružena je visokom stambenom izgradnjom pa ona nije znaèajan èimbenik širih gradskih vizura. Pred crkvom je formiran trg izrazito slabog javnoga karaktera, a izrazito jakog privatnoga karaktera jer je od užeg okruženja odijeljen ogradom. Trg odreðuje volumen crkve i volumen samostana salezijanaca. Dio trga pred crkvom je reprezentativnog karaktera, dok je dio trga pred samostanom intimnijeg karaktera. Ulaz u crkvu naglašen je monumentalnim stubištem.
Crkva sv. Ane u Rudešu, Topolnica 6, arhitekt I. Èerne, god. projekta 1967?. - Urbanistièki kontekst crkve odreðen je niskom i izrazito gustom stambenom izgradnjom obiteljskih kuæa. Crkva je skromnoga, utilitarnog oblikovanja te je gotovo neprimjetna u stambenoj ulici i naznaèena tek niskim zvonikom. Ispred crkve nije formiran ulazni pretprostor.
Crkva Kraljice Sv. Krunice na Borongaju, Kontakova 1, arhitekt Branko Pintek, god. projekta 1968. - Samostan dominikanaca i crkva Kraljice Sv. Krunice31 nalaze se u gradskom predjelu niske i guste stambene izgradnje obiteljskih kuæa. Pred crkvom i samostanom formiran je prostor gradskog perivoja, èime crkva i samostan dobivaju reprezentativno obilježje u mikrourbanistièkoj situaciji. Pred ulazom u crkvu nastao je manji ulazni trg izrazito jakog javnoga i slabog privatnog karakatera, a ulaz u liturgijski prostor odvojen je visinski od razine trga i istaknut ulaznim stubištem. Crkva nije element slike grada jer ne sudjeluje u širim gradskim vizurama. Iako crkva ne dominira gradskim tkivom, ekspresivnošæu svoga oblikovanja ona upuæuje na sakralni sadržaj.
Crkva Presvetog Trojstva u Preèkom, Preèko 50, inž. Fuèiæ i Prenèil, god. projekta 1974.Cjelokupni sklop sastoji se od crkve i župnog dvora. Dva volumena svojim smještajem na parceli formiraju pristupni trg s hortikulturnim ureðenjem, kojeg je izrazito jak privatni, a izrazito slabi javni karakter naglašen odvajanjem ogradom od okolne izgradnje. Meðutim, volumen crkve okrenut je prema trgu stražnjim proèeljem, tako da ulaz u crkvu nije formiran izravno s trga. Nespretnim položajem ulaza umanjeno je i simbolièko znaèenje ulaza u liturgijsku graðevinu.
Crkva sv. Josipa Radnika u Gajnicama, Jankoviæev put 6, nepoznati autor, god. projekta 1977. - Urbanistièki kontekst crkve sv. Josipa u Gajnicama sastoji se od izrazito rahlo formirane strukture obiteljskih kuæa. Crkva je nastala kao prilagodba gospodarskog objekta liturgijskoj funkciji. Crkva nije postala dio širega urbanistièkog konteksta, a pred njom je oblikovan trg izrazito jakog privatnoga i izrazito slabog javnoga karaktera.
Crkva Blažene Djevice Marije u Španskom, Barakoviæeva 20, arhitekt Valdemar Balley, god. projekta 1980. - Crkva32 se nalazi u predjelu naselja Špansko što ga obilježava dijelom niska i gusta stambena izgradnja obiteljskih kuæa, a dijelom izgradnja višestambenih zgrada srednje visine. Crkva se nalazi na kraju slijepe Barakoviæeve ulice. Graðevina nije ostvarila odnos prema širemu urbanistièkom kontekstu. Ulaz u crkvu ostvaren je izravno iz Barakoviæeve ulice, a pred crkvom nije oblikovan ulazni pretprostor.
Crkva Sv. Duha u Staglišæu, Dugoratska 2, nepoznati autor, god. projekta 1981. - Crkva Sv. Duha element je niske i guste urbane matrice pretežito stambene izgradnje obiteljskih kuæa. Svojim oblikovanjem crkva se uklopila u okolnu izgradnju i nije postala element širih gradskih vizura. Meðutim, u mikrourbanistièkom kontekstu, svojim položajem na križanju dviju ulica i formiranjem trga jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnoga karaktera stvoren je kvalitetan javni prostor toga gradskog predjela i kvalitetan pretprostor liturgijske graðevine.
Crkva sv. Pavla Apostola u Retkovcu, Grabova bb, arhitekt Tomislav Premerl, god. projekta 1988. - Crkva sv. Pavla Apostola33 nalazi se na rubu stambenog predjela odreðenog pravilnom mrežom ulica i srednje gustom izgradnjom obiteljskih kuæa. Svojim položajem crkva nije element širih gradskih vizura. Cjelokupni sklop sastoji se od crkve, župnog
29 Premerl, 1994.; 2010.; Zorko, 2001.
30 Pavièiæ, 1996.; Premerl, 1994.; 2010.; Sokol Gojnik, 2009.; Uchytil, Barišiæ, Štulhofer, 2007.
31 Premerl, 1994.; 2010.
32 Alajbeg, Èièko, 2000.; Premerl, 1994.; 1996.; 2010.
dvora i zvonika koji položajem na parceli stvaraju vanjske prostore razlièitog karaktera. Pred crkvom se nalazi pristupni trg izrazito jakog privatnoga, a izrazito slabog javnoga karaktera, ogradom odvojen od okolnog prostora. Ulaz u crkvu je naglašen monumentalnim stubištem. U prostoru izmeðu crkve i župnog dvora stvoren je intimni prostor (stambena ulica) koji odreðuju volumeni crkve, župnog dvora i zvonika.
Crkva Isusova Uskrsnuæa u Sesvetskom Kraljevcu, Dugoselska 4, arhitekt Ivan Antoliæ, god. projekta 1989. - Crkva Isusova Uskrsnuæa nastala je kao preinaka postojeæe stambene zgrade na nepravilnoj parceli. Volumen se sastoji od crkve i župnog dvora povezanih u cjelinu. Volumen je oblikovno slièan okolnoj stambenoj izgradnji bez posebnosti naglašavanja sakralnog sadržaja, a sklop je samo akcentuiran vertikalom zvonika kojom se naglašava ulaz u crkvu. Volumen crkve blago je uvuèen u odnosu na cestu pa je tako pred njim formiran manji pristupni trg izrazito jakog privatnoga i izrazito slabog javnog karaktera.
Crkva Roðenja Bl. Djevice Marije Šanci-Savica, Velikogorièka 27, arhitekt Marijan Turkulin, god. projekta 1985. - Crkva Roðenja Blažene Djevice Marije34 nalazi se u slabo izgraðenom poluurbanom ambijentu. Velika arhitektonska cjelina crkve i župnog dvora dominira neizgraðenim predjelom grada, ali nije element širih gradskih vizura. Na velikoj parceli, koja je od okolnog prostora odijeljena ogradom, stvoren je velik pristupni trg izrazito jakog privatnoga i izrazito slabog javnog karaktera. Trg je odreðen volumenom crkve i snažnom prilaznom pješaèkom rampom, a strukturiran je elementima urbane opreme - fontanom, klupicama, raspelom. S trga se stubama pristupa u crkvu koje je ulaz izdignut u odnosu na razinu trga.
Crkva sv. Vida u Petruševcu, I. Petruševec 56 e, arhitekt Marijan Turkulin, god. projekta 1990. - Crkva sv. Vida u Petruševcu graðevina je manjih dimenzija. Nalazi se u predjelu grada koji obilježava rahla i rijetka izgradnja obiteljskih kuæa. Svojim oblikovanjem crkva nije element širih gradskih vizura. Pred crkvom je formiran pristupni trg slabog javnoga, a jakog privatnoga karaktera, intimiziran perivojnim ureðenjem.
Crkva sv. Maksimilijana Kolbea na Bijeniku, Bijenik 18, arhitekt Stjepan Krajaè, god. projekta 1983. - Crkva sv. Maksimilijana Kolbea
33 Juriæ, 2001.; Juriæ, 1992.; Križiæ, Roban, 1993.; Sokol Gojnik, 2012.; Vuèetiæ, 1996.; Vukiæ, 1995.
34 Dobroniæ, 1993.; Premerl, 1994.
35 Premerl, 1994.; 1996.; 2010.
36 Premerl, 1996.
na Bijeniku je manja liturgijska graðevina koja se nalazi u predjelu rahle izgradnje obiteljskih kuæa. Svojim oblikovanjem ne sugerira sakralno-liturgijski sadržaj niti je naglasila širi prostorni kontekst. Pred crkvom nije formiran javni prostor. U liturgijski prostor pristupa se stubištem, a ulaz je formiran na razini prvoga kata.
Crkva sv. Mateja u Dugavama, Aleja sv. Mateja 123, arhitekti Vinko Peneziæ i Krešimir Rogina, god. projekta 1989. - Crkva sv. Mateja u Dugavama35 svojim je položajem na znaèajnoj cesti u naselju vidljiv znak iz daljih vizura èetvrti, ali ne i širih gradskih vizura. Iz perspektive pristupne ceste naglašen je volumen župnog stana, a tek je u pozadini naznaèen volumen crkve, dok se sa strane perivoja otvara perspektiva na crkvu i zvonik. Ispred crkve oblikovan je vanjski trg koji se jednim dijelom pretvara u amfiteatralnu pozornicu za potrebe organiziranja liturgijskih slavlja na otvorenom, a dijelom je to prostor okupljanja vjernika. Trg je uvuèen u dubinu parcele i ima izrazito jak privatni i izrazito slab javni karakter. U nemoguænosti ostvarenja èvršæe povezanosti crkve s naseljem (zbog rubnoga smještaja u naselju) arhitekti su stvorili kvalitetne vanjske prostore intimnog karaktera. Crkva Dobrog Pastira u Brestju, Ciklama 2a, arhitekt Aleksandar Bašiæ, god. projekta 1991. - Šira urbanistièka situacija crkve Dobrog Pastira u Brestju odreðena je srednje gustom urbanom matricom koju èine obiteljske kuæe. Crkva je oblikovanjem i položajem u neizgraðenom dijelu gradskog predjela prepoznatljiv urbani znak u užemu urbanistièkom kontekstu. Crkva i župni dvor èine jedinstven volumen. Pred crkvom je formiran velik pristupni trg koji je od okolne izgradnje odvojen ogradom i ima izrazito jak privatni i izrazito slab javni karakter. U crkvu se ulazi s velikog pristupnog trga. Ulaz je naglašen ulaznim trijemom i izdignut je iznad razine trga. Ostatak parcele pejsažno je ureðen.
Crkva sv. Anðela u Savskom gaju, Prekratova 69, arhitekt Stjepan Krajaè, god. projekta 1994-1996. - Crkva sv. Anðela u Savskom gaju nalazi se u predjelu srednje guste i niske izgraðenosti obiteljskih kuæa. Crkva je uvuèena u parcelu, a pred crkvom se nalazi dubok trg izrazito jakog privatnoga i izrazito slabog javnog karaktera naglašenog ogradom koja ga odvaja od javnoga prostora grada. Trg je oblikovan elementima urbane opreme. Vertikalom zvonika crkva je element vizura užega urbanog ambijenta. Ulaz u crkvu je izdignut iznad razine trga i naglašen ulaznim trijemom. Crkva Bezgrješnog Srca Marijina na Jordanovcu, Jordanovac 110, arhitekti Vlasta i Ante Vulin, god. projekta 1982. - Crkva Bezgrješnog Srca Marijina36 nalazi se u gradskom okruženju koje je obilježeno stambenom iz-
gradnjom obiteljskih kuæa i višestambenih zgrada. Na sjeveroistoènoj strani Ulice Jordanovac nalazi se predio izgradnje javnih graðevina koji je pejsažnim pojasom odvojen od stambenih predjela gdje se nalazi crkva Bezgrješnog Srca Marijina i kolegij Družbe Isusove. Cjelokupni sklop sastoji se od novicijata i doma duhovnih vježbi, izgraðenih 1927. godine po projektu arhitekta Jurja Denzlera, Filozofskog fakulteta Družbe Isusove te crkve sa župnim dvorom i pastoralnim centrom. Formirani su mikrourbanistièki odnosi izmeðu pojedinih graðevina. Svojim položajem crkva je okrenuta prema glavnoj pristupnoj prometnici, no oblikovanjem nije ostvarila urbanistièku pregnantnost. Pred njom je oblikovan pristupni trg javno/privatnog karaktera. Javni karakter trga ostvaren je orijentacijom prema prometnici i izravnom vezom s njom, a blago odvajanje pejsažnim ureðenjem trgu daje i dijelom privatni karakter. Crkva Uzašašæa Gospodnjega u Sloboštini, Mije S. Bolšiæa 15, arhitektica Jagoda Bodiæ, god. projekta 1995. - Crkva Uzašašæa Gospodnjega nalazi se u stambenoj èetvrti Sloboština, gdje se u predjelu visoke izgradnje nastavila izgradnja višestambenih zgrada susjednog naselja Dugave. Ostalo èine predjeli niske izgradnje obiteljskih kuæa. Crkva se nalazi na jakoj prometnici gradske èetvrti. S obzirom na to da je okružena višestambenom izgradnjom, crkva ne dominira urbanistièkim tkivom, ali ipak sudjeluje u doživljaju slike naselja, èak i iz daljih vizura. Decentnim oblikovanjem crkva se nepretenciozno uklopila u okolni stambeni kontekst. Pred crkvom je formiran trg javno/privatnog karaktera. Svojom orijentacijom i vezom prema gradskoj prometnici trgom je ostvaren javni karakter, a uzdizanjem od kote prilazne ulice i oblikovanjem obodnog trijema on je intimiziran, èime je ostvaren njegov privatni karakter. Na ovaj naèin stvorena je graduacija ulaza u liturgijski prostor. Na ulaznom proèelju naglašena je vertikala zvonika koji je znak u prostoru, posebice s pristupnih prometnica.
Crkva Marije Majke Crkve u Trnovèici, Puklavèeva 22, arhitekt Aleksandar Bašiæ, god. projekta 1994. - Gradski predio Trnovèica obilježava rahla stambena izgradnja obiteljskih kuæa. Crkva s naglašenim zvonikom smještena je u osi stambene ulice i perivoja te ima naglašen urbanistièki položaj unutar èetvrti. Pred glavnim ulazom predviðen je monumentalni trg jakog javnoga i slabog privatnog karaktera u nastavku pješaèke osi i perivoja.
Crkva sv. Leopolda Mandiæa u Dubravi, Leopolda Mandiæa 41, ing. grað. Ratko Holjevac i Ante Maleš, god. projekta 1998. - Crkva sv. Leopolda Mandiæa nalazi se u stambenoj èetvrti Gornja Dubrava koju obilježava prete-
žito gusta stambena izgradnja obiteljskih kuæa. Svojim mjerilom i oblikovanjem crkva je vizualno istaknuta u užemu urbanistièkom kontekstu premda se nalazi u sporednoj ulici, udaljena od jakih prometnica. Crkva nije element znaèajnih širih gradskih vizura. Pred crkvom je oblikovan velik pristupni prostor javno/privatnog karaktera. Orijentacijom i vezom s ulicom trg je zadobio javni karakter, a njegovim uzdizanjem od razine ulice dijelom je intimiziran, èime je postignut njegov privatni karakter.
Crkva sv. Nikole Biskupa u Stenjevcu, Medpotoki 1a, arhitekt Florijan Škunca, god. projekta 1998. - Sklop crkve sv. Nikole Biskupa i pastoralnog centra duboko je uvuèen u gradski predio te nije element širih gradskih vizura. Oko crkve se nižu predjeli rjeðe stambene izgradnje obiteljskih kuæa pa je crkva znak u užemu urbanistièkom kontekstu. Pred crkvom je oblikovan trg izrazito jakog privatnoga i izrazito slabog javnog karaktera koji je od okolnoga urbanog tkiva odvojen ogradom. S trga se stubištem pristupa u liturgijski prostor. U pozadini crkve nalazi se pastoralni centar. Izmeðu crkve i pastoralnog centra stvoren je manji trg intimnoga karaktera.
Crkva sv. Ivana Krstitelja u Ivanja Reki, Ivanjoreèka 46, arhitekt Ivan Antoliæ, god. projekta 1998. - Urbano tkivo Ivanje Reke odreðeno je jednim dijelom gustom stambenom izgradnjom obiteljskih kuæa na istoènom dijelu, dok je zapadni dio neizgraðen. Crkva se nalazi na Ivanjareèkoj cesti. U njenoj pozadini neizgraðeni su gradski predjeli pa je crkva uoèljiv znak u prostoru u užemu urbanistièkom kontekstu. Pred crkvom je oblikovan pristupni trg, orijentiran prema pristupnoj cesti, a od nje blago odvojen pejsažnim ureðenjem parcele, èime je postignut njegov jaki javni, a slabi privatni karakter.
Crkva Marije Anðeoske u Sesvetskoj Sopnici, 24. prosinca 18, arhitekt Sreèko Kreitmayer, god. projekta 1998. - Crkva Marije Anðeoske nalazi se u predjelu odreðenom srednje gustom izgradnjom obiteljskih kuæa i neizgraðenim prostorima. Crkva se nalazi uz rub izgraðenog podruèja. Arhitekt je oblikovanjem metodom kontrasta nastojao stvoriti znak u prostoru. Buduæi da je crkva smještena u slabo izgraðenom predjelu, ona dominira užim urbanistièkim kontekstom. Iz perspektive pristupne prometnice dominira volumen crkve, a župni dvor i planirani samostan u pozadini su. Smještajem volumena na parceli stvoreni su mikrourbanistièki odnosi i vanjski prostori razlièitih karaktera. Pred crkvom je planiran ulazni trg izdignut od razine terena javno/privatnog karaktera. Ureðenje parcele u trenutku ovoga istraživanja nije bilo završeno.
Crkva sv. Leopolda Mandiæa u Voltinom, D. Golika 42, arhitektice Željka Ružiæ i Silvia Lah Kornhauser, god. projekta 1995.-1998.Urbanistièki kontekst odreðen je gustom urbanom matricom koju èine na zapadnoj i južnoj strani obiteljske kuæe te višestambene zgrade s pejsažnim pojasom na sjevernoj strani. Crkva se nalazi na jakoj prometnici Drvinje i prepoznatljiv je urbani znak u užemu urbanistièkom kontekstu. Pred crkvom je formiran trg izrazito jakog privatnoga i izrazito slabog javnog karaktera, koji je od okolnoga urbanog tkiva odvojen ogradom.
Crkva Blažene Djevice Marije Majke Božje u Remetincu, Remetineèki gaj 29, arhitekt Josip Horvat, god. projekta 1998. - Crkva Blažene Djevice Marije Majke Božje smještena je u naselju Remetinec, koje obilježava rijetka višestambena izgradnja. Crkva svojim oblikovanjem nije ostvarila akcent u prostoru pa nije element širih gradskih vizura. Cjelokupni sklop sastoji se od crkve i župnog dvora. Položajem na parceli, ispred crkve i župnog dvora, oblikovan je velik pristupni trg jakog javnoga, a slabog privatnog karaktera, orijentiran prema pristupnoj prometnici i oblikovan kao proširenje javnoga gradskog prostora.
CONCLUSION
Provedenom analizom prema prethodno postavljenim kriterijima dobiveni su rezultati koji govore o urbanistièkim obilježjima liturgijskih graðevina u Zagrebu u 20. stoljeæu. Identitet liturgijskih graðevina u slici grada: Prema dobivenim rezultatima oko treæina (34%) liturgijskih graðevina u Zagrebu izgraðenih u 20. stoljeæu svojim je položajem u urbanom tkivu grada naglasila dio urbanog prostora, èime je postala element slike grada. Od ovih liturgijskih graðevina najveæi se dio nalazi uz glavne prometnice (22%), dok se manji broj nalazi na topografski istaknutim mjestima (8%) ili je dio gradskih struktura koje su same po sebi element slike grada (4%). Najveæi broj liturgijskih graðevina izgraðenih u 20. stoljeæu (66%) nije naglasio dio urbanog prostora u kojem je smješten pa zato nije postao element slike grada.
Identitet vanjskoga prilaznog prostora liturgijskih graðevina: U Zagrebu u 20. stoljeæu je kod 42% sagraðenih liturgijskih graðevina naglašen javni karakter vanjskoga prilaznog prostora. Javni karakter vanjskoga prilaznog prostora liturgijskih graðevina ostvaren je dvojako: jaki javni, a slabi privatni karakter obilježava 27% vanjskih prilaznih prostora; a javno/privatni karakter obilježava 15% javnih vanjskih prilaznih prostora liturgijskih graðevina. Ispred niti jedne liturgijske graðevine sagraðene u 20. stoljeæu nije formiran prilaz-
ni prostor izrazito jakog javnoga karaktera, kao što je primjerice prilazni prostor ispred crkve sv. Marka ili Katedrale u povijesnim dijelovima grada. Liturgijske graðevine u kojima dominira javni karakter vanjskoga prilaznog prostora uglavnom su graðene u prvoj polovici stoljeæa, kad je urbanistièke planove gradio simbolièki koncept.
Nasuprot tomu, u 20. stoljeæu u Zagrebu je ispred 48% liturgijskih graðevina ostvaren privatni karakter vanjskoga prilaznog prostora. Privatni karakter vanjskoga prilaznog prostora ostvaren je dvojako: ispred 6% liturgijskih graðevina formiran je vanjski prilazni prostor slabog javnoga, a jakog privatnoga karaktera, a ispred 42% liturgijskih graðevina formiran je vanjski prilazni prostor izrazito slabog javnoga, a izrazito jakog privatnoga karaktera. Liturgijske graðevine u kojima je naglašen privatni karakter vanjskoga prilaznog prostora uglavnom su graðene u drugoj polovici 20. stoljeæa, kad je urbanistièke planove gradio funkcionalni ili fragmentarni koncept.
Ispred 10% liturgijskih graðevina uopæe nije formiran vanjski prilazni prostor.
Rezultati istraživanja upuæuju na zakljuèak da se - sukladno mijenama u promišljanju grada koje su zahvatile hrvatski, ali i europski urbanizam u 20. stoljeæu - znaèajno promijenilo znaèenje liturgijskih graðevina u slici grada, što je vidljivo na primjeru grada Zagreba. Liturgijske graðevine koje su izgraðene poèetkom 20. stoljeæa najèešæe su naglašavale dio urbanog prostora u kojem su izgraðene jer je grad u to doba strukturiran simbolièkom hijerarhijom planiranja i u kontinuitetu s povijesnim strukturiranjem grada. Meðutim, prema kraju 20. stoljeæa mijenja se urbanistièki pristup gradu, grad se poèinje strukturirati funkcionalno i fragmentarno. Nestaje cjelovita misao o gradu, a novi principi bivaju usidreni u funkcionalistièkim postulatima. Liturgijske graðevine, ali i ostale važne javne graðevine, gube snažnu simbolièku ulogu u tkivu grada. U ovome razdoblju najveæi dio liturgijskih graðevina nije naglasio dio urbanog prostora u kojem je izgraðen i nije postao naglašeni element slike grada. Dobiveni rezultati svjedoèe da se - za razliku od povijesnih razdoblja kad su liturgijske graðevine bile žarišta urbaniteta ispred kojih se najèešæe pojavljivao trg javnoga karakterau 20. stoljeæu važnost liturgijskih graðevina mijenja i bilježimo pojavu privatnoga karaktera prostora ispred liturgijskih graðevina. Trgovi izrazito jakog javnoga, a izrazito slabog privatnoga karaktera koji su obilježili povijesna razdoblja, u 20. stoljeæu u Zagrebu se pojavljuju u jako malom postotku, a najveæi dio prilaznih prostora pred liturgijskim graðevinama karakterizira privatni karakter.
Sl. 5. Crkva sv. Marka, Gradec Fig. 5. St Mark’s Church, Gradec
Prilazni prostor izrazito jakog javnoga, a izrazito slabog privatnoga karaktera: Nema primjera meðu liturgijskim graðevinama izgraðenima u 20. stoljeæu.
Sl. 6. Crkva sv. Blaža, Prilaz Ðure Deželiæa Fig. 6. Church of St Blaise, Prilaz Ðure Deželiæa
Prilazni prostor jakoga javnog, a slaboga privatnog karaktera:
1. Bazilika Srca Isusova, Palmotiæeva ulica
2. Crkva sv. Blaža, Prilaz Ðure Deželiæa
3. Crkva Majke Božje Lurdske, Vrbaniæeva ulica
4. Crkva Uzvišenja Svetoga Križa, Siget
5. Crkva blaženog Augustina Kažotiæa, Volovèica
6. Crkva sv. Nikole Taveliæa, Kustošija
7. Crkva Kraljice Svete Krunice, Kontakova ulica
8. Crkva Sv. Duha, Staglišæe
9. Crkva sv. Leopolda Mandiæa, Dubrava
10. Crkva sv. Ivana Krstitelja, Ivanja Reka
11. Crkva Blažene Djevice Marije Majke Božje, Remetinec
12. Crkva sv. Mihaela Arkanðela, Dubrava
13. Crkva Marije Majke Crkve, Trnovèica
Sl. 8. Crkva sv. Ivana apostola i evanðelista, Utrine Fig. 8. Church of St John the Apostle and Evangelist, Utrine
Prilazni prostor slabog javnoga, a jakog privatnoga karaktera:
1. Crkva sv. Ivana apostola i evanðelista, Utrine
2. Crkva sv. Josipa, Trešnjevka
3. Crkva sv. Vida, Petruševec
Sl. 9. Crkva Sv. Obitelji, Držiæeva ulica
Fig. 9. Church of the Holy Family, Držiæeva st.
Prilazni prostor izrazito slabog javnoga, a izrazito jakog privatnoga karaktera:
1. Crkva Sv. Obitelji, Držiæeva ulica
2. Crkva Bezgrješnog zaèeæa Blažene Djevice Marije, Dubrava
3. Crkva sv. Jeronima, Maksimirska cesta
4. Crkva Predragocjene Krvi Isusove, Kozari bok
5. Crkva sv. Antuna Padovanskog, Sesvetska Sela
6. Crkva Krista Kralja, Mirogoj
7. Kapela Ranjenog Isusa, Ilica
8. Kapela Majke Božje Kraljice Hrvata, Remetinec
9. Crkva sv. Marka Križevèanina, Selska cesta
10. Crkva Krista Kralja, Trnje
11. Crkva Marije Pomoænice, Knežija
12. Crkva Presvetog Trojstva, Preèko
13. Crkva sv. Josipa Radnika, Gajnice
14. Crkva sv. Pavla Apostola, Retkovec
15. Crkva Isusova Uskrsnuæa, Sesvetski Kraljevec
16. Crkva Roðenja Bl. Djevice Marije, Šanci-Savica
17. Crkva sv. Mateja, Dugave
18. Crkva Dobrog Pastira, Brestje
19. Crkva sv. Anðela, Savski gaj
20. Crkva sv. Nikole Biskupa, Stenjevec
21. Crkva sv. Leopolda Mandiæa, Voltino
Sl. 7. Crkva sv. Antuna, Sv. Duh Fig. 7. Church of St Anthony, Sv. Duh
Prilazni prostor javno/privatnog karaktera :
1. Svetište Sv. Mati Slobode, Jarun
2. Crkva Majke Božje Sljemenske Kraljice Hrvata, Sljeme
3. Crkva sv. Antuna, Sv. Duh
4. Crkva sv. Ivana Bosca, Podsused
5. Crkva Bezgrješnog Srca Marijina, Jordanovac
6. Crkva Uzašašæa Gospodnjega, Sloboština
7. Crkva Marije Anðeoske, Sesvetska Sopnica
Sl. 10. Crkva Bl. Dj. Marije, Špansko Fig. 10. Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Špansko
Nije formiran vanjski prilazni prostor:
1. Crkva Srca Isusova i kapela sv. Antuna u sklopu Meðubiskupijskog djeèaèkog sjemeništa
2. Dom Božje providnosti i kapela Corpus Domini, Trešnjevka
3. Crkva sv. Ane, Rudeš
4. Crkva Blažene Djevice Marije, Špansko
5. Crkva sv. Maksimilijana Kolbea, Bijenik
tabl. iii. Obilježja formiranja vanjskoga prilaznog prostora pred liturgijskim graðevinama
1. Alajbeg, T.; Èièko, M. (2000.), Župa BD Marije Špansko, Zagreb
2. Babiæ, V. (1986.), Meštroviæ i arhitekti, „Rad JAZU”, knj. 423, Razred likovnih umjetnosti, knj. XIII: 145-165, Zagreb
3. Bašnec, N. (1992.), Katolièka župa sv. Mihaela u Zagrebu 1942.-1992., Škaler-Erent, Zagreb
4. Èorak, Ž. (1976.), Odlomci o genezi modernizma, „Arhitektura”,156-157: 55, Zagreb
5. Èorak, Ž. (2000.), U funkciji znaka: Drago Ibler i hrvatska arhitektura izmeðu dva rata, Matica hrvatska, Zagreb
6. Deanoviæ, A. (1983.), Meštroviæevi prostori, „Èovjek i prostor”, 369, Zagreb
7. Deanoviæ, A. (1986.), Meštroviæevi prostori, „Rad JAZU”, knj. 423, Razred likovnih umjetnosti, knj. XIII, Zagreb
8. Dobroniæ, L. (1993.), Novije Bogorodièine crkve na podruèju Zagreba, „Bogoslovna smotra”, Katolièki bogoslovni fakultet, 1-2, Zagreb
9. Domljan, Ž. (1977.), Kripta, umjetnièko djelo arhitekta Pleènika, „Majka”, Župni list župe Majke Božje Lurdske, 2, Zagreb
10. Frankoviæ, E. (1981.), Regulatorna osnova grada Zagreba iz 1865. godine, „Život umjetnosti”, 32, Zagreb
11. Frankoviæ, E. (1983.), Regulatorna osnova istoènih dijelova Zagreba, „Zbornik za narodni život i obièaje Južnih Slavena”, knj. 49, Zagreb
12. Frankoviæ, E. (1988.a), Lenucijeva era, „Arhitektura”, 204-207: 81-111, Zagreb
13. Frankoviæ, E. (1988.b), Lenuci u Zagrebu. Urbanistièko planiranje Zagreba od 1892.-1914., katalog izložbe, Muzej za umjetnost i obrt, Zagreb
14. Fuèiæ, M. (1987.), Crkva Krista Kralja na Mirogoju u Zagrebu, „Mirogoj - kulturno-povijesni vodiè”, Kršæanska sadašnjost: 96, Zagreb
15. Gjilas, M. (1987.), Župa sv. Obitelji, Zagreb
16. Hanièar Buljan, I.; Jakšiæ, N. (2009.), Dovršetak nedovršenog: O izgradnji zvonika crkve sv. Antuna Padovanskog u Zagrebu, „Kvartal”, 6 (1/2): 101-105, Zagreb
17. Ibeling, H.; Ivanišin, K. (2009.), Landscapes of Transition, An Optimistic Decade of Croatian Architectural Culture: 59-63, CCA, SUN, UPI-2M Plus, Zagreb
18. Ivanèeviæ, R. (1983.), Blok zakladne bolnice u Zagrebu - spomenik moderne arhitekture, „Èovjek i prostor”, 363 (6): 30-34, Zagreb
19. Jakšiæ, N. (2007.), Arhitektonski opus Jurja Denzlera tridesetih godina dvadesetog stoljeæa, disertacija, Arhitektonski fakultet, Zagreb
20. Jendriæ, D. (2004.), Teško oblikovanje duhovnog prostora, „Veèernji list”, 2.10.: 56-57, Zagreb
21. Jukiæ, T. (1997.), Strukturalne promjene rubnih dijelova grada - prilog prouèavanju urbanistièkog razvoja Zagreba, disertacija, Arhitektonski fakultet, Zagreb
22. Juraèiæ, D. (1987.), Tri zaboravljene zgrade, „Arhitektura”, 200-203: 30-31, Zagreb
23. Juriæ, Z. (1987.), Kronološki prikaz gradnje crkve sv. Blaža u Zagrebu u vremenskom razdoblju od 1889. do 1940. godine, magistarski rad, Arhitektonski fakultet, Zagreb
24. Juriæ, Z. (1992.), Nova hrvatska sakralna arhitektura, „Kontura”, 6, Zagreb
25. Juriæ, Z. (1993.), Kršnjavi - Vancaš: planiranje gradnje Crkve sv. Blaža u Zagrebu, „Radovi Instituta za povijest umjetnosti”, 17 (2), Zagreb
26. Juriæ, Z. (1997.), Crkva sv. Blaža u Zagrebu 1908.-1914., „Život umjetnosti”, 59, Zagreb
27. Juriæ, Z. (2001.), Savršenstvo zidanja opekom, „Vijenac”, 188 (17.5.), Zagreb
28. Karaè, Z.; Žuniæ, A. (2013.), Antologijski arhitektonski vodiæ Zagreba: 100 izabranih zgrada, Arhitektonski fakultet Sveuèilišta u Zagrebu; UPI-2m Plus, Zagreb
29. Kneževiæ, S. (1996.), Zagrebaèka Zelena potkova, Školska knjiga, Zagreb
30. Kneževiæ, S. (2003.), Zagrebu u središtu, Barbat, Zagreb
31. Kolacio, Z. (1978.), Bolléova arhitektura u prostoru Zagreba, „Život umjetnosti”, 26-27: 22, Zagreb
32. Kreèiæ, P. (1992.), Pleènik, Jaca Book, Milano
33. Križiæ Roban, S. (1993.), Tomislav Premerl: Ljudska slika crkve, „Kontura”, 3, Zagreb
34. Kosiæ, K. (1974.), Mirogoj izmeðu juèer i sutra, „Mirogoj-Zagreb 1873.-1973.”, Grafièki zavod Hrvatske, Zagreb
35. Laslo, A. (1984.), Natjeèaj za generalnu Regulatornu osnovu grada Zagreba, 1930/31, „Èovjek i prostor”, 370, Zagreb
36. Laslo, A. (1995.), Arhitektura modernog graðanskog Zagreba, „Život umjetnosti”, 56-57: 58-71, Zagreb
37. Malekoviæ, V. (1974.), Mirogoj galerija umjetnina, „Mirogoj-Zagreb 1873.-1973.”, Grafièki zavod Hrvatske, Zagreb
38. Malekoviæ, V. (2000.), Jože Pleènik: projekti i realizacije u Hrvatskoj 1909.-1956., katalog izložbe (6.-30.6.2000.), Muzej za umjetnost i obrt, Zagreb
39. Maroeviæ, I. (1994.), Traganje za duhovnim, „Èovjek i prostor”, 3-4: 16-15, Zagreb
40. Maroeviæ, I. (2003.), Antologija zagrebaèke arhitekture, Art studio Azinoviæ, Zagreb
41. Maruševski, O. (1991.), Bazilika Srca Isusova u Zagrebu, „Obnovljeni život”, 46, Zagreb
42. Matiæ, I. (1998.), Sjemenište na Šalati i Družba Isusova, „Obnovljeni život”, 53, Filozofsko teološki institut Družbe Isusove, Zagreb
43. Mikiæ, V. (2002.), Arhitekt Antun Ulrich - klasiènost moderne, Naklada Jurèiæ, Zagreb
44. Mrduljaš, M.; Mimica, V.; Rusan, A. (2009.), Suvremena hrvatska arhitektura - Testiranje stvarnosti, Arhitekst, Zagreb
45. Pavièiæ, N. (1996.), Salezijanci u Zagrebu: Omladinski dom salezijanaca na Knežiji, Salezijanski bogoslovni dom, Zagreb
46. Perše, F. (1962.), Meštroviæ vjeèna luè Hrvatske, „Hrvatska revija”, 12 (4), Zagreb
47. Piploviæ, S. (1983.), Arhitektura Ivana Meštroviæa, „Moguænosti”, 30, Split
48. Prelovšek, D. (1992.), Josef Pleènik: 18721957: Architectura perennis, Beè
49. Premerl, T. (1967.), Projekti i realizacije arhitekta Jurja Denzlera, „Arhitektura”, XXI, Zagreb
50. Premerl, T. (1977.), Od klasiènog reda do vlastite moderne, „Kaj”, 3-5: 73-84, Zagreb
51. Premerl, T. (1979.), Juraj Neidhardt, „Èovjek i prostor”, 1, Zagreb
52. Premerl, T. (1981.), Djelo klasiène i suvremene harmonije oblika, „Èovjek i prostor”, 343: 10-11, Zagreb
53. Premerl, T. (1984.), Èetiri vrijedna djela moderne arhitekture na Medvednici, „Kaj”, 6: 93-100, Zagreb
54. Premerl, T. (1987.), Novi sakralni prostorproblemi arhitekture, „Èovjek i prostor”, 415, Zagreb
55. Premerl, T. (1990.), Hrvatska moderna arhitektura izmeðu dva rata. Nova tradicija, Nakladni zavod Matice hrvatske, Zagreb
56. Premerl, T. (1994.), Crkveno graditeljstvo dvadesetog stoljeæa, u „Sveti trag: devetsto godina umjetnosti Zagrebaèke nadbiskupije: 1094.1994.” ; MGC - Muzej Mimara, 10.9.-31.12., Zagreb
57. Premerl, T. (1996.), Novija crkvena arhitektura u Zagrebu, katalog izložbe, Galerija Modulor, Zagreb
58. Premerl, T. (1998.), Kovaèiæeva moderna i njen odjek u hrvatskoj arhitekturi, „Radovi Instituta za povijest umjetnosti”, 22: 151-163, Zagreb
59. Premerl, T.; Gregl, M. (2001.), Nemoæ devedesetih godina, Zagreb
60. Premerl, T. (2003.), Zagreb - grad moderne arhitekture, Durieux, Zagreb
61. Premerl, T. (2008.), Moderna kao izrièaj i oblikovatelj sakralnog. Franjevci konventualci baštinici modernih umjetnosti, zbornik znanstvenog skupa „Posljednjih stotinu godina (1907.-2007.)”, održanog u Zagrebu 29.-30. 9.2008.: 170-201, Zagreb
62. Premerl, T. (2010.), Sakralna arhitektura dvadesetog stoljeæa u Hrvatskoj, zbornik znanstvenog skupa „Hrvatska arhitektura u XX. stoljeæu”, Matica hrvatska, 8.-10. XI. 2007., Zagreb
63. Premerl, T. (2015.), Hrvatska moderna arhitektura izmeðu dva rata. Nova tradicija, EPH Media d.o.o., Zagreb
64. Radoviæ Maheèiæ, D.; Laslo, A. (1997.), Viktor Kovaèiæ - promotor hrvatske moderne arhitekture, „Radovi Instituta za povijest umjetnosti”, 21: 142-165, Zagreb
65. Radoviæ Maheèiæ, D. (2007.), Moderna arhitektura u Hrvatskoj 1930-ih, Školska knjiga, Institut za povijest umjetnosti, Zagreb
66. Razum, S. (2004.), Nadbiskupsko djeèaèko sjemenište i Nadbiskupska klasièna gimnazija u prvih 30 godina djelovanja (1920.-1950.), „Tkalèiæ”, 8: 329-345, Zagreb
67. Sekuliæ-Gvozdanoviæ, S. (1978.), Tri istaknuta djela iz opusa arhitekta Jurja Denzlera, „Rad JAZU”, knj. 381, Zagreb
68. Sekuliæ-Gvozdanoviæ, S. (2000.), Arhitekt Juraj Denzler, Braæa hrvatskog zmaja, Zagreb
69. Sokol Gojnik, Z. (2009.), Liturgijska arhitektura u urbanistièkom planu Zagreba iz 1938. godine, „Prostor”, 17 (1 /37/): 146-157, Zagreb
70. Sokol Gojnik, Z.; Obad Šæitaroci, M. (2012.), Tema titulara u liturgijskoj arhitekturi Zagreba u 20. stoljeæu, „Peristil”, 55: 121-128, Zagreb
71. Sokol Gojnik, Z. (2016.), Sakralna arhitektura akademika Borisa Magaša, zbornik znanstvenog skupa o arhitektu Borisu Magašu”: 57-62, Udruga za zaštitu i razvoj kulturne i prirodne baštine Karlovca, Karlovac-Zagreb-Rijeka
72. Sokol Gojnik, Z.; Gojnik, I.; Obad Šæitaroci, M. (2012.), Naèela moderne utkana u sakralni prostor arhitekta Tomislava Premerla, „Prostor”, 20 (1 /43/): 74-87, Zagreb
73. Špoljariæ, S.; Nuiæ, V. (2005.), Crkva i samostan hercegovaèkih franjevaca u Zagrebu, Zagreb
74. Štulhofer, A. (1991.), Sportski objekti arhitekta Franje Bahovca, magistarski rad, Arhitektonski fakultet, Zagreb
75. Uchytil, A.; Barišiæ Mareniæ, Z.; Štulhofer, A. (2004.), Jože Pleènik - impulsi i ogranièenja crkve Majke Božje Lurdske u Zagrebu, „AR”, 1, Ljubljana
76. Uchytil, A.; Barišiæ Mareniæ, Z.; Štulhofer, A. (2007.), Arhitekt Zvonimir Požgaj, Acta Arhitectonica - Atlas arhitekture, Arhitektonski fakultet, Zagreb
77. Uskokoviæ, J. (1980.), Monumentalizam kao struja hrvatske moderne, „Život umjetnosti”, 29/30: 198-215, Zagreb
78. Vereš, S. (1974.), Mirogoj poèivalište znamenitih ljudi, „Mirogoj-Zagreb 1873.-1973.”, Grafièki zavod Hrvatske, Zagreb
79. Vuèetiæ, R. (1996.), Nova sakralna arhitektura, „Èovjek i prostor”, XLIII (3-5): 62, Zagreb
80. Vukiæ, F. (1995.), Crkva sv. Pavla apostola u Retkovcu u Zagrebu, „Život umjetnosti”, XXX (56-57): 118-119, Zagreb
81. Zagorac, I. (2008.), Projekt Marijana Haberlea za provincijat franjevaca konventualaca uz naselje Eugena Kvaternika u Sisku 1943. g., „Prostor”, 16 (2 /36/): 210-223, Zagreb
82. Zorko, T. (2001.), Osnutak župe sv. Nikole Taveliæa u Kustošiji, „Èasopis za suvremenu povijest”, Hrvatski institut za povijest, Zagreb
83. *** (1993.), Raumgedanken, Acht Architekten aus Zagreb - Kroatien, katalog izložbe, 15-16, Beè
84. *** (2007.), Continuity of the avant-garde. Fragments of Croatian Architecture from Modernism to 2007, Oris: 76-77, Zagreb
85. *** (2009.), Zagrebaèki salon arhitekture 2009., katalog izložbe, Zagreb
Izvori Sources
Dokumentacijski izvori
Document Sources
1. Državni arhiv u Zagrebu, Opatièka 29, Zagreb [DAZG]
2. Muzej grada Zagreba, Opatièka 20, Zagreb [MGZ]
3. Arhiv Gradskog zavoda za prostorno ureðenje, Ulica Republike Austrije 18, Zagreb [AGZPU]
Izvori ilustracija
Illustration Sources
Sl. 1. Z. Sokol Gojnik
Sl. 2-10. Z. Sokol Gojnik na podlozi Hrvatske osnovne karte
This article examines the urban features of the 20th century liturgical buildings in Zagreb. Based on some previously established criteria, it brings forward the results of a field research and the analysis of the existing liturgical buildings in terms of their condition and their position on the Croatian base map.
Two criteria were laid down for the analysis of the urban features of the 20th century liturgical buildings in Zagreb. The first one refers to the urban accent in the urban fabric. i.e. a macro-urban aspect which helps to assess the role of the liturgical buildings in building up the image of the city and in highlighting a part of the urban fabric. The second criterion is based on the characteristics of the outdoor spaces in front of the liturgical buildings, i.e. a micro-urban aspect by means of which it is possible to analyze the formation of the public spaces in front of the liturgical buildings.
The classification of the liturgical buildings is based on the first criterion. A thorough analysis of all liturgical buildings in Zagreb shows that their contribution to the image of the city and to the articulation of a particular part of urban fabric results from three fundamental components: their position in relation to the main streets, their position on topographically prominent sites, and their position within an impressive part of urban fabric.
The liturgical buildings have been analyzed here according to the first criterion. Within this classification further analysis was carried out according to the second criterion which defines the character of the outdoor space in front of the liturgical buildings. The results of the analysis based on the previously established criteria reveals the urban features of the 20th century liturgical buildings in Zagreb.
The results of this research confirm that, according to the first criterion, around one-third (34%) of the liturgical buildings built in Zagreb in the 20th century were built on the sites which gave prominence
Biografije
Biographies
Dr.sc. ZORANA SOKOL GOJNIK, viša asistenticaznanstvena novakinja na Arhitektonskom fakultetu. Podruèje njenog interesa je sakralna liturgijska arhitektura kojom se bavi u znanstvenoistraživaèkom i struènom projektantskom radu.
Mr.sc. IGOR GOJNIK samostalni je arhitekt, voditelj arhitektonskog ureda „Siloueta” u Zagrebu. Autor je cijeloga niza arhitektonskih realizacija, projekata i studija te dobitnik brojnih nagrada na arhitektonskim natjeèajima. Sudjeluje u znanstvenoistraživaèkom projektu Heritage Urbanism Hrvatske zaklade za znanost, u sklopu kojeg izraðuje doktorsku disertaciju. [www.siloueta.com]
MLADEN OBAD ŠÆITAROCI, akademik, dr.sc., redoviti je profesor na Arhitektonskom fakultetu u Zagrebu. Voditelj je znanstvenoistraživaèkog projekta Urbanizam naslijeða te autor brojnih znanstvenih i struènih radova iz podruèja urbanizma, prostornog planiranja i pejsažne arhitekture. [www.scitaroci.hr]
to a particular urban area and thus made a valuable contribution to the image of the city.
The majority of these liturgical buildings are situated along the main streets (22%) while some are located on topographically prominent sites (8%) or form an integral part of the urban structures which themselves create the image of the city (4%). By contrast, the results point out the fact that the majority of liturgical buildings built in the 20th century (66%) did not give prominence to the urban area where they were built and thus failed to become a key element in building up the image of the city. Further analysis based on the second criterion indicates that only 42% of liturgical buildings feature an outdoor access of public character which may be subdivided into two types: strong public but poor private character which characterizes 27% of outdoor accesses, and public/private character typical of 15% of public outdoor accesses to liturgical buildings.
There is no liturgical building of the 20th century with an access of strong public character as in the case of the access to St Mark’s church or the Cathedral in the historic parts of the city. Those liturgical buildings with a dominant public character of the outdoor access were mainly built in the first half of the century when urban plans were typically based on a symbolic concept.
By contrast, in the 20th century in Zagreb an outdoor access that is distinctly private has been formed in front of 48% liturgical buildings. The private character of such spaces is manifested as two types: 6% of liturgical buildings feature an outdoor access with a poor public but strong private character while 42% have an outdoor access of a very poor public but exceptionally strong private character.
Liturgical buildings with a distinctly private character of their outdoor access were mainly built in the second half of the 20th century when urban plans
were characterized by a functional or fragmentary urban-planning concept. 10% of liturgical buildings had no outdoor access.
The results of this research confirm that the role of the liturgical buildings in the creation of the image of the city has considerably changed. This is the result of a changed perception of a city in the context of Croatian and 20th century European urbanism as exemplified here by the liturgical buildings of Zagreb. Liturgical buildings built in the early 20th century most commonly gave special prominence to a part of the urban fabric where they were built due to the fact that at the time the city was structured according to hierarchical symbolic significance and in line with the historical formation of the city. However, towards the end of the 20th century, some changes occurred in the perception of a city from an urbanplanning perspective: the city started to be seen from a functional and fragmentary perspective. A comprehensive concept of a city vanished in order to be replaced by a functionalist approach. Liturgical buildings as well as other public buildings ceased to play a symbolic role in the fabric of a city. Therefore the majority of liturgical buildings of the period did not bring the urban area where they were built into prominence and thus failed to become a key component in building up the image of the city.
Unlike the previous historical periods when liturgical buildings used to be the focus of urban design, most commonly with a square of public character in front of them, the results of this research give evidence of a changing role and significance of the 20th century liturgical buildings now featuring an outdoor space of private character. The squares of exceptionally strong public but poor private character typical of the previous historical periods, are absent throughout the 20th century in Zagreb. Urban outdoor spaces are now mostly characterized by private character.
ZORANA SOKOL GOJNIK, Ph.D., senior assistantjunior researcher at the Faculty of Architecture. Her research and practical work in architectural design is mostly focused on religious liturgical architecture.
IGOR GOJNIK, Mr.Sc., licensed architect, head of the Zagreb-based architectural practice ”Siloueta”. He is the author of numerous architectural projects and studies as well as the recipient of several awards at architectural competitions. He is currently working on his Ph.D. thesis within the scientific research project Heritage Urbanism supported by the Croatian Science Foundation. [www.siloueta.com]
MLADEN OBAD ŠÆITAROCI, F.C.A., Ph.D., full professor at the Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb. He is head of the research project Heritage Urbanism and author of numerous scientific and professional works in urban and physical planning and landscape architecture. [www.scitaroci.hr]
Fig. 1 (B.1.) 3s DV Eng. pl. Bedekoviæ - Eng. Schindler, 15 Grškoviæeva St, 1928- [29-]-30, ARCH Šterk, COL Korka, Kiveroff, CTR Schindler, recent Sl. 1. Troetažna slobodno stojeæa vila inž. pl. Bedekoviæ - inž. Schindler, Grškoviæeva ulica 15, 1928.- [29.-]-30., arhitekt Vladimir Šterk, suradnici Jovan Korka i Georg Kiveroff, izvoðaè ing. Oswald Schindler [u vlastitoj režiji?], postojeæe stanje
Office of the Licensed Architect Darko Kahle, PhD
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Jurjevska 18 darko.kahle@gmail.com
Original Scientific Paper
UDC 728:72.036(497.5 Zagreb)”19”
Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning
2.01.04. - History and Theory of Architecture and Preservation of the Built Heritage
Article Received / Accepted: 16. 3. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
Ured ovlaštenog arhitekta dr.sc. Darko Kahle HR - 10000 Zagreb, Jurjevska 18 darko.kahle@gmail.com
Izvorni znanstveni èlanak
UDK 728:72.036(497.5 Zagreb)”19” Tehnièke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam
2.01.04. - Povijest i teorija arhitekture i zaštita graditeljskog naslijeða Èlanak primljen / prihvaæen: 16. 3. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
izmeðu 1928. i 1934. godine
housing Modern architecture
Neues Bauen
residential architecture Zagreb
This article is a rearrangement of author’s dissertation: ”Residential Buildings of Neues Bauen in Northern Parts of Zagreb between 1928 and 1945”, defended on April 12th, 2007 at the University of Zagreb, School of Architecture, upon mentorship of Professor Emeritus Nikola Filipoviæ. 39 apartment buildings and 109 villas erected from 1928 to 1935 as a whole may represent vivid contribution of architects residing in Zagreb to Modern architecture.
stanovanje moderna arhitektura novo graðenje stambena arhitektura Zagreb
Ovaj je èlanak prerada autorove disertacije „Stambene kuæe Novog graðenja u sjevernim dijelovima Zagreba u razdoblju od 1928. do 1945. godine”, obranjene 12. travnja 2007. godine na Arhitektonskom fakultetu u Zagrebu, pod mentorstvom professora emeritusa Nikole Filipoviæa. A 39 ugraðenih najamnih stambenih zgrada i 109 vila Novoga graðenja, podignutih izmeðu 1928. i 1935. godine, pokazuju snažan doprinos zagrebaèkih arhitekata modernome pokretu.
* The term Neues Bauen (New Building - literally translated from German) and the related term Neue Sachlickeit (New Objectivity) were used to designate modern tendencies in architecture in Germany and German-speaking countries in the 1920s and 1930s. In Croatian, the architect and architectural historian Aleksander Laslo proposed the equivalent term Novo graðenje (New Building). These terms generally refer to what will largely be known as modern architecture.
Sincethe beginning of interest for the history of Neues Bauen* in the Zagreb area back in the 1970-ies, there was a permanent need for exhaustive researching the archives of city administration, whose signatures are surprisingly in a more than good condition due to constant care of public servants of the State Archives in Zagreb [DAZ].1 Author started to screen the archives back in 1999 for his master thesis2 and followed in 2000 for his dissertation.3 The article correspond with the results of dissertation research, enlarged to the whole legal city area but within the timespan shortened to a period from 1928 to 1934, when the construction boom from 1926 to 1932 potentiated the emergence of Modern residential buildings. Numbers of edifices built and occupied in the period4 cannot be quantitatively compared with huge contemporary endeavors either in Tel Aviv5 or Stockholm.6 However, the numbers achieved in Zagreb in given circumstances are an extraordinary qualitative achievement.
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND LITERATURE REVIEW
PREGLED LITERATURE I BIBLIOGRAFIJE
A majority of licensed architects [LAs] and licensed structural engineers [LSEs] who participated in design and erection of residential buildings as free-lance professionals were students of Zagreb Science&Technology High School (HR: Realna gimnazija u Zagrebu) im-
mediately before, during or shortly after the First World War. Most of them studied Architecture or Civil Engineering at most prominent Austro-Hungarian Institutes of Technology of the time (DE: Technische Hochschule). After opening the Department of Architecture at the Zagreb Institute of Technology in 1919 (HR: Tehnièka visoka škola u Zagrebu) most of them started to studying home instead, some of them moved from foreign schools (Albini). All of them were per definitionem able to write and read German, some of them Hungarian and Prague students additionally French and Czech. A majority of licensed master builders [LMBs] and licensed bricklayers [LBLs] were professionally educated at the State Arts and Crafts High School (HR: Držav-
1 Primarily, I want to express gratitude to all present and former members of the DAZ, headed by former Chairman Prof. Darko Rubèiæ and current Chairwoman Assistant Professor Dr. Živana Heðbeli, with special thanks to Ivana Ciko Vidoviæ. Furthermore, I want to express gratitude to reviewers and editorial staff for ameliorating this article and making it more attractive to the reader. Last but not least, I want to express gratitude to thesis advisor Professor Emeritus Dr. Nikola Filipoviæ, members of evaluating committee Professor Dr. Lenko Pleština and Professor Dr. Sreèko Pegan, further to members of my family M.Ed. Ivana Kahle and Dr. Tomislav Kundiæ and finally to former colleagues from City Institute for the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Heritage Late Architect and Architectural Historian Aleksander Laslo and current Chairman Professor Silvije Novak.
2 Kahle, 2003b: 231
3 Summary: Kahle, 2003a: 173. In this preparatory article a definition of a residential building of Modern Movement is given as ”…a modern residential building with horizontally placed [=laid] windows and [flat] roof, i.e. a cubic-shaped structure.” [Kahle, 2007b: 332]
4 See Appendices A&B.
5 The White City with circa 4000 buildings, see: Architectural Record News, April 21st, 2008, Esther Hecht: Bauhaus Museum Opens in Tel Aviv’s White City, retrieved March 11th, 2016 [http://www.architecturalrecord.com/ articles/4350-bauhaus-museum-opens-in-tel-aviv-s-white-city?v=preview]
6 Södra Ängby with circa 500 buildings, see: Wikipedia, retrieved March 11th, 2016 [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ S%C3%B6dra_%C3%84ngby]
7 e.g. ”Wasmuths Monatshefte”, ”Stavba”, ”Stavitel”
8 e.g. ”L’Architecture d’aujourd’hui”, or ”Arhitektura” from Ljubljana
9 e.g. Technical Journal (HR: Tehnièki list)
10 e.g. Miroslav Krleža about Prof. Drago Ibler or Zlatko Neumann about Adolf Loos
11 e.g. for Workers’ Chambers Palace in 1932 and 1933
12 Architecture, Technical Journal and newly emerged Builder’s Journal (HR: Graðevinski vjesnik)
13 Bjažiæ Klarin, 2015: 75
14 The manuscript, written probably in German or French, disappeared, according to Van Straaten. The article was translated and published in English as ”The Rebirth of Art and Architecture in Europe” in his monograph on Theo van Doesburg. [Van Straaten, 1988: 14-20]
15 Planiæ, 1932: 1
16 Ironically, in advertising part of this book invited or chosen contractors presented buildings in sharp contradiction with manifestos declared in so-called programmatic part.
17 EN: ‘Earth’; Èorak, 1971: 141-151, Mutnjakoviæ, 1971: 153-180
na obrtna škola, Graditeljski odsjek), where German was obligatory too. After the First World War the National and University Library in Zagreb continued to receive professional journals from German and former Austro-Hungarian area7 and started to receive new.8 Leading contemporary bookstores in Zagreb sold professional architecture books and journals in major foreign languages. Conclusively, the people who pioneered the Modern Movement in Zagreb area were connected and able to acquire all the information needed.
In the period from 1928 to 1934 architects and structural engineers started to publish more professional papers in journals published by professional or regulatory associations.9 Newspapers articles were launched when advocating works of prominent architects10 or discussing important municipal or state architectural competitions.11 Discussions started there gradually moved to professional journals.12 Issued books were relatively rare. In 1930 Eng. Arch. Ernest Weissmann and Dr. Miroslav Deliæ issued a more medical-oriented brochure on ”Sanatorium for the Tuberculosis of Bones and Joints”.13 A
year later Stjepan Planiæ succeed to convince Theo Van Doesburg to write an article for domestic cultural journal The Croatian Review (HR: Hrvatska revija), whose lines happened to be the Van Doesburg’s testament.14 In 1932 eagerly Planiæ went beyond and published a unique monograph on Modern Movement in Kingdom of Yugoslavia, entitled ”Problems of Modern Architecture” (HR: Problemi savremene arhitekture)15 where a majority of Modern Movement architects from Zagreb and Belgrade published their projects and realizations. However, Eng. Arch. Georg Kiveroff, Eng. Arch. Jovan Korka, Arch. Ðorðe Krekiæ, Arch. Vjekoslav Muršec, Eng. Arch. Vladimir Šterk and Eng. Arch. Marko Vidakoviæ were absent from programmatic part, to name a few.16
Željka Èorak and Andrija Mutnjakoviæ started to pull out the Modern Movement, specifically Neues Bauen, in Croatia from oblivion with contribution to the seminal exhibition ”A Critical Retrospective of Group Zemlja” in 1971.17 Five years after Tomislav Premerl headed the editorial board of journal Architecture and published an issue unofficially
Fig. 2 A): (B.25.) 4s SDV Dujiæ [Deutsch], 56 Medvešèak St, 1931-32, ARCH Dr. Deutsch, P.; CTR Freudenreich&Deutsch, P.LMB&LA, as executed [Stamp: in the Session of Façade Committee [taken] on _/_ 19__ façade approved; signatures unreadable]; B), C) & D): unapproved variant solutions of street front
Sl. 2. A): Èetveroetažna poluugraðena vila Dujiæ, Medvešèak 56, 1931.-32., arhitekt dr. Pavao Deutsch, izvoðaè Freudenreich i Deutsch ovlašteni graditelj i arhitekt, izvedeno stanje; B), C) i D): neodobrene inaèice uliènoga proèelja
Fig. 3 Rejected fully flat-roofed variants of 6s AB Suden, 7 Mesnièka St, 1931, ARCH Dr. Deutsch, P. (CTR Freudenreich&Deutsch, P.LMB&LA), perspective views
Sl. 3. Odbijene varijante potpuno ravnoga krova šesteroetažne ugraðene najamne stambene i trgovaèke zgrade Suden, Mesnièka ulica 7, 1931., arhitekt Dr. Pavao Deutsch (izvoðaè Freudenreich i Deutsch ovlašteni graditelj i arhitekt)
Fig. 4 6s AOB Präger, 3 Gunduliæeva St, 1926-27, ARCH Šterk, COL Ancel Medaniæ, Planer, Schindler and probably Planiæ, approved but unexecuted front design
Sl. 4. Šesteroetažna ugraðena stambena, poslovna i trgovaèka zgrada Präger, Gunduliæeva ulica 3, 1926.-27., arhitekt Vladimir Šterk, suradnici Ðuro
Ancel Medaniæ, Albert Planer, Oswald Schindler i vjerojatno Stjepan Planiæ, odobrena urudžbirana neizvedena inaèica uliènoga proèelja
Fig. 5 (A.2.) 6s AB of the ”Retirement fund of employees of the Croatian National Theatre”, 17 Maruliæev Sq., 1928-29, ARCH Šterk, COL Delenardo, Korka, Kiveroff, CTR Cernjak&Neumann, J. LSE
Sl. 5. Šesteroetažna ugraðena najamna zgrada „Mirovinskog fonda zaposlenika Hrvatskog zemaljskog [=narodnog] kazališta”, Maruliæev trg 17, 1928.-29., arhitekt Vladimir Šterk, suradnici Milan Delenardo, Jovan Korka i Georg Kiveroff, izvoðaè ing. Cernjak i Neumann [J.]
titled as ”Croatian Modern Architecture between the World Wars”18, containing a panel discussion with living members of Modern Movement19, which may be counted as a primary source. Later Premerl continued to present the material up to three edition of the book under the same name.20
Slowly the presentations about prominent contributors started to emerge; in this context, some monographs were published based on doctoral dissertations: on Prof. Hugo Ehrlich by Dr. Žarko Domljan21, on Prof. Drago Ibler by Dr. Željka Èorak22, on Eng. Arch. Löwy by Dr. Darja Radoviæ-Maheèiæ23, Arch. Antun Ulrich by Prof. Dr. Vesna Mikiæ [-Brodnjak]24, Arch. Ignjat Fischer by Dr. Marina Bagariæ25 and Arch. Lavoslav Horvat by Dr. Zrinka Paladino26; some other on yet unpublished doctoral dissertations: on Prof. Arch. Neven Šegviæ by Prof. Dr. Andrej Uchytil, on Arch. Bernardo Bernardi by Dr. Iva Ceraj, on Prof. Eng. Arch. Vladimir Turina by Dr. Hela Vukadin [-Doronjga], Eng. Arch. Zoja Dumengjiæ by Dr. Zrinka Barišiæ Mareniæ; or master thesis: on Eng. Arch. Egon Steinmann by Dr. Iva Muraj, on Prof. Eng. Arch. Zvonimir Vrkljan by Dr. Zrinka Barišiæ Mareniæ, on Prof. Eng. Arch. Al-
fred Albini by Prof. Dr. Andrej Uchytil, on Eng. Arch. Fran Bahovec by Prof. Dr. Ariana Štulhofer, further exhibitions: on Eng. Arch. Zlatko Neumann by late Aleksander Laslo27, on Arch. Mladen Kauzlariæ by Dr. Hela Vukadin Doronjga28, on Arch. Stjepan Planiæ by Dr. Darja Radoviæ-Maheèiæ and Ivana Hanièar Buljan29 and finally, some scholarly articles as well, e.g. on Eng. Arch. Zvonimir Kavuriæ by Ivana Hanièar Buljan30 and Eng. Arch. Vladimir Šterk by Dr. Darko Kahle31, all in Croatian. Prof. Eng. Arch. Zvonimir Vrkljan published his own writings in 1995, with valuable information on colleagues and edifices from the period.32
Regarding literature in English, recently was issued a monograph on a broader subject ”Modern Architecture in Croatia”33, an overwhelming study on typology of urban forms of Zagreb including Modern Movement ”Project Zagreb: Transition as Condition, Strategy, Practice”34, a standard introductory work ”Lexicon of Architects - Atlas of 20th Century Croatian Architecture”35, further articles on Zlatko Neumann36 and Marko Vidakoviæ37, followed by the bilingual book on Ernest Weissmann.38
18 Premerl, ed. 1976: 1
19 Premerl, et al., mods. 1976: 116-128
20 Premerl, 19891: 1, Premerl 19902: 1; Premerl, 20153: 1
21 Domljan, 1982: 1, based on diss.doct.
22 Èorak, 1981: 1, based on diss.doct.
23 Radoviæ-Maheèiæ, 1999: 1, based on diss.doct.
24 Mikiæ-Brodnjak, 2002: 1, based on diss.doct.
25 Bagariæ, 2011: 1, based on diss.doct.
26 Paladino, 2013: 1, based on diss.doct.
27 Laslo, curator, 1990: 1
28 Vukadin Doronjga, curator, 2003: 1
29 Kožariæ, ed., Radoviæ-Maheèiæ, Hanièar Buljan, curators, 2003: 1
30 Hanièar Buljan, 2006: 281
31 Kahle, 2008: 193, with exhaustive bibliography on Architect Vladimir Šterk
32 Vrkljan, 1995: 1
33 Radoviæ-Maheèiæ, ed. 2007: 1
34 Blau, Rupnik, et al., 2007: 1
35 Uchytil, Barišiæ Mareniæ, Kahroviæ, 2009, 20112: 1
36 Kahle, 2015: 28, with exhaustive bibliography on Architect Zlatko Neumann
37 Damjanoviæ, 2015: 1
38 Bjažiæ Klarin, 2015: 1
39 DAZ-ZGD signature Pavlinoviæeva 2. Earlier encyclopaedic literature in Croatian (e.g. Internet issue of Croatian Bibliographical Lexicon /HR: Hrvatski bibliografski leksikon/: http://enciklopedija.lzmk.hr/clanak.aspx?id= 53394, Author Dr. Žarko Domljan, 1983) stated that Bela Auer was son of Secessionist painter Robert Auer. Newer researchers stated that Secessionist painter Robert Auer, Architect Bela Auer and Koloman Auer were children of Ferdinand and Amelia Auer (e.g. Internet issue retrieved from newspaper Jutarnji list, issued on April 20th, 2010: http://vijestigorila.jutarnji.hr/gorilopedija/lifestyle/ zemljopis_i_povijest/vila_auer, Author Art Historian Dijana Požar, 2010)
40 Kahle, 2007a: 81, diss.doct.
Between 1892 and 1918 in Zagreb city area were built 23 two-and-more-storeys and 6 one-storey attached residential buildings whose flat roofs possess a close resemblance to flat roofs of apartment and tenement houses in New York City. The pioneers of these buildings were architects and structural engineers of firm Pilar, Mally & Bauda. One of eldest cubic-shaped villas with as near as flat roofs, designed by Architect Ignjat Fischer and built in 189739, belonged to sculptor Robert Auer, a relative of architect Bela Auer.40 Further research will show total numbers of villas with flat roofs of same type. It is correct to count these buildings as forerunners of Modern Movement in Zagreb.
First modern front was invented by the Architect Vladimir Šterk for Präger residential and office building in 3 Gunduliæeva St as early as March 1926 (Fig. 4). Probably due to absent of any decoration the landlord obliged the architect to redesign it in manner of Czech Cubism. However, decorated remodeled front
was worth publishing as Modern in the seminal issue of Architecture in 1930.
A decisive impetus to Modern architecture in Zagreb was given with exhibition on Czechoslovak Architecture in Spring 1928, composed on recent works of Czech and Slovak architects. The architect Dr Pavao Deutsch (Fig. 2, 3) was one of exhibition board members from Yugoslavia. Shortly before the opening one hotel entrepreneur asked for a building permit for 10s corner hotel building ”Milinov”, 1 Gajeva St, with all flat roofs, complete in Skyscraper Style, but was rejected and ordered to cover all the roofs with pitched roofing (today Hotel Dubrovnik). This and other cases may illustrate how hard and unexpected the course of Modern architecture in Zagreb was, tied with political lobbying all along.
It seemed that things went in right direction after this exhibition. Albini changed his semimodern project for the purpose of ”Endowment of Dr. Juraj Žerjaviæ for erection of Zagreb Institute of Technology”, 25 Kršnjavoga St, into a full modern block of flats (Fig. 13), Šterk obtained a flat roof permit for an insti-
Fig. 6 (B.53.) 4s DDV Löschitz-Škarica, 6-8 Vinkoviæeva St, 1932-35, ARCH Grgiæ, A., CTR Kostelac&Filipec LMB&LBL, western half erected as SDV Sl. 6. Èetveroetažna dvojna slobodno stojeæa vila Löschitz-Škarica, Vinkoviæeva ulica 6-8, 1932.-35., arhitekt Ante Grgiæ, izvoðaè Kostelac i Filipec, ovlašteni graditelj i majstor zidar, zapadni dio sagraðen kao poluugraðena vila
Fig. 7 (B.34.) 2s DV Guštin, 22 Jabukovac St, 1931-32, ARCH Planiæ, CTR Senk LSE (facades colored in red) Sl. 7. Dvoetažna slobodnostojeæa vila Guštin, Jabukovac 22, 1931.-32., arhitekt Stjepan Planiæ, izvoðaè ing. Ivan Senk, izvedeno stanje prije prigradnje (proèelje olièeno crvenom bojom)
Fig. 8 (B.33.) 3s DV Kulischek, 20 Jabukovac St, 1931-33, ATL, CTR Senk LSE
Sl. 8. Troetažna slobodnostojeæa vila Ivan Kulischek, Jabukovac 20, 1931.-33., arhitekt kuæevlasnik, izvoðaè ing. Ivan Senk
Fig. 9 A): (B.31.) 3s SDV Petroviæ, B., 28 Novakova St, 1932, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA, unexecuted variant of double semidetached villa; B): executed semidetached villa before alteration
Sl. 9. A): Troetažna poluugraðena vila Petroviæ [Božena], Novakova ulica 28, 1932., arhitekt i izvoðaè Bogdan Petroviæ, neizvedena inaèica dvojne slobodno stojeæe vile; B): izvedeno stanje prije adaptacije
Fig. 10 Unexecuted project of 4s DV Rosenwasser, 29 Vramèeva St, 1931, ARCH Auer V. Sl. 10. Neizvedeni projekt èetveroetažne slobodnostojeæe vile Rosenwasser, Vramèeva ulica 29, 1931., arhitekt Vladimir Auer, ovlašteni graditelj
Fig. 11 (B.37.) 3s SDV Prodanoviæ, 6 Rokova St, 1931-32, ARCH Korka (+ Krekiæ, Kiveroff), CON Šterk, CTR Popoviæ, D. LMB
Sl. 11. Troetažna poluugraðena vila Prodanoviæ, Rokova ulica 6, 1931.-32., arhitekti Jovan Korka, Ðorðe Krekiæ i Georg Kiveroff, konzultant arhitekt Vladimir Šterk, izvoðaè Dragan M. Popoviæ, ovlašteni graditelj
Fig. 12 (A.22.) 7s CAB of the ”Retirement fund of employees of the Chamber for commerce, crafts and industry”, 19 Kr. Zvonimira St, 1932-33, ARCH Cota, CTR Carnelutti Bros. Co. LSE Sl. 12. Sedmeroetažna uglovna ugraðena najamna zgrada „Mirovinskog fonda zaposlenika Komore za trgovinu, obrt i industriju”, Ulica kralja Zvonimira 19, 1932.-33., arhitekt Frane Cota, izvoðaè Braæa Carnelutti d.d.
Fig. 13 (A.1.) 5s CAB of the ”Endowment of Dr. Juraj Žerjaviæ for erection of Zagreb Institute of Technology”, 25 Kršnjavoga St, 1928-29, ARCH Albini, COL UAS, CTR Grgiæ, I.&Co. LSE Sl. 13. Peteroetažna uglovna ugraðena najamna zgrada „Zaklade Dra. Jurja Žerjaviæa za izgradnju Tehnièke visoke škole u Zagrebu”, Ulica Kršnjavoga 25, arhitekt Alfred Albini, suradnici za sada nepoznati studenti arhitekture, izvoðaè ing. Ivo Grgiæ
tutional landlord, i.e. ”Retirement fund of employees of the Croatian National Theatre”, 17 Maruliæev Sq. (Fig. 5, in same block the authorities refused to allow Z. Neumann to erect a full flat roof), but a remarkable number of flat-roofed apartment attached buildings were officially disapproved of (Šterk: Eisenstädter, Baranyai: Serbian Bank Retirement Fund, Dr. Deutsch: Šeatoviæ&Brozièeviæ double building, Petroviæ: Bittermann, etc. etc.).
Public servants also tried to force Šterk to execute a portion of pitched roof on Rosinger&Jungwirth corner apartment building. In such conditions, Steimann’s two flat roofed villas surrounded by pitched roofed Križaniæeva High School is more than a manifestation.
Finally, some proponents of upper class made turnaround and asked villas with flat roof, whether as remodeling classicist project, as Šterk: 1 Gajdekova St or as entirely new project, as Ulrich: 106 Lašæinska St (demolished) or as adaptation of a new pitchedroof villa into a full Modern one, as Dr. Deutsch: 27 Dvornièiæeva St.
SIGNIFICANCE OF RESIDENTIAL
IZRAŽAJNE ODREDNICE STAMBENIH ZGRADA NOVOGA GRAÐENJA U ZAGREBU
IZMEÐU 1928. I 1934. GODINE
Typology - The Zagreb city area was enlarged to circa 66 sq. km in 1900 and remained unchanged until 1945. This area was officially divided into three partly overlapping subdivisions: hilly slopes of Medvednica mountain northern from Ilica, Vlaška and Maksimirska streets (I), still unfinished area of closed blocks between these streets and railway line Zaprešiæ - Dugo selo (II) and finally alluvial plain between the railway and the river Sava where shanty villages started to emerge (III). Due to differentiation of buildings in two classes prescribed in building code, residential buildings of Neues Bauen may be positioned in two large classes: The attached apartment building of Neues Bauen [Appendix A], erected in closed blocks (II); and the Villa of Neues Bauen [Appendix B] with semi-open or open building requirements, usually in northern hilly parts of the city (I), but there were villa ensembles in other parts of the city. Eligible edifices are listed below in chronological order compared by date of initial technical survey in the process of issuing building permit.
The Layout - The layout arrangement was hugely influenced by the building code, demands of a particular landlord and building process itself. The inert attitudes and habits of public clerks in city administration navigated them to extensive use of old layouts, emerged and matured in the period before the First World War, when layouts of villa buildings usually had been derived from atrached apartment houses too. The majority of landlords was keen to preserve antiquated patterns speculating with every sqm of given space inside the code restrictions. However, a small nucleus of landlords was started to use new layout organizations, where in villas space was usually intertwined between storeys, or where one entire storey was one spacious flat inside restricted space of attached building. Advocating of radical layout arrangements like the Raumplan or Plan Libre was unsuccessful, as Zlatko Neumann and Drago Ibler both experienced in 1929, when their respective landlords refused to execute approved designs of villa (103A Pantovèak St) resp. residential building (168A Ilica St).
The Structure - Due to utilization of building process to as few as professional workers
Appendix A: A comprehensive list of apartment buildings of Neues Bauen in the Zagreb city area between 1928 and 1934
Prilog A: Iscrpni popis ugraðenih stambenih zgrada Novoga graðenja na podruèju grada Zagreba u razdoblju od 1928. do 1934. godine
A.1. 5s CAB of the ”Endowment of Dr. Juraj Žerjaviæ for erection of Zagreb Institute of Technology”, 25 Kršnjavoga St, 1928-29, ARCH Albini, COL UAS, CTR Grgiæ, I.&Co. LSE
A.2. 6s AB of the ”Retirement fund of employees of the Croatian National Theatre”, 17 Maruliæev Sq., 1928-29, ARCH Šterk, COL Delenardo, Korka, Kiveroff, prob. Dr Deutsch, Petroviæ, CTR Cernjak&Neumann, J. LSE
A.3. 7s CAB of the Serb Orthodox Church, 2 Sv. Preobraženja St, 1929-30, ARCH Kliska, COL Kauzlariæ, M., prob. Bohutinsky, AIC prob. Denzler, CTR Grgiæ, I.&Co. LSE
A.4. 5s CAC of the ”1st Croatian Foil & Zinc Factory Co.”, later Eng. Aljinoviæ, 16-18 Kn. Ljudevita Posavskog St, 22 Crvenog Križa St, 1929-31, ARCH Kliska, COL Bohutinsky, CTL, erected as separate CAB and 2 separate ABs
A.5. 6s AB Arch. Weller, jun., 6 Ðorðiæeva St, 1930, ATL, AIC&CTR Florschütz LMB, COL Auer, V.
A.6. 5s AB Dr. Sisariæ, 26 Kukuljeviæeva St, 1930, ARCH Prof. Ibler, CTR Kauèiæ Bros. & Gyiketta LMB
A.7. 7s AB Mezera-Ungar (ex Wellisch), 13 Martiæeva St, 1930-31, ARCH Prof. Ibler, CTR Kaiser&Šega LSE
A.8. 6s AB Mezera-Ungar, 60 Vlaška St, 193031, ARCH Prof. Ibler, CTR Kaiser&Šega LSE
A.9. 6s AB Dirnbacher, 21 Gunduliæeva St, 1930-31, ARCH Auer, V., CTR Florschütz LMB
A.10. 5s CAB of the ”Endowment of Dr. Juraj Žerjaviæ etc. etc.”, 36 Jukiæeva St, 1930-32, ARCH Albini, COL UAS, AIC Èorko, CTR Grgiæ, I.&Co. LSE
A.11. 6s CAB Rosinger - Dr. Jungwirth, 30 Draškoviæeva St, 23 Ðorðiæeva St, 1930-31, ARCH Šterk, COL Korka, Kiveroff, AIC Schindler, CTR Ivanèiæ&Wolkenfeld LSE
A.12. 5s AC Eng. Aljinoviæ, 23-25-27 Kn. Ljudevita Posavskog St, 1931, ARCH Kliska, COL Bohutinsky, CTL, erected as 3 separate ABs
A.13. 5s AB ITY Fischer, 104 Ilica St, 1931-33, ARCH Šterk, COL Delenardo, CTR Cernjak& Neumann J. LSE
A.14. 5s CAC Eng. Aljinoviæ, 21 Kn. Ljudevita Posavskog St, 21 Crvenog križa St, 193132, ARCH Kliska, COL Bohutinsky, CTL, erected as separate CAB and separate AB
A.15. 7s AB Prof. Šen, 34 Gunduliæeva St, 193132, ATL, AIC Kovaèeviæ, CTR Weiss LMB
A.16. 4s DAB ”Mana” Co., 60-62 Klaiæeva St, 1931-32, ARCH Kovaèeviæ, CTR O.&E. Sorg LSE&LMB
A.17. 5s CAB Armuth, 1 Cankarova St, 1932, ARCH Neumann, Z., CTR Cernjak&Neumann J. LSE
A.18. 6s AB Mokroviæ, 47 Draškoviæeva St, 1932, ARCH Planiæ, CTR Carnelutti Bros. Co. LSE
A.19. 6s AB Frisch - Dr. Silberstein-Guttmann, 13 Petrinjska St, 1932-33, ARCH Gomboš& Kauzlariæ, M., CTR Špiller&Šurina LSE
A.20. 8s AOB Schlenger, 4 Bogoviæeva St, 193233, ARCH Löwy, CTR Dubsky&Co. LSE
A.21. 8s CAOB Günsberg, 7 Petriæeva St, 193233, ARCH Löwy, CTR Fijember LSE
A.22. 7s CAB of the ”Retirement fund of employees of the Chamber for commerce, crafts and industry”, 19 Kr. Zvonimira St, 193233, ARCH Cota, CTR Carnelutti Bros. Co. LSE
A.23. 8s CAOB of the ”Endowment for [building] the New Endowment Hospital”, w. Chapel of Wounded Jesus, 1 Petriæeva St, 1932-33, ARCH Ulrich&Bahovec, CTR Fijember LSE
A.24. 5s AB Klepetař, 4 Maksimirska St, 1932-33, ARCH Gomboš&Kauzlariæ, M., CTR Cernjak &Neumann J. LSE
A.25. 4s AB Kordiæ-Vrga-Glumièiæ, 7 Šulekova St, 1932-35, ARCH Korka (Krekiæ, Kiveroff), CON Šterk, CTR Car LMB
A.26. 8s AOB Alkalay, 2B Gajeva St, 1932-33, ARCH Dr. Deutsch, P., CTR Freudenreich &Deutsch, P., LMB&LA
A.27. 4s AB Èorko, M., 21 Nova St, 1932, ARCH Cota, CTR Èorko LA
A.28. 5s AB Tabaènik, 21 Kr. Zvonimira St, 193233, ARCH Cota, CTR Carnelutti Bros. Co. LSE
A.29. 6s AB Neidhardt, 22 Preradoviæeva St, 1932-36(!), ARCH Neidhardt, F., CTR O.&E. Sorg LSE&LMB
A.30. 6s CAB Nossan, 23 Kr. Zvonimira St, 193233, ARCH Löwy, CTR Fijember LSE
A.31. 8s CAOB Hahn, 2 Bogoviæeva St, 1932-33, ARCH Goldscheider, CTR Freudenreich& Deutsch, P., LMB & LA
A.32. 7s AB Majdak, 8 Šoštariæeva St, 1933-34, ARCH Goldscheider, CTR Fijember LSE
A.33. 5s AOB of the ”Endowment for [building] The Physicians’ Chamber [House]”, 9 Šubiæeva St, 1933-36, ARCH Cota&Požgaj, CTR Èorko LA
A.34. 6s AB Hežmann, 33 Gunduliæeva St, 193233, ARCH Gottwald, CTR Petroviæ LA
A.35. 4s CAB Metzger, 2 Mašiæeva St, 1933, ARCH Delenardo&Buèar, CTR Neuberger LSE & Mevorah Co.
A.36. 4s AB Rechnitzer, 25 Nova St, 1933-34, ARCH Šterk, CTL
A.37. 5s AB Kohn, 12 Kn. Borne St, 1933-34, ARCH Gomboš&Kauzlariæ, M., CTR Pollak &Bornstein LMB
A.38. 9s CAOB of the ”Employees’ Retirement fund of The City Savings Bank”, 17 Bana Josipa Jelaèiæa Sq., 1934-36, ARCH Prof. Ehrlich, Design ARCH Gomboš&Kauzlariæ, M., CTR Cernjak&Neumann J. LCE
A.39. 6s AB ITY Mlinek, 83 Petrinjska St, 193435, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA
Appendix B: A comprehensive list of villas of Neues Bauen in the Zagreb city area between 1928 and 1934
Prilog B: Iscrpni popis vila Novoga graðenja na podruèju grada Zagreba u razdoblju od 1928. do 1934. godine
B.1. 3s DV Eng. pl. Bedekoviæ - Eng. Schindler, 15 Grškoviæeva St, 1928- [29-]-30, ARCH Šterk, COL Korka, Kiveroff, CTR Schindler
B.2. 3s DV Pfeffermann, 27 Jurjevska St, 192829, ARCH Vidakoviæ, CON[?] Šterk, AIC Denzler, CTR Kremen Co. LA
B.3. 3s SDV Arlavi, 13 Istarska St, 1929-30, ARCH Baranyai, CTR Benedik, LA
B.4. 2s DV Eng. Auer, B., 13 Rokova St, 192930, ATL, AIC Miliæ, LMB, CTL
B.5. 3s DV Kovaèeviæ, 19 Šulekova St, 192930, ARCH&CTR Florschütz LMB, COL prob. Auer, V., DEM
B.6. 2s SDV ITY Car, 13 Fijanova St, 1929-30, ARCH Neidhardt, F., CTR Cekuš LSE
B.7. 3s DV Prof. Dr. Mariæ, 1 Gajdekova St, 1930-31, ARCH Šterk, COL Korka, Kiveroff, CTR Kovaèiæ LBL
B.8. 2s SDV Kruljc, 22 Osredak St, 1930-34, ARCH&CTR Gereš, LMB, CON Šterk
B.9. 2s DV Dr. Grabušiæ, 157 Petrova St, 193031, ARCH Korka (Kiveroff), AIC prob. Hollešek, CON Šterk, CTR Aranjoš LMB
B.10. 2s DSDV Kosak, 52 Mlinarska St, 193031, ARCH Neumann, Z., AIC Bukšeg, CTR Štefaniæ LBL
B.11. 1s ODV, 11 Kn. Borne St, 1930- [-31]-34, ARCH Steinmann, CTR Fijember LSE1
B.12. 1s ODV, 13 Kn. Borne St, 1930- [-31]-34, ARCH Steinmann, CTR Fijember LSE2
B.13. 3s AV Stiplošek, 100 Ozaljska St, 1930-31, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA
B.14. 2s DV Vajda, 106 Lašæinska St, 1930-33, ARCH Ulrich, CTR Brezak LBL, DEM
B.15. 3s DV Baranyai LMB, 37 Jabukovac St, 1930-31, ATL, CTR Benedik LA
B.16. 2s DV Mosinger, 112 Pantovèak St, 193031, ARCH Šterk, COL Korka, Kiveroff, CTR Špiller&Šurina LSE
B.17. 3s DV Wurm Falls Schapira, 12 Horvatovac St, 1930- [-31]-34, ARCH Neumann, Z., CTR Neuberger LSE
B.18. 2s DV Kanet LA acting for ”ISTEG” Yugoslavia Co., later Rottenbüchler-Lercher, 52 Voæarska St, 1930- [-31]-34, ATL&CTL
B.19. 2s DV Šandor, 9 Mikuliæeva St, 1931, ARCH Neidhardt, F., CTR O.&E. Sorg LSE &LMB
B.20. 1s DV Novakoviæ-Slivnjak, 1931, 2 Bulatova St, ARCH Auer, V., CTR Kauèiæ Bros. & Gyiketta LMB
B.21. 2s DV Karabaiæ, 3 Svibovac St, 1931, ARCH Kanet, CTR Muževiæ LBL
B.22. 1s DV Dr. Herjaniæ-Strecha, 79 Kraljevec St, 1931, ARCH Šterk, COL Delenardo, CTR Cernjak&Neumann J.LSE
B.23. 3s DV Radan, 39 Jabukovac St, 1931-32, ARCH Šterk, COL Korka, Krekiæ, Kiveroff, CTR Ivanèiæ&Wolkenfeld LSE
1 Planiæ, 1932: II.12
2 Planiæ, 1932: II.12
B.24. 3s DV Mautner, 14 Slavujevac St, 1931-32, ARCH Korka (Krekiæ, Kiveroff), CON Šterk, CTR Ebenspanger LMB
B.25. 4s SDV Dujiæ [Deutsch], 56 Medvešèak St, 1931-32, ARCH Dr. Deutsch, P.; CTR Freudenreich&Deutsch, P.LMB&LA
B.26. 2s DV Weiss LMB, 28 Baboniæeva St, 193132, ARCH Kliska, COL Bohutinsky, CTL
B.27. 3s DV Spitzer, 15 Novakova St, 1931-32, ARCH Gomboš&Kauzlariæ, M., CTR Cernjak &Neumann J.LSE
B.28. 3s DV Prof. Dr. Durst, 4 Vijenac St, 1931-32, ARCH & Contr. Florschütz LMB
B.29. 3s DV Vudy, 4 Buconjiæeva St, 1931-32, ARCH Ulrich, Contr. Jenko LSE
B.30. 3s DV Deèak, 139 Hercegovaèka St, 193134, ARCH Freudenreich, CTR Vesely LSE
B.31. 3s SDV Petroviæ, B., 28 Novakova St, 1932, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA
B.32. 3s DV Vurdelja, 29 Kozarèeva St, 1931-32, ARCH Planiæ, CTR Jeremiæ LSE
B.33. 3s DV Kulischek, 20 Jabukovac St, 1931-33, ATL, CTR Senk LSE
B.34. 2s DV Guštin, 22 Jabukovac St, 1931-32, ARCH Planiæ, CTR Senk LSE
B.35. 3s DV Ratkoviæ, 4 Kamenjak St, 1931-32, ARCH Auer, V., CTR Žugèiæ, TIC Kralj LMB
B.36. 3s DV Dr. Gjuriš, 4 Slavujevac St, 1931-37, ARCH Šterk, COL Korka, Krekiæ, Kiveroff, CTR Fijember LSE
B.37. 3s SDV Prodanoviæ, 6 Rokova St, 1931-32, ARCH Korka (+ Krekiæ, Kiveroff), CON Šterk, CTR Popoviæ, D. LMB
B.38. 3s DV Dr. Šercer, 17 Novakova St, 1932, ARCH Kulischek, CTR Senk LSE
B.39. 3s DV Draganec, 51 Mlinarska St, 1932, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA
B.40. 2s DV Pettaj LSE, 35 Jabukovac St, 193233, ARCH Baranyai, CTL
B.41. 2s AV Kabiljo LMB, 69 Ozaljska St, 1932, ATL&CTL, DEM
B.42. 2s SDV Prokop, 3 Sabljiæeva St, 1932, ARCH Muršec, CTR Presièek&Levi LMB
B.43. 2s DV Horvat, 33 Jabukovac St, 1932, ARCH &CTR Kabiljo LMB
B.44. 2s DV Dr. Botteri, 54A Tuškanac St, 193233, ARCH Cota, CTR Carnelutti Bros. LSE
B.45. 2s DV Rehoriæ, 24 Istarska St, 1932-33, ARCH Delenardo, CTR Rakoš LMB
B.46. 3s DV Pregl, 13 Harambašiæeva St, 1932, ARCH Planiæ, CTR Družinec LBL
B.47. 2s DV Klaiæ, 76 Hercegovaèka St, 1932, ARCH Neumann, Z., AIC Dr. Deutsch, P., CTR Freudenreich&Deutsch, P., LMB&LA
B.48. 3s DV Dr. Klepac, 128 Pantovèak St, 1932, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA
B.49. 2s DV Beer, 27 Jabukovac St, 1932-33, ARCH Prof. Ibler, CTR Weiss LMB
B.50. 3s DV Planer, 39 Vinkoviæeva St, 1932, ARCH Planer, CON Šterk, CTR Knez LBL
B.51. 3s DV Bauer, 15 Jabukovac St, 1932-33, ARCH Prof. Ibler, CTR Kabiljo, LMB
B.52. 3s SDV Jazbec, 44 Srebrnjak St, 1932, ARCH. Planiæ, CTR Carnelutti Bros. LSE
B.53. 4s DDV Löschitz-Škarica, 6-8 Vinkoviæeva St, 1932-35, ARCH Grgiæ, A., CTR Kostelac &Filipec LMB&LBL, western half erected as SDV
B.54. 3s DV Eisen, 53 Goljak St, 1932-33, ARCH Auer, B., CTR NKY
B.55. 3s DV Grabušiæ, 12 Štoosova St, 1932-34, ARCH Korka (+ Krekiæ, Kiveroff), CON Šterk, CTR Popoviæ, D. LMB
B.56. 3s SDV Nový, 90 Hercegovaèka St, 1932-34, ARCH Kauèiæ, R., CTR K. Sterle, TIC Sterle, S.LMB
B.57. 2s DV Mrkvièka, 5 Svibovac St, 1932-33, ARCH Szentgyorgyi, CTR Švab, LMB
B.58. 3s DV Novak-Varljen, 6 Pavlinoviæeva St, 1932-33, ARCH Ciciliani, CTR Lukežiæ LBL
B.59. 3s SDV Hombauer, 60 Pantovèak St, 193233, ARCH Velikonja, CTR Aranjoš LMB
B.60. 3s DV Maranguniæ-Stuniæ, 27 Vinkoviæeva St, 1932-33, ARCH Cota, CTR Milèiæ & Wollmost Co. LMB
B.61. 1s AV Lorber, R., 86 Selska St, 1932-33, ARCH Lorber, CTR Lorber&Mevorah Co. LA
B.62. 2s DV Suden, 3 Gorana Kovaèiæa St, 193233, ARCH Dr. Deutsch, P., AIC prob. Hollešek, CTR Aranjoš LMB
B.63. 3s SDV Lojen, 42 Srebrnjak St, 1932-34, ARCH&CTR Èrèek, LBL
B.64. 3s DV Salzer, 15 Vramèeva St, 1932, ARCH Košæica, CTR Omerzo, LBL
B.65. 2s DV Kovaèeviæ, 35 Kozarèeva St, 1932-33, ARCH Kovaèeviæ, CTR Faltus Bros. & Badovinac LA
B.66. 2s DV Hraniloviæ, 26 Baboniæeva St, 193233, ARCH Gomboš&Kauzlariæ, M., CTR Kauèiæ Bros. & Gyiketta LMB
B.67. Two 3s houses of terraced complex ”Pilot” [d.d.] Co. for Building Industry, 9-11 Supilova St, 1932-33, ARCH Ulrich, CTR Presièek Co., TIC Popoviæ, S. LMB
B.68. 2s DV with coffee shop Hirschler, 2 Gornje Prekrižje St, 1932-33, ARCH Löwy, CTR Lukežiæ LBL
B.69. 2s DV Matica, 161 Petrova St, 1932, ARCH Ulrich, CTR Fijember LSE
B.70. 3s SDV Zajièek, 89 Ksaverska St, 1932-34, ARCH Pavešiæ, CTR Neuberger LSE
B.71. 2s DV Molnar, 40 Gajdekova St, 1932-33, ARCH Freudenreich, CTR Bukšeg LMB
B.72. 3s SDV Richter, 52 Medvešèak St, 1932-33, ARCH Velikonja, CTR Helfmann LSE
B.73. 2s DV ITY WLA Planiæ, 27 Radnièki dol St, 1932-34, ARCH&CTR Planiæ LMB
B.74. 1s SDV WLA Veseljko, 10 Višnjica St, 1932, ARCH&CTR Veseljko, I.
B.75. 3s DV Precca, 23 Novakova St, 1933, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA, AIC Grgiæ, I.
B.76. 2s DV ITY Debiæ, 84 Hercegovaèka St, 193335, ARCH NKY, CTR Tovarnik LBL
B.77. 3s DV Sabljiæ, 7 Bosanska St, 1933-34, ARCH Auer, V., CTR Ebert LMB
B.78. 2s DV Planèiæ, 94 Vinogradska St, 1933-36, ARCH Badovinac, CTR Faltus LA
B.79. 3s DV Poljan, 12 Gajdekova St, 1933, ARCH Košæica, CTR Cesarec LMB
B.80. 2s DV Hiršl, 37 Kozarèeva St, 1933, ARCH &CTR Simon LMB
B.81. 2s DV Eng. Mihajlov, 35 Vinkoviæeva St, 1933-34, ARCH Baranyai, COL&CTR Hönigsfeld LA
B.82. 2s DV Žepiæ, 46 Grškoviæeva St, 1933-38, ARCH Kliska, CTR Union Co. Kollibaš LSE
B.83. 2s DV WLA Galiæ, 28 Istarska St, 1933, ARCH Galiæ, D., CTR Planiæ LMB
B.84. 3s SDV Uzorinac, 30 Kozarèeva St, 193334, ARCH Prof. Albini, CTR Faltus Bros. & Badovinac LA
B.85. 1s SDV Thunn, 173 Selska St, 1933-34, ATL, CTR Svoboda LMB
B.86. 2s SDV Kremer, 13 Rendiæeva St, 1933-34, ARCH Anžel, CTR Kabiljo LMB
B.87. 2s SDV Durlen, later Braum, 51 Bukovaèka St, 1933-34, ARCH Neidhardt, F., CTR Durlen LBL
B.88. 4s SDV Ljuština, 9 Novakova St, 1933-34, ARCH Pavešiæ, CTR Faltus Bros. & Badovinac LA
B.89. 2s SDV Martinèeviæ, later Simiæ, 49 Bukovaèka St, 1933-34, ARCH Neidhardt, F., CTR Husinec LBL
B.90. 3s DV Dr. Schwarz, 7 Torbarova St, 193334, ARCH Neumann Z., AIC Bauer, H., CTR Cernjak&Neumann J. LCE
B.91. 3s SDV Dr. Mayerhofer-Ružinski, 80 Medvešèak St, 1933-34, ARCH Auer, B., CTR Èorko LA
B.92. 3s SDV Sorger, 16 Mlinarska St, 1933-34, ARCH Dr. Deutsch, P., CTR Freudenreich& Deutsch, P.LMB&LA
B.93. 2s DV Antoliæ, 6 Kišpatiæeva St, 1933-36, ARCH Gereš, CTR Kostelac LMB
B.94. 2s DV Roth, 6 Davor St, 1933-34. ARCH Planiæ, CTR Presièek & Levi Co. LMB
B.95. 2s DV Dr. Èipèiæ-Raša, 22 Lenucijeva St, 1933-34, ARCH Anžel, CTR Švab LMB
B.96. 4s SDV Verkljan, 7 Novakova St, 1934, ARCH Prof. Vrkljan, Z., CTR Èorko, LA
B.97. 2s DV Tuèkoriæ, 48 Srebrnjak St, 1934, ARCH Vilièiæ, CTR Neuberger LCE
B.98. 2s DV Vidas, 117A Pantovèak St, 1933-35, ARCH&CTR Vincek LMB
B.99. 4s DV Pastuoviæ, 11 Novakova St, 1934-35, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA
B.100. 1s DV Dr. Schwartz, 11 Golubovac St, 193435, ARCH Gomboš&Kauzlariæ, M., CTR Durlen LBL
B.101. 3s SDV Metzinger, 11 Karasova St, 1934, ARCH&CTR Anžel LMB
B.102. 3s DV Dr. Klepac, 63 Goljak St, 1934, ARCH&CTR Petroviæ LA
B.103. 2s DV Helebrant, 8 Vrhovèev Vijenac St, 1934-35, ARCH Helebrant, CTR Gereš LMB
B.104. 2s SDV Rožiæ, 188 Pantovèak St, 1934-36, ARCH&CTR Thuro LMB
B.105. 3s SDV Horvat-Krèmarek, later Machnik, 8 Krežmina St, 1934-38, ARCH&CTR Veseljko, L. LBL
B.106. 3s SDV Jagunec, 1A Blažekova St, 1934-35, ARCH&CTR Anžel LMB
B.107. 2s DV Klobuèar, 19 Jabukovac St, 1934-35, ARCH Gomboš&Kauzlariæ, M., CTR Durlen LBL
B.108. 2s DV Schneider, 10 Karasova St, 1934-35, ARCH Neidhardt, F., CTR Faltus Bros. & Badovinac LA
B.109. 2s DV Margetiæ, 184 Petrova St, 1934-35, Arch. Neumann Z., Contr. Cernjak&Neumann J. LCE
Register of persons for appendices A and B
Registar osoba navedenih u prilozima A i B
Prof. Albini, Alfred, LA (Eng.) Aljinoviæ, Josip, LSE
Anžel, Radivoj, LMB
Aranjoš, Stjepan (Stjepko), LMB, principal of Stjepko Aranjoš Construction Company (Eng.) Auer, Bela, LA (prob. not related with Auer, Vladimir)
Auer, Vladimir, LMB
(Eng.) Badovinac, Ilija, LA
Bahovec, Fran (Franjo), public servant employed in City [of Zagreb] Construction Office, therefore AWL
Baranyai, Aladar Vladimir, LMB
Bauer, Hinko, AWL, later LA (not related with Bauer, Bruno, LA)
Benedik, Slavko, LA
Bohutinsky, Gustav, AWL, later LA
Bornstein, Julio, LMB
Brezak, Filip, LBL
Buèar, Stanko, prob. AWL
Bukšeg, Vilim, LMB
Car, Franjo, LMB
Carnelutti, Amadeo, LSE (related with Carnelutti, Gjuro, LMB; son)
Cekuš, Janko, LSE
Cernjak, Stjepan, LSE
Cesarec, Dragutin, LMB
Ciciliani, Emil, LA, Litoral Banate
Cota, Franjo (Frane), LA
Èorko, Josip, architectural engineer licensed as LMB Èrèek, Josip, LBL
Delenardo, Milan, LA
Prof. Denzler, Juraj, LA
Dr. Deutsch, Pavao, LA, occasionally Duiæ, P. (related with Deutsch, Julio, LA; son)
Družinec, Franjo, LBL
Dubsky, Josip, LSE (related with son Dubsky, Jaromir, LSE)
Dujmoviæ, pl. Boris (Borislav), LMB
Durlen, Franjo, LBL
Ebenspanger, Lav (Leo), LMB
Ebert, Vilko, LMB
Prof. Ehrlich, Hugo, LA
Faltus, Vjekoslav, LA (with unknown brother related in Faltus Bros.)
Fijember, Mirko, LSE
Filipec, Antun, LBL
Florschütz, Sreæko [Felix], LMB
Freudenreich, Aleksander, LMB, later LA Gereš, Josip, LMB
Goldscheider, Oton [Otto], LA Prof. Gomboš, Stjepan, LA
Gottwald, Hinko [Heinrich], LMB (prob. draughtsman unofficially employed in City [of Zagreb] Construction Office, later employed by Bogdan Petroviæ)
Grgiæ, Ante, LA (related with Grgiæ, Ivo; unknown)
Grgiæ, Ivo, LSE
Gyiketta, Aleksander, LMB
Helebrant, Miroslav, SEWL (prob. related with landlords Helebrant, Adolf&Helena, parents)
Helfmann, Teodor, LSE
Hollešek [Holesek], Alfred, MBWL, design architect by Stjepko Aranjoš Construction Company from 1926 to 1935 (?), later LMB
Hönigsfeld, Ervin, LA
Husinec, Petar, LBL
Prof. Ibler, Dragutin (Drago), LA
Ivanèiæ, Josip, LSE
Jenko, Oskar, LSE
Jeremiæ, Branislav, LSE, Novi Beèej, Danube Banate
Kabiljo, Ašer, LMB
Kaiser, Aleksander, LSE
Kanet, Otmar, LA
Kauèiæ, Rudolf, LMB (related with brother Kauèiæ, Josip, LMB in Kauèiæ Bros.; not related with Kauèiæ, Ivan, LBWL)
Prof. Kauzlariæ, Mladen, LA (related with Kauzlariæ, Veljko; brother)
Kiveroff [Kiweroff (?), err. Kiverov], Georg [Georgi (?), err. Ðorðe], AWL
Prof. Kliska, Stanko, LA
Knez, Mihovil, LBL
Kollibaš, Franjo, LSE
Prof. Korka, Jovan, LA
Kostelac, Josip, LMB
Košæica, Zlatko, MBWL, later LMB
Kovaèeviæ, Milovan, LA
Kovaèiæ, Zvonimir (Zvonko), LBL
Kralj, Stjepan, LMB
Prof. Krekiæ, Ðorðe, AWL, later LA Kulischek, Ivo (Ivan), AWL
Levi, Sadik, LMB
Lorber, Moses, later Lorber, Antun Moses, LA Löwy, Slavko, LA Lukežiæ, Adam, LBL
Mevorah, PWL
Milèiæ, Vladimir, LMB
Miliæ, Bogdan, LMB
Muršec, Vjekoslav, LMB, later LA Muževiæ, Josip, LBL
Neidhardt, Franjo, AWL (related with Neidhardt, Juraj; prob. brother)
Neuberger, Leo, LSE (brother of Dr. Neuberger, Pavao [Paul], lawyer)
Neumann, Josip, LSE (related neither with Neumann, Zlatko, nor with Najman, Josif)
Neumann, Zlatko, LA
Omerzo, Božidar, LBL
Pavešiæ, Zvonimir, AWL, later LA Petroviæ, Bogdan, LA (related with landlady Petroviæ, B.[ožena]; wife)
Pettaj, Veljko, LSE
Planer, Albert, AWL (prob. related with Eng. Planer, Josip; father)
Planiæ (former Klobasa), Stjepan, LMB, later LA (related with landlord Planiæ, Stjepan, sen.; father)
Pollak, Albert, LMB
Popoviæ, Dragan M., LMB (not related with Popoviæ, Stjepan, LMB)
Požgaj, Zvonimir, AWL
Presièek, Slavko, PWL
Rakoš, Josip, LMB
Rechnitzer, Oto [Otto], LSE
Schindler, Oswald, AWL
Senk, Ivan, LSE
Simon, Ðuro (Gjuro), LMB
Sorg, Erwin, LMB (related with Sorg, Otto; prob. brother)
Sorg, Otto, LSE
Steinmann, Egon, public servant employed in Province [Sava Banate] Construction Office, therefore AWL
Sterle [Sterrle], Krista, PWL (prob. related with Sterle, Stjepan; husband)
Sterle [Sterrle], Stjepan, LMB
Svoboda, Feliks, LMB
Szentgyorgyi, Lujo (Ljudevit), AWL, later LA
Šega, Ferdo [Ferdinand], LSE
Prof. Šen [Schön], Edo [Eduard], LA
Špiller [Spiller], Dragutin, LSE
Štefaniæ, Zvonimir, LBL
Šterk, Vladimir, LA
Šurina, Josip, LSE
Švab [Schwab], Dragutin, LMB
Thunn, Viktor, LMB
Thuro, Ivan, LMB
Tovarnik, Ljudevit, LBL
Turky, Marijan, LMB, in lieu of Franjo Durlen sometimes
Ulrich, Antun, public servant employed in City [of Zagreb] Construction Office, therefore AWL
Velicogna [Velikonja], Ivo (Ivan), LMB
Vesely, Josip, LSE
Veseljko, Ivan, BLWL (prob. related with Veseljko, Ljudevit; brother)
Vesel[j]ko, Ljudevit, LBL
Dr. Vidakoviæ, Marko, LA
Vilièiæ, Vjekoslav, AWL, later LA Vincek, Matija, LMB
Prof. Vrkljan, Zvonimir, LA
Weiss, Ervin, LMB
(Arch.) Weller, Gustav junior, LA (related with Weller, Gustav; son)
Wolkenfeld, Hans, LSE
Wollmost, PWL
Žugèiæ, Martin, PWL
Abbreviations3
Kratice
Arch. - Architect
b. - blue, occasionally black or green number, signed in the below right corner of a signature folder
ch. - chapter
diss. doct. - doctoral dissertation
Dr. - Doctor (physician, dentist, lawyer, of science, of technical sciences)
ed. - edition
Eng. - Engineer (architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical)
err. - erroneously
i.e. - id est
ibid. - ibidem, same as
Kn. - ”Kneza” (EN: Dux) in Zagreb street names
Kr. - ”Kralja” (EN: Rex) in Zagreb street names
ns, usually 2s to 9s - number of stories given counted as in the US, i.e. first story is the ground story
pl. - nobleman (HR: plemeniti)
prob. - probably
Prof. - Professor (high school, college, university)
r. - red number, signed in the above right corner of a signature folder
sign - signature
Sq. - square (HR: trg)
St - street (HR: ulica)
w. - with
AB - apartment building (attached by default), may content single shop or multiple shops in 1st story
AC - apartment complex (of buildings, all attached by default), may content single shop or multiple shops in 1st story
AIC - architect-in-charge, i.e. a professional personally responsible for realization of building process, if known
ARCH - general designer of a building
ATL - architect [is] the landlord (the landlord made design as professional leading architectural practice)
AOB -apartment building with rental office areas usually in 2nd, possible in 3rd story, with multiple shops in 1st story (attached by default), offices of freelance professionals like physicians, dentists or lawyers not counted
AV - attached villa (building)
AWL - architect without license, a professional unable to sign drawings submitted for approval
BL - bilingual edition
BLWL - bricklayer without license, a professional unable to sign drawings submitted for approval
CAB - corner apartment building (attached by default), may content single shop or multiple shops in 1st story
CAC - corner apartment complex (of buildings, all attached by default, it can be a whole block), may content single shop or multiple shops in 1st story
CAOB - corner apartment building with rental office areas usually in 2nd, possible in 3rd story, with multiple shops in 1st story (attached by default), offices of freelance professionals like physicians, dentists or lawyers not counted
3 According to the CMOS, 15th ed., chap. 15
CMOS - The Chicago Manual of Style, referred to the 15th edition
COL - collaborator or collaborators in design
CON - senior consultant designer
CTL - contractor [is] the landlord (the landlord acted as professional leading architectural practice or construction firm)
CTR - general contractor
CZ - Czech Republic, Czechia
DAB - double apartment building (attached by default)
DAZ - The State Archives in Zagreb (HR: Državni arhiv u Zagrebu)
DDV - double detached villa
DE - German language
DEM - demolished, if known
DSDV - double semidetached villa
DV - detached villa (building)
EN - English language
FGD - archival collection of photographs taken in process of issuing legal building and occupancy approvals (HR: Fotografije graðevinske dokumentacije)
HR - Croatian language
IT - Institute of Technology (DE: TH - Technische Hochschule; HR: TVŠ - Tehnièka visoka škola)
ITY - in-the-yard, i.e. eligible building not in the street
LA - licensed architect, later licensed architectural engineer, given by Yugoslav building legislation between 1918 and 1941
LBL - licensed bricklayer, given by Yugoslav building legislation between 1918 and 1941
LMB - licensed master builder, given by Yugoslav building legislation between 1918 and 1941
LOIO - landlord-on-its-own (the unskilled landlord coordinated subcontractors)
LSE - licensed structural engineer, given by Yugoslav building legislation between 1918 and 1941
MBWL - master builder without license, a professional unable to sign drawings submitted for approval
ML - monolingual edition
NKY - not known yet
ODV - official detached villa
PWL - professional without license, a person acted as an unlicensed partner in shared entrepreneurship
SDV - semidetached villa (building)
SL - Slovenian language
SP - Spain
TIC - technician-in-charge (HR: tehnièki poslovoða), i.e. licensed professional who is in charge of business for a company where all partners are unlicensed
UAS - unknown architectural students, occasionally draught persons on their professor’s projects
WLA - without legal approval
YU - former Yugoslavia, from 1918 to 1991
ZGD - archival collection of documentation made in process of issuing legal building and occupancy approvals (HR: Zbirka graðevinske dokumentacije)
1. Bagariæ, M. (2011), Architect Ignjat Fischer (HR: Arhitekt Ignjat Fischer) (ML: HR), Meandarmedia&MUO, Zagreb, HR
2. Bjažiæ Klarin, T. (2015), Ernest Weissmann: Socially Engaged Architecture, 1926-1939 / Ernest Weissmann: Društveno angažirana arhitektura, 1926.-1939. (BL: EN&HR) HAZU / Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts - HMA / Croatian Museum of Architecture, Zagreb, HR
3. Blau, E.; Rupnik, I.; et al. (2007), Project Zagreb: Transition as Condition, Strategy, Practice, Actar, Barcelona, SP
4. Èorak, Ž. (1971), Introductory Article to Architectural Part (HR: Kritièka Rretrospektiva ‘Zemlja’: Arhitektura); [Exhibition Catalogue of] 6th Zagreb Salon: A Critical Retrospective [of Group] ‘Zemlja’ (EN: Earth)”, May 8th - June 8th, (ML: HR): 141-151, Zagreb
5. Èorak, Ž. (1981), Sign as function: Drago Ibler and Croatian Architecture between the World Wars (HR: U funkciji znaka: Drago Ibler i hrvatska arhitektura izmeðu dva svjetska rata) (ML: HR), IPU, 2, Zagreb [YU]
6. Damjanoviæ, D. (2015), Architect Marko Vidakoviæ, the Zagreb exhibition of Contemporary Czechoslovakia architecture (1928) (ML: EN), „Soudobé dějiny (Contemporary History)”, ISSN 1210-7050, Institute of Contemporary History of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, 10 (1): 1-20, Prague, CZ
7. Deutsch, dr. P. (1932), Flat roofs (HR: Ravni krovovi) (ML: HR), „Graðevinski vjesnik”, 1 (2): 1821, Zagreb [YU]
8. Doesburg, Th. Van (1931), The Rebirth of Art and Architecture in Europe (HR: Obnova umjetnosti i arhitekture u Evropi) (ML: HR), ”Hrvatska revija”, 8, MCMXXXI: 419-432
9. Doesburg, Th. Van (1988), The Rebirth of Art and Architecture in Europe (ML: EN), in Van Straaten, 14-20
10. Domljan, Ž. (1979), Architect Ehrlich (HR: Arhitekt Ehrlich) (ML: HR), DPUH, 26, Zagreb [YU]
11. Hanièar Buljan, I. (2006), An Addendum to Biography of Architect Zvonimir Kavuriæ (19011944) (HR: Prilog za biografiju arhitekta Zvonimira Kavuriæa (1901.-1944.)) (ML: HR), „Radovi IPU”, 30: 281-297, Zagreb, HR
12. Kahle, D. (2003a), Modern Residential Buildings in North Zagreb between 1928 and 1945 (ML: HR, Summary in EN), ”Prostor”, 11 (2 /26/): 167-173, Zagreb, HR
13. Kahle, D. (2003b), Built-in Apartment House in Zagreb between 2 January 1928 and 14 February 1935, Master’s Thesis: Summary (ML: EN), ”Prostor”, 11 (2 /26/): 231, Zagreb, HR
14. Kahle, D. (2007), Modern Residential Buildings in the Northern Parts of Zagreb in the Period from 1928 to 1945, Doctoral Dissertation: Summary (ML: EN), ”Prostor”, 15 (2 /34/): 332, Zagreb, HR
15. Kahle, D. (2008), Projects and Realizations by Vladimir Šterk in Zagreb between 1923 and 1941 (HR: Potpisani projekti i realizacije Vladimira Šterka u Zagrebu od 1923. do 1941.) (ML: HR), ”Prostor”, 16 (2 /36/): 193-209, Zagreb, HR
16. Kahle, D. (2015), Architect Zlatko Neumann: Buildings and Projects between the World Wars (ML: EN, summary in HR), ”Prostor”, 12 (1 /27/): 28-41, Zagreb, HR
17. Kempf, J. (1927), The Family House of the Middle Class (DE: Das Einfamilienhaus des Mittelstandes) (ML: DE), Calwey, Munich, DE
18. Kožariæ, I. ed.; Radoviæ Maheèiæ, D.; Hanièar Buljan, I. curators (2003), Stjepan Planiæ 19001980: from the architect’s records / Stjepan Planiæ 1900.-1980.: iz arhiva arhitekta (BL: EN&HR), Exhibition catalogue, December 2003 - January 2004, Gliptoteka HAZU, Zagreb, HR
19. Laslo, A. curator (1990), Zlatko Neumann & seven lamps of the New Objectivity: exhibition catalogue (HR: Zlatko Neumann & sedam svjetiljki Novog graðenja: katalog izložbe) (ML: HR), Anon., Zagreb [YU]
20. Mikiæ-Brodnjak, V. (2002), Architect Antun Ulrich: A Classicism of the Modern (HR: Arhitekt Antun Ulrich: klasiènost moderne) (ML: HR), Naklada Jurèiæ, Zagreb, HR
21. Mutnjakoviæ, A. (1971), [Architectural Part, Curator] (HR: Kritièka Retrospektiva ”Zemlja”: Arhitektura); [Exhibition Catalogue of] 6th Zagreb Salon: A Critical Retrospective [of Group] ‘Zemlja’ (EN: Earth)” (HR: Kritièka Retrospektiva ”Zemlja”), May 8th - June 8th (ML: HR): 153-180, Zagreb
22. Paladino, Z. (2013), Lavoslav Horvat: A contextual ambient & Modern (HR: Lavoslav Horvat: Kontekstualni ambijentalizam i moderna) (ML: HR) Meandarmedia, Zagreb, HR
23. Planiæ, S. ed. (1932), Problems of Modern Architecture (HR: Problemi savremene arhitekture) (ML: HR); Jugoslovenska štampa d.d., Zagreb [YU]
24. Premerl, T. ed. (1976), Croatian Modern Architecture between the [World] Wars (HR: Hrvatska moderna arhitektura izmeðu dva rata) (ML: HR), ”Arhitektura”, 156-7, Savez arhitekata Hrvatske, Zagreb [YU]
25. Premerl, T.; Salopek, D.; Venturini, D.; Tajder, R. mods. (1976), A Talk with the protagonists of Modern [Architecture between the World Wars] (HR: Razgovor s protagonistima Moderne) (ML: HR), in: Premerl, 1976: 116-128
26. Premerl, T. (19891, 19902), Croatian Modern Architecture between the World Wars: A new Tradition (HR: Hrvatska moderna arhitektura izmeðu dva rata: nova tradicija) (ML: HR), Nakladni zavod Matice hrvatske, Zagreb [YU]
27. Premerl, T. (20153), Croatian Modern Architecture between the World Wars: A new Tradition (HR: Hrvatska moderna arhitektura izmeðu dva rata: nova tradicija) (ML: HR), Jutarnji list, Zagreb, HR
28. Radoviæ-Maheèiæ, D. (1999), Slavko Löwy: A Cofounder of Croatian Modern Architecture in Ninety Thirties (HR: Slavko Löwy: sustvaratelj hrvatske moderne arhitekture tridesetih godina) (ML: HR), IPU, 17, Zagreb, HR
29. Radoviæ-Maheèiæ, D. ed. (2007), Modern Architecture in Croatia / Moderna arhitektura u Hrvatskoj (BL: EN&HR), Institut za povijest umjetnosti, Školska knjiga, Zagreb, HR
30. Straaten, E. Van (1988), Theo Van Doesburg, Painter and Architect (ML: EN), SDU Publishers, The Hague, NL
31. Uchytil, A.; Barišiæ Mareniæ, Z.; Kahroviæ, E. (2009, 20112), Lexicon of Architects - Atlas of 20th Century Croatian Architecture / Leksikon arhitekata Atlasa hrvatske arhitekture XX. stoljeæa (bilingual: English&Croatian), Sveuèilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet, Zagreb, HR
32. Vrkljan, Z. (1995), Memories (HR: Sjeæanja) (ML: HR), Sveuèilište u Zagrebu, Zagreb, HR
33. Vukadin Doronjga, H. curator (2003), 24 Hours of a Hero: Mladen Kauzlariæ - a Taste of interwar Zagreb (HR: 24 sata heroja: Mladen KauzlariæUkus meðuratnog Zagreba) (ML: HR), May 12th - June 23rd, 2003, MGZ, Zagreb, HR
34. *** (1933), Modern Buildings (HR: Moderne novogradnje) (ML: HR), „Svijet”, 8 (11): 215, 217, Zagreb, [YU]
35. *** (1971), [Exhibition Catalogue of] 6th Zagreb Salon: A Critical Retrospective [of Group]
‘Zemlja’ (EN: Earth)” (HR: Kritièka Retrospektiva ”Zemlja”), May 8th - June 8th, 1971 [Introductory Article to Architectural Part: Željka Èorak (141151), Curator of Architectural Part: Andrija Mutnjakoviæ (153-180)] (ML: HR), Zagreb, [YU] 36. *** (200315), The Chicago Manual of Style (=CMOS): The Essential Guide for Writers, Editors, and Publishers, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill. & London, UK
Archive Sources
Arhivski izvori
DAZ-ZGD signatures
• A.1.-A.39.
1928(2): sign r.1744/4 b.1090 Jukiæeva 36; sign b.1791/1 Maruliæev trg 17
1929(2): sign b.2288 Preobraženska 2; sign r.610/1 Derenèinova 48 Crvenog Križa 22 & sign r.2310/1
Butorac A. 18
1930(7): sign r.915/3 b.608 Ðorðiæeva 6; sign r.2151/2 b.2485 Kukuljeviæeva 26; sign r.2461/1 b.1778/79 Martiæeva 13; sign b.3231 Vlaška 60; sign r.1308/2 Gunduliæeva 21; sign r.1744/4 b.1090 Jukiæeva 36; sign r.824 b.536 Draškoviæeva 30 Uglovnica Ðorðiæeva 23
1931(5): sign: r.2310/4 Butorca (sic!) A. 23 & r.2310/5 Butorac A. 25 & r.2310/6 Butorac A. 27; sign r.1552/1 b.958/959 Ilica 104; sign r.2310/3 Butorac A. 21; sign r.1315/1 b.799/803 Gunduliæeva 34; sign r.1864/2 b.1184 Klaiæeva 60 i 62 1932(15): sign r.558/1 b.337/339 Cankarova 1; sign r.828/5 b.539 Draškoviæeva 47; sign r.3019 b.2179 Petrinjska 11; sign r.317/3 b.153 Bogoviæeva 4; sign r.3015/3 b.1756 Marinkoviæeva 7; sign r.2012/1 b.2837 Zvonimirova 19; sign r.2012/1 b.2837 Marinkoviæeva 1 F. Petriæa 1; sign r.2342/4 b.1693 Maksimirska 4; no signature (!) Šulekova 9; sign r.1037/3 b.682 Gajeva 2B; sign r.2727/6 Lenjingradska 21 Nova cesta; sign r.2012/3 b.2837 Zvonimirova 21; no signature (!) Preradoviæeva 22; sign r.2012/5 b.2837 Zvonimirova 23; sign r.317/1 b.153 Bogoviæeva 2B & sign r.1038/1 b.683 Gajeva 2C
1933(6): sign b.2980 Šoštariæeva 8; sign b.2997 Šubiæeva 9; sign r.1312/7, b.799 Gunduliæeva 33; sign r.2490/1, b.1802 Mašiæeva 1; sign r.2727/9, b.1553/1 Nova cesta 25 Lenjingradska 25; sign r.1884/1, b.2852/1 Kneza Borne 12 Solovljeva (sic!) 12
1934(2): sign r.1037/1, b.682 Trg bana Josipa Jelaèiæa 17; sign r.3034/4, b.2193 Petrinjska 83
• B.1.-B.109.
1928(2): sign r.1295/7 b.791 Grškoviæeva 15; sign r.1768/9 b.1105 Jurjevska 27A
1929(4): sign r.1627/12 b.1008 Istarska 13; sign b.2619 Rokova 13-15; no signature (!) Šulekova 19; sign r.980/12 Fijanova 13
1930(12): sign r.1032/1 b.678 Gajdekova 1; sign r.2869/5 Osredak 22; no signature (!) Petrova 157; sign r.2640/5 b.1904/1 Mlinarska 52; sign r.2089/3 b.1444 Križaniæeva 4 4A; sign r.2089/3 b.1444 Križaniæeva 4 4A; sign r.2886/4 Konèareva 188 Ozaljska 100; sign r.2221/12 Lašæinska 58; sign r.1654/8 b.1026 Jabukovac 37; sign r.2954 b.2137 Pantovèak 112; sign r.1467/1 b.891 Horvatovac 12; sign b.3253 Voæarska 52 1931(19): sign r.2588/7 b.1853 Mikuliæeva 9; sign r.543/1 Bulatova 2; sign b.2945 Svibovac 3; sign r.2034/10 b.1401 Kraljevec 79; sign r.1654/9 b.1026 Jabukovac 39; sign b.2814 Slavujevac 14; sign r.2532/2 Moše Pijade 116 Medvešèak 56; sign r.134/1 Baboniæeva 28; sign r.2775/2 b.1995 Novakova 15; sign b.3183 Vijenac 4; sign r.515/4 Buconjiæeva 4; sign r.1420/3 b.867 Hercegovaèka 115; sign r.2012/1 b.2837 Novakova 28; sign
r.1980/3 b.1314 Kozarèeva 29; sign r.1653/9 Jabukovac 20; sign r.1654/2 Jabukovac 22; sign r.1812/3 b.1137 Kamenjak 4; sign b.2814 Slavujevac 4; sign b.2619 Rokova 6 1932(37): sign r.2775/3 b.1995 Novakova 17; sign r.2640/4 Mlinarska 51; sign r.1654/7 Jabukovac 35; sign r.2880/2 Konèareva 193 Ozaljska 69; sign b.2837 Sabljiæeva 3; sign r.1654/6 Jabukovac 33; sign b.3124 Tuškanac 54A; sign r.1628/7 Istarska 24; sign r.1335/1 Harambašiæeva 13; sign r.1416/6 b.863 Hercegovaèka 76; sign r.2956/3 b.2139 Pantovèak 128; sign r.1654/5 Jabukovac 27; sign b.3196/2 Vinkoviæeva 39; sign r.1653/5 b.1024 Jabukovac 15; no signature (!) Srebrnjak 40; sign b.3195 Vinkoviæeva 6; B.55. sign r.2798/9 Novi Goljak 23 (!); sign b.2994 Štosova (sic!) 12; sign r.1417/7 Hercegovaèka 90; sign b.2945 Svibovac 5; sign r.2988/5 Pavlinoviæeva 6; sign r.2948/3 Pantovèak 60; sign b.3196/1 Vinkoviæeva 27; sign b.2776/1 Selska c. 86; sign r.1972/5 b.1305 Kovaèiæeva 3; no signature (!) Srebrnjak 42; sign b.3294 Vramèeva 15; sign r.1830/8 Kozarèeva 35; sign r.133/9 b.35 Baboniæeva 26; sign b.KÈ 2296/155 resp. KÈ 2296/156 Supilova 9 resp. 11 ”Pilot”; sign r.1089/1 Gornje Prekrižje 2; sign b.2217 Petrova 161; sign r.2125/8 Ksaverska cesta 89; sign r.1033/12 Gajdekova 40; sign r.2531/6 Moše Pijade 112 Medvešèak 52; sign b.2485/2 Radnièki dol 26; sign b.3224 Višnjica 10 1933(21): sign r.2776/3 b.2037 Novakova 23; sign r.1417/3 Hercegovaèka 84; sign r.389/6 b. 195/1 Bosanska 5A; sign b.3207 Vinogradska 92 92/1; sign r.1032/6 Gajdekova 12; sign r.1980/8 Kozarèeva 37; sign b.3196/2 Vinkoviæeva 35; sign r.1299/3, b.794 Grškoviæeva 46; sign r.1628/11 b. 1008 Istarska 28; sign r.1980/4, b.1314 Kozarèeva 30; sign b.2778/3 Selska 173; sign b.2583 Rendiæeva 13; sign r.531/5 Bukovaèka 51; sign r.2774/1, b.2036 Novakova 9; sign r.531/1 Bukovaèka 49; sign b.3039 Torbarova 7; sign r.2535, b.1961/1962 Moše Pijade 130 Medvešèak 80; sign r.2635/5 Mlinarska 16; sign r.1837/4 Kišpatiæeva 6; sign r.696/4, b.453 Davor 6; sign r.2237/1, b.1530 Lenucijeva 22 1934(14): sign r.2770/1, b.2035/2040 Novakova 7; sign b.2868 Srebrnjak 44; sign r.2954/8, b.2137 Pantovèak 117A; sign b.2036, r.2774/3 Novakova 11; sign r.1069/7, b.714/715 Golubovac 11; sign r.1830/9 b.1149/1 Karasova 11; sign r.1077/3 Goljak 33; sign. r.531/5 Bukovaèka 51; sign r.2960/2 Pantovèak 188; sign r.2079/6 Krežmina 8; sign r.303/1 Blažekova 1; sign r.1653/8 Jabukovac 19; sign r.1830/8 Karasova 10; sign b.2218 Petrova 184
Illustration Sources
Izvori ilustracija
Fig. 1 Author, recent photograph
Fig. 2 DAZ-ZGD, sign r.2532/2 Moše Pijade 116 Medvešèak 56
Fig. 3 DAZ-ZGD, sign r.2562/2 b.1836 Mesnièka 7
Fig. 4 DAZ-ZGD, sign r.1302/3 b.796 Gunduliæeva 3
Fig. 5 DAZ-ZGD, sign b.1791/1 Maruliæev trg 17
Fig. 6 DAZ-FGD No.194
Fig. 7 DAZ-FGD No.163
Fig. 8 *** 1933: 215
Fig. 9 DAZ-ZGD, sign r.2012/1 b.2837 Novakova 28
Fig. 10 DAZ-ZGD, sign b.3294 Vramèeva 15
Fig. 11 DAZ-ZGD, sign b.2619 Rokova 6
Fig. 12 DAZ-ZGD, sign r.2012/1 b.2837 Zvonimirova 19
Fig. 13 DAZ-ZGD, sign r.1744/4 b.1090 Jukiæeva 36
Fig. 14 *** 1933: 215
Summary Sažetak
Stambene zgrade Novoga graðenja u Zagrebu izmeðu
Podruèje grada Zagreba bilo je 1900. godine uveæano na oko 66 km2 i ostalo je nepromijenjeno do 1945. godine. Ovaj teritorij bio je službeno podijeljen u tri podcjeline: brežuljkasti obronci Medvednice sjeverno od Ilice, Vlaške i Maksimirske ulice (I), još nedovršeno podruèje blokovske izgradnje izmeðu gore navedenih ulica i željeznièke pruge Zaprešiæ - Dugo Selo (II), odnosno aluvijalna dolina izmeðu željeznièke pruge i rijeke Save, gdje je upravo bila zapoèeta izgradnja takozvanih divljih naselja (III). Zbog graðevinskim pravilnikom propisane podjele zgrada u dvije vrste, stambene zgrade Novoga graðenja mogu se svrstati u dvije klase: ugraðene stambene zgrade Novoga graðenja [Prilog A] podizane uglavnom u zatvorenim blokovima (II), odnosno vile Novoga graðenja [Prilog B] podizane na poluotvoreni ili otvoreni naèin izgradnje obièno u sjevernim dijelovima (I), ali suvremenih naselja vila bilo je u svim dijelovima grada. Kvalificirane zgrade izlistane su kronološki prema dataciji prvoga tehnièkog pregleda nacrta u procesu ishoðenja graðevinske dozvole.
Organizacija tlocrta bila je potpuno pod utjecajem graðevinskih propisa, zahtjeva odreðenog kuæevlasnika i procesa graðenja. Dugovjeènost i stabilnost propisanih ogranièenja nauèila je gradske èinovnike na ekstenzivnu uporabu starih tlocrtnih obrazaca, nastalih i sazrelih prije Prvoga svjetskog rata, kada su i tlocrtni obrasci vila uglavnom bili derivirani od ugraðenih najamnih zgrada. Veæina kuæevlasnika bila je voljna zadržati preživjele obrasce, špekulirajuæi sa svakim kvadratnim centimetrom danog prostora unutar propisanih ogranièenja. Ipak, mala jezgra odabranih kuæevlasnika krenula je prema novim prostornim organizacijama - bilo dvokatnim stanovima unutar vila, bilo jedinstvenim stambenim prostorom preko cijeloga kata unutar ogranièenoga prostora tlocrtnog obrisa ugraðene najamne zgrade. Zastupanje radikalnih tlocrtnih rješenja poput Raumplana odnosno Plana Libre nije bilo uspješno, što su Zlatko Neumann i Drago Ibler iskusili još 1929. godine, kada njihovi kuæevlasni-
ci nisu podigli u procesu ishoðenja graðevinske dozvole odobrene projekte vile (Pantovèak 103A), odnosno stambene zgrade (Ilica 168A). Zahvaljujuæi prilagodbi procesa graðenja što je moguæe manjem broju izuèenih profesionalaca, konstrukcije u kojima prevladavaju zidovi zidani opekom i mortom s ubaèenim stupovima, podvlakama i stropovima od armiranoga betona umjesto drvenoga grednika - dominantne su. Predgotovljene armiranobetonske stropne konstrukcije (npr. isteg-strop) ili lokalno patentirane (tzv. Dr. Krajèinoviæ strop) polako zauzimaju svoje mjesto u konstrukciji, izraèunate i smještene prema suvremenim njemaèkim ili švicarskim propisima za armirani beton, opravdavajuæi uporabu najveæim moguæim brojem needuciranih djelatnika. Kuæe graðene iskljuèivo u èeliènoj ili drugoj metalnoj konstrukciji nisu pronaðene. Èesto su uporabljene takozvane miješane konstrukcije, gdje bi npr. donji katovi imali skelet, a gornji zidane stijene sa stropovima od drvenoga grednika, odnosno npr. ulièni dio zgrade bio je cijeli sagraðen od zidanih stijena s drvenim grednikom, a dvorišni dio u armiranobetonskom skeletu. Ravni su krovovi ispoèetka od drvocementa na konstrukciji od drvenoga grednika, dok lagano prodiru armiranobetonski stropovi s polimernom hidroizolacijom. Prva proèelja modernoga pokreta podsjeæala su na uzorak horizontalno postavljenih linija odnosno na kubiène forme s balustradama. Nešto kasnije proèelja postaju neornamentirane plohe s redovima trokrilnih prozora. Vile mogu imati dvije vrste vanjskog oplošja: bilo tektonsko (slièno Van’t’Hoffu ili Franku Lloydu Wrightu), bilo stereotomsko kubièno (slièno Loosu ili èeškoj moderni).
Zagreb je postao novèarsko i trgovaèko središte novoosnovanoga Kraljevstva Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca sve do vrhunca financijske krize. U godinama oporavka taj æe utjecaj kopnjeti i Beograd æe postati centar i tih djelatnosti, uz politièki utjecaj kao središta države. U zagrebaèkim novèarskim ustanovama stalno je bio prisutan židovski kapital, akumuliran industrijom iz cijele Hrvatske i Slavonije te oploðen
bankama i drugim kapitalnim zavodima koji su svoju snagu crpili iz poslova špekulacije nekretninama, sve do insolventnosti Gradske štedionice 1932. godine. Ljudi koji su vodili ova poduzeæa htjeli su biti uvršteni u promicatelje novoga pa su posljedièno naruèili izniman broj stambenih zgrada i vila Novoga graðenja izmeðu 1930. i 1932. godine. U poèetnim godinama Tehnièke visoke škole u Zagrebu (poslije Tehnièkoga fakulteta s nepromijenjenom strukturom nastave) pretežno su svi arhitekti - sudionici modernoga pokreta - bili njeni studenti (Zvonimir Vrkljan, Egon Steinmann, Stanko Kliska, Jovan Korka, Georg Kiveroff, Bogdan Petroviæ, Ernest Weissmann i Ante Grgiæ) predvoðeni praškim studentima (Vladimir Šterk, Marko Vidakoviæ, Ivan Zemljak, Stjepan Hribar i Vjekoslav Muršec). Stvaranje paralelne arhitektonske škole na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu pod vodstvom profesora Drage Iblera pojaèalo je natjecateljski duh u Zagrebu, i to zahvaljujuæi ovim studentima: Stjepan Planiæ, Lavoslav Horvat, Drago Galiæ, Aleksandar Freudenreich, Mladen Kauzlariæ i Gustav Bohutinsky. Tada važeæi graðevinski propisi omoguæavali su ovlaštenim graditeljima, a u posebnim sluèajevima i ovlaštenim majstorima zidarima, projektiranje stambenih zgrada, èime su i oni donekle pridonijeli modernome pokretu. Stambene zgrade Novoga graðenja pojavljuju se postupno u Zagrebu izmeðu 1929. i 1934. godine. Karakteristika najveæeg broja tih zgrada nisu ni trakasti prozori ni kubiène forme u armiranom betonu ili èeliku postavljene na vitke okrugle stupove, nego bolno i polagano generirane kubiène forme. Proèelja su obilježavali nizovi položenih trokrilnih, rjeðe èetverokrilnih prozora, a zidovi su graðeni uglavnom opekom i mortom sa sporadièno korištenim konstruktivnim dijelovima od armiranoga betona. Zgrade su u pojavnosti više loosovske negoli corbusierovske. Ne baš dokraja savršene, ove zgrade ipak pokazuju neminovnu želju biti novima, modernima, odnosno plodonosnima u pojavnom naèinu arhitektonskoga dizajna toga doba.
DARKO KAHLE
Biography
Biografija
DARKO KAHLE, PhD, Architect [ARB, United Kingdom], Architekt [BYAK, Freistaat Bayern], Licensed Architect [HKA, Croatia], Research Fellow [MZOS, Croatia]; 1989 MArch, 2002 MSc in Architecture and Urban Planning, 2007 PhD in Architecture and Urban Planning [University of Zagreb, School of Architecture, Graduate School of Built Heritage Split]. From 2002: 10 published scientific articles, 4 executed renovation projects & 2 competition projects.
Dr.sc. DARKO KAHLE, arhitekt [ARB, Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo], arhitekt [BYAK, Slobodna Država Bavarska], ovlašteni arhitekt [HKA, Hrvatska], znanstveni suradnik [MZOS, Hrvatska]; 1989. diplomirani inženjer arhitekture, 2002. magistar tehnièkih znanosti, 2007. doktor tehnièkih znanosti [Sveuèilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet, Mediteranski centar za graditeljsko naslijeðe Split]. Od 2002. godine objavio je deset znanstvenih radova, èetiri izvedena projekta obnove i dva natjeèajna projekta.
1 University of Montenegro
Faculty of Architecture
MNE - 81000 Podgorica, George Washington bb
2 University of Zagreb
Faculty of Architecture
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26 svetislav@ac.me nlipovac@arhitekt.hr arh.vlahovic@gmail.com
Preliminary Communication
UDC 711.4-122 (16.16 Podgorica) ”19/20” Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning
2.01.02. - Urban and Physical Planning
Article Received / Accepted: 19. 4. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
1 Univerzitet Crne Gore Arhitektonski fakultet
MNE - 81000 Podgorica, George Washington bb
2 Sveuèilište u Zagrebu
Arhitektonski fakultet
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26 svetislav@ac.me nlipovac@arhitekt.hr arh.vlahovic@gmail.com
Prethodno priopæenje
UDK 711.4-122 (16.16 Podgorica) ”19/20” Tehnièke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam 2.01.02. - Urbanizam i prostorno planiranje Èlanak primljen / prihvaæen: 19. 4. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
place identity place-making
Podgorica
Titograd urban planning
Existing and recognized natural and historic values within a city district play an important role in maintaining and creation of the recognizable city image. The respect of a planner for their perception and conservation can be well observed through prepared and adopted urban plans of different levels. Taking Podgorica as an example, this paper represents an overview of how these values were recognized and implemented in city planning documents.
prepoznatljivost mjesta stvaranje mjesta Podgorica Titograd urbanistièko planiranje
U stvaranju i održavanju prepoznatljive slike nekoga mjesta veliku ulogu imaju postojeæe, a prepoznate prirodne i povijesne vrijednosti unutar podruèja planiranog za njegov razvoj. Odnos planera prema pravilnoj spoznaji i èuvanju tih vrijednosti može se oèitati kroz izraðene i usvojene urbanistièke planove. Na primjeru grada Podgorice dan je prikaz naèina prepoznavanja i planerski odnos prema tim vrijednostima, od prvih urbanistièkih planova pa do danas.
Oneof the methodological approaches in revealing the creation of a place identity is, by no means, a search for and adequate scientific reading of existing historic planning documents. Through these documents, the planer’s attitude towards existing (natural or historic) values and the importance of preserving existing or creating new identity can be recognized, determined and implemented in the future Place creation and management. The major approaches that are regularly mentioned in the process of urban planning are: Conservation, Preservation and Protection of Place identity. This paper1 will try to reveal the creation of Place Identity for Podgorica, the capital of Montenegro, as seen through the prepared planning documents.
PREPOZNATLJIVOST MJESTA
I URBANISTIÈKO PLANIRANJE
The natural environment is undoubtedly major source of identity elements in regional and urban planning. The affluence of the natural heritage of a region, along with its cultural and historic heritage, requires special attention in their detection and valorization. As a result of the improved criteria for preservation of natural and cultural heritage and a desire for self-sustainable development, there is a common need in today’s planning legal practice2 to modify professional and legal terms3 and
approaches in conventional planning models and methodologies. The planning ideas and schemes have been mostly based on the notion of creating optimal physical and functional patterns, while the environment preservation and its resources were reduced to a mere re-recording of facts from previous plans, and which has to be changed in order to preserve the natural diversity and integrity of places and their curtilage.
Thus, one of many important urban planners’ responsibilities is capturing the sense of place, a sense that makes the area so special and different from the neighboring one, and keep it not only throughout the entire planning process but also throughout the Place life. A plan, as a step-by-step process, must protect and preserve the unique physical resources of each place through time by solving problems, or at least by giving guidelines on how to avoid problems.
But in many physical plans the buildable areas were planned regardless the natural (topographic) conditions and features of the area, or real needs. As a result of that neglectedness, there are numerous buildable areas in close vicinity to valuable natural identity elements or within the viewshed upon such elements, imposing direct (aesthetic) threat to the place identity.4 This is often explained as the political or investor’s demand, but it brings us to forgetting that the process of Place making should be understood as reaching different goals that are of obvious symbolic, civic and social interest, but could also open new opportunities for architectural and urban development.5 This kind of planning approach takes us undoubtedly to waste of space, regardless the real Place and Region growth and development needs.
1 This paper represents preliminary research results on creation of the identity of Place through the urban planning history for Podgorica, Montenegro. The research is performed within the scientific project Heritage Urbanism - Urban and Spatial Planning Models for Revival and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage [HERU-2032] financed by the Croatian Science Foundation, which is being carried out at the Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb, with Prof. Mladen Obad Šæitaroci Ph.D. as a principal scholar.
2 Lipovac, Popoviæ, Robina, 2015: 49
3 The most common problem in planning is the usage of three terms: conservation, preservation and protection Without their clear and omni acceptable definition it will be quite impossible to produce plans that will be professionally accepted and enforceable.
4 Place identity usually refers to a cluster of elements scoped through geography, urban planning and design, landscape architecture… Methodologies used for understanding these elements primarily involve techniques such as mapping the entire range of physical elements from natural and cultural environment. Urban planners, along with landscape architects, should use some forms of deliberative planning, charettes, public discussions with local communities as a way of working with and for place identity.
5 Palermo, 2014: 4
6 The Place identity is pretty often understood and recognized as the urban character, or neighborhood character, or just a local character
Consequently, much has been written about the Place Identity and the Sense of Place; two terms that are closely related to urban planning. The importance of the Place Identity6 in urban and physical planning has been recognized differently throughout the planning history, but the most important approaches can be observed in the last 30 years when It became a significant issue in urban planning and design. This process could be noted in urban plans prepared for Podgorica (Montenegro), once named Titograd, in former Yugoslavia. One of the ways to explore the making and changing of the Place identity is obviously the study of the roots of the Place name, as one of many Place identities is the name of a particular Place. However, the place names are subject to many changes and people are forgetting or neglecting that the names usually are connected with the heritage of the particular Places. What are the motives behind such name changes in global contexts? One of the answers for changing the Place name is inextricably linked to political changes in the region where the Place is.7
The Importance of Place, Concept of Place, or Nature of Place experience8 has been examined more within sociological researches, less as a part of an urban planning process. But, dealing with place concept without knowing and accepting geographic issues in urban and physical planning process does not take us to Place Making. A very good discussion of this subject can be found in the article9 written by professor Emeritus Fred E. Lukermann in which he revealed six major components of the place concept.10 According to this, it is obvious that the first step in
7 Name of Podgorica, the capital of Montenegro, has its meaning connected with the fact that the place is nested at the foothill of a small hill: Gorica (close to the center of the town) reaching some 107 meters above sea level. Other hills near by the town, which are creating the city appearance are Malo brdo, Velje brdo, Ljuboviæ brdo i Dajbabe brdo Also the name was changed for political reason in the mid of the 20th century, the place returned the original name after the country became independent state.
8 Lipovac, 1997: 8-12
9 The article titled Geography as a Formal Intellectual Discipline and the Way in Which it Contributes to Human Knowledge was published in Canadian Geographer; in 1964.
10 Professor Lukermann was the Chair of the Geography Department, University of Minnesota. According to him, the Place concept consists of: a) The idea of location, location as it relates to other things and places, is absolutely fundamental; b) Place involves an integration of elements of nature and culture; this undoubtedly implies that every place is a unique entity; c) Although the places are unique, they are interconnected by a system of spatial interactions and transfers, part of a frame of circulation; d) Places are part of larger areas and are focuses in a system of localization; e) Places are emerging and becoming: with historical and cultural change new elements are added, while some old disappear; f) Places have meaning: they are characterized by the beliefs of individuals.
11 Lipovac, 2000: 59-64
defining a Place is to experience, reveal and describe its location, along with the surrounding environment and naming all, or at least most, of the existing elements of identity. However, the description of the location alone is not sufficient to define the entire place, its meaning and experience. Therefore, the planers need to reveal and use the existing elements of identity from the natural environment11 throughout the entire planning process. Some of the most influential elements from natural environment in urban planning are the ones known as relief and landform which includes all terrain form appearances and water (mountains, hills, valleys, creeks, rivers, lakes… and their banks). The way how these natural features have been used within the planning process is reflected on creation and later maintenance of the Identity of Place and life of the Place. Some of the important sources of identity, by no means, are the historic plans prepared through Time for the future settlement development. In this paper, the authors will try to reveal the relation through Time between the planners and the existing place identity elements from the natural environment for the town of Podgorica, from its very beginning of planning history (second half of the 19th century) until the last produced plan in 2014.
POVIJEST NASTANKA GRADA PODGORICE
KROZ URBANISTIÈKO-PLANERSKI PROCES
The modern city of Podgorica, the capital of Montenegro, is nested in the northern part of the Moraèa (Moracha) River valley (Fig. 1), surrounded by a neckless of small hill chains along the three sides (east, north, west) and the marshy coast of Skadar Lake on the south. Geographically, the entire area is intersected by five rivers - Moraèa, Ribnica (flowing through the town itself, and Zeta, Cijevna and Sitnice at the town outskirts. The first names of a settlement (Ribnica and Podgorica) built in this valley must have been derived from one of the rivers name (Ribnica), and later one (Podgorica) as a term meaning ”by the foothill”. The settlement was started up by the river mouth of Ribnica River into Moraèa River, and later by the north foothill side of Gorica hill. The entire wider urban development of Podgorica can be observed through four major historic periods that encompass the years as follows:
a) Roman to Ottoman period (49 BC-1474 AD), b) Ottoman period (1474-1878), c) Principality of Montenegro and Kingdom of Yugoslavia period (1878-1946), d) Post World War II period (1946-today).
a) From Roman to Ottoman Period (49 BC1474 AD) - First settlement records within this area originate from the Roman period when a settlement known as the roman municipality of Doclea12, was built as a part of a Roman Municipium. It was an urban area, walled by a very strong walls and towers, between the riverbanks of three rivers: Zeta, Moraèa and Širalija (Shiraliya) sizing nearly 25 hectares13 and having the only terrestrial access to the nearby Via Narona road across the bridges over Širalija River (westbound) and Moraèa (southbound). The entire settlement layout was a typical Roman one: irregular extended polygon with two main (perpendicular) streets and a square (forum) with a basilica at their intersection. But in the case of Doclea, the main streets were not following a north-south and east-west direction (as was the case with most of Roman towns), but followed the natural environment appearance: the topographic features of the terrain north of the mouth of Zeta and Moraèa Rivers (Fig. 2). Besides these general city appearances and nesting, it is important to mention that the town had the water supply system (aqueduct) directly bringing fresh and clean water from nearby Cijevna River (and possibly Širalija River). The place was destroyed several times but was re-erected and inhabited until the mid of the 9th century.14 Another proof of the importance and a long life of this settlement is the fact that the settlement had two necropolises (cemeteries) planed outside the settlement walls. Today, the area is an archeological site, which was highly devastated by the railway that went right through it (1947/48), by construction of the electric power station, asphalt road, power lines, ravage of the town walls including stone building decoration15, plus numerous illegal house constructions (Fig. 3). Fortunately, the future town spread did not go that direction! Today, there are some professional discussions that the very first Slavic settlement (as
a historic nucleus of today’s Podgorica) was nested atop a small mesa, by the confluence of Ribnica and Zeta River, and named after one of them - Ribnica.16 But, there are no real scientific proofs for that. To the contrary, some recent researches are putting Ribnica settlement in the wider range of Zeta River valley. As the proof for this conclusion they is the fact that there was no case in the history of Montenegro that a settlement would have changed the name from one (Ribnica) to another one (Podgorica17), both of a Slavic origin. Later, the settlement grew and served as a pretty strong trade and customs road point between the Republic of Ragusa (Dubrovnik) and Serbia, interconnecting by road some other places with Ribnica, like Trebinje and Nikšiæ. This first settlement, probably just a hamlet, must have had been a typical unplanned medieval irregular street network
12 The name of a settlement probably originates from the Illyrian tribe known as Docleati, while the Slavic tribes that spread over this area after the 7th century named it Duklja
13 The site was minutely researched by Piero Sticotti, Italian archeologists, between 1896 and 1898. The results were published in a book titled Über die Ergebnisse einer Reise nach Doclea, printed in Anzeiger der Kaiserlichen Akademiae der Wissenschaften, Philosophische-historische Klasse, XLV (1908), Wien and reprinted by Matica Crnogorska and the Association for Culture and Science (under the title: The Roman Municipality of Doclea in Montenegro) in Podgorica, 2000. This is the only graphic presentation of the place found ever since.
14 The long life of this settlement obviously was caused by the fact that the nearness of river was used not only for defense but also for drinking water supplement and watering the near-by fields.
15 Interestingly, by the mid of the same year (July 3rd) the Government of Peoples’ Republic of Montenegro constituted the Institute for Protection and Scientific Research of Cultural Heritage and Natural Values, which announced in 1956 the Duklja site as a heritage monument of national importance. But it was already too late, as the stone material from the site was spread around and used for construction of two basilicas and a church prior the railway construction had started. After the railway has been set in traffic, the new infrastructure (water supply, sewage, electricity and at the end the asphalt road) was introduced into this antic site which created the basic conditions for the
settlement, spread around the little church. There is not much remains of this settlement preserved today to help in better understanding of this Place.
b) Ottoman Period (1474-1878) - Podgorica urban development was interrupted by the Ottoman’s military penetration into this area in the second half of the 15th century. Today we can still witness some of the relicts from Ottoman period - the remains of a triangle shaped military fortress, also known as Depedogen18, at the confluence of two rivers (Moraèa and Ribnica). South of the fortress, an organic street lay-out medieval settlement (Stara Varoš) was later established19 (Fig. 4).
The Moraèa River was never considered as something a settlement would be close to. To the contrary, along the steep river banks (on the top of the mesa) the first palisades were erected around the medieval settlement.
inhabitance of this valuable site. In May 2007 the Republic Institute for heritage Monuments Protection approved a new project for future railway re-development, which considers the removal of the entire railway structures (causeways and pillars) from the site before the end of 2017.
16 The first mentioning of the name Ribnica dates back to 1216, but the real proof for a settlement nested on the mesa overlooking the confluence of Ribnica into Moraèa River is the existence of a small church of St. George dating back to the beginning of the 12th century.
17 The first written data on the name of Podgorica takes us back to the year 1326 when the name was briefly mentioned in a court document which is today stored in Kotor Archives
18 The fortress was built by sultan Mehmed-han between 1474 and 1479 and used as an ammunition warehouse for the Ottoman army.
19 Interestingly, the spread of the settlement was east of Moraèa and south of Ribnica, and has never occurred on the right bank of Moraèa River, as it probably served as a natural defense area from the enemy’s attack from the west.
20 Kneževiæ, Brajoviæ,1987: 13
21 The stone bridge originate from the Roman period, was destroyed by the earthquake in 618 a.d. and restored by the beginning of the 18th century by Hadji Pasha.
22 The both versions of the plan were made by a Russian engineer Vladimir Vorman.
They probably served as an additional defense line against the enemy. Within Stara Varoš, not even at the highest peak of a settlement, there were no public buildings but only several hundred small residential houses built along curving narrow streets.20 The only built structure out-topping the settlement was a Scender-Chaush (or Doganjska) mosque from the 15th century, and the clock tower from the 17th century. They are both still well preserved today. The most impressive infrastructure building that is still holding the image of the Ottoman’s time is, by no means, an old (well conserved and preserved) stone Hadji-Pasha Bridge21 over Ribnica River on the north edge of Stara Varoš. From this period, there are no mapping documents on settlement planning, but some construction remains are revealing the fact helping in dating the construction - the fortress and the wall design provide the proof elements that they were built at the very beginning of the usage of firearms and the gunpowder period. The settlement built outside the fortress, and surrounded by a palisade wall, was irregularly shaped settlement nested on the top of the mesa, with narrow meandering streets and obviously was never planned.
c) Principality of Montenegro and Kingdom of Yugoslavia Period (1878-1946) - After the Berlin Congress (1878), the town of Podgorica was united with Montenegro, and that year is considered to be the end of Ottoman period and the beginning of a new one having sudden growth of incoming residential population. By the year 1878, Podgorica had some 1,500 houses and nearly 8,000 residents, the number that had a constant tendency in growth. In order to enable the ”organized” accommodation for the increasing number of residents, for the area out of Stara Varoš limits, the first urban plan for settlement enlargement was prepared in 1879.22 According to the plan, the area planned for a new town
was spread north-west from the confluence of Ribnica into Moraèa River. Following the ideas of neoclassicism in urban planning, two versions of a new city plan were proposed: both based on a grid street network with slight modification of the street direction of the New Town (Fig. 5) planned on the other side of Moraèa River. The first one had the same direction of a street grid layout for Nova Varoš and the New Town. In the second version, the street grid layout was rotated counterclockwise for some 15 degrees. But somehow, none of the versions paid any attention to the existence of two rivers, as the proposed town development occupied the area far from the rivers and their features. The closest point, in both plan versions, where the town reached the river remained the samethe Hadji-Pasha Bridge. Both versions of the plan proposed the mayor redevelopment for Stara Varoš (Fig. 5) rolling over the inherited street network, which fortunately has not happened ever since. But, most of the carried out urban development proposal for Nova Varoš followed the Vorman’s ideas, and they are notable in today’s layout of Podgorica: a strict street grid network, forming rectangle shaped town blocks. The street layout of a New Town was totally different: the main concept was based on three main streets forming the shape of a letter Y. The idea was to have a center of a New Town by the junction of these, main ”Boulevards” (ending nowhere). The second plan version had a road which was planned to follow slightly the Moraèa River bend, but that was all that could be recognized as a connection with sur-
rounding natural features the river. On both rivers there were two planed bridges. The Vorman’s plan stayed ”in power” until the end of the World War II, although the town has out-grown the planned number of residents reaching nearly over 13,000 between the WWs, and having over 16,000 residents by the end of WWII.23 The rivers within a town image remained the same - ”uncontrolled natural wilderness” that divided the town.
d) Post WWII Period (1946-2014) - The first interventions within Podgorica after the end of WWII were focused upon the reconstruction of the destroyed parts of Nova Varoš and supporting infrastructure. By the end of 1946 a Decision on preparing a General Plan for a new Podgorica24 was adopted, and core planning idea25 was to locate the railway station into the New Town area (west of Moraèa River) obviously trying artificially to move the town spread westbound, across the Moraèa River. But the planning idea was grounded in 1948 by the Ministry of traffic Decision by which the railway and the station had to be relocated, this time east of Moraèa. Due to the lack of skilled planners in Montenegro, the republic government of Montenegro passed the General Plan preparation to the Fed-
23 During the WWII Podgorica was heavily bombarded - most of residential and public buildings were destroyed (more than 80%), along with the entire town infrastructure.
24 On July 13th 1946 the City Council changed the town name from Podgorica to Titograd.
25 An architect Vujadin Popoviæ was named for a principle planer.
eral Urban Institute.26 The plan was prepared in 1950 (Fig. 6) but was not adopted due to many objections.27 The main planning objection was cutting down the residential areas based on demographic miss-planning - by the year 2000 the plan estimated a city to have only 60,000 residents! Most of the city functions were planned west of Moraèa although most of them existed already east of Moraèa. The railway and main roads were planned to serve the city area east of Moraèa River. The main boulevard between Nova Varoš and the New Town was planned to end at the New Town square, slightly far from the Moraèa River crossing. East side was planned to host cultural and public and government buildings, while the west one was planned for new residential areas. The plan proposed a wide greenbelt along Moraèa River without any traffic, which was to be over-passed by five bridges, but there were no other planning ordinances on what to use the greenbelt for. Compared to Vorman’s plan, there was a small improvement on validation of natural features and values in urban planning: the layout of the street-network west of Moraèa River was curved28 and somehow parallel with the foothill line of Malo brdo. Regarding
26 This time an architect Ljubo Iliæ was named for a principal planner.
27 Besides moving the existing town (political) functions west of Moraèa, while the railway Stara Varoš was to be totally destroyed.
28 Today’s Dalmatinska Street represents a part of that curved street network.
29 This time the principal planner was Miloš Somborski.
the usage of natural features (hills and rivers) in planning of a new town image, that was all!
USVOJENI URBANISTIÈKI PLANOVI PODGORICE
Most of the area planned for the spread of Titograd (Podgorica) was built up by illegal housing, due to the enormous migration of people to Titograd, a core industrial city in Montenegro. After the failure of the Plan from 1950, a new planning group29 was formed and they made a new proposal partially based on the first Vorman’s plan. The plan concept was based on forming three clearly recognized sub-centers: Stara Varoš, Nova Varoš and New Town. The New Town was planned over the open, unbuilt space west of Moraèa River, which was to be connected by Nova Varoš by a wide boulevard west of Moraèa (Fig. 7). After reaching a certain point in space (new center) the boulevard was to split into two avenues ending (again) nowhere! Instead of stipulating preparation of more detailed zoning plans for unbuilt areas, the author prepared and submitted to the City council set of detailed plans for city blocks (with outlines of buildings) in scale 1:2500, along with related infrastructural plans. Regardless the overdetailed presentation of blocks and the expressed natural landscaping along the river banks, the critiques were focused upon the urban concept - a rigid street network and three town parts divided by the rivers. The
Fig. 8 General plan for Titograd, 1964
Sl. 8. Generalni plan Titograda iz 1964.
Fig. 9 Landscaped areas within GUP limits
Sl. 9. Krajobrazne površine unutar podruèja obuhvata GUP-a
Fig. 10 General Urban Regulation - General Landuse (2014), excerpt Sl. 10. Generalna urbanistièka regulacija - Opæa namjena površina (2014.), izvod
Fig. 11 General Urban Regulation - Planning Conditions for Space Development (2014), excerpt Sl. 11. Generalna urbanistièka regulacija - Režimi ureðenja prostora (2014.), izvod
only reasonable street lay-out was the one of a boulevard connecting the New Center and Nova Varoš, ending on Ribnica river bank. The plan was made for the city which was to reach the number of 45,000 residents by the year 1975. Again, the natural features values and importance of rivers have not been recognized - the wide area along the river banks remained ”natural site” (without any possible usage ideas), creating a very large distance between the New buildings and the river bank. Still, some essential ideas of this plan have been realized and can be recognized in the street network of today’s Podgorica.
Due to the unplanned and increasing migration into the capital, the (planned) residential areas, (along with some public functions) became too small for the future-to-become town residents. The plan had to be amended by enlarging residential areas and that process started at the beginning of 1961 by the Institute of Urban Planning in Titograd.30 The plan covered the area of 29 km2 and was meant for 85,000 residents to reach by the year 1990 (nearly double compared to Somborski Plan) and was adopted in 1964 (Fig. 8). This time four city cores were set and named: Stara Varoš, Nova Varoš, Kruševac and Zagoriè. The natural devious river bed of Moraèa and Ribnica contrasted to rigid orthogonal street network created large areas of greenery.31 The plan was prize awarded, although there were a lot of complains, like: the wide greenbelts along rivers (on both sides) served only as a ”protection” zone between the
built areas on both Moraèa river banks; having no relations and connection with them and in between. However, this ”green” plan put the city of Titograd to be the second city in former Yugoslavia having in mind square meters of greenery per capita. as the green areas near Moraèa and Ribnica were sized to over 120 hectares. Another visionary idea of this Plan for the establishment of river importance within a city was the construction of two dams - one each, on Moraèa and Ribnica. This water regulation flow by the dams was planned to raise the water level during summer months (when the quantity of water is very low) and help in creating and maintenance of ponds and artificial lakes within recreational areas along the rivers. The green areas along rivers were to help in cooling down the city temperature during summer. Unfortunately, nothing of that idea was realized, ever since.
Following the ordinances of the Urban and Regional Physical Planning Act32 first steps were undertaken towards another revision of the GUP. For the next generation of the GUP several preliminary guidelines were outlined in 1972.33 We would like to stress out some of them:
a) life of residents to be routed towards rivers, b) usage of natural values through protection of cultural and natural heritage,
c) distribution of city functions in accordance with the results of natural environment analyses,
d) enlarge the accessibility to river banks and northbound areas.
These preliminary research and guidelines34 pointed out that within the GUP coverage there were more than 400 hectares of forest and other natural landscaped areas. But, there were no guidelines on how to connect these natural landscaped areas with the planned ones within the built areas (parks, sport and recreation, playgrounds…). The average size of a landscaped area within residential communities ranged between 8 and 10 m2 per resident. As it can be observed on graphic analysis of the existing landuse within GUP limits (Fig. 9), the areas along river banks
30 An architect prof. Uroš Martinoviæ was assigned as a principal planning consulter, and he kept most of Somborski plan idea and enlarged the town residential development areas west of Moraèa River.
31 Ivanoviæ, 1974: 113
32 ”Službeni list SR Crne Gore”, 36/64, 28/71 and 29/73.
33 *** 1972: 30-32
34 The very same guidelines were outlined during the process of preparing Physical Urban Plan that was adopted in 2014, which indicates that not many of them originating from the GUP of 1972 have not been realized ever since.
35 If the density is calculated according to the planned area and the number of planned number of residents we
were planned for sport and recreation usage, but no solution or planning model was stated on how to master the difference of levels between river banks and the area where the sport and recreation was planned: there was no space that could have been used as a ”link” between these planned recreational and public parks with the landscape of the river banks. The rivers were still ”excluded” from the image of the city, and no planning ordinances regarding the river appearance and preservation or maintenance within the city limit were mentioned.
The GUP, which was adopted in 1974, covered the area sizing more than 89 km2 and was planned to fulfill the needs of nearly 140,000 residents by the year 1991. Compared to the previous one, this GUP ”opened” some new city cores. There were no significant changes compared to the GUP (1964) concept, except for one portion of Moraèa River bank being planned for exhibition functions (which has never been realized). Neverthe-less, in 1975 a plan for regulation of the rivers confluence was prepared by an architect Vasilije Kneževiæ, and the regulation lasted until 1981. The regulation comprised the Hadji Pasha Bridge and both Ribnica banks next to the confluence into Moraèa River. This is still the only regulated access to the river, ever since.
The revision of the GUP in 1990 covered the area of nearly 85 km2, and planned for 142,000 residents.35 It has emphasized the need for re-location for most of the industry nested next to the town center. The importance of rivers within the town was the topic, again - the river banks of Moraèa and Ribnica were planned to have bike lanes, along with numerous pedestrian walks through the landscaped area, but there were no special planning ordinances how to preserve the natural character of the river banks. As a part of tourism development there was a proposal for a recreational center on Moraèa River that would, besides swimming and different sport fields have some accommodation buildings (hotels, motels, bungalows). Archeological site of old Duklja was planned to become
get a very low density - bellow 20 residents per hectare. The reason for that is: the plan was covering a lot of surrounding rural areas, without building areas, but no planning ordinances regarding the conservation and preservation of natural features that help in creating the identity of a city.
36 Physical urban Plan of Podgorica was produced as a joint venture project between URBI Montenegro and WINsoft from Podgorica in coordination with Urban Institute of Slovenia and Geateh from Ljubljana. The Plan was prepared using topographic maps in two scales - 1:50000 and 1:25000. The latter scale was used for more detailed presentation of the City area itself, while the larger scale covered the whole entire City-area.
Plans for Podgorica (Titograd)
urbanistièke planove Podgorice
Planning issues about river appearance within the city image
River recognized as a natural value in the city River banks used to infiltrate greenery into the city Area next to river banks used for recreation Recognized connection between rivers and the city Approach to the river for residents Street network and the natural issues (river flow and adjacent hills)
Vorman’s Plan (1879) / General Plan (1950)
General Plan (1957)
General Urban Plan (1964)
General Urban Plan (1974)
Plan for river regulation (1975)
General Urban Plan (1990)
PUP (2014)
connected with rivers and green network of Titograd. The height of buildings next to rivers and the recreational areas was limited to P+1, maximum in order to maintain the natural appearance of rivers as much as possible.
The Physical Urban Plan of Podgorica, adopted in 2014, presented two spatial observation of the City: first as it was at the moment of preparing the Plan, and second as it should look like in 20 years. The whole process was performed in a much comprehended manner than in previous plans. Many cartographic presentations were prepared in different scales (ranging from 1:50000 to 1:5000). But still, the natural features (rivers and near-by hills) in the future city image were not recognized. Looking at the physical planning document from 201436 someone can easily distinguish the river flows and understand that their appearance within the city has to be observed and planned as a whole (Fig. 10). However, the map no. 16 of the same Plan, represents the areas for which the more detailed plans have to be prepared and adopted, and it becomes obvious that the central city area (the confluence of Ribnica and Moraèa River) has been divided over six detailed plans (Fig. 11), each dealing with one side or just one portion of the river bank, as the borderline between areas was set in the middle of the river bed! Even if each planner had in mind all the best with river bank image preservation, it is clear that without an overall plan setting general ordinances for how to incorporate rivers into the city life, it would be impossible to expect that these plans would drive towards the desired river curtilage appearance. Each of them would do it in own way and the result would be... The very similar planning relation was given to the existing hills within the GUP boundary. Luckily or not, not much of the proposed ideas had been realized (Fig. 12) and the natu-
ral river banks, for most of the river length through the city, are pristine and waiting for a proper recognition and incorporation within the city image. They were just something that has to be spanned over by new bridges, revealing the architectural ideas for that kind of buildings. The natural features of Podgorica are still waiting to be recognized and evaluated adequately in future.
In urban planning it is difficult to define a unique and universal planning methodology or a model that would preserve the values of a certain PLACE. But one step ahead in this process is, obviously, the evaluation of existing values and their possible implementation in future plans. This would help in defining planning goals that would work and help in preserving values that could be used in creation the unique image of a Place. Consequently, this paper focused on bringing to surface how the fact that a city of Podgorica has two rivers and hills was recognized through time and plan making. Rivers are considered to be city lungs; they are places of recreation and enjoyment for their residents. Unfortunately, throughout urban planning history of Podgorica this was neglected or just put aside. In this paper the authors tried to search for some of the issues about the rivers and how they were recognized and used in planning process:
rivers as a natural value of a city (mentioned in ordinances and recognized in graphic), river banks as green veins penetrating the city area (as a natural feature or planned one), usage of river bank areas for recreation (active or just walking and strolling), rivers connecting the city (by bridges or similar landuse on both sides), approachability to rivers (physical), relation between natural features and street network (following the appearance or not). The results were not very promising, as it can be noticed today that most of the river banks within Podgorica area remained ”natural” areas, covered by trees and bushes (in most of the plans it was noted as forest!), not allowing much of the river access for residents. In order to preserve all the values the rivers have it is of crucial importance do define one single obligatory urban (or even landscape) plan for a town section that would encompass the most important river sections (with both, banks and surrounding landuse), including all existing cultural and built values, rather than splitting the area into several detailed plans that were or will be prepared by several different planning groups. In planning history Podgorica had one of that kind (1974) but was not put into action!
1. Doderoviæ, M.; Ivanoviæ, Z. (2012.), Uvoðenje reda u prostor Crne Gore, ”Matica”, Matica Crnogorska: 101-120, Podgorica
2. Gelichi, S.; Negrelli, C.; Leard, S.; Sabbionesi, L.; Belcari, R. (2012.), Duklja na kraju antièkog doba. Studije i istraživanja istorije jednog napuštenog grada Prevalitanije, Nova Antièka Duklja III, Zbornik radova, JU Muzeji i galerije Podgorice: 7-40, Podgorica
3. Ivanoviæ, Z. (1974.), Urbano geografske promjene u razvitku Titograda, Skupština opštine Titograd, Odjeljenje za komunalne poslove i urbanizam, Titograd
4. Lipovac, N. (1997.), Space and Place, ”Prostor”, 5: 1-34, Zagreb
5. Lipovac, N. (2000.), Planning as a Function of Preserving the Identity of Place, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Zagreb - University of California at Berkeley
6. Lipovac, N.; Popoviæ, S.; Robina, M. (2015.), The Understanding of Professional and Legal Terms in Physical Planning - Better Protection of Cultural Heritage, in: Cultural Heritage - Possibilities for Spatial and Economic Development, HERU Conference Proceedings: 48-53, Zagreb
7. Lukerman, F.K. (1964.), Geography as a Formal Intellectual Discipline and the Way in Which it Contributes to Human Knowledge, „The Canadian Geographer”, 8 (4): 167-172, Montreal
8. Mijoviæ, P. (1965.), Istorijske anglomeracije u urbanizmu Titograda, Zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture Socijalistièke Republike Crne Gore, Cetinje
9. Mijoviæ, P. (1970.a), Tragom drevnih kultura Crne Gore, Grafièki zavod, Titograd
10. Mijoviæ, P. (1970.b), Ozloglašeno nasljeðe, Obod, Cetinje
11. Miliæ, B. (1974.), Generalni urbanistièki projekat Titograda, Republièki zavod za urbanizam i projektovanje, Titograd
12. Palermo, P.C.; Ponzini, D. (2014.), Place-making and Urban Development: New challenges for contemporary planning and design (Regions and Cities), Routledge, Oxon - New York
13. Peroviæ, M. (2008.), Iskustva prošlosti, Graðevinska knjiga, Beograd
14. Popoviæ, G.S.; Vuksanoviæ, D. (2006.), Arhitektonski atlas Crne Gore/ Architectural Atlas of Montenegro, GTZ - German Technical Cooperation, Podgorica
15. Popoviæ, G.S. (2010.), Three Examples Of Montenegro City Design (Danilovgrad, Nikšiæ, Podgorica), Meðunarodni nauèni skup Graðevinarstvo - nauka i praksa, 15.-19.2., (2): 1209-1225, Žabljak
16. Popoviæ, G.S. (2015.), Re-Ekvilibracija (Ponovno oživljavanje) Stare Varoši - Podgorica, „Forum”, 33: 41-44, Podgorica
17. Sticotti, P. (1908.), Über die Ergebnisse einer Reise nach Doclea, Anzeiger der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophischehistorische Klasse, XLV (1908), Wien
18. Vlahoviæ, S. (2015.), Diskontinuitet veze grada s rijekama - Podgorica, diplomski rad na Arhitektonskom fakultetu Univerziteta Crne Gore
19. *** (1974.), Generalni urbanistièki plan - Titograd, predkoncepcija 1, Republièki zavod za urbanizam i projektovanje, Titograd
20. *** (2005.), Arhitektonski atlas Crne Gore, Ministarstvo za ekonomski razvoj, Podgorica
Sources
Izvori
Internet Sources
Internetski izvori
1. http://antickadukljacg.com/pdfs/ZbornikIII.pdf [20/3/2016]
2. http://www.podgorica.me/sites/podgorica.me /files/Urbanizam/PUPnacrt [20/3/2016]
Illustration Sources
Izvori ilustracija
Fig. 1 N. Lipovac
Fig. 2 Gelichi, et al., 2012: 12 (originally prepared by Piero Sticotti in 1913)
Fig. 3 Google maps [25/3/2016]
Fig. 4 Google maps [25/3/2016]
Fig. 5 Ivanoviæ, 1974: 68
Fig. 6 Ivanoviæ, 1974: 70
Fig. 7 Miliæ, 1974
Fig. 8 Miliæ, 1974
Fig. 9 GUP Titograd, predkoncepcija 1 (1972): 201
Fig. 10 http://www.podgorica.me/sites/podgorica.me/files/Urbanizam/PUPnacrt
Fig. 11 http://www.podgorica.me/sites/podgorica.me/files/Urbanizam/PUPnacrt
Fig. 12 N. Lipovac
Summary Sažetak
Izrada prostornoplanske dokumentacije za gradove i naselja u Crnoj Gori novijega je datuma. Jedan od malobrojnih gradova za koji je raðena urbanistièka dokumentacija koja bi odredila buduæi razvoj grada jest Podgorica (Titograd). U ovome je radu autorsko istraživanje bilo usmjereno na postojeæu i dostupnu prostornoplansku dokumentaciju izraðenu za grad Podgoricu u Crnoj Gori u posljednjih 140 godina. U provedenom istraživanju naglasak je dan na analizu dostupnoga pisanog i kartografskog dijela pojedinih planova, ocjenu planerskog odnosa i pristup prema postojeæim vrijednostima iz prirodnog okoliša koji utjeèu na stvaranje slike grada, kao i jesu li i kako su steèene spoznaje ugraðene u te planove. Tu se ponajprije misli na pojavnost rijeke(a) u prostoru nekog naselja i njezine uloge u stvaranju i održavanju slike grada. Povijest nastanka grada Podgorice može se promatrati tijekom èetiriju glavnih razdoblja: razdoblje od nastanka u antièko doba pa do 1474. god., razdoblje od 1474. do 1878., razdoblje od 1878. do 1946. i razdoblje od 1946. do 2014. godine. Jasno je bilo veæ na samom poèetku istraživanja da se stvarna prostornoplanska dokumentacija poèela izraðivati tek u treæem razdoblju, ali u stvaranju najranije slike nastanka naselja pomogle su postojeæe skice nastale tijekom provedenih arheoloških istraživanja antièkoga lokaliteta. Za podruèje grada Podgorice (Titograda) od 1879. god. do danas izraðeno je sedam regulacijskih ili generalnih (prostornih) planova ureðenja. Svaki je od njih na neki svoj naèin promatrao širenje poèetne jezgre naselja - Stare Varoši na ušæu rijeke Ribnice u rijeku Moraèu. To su tzv. Vormanov plan regulacije (1879.), Generalni plan Titograda iz 1950., 1957. i 1964. godine te Generalni urbanistièki plan Titograda iz 1974. i 1990. godine. Izradi svakoga od ovih planova prethodila je izrada odreðenih smjernica od strane vlasti. Posljednji u nizu izraðenih planova za Podgoricu (nekadašnji Titograd) jest Prostorni urbanistièki plan grada Podgorice iz 2014. godine.
Biographies
Biografije
SVETISLAV G. POPOVIÆ - Received his Ph.D. in 2010 at Belgrade University. The research is focused on history of making cities in Montenegro and related legislation in Urban Planning. Wrote numerous papers at Congresses and Symposiums and four books.
NENAD LIPOVAC - Received his Ph.D. in 2000 at Zagreb and Berkeley University. Fulbright postdoc researcher at UC Berkeley. The research is focused on professional and legal terminology in planning. Author of 5 books out of which the English-Croatian Professional Glossary for Urban and Physical Planners (2014) is the outstanding.
SANJA VLAHOVIÆ - Graduated in 2015. Received several scholarships and prizes on International exhibitions. Now attending Doctoral Study at the Faculty of Architecture in Zagreb.
Temelje buduæega razvoja Podgorice svakako je zacrtao tzv. Vormanov plan koji je kroz prijedlog nove prometne mreže predložio stvaranje tri prostorne cjeline grada (Stara Varoš, Nova Varoš i Novi Grad) u odnosu na položaj rijeka Moraèe i Ribnice. Ova se zamisao provlaèila i kroz sve sljedeæe urbanistièke planove, s manjim odstupanjima u osnovnoj uliènoj mreži. Meðutim, svi planovi do 1974. predlagali su velike prostorne promjene u najstarijem dijelu Podgorice - Staroj Varoši. Sreæom, ništa po tome nije postupljeno, pa je i dandanas Stara Varoš ostala nedirnuta srednjovjekovna prostorna jedinica grada. Stoga je vrlo važno za to podruèje provesti vrlo detaljnu konzervatorsku studiju koje bi se smjernice ugradile u buduæu urbanistièku dokumentaciju grada. Èinjenica da prostorom planiranim za razvoj grada protjeèu dvije rijeke i nalaze se velike ozelenjene površine te da sve to ima vrlo veliku prirodnu vrijednost, kao i vrijednost za život i rad stanovnika, prepoznata je tek u tijeku izrade smjernica za izradu GUP-a 1974. godine. Nažalost, sve je ostalo u tim dobro sroèenim smjernicama o potrebi približavanja rijeke gradu i približavanja stanovnika rijeci - obala ovih dviju rijeka i nadalje je ostala ‘vrlo prirodna’ i bez moguænosti pristupa do same vode te korištenja njihovih obala za šetnju, rekreaciju i sl., osim u jednome vrlo malom dijelu koji je ureðen temeljem detaljnog plana ureðenja dijela rijeka Moraèe i Ribnice. ‘Prirodni’ pojasi uz rijeke ostaju i nadalje prostori koji razdvajaju (a ne spajaju) pojedine dijelove grada, a to nikako ne ide u prilog suvremenoj planerskoj želji da se prirodne vrijednosti èuvaju i štite kako bi postale sastavni dio nekoga naselja i prepoznatljive (postojeæe ili nanovo stvorene) slike, u ovome sluèajugrada Podgorice. Pokušaji da se dijelovi grada uz rijeke ili brda pretvore u sportsko-rekreacijske površine samo su djelomièno planski ostvareni (i to novom generacijom planova iz 2014.), ali ništa cjelovito. Možda je jedan od razloga to što su predlagani zahvati promatrani odvojeno, bez nužnog pro-
mišljanja o potrebi cjelovitoga sagledavanja prirodnih prostora u gradu.
Autori ovoga istraživanja smatraju kako je upravo sada pravi trenutak da se izradom odgovarajuæih studija (na temelju novoutvrðenih modela u planiranju i zaštiti prostora) o procjeni stvarnoga stanja èimbenika iz prirodne i kulturne baštine spoznaju vrijednosti dijela prirodnog okoliša koji se nalazi unutar podruèja Podgorice te temeljem suvremenih znanstvenih spoznaja predlože modeli i planerski koraci k uvrštavanju prirodnih vrijednosti i pojavnosti u sadašnji i buduæi (planirani) život grada i njegovih stanovnika. Potrebno je ponajprije shvatiti da se prirodne znaèajke prostora, primjericerijeka i obala, ne smiju gledati unutar umjetno stvorenih granica pojedinih detaljnijih prostornoplanskih dokumenata (pogotovo gdje su razdvojene umjetnim granicama koje idu ‘sredinom rijeènog toka’), veæ iskljuèivo kao jedinstveni prostor koji se uvlaèi u tkivo grada. Samo na taj naèin planer æe uspjeti saèuvati postojeæu prepoznatljivost ili stvoriti novu prepoznatljivost mjesta koje æe služiti na zadovoljstvo svim stanovnicima i posjetiteljima toga mjesta (grada).
Prostor i Mjesto - pojmovi su koje svaki planer mora spoznati pri postupku izrade prostornoplanske dokumentacije bilo koje razine. Da bi se spoznao dio prostora, moraju se spoznati osnovne odrednice, a na prvome mjestu granica obuhvata promatranoga prostora. U urbanistièkom i prostornom planiranju to je tehnièka granica odreðena na razini drugih zakona ili planova višega reda. Da bi se spoznale sve vrijednosti toga mjesta, nužno je provesti iscrpnu analizu svih postojeæih vrijednosti i utvrditi smjernice za njihovo održavanje, poboljšavanje i ugradbu u planske odrednice kojima se postiže sveukupan planski i gospodarski rast odreðenoga mjesta (prostora). Jedino æe se na taj naèin stvoriti planerski uvjeti da se sve tako spoznate i ocijenjene vrijednosti ugrade u planski dokument i pomognu u buduæem razvoju grada.
SVETISLAV G. POPOVIÆ NENAD LIPOVAC SANJA VLAHOVIÆ
SVETISLAV G. POPOVIÆ - Doktorirao je 2010. na Univerzitetu u Beogradu. Istraživaèki rad usmjeren mu je na povijest nastanka naselja u Crnoj Gori i zakonodavstvu u odnosu na urbanistièko planiranje. Napisao je brojne radove za izlaganja na meðunarodnim kongresima i èetiri knjige.
NENAD LIPOVAC - Doktorirao je 2000. na zagrebaèkom Sveuèilištu i UC Berkeley. Dobitnik je Fulbrightove stipendije na UC Berkeley. Trenutni njegov istraživaèki rad usmjeren je na struène i zakonodavne planerske pojmove. Autor je pet knjiga, od kojih se posebno istièe posljednja: English-Croatian Professional Glossary for Urban and Physical Planners (2014.).
SANJA VLAHOVIÆ - Diplomirala je 2015. Dobitnica je velikog broja stipendija i nagrada na meðunarodnim izložbama. Trenutno je na doktorskom studiju Arhitektonskog fakulteta u Zagrebu.
1 University of Camerino
School of Architecture&Design
IT - 63100 Ascoli Piceno, Colle dell’Annunziata, Viale della Rimembranza
2 University of Zagreb
Faculty of Architecture
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26 flaviostimilli@gmail.com mos@arhitekt.hr massimo.sargolini@unicam.it
Subject Review
UDC 71:796.03(4)”20”
Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning
2.01.02. - Urban and Physical Planning
Article Received / Accepted: 2. 5. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
1 Sveuèilište u Camerinu Fakultet arhitekture i dizajna
IT - 63100 Ascoli Piceno, Colle dell’Annunziata, Viale della Rimembranza
2 Sveuèilište u Zagrebu Arhitektonski fakultet
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26 flaviostimilli@gmail.com mos@arhitekt.hr massimo.sargolini@unicam.it
Pregledni znanstveni èlanak
UDK 71:796.03(4)”20” Tehnièke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam 2.01.02. - Urbanizam i prostorno planiranje Èlanak primljen / prihvaæen: 2. 5. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
regional planning
sports facilities
territorial impact
transport infrastructures
Winter Olympics
In the modern Winter Olympics, the landscape and territorial impact of sports facilities and infrastructures, especially the transportation network required to connect the host city with the mountain venues, is a major challenging issue, matter of concern to planners. Three case studies are compared from this viewpoint, to point out common and different problems, strategies and outcomes: Turin 2006, Sochi 2014 and the plan for Krakow 2022.
prostorno planiranje sportski objekti utjecaj na teritorij prometne infrastrukture Zimske olimpijske igre
U modernim Zimskim olimpijskim igrama utjecaj sportskih graðevina i infrastrukture na teritorij i krajolik, posebice prometne mreže potrebne za povezivanje grada domaæina sa sportskim terenima u planinama, jedan je od glavnih izazovnih problema - pitanje od posebne važnosti za planere. S planerskoga motrišta analizirana su tri sluèaja koja ukazuju na zajednièke i razlièite probleme, strategije i posljedice: Torino 2006., Soèi 2014. i plan za Krakov 2022.
Themodern Winter Olympics has a momentous impact, for better or worse, on the host city and region. Whereas Summer Olympics is usually held in just one, though large, urban area, its younger sister demands not only for a convenient host city, but for an additional number of mountain venues, more or less afar, affecting large extents of the territory. The spatial changes brought about by the Games can be defined as Olympic territorialisation.1 This process can enhance the mobility system and improve the access to mountains, as well as revive local economy, boost tourism and launch internationally the city image and the regional branding.2 On the other hand, it can affect in the negative the environmental quality and landscape identity3, and produce an increase in the cost of living and local taxation. Depending on many variables, different consequences appear in the short, medium and long run.4
Through a comparative analysis, this paper outlines and discusses the regional planning strategies, the models of intervention and landscape protection, as well as the territorial legacies of the Winter Olympics, in three case studies. Being a part of the research project Heritage Urbanism [HERU] 5, the study has been developed by means of the HERUproject approach and research tools.6 The aim is to point out common and different spatial constraints, challenges and outcomes of the Games, through the four-steps HERU
method 7 and with the additional purpose of trying out its potential and flexibility (as it is tested here in the broader field of regional studies and planning).
Scope of the research - In the last decades, due to the international promotion of the event and to some changes in the Olympic disciplines and regulations, the Winter Games has grown tremendously in every respect (e.g. participating countries, sport disciplines, athletes and team officials, technical officials, logistical requirements, new communication and media, higher level of services). In turn, also the size and number of the required transportation and sports facilities have increased very much8, so the research is limited to compare the European Winter Olympics of the last 20 years.
Out of the latest 5 editions, only 2 took place in a European context - Turin 2006 and Sochi 20149 - but a 3rd case is included here, although not implemented and just in the form of a plan: it is the project for Krakow 2022, which really had good chance of succeeding10, if only a referendum had not given a negative response.11 Nevertheless, researches went forward, as they were primarily aimed at taking charge of the regional issues, envisioning future scenarios and drawing up
1 This term expresses the ”production” and transformation of territory - carried out through human activities and freighted up with anthropological value - which, with the Olympics, reaches an unusual and challenging peak [cf. Dansero, Mela, 2007 and Dansero, Puttilli, 2010].
2 Sometimes, it is even sufficient to participate in the Olympic bidding process [Abebe, et al., 2014], which is the case of Krakow 2022 (the plan was in fact aborted after a referendum; cf. next section, note 11).
3 Cf. Chappelet, 2008
4 Cf. Essex, Chalkley, 2004
5 Urban and Spatial Models for Revival and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage: the project is financed by the Croatian Science Foundation [HERU 2032] and is been carrying out at the Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb.
6 It is also the result and continuation of previous studies undertaken by the School of Architecture and Design, University of Camerino (Italy), which has signed recently an international agreement with the Faculty of Architecture in Zagreb and is cooperating, among others, in the HERU project too: the research is in fact the follow-up of a study begun in 2012, when the School of Architecture and Design was engaged in the discussion of a preliminary plan supporting the Polish-Slovak bid for 2022 Winter Olympics. Several master theses and participations in international conferences followed (cf. note 14) and the Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb, was finally involved (in particular, the Department of Urban Planning, Spatial Planning and Landscape Architecture).
7 More in Methodology
8 Cf. Chalkley, Essex, 2002
9 Whether Sochi is properly and definitely included in (the concept of) Europe or not, it might be a matter of some debate; but according to the common geographical definition of Europe (that is the land lying westward of the watershed divides of the Ural and the Caucasus Mountains), Sochi does fall - at least physically - within the Old Continent.
10 Kozłowska, 2014
possible planning solutions, whether or not the bid would come out successfully.12
Literature review and conceptual framework
- Given the complexity of a Winter Olympics, the range of related studies in scientific literature is very broad and heterogeneous. This is of no surprise, since the principal subject put into play before, during and after the Games, is spatial planning, which includes a variety of disciplines, from economy to environment, history, tourism, transport, lanscape design, people engagement, etc. (in particular, for transportation issues, cf. Bovy, 2014). However, little has been written about cultural landscapes13 in the context of a Winter Olympics; so this study is also aimed, at least partially, to make up for this lack. Moreover, owing to the fact that 10 years have passed since the Turin Olympiad, while just a couple since the last edition in Sochi, the number and spectrum of available references is different in the two cases. Most of literature about Sochi is concerned with environmental topics (cf. especially Müller), while the scientific approach to Turin 2006 is more comprehensive and ”balanced”. The plan for Krakow 2022, instead, is analised basically on the ground of the authors’ direct experiences in Poland14 and few published works.
11 Krakow is not alone in the list of withdrawals; in the only bid for the 2022 Winter Olympics, as many as 7 other European cities renounced, mostly after popular consultations: Barcelona, Munich, Davos, St. Moritz, Stockholm, Lviv and Oslo. Considering that the Games in the last few years have become so much unpopular among European local communities and that the next 2 Winter Olympics will be held in Asia - respectively in South Korea, Pyeongchang 2018, and China, Beijing 2022 - it is evident how Europe has lost its historical central role, even though it retains a high potential competitiveness and attractiveness and still rates the highest number of the past W. Games.
12 Although not implemented, the Krakow plan has fostered a number of conferences and other initiatives, whose outcomes have contributed to make possible the comparison with Turin and Sochi.
13 This locution refers to a comprehensive and multifaceted concept of space, which includes natural, historical and anthropic elements, representing a complex reality which is hardly divisible in its components.
14 Participation in the 2012, 2013 and 2014 International Mountain Forums in Zakopane; active partnership in the European Interreg project Access2Mountain (Sustainable Mobility and Tourism in Sensitive Areas of the Alps and the Carpathians, 2011-2014); direct involvement in the regional promotion at the Tatrzańska Agencja (the Tatra Agency for Development, Promotion and Culture) in the summer of 2013
15 The Heritage Urbanism method consists of 4 steps: determining the factors of cultural heritage identity; establishing the criteria for evaluation and new interventions in heritage spaces; identifying the historical/existing model and establishing a model for revitalization and enhancement; setting up possible sustainable scenarios [Obad Šæitaroci, et al., 2015].
16 Arresta, Catalano, 2005
17 On the other hand, more questionable and controversial effects were recorded in the Alpine valleys [Pastorelli, 2010]; cf. below in Post-Olympic scenarios
18 Arnold, Foxall, 2014
At any rate, there is already enough material to try a comparison between the three and draw some first conclusions.
Methodology - The study capitalizes on the early outcomes of the HERU project and makes use of its researching method, developed with the purpose of being a scientific and effective tool for the sustainable evaluation and enhancement of Cultural Heritage.15 Given the territorial approach and perspective of this comparative analysis, the method has been adjusted as follow: determining the factors of landscape and territorial identity; establishing the criteria used for landscape and environmental protection during the construction of the Olympic facilities; identifying the spatial models and the planning strategies applied for carrying out the Olympic project; defining and assessing the postOlympic scenarios and drawing out the learned lessons. A research development should follow, aimed at providing specific guidelines/recommendations for the sustainable revival and enhancement of landscape heritage in the context of a Winter Olympics.
PROSTORNO-VREMENSKI KONTEKST I RAZLOZI KANDIDATURE
Turin 2006 - The XX Winter Olympics was spread over many places in a vast territory stretching from Turin, in the high Po valley, to Bardonecchia and Sestriere, the highest municipality in Italy at 2035 m a.sl. The project was sponsored by the Turin city administration that, in the early 90s, envisaged that the mega-sport event could sustain and foster the new plans of urban redevelopment. Turin - commonly known as the city of FIAT, with the main plants and factories of the national automobile company - had been the most important industrial city in Italy since World War II but, already by the end of the 80s, was suffering a dramatic industrial decline. In order to survive and flourish again, it had to reinvent itself, rediscover its rich cultural heritage and figure out some new identity. With this aim, the City Council undertook a plenty of ambitious projects, in an effort to boost local economy and revive the large brownfields left down by the crisis. Therefore, the bid for the Winter Olympics was just a part of an overall bigger strategy16 for the city renewal, and this was not only a good point for winning the competition, but was the very reason of the future Olympic success (especially in terms of positive impacts on the urban area).17
Sochi 2014 - The XXII Winter Olympics was centred in only two areas: one in the Sochi-
Adler conurbation (Greater Sochi) by the Black Sea, and the other in Krasnaya Polyana in the Caucasus Mountains. The project was launched and supported by the central government in Moscow (the Putin’s Games18), while local Administrations played a minor role. However, this is somehow comprehensible, if one considers that Sochi was already the largest resort city in Russia, with more than two million tourists coming each summer from all over the country.19 What is in fact surprising is that Sochi, although very near to the Caucasus Mountains, was not really a winter destination before the Games, but a pleasant seaside town with a humid subtropical climate.20 It holds the record of the warmest Winter Olympics’ host city ever, and both Sochi and the region had to undergo a lot of works and changes, in order to be ready for the event.21
The plan for Krakow 2022 - The issue of chronic traffic congestion between Krakow and Zakopane, due to the backwardness of the regional transportation network, was no doubt one of the main reasons behind the Polish bid for the XXIV Winter Games.22 It arose from a joint initiative of Krakow and the
Małopolska Region, but the first idea was launched already in 1993 by the city of Zakopane (which later on applied for the 2006 Olympics but failed).23 The town, also known as the Polish Winter Capital City, is the highest in Poland, at the very bottom of the Tatra Mountains. It is a nice and renowned resort of ca. 30.000 residents that is actually much bigger, as it features a huge number of tourists all year round.24 However larger it is, Zakopane’s Authorities realized that a Winter Olympics was too great a burden to be sustained by the city alone, and that again they would have poor chance of winning the competition. Thus Krakow took the lead and set up a further cooperation with Jasná Chopok, a small resort on the Slovakian side of the range.
ÈIMBENICI PEJSAŽNOG I PROSTORNOG IDENTITETA
The northern Cottian Alps - While Turin was in search of a new identity, the development prospects of the Alpine valleys were different, since the process of territorialisation and spatial identity-making were proceeding more slowly and continuously (the impact of modernity was more diffuse and, in a way, softer).25 Although modern infrastructures, new ways and techniques of farming, industrial manufacture, winter tourism and the ski industry had entered the region for long and altered the landscape patterns and the image of the northern Cottian Alps to an appreciable extent26, these retained, well preserved, a good deal of their natural and cultural heritage27, which is in fact the main resource of the territory, at the disposal and to the enjoyment of both tourists and locals. Outstanding examples are the old, rich and bio-diverse Alpine forests and pastureswhere grazing is still practiced, both inside
19 Cf. Petersson, Vamling, 2013
20 In particular, since Soviet times, it has been developed as a health resort for the elite of the working class and, later, for the higher social classes of the new Russia. [Scharr, et al., 2012]
21 As a result, the Olympic project has been the most expensive in history.
22 Krasicki, 2014
23 Cf. Berbeka, 2014
24 More than 5 million per year
25 Cf. Ercole, 2006
26 Segre, 2002
27 Dansero, 2002
28 Cf. the outstanding Fenestrelle Fort (Fig. 3)
29 At the very start of the Olympic project, one of these borgate, the ancient Baite di Jossaud near Pragelato, risked to be demolished and rebuilt, because of a real estate speculation. Fortunately, instead, the action was
and outside the numerous natural parksand the plenty of medieval and Savoy’s fortresses28, villages and hamlets (borgate), with remarkable instances of Occitan architecture29 (Fig. 2). Therefore, the landscape structure is complex and heterogeneous - ranging from natural or semi-natural environments to agricultural fields and small settlementsand the spatial arrangement is a balanced amalgam of all components (distributed in harmonic way and with an increasing degree of naturalness from the valleys to the mountain peaks).30 However, the full picture - that is to say the landscape character or identity - is hardly decomposable in its constituents and results from the co-evolution and overlapping of natural processes and human activities, in a region which is marked by a harsh topography (high mountains with steep slopes and deeply carved, narrow valleys) and a low population density31 (Fig. 4).
The Western Caucasus - Until last century (due to the unfavourable subtropical climate), the flat coastal areas of the Sochi Riviera, as well as the valleys and the river floodplains stretching towards the mountains, were an entire expanse of marshy areas, infested with malaria and unsuitable for permanent residence. Although the region was inhabited since long and many civilizations overlapped and followed one another almost
timely stopped and functioned as a positive reference for other similar cases.
30 Dansero, Segre, 2002
31 81/km2, widespread in small towns, mountain villages and resorts and organized in 5 Unions of Mountain Towns and Communities
32 Cf. Guseva, et al., 2010
33 Interestingly, the longest mountain narrow-gauge railway in Russia, for freights, passengers and with a special tourist service, runs through the region of Krasnodar, some 100 km north of Sochi and Krasnaya Polyana.
34 68/km2
35 Sochi National Park, Caucasian State Nature Biosphere Reserve and Western Caucasus UNESCO World Heritage Site
36 Unesco (2000)
37 Or styl witkiewiczowski, after its mostly known interpreter, the architect Stanisław Witkiewicz, who lived and worked in Zakopane by the end of 19th century
seamlessly, they did not succeed in establishing any long-stable dwelling or real town, but kept on moving from place to place, in search of better circumstances. Even in more recent times, when they tried to reclaim the swampy soil for farming, they eventually failed and nothing changed so much until the massive coming of Russians, after the 1917 revolution.32 Then, a number of towns flourished by the Black Sea - mostly along the coast and with an elongated city layout - and several lines of the Russian railways crossed the region and connected the towns with Moscow (from Adler and Sochi via Krasnodar).33
In the Krasnodar region of Western Caucasus, the population density is pretty low34, and people are distributed dishomogeneously over the land. This means a reduced number of small-to-medium size settlements and great extents of unoccupied territory, protected under the umbrella of 3 famous natural parks.35 According to UNESCO experts36, this is one of the two large mountain areas in Europe that has not experienced significant human impact and still features a variety of natural habitats, such as primeval forests, lowlands and glaciers. The coastline conurbation of Greater Sochi is thus in sharp contrast with the prevailing natural environment of the hinterland, and agriculture is confined within a long, narrow strip of land, stretching parallel to the coast just few kilometres away.
The Tatra Mountains - For geomorphologic, climatic and historical reasons, the countryside of the upper part of Małopolska (the Krakow voivodeship), is a multipurpose landscape in which the variety of land uses and patterns is striking all the way up to the very mountains (Fig. 5). The natural scenery within the National Park of High Tatras, instead, is an outstanding example of well-preserved natural environment (Fig. 7), where anyway some traditional activities are practiced yet (such as, first and foremost, sheep grazing). Besides, the region is distinguished by a typical style of vernacular architecture (Styl zakopiański37, Figs. 6, 8), which contributes significantly to the charm of places or genius loci. Since the Tatras chain is the only signifi-
cant mountain range in Poland, people have been attracked since long from all over the country, and population density is relatively high.38 The territory holds a remarkable landscape value, complexity and harmony, but the general equilibrium is also very fragile.
CRITERIA FOR LANDSCAPE PROTECTION DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE OLYMPIC FACILITIES
KRITERIJI OÈUVANJA KRAJOLIKA
KOD IZGRADNJE OLIMPIJSKIH GRAÐEVINA
Turin 2006 - As opposed to the city of Turin (where there was a need for a profound urban renewal, primarily aimed at recovering the abandoned industrial areas), the mountain environment did not demand for momentous changes but for sustainable planning strategies, able to combine economic and tourism development with the protection and enhancement of cultural landscapes. A delicate balance between the anthropogenic components and the (semi)natural environment was at stake, and for the purpose of its
sustainable preservation the Turin Organising Committee applied, for the first time in Italy, the European Strategic Environmental Assessment [SEA].39 This new planning tool, combined with the Environmental Impact Assessment for single works, was definitely useful to avoid some more disruptive impacts on landscape heritage. Besides, the SEA process enabled the development of new capabilities and expertise in regional planning and left an immaterial legacy of precious innovations and best practices.40 Overall, it contributed positively to the project and helped not only to define issues and risks in the first stages, but to monitor the whole project implementation and, partially, even the aftermaths.41 In particular, starting from a comprehensive study of the regional situation, it proceeded with specific descriptions of local areas, providing a detailed report for each of them on the model of a SWOT analysis.42 The principal criteria taken into consideration were: basic characteristics of the area; ongoing dynamics and models of use; spatial and environmental value; significance of the site in relation to the whole region; spatial degradation and critical issues; potential risks; legislative constraints; pressure factors; expected impacts before (work phase), during and after the event; reversibility of the expected impacts; recommended mitigations and/or compensations.
Sochi 2014 - Considered the lack of worldclass level athletic facilities fit for international competitions and the old age and poorness of regional infrastructures (not only the transportation network, but also telecommunications and the energy supply system), the project implementation’s underlying principles were primarily aimed at matching the IOC43 requirements and speeding up a general modernization of regional services. Environmental sustainability should have been pursued in parallel, but most of efforts were made to fulfil efficiency and technological standards44, and little attention was actually paid to landscape issues. On the ground of the extraordinary nature and urgency of the mega-sport event, a number of exceptional measures were taken (even the variation of
38 139/km2
39 CF. Christillin, et al., 2005
40 For instance, in direct connection with the SEA and in support of the Olympic strategic plan, a valuable IT tool was developed by the Italian Military Geographical Institute: the software GISTOR ’06, an advanced Geographical Information System that provided the Organizing Committee with precious computer assistance. [Colella, 2006]
41 Frey, et al., 2008
42 Brunetta, 2002
43 International Olympic Committee
44 See for ex. the advanced sewage plant in Sochi, equipped with tertiary treatment and micro-filtration.
45 Müller, 2014
the protected areas’ boundaries45), allowing for significant deforestation in the Sochi National Park - more than 250 ha in order to make room for the Roza Khutor ski complex (Fig. 10) - and for the construction of the Olympic Park on the coastline (displacing residents from Imeretinskaya Bay46 and worsening the current degradation of the natural potential in the Caucasian Riviera).47
The plan for Krakow 2022 - In compliance with the European directives about environmental impacts and their assessement, one of the provision put forward by the Krakow Olympic plan was the implementation of the SEA. The foreseen criteria for landscape protection and physical intervention were based on the model of Turin 2006, a case well known to Poles, as it prevailed over Zakopane in the bid for the XX Winter Games.48
AND PLANNING STRATEGIES
PROSTORNI MODELI
I STRATEGIJE PLANIRANJA
Turin 2006 (Fig. 9) - Owing to the extensive model of use of the mountain territory and to the spatial dissemination of people and settlements over large areas, the project organizers spread likewise the venues for the typically mountain sports. As for Turin, the Olympic village and the sports facilities (where most of indoor events took place), were located in the Lingotto district and other areas along a huge urban axis - the Turin Central Backbone - which connected them all and gave the city a completely new layout.49 This was made possible by shifting the central station and a long stretch of the railway line beneath the ground level, and by recovering a number of ex-industrial areas and premises.
The major difficulties, thus, were not in the city that was waiting such changes for long, but in the mountains. As many as 12 sites - both within and without 2 main Olympic valleys (Val di Susa and Val Chisone), with 3 Olympic villages, all the venues for outdoor competitions and a couple of indoor arenas - were up to 100 km away both from Turin and from each
46 Wurster, 2013
47 Emergency permissions were issued in Turin too, but mainly in the end of the process, for specific urgent works and only on condition of providing countermeasures, i.e. environmental mitigation/compensation actions.
48 Cf. Kozłowska, 2014
49 Cf. Filippi, Mellano, 2006
50 Bovy, 2006
51 On the French side of the Cottian Alps, instead, one can rely on some very interesting narrow-gauge and lightrail connections (in particular between Briançon, Grenoble, Albertville and Bourg-Saint-Maurice), that make the tourist offer more wide and competitive (Legambiente Italia, 2007).
other. Transportation was therefore a very complex and pressing issue, addressed by a twofold strategy: in the one valley already equipped with a railway track, a rail shuttle service was introduced; in the other, car traffic was prohibited altogether and replaced by a shuttle bus service.50 Unfortunately, all these were temporary measures: if it is true that the road conditions improved significantly and the public transport worked very well during the Games, afterwards the situation went back nearly to square one, with the predominance of private cars and traffic congestion almost every weekend.51
Sochi 2014 (Fig. 11) - The spatial model and strategies behind Sochi 2014 were totally different from whatever experienced before in
the context of a Winter Olympics. For the first time, the plan delivered the construction of 100% new outdoor and indoor venues and, like in the Summer Games, of an entire Olympic Park in the Sochi urban area (Fig. 13).
Given the magnitude of the programme, for the sake of efficiency and for security reasons, everything was focused in only 2 places, at relatively close distance (less than 50 km), the coastal and the mountain cluster. In between, an upgraded mobility system (including several new roads, railways and intermodal hubs52, plus the renovated and expanded airport), allowed for public transport and fast travelling (Fig. 12). Betting on the improved logistics, this huge project had the ambition of converting a sea-side holiday town in a year-round international destina-
tion, by attracting crowds of tourists far beyond the Games. Whilst waiting for that to become fully true and to check its long-run sustainability, what is evident so far is that the Winter Olympics succeeded quite well in terms of the provided transport services, and that its bipolar scheme has increased the contrast between the coastal and the mountain environments, by shortening the travelling distance and the overall relation between each other.53
The plan for Krakow 2022 (Fig. 1) - According to the outlined project for Krakow 2022, the indoor ice games should have been held mostly in Krakow, where the sports facilities, whether renovated, rebuilt or totally new, would have been along an east-west urban axis and linearly connected. The rest of the mountain races would have been shared by several localities, spread on both sides of the Tatra Mountains. It would have been the first Olympics organized by two countries and the Polish-Slovak partnership would have prevented from a number of otherwise needed works, such as forest clearings for new ski slopes, ski lifts, reservoirs for artificial snowmaking etc.54 (Figs. 14, 18).
On the other hand, in order to get all the venues fast and properly connected (the maximum distance being closed to 200 km, from Krakow to Jasná Chopok), the Slovakian involvement would have implied a challenging upgrading of the existing transportation system - that was in fact one of the main purposes of the proponents - including the construction of possible new routes for other means of transport than vehicles.55 As for the Olympic villages, besides the main one in Krakow, a second one should have been placed in Zakopane, close to the mountains and possibly removable after the Games.
52 Cf. Shabarova, 2014
53 Unfortunately, there was little concern about the space in the middle, namely the basin of the river Mzymta, where the new road and rail tracks have altered significantly the valley image and the ecosystem functioning. [cf. Müller, 2014]
54 Notably, there is already a ski-jump facility in Zakopane, where the sport is very popular and the structure is already part of the collective imagination of the region (it was built up in 1925, Fig. 16).
55 There were in fact some hypotheses about new cableways and the possible extension of the Polish railway line (in order to connect it to the more developed Slovakian mountain rail system, Fig. 15), but the project proposal recommended only the enhancement of the backward rail tracks, while most of provisions were aimed at improving, or better to say doubling, the road network.
56 Cf. Bondonio, Mela, 2008
57 Actually, the Olympic project did benefit from a general support of local population not only before or during the event, but also later on: favoured by a clever promotional campaign, people sustained the bid from the very beginning and were looking forward to the Games; the Olympics’ smooth running and success had a positive influence
Turin 2006 - After a decade from the event, the spatial legacy of the Winter Olympics in a long-run perspective can be assessed with some confidence. Once more, a distinction is necessary between Turin and the Mountain Valleys.56 Here, the general improvement of the road network, extremely needed and already planned in any case, could not soften or conceal the negative aftermaths, much more striking and impacting, especially on the landscape image and identity of local communities.57 In particular, as feared58, the 2 most opposed and criticized sports facilities, the skijump complex in Pragelato and the bobsleigh track in Cesana, have turned white elephants: the first, if not officially closed yet, lay down (again) completely abandoned59; and the second, pronounced formally dead in 2014 by the City Council, is still waiting to be (expensively) dismantled60 (Figs. 17, 19).
More controversial is the legacy of the Mountain Olympic Villages in Bardonecchia, Sestriere and Pragelato, and of the 2 ice stadiums in Torre Pellice and Pinerolo. The first have been turned into holiday villages thatowing to their unusual dimension and tourist offer in comparison to the size and number of the surrounding accommodation facilitiesare accused of damaging local economy (by having already caused a fall of rents and a series of economic failures after which, in few years from the games, the tourism influx stopped growing and apparently even regressed).61 While the latter two, underused and with very high costs of maintenance and management, are often at risk of closure.
The Turin urban legacy of the Games is no doubt more positive. Except from one issue
on public opinion too; and this remained largely favourable even after, although with some important differences between the city and the mountain valleys [Guala, 2008]. Even in the case of Sochi, much more discussed and criticized, there was a similar support base for the event [Müller, 2014].
58 Cf. Lazzeroni, Bobbio, 2002 and D’Auria, 2008
59 For few years, the 5 ski-jumps hosted some sports events, but fell in disuse very soon (the last competition was in 2009), remained closed for 4 years, then reopened in 2013 in a revival attempt, but now are again totally unused and lay down in complete state of abandonment.
60 What shall be the destiny of these 2 heavy structures that implied significant clearings of forested areas, impressive excavations and huge investments of money, is still uncertain; on the paper, as stated by the City Council, the hill in Cesana should be returned of its original appearance by an extraordinary ecological restoration, but the process will be for sure a very long and unpredictable one.
61 However, Climate Change too has to be taken into consideration as a severe impact factor on local economy; as far at least as winter tourism is concerned, the Alpine ski season of the last decade has been drastically shortened by high temperatures due to global-warming.
that is still causing troubles (the unsettled reuse of few buildings in the former Olympic village, now occupied by immigrants and refugees), the city has gained many advantages. In addition to a general renovation and improvement of open spaces and building facades, the ex-Olympic arenas have been the stage for different kind of sports, musical and other cultural events; the Turin backbone has provided new public areas and (re) connected different parts of the city; the first line of the city subway was finally completed; and the rest of the Olympic facilities were readapted and sold as residences in the real estate market, or given to the municipality as student dormitories and social housing.
Sochi 2014 - The Sochi post-Olympic scenario is very much uncertain because still in the
process of development. However, thanks to the Games, Sochi has acquired an international prominence and appealing that will last for some time. Once a year, in fact, from 2014 to 2020, the city has been appointed to organize the Russian race of the Formula-1 Championship (which is taking place in the car-racing track that was built all around the Olympic park) and, in 2018, it will host several matches of the FIFA World Cup.
However, if this will be enough to make the Olympic investment profitable, it is still far from obvious.62 Sochi does not possess yet a sufficient user base able to keep alive, autonomously and with little help from the central government, the huge Olympic facilities. Even infrastructures, which usually are one of the easiest outcomes to be kept in use63 (because mostly needed), have been in fact oversized and risk becoming eventually a kind of transport white elephants. The fate of Sochi is sealed: in order to avoid the worst consequences and unpredictable costs of tremendous and overdimensioned investments, it must keep on growing, hosting international events and attracting more and more people.
The plan for Krakow 2022 - As difficult as it is to elaborate future scenarios, which is one of the most important and challenging research pathways in the field of regional planning, the bidding process required that the Olympic plan should have also addressed that very issue. Anyway it was not so hard, for a city of the size and importance of Krakow, to imagine an urban reuse of the sports arenas after the Games: they were addressed as possible venues for future sports, musical and other cultural events or for political and similar huge public meetings.
Less obvious, instead, was the destiny of the infrastructure works and investments in the mountains. In this regard, the simple fact that the current transportation system on the Polish side is about to collapse and has to be deeply and urgently revised - mostly due to mass tourism - cannot justify the simplistic, road-oriented approach that was prevailing among decision makers. By interpreting the territory in terms of landscape resistance, resilience and carrying capacity, it is clear that the Tatras piedmont area cannot afford a significant expansion of the road network, unless at very high costs and with unpredictable outcomes. Since a railway line still exists, connecting Krakow with Zakopane (however old, underused and extremely slow), the regional planning strategy should be aimed, first and formost, at modernizing and speeding up the public-rail transport, making it finally competitive. Then, or in parallel, a plan for other kind of slow and soft mobility could be pursued as well, but until the rail system
62 Even the Formula-1 events, in fact, do not require a real involvement of the Olympic facilities: they are poorly used and their main function is to provide just a fancy background to the race. [Müller, 2014]
63 Bovy, 2010
64 The regional and local governments were planning to construct a high-speed train, connecting the future Olympic park with Krakow’s railway station and old town. It seems to the Authors that such a service should have been extended up to Zakopane and Jasná Chopok, and that the plan is still feasible now. [Stimilli, 2015]
65 As a further analogy between Turin and Krakow, more than few people, as early as the 1998, asked for the possible engagement of Albertville, on the French side of the Alps, just for the same reasons of the Slovakian involvement in the Krakow bid: the reuse of some of its sports facilities, built up for the 1992 Winter Games and already underused (especially the ski-jump in Courchevel and the bobsleigh track in La Plagne), could have prevented from new spendings and constructions on the Italian side.
will be stuck to the present condition, any other effort will be useless.64
The factors of landscape and territorial identity are quite similar in the sub-Alpine and sub-Carpathian regions of Turin and Krakow. Their comparable multipurpose landscapes, historical settlements and architectural heritage bear witness to the long process of territorialisation. On the contrary, in the Caucasian province of Sochi, the landscape transformation started later on and was limited basically to the coastline and the near hinterland. Large extents of intact nature are still preserved in the mountain environment and there is in fact little compenetration between natural and anthropic portions of land, which appear mostly in contrast.
In Turin and Krakow, the criteria for landscape protection during the construction of
the Olympic facilities have been outlined on the ground of similar principles of sustainability and through the same binding procedure, the European Strategic Environmental Assessment. In Sochi, instead, poor attention was paid to this issue, as most of efforts were aimed at counterbalancing the huge Olympic investments, by making these as much rational and effective as possible.
Spatial models and planning strategies, again, are quite similar in the Italian and Polish case, while the Russian differs substantially (Fig. 20). Sochi 2014 has amplified all implications and effects of a Winter Olympics, by emphasizing and sharpening its spatial bipolarity and by taking the size and investments to the extremes. Both in the mountains and in the city, everything was concentrated in a limited area, as opposed to the widespread character of Turin 2006 and the plan for Krakow 2022, where the distance between the host city and the mountain venues was longer, and their spatial relationship more complex.65
In line with the twofold dimension of the Games, the post-Olympic scenarios have to be clearly distinguished whether are related to the urban setting of the leading host city or to the smaller resorts of mountain environment. In the first case, the urban user base can guarantee an easier integration and post-Olympic usage of the sports facilities (as proved by Turin, by the analogue case of Krakow and, to a lesser extent, even by Sochi), while the lower carrying capacity of mountain settlements does not allow for the maintenance of big structures, which are usually out of size and out of place and at high risk of abandonment. Given the current IOC requirements and the variety of sport competitions compressed in a couple of weeks, most of the European medium-sized cities cannot neither sustain the physical impacts of Olympic facilities and infrastructures nor afford the financial investment (unless with a great support of the central government). The host cities of the last and next editions are in fact big cities or even metropolis, organized ever more on the model of the Summer Games.66 Extending the analogies, a further comparison could be tried with the World exhibitions, drawing out again differences and similarities to better understand the spatial impact of megaevents (with specific regard to the urban environment and its close surroundings).67 At any rate, as already proved by the case of Turin 2006, European mountain regions can hardly sustain, even just in few years from the Games, the burden and costs of all the necessary sports facilities.68
ZAKLJUÈAK
The Winter Olympic Games is increasingly considered and exploited as a driver of economic, urban and regional development. It represents a great discontinuity that can accelerate and boost infrastructural projects, foster tourism and promote an overall improvement and modernization of regional services and transport.
However, in order to gain a positive and sustainable legacy in a long-run perspective, it should be better understood and implemented in the framework of some broader, continuous and pre-existing planning processes (as it was for instance the long lasting plan for the Turin urban renewal).69
Each of the regional planning strategies has been affected by its territorial setting and, when applied, has modified this in turn. Nevertheless, the role and importance of regional, landscape and spatial planning in defining and guiding the Olympic project was still undervalued in the three case studies (although with some evident differences) and ”subordinated” to the pressing issues and logics of transportation and economic development.
This, often, has led to overdimension the constructions and investments and to underestimate the territorial impact of the Olympic facilities and infrastructures, a matter which still appears very far from being properly and sustainably addressed.
66 Besides Turin and Sochi: Nagano 1998, Salt Lake City 2002, Vancouver 2010, Pyeongchang 2018 and Beijing 2022.
67 Cf. Petroviæ, 2009. In particular, a parallel between the waterfronts of Sochi 2014 and of EXPO’98 in Lisbon would highlight the importance of landscape architecture in such urban (re)development projects. [Cf. Petroviæ, et al., 2013]
68 In this respect, reversible structures and environmentally sound interventions, as well as the use of compatible construction materials, should be considered as priority
actions (a good example is the Olympic village of Lillehammer 1994, dismantled after the Games and reassembled where really needed in a long-time perspective).
69 On the mountain side, National parks and protected areas should also play a more evident role, bringing in their expertise in landscape ecology and natural sciences, and claiming for the sustainable preservation and improvement of the ecological network resilience, the related ecological services and the overall landscape matrix, not only within their own territorial jurisdiction but even outside (e.g. buffer zones, landscape corridors).
Table I Summary comparison of the Olympic regional spaces
Tabl. I. Sažeta usporedba olimpijskih prostora
TURIN (Piedmont, Italy) SOCHI (Krasnodar Krai, Russia) KRAKOW (Małopolska, Poland)
• Turin urban area (Lingotto District and Central Backbone) + Pinerolo
• 2 Olympic valleys in the Cottian Alps (Val di Susa and Val Chisone)
• 3 main Olympic villages in Turin, Bardonecchia and Sestriere (+ a smaller one in Pragelato)
• More than a half of the needed sports facilities were built new, whether in Torino (indoor structures) or widespread in the mountains (Pragelato, Bardonecchia, Cesana, Pinerolo, Sestriere, etc., mainly outdoor facilities)
• Construction of the first line of the Torino subway
• Shift of the city railway line and the central station beneath the ground level
• Temporary rail-shuttle service in one of the Olympic valleys (Val di Susa)
• Completion of the highway Torino-Pinerolo (second segment)
• Enlargement of the highway Torino-Bardonecchia (fourth lane)
• General enhancement of the local mountain road system
• Overall improvement of the Torino city road system (especially favoured by the underground relocation of the railway line)
• Construction of 2 hubs in the metropolitan road network
• Improvement of the passenger capacity of the Torino-Caselle airport (already existing and quite ready anyway to sustain the visitors’ Olympic peak)
Olympic venues
• Sochi urban region (Coastal Cluster)
• Krasnaya Polyana (Mountain Cluster in the Caucasian Mountains)
Olympic villages
• Coastal Olympic village (the main one)
• Mountain Olympic village (in Roza Khutor plateau)
Sports facilities
• All of the required sports facilities, both indoor and outdoor, were built new within two main areas (the coastal and the mountain clusters)
Railways
• Reconstruction of the existing railway in order to provide double track throughout
• Establishment of the high-speed Moscow-Adler connection
• Construction of a new railroad to the mountains
• Several new or renovated railway stations
• 6 new tunnel complexes and several new bridges
Road network
• Massive construction of roads, tunnels, bridges and interchanges in and around Sochi (in particular: 8 flyovers, 102 bridges, tens of tunnels and 1 bypass route for heavy trucks, for a total of 367 km of new paved roads)
• Krakow metropolitan area (Kraków Olympic Park Cluster + Kraków Wisła Cluster)
• Tatra mountains region (Zakopane Cluster + Jasná, in Slovakia)
• Krakow Olympic Village
• Zakopane Olympic Village and Media Centre
• Modernization of 6 existing sports arenas and construction of 5 new ones in Krakow
• A few of new ski-slopes and ski-lifts + construction of the bobsleigh track, the most discussed and criticized sport facility
• Construction of 3 additional tram lines in Krakow
• Renewal of the railway line Krakow-Zakopane
• Implementation of the Krakow suburban rail system and park and ride facilities
• Enlargement and conversion of the first 60 km of the road Krakow-Zakopane road into a 4 lanes expressway
• Enlargement of the following 40 km left and building of several bypasses
• Construction of the third (eastern) ring road in Krakow
• Possible construction of new routes between Poland and Slovakia
Airports and harbours
• A new terminal at Sochi International Airport (4 km overlapping the Mzymta River)
• New backup airports in Gelendzhik, Mineralnye Vody and Krasnodar
• A new terminal at the Port of Sochi (which allows docking for cruise ships with capacities of 3,000 people)
• Displacement of the seaport cargo terminal from the centre of Sochi
• Improvement of the carrying capacities of Katowice and Krakow airports
• Significant enlargement and empowerment of the Nowy Sącz and Nowy Targ local airports (as backup ones) + possible improvement of the Poprad airport in Slovakia
1. Abebe, N.; et al. (2014), Bidding for Development - How the Olympic Bid Process can accelerate transportation development, Springer Science + Business Media, New York
2. Arnold, R.; Foxall, A. (2014), Lord of the (Five) Rings - Issues at the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympic Games, ”Problems of Post-Communism”, 61 (1): 3-12, Harvard University, Cambridge
3. Arresta, D.; Catalano, S. (2005), La trasformazione materiale e immateriale del territorio in vista dei giochi olimpici invernali Torino 2006. Lo stato dell’arte a un anno dai giochi, Working paper No. 2, Torino Incontra, Centro Congressi, Torino
4. Berbeka, J. (2014), Consequences of application to host 2022 Winter Olympic Games for tourism in Krakow, ”Economic problems of tourism”, 4: 225-237, Szczecin
5. Bondonio, P.; Mela, A. (2008), Which legacies of Torino 2006 OWGs for the Olympic movement and the local society? ”Olympic Winter Games, Proceedings of the 1st annual conference on Olympic Legacy”, 8-9 May 2008, University of Greenwich
6. Bovy, P. (2006), Solving outstanding megaevent transport challenges: the Olympic experience, ”Public Transport International”, 6: 3234, Bruxelles
7. Bovy, P. (2010), No transport white elephants, ”ITS, Intelligent traffic systems magazine”, 2: 16-18, Munich
8. Brunetta, G. (2002), Valutazione ambientale strategica e grandi eventi: riflessioni a partire dall’esperienza di Torino 2006, ”Bollettino della Società Geografica Italiana”, Series XII, 7: 913932, Rome
9. Chalkley, B.; Essex, S. (2002), L’evoluzione degli impatti infrastrutturali delle olimpiadi invernali, 1924-2002, ”Bollettino della Società Geografica Italiana”, Series XII, 7: 831-851, Rome
10. Chappelet, J.L. (2008), Olympic Environmental Concerns as a Legacy of the Winter Games, ”The International Journal of the History of Sport”, 25 (14): 1884-1902, DOI: 10.1080/095233608024 38991
11. Christillin, E.; Giordano, R.; et al. (2005), La Valutazione Ambientale Strategica dei XX Giochi Olimpici Invernali Torino 2006, EdicomEdizioni, Udine
12. Colella, C. (2006), GISTOR ’06 - Sistema Informativo Geografico per i XX Giochi Olimpici Invernali Torino 2006, edited by Istituto Geografico Militare, Florence
13. Dansero, E. (2002), I ‘luoghi comuni’ dei grandi eventi. Allestendo il palcoscenico territoriale per Torino 2006, ”Bollettino della Società Geografica Italiana”, Series XII, 7: 861-894, Rome
14. Dansero, E.; Mela, A. (2007), Olympic territorialisation - The case of Torino 2006, ”Journal of Alpine Research”, 95 (3): 16-26, DOI: 10.4000/rga.281
15. Dansero, E.; Puttilli, M. (2010), Mega-events tourism legacies: the case of the Torino 2006 Winter Olympic Games - a territorialisation approach, ”Leisure Studies”, 29 (3): 321-341, DOI: 10.1080/02614361003716966
16. Dansero, E.; Segre, A. (2002), I XX Giochi Olimpici Invernali ‘Torino 2006’. Breviario minimo, ”Bollettino della Società Geografica Italiana”, Series XII, 7: 853-859, Rome
17. D’Auria, D. (2008), Olimpiadi Torino 2006 e sostenibilità ambientale casi studio: tre opere olimpiche problematiche, Master thesis, Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Turin
18. Ercole, E. (2006), Giochi olimpici invernali e sviluppo locale: Torino e il Piemonte, XXVII Conferenza italiana di Scienze Regionali, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa
19. Essex, S.; Chalkley, B. (2004), Mega-sporting events in urban and regional policy: a history of the Winter Olympics, ”Planning Perspectives”, 19 (2): 201-204, DOI: 10.1080/0266543042000 192475
20. Filippi, M.; Mellano, F. (2006), Agenzia per lo svolgimento dei XX giochi olimpici invernali, Torino 2006, Electa, Milan
21. Frey, M.; Iraldo, F.; Melis, M. (2008), The impact of wide-scale sport events on local development: an assessment of the XX Torino Olympics through the sustainability report, Working Paper Series, No.10, IEFE, Bocconi University, Milan
22. Guala, C. (2008), To bid or not to bid: public opinion before and after the Games. The case of the Turin 2006, ”Olympic Winter Games, Proceedings of the 1st annual conference on Olympic Legacy”, 8-9 May 2008, University of Greenwich
23. Guseva, A.V.; et al. (2010), Zone Olympic sites of Sochi - 2014 and its historical and cultural heritage, ”European researcher”, 1: 17-22, Sochi
24. Kozłowska, M. (2014), Future of Winter Olympic Games in the Context of Ongoing Application Process to Host Winter Olympic Games 2022 - Study Case: Cracow Bid, ”Current Issues of Tourism Research”, 2: 27-37, Krakow
25. Krasicki, S. (2014), Winter Olympics in Krakow - Opportunities and Dangers, ”Current Issues of Tourism Research”, 1: 60-61, Krakow
26. Lazzeroni, C.; Bobbio, L. (2002), Olimpiadi Torino 2006: una mappa dei possibili conflitti, Master thesis, Master in analysis of public policies (Mapp), COREP, Turin
27. Müller, M. (2014a), After Sochi 2014: costs and impacts of Russia’s Olympic Games, ”Eurasian
Geography and Economics”, 55 (6): 628-655, DOI: 10.1080/15387216.2015.1040432
28. Müller, M. (2014b), Popular perception of urban transformation through mega-events: understanding support for the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, ”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy”, 30: 693-711, DOI: 10.1068/C11185R
29. Müller, M. (2014c), (Im-)Mobile policies: Why sustainability went wrong in the 2014 Olympics in Sochi, ”European Urban and Regional Studies”, 0 (0): 1-19, DOI: 10.1177/09697764145 23801
30. Obad Šæitaroci, M.; et al. (2015), Cultural Heritage - Possibilities for Spatial and Economic Development, International Scientific Conference, Proceedings book, Zagreb
31. Pastorelli, F. (2010), Le rovine di Torino 2006 - I territori montani pagano lo scotto dei Giochi olimpici invernali, ”Alpinscena”, 94: 16-17, Torino
32. Petersson, B.; Vamling, K. (2013), The Sochi predicament: contexts, characteristics and challenges of the Olympic Winter Games in 2014, Cambridge scholars publishing, Newcastle
33. Petroviæ Krajnik, L. (2009), Impact of the World Exhibition on urban and regional development, Ph.D. dissertation, Institute of Urbanism, Faculty of Architecture, Graz University of Technology
34. Petroviæ Krajnik, L.; Obad Šæitaroci, M.; Dundoviæ, B. (2013), Landscape Architecture of the EXPO’98 Project Transformation Factor of the Eastern Coastal Zone of Lisbon, ”Prostor”, 21 (1): 128-139, Zagreb
35. Scharr, K.; Steinicke, E.; Borsdorf, A. (2012), Sochi 2014 : Olympic Winter Games between mountains and seaside, ”Journal of Alpine Research”, 100 (4): 2-14, DOI: 10.4000/rga.1717
36. Segre, A. (2002), L’ambiente delle Olimpiadi, ”Bollettino della Società Geografica Italiana”, Series XII, 7: 895-912, Rome
37. Shabarova, E. (2014), Speed commuter-urban rail transport, ”Russian Journal of Logistics and Transport Management”, 1 (1): 19-31, DOI: 10.20295/2313-7002-2015-2-18-30
38. Stimilli, F. (2015), Improving accessibility to the Tatra Mountains on the Polish side, Master Thesis, School of Architecture and Design, University of Camerino
39. Wurster, S. (2013), Homes for Games: A filmic interpretation of Sochi 2014 and resettlement in Imeretinskaya Bay, ”European Urban and Regional Studies”, 0 (0): 1-8, DOI: 10.1177/0969 776413502660
Izvori
Internet Sources
Internetski izvori
1. Bovy, P. (2014), Olympic and mega-event transport bibliography 1997-2014 (www.mobilitybovy.ch/resources/Doc2-WWW.BIBLIO.MAY2014.255.pdf)
2. Legambiente Italia (2007), Dossier: l’eredità olimpica di Torino 2006 (www.helpconsumatori.it/data/docs/DossierTO2006.pdf)
3. Unesco (2000), Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage, World Heritage Committee, 23rd session, Marrakesh, Morocco, 29 November - 4 Dec. 1999 (www.whc.unesco.org/archive/1999/whc-99-conf209-22e.pdf)
Illustration Sources
Izvori ilustracija
Fig. 1, 9, 11, 20 Authors, 2016
Fig. 2 borghipiubelliditalia.it (19/4/2016)
Fig. 3 italtour.org10581091108810801085.html (28/4/2016)
Fig. 4 progeopiemonte.it (19/4/2016)
Fig. 5a Jabłońska, T. (2012), Tatry. Fotografie Tatr i Zakopanego 1859-1914, Bosz
Fig. 5b, 6-8, 16 Photo: Stimilli, 2013
Fig. 10, 12 Sochi Organising Committee (2014), Sochi 2014 Official Report
Fig. 13 mobility-bovy.ch (19/4/2016)
Fig. 14, 17, 18 Arpa Piemonte (2006), Relazione finale su Torino 2006
Fig. 15 zelpage.cz (19/4/2016)
Fig. 19 D’Auria, Dansero, 2008
Table I Authors, 2016
Summary Sažetak
Prostorno planiranje i utjecaj igara na teritorij
U èlanku su prikazane tri studije sluèaja regionalne strategije za Zimske olimpijske igre u Europi - Torino, Soèi i Krakov. Prva dva plana provedena su 2006. i 2014. godine, a treæi, koji je bio planiran za 2022. godinu, neæe se ostvariti jer se Poljska povukla iz olimpijskog natjeèaja nakon referenduma kojim su se graðani Krakova izjasnili protiv sudjelovanja. Usporedbeno su analizirani utjecaji sportskih graðevina i infrastrukture na teritorij, pozitivne i negativne posljedice za grad domaæin i planinska podruèja, te ulogu prometne mreže koja povezuje grad sa sportskim terenima u planinama. Rad je rezultat znanstvenog projekta Urbanizam naslijeða / Heritage urbanism koji se provodi na Arhitektonskom fakultetu Sveuèilišta u Zagrebu, a u suradnji s Fakultetom arhitekture i dizajna Sveuèilišta Camerino u Italiji. Tri se regije usporeðuju primjenjujuæi metodu projekta, koja se sastoji od èetiri sastavnice: odreðivanje èimbenika pejsažnog i prostornog identiteta, utvrðivanje postavljenih kriterija za zaštitu krajolika i za izgradnju olimpijskih graðevina, prepoznavanje primijenjenih prostornih modela i strategije planiranja te analiza i vrjednovanje scenarija nakon Igara. Poslije Drugoga svjetskog rata Torino je bio najvažniji industrijski grad u Italiji. U kasnim 1980-im godinama industrijska i ekonomska kriza utjecala je na grad. Zato je Gradsko vijeæe pokrenulo projekte za revitalizaciju grada. Olimpijski projekt bio je sastavni dio te široke strategije gradskog unaprjeðenja, a imao je razlièite pozitivne uèinke, od kojih su najvažniji: prebacivanje Glavnoga kolodvora i željeznièke pruge u podzemlje te novo povezivanje dijelova grada koji su prije bili odvojeni, obnavljanje napuštenih prostora grada i završetak prve linije gradske podzemne željeznice. S druge strane, planinska podruèja nisu dobila toliko pozitivnih uèinaka. Iako je javni prijevoz radio vrlo dobro tijekom sportskoga dogaðaja, zanemariva su poboljšanja u prometu nakon Igara jer je veæina mjera bila samo privremena, dok su neke goleme sportske graðevine utjecale negativno i na pejsaž i na opæinski proraèun. Primjerice,
Biographies
Biografije
FLAVIO STIMILLI, M.Sc., graduated from the School of Architecture and Design, University of Camerino, where he is research assistant in the field of regional and physical planning.
MLADEN OBAD ŠÆITAROCI, F.C.A., Ph.D., full professor at the Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb. He is head of the research project Heritage Urbanism and author of numerous scientific and professional works in urban and physical planning and landscape architecture. [www.scitaroci.hr]
MASSIMO SARGOLINI, architect, full professor at the School of Architecture and Design, University of Camerino. He is director of the Master in Parks and landscape and author of numerous scientific and professional works in urban, regional and landscape planning.
skakaonica i staza za bob dovele su do velikih financijskih ulaganja za izgradnju i održavanje, a postale su nepotrebne i nezgrapne strukture zbog nedovoljnog korištenja nakon Igara. Graðevine su potpuno napuštene još prije isteka deset godina, tako da su njihove Opæine donijele odluku o zatvaranju, rastavljanju i vraæanju na prethodno stanje okoliša, a to je skup, naporan i vrlo dug proces. Takoðer, èetiri olimpijska sela naknadno su pretvorena u prevelike turistièke sklopove, što je postojeæe tradicionalne smještajne graðevine stavilo u financijski nezavidan položaj. Ravnoteža zapadnih Alpa vrlo je delikatna, s obzirom na to da je krajolik kompleksan i višenamjenski: zemlja je podijeljena na male posjede, korištenje zemljišta je razlièito, naselja su malena, važna je prirodna baština, a graditeljsko naslijeðe je jedinstveno. Takvi su krajolici rezultat duge povijesti teritorijalizacije, koja je proces opodruèivanja i preoblikovanja teritorija proveden putem ljudskoga rada. Unatoè nekim negativnim posljedicama, 20. Zimske olimpijske igre u Torinu bile su uglavnom uspješne i dovoljno usmjerene i na zaštitu okoliša. Prvi je put u Italiji bio primijenjen europski postupak Strateške procjene utjecaja na okoliš, koji je sprijeèio najgore utjecaje pa se regionalni plan poprilièno prilagodio krajoliku, iako su politièka i ekonomska pitanja prevladala u cjelokupnom voðenju projekta. Za razliku od Torina, gdje su se sportske arene nalazile u nekoliko dijelova grada, a planinska natjecanja održavala su se u razlièitim, meðusobno vrlo udaljenim mjestima u Alpama, u ruskom Soèiju sve je bilo koncentrirano na samo dva mjesta. Okolina zapadnoga Kavkaza i crnomorske obale, duž koje se odvija širenje grada Soèija, drukèija je od okolice Torina. Postupak teritorijalizacije poèeo je kasnije i malo je utjecao na planine koje su zadržale velik prirodni sadržaj i vrijednost (prije Igara Soèi je bio poznat samo kao ljetovalište na moru jer ima pravu suptropsku klimu). Da bi se olimpijski park na obali dobro povezao s planinskim odredištima, potrebna je bila izgradnja velike
infrastrukture. Takoðer, sva olimpijska borilišta izgraðena su potpuno nova. Rezultat su bile najskuplje olimpijske igre svih vremena, koje su jako promijenile panoramu obale u zaljevu olimpijskog parka, doline rijeke Mzymte i okolice planinskog sela Krasnaja Poljana. Financijska ulaganja bila su tako golema da je regija sada prisiljena na rast, na stalno organiziranje velikih dogaðaja i na privlaèenje što više turista: iako æe Soèi biti jedan od sjedišta sljedeæega Svjetskoga nogometnog prvenstva, a svake godine do 2020. održat æe se autoutrka Svjetskoga prvenstva Formule 1 oko olimpijskog parka, buduænost okolice Soèija izgleda posve neizvjesna jer nedostaje još uvijek minimalna baza stabilnih korisnika.
Treæi sluèaj, plan za Krakov 2022., trebao je obuhvatiti cjelokupno podruèje Tatra, koje su najviše planine u Karpatima i prirodna granica izmeðu Poljske i Slovaèke. Bilo bi uistinu prvi put da se Zimske olimpijske igre održe u dvjema državama (isto je bilo predloženo za Torino jer se nekoliko sportskih graðevina nalazilo na drugoj strani Alpa, u Francuskoj kod Albertvillea, gdje su se Igre veæ održale 1992. godine). Sportske graðevine u Krakovu bile su planirane u razlièitim dijelovima grada pa bi prostorni model i strategija planiranja bili vrlo slièni talijanskom sluèaju, kao što je slièna i struktura krajolika. Da bi se dobro procijenili èimbenici utjecaja na krajolik i modeli prostornog planiranja u prostoru održavanja Zimskih olimpijskih igara, treba jasno razlikovati prostorne zahvate u planinskim predjelima od onih u gradovima i njihovoj neposrednoj okolici. Potrebno je utvrditi èimbenike pejsažnog i prostornog identiteta pa s obzirom na to procijeniti posljedice planiranih zahvata. Prostorni su modeli Torina i Krakova raspršeni, kao i utjecaji olimpijske infrastukture na teritorij, dok je model Soèija prilièno drukèiji zbog krajnosti u smislu velièine i teritorijalne bipolarnosti Igara. U tom sluèaju, posljedice sportskih objekata i prometnih graðevina evidentnije su i problematiènije pa æe biti puno teže njihovo održivo upravljanje u sljedeæim godinama.
FLAVIO STIMILLI
MLADEN OBAD ŠÆITAROCI
MASSIMO SARGOLINI
FLAVIO STIMILLI, M.Sc., diplomirao je na Fakultetu arhitekture i dizajna Sveuèilišta u Camerinu, gdje je znanstveni novak u podruèju urbanizma te prostornog i pejsažnog planiranja.
MLADEN OBAD ŠÆITAROCI, akademik, dr.sc., redoviti je profesor na Arhitektonskom fakultetu u Zagrebu. Voditelj je znanstvenoistraživaèkog projekta Urbanizam naslijeða te autor brojnih znanstvenih i struènih radova iz podruèja urbanizma, prostornog planiranja i pejsažne arhitekture. [www.scitaroci.hr]
MASSIMO SARGOLINI, arhitekt, redoviti je profesor na Fakultetu arhitekture i dizajna Sveuèilišta u Camerinu. Voditelj je poslijediplomskog studija Parks and landscape i autor brojnih znanstvenih i struènih radova iz podruèja urbanizma te prostornog i pejsažnog planiranja.
1 Sveuèilište u Zagrebu Arhitektonski fakultet
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26
2 Hrvatski muzej arhitekture - HAZU
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Ivana Gorana Kovaèiæa 37 msmode@arhitekt.hr msmokvina@hazu.hr auchytil@arhitekt.hr
Pregledni znanstveni èlanak
UDK 72.01:72.036 D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (6) ”19” Tehnièke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam
2.01.01. - Arhitektonsko projektiranje
2.01.04. - Povijest i teorija arhitekture i zaštita graditeljskog naslijeða Èlanak primljen / prihvaæen: 20. 11. 2015. / 7. 6. 2016.
1 University of Zagreb Faculty of Architecture
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Kaèiæeva 26
2 The Croatian Museum of Architecture - Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts
HR - 10000 Zagreb, Ivana Gorana Kovaèiæa 37 msmode@arhitekt.hr msmokvina@hazu.hr auchytil@arhitekt.hr
Subject Review
UDC 72.01:72.036 D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (6) ”19” Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning
2.01.01. - Architectural Design
2.01.04. - History and Theory of Architecture and Preservation of the Built Heritage Article Received / Accepted: 20. 11. 2015. / 7. 6. 2016.
Afrièki radovi hrvatske arhitektice
Croatian Architect and her Approach in African Context
Afrika Crnkoviæ Oèko, Dragica hrvatska moderna arhitektura 20. stoljeæe
Arhitektica Dragica (Daša) Crnkoviæ Oèko u razdoblju od 1958. do 1974. godine u dva navrata boravi u Africi djelujuæi u Etiopiji, Zambiji, Svaziju i Sierra Leoneu. Ovaj tekst postavlja njezin afrièki opus u kontekst djelovanja hrvatskih arhitekata u zemljama Treæega svijeta, nastojeæi pritom odgovoriti na pitanja translacije sustava vrijednosti imanentnog tradiciji hrvatske moderne arhitekture i odraza neposrednih radnih okolnosti na aspekte projektantskog pristupa.
Crnkoviæ Oèko, Dragica Croatian Modern architecture 20th century
The architect Dragica (Daša) Crnkoviæ Oèko was in Africa on two occasions between 1958 and 1974 working in Ethiopia, Zambia, Swaziland and Sierra Leone. This article presents her work in Africa within the context of other Croatian architects who used to work in the Third World countries. It aims to address the question of a transfer of values that is immanent in the Croatian Modernist architectural tradition as well as the influence of the immediate surroundings on the aspects of design approach.
Treæega svijeta1 u kontekstu jugoslavenskoga graditeljstva2 poèinje još ranih 1950-ih godina. Sustav znanja steèen u procesu intenzivne poslijeratne obnove i modernizacije zemlje pritom je struèna referentna èinjenica potpomognuta politièkom inicijativom usmjerenom prema pokretu nesvrstanih. Prvi jugoslavenski posao u inozemstvu - izgradnja luke Latakija u Siriji, koju je 1952. zapoèeo splitski Pomgrad3 - na svojevrstan je naèin najavio relativno malen udio arhitektonske djelatnosti u odnosu na velik udio graðevinarstva unutar graditeljskoga izvoznog produkta.4 Taj æe se omjer održati tijekom relativno usustavljene aktivnosti domaæih graditeljskih poduzeæa i struènjaka u inozemstvu, pod kontrolom bivše države. Promjenom politièkog ureðenja 1991. ta je aktivnost svedena na svoje reminiscencije, unutar kojih je isti omjer prisutan sve do danas.
Djelovanje hrvatskih arhitekata u zemljama Treæega svijeta odvijalo se unutar razlièitih organizacijskih i projektantskih okolnosti. Primjerice, struènjaci tehnièke pomoæi Ujedinjenih naroda ili tehnièke pomoæi Jugoslavije ponekad su i godinama radili unutar državnih tijela afrièkih ili azijskih zemalja, uglavnom u sastavu meðunarodnih timova.5 Za razliku od njih, projekti ugovoreni u vidu eksporta domaæih poduzeæa èesto su odraðivani intenzivno, unutar relativno kratkih rokova i homogenih timova, pri èemu bi zadanu lokaciju posjeæivali samo njihovi pojedini èlanovi.6
Raspisivanje meðunarodnih natjeèaja takoðer je rezultiralo uspješnom komunikacijskom sponom na promatranim relacijama7, a iako tek posredno ili potpuno nevezano za organizacije bivše države, odreðeni broj pojedinaca u istome prostoru gradi svoje individualne opuse.8 S obzirom na to da svima prethode struèno znanje i reference steèene na hrvatskom prostoru i unutar hrvatske arhitektonske tradicije, translacija analognoga sustava vrijednosti primijenjenog na udaljenom teritoriju i s novim ulaznim èinjenicama pretpostavka je koju ovaj rad nastoji potvrditi. Pretpostavka je takoðer da razlièite okolnosti djelovanja arhitekata u ekspozituri rezultiraju i specifiènim varijacijama njima pripadajuæih projektantskih pristupa. Odgovore na navedena pitanja ovaj rad nastoji istražiti usmjeravajuæi se na afrièki opus arhitektice Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko. Struèni angažman Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko ilustrativan je jer je unutar dvaju navrata svojega boravka u Africi, gdje je provela ukupno deset godina, djelovala kao arhitektica u èetirima državama radeæi u razlièitim radnim timovima, za razlièite naruèitelje i svladavajuæi razlièite projektne zadatke. U Etiopiji boravi od 1958. do 1960., formalno zaposlena na zagrebaèkom Arhitektonskom fakultetu gdje joj status za to vrijeme miruje, u snažnom ozraèju jugoslavenskih struènjaka i poduzeæa koji u to doba stupaju na tamošnje tržište. U Zambiji, Svaziju i Sierra Leoneu boravi od 1966. do 1974. te, prekinuvši radni odnos na fakultetu, djeluje bez znaèajnoga dodira s domovinom, u okruženju meðunarodne struène komunikacije.9 Analognu je promjenu moguæe pratiti i u njezinu radu, uz prilagodbu podneblju, društvenim okolnostima i tehnološkim moguænostima kao konstantnim kate-
1 Pojam ‘Treæi svijet’ na koji se ovaj tekst referira geopolitièke je naravi i odnosi se na grupaciju država koje se u hladnoratovskom kontekstu ne opredjeljuju ni za jedan od dvaju sukobljenih blokova, formirajuæi ‘treæe’ stajalište.
2 Izdvajanjem hrvatskih arhitekata iz konteksta bivše federacije, s obzirom na razlièite arhitektonske tradicije njezinih republika koje povijesno nisu ni težile uæi pod zajednièki nazivnik, u ovome je tekstu fokusirana hrvatska arhitektura kao kategorija koje elementi ulaze u proces transfera. Kontekst ‘jugoslavenskoga’ u tekstu referira se na aspekt koji jest zajednièki republièkim tradicijama u promatranome razdoblju, a to je politièki okvir unutar kojeg su se razvijale.
3 Celmiæ, 2004.a: 116-117
4 Prema tabelarnome prikazu strukture izvršenih graðevinskih radova u inozemstvu, objavljenom u publikaciji Jugoslavensko graðevinarstvo u svetu Jugoslavenskoga graðevinskog centra u Beogradu, udio koji pripada izradi projektne dokumentacije u padu je od 6,7% 1966. do 1,1% 1974. godine. [*** 1975: publikacija bez paginacije]
5 Kao ilustraciju tog tipa angažmana moguæe je izdvojiti rad Vlade Antoliæa u Mianmaru, Maleziji i Indoneziji 1953.-1965. [*** 1991: 86-91]; Mire Marasoviæa u Gani 1961.-1964. [Celmiæ, 2004.b] i Branka Petroviæa u Etiopiji 1962.-1969. [Kranjèeviæ, 2012.]
6 Jedan od najopsežnijih projektantskih zadataka tog tipa bila je izrada dokumentacije za vojnu luku Homs u
ja.14 Najsuptilniji je takav primjer projekt za Etnografski muzej15 smješten u rubnom podruèju medvednièkih obronaka, u sjevernom dijelu Zagreba, projektiran kao kompozicija elemenata apstraktne geometrije izdignutih iz baze na kojoj je sugestivno upotrijebljen prirodni materijal kao veza s tlom. Apstrahirana do mjere univerzalnosti, njegova je arhitektura akontekstualna. Kao u sliènim primjerima manje ili više rašèlanjenih kompozicija, ona stvara vlastiti kontekst (Sl. 4.).
U suburbanim situacijama i situacijama u ruralnim podruèjima možda je u najveæoj mjeri prisutna težnja za modernizacijom društva u svim njegovim aspektima. U radu arhitekata ta je težnja prisutna kroz intervencije u okolnostima gdje se, unatoè skromnim sredstvima, upravo od njih oèekuje kvalitativan pomak u stvaranju novih prostornih identiteta. U tom kontekstu, kao suradnica profesora Strižiæa izraðuje studije tipskih seoskih škola u razlièitim uvjetima klime i krajolika, a velik broj zgrada društvenog standarda u sliènim okolnostima i sama projektira i realizira.16 U suradnji s Bernardom Bernardijem osvaja prvu nagradu na natjeèaju za osmogodišnju školu u Podsusedu.17 Jedan je od projektanata koji tijekom druge polovice 1940-ih i prve polovice 1950-ih daju doprinos arhitektonskim ansamblima Pionirskoga grada18 i Studentskoga grada19 u zagrebaèkoj Dubravi te u nacionalnom parku Plitvièka jezera.20 Prihvaæen moderni arhitektonski svjetonazor ovdje dobiva svoj blagi odmak, poprimajuæi regionalne elemente - bilo da je rijeè o primjeni lokalnih materijala ili odreðenih graditeljskih oblika. Graðevine u prirodnom krajoliku pritom se osjetljivo prilagoðavaju topografiji i podneblju, dok graðevine u naseljenim podruèjima redovito pružaju dodatne kvalitete u vidu prostora za društveni život zajednice, u oba sluèaja nastojeæi afirmirati šire urbanistièke ili prostorne situacije.
Na ovaj naèin percipiran pristup Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko nije izolirana èinjenica, naprotiv - on izrasta iz sustava vrijednosti svojstvenog hrvatskoj modernoj arhitekturi i odraz je stremljenja aktualnog trenutka. Iste postupke poslije æe primijeniti prilagoðavajuæi ih kontekstu afrièkih zemalja.
AFRIÈKO ISKUSTVO - U POTRAZI
ZA SUVREMENOM AFRIÈKOM ARHITEKTUROM
AFRICAN EXPERIENCE - IN SEARCH OF CONTEMPORARY AFRICAN ARCHITECTURE
Djelovanje hrvatskih arhitekata u zemljama Treæega svijeta u razdoblju od 1950-ih do 1980-ih godina prošloga stoljeæa tematska je cjelina u pravilu vezana za vanjsku politiku nekadašnje Jugoslavije voðenu idejom nesvrstavanja. Kao sastavni dio šire mreže struè-
njaka, njihov se angažman odvijao putem razlièitih centralno više ili manje usmjeravanih sustava, od organizacija tehnièke pomoæi do agencija tržišne orijentacije. Promatrano s takvog aspekta, afrièko iskustvo arhitektice Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko, s obzirom na njegovu posve individualnu prirodu, svojevrstan je izuzetak. Za institucionalno usmjeravane putove meðunarodne suradnje vezana tek posredno, preko supruga koji dužnost struènjaka tehnièke pomoæi obnaša u Etiopiji, Zambiji, Svaziju i Sierra Leoneu, prilike za rad u struci nalazila je samostalno. Okolnosti struènoga rada pritom su varirale od vanjske suradnje za jugoslavensko poduzeæe, preko angažmana u državnom i privatnim arhitektonskim uredima do samostalnoga projektantskog rada. Prateæi njezin rad kroz navedene segmente, namjera je ovoga teksta ispitati njegova vrijednosna ishodišta u tradiciji hrvatske moderne arhitekture uz nove ulazne varijable klime, društva i tehnologije te sagledati utjecaje neposrednih radnih okolnosti na aspekte projektantskog pristupa.
Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko u Africi je boravila u dva navrata, od 1958. do 1960. u Etiopiji, te od 1966. do 1974. u Zambiji, Svaziju i Sierra Leoneu.21 Odlazak u Afriku u oba je navrata bio potaknut angažmanom njezina supruga, ekonomista i demografa Jugoslava Crnkoviæa u programima tehnièke pomoæi. Promjene mjesta boravka pratila je cijela obitelj. Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko pritom je aktivno i s uspjehom, mijenjajuæi zaposlenja, pronalazila vlastiti stvaralaèki put.
• Etiopija - S obzirom na to da nikad nije bila u poziciji podreðenosti kolonijalnim velesilama, niti se takvim može smatrati kratko razdoblje talijanske okupacije prije i tijekom Drugoga svjetskog rata, u godinama u kojima se mnoge afrièke zemlje još uvijek nastoje osloboditi ostataka kolonijalnih odnosa, Etiopija dolazi u žarište politièkog interesa zemalja kako istoènog tako i zapadnog bloka. U tom je
14 Samostalno ili u suradnji, Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko s uspjehom je sudjelovala na brojnim natjeèajima 1950-ih i u prvoj polovici 1960-ih godina, raspisanim upravo za prostorno-programske situacije od kljuènoga znaèenja za grad. To su, primjerice, natjeèaj za zgradu uèiteljske škole [*** 1953: 9], zgradu Radnièkoga sveuèilišta [*** 1956: 61], zgradu Centralnoga komiteta [*** 1961: 25], zgradu Radiotelevizije [Gomboš, 1963: 4] u Zagrebu itd.
15 Projekt nepoznatoga podrijetla, objavljen u tekstu Nevena Šegviæa Stvaralaèke komponente arhitekture FNRJ u èasopisu „Arhitektura”, 1950. [Šegviæ, 1950: 39]
16 Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko s uspjehom je sudjelovala na nizu natjeèaja za zgrade društvene namjene u manjim sredinama. Od izvedenih ili djelomièno izvedenih radova moguæe je izdvojiti školske zgrade u Siveriæu, Jastrebarskom i Lipnici. [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66]
17 *** 1954: 98-99
18 U arhitektonskim studijama Pionirskoga grada sudjeluje još za studija. [*** 1948.a; *** 1948.b]
19 Sedam smještajnih paviljona Studentskoga grada, u dvije varijante, izvedeno prema projektu Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko. [*** 1950]
Sl. 7. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko: Kuæa s atrijem, okolica Addis Abebe, Etiopija, 1959.
Fig. 7. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko: Atrium House, Adis Abeba, surroundings, Ethiopia, 1959
Sl. 8. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko: Motel uz rijeku Awash, Etiopija, 1959.
Fig. 8. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko: Motel along the Awash river, Ethiopia, 1959
masa postavljenih uz glavne gradske prometnice. Superponiran na postojeæu gradsku strukturu, novi sloj temeljen je na kontinuitetu misli predratnog CIAM-a prepoznatljivom u oblicima poslijeratne rekonstrukcije mnogih hrvatskih gradova. Tretirajuæi kontekst zateèene matrice afrièkoga grada sitnog mjerila i nekvalitetne gradnje kao podlogu bez znaèajnih urbanih vrijednosti, novi sloj stvara vlastitu kontekstualnost.
Sl. 9. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko: Zgrada Odbora za planiranje Ministarstva industrije i trgovine, Addis Abeba, Etiopija, 1959.
Fig. 9. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko: Planning Office building of the Ministry of Trade and Industry, Adis Abeba, Ethiopia, 1959
U domeni pojedinaènih arhitektonskih rješenja, analogan je pristup vidljiv na primjeru varijantnih rješenja Zgrade Odbora za planiranje Ministarstva industrije i trgovine. Rašèlanjenom kompozicijom geometrijskih tijela ostvaren je mikrourbanizam lokacije javne namjene, u osnovi univerzalan i nepoveziv s graditeljskim oblicima tropskog podneblja. Zahtjevi klime respektirani su kroz proširenu funkciju zgrade elementima natkrivenog trijema i zatvorenog dvorišta (Sl. 9.).
Nešto je drukèije koncipirana Kuæa s atrijem smještena u prirodnom ambijentu, gdje jeviše u fenomenološkom, a manje u tehnološkom smislu - upotrijebljen lokalni materijal, a aspekt klime sagledan kroz inkorporaciju vanjskog prostora unutar još uvijek èvrstih granica njezina volumena i upotrebu polupropusnih membrana zidova (Sl. 7.). Potpuni odmak prema lokalnim graditeljskim oblicima vidljiv je u situacijama gotovo netaknute prirode. Na primjeru Motela uz rijeku Awash (Sl. 8.) suvremeni je program studiran unutar jedinica kružnog tlocrta tradicijskih afrièkih stambenih sklopova, tzv. compounda. U regiji bez dominantnih naslijeðenih tradicija urbanoga karaktera, ovo je možda jedino mjesto gdje snaga lokalnoga graditeljskog naslijeða preuzima imperativ u donošenju prostornih odluka.
• Zambija, Svazi, Sierra Leone - Intenzivno bavljenje teorijskim radom prekinuto je ponovnim odlaskom u Afriku, gdje æe boraviti osam godina, nakon èega se vraæa u Zagreb i odlazi u mirovinu.32 Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko u tom je razdoblju potpuno involvirana u projektantsku praksu. U okruženju bitno slabijih bilateralnih odnosa s Jugoslavijom (što na
32 Posveæenost teorijskom radu u daljnjem æe razdoblju zamijeniti intenzivnija posveæenost slikarstvu. Radu ‘Art Society’ u Mbabaneu (Svazi) prikljuèuje se 1970., gdje sudjeluje na zajednièkim izložbama. Godine 1974. ima prvu samostalnu izložbu u Freetownu (Sierra Leone). Njezina je samostalna izložba održana u prostorijama Društva arhitekata Zagreba 1979. [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66]
33 Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko bila je èlanica urednièkog odbora prvih izdanja èasopisa „Arhitektura”, Saveza arhi-
svojevrstan naèin potvrðuje i angažman njezina supruga - ovoga puta ne više kao struènjaka jugoslavenske tehnièke pomoæi, veæ kao eksperta Organizacije ujedinjenih naroda), iako u vezi s domaæim strukovnim organizacijama33, ali izvan formalne povezanosti s Fakultetom, ona djeluje u relacijama meðunarodnih arhitektonskih kontakata. Praksu u Zambiji zapoèinje radom u birou danskog arhitekta Erharda Lorenza34 u Lusaki, nakratko je prekida radom u Projektnom uredu Nacionalnog vijeæa za znanstvena istraživanja, nakon èega se opet vraæa u isti biro gdje osim profesionalnih sklapa i dobre prijateljske odnose. Bavi se uglavnom projektiranjem stambenih graðevina raznih tipova i mjerila, od slobodnostojeæih obiteljskih kuæa preko sklopova do stambenih višekatnica. Meðu ostalim, sudjeluje i na projektima jedne od rezidencija tadašnjega zambijskog predsjednika Kennetha Kaunde.35 Odlaskom u Svazi, zapošljava se u birou portugalskog arhitekta Joséa Forjaza u Mbabaneu, gdje se dominantno bavi projektiranjem graðevina društvene namjene. Boravak u Africi završava samostalnim projektantskim radom u Freetownu u Sierra Leoneu, gdje projektirajuæi uglavnom kuæe za strance praktièno zao-
tekata Hrvatske i Društva arhitekata Zagreba (kojeg je predsjednica 1963.). Tijekom boravka u Zambiji, 1968. izabrana je za zaslužnoga èlana Saveza arhitekata Jugoslavije. [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66]
34 Sklapanjem partnerstva s arhitektom Michaelom Pearceom, od 1967. ured djeluje pod nazivom „Lorenz and Pearce Architects”. [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66]
35 HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66
36 De Raedt, 2013.
kružuje podruèje svojega teorijskog interesa, lociranog u podruèju suvremene stambene arhitekture afrièkoga kontinenta, ustanovljeno još u Etiopiji.
Pored nezanemarive vremenske distance u odnosu na boravak u Etiopiji, okolnosti drugoga, duljeg, razdoblja njezina boravka u Africi bitno su razlièite. Za razliku od relativno samostalnoga projektantskog rada u Etiopiji, u Zambiji i Svaziju radi u biroima privatnih, europskih provenijencija èvrsto pozicioniranih u sustavu lokalnih graditeljskih aktivnosti. Veæ u prvim radovima, Compoundu od dvanaest stanova (Sl. 10.), a još više na primjeru Obiteljske kuæe Austin u Lusaki (Sl. 11. i 12.), primjetno je odstupanje od prioriteta proporcioniranja i komponiranja geometrijskih volumena kojih precizne granice gube nekadašnju èvrstoæu. Za razliku od prvotne vizualne, prostorni imperativi prelaze u osjetilnu domenu percepcije. Tektoniènost arhitektonskih elemenata, provedena do razine prožimanja vanjskog i unutarnjeg prostora, formira segmente razlièitih kvaliteta svjetlosti, sjene i zraka.
U projektiranju graðevina društvene namjene financiranih od države ili meðunarodnih organizacija sredstva su bitno skromnija pa je prioritet postiæi sklad izmeðu arhitektonskih principa vremena i lokalnih moguænosti gradnje. Za razliku od škola i bolnica projektiranih ranih 1960-ih godina, kada su se graðevni materijal i ekspertiza u pravilu uvozili, krajem istoga desetljeæa dolazi do promjene tendencije prema uporabi lokalnog materijala i rada.36 Promjenu tog uvjeta moguæe je ilu-
Sl. 10. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (Biro arhitekta E. Lorenza): Compound od dvanaest stanova, Lusaka, Zambija, 1966.
Fig. 10. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (E. Lorenz architectural practice): 12-apartment compound, Lusaka, Zambia, 1966
Sl. 11. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (Biro arhitekta E. Lorenza): Obiteljska kuæa Austin, varijantna rješenja tlocrta i presjeka, Lusaka, Zambija, 1967.
Fig. 11. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (E. Lorenz architectural practice): Single-family house Austin, layouts and sections, variations, Lusaka, Zambia, 1967
strirati usporedbom studentskog doma koji 1964. Miro Marasoviæ i John Owusu Addo u Gani projektiraju kao betonsku osmerokatnicu37 i internatskih sklopova koje poèetkom 1970-ih Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko projektira u Svaziju kao sustave prizemnih graðevina baziène tehnologije izvedbe. Graðevine koje u tim uvjetima nastaju svedene su na minimum izražajnosti, redovito s velikom površinom natkrivenoga i inkorporiranoga otvorenog prostora te funkcionalno spretnim, ponekad i dovitljivim rješenjima. Kad je rijeè o programima koji zahtijevaju karakter sklopa, što je primjerice Internatska škola „Ephesus” u Lobambi, kroz funkcionalnu rašèlambu formiraju se kvalitetni vanjski meðuprostori (sl. 13.). Promjena paradigme u odnosu na pristup imanentan hrvatskoj tradiciji najvidljivija je u posljednjem ostvarenju Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko u Africi, tzv. „Lebdeæoj kuæi” u Freetownu, gdje je inkorporirana svojevrsna sinteza njezina projektantskog iskustva u supsaharskom prostoru (Sl. 1.).
menskim relacijama, èinjenici da je u Etiopiji provela dvije godine kao u svojevrsnoj osobnoj ekspozituri, svjesna relativno brzog povratka pod struèno okrilje zagrebaèkoga Arhitektonskog fakulteta, dok je kasniji odlazak, pored osobnog sazrijevanja, podrazumijevao i dulje razdoblje bez jasne perspektive o povratku, pa stoga ne zaèuðuje ni veæa kolièina otvorenosti i spremnosti na vanjske utjecaje. Dodatno, dok je u Etiopiji radila kao samostalna projektantica, u Zambiji i Svaziju radi unutar veæ uhodanih arhitektonskih ureda drukèijega profesionalnog zaleða od njezina, a to je zasigurno potenciralo i odreðeni, više intiman, a manje nametnut, pomak u projektantskom pristupu.
Sl. 12. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (Biro arhitekta E. Lorenza): Obiteljska kuæa Austin, Lusaka, Zambija, 1967.
Fig. 12. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (E. Lorenz architectural practice): Single-family house Austin, Lusaka, Zambia, 1967
Slièan pristup propusne granice eksterijera i interijera, pri èemu su aspekti klimatskih zahtjeva riješeni gotovo matematièkom preciznošæu, vidljiv je u tendencijama niza modernih graðevina tropskog podneblja bliskim sferi utjecaja tzv. tropske arhitekture. Njezini su postulati, pa i sam naziv, meðu ostalim formulirani programom „School of Tropical Architecture” londonske „Architectural Association School of Architecture”, koji na toj instituciji kontinuira od 1954. do 1970. godine38, te sintetizirani priruènicima za projektiranje „Tropical Architecture in the Humid Zone”, 1956.39, i „Tropical Architecture in the Dry and Humid Zones”, 1964.40, autora Jane Drew i Maxwella Frya. Moderna arhitektura koja izrasta iz osjetljivosti na ekstremnu klimu širi se afrièkim kontinentom transnacionalnim djelovanjem poduzeæa i pojedinaca zapoèetim još u kasnim kolonijalnim odnosima. Posve je izvjesno da su i Erhard Lorenz koji u Lusaku dolazi preko Velike Britanije41 i José Forjaz koji u Mbabane dolazi preko tadašnje portugalske kolonije Mozambika42 bili u komunikaciji s njezinim mrežama.43
ZAKLJUÈAK
CONCLUSION
Dug i dinamièan boravak Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko u Africi, raznolik u smislu konteksta unutar kojeg je struèno djelovala, rezultirao je suptilnim varijacijama u domeni njezina projektantskog pristupa. Kad je rijeè o translaciji principa svojstvenih tradiciji hrvatske moderne arhitekture, ona je najintenzivnija pod okriljem najizrazitijih utjecaja matice zemlje inkorporiranih u liniji transfera, što prije svega podrazumijeva njezin rad u Etiopiji. Razloge tome moguæe je tražiti i u vre-
‘Tropska arhitektura’ još je 1950-ih definirana kao arhitektura izrazite osjetljivosti na klimu, društvo i tehnologiju - kao aspekte discipline izrazito važne u prilagodbi europskih arhitekata kontekstu tropskih zemalja. Taj se koncept, meðutim, uglavnom zaustavljao na aspektima klime.44 Upravo u toj domeni najvidljivija je i promjena projektantskog pristupa Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko. Iako su podruèja na kojima je projektirala izložena sliènoj suptropskoj klimi kišnog i sušnog razdoblja, odraz tog fenomena u njezinoj se arhitekturi intenzivira tijekom godina proživljenog iskustva njegove ekstremnosti. Dok je u ranijim primjerima klima jedan od parametara ravnopravno uzetih u obzir pri projektiranju, pri èemu prioriteti ostaju na razini geometrijskih odnosa, u kasnijim primjerima taj se obrazac mijenja te upravo doživljaj klime postaje jedna od dominantnih pozicija u donošenju projektantskih odluka.
Unutar teme hrvatskih arhitekata koji su djelovali u zemljama Treæega svijeta Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko pripada meðu one malobrojne koji svoje opuse u tom prostoru ostvaruju izvan formalnog posredovanja organizacija bivše države. Za razliku od sustavnih veza koje su se odvijale putem eksportnih agencija i agencija tehnièke pomoæi, njezino je djelovanje individualno i intimno, a unikatan opus rezultat je sukcesivne sinteze iskustava hrvatske moderne arhitekture i supsaharske Afrike.
37 KNUST-DO
38 Uduku, 2006: 399
39 Fry, Drew, 1956.
40 Fry, Drew, 1964.
41 Kontakt Erharda Lorenza s ‘mrežama tropske arhitekture’ dokazuje i njegovo poznanstvo s Oveom Arupom, takoðer podrijetlom Dancem, osnivaèem jedne od kljuènih multinacionalnih kompanija upravo u tom podruèju.
[Jones, 2006: 155]
42 Dennis, 1988: 98
43 O ‘mrežama tropske arhitekture’: Le Roux, 2003.
44 Koncept Jane Drew i Maxwella Frya [Fry, Drew, 1956; Fry, Drew, 1964.] praktiène odgovore na problematiku društva i tehnologije dobiva tek poslije. Stoga ne iznenaðuje da iste probleme nasluæuje i Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko u svojemu teorijskom radu.
Sl. 13. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (Biro arhitekta J. Forjaza): Internatska škola „Ephesus”, varijantno rješenje, Lobamba, Svazi, 1971. Fig. 13. D. Crnkoviæ Oèko (J. Forjaz architectural practice): Ephesus boarding-school, variation, Lobamba, Swaziland, 1971
ODABRANI RADOVI D. CRNKOVIÆ OÈKO
SELECTED WORKS OF D. CRNKOVIÆ OÈKO
Hrvatska do 1958.
1940. „Okrugla kuæa” (obiteljska kuæa), Dvorièek 17a, Podsused, Zagreb; izvedeno
1948. Arhitektonske studije Pionirskoga grada, Dubrava, Zagreb
1950. Stambeni paviljoni Studentskoga grada (7 smještajnih jedinica u 2 varijante), Dubrava, Zagreb; izvedeno
1950. Etnografski muzej, Zagreb; projekt
1950. Stambeni paviljon na Plitvièkim jezerima; izvedeno (kao suradnica Zdenka Strižiæa)
1951. Kupalište na Plitvièkim jezerima; izvedeno (kao suradnica Zdenka Strižiæa)
1952. Pristanište na Plitvièkim jezerima; izvedeno (kao suradnica Zdenka Strižiæa)
1953. Uèiteljska škola, Savska cesta, Zagreb; natjeèaj, otkup (s Vladimirom Fullom)
1953. Osmogodišnja škola, Podsused; natjeèaj, I. nagrada (s Bernardom Bernardijem)
1953. Hotel na Plitvièkim jezerima; natjeèaj, nagrada
1954. Osmogodišnja škola, Siveriæ; djelomièno izvedeno (s Vladimirom Fullom)
1954. Dvorazredna škola, Lipnica; izvedeno
1954. TBC bolnica, Petrinja; natjeèaj, otkup (s Vladimirom Fullom)
1955. Gimnazija, Nova Gradiška; natjeèaj, nagrada (s Vladimirom Fullom)
1955. Radnièko sveuèilište, Zagreb; natjeèaj, III. nagrada (s Vladimirom Fullom)
1955. Studije za tipove malih škola (kao suradnica Zdenka Strižiæa)
1955. Dom narodnog zdravlja, Prijedor; projekt (s Bernardom Bernardijem)
1955. Dom Zavoda za socijalno osiguranje - Filijala Trešnjevka, Zagreb; projekt
1956. Pretprojekt za zgradu Filozofskoga fakulteta, Zagreb; poslije èlanica natjeèajnog ocjenjivaèkog suda
1956. Dom željeznièara (školski centar), Beograd; natjeèaj, III. nagrada (s Vladimirom Fullom)
1957. Stambena zgrada za službenike PTT-a, Ulica Koste Vojnoviæa 5, Zagreb; izvedeno (s Vladimirom Fullom)
1957. Stambena zgrada za službenike Zavoda za socijalno osiguranje, Ulica kraljice Jelene 8, Zagreb; izvedeno (s Vladimirom Fullom) (nepoznata godina) Èetverorazredna škola, Jastrebarsko; izvedeno (moguæe u suradnji)
Etiopija 1958.-1960.
1958.-1959. Motel uz rijeku Awash; projekt
1959. Zgrada Odbora za planiranje Ministarstva industrije i trgovine, Addis Abeba; projekt
1959. Urbanistièko rješenje centra Addis Abebe, Addis Abeba; projekt (s Vladimirom Ugrenoviæem)
1959. Radiostanica, Addis Abeba; projekt (s Vladimirom Ugrenoviæem)
1959. Stambena zgrada, Addis Abeba; projekt (nepoznata godina) Kuæa s atrijem (obiteljska kuæa), okolica Addis Abebe; projekt (nepoznata godina) Adaptacija Jugoslavenskog kluba, Addis Abeba (nepoznata godina) Postav izložbe „Smjernice ekonomskog razvoja Etiopije”
Hrvatska 1960.-1966.
1961. Zgrada CK SKH, Zagreb; natjeèaj, otkup (s Vladimirom Fullom)
1962. Dom Radiotelevizije, Zagreb; natjeèaj, otkup (s Melitom Vilièiæ)
Zambija 1966.-1970.
1966. Compound od dvanaest stanova, Lusaka; izvedeno (u birou arhitekta Erharda Lorenza)
1966. Hotel, Barotseland; varijantna rješenja 1967. Obiteljska kuæa Austin, Lusaka; izvedeno (u birou arhitekta Erharda Lorenza)
1969. Nacionalni centar za znanstvena istraživanja, Lusaka; projekt (u projektnom uredu Nacionalnog vijeæa za znanstvena istraživanja)
1970. Predsjednièka rezidencija za Kennetha Kaundu, rezidencijalni sklop izvan grada; suradnja na raznim segmentima projekta (u birou Lorenz and Pearce Architects) (nepoznata godina) Kuæe za kompaniju Ove Arup and Partners, Lusaka; izvedeno (u birou arhitekta Erharda Lorenza, tj. Lorenz and Pearce Architects)
Svazi 1970.-1972. (u birou arhitekta Joséa Forjaza)
1971. Internatska srednja škola, Matsapa-Kwaluseni; varijantna rješenja školskog sklopa i projekti pojedinaènih graðevina; djelomièno izvedeno
1971. Internatska škola „Ephesus”, Lobamba; varijantna rješenja školskog sklopa i projekti pojedinaènih graðevina; djelomièno izvedeno
1971. Djeèji vrtiæ, Mbabane; izvedeno
Sierra Leone 1972.-1974.
1973. „Lebdeæa kuæa” (obiteljska kuæa), Freetown; izvedeno
1. Celmiæ, I. (2004.a), Sjeæanje na gradnju luke Latakija u Siriji, „Graðevinar”, 56: 115-122, Zagreb
2. Celmiæ, I. (2004.b), In memoriam. Miro Marasoviæ, dipl.ing.arh. (1914.-2004.), „Graðevinar”, 56: 323, Zagreb
3. De Raedt, K. (2013.), Shifting conditions, frameworks and approaches. The work of KPDV in postcolonial Africa, „ABE Journal”, 4, abe.revues.org/650 (31.8.2015.)
4. Dennis, D. (1988.), The work of José Forjaz in Mozambique, „Environmental Design”, 1-2: 94103, Rim
5. Fry, M.; Drew, J. (1956.), Tropical architecture in the humid zone, Batsford, London
6. Fry, M.; Drew, J. (1964.), Tropical architecture in the dry and humid zones, Batsford, London
7. Gomboš, S. (1963.), Natjeèaj za Dom Radio-televizije u Zagrebu, „Èovjek i prostor”, 119: 1-6, Zagreb
8. Jones, P. (2006.), Ove Arup: Masterbuilder of the Twentieth Century, Yale University Press, New Haven - London
9. Kranjèeviæ, J. (2012.), Branko Petroviæ: požeški arhitekt i urbanist, „Požeška kronika”, 511: 6, Požega
10. Le Roux, H. (2003.), The networks of tropical architecture, „The Journal of Architecture”, 8: 337-354, London
11. Mlaðenoviæ, I. (1986.), Ivan Štraus, u: „11 istaknutih arhitekata Jugoslavije”, ULUPUDS, Beograd
12. Mutnjakoviæ, A. (1956.), Muzej u Alepu. Prva nagrada meðunarodnog natjeèaja, „Èovjek i prostor”, 52: 2-3, Zagreb
13. Prtenjak, I. (2015.), Arhitekture/Architectures, UPI-2M, Zagreb
14. Sinðeliæ, S. (1969.), Naši graðevinski struènjaci u Etiopiji, „Arhitektura urbanizam”, 58: 43-44, Beograd
15. Strižiæ, Z. (1950.), Nacionalni park Plitvièka jezera, „Arhitektura”, 7-8: 3-24, Zagreb
16. Strižiæ, Z. (1953.), Plitvièka jezera i natjeèaj za projekt hotela, „Arhitektura”, 5-6: 3-7, Zagreb
17. Šegviæ, N. (1950.), Stvaralaèke komponente arhitekture FNRJ, „Urbanizam i arhitektura”, 5-6: 5-40, Zagreb
18. Uduku, O. (2006.), Modernist architecture and ‘the tropical’ in West Africa, The tropical architecture movement in West Africa, 1948-1970, „Habitat International”, 30 (3): 396-411, Oxford 19. *** (1948.a), Menza za Pionirski grad u Zagrebu, „Arhitektura”, 8-10: 41, Zagreb
20. *** (1948.b), Djeèje zabavište, „Arhitektura”, 8-10: 42, Zagreb
21. *** (1950.), Stambeni paviljoni studentskog naselja Sveuèilišnog grada u Dubravi u Zagrebu, „Arhitektura”, 11-12: 54-59, Zagreb 22. *** (1953.), Uz natjeèaj za uèiteljsku školu u Zagrebu, „Arhitektura”, 4: 4-11, Zagreb 23. *** (1954.), Natjeèaj za osmoljetku u Podsusedu, „Arhitektura”, 3: 98-102, Zagreb 24. *** (1955.), Naše gospodarsko sodelovanje z Etiopijo, „Dolenjski list”, 23.12.: 1, Novo Mesto 25. *** (1956.), Natjeèaj za Radnièko sveuèilište u Zagrebu, „Arhitektura”, 1-6: 60-61, Zagreb
26. *** (1961.), Natjeèaj za izradu idejnog rješenja zgrade Centralnog komiteta Saveza komunista Hrvatske, „Arhitektura”, 5-6: 25-32, Zagreb 27. *** (1975.), Jugoslavensko graðevinarstvo u svetu, Jugoslavenski graðevinski centar, Beograd 28. *** (1991.), Arhitekti èlanovi JAZU [ur. Galiæ, D.], Hrvatska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti, Zagreb
29. *** (1997.), Tko je tko u hrvatskoj arhitekturi [ur. Rogina, K.], Udruženje hrvatskih arhitekata, Zagreb
30. *** (2000.), Sveuèilište u Zagrebu - Arhitektonski fakultet, 1919./1920.-1999./2000. Osamdeset godina izobrazbe arhitekata u Hrvatskoj [ur. Obad Šæitaroci, M.], Arhitektonski fakultet, Zagreb
Sources
Arhivski izvori
Archive Sources
1. Arhitektonski fakultet Sveuèilišta u ZagrebuArhiv personalnih dosjea [AF-APD], Kaèiæeva 26, Zagreb
2. Hrvatska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti - Hrvatski muzej arhitekture - Osobni arhivski fond Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/ 66], Ivana Gorana Kovaèiæa 37, Zagreb
3. Državni arhiv u Zagrebu - Zbirka graðevinske dokumentacije [HR-DAZG-1122], Opatièka 29, Zagreb
4. Arhiva bivšeg poduzeæa Centroprojekt Zagreb [CPZG]
5. Tehnièko sveuèilište Kwame Nkrumah u Kumasiju - Arhiv Projektnog ureda (Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology - Development Office) [KNUST-DO], Kumasi, Gana
6. Privatna arhiva g. Ranka Æetkoviæa, Zagreb
Osobna, grafièka i fotodokumentacija
Personal, Graphic and Photo Documentation
1. Personalni dosje Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko [AF-APD]
2. Osobni arhivski fond Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66]
3. Vojno-pomorska baza Homs - projektna dokumentacija (1974.-1976.) [CPZG]
4. Zbirka graðevinske dokumentacije [HR-DAZG1122]
5. Zgrada studentskog doma ‘Unity hall’ - projektna dokumentacija [KNUST-DO]
6. „Okrugla kuæa”, Podsused - projektna dokumentacija [arhiva g. R. Æetkoviæa]
Neobjavljeni tekstovi
Unpublished Texts
1. Crnkoviæ Oèko, D. (1960.-1963.a), Etiopija, rukopis [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66]
2. Crnkoviæ Oèko, D. (1960.-1963.b), Guragee, rukopis [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66]
3. Crnkoviæ Oèko, D. (1960.-1963.c), Karakteristike uroðenièkog stanovanja, rukopis [HAZUHMA-OAF/DCO/66]
4. Crnkoviæ Oèko, D. (1960.-1963.d), Kulturno naslijeðe Etiopije, rukopis [HAZU-HMA-OAF/ DCO/66]
5. Crnkoviæ Oèko, D. (1960.-1963.e), Stan za bijele - Addis Abeba, rukopis [HAZU-HMA-OAF/ DCO/66]
6. Ugrenoviæ, V. (1959.), Izvještaj o prouèavanju moguænosti plasiranja projektantskih usluga u Ethiopiji, rukopis [HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66]
Razgovor s osobama
Interviews
Gða Dunja Crnkoviæ Vejzoviæ
Gða Sanja Crnkoviæ Pozaiæ
G. Ranko Æetkoviæ
Izvori ilustracija
Illustration Sources
Sl. 1., 3.-6., 8.-14. HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66
Sl. 2. Autori
Sl. 7. Autori prema grafièkoj dokumentaciji HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66
Izvori za popis radova Dragice Crnkoviæ Oèko nalaze se u referencama u tekstu vezanim za pojedinaène radove, ostali radovi prema dokumentaciji HAZU-HMA-OAF/DCO/66.
The work of Croatian architects in the Third World countries between the 1950s and the 1980s is usually associated with the non-aligned foreign policy of former Yugoslavia. They were a part of a wide network of experts engaged by central institutions in various activities ranging from technical assistance to market-oriented agencies. In this context, the professional engagement of the architect Dragica (Daša) Crnkoviæ Oèko in Africa was unique and therefore an exception.
During trips with her husband, who was engaged as an expert for technical assistance in Ethiopia (19581960), Zambia, Swaziland and Sierra Leone (19661974), D. Crnkoviæ Oèko found professional opportunities to work as an architect. She used to work on outsourcing basis for Yugoslavian companies, in state and private architectural practices but also on her own. This article looks into her professional activities in the context of the values immanent in Croatian post-war architecture transferred into new circumstances (different climate, society and technology) and analyzes the impact of the immediate surroundings on her design approach. Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko graduated in 1949 from the Technical Faculty in Zagreb where she soon started to work as assistant in the Department of Architectural Design. In parallel, she used to work on numerous projects either individually or as member of a team in post-war reconstruction. In various spatial settings, her designs were characterized by clear concepts adjusted to rational investments and features of the sites. Her approach thus varied depending on the context: from relatively consolidated urban areas and locations of great urban significance to suburban and rural areas as well as the areas of wild nature. All her projects share a common feature: a modern architectural vocabulary, which, depending on the context, ranges from non-contextual, abstract geometrical compositions to design features rooted in local building
tradition, be it the existing urban rules, local materials or specific architectural forms. Her approach stems from the values immanent in Croatian Modern architecture and reflects current tendencies. She applied the same procedure later, yet adapted it to African context.
Her sojourn in Ethiopia was tied in many respects to her homeland. Formally employed at the Faculty of Architecture in Zagreb, she was active in theoretical work and used to work for various investors.
In her design she addressed the issues in a similar way as in Croatia which results in a comparative approach.
In her conceptual urban design of the center of Adis Abeba produced in collaboration with the architect Vladimir Ugrenoviæ, she implemented freestanding geometrical solids as harmoniously composed volumes placed along the main city roads. The new layer, imposed on the existing urban fabric, was based on the continuity of the pre-war CIAM principles recognizable in many Croatian citied in the post-war reconstruction period. In the context of her individual designs, the analogous approach is exemplified by the design variations for the Planning Office building of the Ministry of Trade and Industry. The Atrium House situated in a natural setting shows a tendency to depart from the abstract and non-contextual regarding local materials although more in the phenomenological than technological sense. The influence of the climate is taken into consideration through an integration of the outdoor spaces within the volumes with still firm boundaries. A total departure from the abstract form is clearly visible in wild natural settings. The motel along the Awash river is an example of a contemporary program developed within the circular units so typical of African dwellings
Having resigned from the Faculty, she went to Zambia, Swaziland and Sierra Leone where she worked in an international professional setting. Her work in
Zambia started in the architectural practice of the Danish architect Erhard Lorenz in Lusaka. For a short period of time she used to work in the Department of Architecture of the National Council for Scientific Research but later returned to the same practice. In Swaziland she worked in the architectural practice of the Portuguese architect José Forjaz in Mbabane.
Her stay in Africa ended with her individual design work in Freetown in Sierra Leone. Even in her first works, the so-called ”Compound” comprising 12 apartments and even more the single-family house Austin in Lusaka, show a departure from the proportioning and composing of geometrical volumes whose precise boundaries lose their former firmness. Unlike the original visual quality in the perception of space, spatial experience now turns to a sensory domain.
In case of the social program such as the Ephesus boarding school in Lobamba, the investments were modest so she had to reconcile the current architectural tendencies with the local building technology. A different approach from the one based on Croatian tradition is mostly visible in her last project in Africa, the so-called Floating House in Freetown where she integrated diverse design experiences in the Sub-Saharan region.
During her long and dynamic stay in Africa she gained a wealth of professional experience resulting in subtle variations in her design approach. The inherent principles of Croatian Modern architecture were transferred into a new context most intensively when she was under direct influence of her homeland, for example while she was working in Ethiopia. Her work in successful architectural practices with a different professional background, like in Zambia and Swaziland, resulted in a shift in her approach to architecture. Her unique body of work is the result of merging the influences from Croatian Modern Architecture and Sub-Saharan Africa.
Biografije Biographies
MOJCA SMODE CVITANOVIÆ, dipl.ing.arh., i MARINA SMOKVINA, dipl.ing.arh., suradnice su znanstvenoistraživaèkog projekta „Atlas hrvatske arhitekture XX. stoljeæa”. Bave se istraživanjem djelovanja hrvatskih arhitekata u zemljama Treæega svijeta. Dr.sc. ANDREJ UCHYTIL, dipl.ing.arh., redoviti je profesor Katedre arhitektonskog projektiranja i Katedre teorije i povijesti arhitekture. Voditelj je znanstvenoistraživaèkog projekta „Atlas hrvatske arhitekture XX. stoljeæa” do 2012. godine. Dobitnik je nagrada UHA-e „Neven Šegviæ” za teorijski rad 2008., Državne nagrade za znanost 2009. (sa Z. Barišiæ Mareniæ i E. Kahroviæ) te I. nagrade Zagrebaèkog salona 2009. (s R. Waldgoni) za realizaciju crkve sv. Ivana Evanðelista u Zagrebu.
MOJCA SMODE CVITANOVIÆ and MARINA SMOKVINA, Dipl.Eng.Arch., collaborators in the scientific research project Atlas of the 20th Century Croatian Architecture. Their research interests focus on the Croatian architects working in the Third World countries. ANDREJ UCHYTIL, Dipl.Eng.Arch., Ph.D., Full Professor in the Department of Architectural Design and the Department of the Theory and History of Architecture. He is head of the scientific research project Atlas of the 20th Century Croatian Architecture until 2012. He received Neven Šegviæ award in 2008, the State Award for Science in 2009 (with Z. Barišiæ Mareniæ and E. Kahroviæ), and the 1st Zagreb Salon award in 2009 (with R. Waldgoni) for the realization of the Church of St John the Evangelist in Zagreb.
Table I Criteria
Tabl. I. Kriteriji vrednovanja životnih uvjeta u obnovljenim zgradama u kontekstu održivog ruralnog turizma
CriteriaActions and characteristicsElements
1. Bio-climatic factors (altitude) 1.1 Architectural expression1.1.1 Façade
Roof
Materials used 1.1.4 Façade openings
2. Location use planning2.1 Equipment and renewal of location infrastructural capacities
3. Rural settlement arrangement design
4. Architectural-aesthetic aspects
a. Arrangement of rural settlements
b. Arrangement of rural settlement centers
c. Planned revitalization of residential buildings
d. Planned revitalization of commercial buildings
Preserved architectural heritage
4.1 Revitalized
4.2 Reconstructed
5. Technical aspects5.1. Construction-static characteristics (depending of construction and material)
Water supply
Sewage 2.1.3 Road infrastructure
Log cabin (wooden house)
Wood cabin (wooden construction elements with soil filling)
Stone house
5.2. Construction material5.2.1 Stone
5.3. Fire protection
6. Functional aspects6.1. Living area - residential standard
6.2. Functional characteristics
6.3. Residential area use
7. Position of building in yard complex - urban setup
7.1. Relation of residential building and commercial buildings in the yard
7.2. Preserve architectural heritage or rebuild the identical houses
8. Interior equipment8.1. Preserve inherited interior elements8.1.1 Fireplaces
8.1.2 Mantles
8.1.3 Tile stoves
8.1.4 Old furniture restoring
8.1.5 New furniture according to the old elements
8.2. Old crafts
9. Renewable energy sources9.1. Passive energy use9.1.1 Natural lee
9.1.2 Window size
9.1.3 House position against ordinal directions
9.1.4 Burying and basement
9.2. Active systems9.2.1 Solar thermal systems (STS)
9.2.2 Photovoltaic (PV) systems
9.2.3 Windmills
9.2.4 Heat pumps
10. Environmental aspect of location
10.1. Protection and improvement of environment quality10.1.1 Water
10.2. Careful waste management
11. Planned reconstruction11.1. Residential buildings
11.2. Buildings for commercial activities
11.3. Auxiliary economic buildings
12. Sociological aspects12.1. Rural autochthonous population
12.2. Guest activities
13. Agro-economic aspects13.1. Preservation of autochthonous vegetables and fruits13.1.1 Traditional food and drinks
13.2 Preservation of autochthonous domestic animals
14. Economic aspectsRenewal of the existing houses provides for savings in energy, construction material, land and infrastructure. Application of the new systems should be planned in the manner that the investments provide return.
University of Novi Sad
Faculty of Civil Engineering Subotica
Serbia - 24000 Subotica, Kozaraèka 2
BauLab GmbH
Switzerland - 4656 Starrkirch-Wil, Bumelochstrasse 1 ljiljana.d.aleksic@gmail.com info@bau-lab.ch
Subject Review
UDC 725.025.4:728.6:379.8:910.4 (4)”19/20”
Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning 2.01.03. - Architectural Structures, Building Physics, Materials and Building Technology
Article Received / Accepted: 14. 2. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
Sveuèilište u Novom Sadu Graðevinski fakultet, Subotica Srbija - 24000 Subotica, Kozaraèka 2 BauLab GmbH
Switzerland - 4656 Starrkirch-Wil, Bumelochstrasse 1 ljiljana.d.aleksic@gmail.com info@bau-lab.ch
Pregledni znanstveni èlanak
UDK 725.025.4:728.6:379.8:910.4 (4)”19/20”
Tehnièke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam
2.01.03. - Arhitektonske konstrukcije, fizika zgrade, materijali i tehnologija graðenja Èlanak primljen / prihvaæen: 14. 2. 2016. / 7. 6. 2016.
building revitalization integration of solar systems revitalization of rural settlements rural tourism sustainable development
This paper deals with problematic of sustainable development of rural tourism with particular focus on building revitalization and integration of solar systems. The relevant principles and criteria are established and functional and aesthetic, energetic, economic, social and ecological aspects are considered. The possibilities and effects are presented. Several examples of sustainable building revitalization in Europe in rural tourism are presented.
obnova zgrada ugradnja solarnih sustava revitalizacija ruralnih naselja ruralni turizam održivi razvoj
Ovaj se rad bavi problematikom održivoga razvoja u ruralnome turizmu s osobitim osvrtom na obnovu zgrada i ugradnju solarnih sustava. U njemu se definiraju relevantni principi i kriteriji, razmatraju estetski, energetski, ekonomski, društveni i ekološki aspekti te analiziraju moguænosti i rezultati. Rad prezentira i neke europske primjere održive obnove zgrada u održivom razvoju ruralnog turizma.
Ruralenvironment as a possible tourist destination represents significant untapped potential that may, upon certain investments, compete with the other tourist destinations. This paper covers the issues of sustainable development principles application, at the level of accountability held by all participants in the process of revitalizing and creating the tourism-appropriate architecture in the rural communities, and integration of solar systems within the framework in particular. There is a close connection between the rural tourism development and revitalizing the existing buildings, in line with the environment presentation along with the sustainable development of the entire local community. Criteria for living conditions in the revitalized sustainable rural tourism buildings had been defined, and meeting those criteria would provide users with comfortable living, with rational energy consumption. Great attention is paid to the environment protection and improvement, through environmentally responsible behavior, since the economic-environmental sustainability is an exceptionally important prerequisite of rural areas renewal and development.1 Rural tourism has threefold growth rate against the classical tourism, with the expected annual growth of 20%.2 Rural tourism relies on the needs of urban inhabitants for tranquility and areas for sporting leisure in the open. Sustainable development of rural tourism has the task to
preserve autochthonous masonry and existing building fund that is being revitalized and extended or rebuilt as needed, however always in line with the characteristics of autochthonous traditional architecture, using local construction material, and employing local inhabitants. Revitalizing rural environments greatly depends on availability of transportation networks, to facilitate efficient travel from urban centers to the remote rural settlements.
If buildings in rural settlements have good sun exposure, not being shaded by the elements from the environment, they are major consumers of thermal energy, i.e. electricity, which is true for numerous residential and hospitality buildings, they are particularly favorable to installing solar thermal systems [STS], i.e. photovoltaic [PV] systems under the revitalization process. The paper lists the fundamental principles of integrating solar systems during reconstruction of a building. Utilization of solar systems may yield multiple benefits: environmental, energetic, functional and aesthetic. Since the older buildings in rural environment are built in traditional style, special attention should be given to the aesthetic aspect of integration. The position, form, type of solar panels must be carefully chosen and in accordance with the whole surrounding, building design and building envelope. Appropriate designed solar systems may improve energy efficiency of a building, potentially up to the level of selfsustainability, and with the quality aesthetic solution, they may become a new, recognizable architectural designations. Educational aspect would also be important, since visually recognizable solar systems directly promote building awareness about the importance of energy preservation, renewable energy sources and sustainable development. The residential building, 110 years old, in a Swiss village, was selected as the example, with its reconstruction being covered by the authors of this paper, demonstrating potential problems and principles of integrating PV systems in rural environment. The possibilities for integration of solar systems in building revitalization in rural tourism are presented through several other examples in Europe.
ODRŽIVI RAZVOJ U RURALNOM TURIZMU
Rural tourism development - Rural tourism spontaneously occurs in Western and Central Europe in the early 20th century. Agro-tourism develops with the agriculture development in 1960’s and 1970’s. It becomes an international touristic product after 2000, especially in the countries with developed touristic offer,
considering it an important component of an integrated, sustainable rural settlements’ development. There are between 600,000 and 1,000,000 households in Europe registered for providing rural tourism services, with 12 million beds and providing 1.5-3 million jobs.3
General terms and definitions - The simplest definition of the rural tourism is that this is the tourism that happens in rural environment. Definition by Swiss professors W. Hunziker and K. Krapf from 1942 was extended by the AIST [Academy for the International Study of Tourism] in 1957, focusing on the economic influences of tourism phenomenon, noting that ”tourism: a set of social and economic relations, visitor travelling to a destination, temporary stay of visitor unrelated to visitor’s economic benefit (a tourist spends funds earned elsewhere, usually at the place of permanent residence)”.4 Broader concept states that ”the rural tourism entails not only the agro-tourism; it also includes leisure in
1 Lane, 1993
2 Cox Rachel, 2006: 865-888
3 Joviæ, 2015
4 Štahan, 2014
5 Štahan, 2014
6 Commission on World Environment and Development, 1987
7 World Bank: Environment, growth and development, 1987
8 Allen, 1980
9 Pearce, Warford, 1993
10 The Florida Center for Community Design&Research
the nature, excursions to rural areas, with touristic stay and service including events, festivals, recreation, production and sale of personal crafts, crafting and agricultural products, along with the lodging”. Encyclopedia of Tourism (2000) states that the rural area is the fundamental resource for development of rural tourism, and Rural Tourism in EuropeExperiences, Development and Perspectives (2004) publication states that the term of ”rural tourism” is used when the rural culture is the key component of touristic product offered”.5
Concept of sustainable development is laid out in six definitions.
1) Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.6
2) Sustainable development is development that satisfies the multiple criteria of sustainable growth, poverty alleviation, and environmental management.7
3) Sustainable development is development that is likely to achieve lasting satisfaction of human needs and improvement of the quality of human life.8
4) Sustainable development is a process in which the natural resource base is not allowed to deteriorate.9
5) Sustainability is the optimal balance of natural, economic, and social systems over time.10
Strengths:
- Green energy generation
- Strong brand
- Standardized and accessible technology
- Integrability into built environment
- Architectural values
Opportunities:
- Fast developing market (=40% increase per year)
- Constant technological advancements
- Increase of fossil fuels price
- Limited sources of fossil fuels
Weaknesses:
- Cannot compete with conventional energy sources
- High energy payback for PV (2-4 years)
- Life cycle of =25 years
- High initial costs
Threats:
- High dependence on subsidies
- Reaching technological advancements limit
- Limitation of rare minerals needed for present PV technologies
6) An ideal sustainable society would be one in which all energy would be derived from current solar income and all non-renewable resources would be recycled.11 According to them, sustainability should balance the needs of present and the needs of future, without reducing quality of life and natural resources and additionally provide favorable economic performance. Sustainably designed buildings aim at reducing negative effects on the environment, through energy efficiency and efficient use of natural resources.12
According to the above definitions of tourism and sustainability, ”sustainable tourism” is the tourism with minimal impact to the environment, while preserving local cultural heritage. This provides for development of the entire rural area, providing new jobs thus decreasing population migration, influencing in general the increase of economic wellbeing and quality of living, while decreasing the use of non-renewable natural resources. Sustainable rural tourism is the responsible tourism, to provide wellbeing to future generations as well.13
KRITERIJI OBNOVE ZGRADA U ODRŽIVOM RURALNOM TURIZMU
The development of rural area houses reaches the apex in autochthonous construction in early decades of 20th century. Since then, the needs arise regarding new capacities in the houses, such as various sheds, kitchens, bathrooms, indoor closed stairways, better installations. Good solutions for yards and relation of living and other quarters in the household are specific for scattered rural settlements, with yards being divided into functional zones: living area, economic part, and yard, with separate entrance to living and economic parts. Where this is not the case, revitalization of yard entails separation of housing and economic part, thus improving the quality of living.14 For the reconstruction and rehabilitation of houses in rural areas architectural and aesthetic aspects are em-
phasized through the respect of the principles of indigenous folk architecture. The elements which are especially considered are form and storey height of houses, materialization and purpose of the attic and the basement space, openings size, used materials, materialization of the façade and form of the roof. Interior equipment mostly utilizes authentic furniture, made of natural material, with authentic interior elements: fireplaces, tile stoves, etc; being refurbished or rebuilt.
Bio-climatic construction is already spontaneously inherent to the traditional rural environment masonry. The houses were built in lee. Position of residential building is such that the construction takes care about the ordinal directions, appropriately sized windows are being placed, terrain slope is used for burying houses, and functional concept of the building is such that the basement is commonly used. Using the traditional construction characteristic, sustainable construction criteria are defined: minimum use of non-renewable energy sources, use of materials from the environment, minimum use of toxic material and environment improving. Ecological aspects of the site are reflected through the protection of water, soil and air with careful management of waste which should lead to environmental sustainability. For the sociological aspect in rural areas the motivation of the local population and local government for responsive waste management is very important. The planned disposal and recycling would result in minimized emission of CO2, the better quality of drinking water and air. Revitalization of architectural fund and rural environment sustainability may be under a set of urbanism and designing criteria, with their multidisciplinary approach providing architectural solutions that do not violate the environment (Table I).
UGRADNJA SOLARNIH SUSTAVA U ODRŽIVOM RURALNOM OKOLIŠU
Potential of solar systems integration in sustainable rural tourism - Because of weaknesses mainly related to economic performance of solar systems, under an exclusive condition of careful design and responsible decision-making in every phase of designing process, integrating solar systems can be a quality solution from the aspect of sustainable development principle in general, as well as in particular case of revitalizing a building within the rural tourism setup. Proper understanding of the solar system application in a given project requires realistic comprehending of solar systems’ strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, and threats (Table II). Solar technologies have very strong brand of green energy and additionally can contribute to architecture, but they are usually expensive. These issues can question application of active solar systems in architecture as sustainable technology.
Taking into account all the issues related to integration of solar systems, it is possible to define seven guidelines that contribute „sustainabilization” of solar technologies:
1. Contribution to architecture: The solar elements should contribute to architecture through their multifunctionality.
2. Innovative design: The solar technologies should be presented in good light through innovative designs.
3. Comfort: The use of solar technologies should increase comfort in the building.
4. Respect constraints (shadows of buildings, trees, vegetation, unfavorable orientation, angles): In rural environment the building density is lower and regarding constraints of shadows, the potential for solar integration is higher.
5. Energy efficiency (optimal tilted angles, improvement of envelope insulation): Simultaneously with designing, simulation software should be used for analyzing energy efficiency of different design variants.
6. Economic feasibility: STSs are generally economically feasible, especially when applied on building with high hot water consumption, which is true for many touristic objects. With increase of fuel and electricity prices, STSs become even more competitive to conventional energy sources and become less expensive with market growth.
11 Pirages, 1977
12 Stevoviæ, Vasilski, 2010
13 George, Mair, Reid, 2009: 177-198
14 Ribar, 1994
15 Aleksiæ, Kosoriæ, 2015
16 Goliæ, Kosoriæ, Krstiæ, 2011
17 Kosoriæ, Wittkopf, Huang, 2011
18 Krstiæ, Kosoriæ, Goliæ, 2012
7. Motivation: Motivation implies positive mass spreading effect of design for people to support energy savings and sustainable development, and can be exceptionally important as a tool to ”sustainabilize” solar technologies in architecture.15
It is clear that saving fossil fuels, reduction of CO2 emissions and decrease of solar systems’ prices make integration of solar systems an appropriate solution to be applied in the building revitalization process in the rural environment. Apart from contributing to the environment protection, integration of solar systems in the existing building envelopes would directly improve envelope insulation properties and would demonstrate a concept of active building envelope. Creative and careful design would improve aesthetic aspect of the entire building.
Design principles of integration of solar systems in revitalization of rural buildings - According to given seven guidelines, it can be concluded that the success of ”sustainabilization” of solar technologies fully depends on design. Some general guidelines for design principles of both STS16 and PV systems17 can be proposed.
Figure 1 systematically presents simplified general model with several basic phases. The integration requires a comprehensive approach with consideration of many aspects. The entire process starts with intention to integrate solar system into design and the complex integrative design process ends with finding the optimal design taking into account inputs from the project participants, and relevant requirements and constraints. Evaluation and selection of optimal design are very subjective; however, this can also be done with the assistance of mathematical methods.18
PV integration in 110 year old residential building in the village ”Starrkirch-Wil” in Switzerland - 110 years old residential building with 250 m2 of living area, in the very center of Starrkirch-Wil at the northwest of Switzerland was completely refurbished in 2014 (Fig. 2).
2 House in Starrkirch-Wil: Before reconstruction, after reconstruction, south balcony with PV panels fence
Sl. 2. Kuæa u Starrkirch-Wilu: Prije rekonstrukcije, nakon rekonstrukcije, južni balkon s ogradom od FN (fotonaponskih) panela
SUSTAINABLE DESIGN IN SUSTAINABLE RURAL TOURISM - EUROPEAN EXPERIENCES
ODRŽIVO PROJEKTIRANJE
U ODRŽIVOM RURALNOM TURIZMU - EUROPSKA ISKUSTVA
In order to increase comfort, and extend the living area, the winter garden was built on the southern side, covered by the balcony with PV modules integrated in the fence. In line with the requirement of Construction Committee and the opinion of the Chamber for Settlement Cultural Values Protection, the PV modules had to be designed as glass, transparent modules without a frame, that do not excessively cover the façade specific for this area, taking care of the solar cells size, spacing and matching them with the rest of façade materials. It was permitted to install 7 custom-made PV panels, with total installed capacity 0.8746 kWp, dimensions 1200´1110´ ´17.52 mm, each with 42 dark mono-crystal solar cells. Apart from benefits regarding electricity production, this PV module fence exquisitely fits the entire project and the façade; solar cells give aesthetic freshness and nice contrast to the façade woodwork, providing partial privacy to the persons sitting on the balcony, hiding them from the street sights. This is the first solar façade integration in this village, which was nicely received, being a motivator and a caveat to the persons passing by and promoting the use of energy from renewable energy sources.
According to the evaluation by the Organization for European Cooperation and Development [OECD], rural areas cover some 90% of the EU territory. More than half of the EU citizens live in these areas, and over 40% of domestic products are manufactured there. The trend in 1970’s was to renew rural areas; in 1980’s, the institutions were passing the programs to protect nature, eco-systems and develop leisure facilities in rural areas. By the end of 20th century and in 1990’s, funds were allocated for rural development, particularly focusing on integral rural development.
Cinque Terre, ”The five lands”, Italia - Cinque Terre area consists of 5 littoral villages in Liguria coastline. Shoreline with five villages and surrounding hills are a part of Cinque Terre national park, being the UNESCO world heritage since 1997, for ”harmonious interaction between human and nature, creating an exquisite site”.19
This area is special because of the villages’ position on the steep terrain, with sea view, picturesque houses in pastel colors, littoral charm, a network of walking paths and climbing cliffs, linking small villages with meandering roads, intersecting by hilly terraces of vineyards and olive groves. Paths, trains, and ships link the villages that are not accessible by cars, from the outside, and on that way is the CO2 emission reduced to a minimum. In 1998, the Italian Ministry of Environment had announced protection of littoral area Cinque Terre.20 Architecture fits the terrain, becoming a part of sloped cliffs. Architectural aspects were adhered to in reconstruction of buildings to adjust them to the new functions. Houses are built on the hillside, protected from the wind. Local inhabitants take strong participation in tourist activities to develop the entire region, through agriculture, gastronomy, and nourishing the old crafts. (Fig. 4).
The ”Casa Rosa” in Marche
ItalyThe ”Casa Rosa” is an ancient farmhouse sitting in the hills of Marche Region (Fig. 3). Using only natural materials, the farm was renewed with techniques of sustainable architecture. The renewable resources were used in order to save on energy costs and to remain respectful to the earth and atmosphere. The renovations have maintained historical and geographic characteristics of the farmhouse. The
system
made up of 56 single-crystal silicon panels of 175 W each. The PV panels cover the roof of a 70 m2 parking lot (Fig. 3). The STS made up of two modules were installed in 2008, one for the production of sanitary hot water and the other for the swimming pool heating. The geothermal drill has been placed on the property and the plant will recover the heat stored by the swimming pool in the summer season and utilize it during colder seasons. The PV panels, the solar heating and the geothermal drills make the whole building self-sufficient.21
”Braeuer” guesthouse in Weisskirchen, Austria - The ”Braeuer” guesthouse hotel is situated in Weisskirchen. This traditional house was refurbished with the aim of energy efficiency improvement (Fig. 5). As the building is mostly furnished with wooden furniture in rural style, the refurbishment was done with natural materials, such as wood, stone, bricks and cellulose fiber materials for insulation. The STS with the total area of 39 m2 of solar thermal collectors was installed providing hot water to 16 hotel rooms. The existing windows were renewed with new old-style windows; the additional insulation of rooftop and external walls was performed, keeping the traditional appearance of the whole building. These refurbishment measures have resulted in annual energy saving of 65,48 MWh and 65,4 tCO2 is avoided per year.22
The Lutheran Conference and Mission Home in Balatonszarszo, Hungary - The Lutheran Conference and Mission Home constructed in 1930 is situated in Balatonszarszo and today is able to host 84 guests at one time. Major expansions were made in 2004 resulting in the creation of a modern hotel.
A complex set of actions were implemented during 2010 and 2011. The solar thermal water heating system with total area of 40 m2 of solar thermal collectors is installed which covers 80% of the hot water demand of this building. The PV panels and pellet boilers are installed (Fig. 6). The wall-cooling system is applied with the circulating liquid which is cooled naturally by the local well. The relevant measures in water and waste management were taken and elective waste collection and recycling are organized. Water-saving equipment is installed and the rain water is collected and used for toilets and garden watering. These refurbishment measures
19 https://www.google.rs/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=hFJeVe7
OCYKksAGCioGoBQ#q=cinque+terre [10.8.2015.]
20 https://www.google.rs/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=hFJeVe7
OCYKksAGCioGoBQ#q=cinque+terre [10.8.2015.]
21 Liebert, 2011
22 Agenzia per l’Energia…, 2013
23 Agenzia per l’Energia…, 2013
have resulted in annual energy saving of 43,38 MWh and 18,34 tCO2 is avoided per year.23
Šumeæani village, Zagreb county, CroatiaŠumeæani village is situated on the hilly terrain of Moslavina, 40 km from Zagreb. The example used is Kezele family household, wine and brandy producers, rearing domestic animals with the horse stables, preserving autochthonous values through revitalizing architectural buildings and ”farmer type” of rural household organization. Their household had covered several traditional houses, and the other buildings were transported from other locations, revitalized with the new functional organization.
Residential and operational buildings are log cabins, characterized by traditional architecture that fits and joins the ambiance (Fig. 7).
The household location is fully utilized, so the cars are being parked outside the family household, so that CO2 emission is zero; areas used by the restaurant are separated from peaceful business area with a meeting room at the ground floor and apartments upstairs, followed by the areas with playground for children and stable with horses.
During the reconstruction and revitalization, the buildings were adjusted to the new functions, namely: service, rest, leisure and business part; using authentic buildings that already existed at the subject location, or that were transported from other locations. Certain principles of bio-climatic construction are recognizable, which mind ordinal directions, size of openings and construction materials. Having that this is Kezele family property, the entire family is invested in touristic activities, agriculture and wine production, gastronomy and developing old crafts for souvenir production, thus socio-economic aspect is adhered to, having that the entire family is engaged in business.
Chalets in Switzerland - The numerous chalets in Switzerland are good examples of both energetically and aesthetically successful integration of solar technology into these traditional wooden style buildings. The Kiwi
chalet (Fig. 8) in the Bernese Oberland built in 1940s has been renovated in 2013 with the goal of eliminating greenhouse effects and it has achieved Zero CO2 emissions. Through the building revitalization solar panels are installed on the roof; new high performance thin insulation is performed inside the building envelope and the heat pump is installed. The Swiss solar panels carefully integrated on the roof and geothermal heating now produce all the energy needed for heating the chalet on-site, as well as the hot water and all other domestic electricity. The building now produces more energy than it needs, and the surplus is sold to local electricity company. On the beautiful chalet in Vaumarcus (Fig. 9) above the Lake of Neuchâtel 40 PV panels with the annual production of 11770 kWh are installed on the south oriented part of the roof in order to produce maximum energy.
dows that prevent unnecessary loss of heat. Local inhabitants take maximum participation in Staro selo development activities through agriculture, hospitality, gastronomy and nourishing old crafts (Fig. 10).
Sustainable rural development is among economic, social, and environmental priorities in the modern society. Process of planning and managing sustainable development of rural settlements, with particular focus on reconstructing the existing architectural buildings and active involvement of local population in this process is of exceptional importance for development of the entire rural environment. The integral policy involves holistic approach to managing sustainable tourism, fully engaging local government and educating local population, with the necessity of responsible behavior of all participants.
Sirogojno ethno villages, Staro selo, Serbia - Sirogojno village is situated 34 km from Užice. Significant cultural center of the village is outdoor museum Staro selo, with some 40 buildings made of woodworks. Residential wooden type buildings consist of two parts, built on stone basement, with high, four-sided roof, covered with shingle. Next to the house, there are cabins for young couples and other auxiliary buildings: milk shed, bread furnace, beehive, and plum dehydrator. Stables for cattle are separated, built outside the yard. Under Staro selo revival, some of the buildings were repurposed, thus extending the functions to: workshops for production of folk craft items and souvenirs, souvenir shops and lodging buildings. The architecture fits the environment and sloped terrain, using mountain architecture elements. Parking for cars is provided at the village entrance, so that CO2 emission is zero. Reconstruction and revitalization had adjusted the buildings to the new functions, however retaining architectural expression using local construction materials, with characteristic façade elements. The buildings are placed on the hillside, simultaneously protecting them from the wind and utilizing sun radiation to the maximum, with small win-
Tourism economy should take protection, improvement, and rational use of rural space as the priority task, along with the role of the state, which would take a leading role by developing infrastructure to improve all levels of communication. Sustainable tourism is a good foundation for improving inter-sectoral cooperation throughout all domains and levels, while focusing attention to protected areas, cultural heritage, etc. Participation of local population, with reconstruction and revitalization of both residential and hospitality buildings and buildings for the nurturing of old crafts, creates the ambiance of social and economic sustainability, proving that such strategy may provide positive economic balance and sustainability of the entire ambiance in the future.
Rural tourism buildings and other types of buildings in the rural environment have great potential for integration of solar systems, especially STSs because of high hot water consumption of these buildings, and this requires comprehensive approach and complex integrative design process. Final solution must be balanced, and maximize creativity and technical performance of the design. The heritage-protected buildings in the rural environment are very specific. The visibility and aesthetics of solar elements and the technique of integration are the key aspects for integration of solar system. The architects must find ways to ”sustainablize” solar technologies, with careful application, using all tools to prove application sustainable, and avoiding mistakes that can shed harmful reputation on efforts of architects to contribute to sustainable future.
[Editor and translator:
Darinka Popoviæ, BA in Philology, English language and literature]
1. Agenzia per l’Energia e lo Sviluppo Sostenibile di Modena (2013), RELACS Final Publishable Report: REnewabLe energy for tourist ACcommodation buildingS, Contract N°: IEE/09/894/ SI2.558309
2. Aleksiæ, Lj. (2015a), Unapreðenje održivog razvoja ljudskih naselja u ruralnim sredinama, Meðunarodna konferencija savremena dostignuæa u graðevinarstvu, Graðevinski fakultet, Subotica
3. Aleksiæ, Lj. (2015b), Projekat Edukativno etno centra Ilina prema ‘Agendi 21’, „Izgradnja”, 7-8, Beograd
4. Aleksiæ, Lj.; Kosoriæ, V. (2011), Sunèeva energija za decu: Projekat dogradnje „OŠ Dragojlo Dudiæ” u Beogradu, „Izgradnja”, 11-12: 671-680, Beograd
5. Aleksiæ, Lj.; Kosoriæ, V. (2015), Energetski efikasna arhitektura kao simbol održivog razvoja u ruralnoj sredini, iNDIS 2015, Planning, design, construction and building renewal, Novi Sad, Serbia
6. Allen, R. (1980), How to Save the World, Strategy for world conservation, Prentice-Hall, Toronto
7. Bolfek, B.; Jakièiæ, D.; Lonèariæ, B. (2013), Moguænosti razvoja turizma na ruralnom podruèju Brodsko-posavske županije, „Oeconomica Jadertina”, 1: 73-87, Slavonski Brod
8. Bramwell, B.; Lane, B. (1993), Sustainable tourism: An evolving global approach, ”Journal of Sustainable Tourism”, 1 (1): 1-5
9. Cawley, M.; Gillmor, D.A. (2008), Integrated rural tourism: Concepts and practices, ”Annals of Tourism Research”, 35 (2): 316-337
10. Commission on World Environment and Development (1987), Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, Oxford
11. Cox, Rachel S. (2006), Ecotourism, ”CQ Researcher”, 16 (37): 865-888
12. Fons, M.V.S.; Fierro, J.A.M.; Gomez y Patino, M. (2011), Rural tourism: A sustainable alternative, ”Applied Energy”, 88: 551-557
13. George, E. Wanda; Mair Heather; Reid Donald G. (2009), Rural Tourism DevelopmentLocalism and Cultural Change, Channel view publications, Bristol / Buffalo / Toronto
14. Goliæ, K.; Kosoriæ, V.; Krstiæ, A. (2011), General model of solar water heating system integration in residential building refurbishment - Potential energy savings and environmental impact, ”Elsevier - Renewable&Sustainable energy reviews”, 15 (3): 1533-1544
15. Hunziker, W.; Krapf, K. (1942), Grundriss der Allgemeinen Fremdenverkehrslehre, Schriftenreihe des Seminars für Fremdenverkehr und Verkehrspolitik an der Handels-Hochschule St. Gallen 1, Zürich
16. Joviæ, M. (2015), Rural Tourism can Revitalise the Countryside, http://blog.bearing-consulting.com/2015/05/25/rural-tourism/
17. Kosoriæ, V.; Wittkopf, S.; Huang Y. (2011), Testing a design methodology for building integration of photovoltaics (PV) using a PV demonstration site in Singapore, ”Architectural Science Review”, 54 (3): 192-205
18. Krstiæ, A.; Kosoriæ, V.; Goliæ, K. (2012), Potential for reduction of CO2 emissions by integration of solar water heating systems on student dormitories through building refurbishment, ”Elsevier - Sustainable cities and society”, 2: 50-62
19. Lane, B. (2005), Sustainable rural tourism strategies: a tool for development and conservation, ”Interamerican Journal of Environment and Tourism”, 1: 12-18, San Pedro, Costa Rica
20. Liebert, O. (2011), Tourism companies go green, The European SETCOM Project - Leading the way in Energy saving
21. Pearce, D.W.; Warford, J.J. (1993), World Without End, Oxford University Press
22. Pirages, D.C. (1977), The Sustainable Society. Implications for Limited Growth, Praeger Publishers, New York, London
23. REVITAS - Revitalizacija istarskog zaleða i turizma u istarskom zaleðu, Smernice razvoja kulturnog turizma ruralnog prostora Istre, Sveuèilište Jurija Dobrile u Puli, Odjel ekonomije i turizma „dr Mijo Mirkoviæ” Preradoviæeva 1, Pula
24. Ribar, B.M. (1994), Vrednovanje uslova stanovanja na selu, Zbornik radova sa nauènog skupa „Unapreðenje stanovanja ‘94”, Arhitektonski fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu
25. Spenceley, A.; Meyer, D. (2012), Tourism and poverty reduction: Theory and practice in less economically developped countries, ”Journal of Sustainable Tourism”, 20 (3): 297-317
26. Stevoviæ S.; Vasilski D. (2010), Nove strategije projektovanja gradova putem filozofije održivog razvoja, „Izgradnja”, 7-8, Beograd
27. Štahan, K. (2014), Energetski uèinkovita arhitektura u urbanom održivom turizmu, „Prostor”, 22 (2 /48/): 278-289, Zagreb
28. Videnoviæ, A. (1994), Geneza, razvoj i nove tendencije u formiranju kuæe i okuænice u razbijenim srpskim selima ibarskog tipa na primeru Vlasine, Zbornik radova sa nauènog skupa „Unapreðenje stanovanja ‘94”, Arhitektonski fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu
29. Wiggins, S.; Proctor, S. (2001), How special are rural areas? The economic implications of location for rural development, ”Development Policy Review”, 19 (4), Blackwell Publishing, London, Great Britain
30. Wilson, S.; Fesenmaier, D.R.; Fesenmaier, J.; van Es, J.C. (2001), Factors for success in rural tourism, ”Journal of Travel Research”, 20: 132-138
31. World Bank (1987), Environment, growth and development, Washington, DC
Internetski izvori
1. http://www.agriturismocasarosa.it/en/galleria /nggallery/casa-rosa/casa-rosa/ [14.4.2016.]
2. http://www.fccdr.usf.edu/ [10.11.2015.]
3. http://www.gasthof-braeuer.at/en_US/home/ gallery-video.html [14.4.2016.]
4. https://www.google.rs/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=definicija%20turizma%20prema%20aiestu [15.11.2015.]
5. https://www.google.rs/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=definicija+ruralni+turizam [15.11.2015.]
6. https://www.google.rs/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=hFJ eVe7OCYKksAGCioGoBQ#q=cinque+terre [10.8.2015.]
7. http://www.b92.net/putovanja/destinacije/evropa.php?&nav_id=482231 [12.8.2015.]
8. https://www.google.rs/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=nacionalni+park+kiskunsagi++madjars [12.8.2015.]
9. https://www.google.rs/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=selo +les+baux+de+provence [14.8.2015.]
10. https://www.google.rs/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=gI 3DVfH_A4m9sQGuyKfABg#q=ruralni+turizam+ kezele [14.8.2015.]
11. https://www.google.ch/search?q=chalet+solar +energie+ch&biw=1219&bih=460&source=ln ms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjHkbKBkZ nMAhWGaRQKHamjC0sQ_AUIBigB#tbm=isch& q=chalet+solar+energy+ch&imgrc=IOQAoY50X BTzJM%3A [14.4.2016.]
12. http://www.immobiliaremartini.eu/proposte/ proposte_gb_17.html [11.4.2016.]
13. https://mcr-e.ch/panneaux-solaires/chalet-avaumarcus/ [11.4.2016.]
14. http://www.rieder-architektur.ch/ [11.4.2016.]
15. http://www.sirogojno.rs/ii-domacinstvo#sthash.ieZBpnnr.dpuf [14.8.2015.]
16. http://www.steiermark.com/de/unterkunft-gasthof-braeuer-_30477 [5.4.2016.]
17. http://szarszo.lutheran.hu/regi/index.php?tema=otthonunkrol [5.4.2016.]
Illustration Sources
Izvori ilustracija
Fig. 1, 2 Authors
Fig. 3 http://www.agriturismocasarosa.it/en/ galleria/nggallery/casa-rosa/casa-rosa/ [14.4.2016.]; http://www.immobiliaremartini.eu/proposte/proposte_gb_17.html [11.4.2016.]
Fig. 4 https://www.google.rs/?gws_rd=cr,ssl& ei=hFJeVe7OCYKksAGCioGoBQ#q=cinque +terre [10.08.2015.]
Fig. 5 http://www.steiermark.com/de/unterkunft-gasthof-braeuer-_30477 [5.4.2016.]; http://www.gasthof-braeuer.at/en_US/ home/gallery-video.html [14.4.2016.]
Fig. 6 http://szarszo.lutheran.hu/regi/index.php ?tema=otthonunkrol [5.4.2016.]
Fig. 7 https://www.google.rs/?gws_rd=cr,ssl& ei=gI3DVfH_A4m9sQGuyKfABg#q=ruralni +turizam+kezele [14.8.2015.]
Fig. 8 https://www.google.ch/search?q=chalet +solar+energie+ch&biw=1219&bih=460 &source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0 ahUKEwjHkbKBkZnMAhWGaRQKHamjC0s Q_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=chalet+solar+ energy+ch&imgrc=IOQAoY50XBTzJM%3A [14.4.2016.]
Fig. 9 https://mcr-e.ch/panneaux-solaires/chalet-a-vaumarcus/ [11.4.2016.]
Fig. 10 http://www.sirogojno.rs/ii-domacinstvo# sthash.ieZBpnnr.dpuf [14.8.2015.]
Tabl. I, II Authors
Summary Sažetak
Ruralni je okoliš kao moguæa turistièka destinacija znaèajan, ali još nedovoljno iskorišten potencijal koji bi mogao, uz odgovarajuæe investicije, konkurirati mnogim drugim turistièkim destinacijama. Ljudi žele pobjeæi iz zagaðenoga urbanog okoliša i provoditi odmor u ekološki èistim podruèjima te se upoznati s tradicijom i kulturom ruralnih podruèja. Ovaj rad analizira moguænosti primjene principa održivoga razvoja u ruralnom turizmu, s posebnim naglaskom na analizi obnove zgrada i ugradnji solarnih sustava, tj. solarnih toplinskih sustava [STS] i fotonaponskih sustava [FN]. S obzirom na složenost i multidisciplinarne aspekte ove problematike, u radu se razmatraju funkcionalni, estetski, energetski, ekonomski, socijalni i ekološki aspekti.
Održivi turizam je turizam s minimalnim utjecajem na okoliš, dok se istodobno nastoji oèuvati lokalno kulturno naslijeðe. Održivi ruralni turizam omoguæava razvoj èitavih ruralnih podruèja, potièe otvaranje novih radnih mjesta - smanjujuæi tako potrebu za migracijama, te opæenito utjeèe na poveæanje ekonomskog blagostanja i kvalitete života, a istodobno smanjuje korištenje neobnovljivih prirodnih izvora.
Postoji snažna povezanost izmeðu razvoja ruralnog turizma i obnove postojeæih zgrada u kontekstu održivosti gospodarstva i okoliša cijele lokalne zajednice. Održivi razvoj u ruralnomu turizmu ima za cilj oèuvati autohtoni graðevinski fundus, koji treba obnoviti i proširiti ili adaptirati prema potrebi, no uvijek u skladu s karakteristikama autohtone tradicijske arhitekture - korištenjem lokalnih graðevinskih materijala i zapošljavanjem lokalnoga stanovništva.
Bioklimatska gradnja inherentna je tradicijskoj gradnji u ruralnim krajevima. Kuæe su graðene u zavjetrini. Stambene se zgrade veæ prilikom gradnje pozicioniraju u odnosu na sporedne strane svijeta, ugraðuju se prozori odgovarajuæe velièine, nagib terena korišten je za ukop, a funkcionalna je koncepcija kuæa takva da se podrum uobièajeno koristi. Na temelju tradicijskih graðevinskih karak-
teristika u ovome se radu definiraju kriteriji koji se odnose na minimalno iskorištavanje neobnovljivih energetskih izvora, korištenje lokalnih materijala, minimalno korištenje toksiènih materijala i poboljšanje okoliša. Obnova graðevinskoga fundusa i održivost ruralnog okoliša trebala bi biti u skladu s urbanistièkim i projektantskim kriterijima u sklopu interdisciplinarnog pristupa što pruža arhitektonska rješenja koja ne degradiraju okoliš. Mnoge postojeæe zgrade u ruralnom okolišu zahtijevaju obnovu. Ako su k tome u velikoj mjeri izložene suncu, tj. nisu zaklonjene nekim elementima u okolišu, tada mogu biti dobri korisnici toplinske i posredno elektriène energije, što vrijedi za brojne stambene i turistièke zgrade koje su osobito pogodne za instaliranje STS, tj. FN sustava u procesu njihove revitalizacije. U radu se naglašava da su solarne tehnologije snažan primjer ekološke energije, no problemi povezani s njihovim gospodarskim uèinkom dovode u pitanje njihovu primjenu kao održive tehnologije. U radu se daje sedam smjernica koje pridonose održivosti solarnih tehnologija, a povezane su s njihovim doprinosom arhitekturi, inovativnom projektiranju, udobnosti, poštivanju ogranièenja, energetskoj uèinkovitosti, ekonomskoj izvedivosti i isplativosti te motivaciji kao znaèajnom èimbeniku koji utjeèe na to da stanovništvo aktivno podrži koncepciju održivoga razvoja. STS sustavi opæenito su ekonomski provedivi i isplativi, osobito kad ih se koristi na zgradama s velikom potrošnjom tople vode, što je sluèaj u mnogim turistièkim objektima. S poveæanjem cijena goriva i elektriène energije ovi sustavi postaju sve konkurentniji konvencionalnim energetskim izvorima i pojeftinjuju s rastom tržišta. Osnovni principi ugradnje solarnih sustava tijekom rekonstrukcije graðevine takoðer su opisani. Korištenje solarnih sustava može donijeti brojne pogodnosti u kontekstu okoliša, energetike, funkcionalnosti i estetike. Pomnjivo i odgovarajuæe projektiranje solarnih sustava može poboljšati energetsku uèinkovitost zgrade i izolacijska svojstva njezine ovojnice, tako da, u kombinaciji s kvalitetnim estetskim rješe-
njem, one mogu postati nove, prepoznatljive arhitektonske destinacije u ruralnom okolišu. Obrazovni i motivacijski aspekti takoðer su vrlo znaèajni. Kao ilustrativni primjer u radu je prikazana stambena zgrada u švicarskom selu, koje su rekonstrukciju izveli autori ovoga rada ukazujuæi na potencijalne probleme, principe i korisnost ugradnje fotonaponskih sustava u ruralnom okolišu. S obzirom na to da je to bio prvi sluèaj ugradnje solarnog proèelja u tome selu, takva je intervencija bila dobro primljena i može poslužiti kao primjer korištenja energije iz obnovljivih izvora. Naselja Cinque Terre u Italiji, sela Šumeæani u Hrvatskoj i Sirogojno u Srbiji analizirani su u ovome radu kao primjeri revitalizacije graðevina u održivomu ruralnom turizmu. U naseljima nema automobilskog prometa, tako da nema emisije CO2. Komunikacijski su pravci pješaèke, biciklistièke ili jahaèke staze. Arhitektura je prilagoðena konfiguraciji terena, vidljiva je primjena bioklimatske gradnje, koja vodi raèuna o sporednim stranama svijeta, velièinama otvora i graðevinskim materijalima. Tijekom rekonstrukcije i revitalizacije graðevine su prilagoðene novim funkcijama, no ipak su zadržale karakteristièan arhitektonski stil korištenjem lokalnih graðevinskih materijala i karakteristiènim fasadnim elementima. U svim tim selima lokalno stanovništvo u potpunosti aktivno sudjeluje u razvoju agronomije, turizma, gastronomije i starih zanata. Sudjelovanje lokalnoga stanovništva, uz rekonstrukciju i revitalizaciju stambenih i turistièkih objekata, stvara klimu društvene i ekonomske održivosti, dokazujuæi tako da ta strategija može osigurati gospodarsku ravnotežu i održivost cijeloga podruèja u buduænosti. Primjeri starih seoskih kuæa, kao što su „Casa Rosa” u talijanskoj regiji Marche, „Braeuer” hotel u Weisskirchenu u Austriji, Luteranski konferencijski i misionarski dom u Balatonszarszu u Maðarskoj i dvije kuæe u Švicarskoj, ilustriraju potencijale, kao i estetske, ekološke i energetske uèinke ugradnje solarnih sustava u procesu revitalizacije zgrada u održivomu ruralnom turizmu.
Biographies
Biografije
LJILJANA ALEKSIÆ, PhD, Dipl.Ing.Arch. is an architect and Assistant Professor at Faculty of Civil Engineering Subotica. Her research interests include expert systems in architecture, management of production technical documentation, rural development.
VESNA KOSORIÆ, PhD, Dipl.Ing.Arch. is the architect and founder of Swiss company BauLab GmbH. In the core of her work is interconnectivity between design, space, sustainability, technology and quality of life.
Dr.sc. LJILJANA ALEKSIÆ, dipl.ing.arh., zaposlena je kao docentica na Graðevinskom fakultetu u Subotici. Bavi se znanstvenim istraživanjima u arhitekturi, organizacijom izrade tehnièke dokumentacije i ruralnim razvojem.
Dr.sc. VESNA KOSORIÆ, dipl.ing.arh., osnivaèica je švicarske tvrtke BauLab GmbH. Bavi se interdisciplinarnim aspektima povezanosti projektiranja, prostora, održivosti, tehnologije i kvalitete života.
Eseji i ogledi
Rezenzije i prikazi knjiga, èasopisa i izložaba.
Vijesti, suradnja, zanimljivosti, bibliografija, znanstveni skupovi, tribine i predavanja.
Essays and Reviews
Evaluations & Reviews of Books, Journals and Exhibitions.
Information, Cooperation, Topics of Interest, Bibliography, Conferences, Debates and Lectures.
A scientific symposium on the work of architect Boris Magaš was held at the Karlovac City Hall on October 25th, 2014, almost to date of the first anniversary that one of the most prominent Croatian architects of the 20th century had passed away. The symposium brought together an array of distinguished lecturers who explored the author’s comprehensive theoretical, architectural and pedagogical ouvre. Their proceedings, collected in this book, display a heterogenous compendium of scientific, personal, analytical, objective as well as subjective insights which paint a fragmented portrait of a multifaceted author and the times he created in. Although the compendium is divided into thematic chapters focusing on his theory, architecture, teaching and planning, brought together they prove the necessary intertwining of the theoretical and practical, artistry and engineering, erudition and commitment in a single work of lasting and universal value.
[Translated by author]
U organizaciji Udruge za razvoj kulturne i prirodne baštine Karlovca 25. listopada 2014. godine održan je znanstveni simpozij o jednom od najistaknutijih hrvatskih arhitekata 20. stoljeæa - akademiku Borisu Magašu. Gotovo o godišnjici njegove smrti, simpozij je u Velikoj vijeænici grada Karlovca okupio èitav niz istaknutih predavaèa koji su govorili o cjelovitomu teorijskom, arhitektonskom i pedagoškom djelu. Njihova predavanja, okupljena u Zborniku, jednako tako predstavljaju heterogen kompendij znanstvenih, osobnih, analitièkih, objektivnih i subjektivnih, èak i projektantskih (projektiranih) uvida kojima se toèkasto oslikava portret autora i duha vremena u kojem je stvarao.
Prvo, teorijsko poglavlje otvara tekst akademika Andrije Mutnjakoviæa kojim pozicionira Magašev teorijski rad u genealogiju kljuènih djela hrvatske „arhitektonske književnosti” proteklih pet stoljeæa i kroza nj obrazlaže utemeljenost Magaševe arhitektonike. Prilozi koji rasvjetljuju pojedine aspekte teorijskog djela neminovno ga promatraju u kontekstu njegovih realizacija, pa i rekonstruiranja teorije na temelju vlastitoga graditeljskog iskustva. Precizan portret umjetnika ocrtao je Nenad Fabijaniæ pomoæu izravnoga traga Magaševa projektantskog impulsa - crteža. Neposustajuæi niz skica i narisanih misli daje intiman uvid u razvojni, misaoni i životni luk arhitekta; analizira Magaševe jedinstvene slobodne invencije praæenjem „rukopisa oka” i njegove konzekvencije u izvedenoj kuæi i detalju. Drugi segment Zbornika - Arhitektura Borisa Magaša - okuplja najveæi broj priloga, a meðu
onima koji su usredotoèeni na distinktna podruèja projektantskoga djelovanja istièu se tekstovi koji daju nov uvid u poznate, ali i manje znane segmente opusa. Meðu njima je tekst Magaševe supruge i suradnice Olge, profesorice na Graðevinskom fakultetu u Rijeci, koja pišuæi o manje poznatim rijeèkim projektima mjestimice daje naslutiti i osobnu kroniku obitelji koje je životna dinamika nerazdvojno vezana, èak i oblikovana, razdobljima obilježenim velikim projektima, natjeèajima i aktualnim gradilištima. Poseban je u tome nizu tekst/projekt Lea Modrèina koji, polazeæi od praoblika trokuta, kvadrata i kruga, dihotomiju planarnoga i prostornoga analizira pomoæu crtanja, precrtavanja, ogoljivanja projekata na elementarnu formu i njezine derivacije do osamostaljenja. Izlaganja središnjega dijela Zbornika otkrivaju i studentske korijene Magaševe inovacije u sportskoj arhitekturi (Ariana Štulhofer), spiritualno i lokalno-specifièno kasnijeg opusa sakralne arhitekture (Zorana Sokol Gojnik), pa i presjek novije hrvatske povijesti koja se implicitno èita u cjelovitoj kronici nastanka i devastacije hotelskoga kompleksa Haludovo (Davor Podbregar). Magašev pedagoški rad tumaèen je u najširem smislu - svrstavanjem priloga o utjecaju karizmatiènoga Uèitelja na generacije studenata na Arhitektonskom fakultetu uz bok s onim segmentom djelovanja koji je afirmirao hrvatsku arhitektonsku tradiciju i ustrajno promovirao njezin prostorni identitet. Zlatko Karaè u posljednjem prilogu treæega poglavlja rasvjetljuje korijene utemeljenosti cjeloživotnog angažmana u istraživanju i pro-
Udruga za zaštitu i razvoj kulturne i prirodne baštine Karlovca Sveuèilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet Sveuèilište u Rijeci, Graðevinski fakultet u Rijeci Karlovac, Zagreb, Rijeka, 2016.
Str. 157, hrvatski [27/22,5 cm, cb, meki uvez]
Odgovorni urednik: Zvonimir Gerber Glavna urednica: Ariana Štulhofer
Recenzenti: Znanstveni odbor simpozija (Velimir Neidhardt, Andrija Mutnjakoviæ, Boris Morsan, Zlatko Karaè, Nana Paliniæ, Zorana Sokol Gojnik) Lektura: Mirjana Ostoja
ISBN 978-953-59033-0-7 CIP 000932753 [NSK Zagreb]
micanju hrvatske graditeljske baštine kroz kroniku sudjelovanja u istraživaèkoj grupi profesora Andrije Mohorovièiæa i desetljeæu asistenture na Arhitektonskom fakultetu od 1956. do1966., te potom nastavljeno nekoliko godina nakon preuzimanja kolegija Teorija arhitekture 1983. godine.
Posljednje poglavlje, slobodno naslovljeno „Veliko mjerilo i urbanizam u teoriji i projektima Borisa Magaša”, daje uvid u znaèajne aktivnosti posljednjega desetljeæa Magaševa života, u kojem se istièe angažman u Savjetu prostornog ureðenja Republike Hrvatske. Helena Knifiæ Schaps i Borka Bobovec istièu kljuèan Magašev doprinos u donošenju strateških dokumenata, smjernica, prijedloga i kriterija kojima je dao utemeljenost i smisao. U završnome poglavlju Boris Morsan vraæa se na Magašev rodni grad kroz analizu „Magaševe linije”, urbanistièkog prijedloga kojim artikulira podruèje istoèno od Karlovaèke zvijezde. Uz navedene autore, vrijedne priloge koji problematiziraju bogati opus, teoriju i strukovni angažman Borisa Magaša ovome su Zborniku dali još i S. Butijer, A. Faber, I. Gojnik, I. Juras, D. Kahle, B. Marièiæ, J. Rošin i A. Žuniæ, a u dodatku je objavljen i sažetak Smjernica i kriterija za arhitektonsku vrsnoæu graðenja. Bez obzira na formalnu podjelu izlaganja prema naglašenim aspektima Magaševa djela u pojedinim prilozima, sakupljeni u cjelovitu zbirku oni zajednièki potvrðuju neodvojivost i meðusobnu uvjetovanost teorijskog i praktiènog, artistièkog i inženjerskog, erudicije i angažiranosti u jedinstvenom opusu trajne i univerzalne vrijednosti.
Lenko Pleština
Izbor studentskih radova akademske godine 2014./2015.
[ur. Dina Vulin Ilekoviæ]
Interior Design Studio
Selection of students’ works in academic year 2014/2015 [ed. Dina Vulin Ilekoviæ]
Design of a building or a space always starts and ends with the interior, with thinking and developing a sensitivity towards it. Materials, textures, colours of the planes and volumes correspond to the forms and proportions of the human body while aesthetic experience derives from the psychological complexity of the human mind. This publication shows continuity of a high-quality approach to interior design teaching. It clearly illustrates the way the assignment is conceived and presents the results that students achieved in Interior Design Studio in academic year 2014/15. The twelve most successful projects have been selected here for presentation. The content of this publication is effectively organized and presented thus providing good insight into the course activities.
Moglo bi se konstatirati da u arhitektonskom zahvatu, projektu graðevine i prostora sve poèinje ili završava interijerom, razmišljanjem i senzibiliziranjem arhitektonske prièe na poèetku ili završetkom u mjerilu 1:1. Materijali, teksture, boje ploha i volumena korespondiraju s mjerama i oblikom ljudskog tijela, a estetski je doživljaj u suptilnoj korelaciji sa psihom korisnika.
Kolegij interijera se u diplomskom studiju pojavljuje na samom kraju, u treæem semestru, s dva redovna i jednim izbornim kolegijem. Složen i zahtjevan predmet kojem je cilj razvijanje poimanja interijera kao zakljuèka i ishodišta arhitektonske kompozicije poduèava se na Arhitektonskom fakultetu na kolegiju „Interijer”, a kreativno vježbanje provodi se na „Radionici interijera”. Niz cijenjenih nastavnika obilježilo je nastavu od inauguracije predmeta i profesora Mladena Kauzlariæa do današnje voditeljice Dine Vulin Ilekoviæ. Afirmaciji kategorije interijera u edukaciji buduæih arhitekata su doprinijeli i nastavnici u èijoj su praksi bila zapažena upravo interijerska rješenja, poput Ante Vulina, Miroslava Begoviæa, Ines i Nikole Filipoviæa, Nenada Fabijaniæa, Ivana Crnkoviæa, Maria Beusana i drugih. Zajednièku liniju, uz sve autorske posebnosti svakog ponaosob, èini intuitivan i u odreðenoj mjeri artistièki pristup. Ovaj katalog pokazuje kontinuitet kvalitetnog naèina rada na tom kolegiju kroz specifièno koncipiran i postavljen zadatak èiji su rezultati prezentirani kroz izbor dvanaest vrlo uspješnih rješenja projektiranih na „Radionici interije-
ra” u akad. godini 2014./2015. Ciljevi kolegija, te specifiènost predstavljenog zadatka, jasno su elaborirani u tekstovima voditeljice kolegija i urednice kataloga Dine Vulin Ilekoviæ. Prikaz radova u katalogu je atraktivno pripremljen i predstavljen karakteristiènim prikazima i tekstovima.
U akad. godini 2014./2015. cilj je zadatka bio projektom interijera istražiti fenomen rada kod kuæe kao karakteristike današnjeg življenja sve veæeg dijela populacije. Prožimanje privatnog, polujavnog i javnog pruža moguænost kreiranja netipiènih prostora nastalih sažimanjem i integriranjem elemenata razlièitih funkcionalnih karaktera, na zadovoljstvo korisnika. Studenti su prostor za stanovanje i rad namijenjen jednoj osobi oblikovali unutar definirane forme armiranobetonskog kvadra unutarnjih dimenzija 4.52´4.52´18.08 m. Volumen je trebalo smjestiti negdje na podruèju Zagreba i okolice, a njegove dvije slobodne stranice su se mogle autorski interpretirati. Uz slobodno definiranje dobi, spola i zanimanja korisnika te položaja kvadra, njegova odnosa prema tlu, orijentacije i toèke ulaza, trebalo je ispitati prostorne moguænosti odnosa stanovanja i rada. Voditeljica postavlja pitanje: Kakav treba biti prostor da rad i boravak u njemu pobuðuje zadovoljstvo? Istièe kako su u najboljim rješenjima studenti, izbjegavajuæi predvidljiv i konvencionalan pristup, kreirali svakodnevni prostorni scenarij za odabranog korisnika kao prijedlog transformacije tradicionalnog pojma i znaèenja individualnog stanovanja koje sadrži radni pro-
Arhitektonski fakultet Sveuèilišta u Zagrebu Zagreb, 2014.
Str. 34, ilustrirano, hrvatski/engleski [20/20 cm, meki uvez]
Recenzent: Lenko Pleština
Autorica i urednica: Dina Vulin Ilekoviæ
Lektura: Mirjana Ostoja
Prijevod: Neda Boriæ
Dizajn i prijelom: Mario Petrak
ISBN 978-953-8042-16-4 CIP 000929539 [NSK Zagreb]
stor. U odnosu prema kontekstu studenti su istraživali poroznost granica izmeðu funkcionalnih cjelina, kao i granica prema vanjskom prostoru, te definirali odnose prirodnog i urbanog ili javnog i privatnog.
Specifiènost predstavljenog zadatka je i naèin provedbe i mentoriranja radionica - uz nastavnike koji redovito sudjeluju u radu na kolegiju Radionica interijera, u školskoj su godini 2014./2015. sudjelovali i kolege drugih matiènih kabineta. U katalogu su predstavljeni najbolji radovi svih mentorskih grupa: Šumski kampanel (stud. J. Èudina, mentorice V. Mikiæ i M. Javoroviæ Pehar), Matijin životni prostor (stud. A. Paša, mentorica N. Cilinger), Urbana grafika (stud. M. Skoblar, mentori V. Oluiæ i M. Bertina), Mobilni kubusi (stud. M. Zeljko, mentorica S. Filep), Prostor u pokretu (stud. I. Ðuzel, mentorice V. Mikiæ i M. Javoroviæ Pehar), Dinamika statiènog (stud. K. Jukiæ, mentorica L. Prpiæ), Duhovnost svakodnevnog (stud. L. Matejèiæ, mentorica N. Cilinger), Umjetnikova promenada (stud. B. Pavièiæ, mentorica N. Cilinger), Intuitivan prostor (stud. M. Prinèiæ, mentori V. Oluiæ i M. Bertina), Svakodnevna scena (stud. A. Špoljarec, mentori D. Vulin Ilekoviæ i B. Vidakoviæ), Boje zvuka (stud. M. Turk, mentori D. Vulin Ilekoviæ i B. Vidakoviæ), Životni slojevi (stud. Mara Uroda, D. Vulin Ilekoviæ i B. Vidakoviæ). Prikazani radovi izmjenjuju se s tekstovima voditeljice kolegija u kojima obrazlaže ciljeve kolegija, njegovu povijest, kontinuitet i znaèenje u obrazovanju arhitekata, te specifiènosti predstavljenog zadatka.
Feða Vukiæ
Feða Vukiæ
The Car - A History, written by Feða Vukiæ, is a book whose title could easily fool the reader. Once we open the book’s door (its cover, of course, but we commend the ingenious idea of designer Negra Nigoeviæ who put a car’s door knob suggesting we enter the world of cars by opening it), we will be surprised by the first contents page. Instead of an (expected) chronological history from the first models to today’s racers, the titles of the book’s ten chapters clearly announce a different approach. Spanning the invention of the wheel to McLuhan, the book is a very interesting read, as much as because of its insight into tho automotive industry as because of its approach to analyzing the meaning of the car in human history. The chapters are meaningful and inspiring, and we can hope some of its thesis or chapters will become the base of further, separate research. In a new book - or books, perhaps.
[Translated by Mia Roth-Èerina]
Knjiga Feðe Vukiæa Automobil, jedna povijest, lako bi mogla naslovom zavarati èitatelja. Kada otvorimo vrata knjige (korice, dakako, ali valja pohvaliti dosjetku Negre Nigoeviæ koje je likovno opremila naslovnicu tipiènom automobilskom kvakom sugerirajuæi da otvaranjem ulazimo u svijet automobila), veæ æe nas prva stranica sadržaja zaèuditi. Umjesto (oèekivane) kronološke povijesti automobila, od prvih modela do današnjih jurilica, naslovi deset poglavlja jasno sugeriraju da se radi o sveobuhvatnom i originalnom pristupu.
Od kotaèa do McLuhana - u èetiri bi se rijeèi preprièala knjiga. „Zavrti kotaè!” naslov je prvog poglavlja u kojem se uistinu zapoèinje izumom kotaèa prije skoro èetiri tisuæljeæa, a posljednje, deseto poglavlje nosi podnaslov „McLuhan i dalje”. S obzirom da je McLuhan predviðao (a što nije predviðao?) da æe današnji automobil u buduænosti biti obièna igraèka, prisjeæamo se da su i drevni Meksikanci izumili kotaè ali su ga koristili samo kao - igraèku.
Kao što za uporabu kotaèa nije dovoljna samo dosjetka, izum kotaèa, veæ èitav niz drugih okolnosti koje tom kotaèu daju smisao, od konja ili goveda koji æe kola vuæi do potrebe da se nešto prenese, tako i automobil nije samo genijalan izum veæ i zadovoljenje jedne potrebe u nastajanju. To je predmet Vukiæeve knjige, automobil kao gospodarski, kulturni, umjetnièki i socijalni fenomen, a ne puko prijevozno sredstvo. Naravno, neizbježno je obuhvatiti povijest automobila
kao proizvoda, od starih unikatnih grdosija, preko glasovitog Fordovog T modela, do današnjih elektriènih limuzina sa sofisticiranom elektronikom. Ali, ni najbolji mehanièar neæe - ako rastavi automobil, uz lim, željezo, gumu, plastiku i boju - naæi status, ugled, snove, èežnju, neæe naæi amerièki san i amerièke vrijednosti, neæe naæi uzavrele šezdesete, umjetnièke tendencije, futurizam, tržišno takmièenje i konkurenciju. Ništa od toga u automobilu nema. Nema, ako ne znamo gledati. Vukiæ, sreæom, zna i zato æemo, èitajuæi (i gledajuæi) ovu zanimljivu knjigu, saznati pravu povijest automobila, ali onda i povijest nas samih. Jer povijest automobila nije i ne može biti ništa drugo nego povijest èovjeka, povijest koja stvara nove odnose, novu kulturu i nove vrijednosti.
Deset podjednako zanimljivih poglavlja Vukiæ posveæuje onim vrijednostima koje su stvorile automobil i koje je on, proizveden, stvarao. Iako kronološki poredana, poglavlja tematski obraðuju najzanimljivije fenomene. Veæ u poèetku, govoreæi o parnom stroju i industrijskoj revoluciji, Vukiæ tehnologiju razumije kao ‹drugu prirodu› èime jasno definira tehniku kao novi prostor opstanka. Stoga veæ prvi automobil, onaj na paru, glomazan i praktièki neupotrebljiv, nagovješæuje vlastitu buduænost, onu koju danas živimo. Radikalna promjena vremena i prostora koju donosi prva serijska proizvodnja automobila jest ona ista promjena koju je donijela veæ željeznica (za koju je Habermas rekao da je svijetu donijela novi kalendar) ali, kaže Vukiæ, s individual-
UPI2M Plus
Sveuèilište u Zagrebu, Arhitektonski fakultet, Studij dizajna Zagreb, 2016.
Str. 255, hrvatski [22,5/18 cm, boja, meki uvez]
Suradnik u istraživanju: Lovro Vukiæ
Urednica: Silvana Buconjiæ
Recenzenti: Daniela Angelina Jelinèiæ, Mislav Ante Omaziæ
Dizajn: Negra Nigoeviæ
Lektura: Vesna Arsovski
ISBN 978-953-7703-33-2 CIP 000931304 [NSK Zagreb]
nom slobodom i moguænošæu impulzivnog kretanja. Slijede poglavlja koja tematiziraju pojavu industrijske estetike. Od Marinettijevog oduševljenja automobilom do obitelji Bugatti, Vukiæ nam pokazuje kako je automobil poèeo dobivati konture umjetnièki oblikovanog predmeta, ali opet to smješta u društveni kontekst i kulturne odnose pokazujuæi kako su proizvodnja stanova i automobila usko povezane. Jeste li, primjerice, znali da su Le Corbusierove ideje jeftinih stanova i Fordov T model dio iste prièe?
„Amerièka noæ” naslov je poglavlja koji govori sam za sebe. Više puta Vukiæ poseže za filmskim temama i naslovima kako bi slikom, predodžbom kontekstualizirao kulturne vrijednosti nekog razdoblja. Zanimljivo je i poglavlje „Pop Design” u kojem nas Vukiæ vodi kroz kratku povijest oglašavanja automobila. U to je vrijeme automobila veæ izgraðeni statusni simbol i komunikacijske se vrijednosti oglasa temelje na obeæanjima sreæe, slobode i erotike. Tehnièke pojedinosti veæ su tada bile sporedne ili sasvim nebitne.
Vukiæeva je knjiga iznimno zanimljiva, koliko zbog temeljitog uvida u povijest automobilske industrije, toliko i zbog pristupa koji u obzir uzima sve bitne elemente kojima se do kraja može razumjeti znaèenje koje automobil ima u ljudskoj povijesti. Poglavlja su sadržajna i inspirativna. Možemo se nadati da æe poneke teze ili poglavlja autor u buduænosti razraditi kao zasebne teme. U nekoj novoj knjizi ili nekim novim knjigama.
Dubravko Baèiæ
Dobroviæ in
Krunoslav Ivanišin, Wolfgang Thaler, Ljiljana Blagojeviæ
Dobroviæ u Dubrovniku
Pothvat moderne arhitekture
Krunoslav Ivanišin, Wolfgang Thaler, Ljiljana Blagojeviæ
Dobroviæ in Dubrovnik traces the past and the present of the 1930s avant-garde modern architecture built in the Mediterranean landscape of the south Dalmatian coast. Extensive historical, theoretical, and phenomenological readings of events and forms, in two essays by architects Krunoslav Ivanišin and Ljiljana Blagojeviæ respectively, describe a specific yet universal Venture in Modern Architecture. Condensed to geographically small area and hardly a decade, these quintessentially modern villas, gardens, and hotels built 70 years ago by the architect Nikola Dobroviæ (1897-1967), are presented through previously unpublished original design drawings, b&w period photographs, and the contemporary color photographs by Wolfgang Thaler. The color plates depict the beauty in decay of heroic works of modern architecture and admirably convey their meaningful Mediterranean resilience.
[Translated by author]
Nakon višegodišnjih istraživanja praškog, dubrovaèkog i beogradskog opusa arhitekta Nikole Dobroviæa (Peèuh, 1897. - Beograd, 1967.) danas zasigurno s veæim samopouzdanjem možemo reæi da Dobroviæ i njegovo djelo više nisu samo fascinantna arhitektonska enigma. U posljednjih dvadesetak godina mnogi su se autori bavili razlièitim aspektima Dobroviæeva opusa, a sada je izdana i prva sintezna monografija o Dobroviæevim dubrovaèkim projektima i realizacijama u cijelosti tiskana na engleskom jeziku. Dobroviæ u Dubrovniku knjiga je namijenjena ponajprije internacionalnoj promociji Dobroviæeva djela, ali možda i ponekomu domaæem sladokuscu. Na izradi monografije udružilo se troje vrsnih autora - Krunoslav Ivanišin, docent na Arhitektonskom fakultetu u Zagrebu, Ljiljana Blagojeviæ, profesorica na Arhitektonskom fakultetu Univerziteta u Beogradu, te austrijski fotograf s posebnim nagnuæem za arhitektonsku fotografiju Wolfgang Thaler. I Ivanišin i Blagojeviæ vrsni su poznavatelji Dobroviæeva opusa. Uz njihove nadahnute tekstove i izvrsne Thalerove fotografije, Dobroviæ u Dubrovniku se tako - iz Dubrovnika - dostojno prezentiran napokon zaputio i prema meðunarodnoj struènoj javnosti.
Knjiga je podijeljena u tri poglavlja, od kojih su prvo i treæe tekstovi Krunoslava Ivanišina i Ljiljane Blagojeviæ, a srednje poglavlje obuhvaæa koloplet impresivnih fotografija Dobroviæevih realizacija u Dubrovniku i okolici koje je Thaler snimio 2010. godine. Thaler je inaèe bio inicijator nastanka knjige i motor cijeloga
pothvata pa je, uz izniman fotografski doprinos, i potpisan kao punopravni èlan autorskog tima.
Tekst Krunoslava Ivanšina, naslovljen Reading Nikola Dobroviæ, Looking at His Architecture, prvo je poglavlje knjige. Pregledno, sustavno i akribièno, Ivanišin u tekstu sistematizira višegodišnja istraživanja Dobroviæeva opusa. Èitajuæi Dobroviæa i njegovu arhitekturu, Ivanišin kontekstualizira Dobroviæevo djelo u lokalnome dubrovaèkom ambijentu, ali ga istovremeno argumentirano smješta i na širi europski arhitektonski horizont. Iz odlomka u odlomak u tekstu se otkrivaju višeslojni aspekti Dobroviæeve projektantske paradigme, potkrijepljeni solidnim teorijskim aparatom i izvježbanim okom interpreta: od konteksta povijesnog i meðuratnog Dubrovnika do razumijevanja konstrukcije i forme kroz presjek, tlocrt i proèelja, ambijent i materijalizaciju Dobroviæevih ostvarenja, oblikovanje volumena i oblogeIvanišin ustrajno i precizno analizira Dobroviæevu arhitekturu, nalazi joj poticaj i razloge, mjeru i esenciju.
Fotografije Wolfganga Thalera obuhvaæaju središnji dio knjige. Okom pasioniranoga promatraèa Thaler fotografira Dobroviæeve interijere i eksterijere u stanju kakvom su danas, ništa ne skrivajuæi, ništa ne uljepšavajuæi. Velièanstvena je to i nijema vizualna analiza fascinantne arhitekture nastale u samo nekoliko godina i na malome podruèju prije više od osamdeset godina, ali i podsjetnik na višedesetljetno, kontinuirano, premda i dostojanstveno propadanje.
JOVIS Verlag GmbH Berlin, 2015.
Str. 176, ilustr. 160, bilješke (uza svako poglavlje), appendix, biografije autora (na koricama) [30/24 cm, tvrdi uvez, omot]
Recezenti: Christopher Long, Ðorðe Zlokoviæ, Andrija Mutnjakoviæ Lektura i korektura: Mara Taylor Oblikovanje: Philip Popoff, Bojan Vutov
ISBN 978-3-86859-357-0
Treæi je dio knjige esej Ljiljane Blagojeviæ (A Lifetime of a Mediterranean Modern), koja, potaknuta komparativnom analizom arhivskoga materijala, ovom prilikom traga za onim usputnim, gotovo efemernim temama, intimnim ili univerzalnim paralelama koje se pojavljuju u Dobroviæevim projektima: brat Petar - opsesivni slikar dalmatinskih krajolika i pejsaža, trajno fasciniran mediteranskim bojama i svjetlom; otok Lopud - poligon znaèajnih realizacija (Grand Hotel Lopud), no za Dobroviæa i mjesto ratne oskudice, askeze i teorijskog rada, pa i nikad izgraðene vlastite kuæe za odmor. Dotièe se i njegove klijentele, pretežito lijeènika, ali i nerealiziranih projekata, potom i zgrada socijalne i medicinske namjene koje je projektirao, utjecaja èeškog funkcionalizma, pa sve do simbolike naziva koje je Dobroviæ šupljinom upisivao u svoje realizacije.
U dodatku knjige u skraæenom je obliku objavljen i prijevod Dobroviæeva teksta „Dubrovnik kao gradotvoraèko svedoèanstvo” iz 1966. godine. Osim Thalerovih fotografija u knjizi je objavljen i èitav niz izvornih nacrta, te dokumenata i fotografija iz razdoblja izgradnje pojedinih zgrada, a takoðer su tiskani i precrti svih Dobroviæevih izvedenih projekata, no šteta što nisu prikazani u veæem mjerilu. Knjiga je izašla u izdanju kuæe JOVIS, uglednoga njemaèkog izdavaèa specijaliziranog za arhitekturu i likovne umjetnosti. Tijekom 2016. godine, uz popratnu izložbu fotografija i nacrta, monografija je predstavljena u Zagrebu, Dubrovniku i Beogradu.
Mia Roth-Èerina
Bernardo Bernardi
Dizajnersko djelo arhitekta 1951.-1985.
Iva Ceraj
Bernardi
The Design Work of an Architect 1951-1985
Iva Ceraj
The scientific monograph covering the most significant work of architect Bernardo Bernardi, the pioneer of Croatian design, is based on the doctoral dissertation and curatorial work of Iva Ceraj within the Croatian Museum od Architecture. It follows the didactic, theoretical, architectural and, foremost, design ouvre of the most prominent Croatian industrial designer of the 20th century. The book sheds light on a previously unpublished selection of drawings and photographs, offering new insights into the surprising parallels with, and the creative influences of Scandinavian organic modernism, indicating Bernardi’s strong affiliation to the democratic ideas of Scandinavian design. A lifelong promotor of humanizing the physical environment, Bernardi can be credited with establishing the design profession in the Croatian context as well as initiating the establishment of the School of Design in Zagreb.
U prvoj polovici 2016. godine u knjižnici HAZU promovirane su dvije znanstvene monografije u izdanju HAZU-HMA nastale na temelju doktorskih disertacija obranjenih na Odsjeku za povijest umjetnosti Filozofskog fakulteta u Zagrebu: „Ernest Weismann - društveno angažirana arhitektura” dr.sc. Tamare Bjažiæ Klarin i „Bernardo Bernardi - dizajnersko djelo arhitekta 1951.-1985.” dr.sc. Ive Ceraj. Osim po formalnim karakteristikama, strukturi i dizajnu, te su dvije knjige sestrinske i po tome što po prvi puta cjelovito rasvjetljuju opus i formativni utjecaj dviju pionirskih autorskih liènosti hrvatske arhitekture odnosno dizajna. Bernardo Bernardi bio je po obrazovanju arhitekt, i u poslijeratnom razdoblju (diplomirao je 1948. na Tehnièkom fakultetu u Zagrebu) se pojavio na umjetnièkoj sceni kao èlan grupe Exat ‘51. Knjiga prati njegovo djelovanje od 1951. i uloge unutar Exata kao promotora potrebe nove artikulacije oblikovane okoline modernog èovjeka, te pojmovnog zaokreta ‘primjenjene umjetnosti’ ka sintagmi ‘industrijski dizajn’ kao preduvjeta uspostave discipline dizajna u Hrvatskoj. Afirmaciji dizajna znaèajno doprinosi i pokretanje Zagrebaèkog triennala, organiziranog prema milanskom uzoru, kao jedne od didaktièkih inicijativa Udruženja likovnih umjetnika primjenjenih umjetnosti Hrvatske (kojim Bernardi predsjeda u drugoj polovici 50-tih). U poèecima vlastitog dizajnerskog rada, Bernardijevo ishodište je neposredna okolinastan, tema kojom se poèinje baviti odmah nakon diplome kao asistent Zdenka Strižiæa
na Katedri za arhitektonsko projektiranje Tehnièkog fakulteta. Autorica detaljno obraðuje razvojnu putanju tog interesa i promocije ‘kulture stanovanja’ u širem društvenom kontekstu didaktièkih i sintetièkih aktivnosti posredovanih teorijskim radom, natjeèajima i izložbama na kojima sudjeluje tijekom 1950-tih i koje kulminiraju varijacijama ‘Stana bliske buduænosti’ nagraðenog na treæoj velesajamskoj izložbi „Porodica i domaæinstvo” 1960. Središnje poglavlje knjige posveæeno je Bernardijevu studijskom boravku u Finskoj, Švedskoj i Danskoj u jesen 1960., te izrazitom utjecaju te tromjeseène stipendije kako na vlastiti pristup oblikovanju, tako i na opsežnu promociju skandinavskog dizajna koja je uslijedila po povratku u Hrvatsku. Bernardi je nizom èlanaka i izložbi o dizajnu nordijskih zemalja, ali i opremanjem vlastitih aktualnih projekata namještajem, primjerice, Arnea Jacobsena, upoznao hrvatsku scenu sa sjevernoeuropskom tradicijom industrijskog oblikovanja i time dodatno utjecao na tadašnju artikulaciju vokabulara hrvatskog dizajna. (Zahvaljujuæi doprinosu višedesetljetnog mosta kulturne razmjene koja je uslijedila, jedan od èetiriju uvodnika knjizi potpisuju veleposlanici èetiriju nordijskih zemalja u Republici Hrvatskoj - Danske, Finske, Norveške i Švedske). Razdoblje 1960-tih i 1970-tih obilježili su projekti u kojima je ambicija humanizacije fizièke svakodnevice transponirana u prostore uèenja, rada i turizma, poput opremanja Radnièkog sveuèilišta u Zagrebu 1961. (posebno detaljno ilustrirano nacrtima i fotografijama iz arhiva HMA, te fotografijama iz
Hrvatska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti
Hrvatski muzej arhitekture
Edicija Architectonica knjiga br. 8 Zagreb, 2015.
Str. 390, hrvatski/engleski [30/24 cm, boja, meki uvez]
Urednik: akademik Andrija Mutnjakoviæ Recenzenti: Željka Èorak, Jasna Galjer, Tomislav Premerl Dizajn: Borut Benèina - Art Studio Azinoviæ, Zagreb
Lektura: Biserka Sinkoviæ Prijevod: Graham McMaster
ISBN 978-953-154-190-9 CIP 000924918 [NSK Zagreb]
arhiva današnjeg Puèkog otvorenog uèilišta Zagreb), komponibilnih sustava uredskog namještaja, te javnih prostora i hotela. Posljednji segment knjige posveæen je Bernardijevoj izuzetno znaèajnoj ulozi u profesionalizaciji struke. Zauzimanjem za osnivanje sveuèilišnog studija dizajna, programima temeljenim na istraživanju oglednih studijskih modela u Weimaru i Ulmu, te onima u Sjedinjenim amerièkim državama, kao i neumornim osnivaèkim strukovnim angažmanima u ULUPUH-u, Centru za industrijsko oblikovanje i Društvu dizajnera Hrvatske, Bernardi je zaslužan za osnivanje Studija dizajna pokrenutog 1989., èetiri godine nakon Bernardijeve iznenadne smrti, zahvaljujuæi nastavku angažmana kolega.
Monografija je promovirana 2. lipnja 2016. godine u Knjižnici HAZU, a pet dana kasnije uslijedilo je otvorenje istoimene izložbe u Hrvatskom muzeju arhitekture. Autorica je, u heterogenom postavu koji ilustrira razlièite aspekte bogatog i svestranog opusa, izložila reprezentativne primjerke oèuvanog namještaja posuðenog iz institucija i ustanova za koje je projektiran, detaljne izvedbene nacrte, skice, crteže, tekstove, Bernardijeve fotografije i korespondenciju iz Osobnog arhivskog fonda autora koji se èuva u Hrvatskom muzeju arhitekture HAZU, upotpunjujuæi tako sve fasete portreta intenzivne autorske osobnosti. Na promociji i otvorenju izložbe više se puta ponovila potreba za uspostavom modela zaštite dizajnerskog nasljeða 20. stoljeæa, kao i potreba osnutka Hrvatskog muzeja dizajna.
Melita Èavloviæ
Ernest Weissmann
Društveno angažirana arhitektura, 1926.-1939.
Tamara Bjažiæ Klarin
Tamara Bjažiæ Klarin
The monograph Ernest Weissmann - Društveno angažirana arhitektura [Socially Engaged Architecture] 1926-1939 presents the life and work of one of the leading figures of Croatian Modern architecture between the two World Wars. In this bilingual edition, the author chronologically traces his architectural career both at home and on the international architectural scene. The book vividly portrays Weissmann as a prolific and versatile architect with keen interest in architecture, theoretical issues and lively debates on the most progressive ideas in the field. The monograph also presents his entire architectural work. Some further research into Weissmann’s work after 1939 and his international career in the United Nations would round off this monograph and provide the answers to the questions that might have remained unanswered. It would thus effectively contribute to a detailed profile of Ernest Weissmann and his architectural career.
Monografsko izdanje Ernesta Weissmanna nedvojbeno je neizostavno djelo hrvatske arhitektonske historiografije kojim se - zahvaljujuæi predanom istraživaèkom radu autorice i dokumentiranju velikom kolièinom arhivskih izvora - rekonstruira dinamika arhitektonske profesije razdoblja izmeðu dvaju svjetskih ratova. Autorica u stopu prati život i djelo Ernesta Weissmanna, jednoga od bitnih nositelja modernosti, te kroz teme umrežavanja - najprije s domaæim protagonistima na lokalnoj, a onda i na internacionalnoj razini - nadopunjuje i proširuje ustaljena uvjerenja, ali i otvara nove, možda dosad previðene istraživaèke linije. Ernest, ili Encika za bliske prijatelje, nije èak ni uskom krugu poznanika mnogo elaborirao o svojim ekstenzivnim internacionalnim pothvatima i aktivnostima. Ovdje zasigurno treba tražiti razloge zbog kojih je ostao u odreðenoj mjeri enigmatièna persona, dosege èijeg životnog luka tek sada saznajemo. Njime se on otkriva kao protagonist internacionalnih modernih kretanja i sukreator progresivnih europskih arhitektonskih debata. Monografija precizno prati Weissmannovo djelovanje u razdoblju od 1926. do 1939. i predstavlja ga kao osobu koja je s jednakom važnosti i težinom nastupila ne samo kao arhitekt veæ i kao složena liènost koja se koristi i pisanim medijima i javnim nastupima, pridržavajuæi se pritom usvojenih naèela. Vremensko ishodište ove monografije postupno je ispripovijedana i zaokružena prièa o zagrebaèkom milieu i arhitektonskim protagonistima 1920-ih i 1930-ih godina. Moguæe je
pretpostaviti da se Weissmann veæ izuzetno rano tijekom studija zanima za pragmu i onu arhitekturu koje bi glavna odrednica bila svrhovitost postignuta èvrstim potezima, usvajajuæi tehnièke vještine na Visokoj tehnièkoj školi i postižuæi s vremenom u tome sve više uspjeha. Unutar èvrstoga referentnog polja prvoga dijela, koje je definirano kontinuiranom transmisijom iskustva i znanja, najprije germanskoga kulturnog kruga, kao nova èvrsta toèka i poveznica - u èijem je polju utjecaja pored Weissmanna bila upletena i nekolicina zagrebaèkih arhitekata - otkriva se sada beèki arhitekt s tadašnjom pariškom adresom - Adolf Loos. On æe u knjizi biti tek poèetak plodonosnoga pariškog razdoblja Weissmannova života i rada, obilježenog ponajprije likom i djelom Le Corbusiera, u èijem je pariškom birou - poput Jurja Neidhardtaod svih arhitekata s prostora bivše Jugoslavije Weissmann odigrao najdužu epizodu. Koliko god krug mladih arhitekata, buduæih protagonista internacionalne arhitektonske scene, bio presudan u Weissmannovim buduæim profesionalnim odabirima, toliko je stažiranje i upoznavanje Le Corbusiera udaljilo mladoga Weissmanna od Corbusierovih ideala. Premda obojica, i Corbusier i Weissmann, razmišljaju o potencijalu prefabricirane izgradnje ponajprije stambenih zgrada, oni to èine s posve drukèijih stajališta. Saznajemo da Le Corbusier, svjestan opasnosti poništavanja autorskoga umjetnièkog doprinosa arhitektonskom djelu, ni u jednom trenutku ne oduzima arhitekturi status umjetnièkog
HAZU - Edicija Architectonica Zagreb, 2015.
Str. 349; ilustr. 212; literatura, izvori, katalog radova, adresar [30/24 cm, u boji, meki uvez, hrvatski/engleski]
Uvodna rijeè: Andrija Mutnjakoviæ
Predgovor: Ákos Moravánszky
Urednik: Andrija Mutnjakoviæ
Prijevod: Andy Jelèiæ
Lektura: Barbara Smith Demo Dizajn i prijelom: Borut Benèina - Art Studio Azinoviæ, Zagreb
ISBN 978-953-154-189-3 CIP 000908160 [NSK Zagreb]
artefakta, dok se Weissmann, nasuprot njemu, barem deklarativno - pod utjecajem konstruktivista Nikolaja Kollija i Marta Stama - u potpunosti priklanja trima nužnim premisama prefabrikacije - ekonomici gradnje, tehnike i tehnologije, koje povezano s time bezrezervno prigrljuje. Ta pariška epizoda života, rada i prijenosa iskustava, detaljno prikazana monografijom, trajno æe obilježiti Weissmanna i baždariti ga za teme koje æe u potpunosti obilježiti njegov profesionalni rad u Zagrebu, gdje æe prefabrikaciju prepoznati kao rješenje širih socijalnih problema društva i alatom unaprjeðenja kvalitete života u domovini. Osim kao lijek za probleme stanovanja, on æe prefabrikaciju usvojiti i kod projekata bolnièkih zgrada, koje sve redom pripadaju istoj arhitektonskoj istini te premda neizvedene, slove još i danas za ikone hrvatske moderne arhitekture.
Monografijom se poentira da jednako kako je format arhitektonskih natjeèaja bio presudan za nastup Weissmanna u domaæoj sredini, toliko su upravo natjeèaji bili presudni za pojavu nove arhitektonske paradigme - one novoga graðenja [Neues Bauen]. Natjeèaji i izložbe natjeèajnih radova uzeti su kao dokazi, osobito oni za Zakladni blok u Zagrebu koji su izrodili struène polemike unutar arhitektonske zajednice, koja je još uvijek tražila ispravnu retoriku kojom bi artikulirala nove pojave i argumentirala potrebu za promjenama. Autorica sada formalnom analizom postupaka projektiranja usvojenih u Parizu umrežava, atribuira i vrjednuje redom pozna-
te, ali i dotad nepoznate Weissmannove projekte, od kojih se bitnima pokazuje posebno projekt zgrade Radnièkih ustanova na bivšoj Ciglani u Zagrebu. Taj postupak svladavanja velikog programa adiranjem pojedinaènih elemenata, grupiranjem prema namjeni i naknadnim povezivanjem prepoznaje kao ono što je Weissmannu omoguæilo da na trima projektima za bolnice egzemplarno manifestira novi naèin razmišljanja o projektiranju - onaj sistemski.
Potaknut nemoguænošæu realizacije nagraðenoga natjeèajnog projekta za Zakladnu i klinièku bolnicu, Weissmann osniva Radnu grupu Zagreb koja je, kako je navedeno, svoju razliku prema njoj srodnom Udruženju umjetnika Zemlja imala upravo u djelovanju u podruèju arhitektonskog projektiranja, uviðajuæi oèito važnost i u postavljanju dobrih primjera prakse za koju su se zalagali, a ne iskljuèivo proklamiranjem vlastitih stajališta putem dostupnih im pisanih medija i izložaba (na kojima su bili jednako tako zastupljeni). S Radnom grupom Zagreb Weissmanna sada upoznajemo kao žustrog kritièara aktualnoga društvenog trenutka i politièkog sustava, koji vjerujuæi u alternativu postojeæem kapitalizmu, zauzima poziciju da bi državni interes trebao pomoæi unaprjeðenju svih segmenata društva, pa tako i arhitekture kao njegova sastavnog dijela. Žarište je na akutnom problemu manjka stanova, usko povezanom s politikama stanogradnje, kako u Zagrebu tako i na globalnoj razini, u koju æe Weissmann steæi uvid nakon Drugoga svjetskog rata prili-
kom dugogodišnjeg angažmana u Ujedinjenim narodima.
Svoja æe uvjerenja Weissmann dosljedno zastupati jer je, kako je jasno na promociji knjige potencirala i Željka Èorak, cijelim svojim životom demonstrirao socijalnu osviještenost i potrebu podreðivanja individualnih potreba širim društvenim interesima. Na tome tragu treba razumjeti i Weissmannov doprinos svjetskoj historiografiji moderne arhitekture, koji je još i dodatno rasvijetljen izvornim dokumentima, a to je postojanje èak dviju drugih (alternativnih) verzija Atenske povelje. One su prikazane kao kljuè razumijevanja one struje koju su èinili lijevo orijentirani arhitekti - José Luis Sert, Mart Stam, Wells Coates i drugi, èiji je Weissmann aktivni èlan. Njegova su stajališta prilikom procesa donošenja povelje - kao grand finale rezolucije CIAM-ova èetvrtog kongresa - bila dio obiju drugih verzija Povelje i ishodišna misao kasnijeg okupljanja ‘ljevice’ unutar CIAM-a usprkos otporima njegova vodstva djelatne do 1938. godine.
Dvije Weissmannove realizacije obiteljskih kuæa u Zagrebu, obje ocijenjene kao antologijski prikazi hrvatske arhitekture, pripadaju nikako manje naprednom, veæ u odnosu na poznate Weissmannove prve natjeèajne radove izmijenjenom pristupu projektiranja. Kuæe Podvinec i Kraus u Zagrebu autorica naziva eksperimentima meðuratne kulture stanovanja koje na pravi naèin prezentiraju Weissmannovo suvereno poznavanje prostornih koncepata: raumplan, plan libre, kao
Sl. 1. Poljoprivredno šumarski fakultet, Radna grupa Zagreb
Sl. 2. Weissmann u Zagrebu, 1930-ih
Sl. 3. Zakladna i Klinièka bolnica Zagreb
Sl. 4. Vila Kraus
Sl. 5. Vila Podvinec u Zagrebu
i visoke razine ostvarenja na podruèju individualnog stanovanja domaæih autora. Povezivanje ovih razlièitih utjecaja nije uèinilo kuæe ništa manje rezolutnim arhitektonskim ostvarenjima, veæ naprotiv. Jedna od moguæih njihovih vrijednosti jest svakako periferijski odmak, koji bi se mogao prizvati u valorizaciji ovoga treæeg puta. Potvrda toga bila bi svakako i posljednja Weissmannova vlastita lošinjska obiteljska ljetna rezidencija koja se, iako izuzeta iz ovoga prikaza jer ne pripada definiranom razdoblju istraživanja, svakako može smatrati kao nastavak Weissmannova arhitektonskog eksperimentiranja. Osim potrebe vrjednovanja spomenute lošinjske rezidencije, i druga prikazom meðuratnog razdoblja postavljena pitanja - od akutnog problema stanovanja do nužnosti slobodnog raspolaganja zemljištem, koja æe imati svoj epilog u periodu velikih društvenih i politièkih promjena nakon Drugoga svjetskog rata - oèekuju odgovor. Nadamo se da æemo nastavkom ovakva sustavnog pristupa koji bi popratio Weissmannov put nakon 1939. godine, dobiti daljnji izuzetan doprinos ne samo lokalnom veæ sada i svjetskom korpusu povijesti arhitekture.
Zlatko Karaè
Darovan Tušek
Darovan Tušek
This is the fourth volume in Darovan Tušek’s series of books dedicated to the architectural and urban-planning competitions in Split, which focuses on the competitions held between 2006 and 2010. This short five-year period saw a burst of activity in the field with 45 competitions presented in this most comprehensive volume of the series. The introductory part depicts the role of the Split-based Architects’ Association in competition procedures as well as the corresponding rules and regulations. The central part of the book contains a chronological review of all competitions including the texts of the invitations for submissions and of the jury’s decisions about the awards. The illustrated section of the book presents the awarded, purchased, and other competition entries. The author provides commentary about the post-competition situations, i.e. the issue of project realizations. In conclusion she brings forward the characteristics of the period and the architectural trends in Split that were set by those competitions.
Nakon što je Darovan Tušek 1993. na Arhitektonskom fakultetu u Zagrebu doktorirao s valorizacijskom tezom o doprinosu arhitektonskih natjeèaja razvoju meðuratnog Splita (1918.-1941.), tu je disertaciju i objavio kao svoju prvu knjigu (1994.). Svjestan važnosti teme i odliène recepcije struke, kronološkim je slijedom prema istomu - dobro postavljenomu i provjerenomu metodološkom obrascu nastavio istraživati i kasnije splitske natjeèaje pa je ubrzo objavio puno opsežniju studiju za razdoblje 1945.-1995. (1996.), potom je obradio desetljeæe 1996.-2005. (2013.), a nedavno je publicirana i njegova èetvrta knjiga u tome nizu za period 2006.-2010. (2015.).
I dok se u prvim svescima autor pokazao kao uporan i pedantan istraživaè - ‘historiograf stare graðe’, uglavnom nepoznate, zametnute u arhivima i privatnim zbirkama - u novijim je knjigama Tušek u drukèijoj ulozi suvremenoga kronièara, svjedoka (pa i sudionika) zbivanja koja, zahvaljujuæi neposrednom uvidu u natjeèajna rješenja, ali i poslijenatjeèajna ‘stanja na terenu’, s autoritetom komentira i elaborira.
Zanimljivo je da je ova posljednja knjiga, iako pokriva najkraæe razdoblje od samo pet godina, opsegom najveæa, što je s jedne strane posljedica iznimne brojnosti natjeèaja provedenih u tome razdoblju (èak 45!), a s druge je strane to rezultat dostupnosti nove dokumentacije - raspisa, podloga, veæine natjeèajnih radova, te protokola i zapisnika ocjenjivaèkih sudova. Autorova dosljednost u strukturaciji knjiga potvrðuje se u sva èetiri sveska, u koji-
ma sinopsis i sadržajna kompozicija gotovo u potpunosti slijede ideju prve disertacijske knjige, što Tušekovoj ediciji daje karakter jedinstvenoga višetomnog djela.
U Uvodu autor analizira splitsku natjeèajnu scenu ovoga razdoblja, bitno uvjetovanu tada aktualnim GUP-om, politièkim okolnostima i mijenama u gradskoj upravi, kao i specifiènostima prosperitetnoga investicijskog vala tijekom posljednjega pretkriznog razdoblja. S tim u vezi elaborirana je uloga Društva arhitekata Splita u provedbi arhitektonskih natjeèaja, iako je odreðeni broj ‘privatnih natjeèaja’ realiziran izvan ingerencije strukovnoga društva, ponekad i uz jasan sukob interesa pojedinih aktera provedbe. Te su godine obilježene i promjenama u natjeèajnoj regulativi, gdje Tušek istièe važnost donošenja novoga Pravilnika o natjeèajima..., koji su zajednièki pripremili i usvojili UHA i Komora arhitekata s namjerom da bude obvezujuæi korektiv u ponašanju svih èlanova.
Središnji dio knjige zauzima poglavlje Kronologija natjeèaja provedenih u Splitu..., u kojem je po dosljednom redoslijedu prezentirano èak 45 natjeèaja. Svaki je elaboriran u nekoliko analitièkih cjelina (Inicijativa, Raspisivanje i tijek natjeèaja, Rezultati natjeèaja, Realizacija), s cjelovitim autorskim podacima za sve radove, te odabranim ilustracijskim prilozima za svako rješenje. Posebno bih istaknuo važnost poglavlja Realizacije u kojem Tušek prati sudbinu provedenih natjeèaja do izvedbe (ako je do nje došlo), odnosno razloge zbog kojih se od mnogih tema odustalo ili
Sveuèilište u Splitu - FGAG; Društvo arhitekata Splita
Biblioteka Društva arhitekata Splita 9 Split, 2015.
Str. 752, bilj. 487, ilustr., izvori i literatura, Summary, indeks imena, izvori grafièkih priloga [23,5/16 cm, c/b, meki uvez]
Suradnici: Hrvoje Bartuloviæ, Ana Grgiæ, Sanja Matijeviæ Barèot, Dujmo Žižiæ
Prijevod sažetka: Željka Zanchi
Grafièko oblikovanje i prijelom: Viktor Popoviæ
Tisak: Kerschoffset, Zagreb
UDK 72(497.5 Split)”2006/2010”
ISBN 978-953-6116-63-8 [FGAG] CIP 151213025 [Sveuèilišna knjižnica u Splitu]
su realizacije provedene mimo natjeèajnoga rezultata. Svaki je tekst popraæen brojnim bilješkama - što faktografske naravi, s dopunskim podacima izvan službene natjeèajne dokumentacije, što bibliografskim referencama i odjecima pojedinih natjeèaja u lokalnom i strukovnom tisku.
U sinteznom poglavlju na kraju knjige Sudionici i znaèajke arhitektonskih natjeèaja Darovan Tušek donosi svojevrsnu statistiku natjecatelja i osvojenih nagrada: najèešæe su na natjeèajima bili prisutni D. Rako (èak 15 puta), E. Šverko, N. Keziæ, D. Gabriæ, L. Pelivan i T. Plejiæ..., dok je u statistici nagrada osobito uspješan bio A. Kuzmaniæ, koji je sudjelovao na šest natjeèaja, a pobijedio na pet! Uz natjecatelje autor je analizirao i strukturu ocjenjivaèkih sudova, investitore, vrste natjeèaja i natjeèajne teme, te vremensku distribuciju postupaka iz koje je razvidno da je 2008. bila najplodnija godina s 12 provedenih natjeèaja.
Knjiga je opremljena iscrpnom literaturom i izvorima koji predstavljaju dragocjenu dokumentacijsku bazu toga vremena za sva buduæa istraživanja, a indeks imena olakšava pretraživanje pojedinaènih autorskih dionica. U svim Tušekovim knjigama obvezan je prilog i engleski sažetak, koji ima dostatnu informativnu važnost u afirmaciji kreativnog rada naših arhitekata pred inozemnim èitateljstvom. Nadamo se da Darovan Tušek veæ priprema petu knjigu, jer od 2010. do danas nataložila se cijela jedna nova povijest splitske arhitekture generirana recentnim natjeèajima.
Jasenka Kranjèeviæ
Stanko Piploviæ
Stanko Piploviæ
This book is dedicated to the architectural and urban development of Split in the 19th century. It was the period when Split grew from a small neglected town into a major hub of its wider surroundings. The city underwent its political, cultural, economic and every other transformation. The book contains two main parts covering the French and the Austrian rule. The author has traced the city’s urban and architectural development on the basis of the available books, documents, newspapers and projects. The book depicts the activities of the Split-based Association of Engineers and Architects and provides short biographies of the builders who left a trace on the city’s 19th century urban design. The book also contains a seven-page summary in English.
Split, drugi grad po velièini u Hrvatskoj, dobio je još jednu vrijednu knjigu. Na jednome mjestu prvi je put cjelovito prikazan urbanistièko-arhitektonski razvoj grada u XIX. stoljeæu. Autor je knjige arhitekt dr.sc. Stanko Piploviæ, poznati neumorni istraživaè graditeljskog nasljeða Dalmacije te autor brojnih knjiga i èlanaka o urbanistièko-arhitektonskom razvoju Splita. Namjera je autora bila rasvjetljavanje izgradnje grada odnosno vremena u kojem su stvarane pretpostavke za njegov kasniji nagli razvoj. Temeljem istraživanja brojnih i dostupnih podataka autor je želio èitateljima predoèiti kako se gradio grad odnosno kada i pod kojim su uvjetima graðene važne graðevine koje Splitu daju gradski karakter, te koji su sve arhitekti u njemu djelovali. Gradovi duge i bogate prošlosti poput Splita imaju svoje uspone i padove, a Split je tijekom XIX. stoljeæa, nakon èetiri stoljeæa letargije pod venecijanskom upravom, doživio prostornu transformaciju jer se od zapuštene varoši preobrazio u važno središte širega okruženja. Ne smije se zaboraviti da je u to doba Split prolazio mukotrpan put politièkog, kulturnog, gospodarskog i drugog sazrijevanja. Split je tijekom XIX. stoljeæa bio pod dvjema upravama. Kratkotrajnom, ali ne manje znaèajnom francuskom i stoljetnom austrijskom upravom. Temeljem tih podataka autor
je podijelio knjigu u dva poglavlja. Zbog nedostupnosti graðe vrlo je malen dio knjige posveæen francuskoj, dok je velik dio knjige posveæen austrijskoj upravi. Svako poglavlje autor zapoèinje opisom opæih prilika kako bi èitatelje upoznao sa situacijom toga doba. U cijeloj su knjizi vješto isprepleteni napori urbanizma i arhitekture u gradnji komunalne infrastrukture, ali i sukobi izmeðu grada, investitora i arhitekata, pogotovo prilikom primjene novih graðevinskih oblika, materijala i tehnologija. Zanimljivost knjizi daju brojni projekti koji nisu realizirani zbog razlièitih razloga. Razdoblje francuske uprave u Splitu obilježilo je djelovanje generala Marmonta. To je doba kad se ureðuju prostori i grade ceste, ali i uspostavlja zdravstveno i drugo struèno školstvo. Zanimljiv je podatak da je general zapovjedio gradnju Arheološkog muzeja u Splitu. Iz gotovo stoljetne austrijske uprave saèuvan je znatno veæi broj dokumenata, tiskovina i projekata, iz kojih je bilo puno lakše rekonstruirati vrijeme preobrazbe grada. Osim prostornoga razvitka grada opisane su prometne veze, pomorske gradnje, stambena arhitektura, upravne zgrade, zgrade za kulturu, zgrade za zdravstvenu i socijalnu skrb, ugostiteljstvo, školske zgrade, vjerske graðevine, graditeljsko nasljeðe, poslovne i gospodarske graðevine, vojne graðevine,
Društvo prijatelja kulturne baštine Split Split, 2015.
Str. 432, ilustrirano, literatura i izvori, kazalo osoba, summary [17,5/24; tvrdi uvez]
Urednica: Karmen Hrvatiæ
Recenzenti: Robert Plejiæ, Vesna Perkoviæ Joviæ
ISBN 978-953-7698-03-4
komunalne zgrade, infrastrukturne graðevine, zelene površine, groblja, javni spomenici, te podruèja za sport i rekreaciju.
Prije zakljuèka autor opisuje djelovanje Društva inžinira i arhitekata u Splitu, a zatim abecednim redom niže kratke biografije graditelja/arhitekata koji su ostavili više ili manje traga na oblikovanje Splita u XIX. stoljeæu. Veæina arhitekata koji su djelovali u Splitu nisu bili iz Splita i u njemu su boravili kratko. U razlièitim vizijama grada te razvoju graditeljskog i prirodnog nasljeða prepoznate su dvije važne toèke, a to su Dioklecijanova palaèa i Marjan, koji su i danas prostorni simboli Splita.
Osobita vrijednost knjige jesu brojni izvori koji nisu dostupni na internetu, a sada su prezentirani na jednome mjestu pa je tako otvoren put zainteresiranim istraživaèima za urbanistièko i arhitektonsko nasljeðe grada Splita. Uporabivosti knjige pomaže opsežno kazalo osoba. Istraživanje ima veæu vrijednost ako se uzme u obzir èinjenica da dosad nijedna institucija nije uspjela naæi snage za istraživanje izgradnje grada toga doba. Nedvojbeno je arhitekt Stanko Piploviæ ponovno zadužio grad Split jer je uspio rasvijetliti urbanistièko-arhitektonsku preobrazbu Splita u XIX. stoljeæu.
Zlatko Juriæ
Max Dvořák
Max Dvořák
M. Špikiæ continues his critical translation work of the seminal texts on conservation and restoration written in Europe in the 19th and 20th century. The books Anatomy of a Historic Monument and Camilo BoitoMonument as a Book were followed by the second completed edition Catechism of Monument Preservation written by M. Dvořák, translated and published in the 1988 thematic issue of the Split-based review ”Pogledi”. Špikiæ as editor of the second edition supplemented it with encyclopaedic texts, notes and an extensive bibliography. The second edition published in Zagreb contains for the first time the original photographs with critical comments. The text was reviewed by the professor J. Mireniæ Baèiæ who translated it thirty years ago. In his introductory text ”Conservation and the last days” Špikiæ brilliantly synthesized the debates and events going on in the conservation field in the German-speaking countries at the beginning of the 20th century.
M. Špikiæ i mala, èvrsto meðusobno prijateljski povezana grupa visokoobrazovanih i sjajnih prevoditeljica - A. Vukadin, S. Šoštariæ, L. Jirsak - strpljivo i brižno nastavljaju raditi golem posao. Na hrvatski jezik pomnjivo prevode i opremaju kritièkim komentarima kapitalne tekstove o konzerviranju i restauriranju koji su napisani u Europi u 19. i 20. stoljeæu. Nakon knjiga Anatomija povijesnog spomenika i Camilo Boito - Spomenik kao knjiga uslijedilo je drugo dopunjeno i kritièko izdanje Katekizma zaštite spomenika M. Dvořáka, a u pripremi su prijevodi Giovanonijevih konzervatorskih tekstova.
Glasoviti europski povjesnièar umjetnosti M. Dvořák imao je neobiènu sudbinu u enciklopedijskim izdanjima u Hrvata. U prvoj enciklopediji bio je prisutan, pa je potom nestao u sljedeæim izdanjima i opet se pojavio u zadnjem izdanju. Katekizam zaštite spomenika prvi je put preveden i objavljen 1988. godine u tematskom broju splitskoga èasopisa „Pogledi”. Špikiæ je uredio drugo kritièko izdanje koje je opremio enciklopedijskim tekstom i bilješkama kojima je protumaèio pojmove i osobe spominjane u tekstu, te priredio opširnu bibliografiju. U drugomu zagrebaèkom izdanju prvi su put objavljene izvorne fotografije s kritièkim komentarima, koje su izostale u prvome izdanju.
Tekst je pregledala profesorica J. Mireniæ Baèiæ, koja ga je i prevela prije tridesetak godina. U uvodnome tekstu „Konzerviranje i posljednji dani” Špikiæ je sjajno sintetizirao rasprave i zbivanja u konzerviranju koji su se
vodili u njemaèkome govornom podruèju na poèetku 20. stoljeæa.
Zašto je njihov rad na prevoðenju i objavljivanju ove knjige tako znaèajan?
Prvo, Špikiæ i suradnice diskretno su distancirani od središnje opsesije suvremenih znanstvenika na otvaranju kanala za diseminaciju narativa i beskrajnim umreživanjem na najvažnijim okruglim stolovima. Oni su se usredotoèili na jedan od temeljnih tradicionalnih istraživaèkih postupaka u humanistièkim znanostima - pomno èitanje, dubinsko razumijevanje, kritièko razmišljanje i nijansirano prevoðenje teorijskoga teksta s jednoga na drugi jezik. Nakon toga slijedi sintezna interpretacija pojedinoga teorijskog teksta unutar cijeloga opusa pojedinog autora, ustanovljenje njegova odjeka meðu suvremenicima i istraživanje utjecaja na buduæi razvoj teorijske misli o konzerviranju. Drugo, krajnje savjesnim i pomno promišljenim prevoðenjem sofisticiranih teorijskih tekstova pisanih na dugotrajno razvijanim europskim jezicima - oni aktivno predlažu definiranje konzervatorsko-restauratorske terminologije te sudjeluju u razvoju i mijenjanju hrvatskoga jezika.
Treæe, iz knjige u knjigu u uvodnim se tekstovima postupno gradi mozaik povijesti konzerviranja u Europi na prijelazu 19. u 20. stoljeæe. Èetvrto, iz knjige u knjigu Špikiæ s pravom uspravno i ponosno stoji na ramenima divova profesora Marasoviæa i Maroeviæa jer nadograðuje i nastavlja njihovo djelo suvremenim teorijskim spoznajama o konzerviranju. Nji-
Naslov originala: Katechismus der Denkmalpflege
Verlag von Julius Bard, Wien, 1916. i 1918.
Prevela: Jasenka Mireniæ Baèiæ
Priredio i komentirao: Marko Špikiæ
Zagreb, sijeèanj 2016.
Str. 255, ilustr. 140, bibliografija [20,5/14,5 cm, meki uvez, crno-bijeli tisak]
Recenzenti: Franko Æoriæ, Libuše Jirsak, Zlatko Juriæ
Grafièki urednik: Boris Kuk
Izdavaè: Naklada Jesenski i Turk
Tisak: Znanje d.o.o. Zagreb
ISBN 978-953-222-740-6 CIP 000919393 [NSK Zagreb]
hov meðusoban složeni teorijski odnos možda najbolje opisuje ova metafora koju je osmislio Bernard iz Chartresa, a upotrebljavali su je u raznim situacijama sir I. Newton, S. Taylor Coleridge, R. Reagan i braæa Galagher iz Oasisa.
Peto, slièan izdavaèki koncept prevoðenja kapitalnih teorijskih tekstova iz europske povijesti umjetnosti i arhitekture proveli su H. F. Mallgrave i S. Anderson u monumentalnoj ediciji Texts&Documents.
Edicija je nastajala zahvaljujuæi bliskim i prijateljskim odnosima jedne male skupine vrijednih, pristojnih i vrhunski obrazovanih osoba. Posebno treba naglasiti nekonformizam izdavaèa „Jesenski i Turk”, koji su knjigu objavili bez financijske potpore Ministarstva i Grada Zagreba.
Šesto, dok u društvu bjesni neprekidni sedamdesetogodišnji rat izmeðu ustaša i partizana, jedna malena skupina mirnih i supertalentiranih pojedinaca strpljivo gradi povijesni i teorijski mozaik koji ima istinsku europsku humanistièku vrijednost. Sedmo, jedna osobna želja umjesto zakljuèka. Sljedeæa knjiga koja bi se sjajno uklopila u postojeæi niz bio bi izbor, prijevod i kritièki komentar Loosovih tekstova o arhitekturi, odijevanju i svakodnevnom životu. U hrvatskoj arhitekturi Loos ima mitski status zbog osobnih kontakata s Kovaèiæem i Ehrlichom, ali su njegovi teorijski tekstovi nedovoljno prisutni, unatoè dvjema dosadašnjim izdavaèkim akcijama.
Zlatko Karaè
od 1699. do 1939.
Dubravka Ðukanoviæ
Architecture of Roman Catholic Churches in Vojvodina from 1699 to 1939
Dubravka Ðukanoviæ
This ample monograph presents a comprehensive synthesis of a years-long research into Roman Catholic religious architecture of Vojvodina (a multi-ethnic and multi-confessional north region of Serbia) as a melting pot of Orthodox, Catholic, Evangelical, and Jewish religious building traditions. Owing to the fact that just few medieval church remains still exist and no new Christian churches were built during the Ottoman period, the predominant religious buildings in the region are churches built from the late 17th century until the Second World War in Baroque, Classicist, and Historicist style including few Secessionist and Modernist examples. The author of the book and the architect, Dubravka Ðukanoviæ, Ph.D., analyzed 250 churches from the liturgical, stylistic, and typological perspective searching for Central European influences and the origins of some architectural forms and spatial arrangements. The chronological and typological tables offering a well laid-out graphic synthesis of the main chapters make this book exceptionally valuable.
Nakon gotovo pet godina rada, terenskoga dokumentiranja i arhivskog istraživanja te potom temeljite elaboracije, autorica dr. Dubravka Ðukanoviæ, arhitektica iz Novog Sada, nedavno je objavila sinteznu znanstvenu monografiju o sakralnoj arhitekturi rimokatolièke konfesionalne grupe u Vojvodini. Rijeè je o do sada slabo poznatom, a iznimno vrijednom korpusu spomenièke baštine koji je kao kulturni sloj velikim dijelom vezan i uz autohtoni hrvatski etnikum Baèke, Srijema i nešto manje Banata, o èemu se kod nas zna tek vrlo malo. S iskustvom svoje prethodne knjige posveæene arhitekturi pravoslavnih crkava 18. i 19. stoljeæa u Baèkoj (objavljene 2009.) i rada na doktorskoj disertaciji (obranjenoj 2013.) iz koje je dijelom proizašla i ova nova knjiga - Dubravka Ðukanoviæ je realizirala studiju uzornoga znanstvenog dometa koja se veæ po svome opsegu i iscrpnosti analize doima kao djelo veæeg institutskog tima, a ne samostalnog istraživaèa! Istraživanjem su obuhvaæene sve 243 rimokatolièke sakralne graðevine na podruèju Vojvodine, meðu kojima su - uz dominantne župne crkve i nekoliko samostanskih - inventarizirane i brojne manje kapele (grobne, zavjetne, obiteljske, kalvarijske) te u najreprezentativnijem sloju tri katolièke katedrale (u Subotici, Petrovaradinu i Zrenjaninu). Autorica je kao donji vremenski okvir istraživanja postavila 1699. (godina Karlovaèkog mira) kada je veæi dio Vojvodine osloboðen od osmanske vlasti i od kada zapoèinje izgradnja novih kršæanskih bogomolja (veæ 1701. dovršena je crkva sv.
Jurja u Petrovaradinu). Gornja kronološka granica koju arh. Ðukanoviæ prepoznaje kao relevantnu je 1939. kada je dovršena rekonstrukcija crkve u Mladenovu, što je posljednja još uvijek stilska rimokatolièka gradnja nastala na promatranom podruèju prije Drugoga svjetskoga rata. Valja znati da zbog duge turske vladavine i razaranja srednjovjekovnog sloja katolièkih crkava, starije predosmanske sakralne arhitekture u Vojvodini gotovo da i nema (rijetke su iznimke npr. samostanske crkve u Baèu i Araèi), pa se može reæi da je Dubravka Ðukanoviæ zapravo obradila kompletan korpus graðevina ove konfesionalne grupe. Tijekom gotovo dva i pol stoljeæa povijesne geneze novovjekih katolièkih crkava autorica je izluèila šest stilski èitkih periodizacijskih odsjeèaka u rasponu od ranog baroka (u Vojvodini kasni cijelo stoljeæe), do kasnog baroka, klasicizma, historicizma (s neizbježnom Bolléovom prisutnošæu), rijetkih egzemplara secesije (npr. crkve u Šidu koju projektira vukovarski arhitekt Fran Funtak), s tek nekolicinom nasluæenih oblikovnih gesti moderne. Meðutim, inovativna vrijednost knjige kolegice Ðukanoviæ osobito je vidljiva u složenoj i pažljivo nijansiranoj tipološkoj klasifikaciji crkava, za što je po rijeèima same autorice, uzore pronašla u monumentalnoj sintezi maðarske sinagogalne arhitekture prof. Rudolfa Kleina. Taj veliki spomenièki korpus razvrstan je u sedam osnovnih tipoloških skupina, prema srodnosti tlocrtnih rješenja - od nekoliko jednobrodnih varijeteta, do transeptnih tlocrta, trobrodnih bazilika i centralnih graðe-
Pokrajinski zavod za zaštitu spomenka kulture, Petrovaradin; Biblioteka: Kulturno nasleðe Novi Sad, 2015.
Str. 577+10 tab., ilustr. 352, bilj.; prilozi: popis crkava, mjesta, skraæenica, izvori, literatura, kazalo
Dvojezièno: srpski/engleski
[31/24,5 cm, kolor, tvrdi uvez, ovitak]
Gl. i odgovorni urednik: Zoran Vapa
Recenzenti: Rudolf Klein, Aleksandar Kadijeviæ, Mirjana Roter Blagojeviæ
Lektura: Vesna Bašiæ
Prijevod: Srðan Starèeviæ, Frenklin Kormak Fotografije: Nedeljko Markoviæ, Dubravka Ðukanoviæ
UDK 726.54(497.113)”1699/1939”
ISBN 978-86-80929-27-9
CIP Biblioteka Matice srpske
vina... Osim što je pojavu pojedinih tipova dr. Ðukanoviæ uvjerljivo povezala s kronološkom podlogom razvoja, pregledno prikazanog na posebno uloženim tipološkim tablama, izluèena su i zemljopisna podruèja na kojima je pojedini tip dominantan. Posebna je cjelina posveæena istraživanju podrijetla i ishodišta pojedinih tipova (ali i stilsko-oblikovnih matrica) te interpretaciji arhitektonskih utjecaja za kojima autorica traga i u susjednim prostorima Hrvatske i Maðarske, ali i u širemu Mitteleuropskome monarhijskom miljeu. Osobitosti prostorne organizacije crkava, protumaèene su, uz ostalo, i kroz prizmu liturgijskih zahtjeva i njihovih mijena tijekom vremena, a takoðer i konstruktivnom uvjetovanošæu, osobito kod sustava svodova. Knjiga je opremljena brojnim ilustracijama gdje se, uz vrsno snimljene fotografije današnjeg stanja, s posebnim užitkom mogu pregledati i gotovo svi saèuvani arhivski nacrti reproducirani u visokoj rezoluciji. Meðutim, nemjerljiv autorièin doprinos nalazimo u stotinama arhitektonskih snimaka objekata koji do sada nisu imali nikakvu dokumentaciju, nacrtanih ujednaèeno i prireðenih digitalno. U prilogu knjige je ekstenzivna bibliografija, akribièno sastavljen popis izvora i kompleksni indeksni registar. Kao osobit izdavaèki napor treba pohvaliti punu dvojeziènu objavu teksta (srpsko-englesku), što æe arhitekturi Vojvodine otvoriti vrata ka europskim sintezama u kojima primjera s naših podruèja zbog jezièke zatvorenosti uglavnom nema, ili ih je vrlo malo.
Iva Muraj
Vladimir Brezar
Vladimir Brezar
Architectural spaces, objects, forms and details exist independently from man’s consciousness. Their meanings can be recognized by the method of analogy, for instance by comparing with language. During the genesis detail changes its role in a series of transition from imitation to stylization. More than the original function the interpretation of it becomes important. The design of detail depends on technological, anatomical, dimensional, psychological, aesthetical parameters as well as on geometry of joining. Especially the question of detail as application and decoration is exposed due to the changing of aesthetic standards. The denudation of meaning of the ”house without details” leads to the need of message carriers which make possible the communication between architecture and observer. The professional communication inside the branch is excluded here where there the term detail is identified with the term detail drawing. Thus the outer visual form of detail remains the most important; in the first phase it represents the way of realization, but in every further phase it means the memory, the interpretation of the method applied in the first place.
[Abstract preuzet iz knjige]
Traktat (lat. tractatus - zanimanje, obraðivanje) je opširna rasprava o nekom odreðenom predmetu ili pitanju. U svojoj knjizi Traktat o detajlu v arhitekturi Vladimir Brezar, umirovljeni profesor arhitekture, prenosi svoja istraživaèka, struèna i pedagoška znanja i iskustva o detalju. Naslov knjige jasno nagovješæuje da je rijeè o upoznavanju sa znaèenjem arhitektonskog detalja u razlièitim projektantskim procesima te izuèavanju pristupa rješavanju arhitektonskog detalja i njegovoj primjeni u arhitekturi. Detalj se promatra kao fizikalni, konstrukcijski, funkcionalni i tehnološki fenomen.
Knjiga je struèna publikacija na podruèju arhitektonskih konstrukcija i zgradarstva. Arhitektonske konstrukcije predstavljaju jedan od osnovnih kolegija na studijima arhitekture u našoj i susjednim zemljama. Knjiga je napisana na slovenskom jeziku i vrijedna je zbog opæeg manjka sliène suvremene literature na hrvatskom jeziku. Meðu naslovima u hrvatskoj izdavaèkoj ponudi, od strane domaæih autora, nema izdanja koje se bavi išèitavanjem i razumijevanjem detalja. U arhitektonskom obrazovanju takva literatura i znanstveni pristup izvrsna su nadopuna osnovnim kolegijima i uzor koji pokazuje kako arhitektonska struka ne trpi disciplinarne granice, veæ se one meðusobno nadopunjavaju i uzajamno obogaæuju.
Knjiga je objavljena 2015. kao obnovljeni tekst Detajl kot element arhitekturnega jezika studentskoga materijala kolegija Finalizaci-
ja in detajli na poslijediplomskom studiju na ljubljanskom Fakultetu za arhitekturu 1987. godine. Dr.sc. Vladimir Brezar (Kranj, 1935.) diplomirao je na Visokoj tehnièkoj školiOdjel za arhitekturu 1959. u Ljubljani, gdje je zaposlen kao asistent (1959.-1973.), docent (1973.-1978.), izvanredni profesor (1978.1988.) i redoviti profesor (1988.-2005.). Bio je predstojnik Odjela za arhitekturu (1975./76.), dekan Fakulteta za arhitekturu, graðevinarstvo i geodeziju u Ljubljani (1984./85.) i dekan samostalnog Fakulteta za arhitekturu u Ljubljani (1995./96.). Predavao je kolegije Stambene zgrade, Arhitektonske konstrukcije II (poslije Finalizacija i detalji) na Fakultetu za arhitekturu u Ljubljani i kolegij Zgradarstvo na Tehnièkom fakultetu Sveuèilišta u Mariboru (1992./93.). Projektirao je brojne poslovne, stambene i vjerske zgrade u Sloveniji. Njegov rad pokrivao je podruèja masovne gradnje stanova s naglaskom na funkciju i iskoristivost stana te graðevne tehnologije (prefabrikacija, finalizacija i detalji).
Njegove su znaèajnije publikacije: Kompozitna struktura ovojnik konstrukcij (disertacija, UL, Ljubljana, 1984.), Finalizacija in detajli (FA, Ljubljana, 1990.), Stavbarstvo (Univerza v Mariboru, 1995.), My IAHS SketchbookMoja IAHS skicirka (Istanbul, 2012.).
Najnovija knjiga Traktat o detajlu v arhitekturi uzorno je pedagoški strukturirana, slijedi logiku razvijanja znanja o predmetu i postavlja standarde za sliènu literaturu. Tekst je knjige lako razumljiv, izvrsno sistematiziran i
Univerza v Ljubljani, Fakulteta za arhitekturo Ljubljana, 2015.
Str. 49, ilustr. 30, priloga 8, literatura, abstract [30/21, c/b, meki uvez, slovenski jezik]
Recenzenti: Martina Zbašnik-Senegaènik, Domen Zupanèiè Skice: Vladimir Brezar
Grafièko oblikovanje: Marta Bujanda Miguel Za izdavaèa: Peter Gabrijelèiè, dekan
ISBN 978-961-6823-56-2
CIP Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana
prezentiran. Autor originalno i uvjerljivo kombinira razlièite razine izlaganja i pokazuje znanje razlièitih teorija. U formalnom smislu knjiga je podijeljena u dva dijela.
Prvi dio razraðuje graðu u osam poglavlja: detalj kao element arhitektonskog jezika, parametri oblikovanja detalja, sastavljanje i sklop, geometrija sastavljanja, detalj kao dekoracija i imitacija, detalj kao komunikacija, semantièki i održivi paradoksi, analiza znaèenja i zakljuèci.
Drugi dio „Tematski prilozi” sadrži osam specifiènih tema: detalj slijedi koncept, detalj kao crtež, detalj i mjerilo, ‘održivi’ detalji, fasada i voda, zid i pod, problem ugla i detalj koji šokira, te time nadopunjuje i zaokružuje cjelinu.
Važan su doprinos djelu autorske, rukom raðene skice i crteži. Da je prof. Brezar vrhunski crtaè, doznala sam 2012. godine na meðunarodnoj 38. International Association for Housing Science [IAHS] konferenciji u Istanbulu, kad je izdana njegova knjiga My IAHS Sketchbook (Istanbul, 2012.) sa sjeæanjima na IAHS konferencije (1992.-2012.) - potkrijepljena crtežima u boji. Prof. Brezara srela sam ove godine u Zagrebu na otvorenju autorske izložbe „Izložba crteža”, koja je bila otvorena povodom slovenskoga kulturnog praznika - Prešernova dana (Slovenski dom, Zagreb, 27.1.-1.2.2016.), na kojoj je predstavio sažetak svoga bogatoga arhitektonskog opusa i izbor skica s mnogobrojnih putovanja.
Aleksandar Kadijeviæ
Serbien. Stadt als Regionaler Kontext für Architektur
Serbia. The City as a Regional Context for Architecture
Bojan Kovaèeviæ, Adolph Stiller [editors]
Srbija. Grad kao regionalni kontekst arhitekture
Bojan Kovaèeviæ, Adolph Stiller [ur.]
The exhibition ”Serbien. Stadt als Regionaler Kontext für Architektur [Serbia. The City as a Regional Context for Architecture]”, organized as the thirty-ninth exhibition from the exhibition series ”Architektur in Ringturm [Architecture in Ringturm]” (18 Feb - 02 Apr 2015) provided insight into the origins of architecture in the Republic of Serbia focusing primarily on the architecture of medium-sized Serbian towns and less on Serbia’s capital Belgrade whose architecture was presented at the 2011 exhibition ”Belgrad - Momente der Architektur”. The exhibition catalogue with its high-quality illustrations and useful thematic and historiographic reviews, contributes to a more thorough understanding of the origins of architectural profession in Serbia in the last 150 years including a valuable contribution made by the Croatian architects.
Organizirana kao tridesetdeveta u seriji „Architektur im Ringturm”, beèka izložba „Serbien. Stadt als Regionaler Kontext für Architektur” (18.2.-2.4.2015.) srednjoeuropskoj je publici podrobno približila genezu novijega graditeljskog stvaralaštva na prostoru Republike Srbije. U njoj je stavljen akcent na arhitektonski fond srbijanskih gradova srednje velièine, manje na prijestolni Beogradposebno predstavljen izložbom „BelgradMomente der Architektur” 2011. godine. Izložbom i publikacijom nastavljen je proces historiografskog prezentiranja novijih graditeljskih fenomena sa širega bivšeg jugoslavenskog i balkanskog prostora („Rumanien. Momente der Architektur vom 19 Jh. bis heute”, „Avantgarde&Kontinuität: Kroatien, Zagreb, Adria”, „Slowenien Architektur”, „Tirana - Planen, Bauen, Leben”, „Marburg-Maribor” i „Montenegro: Kontrast, Landschaft Artchitektur, Kontext”).
Slojevitu postavku pratio je instruktivan dvojezièni njemaèko-engleski katalog u kojem je grupa pozvanih struènjaka iznijela stajališta o odabranim temama. Katalog su studiozno uredili autori izložbe - beogradski arhitekt Bojan Kovaèeviæ i beèki kustos Adolph Stiller, istovremeno i pisci prvih dvaju poglavlja. Poput prijašnjih, i ovaj je katalog tematsko-metodološki višeslojan, sastavljen od historiografskih, memoarskih i raspravno-kritièkih priloga upotpunjenih veoma kvalitetnim ilustracijama. U uvodnom ogledu „Arhitektura u Srbiji” Stiller aktualizira opæu genezu graditeljstva na tlu Srbije. Najveæu pozornost posveæuje raz-
voju arhitektonske struke u doba industrijalizacije nakon Drugoga svjetskog rata. Kroz ilustracije i komentare istièe doprinos stranih graditelja razvoju Srbije, izdvajajuæi zagrebaèke arhitekte Huga Ehrlicha (JU banka), Lavoslava Horvata (hotel „Jugoslavija”) i autore palaèe SIV-a (A. Ulrich, D. Perak, A. Potoènjak i Z. Neumann). Najviše prostora pridaje poslijeratnim nositeljima autorske moderne arhitekture N. Dobroviæu, B. Bogdanoviæu, M. Mitroviæu, A. Brkiæu, I. Antiæu, M. Lojanici, M. Jovanoviæu i drugima, analizirajuæi i recentnu produkciju B. Mitroviæa, D. i M. Marušiæ, B. Podrecce, S. Kruniæa i A. Spajiæa.
S osam kratkih portreta utjecajnih arhitekata Kovaèeviæ dodatno produbljuje slojevitost kataloške eksplikacije. Buduæi da je tek manjina prikazanih autora još uvijek aktivna, o njihovu se djelu može govoriti kao o zaokruženom i historiografski mjerljivom. I dijalog izmeðu tumaèa arhitekture Duška Kuzoviæa i klasika srbijanske kasne moderne Mihajla Mitroviæa, publiciran u obliku nadahnutog intervjua, aktualizira devastacije znaèajnih autorskih cjelina izvan Beograda, liènost Stanka Mandiæa i kljuène determinante novije srbijanske arhitekture. Potom slijedi prikaz glavnih arhitektonskih ostvarenja u sedam gradova središnje Srbije i Novom Sadu, nedovoljno poznatih srednjoeuropskoj struènoj javnosti. U prilogu „Arhitektura kao dio industrijskog naslijeða Srbije” Rifat Kulenoviæ analizira stanje u tom podruèju, poèevši od sredine devetnaestog stoljeæa. Osim beogradskih industrij-
Verlag: Muery Salzmann, Wien 2015.
Str. 216, ilustr. 500, literatura, kazalo [20/20 cm, u boji, meki uvez]
Urednici: B. Kovaèeviæ, A. Stiller Prevoditelji: I.&W. Rappi, J. Erdeljan, M. Adamoviæ Kulenoviæ, M. Matiæ, E. Saghafi Donorski Lektura: I.&W. Rappi Grafièki dizajn: Haler&Haler Tisak: Remaprint Literadruck
ISBN 978-3-99014-115-1
skih kapaciteta koje su projektirali znameniti arhitekti (J. Najman, D. Brašovan, J. Dubovy i dr.), istièe i komplekse ostvarene u gradovima središnje Srbije. Posljednji prilog kataloga „Percepcija srpske arhitekture u inozemstvu” Vladimira Vukoviæa baca inicijalno svjetlo na tu nedovoljno problematiziranu temu, s naglaskom na razdoblje poslije Drugoga svjetskog rata. U njemu je stavljen akcent na liènost Aljoše Josiæa koji je u suradnji s G. Candillisom i S. Woodsom ostvario zavidnu meðunarodnu karijeru. Doprinosi internacionalnoj struènoj sceni Ranka Radoviæa i Bogdana Bogdanoviæa takoðer su opisani, uz napomenu da je bilo i drugih autora koji su se na njoj istaknuli (M. Pantoviæ, S. Maksimoviæ, M. Bobiæ i D. Radoviæ). Katalog završava biografijama autora tekstualnih priloga, spiskom odabrane literature, kazalom i kartom današnje Republike Srbije. Iznimno kvalitetno ilustriran, ispunjen korisnim problemskim i historiografskim osvrtima, katalog baca novo svjetlo na predmetnu temu. U faktografsko-analitièkom pogledu pridonosi toènijem razumijevanju geneze arhitektonske struke u Srbiji tijekom posljednjih 150 godina, osvjetljavajuæi razlièite tipove zgrada, pri èemu su nepravedno zapostavljeni sakralni objekti srbijanskih autora. Udio hrvatskih graditelja koji su privremeno ili trajnije djelovali u Srbiji primjereno je prikazan, što se odnosi i na slovenske i bosanskohercegovaèke. I po tome ova publikacija zaslužuje pozornost jer poticajno proširuje opseg istraživanja srbijanske arhitekture na širi regionalni kontekst.
S obzirom na bitno smanjen priljev financijskih sredstava iz svih izvora na koje se èasopis oslanjao u dosadašnjem izlaženju (proraèunske potpore, izdvajanja Fakulteta, vlastiti prihodi), Uredništvo je - kako bi se osiguralo daljnje redovito izlaženje i održala dosegnuta razina kvalitete PROSTORA - odluèilo za znanstvene priloge primljene nakon 1. sijeènja 2013. uvesti nužnu financijsku participaciju autora. Podatci i upute za uplatu, kao i nova procedura koju æemo primjenjivati prilikom prijama rukopisa, nalaze se na web stranici èasopisa. Nadamo se razumijevanju cijenjenih suradnika.
Uredništvo
Due to large cuts in funding from all sources, the editorial board has decided to introduce a financial support from the authors for all papers submitted after 1st January 2013. in order to be able to continue regular publication and maintain the achieved quality of the journal PROSTOR. Further information and payment instructions including information about the new procedure for manuscript submission can be found on the journal’s web site. We sincerely hope for your understanding and support.
Editorial board
Opæa i koncepcijska profilacija èasopisa PROSTOR, otisnuta uz impresum, sastavni je dio Uputa suradnicima. Molimo suradnike da poštuju sljedeæe upute:
Priprema i predaja rukopisa
• Uredništvo prima iskljuèivo neobjavljene rukopise na hrvatskom ili engleskom jeziku.
• Rukopis (tekst èlanka s ilustracijama) dostavlja se Uredništvu u elektronièkom obliku, pri èemu autor predaje:
1. za uredništvo: cjeloviti tekst èlanka sa svim podatcima u jednom doc/docx. file-u (MS Word);
2. za recenzente: tekst èlanka bez podataka o autoru u jednom doc/docx. file-u (MS Word)
3. ilustracije:
a) svaka spremljena kao zaseban file (skenirane s minimalnom rezolucijom od 300 dpi u nekom od sljedeæih formata: tiff, jpg, psd, bmp, dwg, cdr); fileovi trebaju biti imenovani kratko (Sl. 1.; Sl. 2.; Tab. I.)
b) u jednom doc/docx. file-u na formatu A4 umetnute sve korištene ilustracije, umanjene, numerirane i potpisane
• Svi radovi podliježu anonimnom recenzentskom postupku.
• Sve ostale opise (oznake znanstvenog podruèja, UDK oznake, datume prijama i prihvaæanja èlanka, dvojeziène elemente itd.) unosi Uredništvo.
• Na autorov æe se zahtjev potvrditi prijam rukopisa.
Recenzije
• Za sve znanstvene priloge Uredništvo osigurava najmanje dvije neovisne recenzije, pri èemu su autorima recenzenti nepoznati, a isto su tako recenzentima nepoznati autori èlanka.
• Konaènu odluku o kategorizaciji rada donosi Uredništvo uzimajuæi u obzir mišljenja recenzenata.
• Objavit æe se svi pozitivno recenzirani i na sastanku Uredništva prihvaæeni èlanci, a redoslijed objave Uredništvo utvrðuje prema sadržajnim i koncepcijskim kriterijima svakoga pojedinog broja.
• Uredništvo æe autora obavijestiti o provedenom recenzentskom postupku, utvrðenoj kategoriji èlanka i eventualnim dopunama ili ispravkama koje je autor obvezan provesti prije konaènoga prihvaæanja èlanka za tisak.
• Autor je obvezan postupiti prema primjedbama recenzenata i ispravljeni tekst dostaviti u roku od 30 dana. Ukoliko autor ne doradi èlanak u roku od 30 dana, èlanak se odbija za tisak. Prepravljeni èlanak može se ponovno poslati kao novi tekst koji æe iæi u redovit recenzentski postupak.
Urednièka redaktura
• Radovi se u integralnom obliku pišu i objavljuju na hrvatskom ili engleskom jeziku, a sažetci, kljuène rijeèi, naslovi i podnaslovi, opisi ilustracija i biografija autora tiskaju se dvojezièno (prijevod osigurava Uredništvo).
• Èlanak autora koji nije izvorni govornik prihvatit æe se cjelovito preveden na engleski jezik samo ako autor osigura jezièki kvalificiran prijevod.
• Uredništvo zadržava pravo manjih ispravaka, promjene naslova, jeziène lekture, prijevoda i uobièajene redakture teksta nužne radi prilagodbe èlanka propozicijama èasopisa.
• Autoru pripada jedan besplatan primjerak èasopisa i 15 posebnih otisaka (separata) njegova èlanka. Dodatni se otisci, na autorov trošak, mogu posebno naruèiti putem Uredništva.
Molimo suradnike da svoj èlanak, osim ovim opæim uputama, obvezno prilagode i Tehnièkim uputama objavljenim na: http://www.prostor.hr
Information about the general concept of the journal PROSTOR next to the impressum is an integral part of these notes. Authors are asked to adhere to the following guidelines:
Manuscript Preparation and Submission
• The Editorial Board accepts only unpublished texts, written either in Croatian or English.
• Manuscripts (text and illustrations) should be submitted to the Editorial Board electronically in the following versions:
1. For the Editorial Board: the text of the article with all data and supplements as a single doc/docx. File (MS Word)
2. For the reviewers: the text of the article without the name(s) of the author(s) as a single doc/docx. File (MS Word)
3. Illustrations:
a) Each illustration should be submitted as a single file (scanned with a minimal resolution of 300 dpl in one of the following formats: tiff, jpg, psd, bmp, dwg, cdr); files should have short names (Fig. 1., Fig. 2., Table I).
b) All illustrations of a manuscript need to be compressed, numbered, completed with cap-
tions, and submitted as a single doc/docx.file in A4 format.
• All manuscripts will be peer reviewed by anonymous reviewers.
• All other designations (the scientific field, UDC designation, dates of admission and acceptance of the manuscript, bilingual elements etc.) are entered by the Editorial Staff.
• The authors will receive acknowledgement of receipt of their manuscript upon request.
• All submitted manuscripts will be subject to independent blind peer-review process by at least two independent experts in the field. Authors and reviewers remain unknown to each other.
• Final decision about the manuscript categorization rests with the Editorial Board whose judgment will be based primarily on the reviewers’ opinions.
• All manuscripts that are positively reviewed and accepted by the Editorial Board will be published. The order of their publication is subject to the Editorial Board’s policy regarding the content and concept of each issue of PROSTOR.
• Author(s) will receive notification of the review process, article categorization and additions or correc-
tions that should be made by the author(s) prior to the final acceptance of the article for publication.
• Author(s) is/are obliged to make all corrections suggested by the reviewers and send back the improved manuscript within 30 days. In case the author(s) fail(s) to submit the revised text within 30 days, their article will not be published. It is possible to submit the revised text as a new contribution which will be then be subjected to a standard peer-review process.
• Articles are written and published in Croatian or English. Other supplements such as summaries, key words, titles and subtitles, captions and author(s)’ biographies are bilingual (translation is provided by the Editorial Board).
• Full-length articles written by non-native speakers of English will be accepted for publication only on condition that the author(s) provide a high-quality English translation signed by a qualified translator.
• The Editorial Board reserves the right to make minor corrections, changes of the titles, language editing, translation and text editing in order to adapt the article for publication.
• The author(s) is/are entitled to one free copy of the journal and 15 offprints of the article. Additional offprints may be ordered from the editor at the author(s)’ expense.
Contributors are asked to adjust their contributions according to the technical notes published on the web page: http://www.prostor.hr
Ovaj su broj èasopisa PROSTOR redakcijski pripremile i realizirale dr.sc. Ariana Štulhofer i dr.sc. Mia Roth-Èerina
Broj je urednièki zakljuèen 7. 6. 2016. Grafièka priprema i tisak dovršeni su 27. 6. 2016.
Osnovna tipografija: Meta
Papir: 115 gr Offsetni tisak c/b
Znanstveni prilozi | Scientific
Ivo Vojnoviæ Palaèa Jakša u Hvaru Jakša Palace in Hvar
Boris Dundoviæ
Zorana Sokol Gojnik
Igor Gojnik
Mladen Obad Šæitaroci
Darko Kahle
Svetislav G. Popoviæ
The Palace of the Post and Telegraph Administration Office in Jurišiæeva Street, Zagreb
Architectural and Stylistic Features
Palaèa Ravnateljstva pošte i brzojava u Jurišiæevoj ulici u Zagrebu Odlike arhitekture i stilskoga rješenja
Urbanistièka obilježja liturgijskih graðevina u Zagrebu u 20. stoljeæu
Urban Features of the 20th Century Liturgical Buildings in Zagreb
Residential Buildings of Neues Bauen in Zagreb between 1928 and 1934
Stambene zgrade Novoga graðenja u Zagrebu izmeðu 1928. i 1934. godine
Planning and Creating Place Identity for Podgorica as Observed
Nenad Lipovac Through Historic Urban Planning
Sanja Vlahoviæ Planiranje i stvaranje Prepoznatljivosti mjesta grada Podgorice oèitano kroz povijesne urbanistièke planove
Flavio Stimilli Turin, Sochi and Krakow in the Context of Winter Olympics
Mladen Obad Šæitaroci Spatial Planning and Territorial Impact of the Games
Massimo Sargolini Torino, Soèi i Krakov u kontekstu Zimske olimpijade
Prostorno planiranje i utjecaj igara na teritorij
Mojca Smode Cvitanoviæ Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko
Marina Smokvina Afrièki radovi hrvatske arhitektice
Andrej Uchytil Dragica Crnkoviæ Oèko
Croatian Architect and her Approach in African Context
Ljiljana Aleksiæ Building Revitalization and Integration of Solar Systems
Vesna Kosoriæ in Sustainable Rural Tourism
Obnova zgrada i ugradnja solarnih sustava u održivom razvoju ruralnog turizma