Krakowskie domy własne wybitnych architektów z przełomu XIX i XX w. – analiza oryginalnych narożnych kamienic z historycznej i współczesnej perspektywy

Beata Elżbieta Makowska, Anna Kulig

doi:10.37190/arc250102

Streszczenie

W artykule omówiono kamienice krakowskie z przełomu XIX i XX w. zaprojektowane przez Teodora Talowskiego, Władysława Ekielskiego i Jana Zawiejskiego. Projekty te, będące ich domami własnymi, dały im możliwość swobody twórczej, która zaowocowała powstaniem oryginalnych i wybitnych form. Nośnikiem nowatorskich i nieschematycznych rozwiązań kamienic było także ich narożne położenie na nieregularnych działkach o szczególnej konfiguracji przestrzennej (układ koncentryczno-radialny Krakowa) i lokalizacja przy ważniejszych ulicach. W opracowaniu projektów dla architektów ważne było uwzględnienie istniejącego kontekstu, a także dbałość o kontakt z naturą poprawiającą jakość życia mieszkańców („zielone elewacje”, loggie, przedogródek).

Celem autorek artykułu była szczegółowa analiza kamienic – ich fasad, układu rzutów, konstrukcji i funkcji, a także odpowiedź na pytania, jak są one dziś użytkowane, oceniane i adaptowane. Praca oparta została na dokumentacji historycznej i fotograficznej kamienic, badaniach in situ, analizie dostępnych opracowań naukowych i innych (studia waloryzacji przestrzeni, karty obiektów).

W wyniku badań wyciągnięto wnioski, że narożne domy własne architektów stanowią wyróżniające się rozwiązania formalne, które współcześnie nie straciły na wartości artystycznej i użytkowej. Analiza charakterystycznych w urbanistyce miasta form o rozpoznawalnych detalach ze współczesnej perspektywy wydaje się ważna, ponieważ są one cennym dziedzictwem architektonicznym, które należy chronić i popularyzować.

Podgląd pełnego artykułu jest możliwy wyłącznie na większych ekranach.

2025

1(81)

Beata Elżbieta Makowska*, Anna Kulig**

Krakow-based outstanding architects’ houses

from the turn of the 19

and the 20

century:

Analysis of original corner townhouses

from a historical and contemporary perspective

DOI: 10.37190/arc250102

Published in open access. CC BY NC ND license

Abstract

This paper discusses Krakow townhouses from the turn of the 19

and 20

centuries, designed by Teodor Talowski, Władysław Ekielski and Jan

Zawiejski. These projects, which were their own homes, gave them an opportunity for creative freedom, which resulted in original and outstanding

forms. The innovative and non-schematic solutions of the townhouses were also conveyed by their corner location on irregular plots of land with

a particular spatial conguration (the concentric-radial arrangement of Krakow) and their location on major streets. In developing the designs, it was

important for the architects to take into account the existing context, as well as to ensure contact with nature improving the quality of life for the

residents (“green façades”, loggias, front gardens).

We analysed the townhouses in detail – their façades, plan layout, construction, and use – aiming to answer questions about how they are used,

evaluated, and adapted today. This study was based on historical and photographic documentation of the townhouses, in situ research, analysis of

available academic and other studies, including space valorisation studies and facility cards.

The study concluded that the architects’ own corner houses represent distinctive formal solutions that have not lost their artistic and utilitarian

value. The analysis of forms with recognisable details in the urban layout of the city from a contemporary perspective can be seen as important, as

they are a valuable architectural heritage that should be protected and popularised.

Key words: architecture of Krakow, corner house, architectural detail

Introduction

Krakow’s architectural heritage and wealth of forms

from dierent eras make it a city with a distinct identi-

ty, one that is recognisable both nationally and globally.

The historic townhouses and tenements located in the area

between the rst and second ring roads are an import-

ant part of its structure. The rst ring road is formed by

a series of streets that encircle the Old Town along Planty

Park, which was built on the site of the city’s former de-

fensive walls. The second ring road consists of, among

other things, Krasińskiego, Słowackiego and Mickiewicza

avenues. In the late 19

and early 20

centuries, a num-

ber of interesting houses were built in the area along the

street frontages. Particularly noteworthy, however, are the

corner forms with unusual solutions, among them houses

and non-modular plots favoured bespoke, original solu-

tions and motivated the architects to creative exploration

that dealt away with pre-established patterns.

The subject of this paper covers the most interesting

Krakow houses of architects Teodor Talowski, Władysław

Ekielski and Jan Zawiejski. It presents their characteristics

and also shows them in the wider context of six other cor-

ner townhouses from the period in question. The forms se-

lected were analysed from a contemporary perspective – as

still functioning townhouses located in a city with a rich

ORCID: 0000-0002-1221-9216. Faculty of Architecture, Cracow

University of Technology, Poland, e-mail: beata.makowska@pk.edu.pl

ORCID: 0000-0003-2845-0145. Faculty of Architecture, Cracow

University of Technology, Poland.

14 Beata Elżbieta Makowska, Anna Kulig

cultural heritage. This study set out to answer questions

such as: what condition the houses are in today, whether

the original residential use had changed (adaptive reuse as

services, oces, etc.), and whether the townhouses were

renovated. The paper also analyses the formal relationships

of the townhouses in question to the existing historical con-

text. An analysis of the tenements according to patterns pro-

posed by Christopher Alexander (1977) was carried out

The period in which the townhouses in question were

built was a time of signicant change in Krakow’s urban

planning. A change in the character of the city’s develop-

ment

occurred around 1870 (Purchla 1990, 7, 16, 45). In

1866, when the city gained autonomy, the delineation of new

streets and the development of those that emerged radially

from the Market Square began. The year 1872 saw the start

of the implementation of Józef Dietl’s plan for the city’s

urban layout. It revitalised housing development in the area

outside Planty Park. In the years 1891–1900, during a pe-

riod of intense building activity when the Krakow Fortress

was being expanded, the area between the rst and second

ring roads was lled with townhouses and tenements. This

also contributed to the signicant development of crafts,

trade, industry and transport. In the years 1860–1910, the

city’s population grew enormously from 50,000 to 152,000

(Tablice historyczne 1996, 359). This prosperity was inter-

rupted by the outbreak of World War I in 1914.

As mentioned, the townhouses under study were built

in the area of Krakow between the rst and second ring

roads. This area, with its distinctive and complex layout,

had a signicant inuence on their form. The irregular

plots specically determined the forms of the corner town-

houses, located on the more important streets, which were

former routes leading to the city gates. The concentric-ra-

dial layout of the streets resulted in city blocks of varying

size and shape (triangular, polygonal, rectangular). The

diagonally diverging streets, perpendicularly intersected,

contributed to the creation of numerous corners with dif-

ferent opening angles

(Purchla 1990, 34). The layout of

transport routes, developed in a long historical process, de-

termined the frontage development of 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-sto-

rey townhouses

The block, which was created by intersecting the space

with streets was a secondary element to the originally

created street. Development in the area adopted the mod-

el of an irregular, ne-grained positive residential fabric,

which creates hollow spaces (streets and squares bounded

Alexander and colleagues described the positive patterns that

make buildings places full of life.

At the end of the 1860s, Krakow gradually transformed from

a still-medieval city into a modern urban organism with new buildings

with metropolitan features.

In comparison, the population of Warsaw increased during this

period from 158,000 to 781,000, of Wrocław from 146,000 to 512,000,

of Łódź from 40,000 to 408,000, of Poznań from 51,000 to 157,000, and

of Szczecin from 64,000 to 232,000.

Corner townhouses accounted for 18.3% of the development.

In the past, they linked the charter-period city with the wider

region and were restructured in the plans for the beautication of the

Republic of Krakow (1815–1846), later in the plan for the regulation of

Greater Krakow 1910.

by frontages), as opposed to a negative fabric built of de-

tached structures (Frysztak 1997, 59). This development

was interspersed with monastery gardens and small gar-

dens next to townhouses

(Miasta-ogrody 1912, 82, 83).

Contact with nature that improved the quality of life for

residents was important in the completed projects. This

quality was provided by loggias, viewing terraces, front

gardens or “green façades” with climbing plants. Narrow

streets inuenced the development of relatively low-rise

buildings regulated by building regulations. Tenements

and townhouses were built between the rst and second

ring roads and had a dominant role in the development of

this area of the city.

State of research

In the available literature, the authors found many stud-

ies on the architectural heritage of Krakow (Łoza 1954;

Demel 1957; Krakowski 1971; Purchla 1990; Bałus 1991;

Białkiewicz 1994; Makowska 2014), including tenements

and townhouses. The work of the architects discussed in

this paper was documented as follows:

– Teodor Talowski’s designs by, e.g., Beiersdorf (1973),

Samek (1985) and Bałus (1994),

–

Władysław Ekielski’s designs by, e.g., Grajewski (1991,

109–124),

– designs by Jan Zawiejski, documented by, e.g., Pur-

chla (1986).

Archival photographs of Krakow townhouses and ten-

ements are presented in several publications (Broniowska,

Tabkowski 2019; Gaczoł, Kwiatkowska 2019; Grzech-

nik-Correale 2017), and their original design documents

are stored at the National Archives in Krakow.

Methods

The paper is a continuation of research conducted in the

years 2004–2006

. The corner townhouses of architects

were subjected to another analysis in 2024, from a contem-

porary perspective. The photos from 2004 and 2024 (after

the renovations) were juxtaposed with surviving archive

photos (from the photographic studio of Ignacy Krieger

and Antoni Pawlikowski) from the period when the town-

houses were built, in the years 1887–1910.

In the rst stage of the study, a query of the National

Archives in Krakow (Archiwum Narodowe w Krakowie

– ANK) was made and data taken from academic publica-

tions including past

and contemporary studies were ana-

lysed. A query was then carried out in the Archives of the

Municipal Conservator of Monuments, where all available

The alternation of built-up and green areas was pointed out by

Ebenezer Howard in 1912, who called Krakow “a garden-city of natural

development” (Miasta-ogrody 1912).

Research project entitled Decoration of Krakow tenements from

the turn of the 19

and 20

centuries – the need to protect cultural val-

ues of architecture, project no: 1547/T07/2004/27, funded by the Minis-

try of Science and Information Technology, Department of Research,

sole contractor: Beata Makowska.

Period trade journals proved an important source of information,

including Architekt.

Krakow-based outstanding architects’ houses from the turn of the 19

and the 20

century 15

unpublished works on the townhouses in question were an-

alysed, allowing, among other things, for the determination

of the date of the renovations and the listing of the build-

ings on the Register of Monuments. The archive materials

allowed copies of the original plans (oor plans, elevation

drawings) to be made, the procurement and verication of

data on the years of construction of the buildings, their au-

thors, the history of the buildings and their remodels. This

made it possible to verify whether the design data had been

realised and to what extent it had been preserved

, and to

identify the extent the City Building Authority in Krakow

interfered with the form of the townhouses and the visual

elements of their façades. Copies of the oor plans also

made it possible to analyse the evolution of the interiors

Illustrations by Ignacy Krieger and his descendants, as

well as those by Antoni Pawlikowski, held in the collec-

tions of the Iconography Studio of the Historical Museum

of the City of Krakow (Muzeum Historyczne Miasta Kra-

kowa – MHK) and the National Archives, and published

in specialist journals, were also an important source of

information. These, combined with in situ research, made

it possible to observe the changes that had taken place in

the façades of the townhouses and in their vicinity, and to

reconstruct decorations that no longer exist

Characteristics of the architects’ corner

townhouses under study

Teodor Talowski (1857–1910) was a prominent archi-

tect of the period and created his own original language of

forms that bordered on historical revival, Art Nouveau and

early Modernism. He displayed great imagination and free-

dom in shaping the spatial layouts of townhouses, and those

he had designed often had asymmetrical façade layouts

with distinctive original detail. The diverse materials used

on the façades – bricks with varied patterns, roughly cut

stone, plaster and decorative mosaics, sentences, emblems

– created their extraordinary picturesqueness. As Zbigniew

Beiersdorf wrote, Talowski’s façades are characterised by

[…] symbolism of mood: the poetics of the buildings’ pic-

turesque, patinated and mysterious façades evoke reec-

tions on the passing of time (1973, 199). The façades of the

townhouses at 35 Karmelicka Street and 1 Retoryka Street

were covered with vegetation, which climbed up them via

carefully delineated channels. Talowski can be seen as

a forerunner of “green” façades that are designed today and

have a positive contribution to urban ecology. Talowski’s

designs displayed distinct free forms and asymmetric lay-

outs. Irregularity is also evident on the façades with win-

dows of dierent shapes and sizes. The interiors were also

unusual for the time – there were sometimes two-storey

rooms. In the building at 9 Retoryka Street, the architect

designed only one staircase with a separate entrance to the

kitchen, and a gazebo on the garden side that allowed con-

The Ekielski house, for example, originally had a dierent façade.

Some plans that had not been preserved in the National Archives

were found in trade journals.

For example, the decorations of the building at 40 Piłsudskiego /

25 Krasińskiego Avenue that is documented in this article.

tact with nature. This was a precursor to common patterns.

According to the journal Architekt, within Talowski there

awakened […] an opposition against the schematic form of

the contemporary house, which is expressed in the houses

at 1 Retoryka Street (as a two-storey building), 2 and 5 Kar-

melicka Street (“under the spider”). In the forms used here,

the artist sometimes goes beyond the template, and draws

so rmly and condently that he makes you recognise his

talent, expressing himself boldly and with a great sense of

the line (W.E. 1910, 83). Talowski can also be regarded as

a precursor to a more loose variation in the height of town-

houses and their more three-dimensional design. In his de-

signs of townhouses, the relationship between elevations

and plans is clear, achieved through structural and decora-

tive means. The articulation of the masses took into account

the dierences in the use of each room (1 Retoryka Street).

Similarly, the placement and design of window and door

apertures was driven by the use of the rooms in the interior

(9 Retoryka Street). The details and decorations, as well as

the materials used, accentuated the articulated forms. The

composition of the façade of the building at 35 Karmelicka

Street, with the continuation of the gable line carried out

in the plane of its wall, can be considered innovative. Ta-

lowski’s individuality contributed to the popularisation of

a more loose way of building and had an impact on more

than just the Polish circles. Alongside the originality in the

approach to house designs, it was important for Talowski

that they harmonised with the urban context. The shape

of the gables on the façade of the building at 1 Retoryka

Street engaged in a dialogue with the gable of the building

at No. 3 and the convent of the Order of the Sisters of the

Servants of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, while the gable of

the building at 35 Karmelicka Street interacted with the

gable of the neighbouring building on the side of Batorego

Street, similarly, the brick gables “conversed” with the rus-

tications and spheres placed on the façade next door.

Władysław Ekielski (1855–1927), whose designs were

characterised by a high level of workmanship using the

best materials, was also an outstanding architect during this

period. He is the designer of the building at 14 Studencka

Street (ANK, ABM, Studencka 14, fsc. 921), which ref-

erences the style of the Viennese school of Heinrich von

Ferstl, from his late period. The layout of the oor plan

is characterised by spatial economy and functionality of

the circulation links, with corridor connections designed in

parallel rooms in an enlade. The example discussed in this

paper is Ekielski’s own house on the corner of 40 Piłsud-

skiego Street / 25 Krasińskiego Avenue, which heralded the

new 20

century and when it was built aroused much con-

troversy

. This design is characterised by an innovative

oor plan (Purchla 1986, 289), a modern layout of forms

(a cut-out form with a cylindrical tower in the corner) that

Feliks Chwalibóg wrote about the house as follows: Meanwhile,

Wolska Street is a sewer of aborted fetuses of architecture, and the mon-

strosity hatched at its mouth has few equals in Krakow. This tower-like

cylinder, it is not known whether it serves as a reservoir for the water

of the peripheral railway with which it is in contact, or whether it is

the boiler of a “grand laundry” or a private crematorium (Chwalibóg

1908, 14).

16 Beata Elżbieta Makowska, Anna Kulig

anticipates later trends. At the same time, it has façades

with historical revival and modernised forms. The motifs

of the Wawel Renaissance are evident in it: windows, deep

eaves, a jug, folk-art-inspired motifs. The comfort of the

ats was enhanced by the front garden and loggias (for-

merly decorated with painterly decoration) providing con-

tact with the green areas in the neighbourhood, as did the

small tower terrace accessible from the top oor at

. The

satisfaction of the users’ needs – recreation and contact

with nature – used in this project was later developed by

Functionalists in the form of a at roof that acts as a ter-

race. In accordance with then-modern hygienic require-

ments, the bathrooms accessible from the ats’ entry halls

were illuminated and ventilated via windows located in the

auxiliary staircase.

The third artist discussed is Jan Zawiejski (1854–1922),

who evolved from historical revival to Modernism (1920s

Modernism). Initially, he was a promoter of the Alt-

deutscher Stil popular in 1880s Berlin. On the other hand,

his Turnau House (1899–1890) located at the corner of

2 Siemiradzkiego Street / 28 Łobzowska Street is a case of

Northern Mannerism. The building discussed in this paper

and located at the corner of 11 Łobzowska Street / 2 Bisku-

pia Street is a forerunner of later Modernist tendencies. On

its façades, a corner bay and windows with large expanses

of glazing were designed to allow users to connect with na-

ture. On the courtyard side, the green area was connected

to the extensive garden next to the Church of St. Francis

de Sales. On the street side, trees were growing on a small

green belt, and the garden square at Biskupi Square was

also visible. In another house designed by this architect at

45 Karmelicka Street, the layout of the structure and the

division of the walls in the interior largely correspond to

the structural weave of the façade composition, in line with

the latest trends. Zawiejski’s townhouses established a di-

alogue with neighbouring buildings, maintaining a similar

scale, repeating the rhythms, directions and characteristic

lines of the façade

Teodor Talowski’s own house on the corner

of 35 Karmelicka Street / 28 Batorego Street

The “Under the Spider” tenement house is located on

an irregular plot at the intersection of Karmelicka and Ba-

torego Streets. It was designed and built between 1887 and

1890 by Teodor Talowski (Figs. 1, 2). The design is slight-

ly dierent from the completed version – the bay window

had a dierent form

. The wing on the side of Karme-

licka Street is double-arched and has an asymmetrically

designed vestibule in the front bay, the other wing on the

side of Batorego Street is single- and double-arched with

a staircase. The building is four-storey and has ve-axis

front façades on both sides (Danilczyk, Kasprzyk 2005,

The archive photo shows plants here (another storey was added

later).

Not all townhouses were appropriate in scale, e.g., the Ohrenstein

House at the corner of 27 Stradom Street / 42 Dietla Street (designed by

Jan Zawiejski, 1911–1913) was considerably larger than its neighbours.

ANK, sign. ABM, 35 Karmelicka Street, photo 361.

44, 45; Danilczyk et al. 2004, 177, 178). The façades have

a decorative surface made of brick and stone, with ceramic

and plaster details. The single-axis corner of the building

is emphasised by a small turret. Both façades are crowned

with gables, the one on the side of Karmelicka Street is

more elaborate and asymmetrical. It is decorated with

a pinnacle with an owl’s head, a bird perched on a ball and

supported on a plinth (alluding to the mascarons designed

for the Cloth Hall by Matejko), the date “1889”, a sundial

and a decorative motif of a spider weaving a web, an anal-

ogy to the architect and his work. According to Bałus, the

symbolism of the spider and the sundial on the façade is

linked to time and transience (1994, 215–238). The sculp-

ture was made by Władysław Chrośnikiewicz. The gable

line is continued on the right by two stone buttresses and

accentuated on the left by a dragon sculpture. Next to it

is an inscription: “Fecit. Theodorus Talowski”. Above the

entrance portal is a small bay window with a decorative

semi-circular pediment and pilasters at the corners, fea-

turing oral motifs on the capitals. The bottom of the bay

window features a winged disc motif inspired by Egyptian

art. An inscription was placed above the bay window: “Si

Deus nobiscum, quis contra nos”

. The display window

and shop portal are crowned by double segmental arches,

one of one colour and the other made of alternating white

and red bricks. The capitals of the shop portal are deco-

rated with oral motifs. The crowning cornice and the

cornice on the bay window were decorated with oculi. On

the side of Batorego Street, the architect designed archi-

tectural forms relating to the Krakow Renaissance (motifs

modelled on the attic of the Cloth Hall) and Gothic (defen-

sive architecture). Bricks were carefully selected for the

façade, imitating the archaic nature of the masonry and its

layering. It is also decorated with metal anchors of vary-

ing forms and fragments of cannonballs. Special channels

were delineated in the façade of the house through which

wild vine can grow. This building was entered into the

Władysław Ekielski’s house on the corner

of 40 Piłsudskiego Street / 25 Krasińskiego Street

This four-storey building was designed in the years

1898–1899 by Władysław Ekielski (Fig. 3). It has a two-

bay layout with an inter-bay corridor (Danilczyk, Kasprzyk

2005, 318, 319; Sudacka 1979). Its oor plan is 16 m deep

(from Piłsudskiego Street) and 15.2 m (from Krasińskiego

Avenue), and is symmetrical in relation to the corner axis

with a circular room, semi-circular staircase and spacious

halls

. The Ekielski house stands out with its original

details and decorations. The façade bears the inscription:

“I did not build this for You, so You build for Yourself as

well”. The frontage is set back at the corner, with a small

The same quotation can be found on the portal of the gate lead-

ing to the courtyard of Wawel Castle.

It was built in stages – rst as a two-storey building with cellars

in 1899, then the 3

oor was added, in 1903 the previously uninhabit-

ed part was included, and the caretaker’s at was also enlarged (ANK,

ABM Piłsudskiego 40, fsc. 447).

Krakow-based outstanding architects’ houses from the turn of the 19

and the 20

century 17

Fig. 2. Krakow, townhouse at 35 Karmelicka Street / 28 Batorego Street (design by T. Talowski, 1887–1890):

a) floor plan, b) façade (source: ANK, ABM Karmelicka 35, fsc. 361)

Il. 2. Kraków, kamienica przy ul. Karmelickiej 35 / Batorego 28 (proj. T. Talowski, 1887–1890):

a) rzut parteru, b) elewacja (źródło: ANK, ABM Karmelicka 35, fsc. 361)

Fig. 3. Kraków, townhouse at 40 Piłsudskiego Street / 25 Krasińskiego Street (designed by W. Ekielski, 1898–1899):

a) ground floor plan (source: ANK, ABM Piłsudskiego 40, fsc. 447), b) façade (source: ANK, ABM Piłsudskiego 40, fsc. 447),

c) photograph from 2024 (photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 3. Kraków, kamienica przy ul. Piłsudskiego 40 / Krasińskiego 25 (proj. W. Ekielski, 1898–1899):

a) rzut parteru (źródło: ANK, ABM Piłsudskiego 40, fsc. 447), b) elewacja (źródło: ANK, ABM Piłsudskiego 40, fsc. 447),

c) zdjęcie z 2024 (fot. B. Makowska)

Fig. 1. Krakow, townhouse at 35 Karmelicka Street / 28 Batorego Street (design by T. Talowski, 1887–1890): a) archive photograph, 1920s

(source: MHK collections invent. no. MHK-8444/N/2, photo by unknown author), b) 2004, c) 2024 (photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 1. Kraków, kamienica przy ul. Karmelickiej 35 / Batorego 28 (proj. T. Talowski, 1887–1890): a) zdjęcie archiwalne, lata 20. XX w.

(źródło: zbiory MHK nr inwent. MHK-8444/N/2, autor nieznany), b) 2004, c) 2024 (fot. B. Makowska)

18 Beata Elżbieta Makowska, Anna Kulig

with a bas- relief depicting an eagle holding a snake in its

talons

. The stone entrance portal located in the rst axis

facing the avenue is enclosed by a wrought-iron gate with

an inscription: “One year before the 20

century of Christ’s

reign over the world”. The windows on the alley side have

arched canopies supported by balusters, with studs charac-

teristic of folk carpentry. Their lintels are decorated with

white and blue ceramics. There is a circular room in the

tower. This building was entered into the Register of Mon-

uments on 11 May 1973 (A-479).

Jan Zawiejski’s house on the corner

of 11 Łobzowska Street / 2 Biskupia Street

The four-storey townhouse with basements known as the

“Bright House” (Fig. 4), located on a quadrilateral L-shaped

plot, was designed and built by Jan Zawiejski between 1909

and 1910

. The two-bay townhouse with a corridor-like in-

termediate bay has a hallway with a short ight of stairs in the

third axis from the left. In the rear bay of the same axis and

adjacent is a staircase (Danilczyk, Kasprzyk 2005, 47, 48).

The composition of the façade, based on a regular rhythm of

large windows and ascetically designed risalits, is close to

the early 20

century Modernist tendencies (Fabiański, Pur-

chla 2001, 283, 284). The architectural forms of the façade

are […] a contemporary travesty of 16

century Krakow Re-

naissance motifs in

a Modernist interpretation

(Purchla

1986, 194). On the side of Łobzowska Street, the façade is

tri-axial, while on the other side – six-axial. Its chamfered

corner is accentuated by a small attic and an oriel window

that extends through the 1

and 2

oors. It is support-

ed by imposts decorated with lion heads and oral motifs.

It is a replica of the decoration of the “Under the White Eagle”

townhouse at 45 Main Market Square.

ANK, ABM Łobzowska 11, fsc. 535.

Among others, two-storey rectangular oriel windows, Wawel

motifs – prominent eaves with wooden coers.

garden planned here. The front façade from Piłsudskiego

Street is tri-axial, with the corner axis formed by archi-

trave loggias on pillars and columns. The entrance, in the

form of a semicircular closed band with a key, is located in

the extreme right axis from Piłsudskiego Street and leads

through an arcade. The ground oor is paved with irregular

stone slabs and the oors with light glazed brick. The house

is […] composed almost exclusively of

Wawel Renaissance

motifs, and forms a picturesque yet deeply rooted example

of the historicist tradition (Fabiań ski, Purchla 2001, 65).

A variety of textures were used on the façade: red brick

facing the tower, white glazed cement brick on the 1

and

oors, two-tone stone on the foundation, and a vari-

ety of plasters. The façade is also decorated with a mosaic

depicting Christ located to the left of the entrance portal.

The architect used an extraordinary wealth of forms on the

façade (Dom własny 1902, 62, 63;

Sprawa budowy 1902,

160). The brick tower is topped with an attic

, on each

storey the windows are variously shaped (tripartite, bipar-

tite, doubled). Particularly noteworthy is the window on

the elevation from Piłsudskiego Street, topped with a full

arch with a tympanum with a ram’s head

(Grajewski

1991,

115). It is anked by rustic pilasters with capitals

decorated with double heads. An inscription was placed

above the bay window: “This is where the light from heav-

en enters, it is to heaven You should look”. The window

sill is decorated with a medallion with geometric borders

and two volutes with heads. The rectangular window lo-

cated in the second axis on the side of the corner tower is

decorated with a bordure with oak and palmette motifs,

while the loggias of the 1

and 2

oors are decorated

with pilasters with animal motifs. The arcade is decorated

The decorations of the arcade niches of the tower, depicting

scenes of the adoration of Mary and the Child by angels, visible on an

archive photograph from around 1900, have not survived.

According to Grzegorz Grajewski, the frieze of the tympanum is

modelled on the window of the castle in Baranów.

Fig. 4. Kraków, townhouse at 11 Łobzowska Street / 2 Biskupia Street (designed by J. Zawiejski, 1909–1910):

a) 1920s (photo by A. Pawlikowski, before 1925, source: Jagiellonian University Museum, MUJ-1784-F), b) 2004 (photo by B. Makowska),

c) ground floor plan (source: ANK, ABM Łobzowska 11, fsc. 535)

Il. 4. Kraków, kamienica przy ul. Łobzowskiej 11 / Biskupiej 2 (proj. J. Zawiejski, 1909–1910):

a) lata 20. XX w. (fot. A. Pawlikowski, przed 1925 r., źródło: Muzeum UJ, MUJ-1784-F), b) 2004 (fot. B. Makowska),

c) rzut parteru (źródło: ANK, ABM Łobzowska 11, fsc. 535)

a b c

Krakow-based outstanding architects’ houses from the turn of the 19

and the 20

century 19

The horizontal plane of the bracket is lled with a bas-re-

lief depicting a Jagiellonian eagle with a crown and the let-

ter S on its breast. The vertical articulation of the façade

is created by pilasters that ank tall tripartite windows

whose heads are decorated with oral motifs. The beams

above the windows are decorated with cartouche-framed

medallions with the initials “J”, “W”, “M” (initials of the

owners’ names: Jan, Wanda and Małgorzata) and a house

mark formed from the letters “J”, “Z” (Jan Zawiejski).

An entrance portal anked by pilasters with lion heads

was designed on the side of Biskupia Street. Its fanlight

is enclosed by a segmental arch with a prominent cuspid,

most prominent in the top part of the arch. The horizontal

divisions on the façade are formed by substantial parapet

cornices, a corbelled cornice over the ground oor and

a crowning cornice placed under a prominent decorative

eave with wooden corbels. Above the eaves, an iron railing

mounted on masonry brackets was placed in the likeness

of an attic. The extreme axis on the right side of the longer

façade is formed by slightly protruding loggias anked by

pilasters with imposts decorated with, among other things,

oculi. The central loggia ends in a full arch and is lled

with a decorative lattice. On the ground oor, the head

placed between the arched brackets supporting the loggia

has been preserved. This building was entered into the

Results

Analysis of architects’ houses

from a contemporary perspective

– an answer to this study’s research questions

Table 1 presents the answers to the research questions

regarding the change in form and use of the townhouses

in question, their state of preservation, and their formal

relationship to their historical context. Overall, it should

be noted that the form of two townhouses did not change,

and only in one of them a third storey was added. Minor

changes were made to the form of use of the buildings

and their technical condition is good. The houses are well

maintained and still in use. As a result, all the townhouses

retained formal links with the existing historical context.

Analysis of architects’ houses

according to Christopher Alexander’s patterns

The titular “pattern language” is both a theoretical and

practical method of architectural design developed by Alex-

ander and colleagues (Alexander 1977, 18). Its elements are

units called patterns. Each pattern describes a problem that

arises in the design and use of architectural forms. It also

points to the essence of its solution (recommendation) in

such a way as to use this solution repeatedly, never repeating

the action. Alexander’s extensive 1,200-page work contains

253 patterns with short titles. Alexander points to a network

of their interrelationships, e.g., pattern no. 110: Main en-

trance. Place the main entrance of the building at a point

where it can be seen immediately from the main avenues

of approach and give it a bold, visible shape which stands

out in front of the building (Alexander 1977, 544). Another

example is pattern no. 207, which helps in the selection of

materials. He recommends using traditional materials and

techniques that have been used for centuries because they

are relatively easy to build, accessible, durable, small-scale,

adaptable and modiable: […] Use only biodegradable,

low energy consuming materials, which are easy to cut and

modify on site. For bulk materials we suggest ultra-light-

weight 4o-6o lbs. concrete and earth-based materials like

tamped earth, brick, and tile (Alexander 1977, 960).

Table 2 shows the titles and numbering of several se-

lected patterns.

Research question

Talowski’s Townhouse house at

35 Karmelicka Street /

28 Batorego Street

Ekielski’s Townhouse at

40 Piłsudskiego Street /

25 Krasińskiego Avenue

Zawiejski’s Townhouse at

11 Łobzowska Street /

2 Biskupia Street

Has the façade of the building changed,

were there any vertical extensions

relative to the original design?

floor extension

in the 20

century

Did the original residential use change?

(services, offices, etc.)

other residential,

office and retail uses

(shops on the ground floor:

bakery, patisserie, kiosk)

formerly residential only,

now mixed residential

and office (law office)

formerly residential

(Gestapo headquarters

during the war,

militia after the war);

porcelain shop in 1933;

now residential and

commercial (Lunch Bar)

Was the townhouse renovated /

what is its current condition?

renovation 1927, 1935, after 1990;

good

renovation 2002–2024;

good

renovation 2005–2013;

good

Did the townhouse retain formal relations

with the historical context?

yes yes yes

Table 1. Analysis of the architects’ houses: changes in their form, use, state of preservation and formal relationships with the historical context

(elaborated by B. Makowska)

Tabela 1. Analiza domów własnych architektów: zmiany ich formy, funkcji, stan zachowania i związki formalne z kontekstem historycznym

(oprac. B. Makowska)

20 Beata Elżbieta Makowska, Anna Kulig

Feature selected

for analysis according to

Alexander’s patterns

Talowski’s townhouse Ekielski’s townhouse Zawiejski’s townhouse

1 21. Four-storey limit 3 floors 3 floors 3 floors

2 207. Good materials mainly brick and stone various bricks, plaster, stone

brick, plaster,

stone cladding

3 232. Roof caps

gables with stone decoration,

attics, turrets

tower surrounded

by lower roofs on two sides

heavily protruding

eave with ornaments,

posts and metal balustrade,

corner slightly highlighted

4 122. Building fronts

building façades

at street edges

Some of the fronts

at the street, some are

set back, at a front garden

building façades

at street edges

5 110. Main entrance

visible with a stone portal,

accented with a bay window

visible with wrought-iron

gate, with stone portal

visible with a stone portal,

accented with a bay window

6 112. Entrance transition

no, straight from the street

into the hallway

yes, preceded by a gate,

garden path, arcade

no, straight from the street

into the hallway

7 160. Building edge

edges varied with recesses,

steps, stone seating

edges differentiated by,

e.g., arcades under the tower

uniform edge, no corners,

only a few steps in the corner

8 167. Six-foot balcony

no, only narrow circulatory

porches from the courtyard

yes, there are deep loggias

at the front and narrow,

farm porches at the back

no, small loggias,

and porches from

the courtyard, narrow,

used for storage

9 119. Arcades no yes, arcade no

131. The flow through

rooms

enfilade

circulation by corridor

and enfilade (in a loop)

circulation by corridor

and enfilade (in a loop)

11 131. Short passages yes, short corridors

yes, a spacious hallway

in each flat

in a four-room flat yes,

but in a smaller one

a long corridor

221. Natural doors

and windows

yes, various sizes and

locations of windows,

up to 8 types

yes, different types

of windows, formal on

the 1

floor and smaller

and modest above

no, identical windows

on all floors,

basements have

small windows

13 133. Staircase as a stage

no, wooden staircase,

modest staircase,

poorly lit

yes, formal open stone

staircase, fan-like,

illuminated by windows

in the roof

no, double staircase

in the stairwell,

but with large windows

in the side walls

14 127. Intimacy gradient

there is a sequence

of rooms

there is a sequence of rooms

– formal, private, storage

there is a sequence

of rooms

15 128. Indoor sunlight yes, rooms are well lit

yes, well-lit,

south-facing windows

yes, large windows,

flat framing

16 246. Climbing plants

yes, designed vines

in special channels

partly, at the loggias no

239. Small panes

237. Massive glass doors

yes, small panes

and glazed doors

of vestibules, porches

glazed room interior doors no

18 249. Ornament yes, rich ornament, fancy

yes, but limited, mainly

around windows and doors

yes, but repetitive

19 180. Window place

bay windows on each storey

in the so-called tower

lack of dedicated areas bay windows on two storeys

Table 2. Analysis of architects’ houses according to Christopher Alexander’s patterns (elaborated by A. Kulig)

Tabela 2. Analiza wybranych cech domów własnych architektów według wzorców Alexandra (oprac. A. Kulig)

Krakow-based outstanding architects’ houses from the turn of the 19

and the 20

century 21

Analysis of other corner townhouses

of the period in question

In order to bring out the original features of Talowski’s,

Ekielski’s and Zawiejski’s townhouses, a synthetic anal-

ysis of other corner tenements built at the same time was

prepared (Table 3). The comparison of the three townhous-

es that are the subject of this paper with six other corner

houses from the same period shows that the architects’

houses present original solutions in every respect and that

they are distinctive (the townhouse designed by Talowski

at 1 Retoryka Street / 26 Piłsudskiego Street is also one

such solution), providing residents with comfortable living

and contact with nature.

The urban context

of the presented architects’ houses

This study used contemporary photographs of corner

houses, taken from several directions and dierent distances.

Observation sites have been chosen that best display them

(Figs. 11–13), highlighting their grandeur and originality.

The comparison of the townhouses in question with more

traditional solutions and repetitive façade types shows their

high aesthetic class. Particularly interesting visual eects

are in views directly to the corner, which is accentuated by

a distinctive detail, roof form, gable, attic, bay window,

balcony or turret. This allows the corner of the building to

act as a visual dominant within the wider urban context.

Conclusions

The following conclusions can be drawn from this

study:

1. The architects’ corner houses represent original and

distinctive formal solutions that have not lost their artis-

tic and utilitarian value. Their originality stemmed from

a new juxtaposition of the previously used forms, as well

as a search for new sources of inspiration rooted in nation-

al traditions and local materials. For the architects, it was

important to capture what is original in the etymological

sense of the word – the roots of both people and things.

Corner houses:

location, designer,

date of construction

Interior layout

Façade composition,

details and decoration

Attention to contact

with nature

Original and distinctive

forms

1 Retoryka /

16 Piłsudskiego

(Talowski, 1889–1890)

(Fig. 5)

two-bay layout

with inter-bay corridor;

floor added in 1909;

original plan

asymmetrical façades;

original details

and decoration

including a frog*

location adjacent

to the square;

plant channels

on the façade; balconies

facing the courtyard

the plan and façade

are original

and stand out

15 Krasińskiego /

Smoleńsk 26

(Pezdański, 1907–1908)

(Fig. 6)

it has a two-bay layout

with an inter-bay

corridor and

an oval staircase

symmetrical façades;

reinterpretation

of Gothic motifs

– flowers shaped

like crockets

balconies;

internal garden

traditional floor plan

and original Art

Nouveau

decorations

15 Krasińskiego /

Smoleńsk 37

(Pokutyński, 1907–1908)

(Fig. 7)

two-bay, L-shaped

layout with

a small risalit

in the courtyard

symmetrical façade with

a concave-convex gable

corner loggia;

small garden/internal

courtyard

a solution in a historical

revivalist tradition

30 Krupnicza /

2 Garncarska

(Zieliński, 1906–1908)

(Fig. 8)

two-bay layout

original forms

of capitals as an echo

of orders in Art Nouveau;

unity of art

– chestnut motifs

two corner balconies;

very small internal

courtyard

traditional floor plan

and original Art Nouveau

decorations

1 Studencka /

4 Podwale

(Hoffmann, 1910–1912)

(Fig. 9)

two-bay L-shaped

layout with

two side outbuildings

symmetrical façade,

creative interpretation

of tradition – the attics

of the Cloth Hall

balconies

(near Planty Park);

very small

internal courtyard

a solution in a historical

revivalist tradition

14 Studencka /

12 Garncarska

(Ekielski, 1892–1893)

(Fig. 10)

two-bay layout

original and symbolic

content of decorative

motifs**

small garden/indoor

solution in

the historicist tradition***

(Purchla 1990, 72, 73)

Table 3. Analysis of other corner townhouses of the period in question (elaborated by B. Makowska)

Tabela 3. Analiza innych kamienic narożnych z tego samego okresu (oprac. B. Makowska)

* As a reference to the River Rudawa, which used to ow in the neighbourhood and next to which one could hear the croaking of frogs, it also alludes

to the building’s use as the seat of a music school.

** Among others, a lyre in the musician’s house (capitol and frieze), a sgrato (depiction of Aurora) and a maxim from Adam Mickiewicz’s Ode to

Youth: “Hail, Dawn of Liberty! Oh, Long live Thou! Thou carriest the Redeeming Sun so bright”.

*** Inspired by the Viennese school of Heinrich von Ferstl from his late period.

22 Beata Elżbieta Makowska, Anna Kulig

Fig. 5. Townhouse at 1 Retoryka Street / 26 Piłsudskiego (designed by T. Talowski, 1889–1890):

a) ground floor plan (source: ANK, ABM Piłsudskiego 26, fsc. 560), b) façade (photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 5. Kamienica przy ul. Retoryka 1 / Piłsudskiego 26 (proj. T. Talowski, 1889–1890):

a) rzut parteru (źródło: ANK, ABM Piłsudskiego 26, fsc. 560), b) elewacja (fot. B. Makowska)

Fig. 7. Townhouse at 17 Krasińskiego Avenue / 37 Smoleńsk Street (designed by J. Pokutyński, 1907–1908):

a) ground floor plan (source: ANK, ABM Krasińskiego 17, fsc. 446), b) façade (photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 7. Kamienica przy al. Krasińskiego 17 / ul. Smoleńsk 37 (proj. J. Pokutyński, 1907–1908):

a) rzut parteru (źródło: ANK, ABM Krasińskiego 17, fsc. 446), b) elewacja (fot. B. Makowska)

Fig. 6. Townhouse at 15 Krasińskiego Avenue / 26 Smoleńsk Street (designed by A. Pezdański, 1907–1908):

a) ground floor plan (source: ANK, ABM Krasińskiego 15, fsc. 446), b) façade (photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 6. Kamienica przy al. Krasińskiego 15 / ul. Smoleńsk 26 (proj. A. Pezdański, 1907–1908):

a) rzut parteru (źródło: ANK, ABM Krasińskiego 15, fsc. 446), b) elewacja (fot. B. Makowska)

Krakow-based outstanding architects’ houses from the turn of the 19

and the 20

century 23

Fig. 8. Townhouse at 30 Krupnicza Street / 2 Garncarska Street (designed by K. Zieliński, 1906–1908):

a) ground floor plan (source: ANK, ABM Krupnicza 30, fsc. 253), b) façade (photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 8. Kamienica przy ul. Krupniczej 30 / Garncarskiej 2 (proj. K. Zieliński, 1906–1908):

a) rzut parteru (źródło: ANK, ABM Krupnicza 30, fsc. 253), b) elewacja (fot. B. Makowska)

Fig. 9. Townhouse at 1 Studencka Street / 4 Podwale Street (designed by T. Hoffmann, 1910–1912):

a) ground floor plan (source: ANK, ABM Studencka 1, fsc. 689), b) façade (photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 9. Kamienica przy ul. Studenckiej 1 / Podwale 4 (proj. T. Hoffmann, 1910–1912):

a) rzut (źródło: ANK, ABM Studencka 1, fsc. 689), b) elewacja (fot. B. Makowska)

2. The architects’ houses from the turn of the 20

centu-

ry were a pretext for showcasing the artistic craftsmanship

of their creators, leading to original and modern solutions.

3. Talowski’s house is characterised by a free-form oor

plan, which was innovative at the time. The composition of

the house’s façade with the extension of the gable line into

the wall plane can also be considered innovative, charac-

terised by a great contrast of textures and shapes, as well as

original details and decoration.

4. Ekielski’s house is characterised by functional com-

munication links, a bold innovative plan, and a modern ar-

ticulation of forms anticipating later trends.

5. Zawiejski’s house, with a façade composition based

on a regular rhythm of large windows and ascetically

24 Beata Elżbieta Makowska, Anna Kulig

Fig. 10. Townhouse at 14 Studencka Street/ 12 Garncarska Street (designed by W. Ekielski, 1892–1893):

a) first floor plan (source: Ekielski 1904, 155, 156), b) façade (photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 10. Kamienica przy ul. Studenckiej 14/ Garncarskiej 12 (proj. W. Ekielski, 1892–1893):

a) rzut pierwszego piętra (źródło: Ekielski 1904, 155, 156), b) elewacja (fot. B. Makowska)

a b

Fig. 11. Townhouse at 35 Karmelicka Street / 28 Batorego Street – map (source: OpenStreetMap) with marked observation posts

(elaborated by A. Kulig, photo by A. Kulig, B. Makowska)

Il. 11. Kamienica przy ul. Karmelickiej 35 / Batorego 28 – mapa (źródło: OpenStreetMap) z zaznaczonymi stanowiskami obserwacji

(oprac. A. Kulig, fot. A. Kulig, B. Makowska)

designed risalits, along with a visually appealing integra-

tion of surfaces and articulation, is close to the Modernist

tendencies of the early 20

century.

6. The location of the plots at the junction of the streets

contributed to the creation of non-schematic oor plan

layouts of the townhouses, as well as dwellings of varied

volumes, well lit, functional and with durable (long-lived)

structures; these buildings tended to underscore the cor-

ner (through bay windows, towers, turrets), and carefully

composed façades and common spaces (hallways, stair-

cases).

7. The corner townhouses designed by the selected three

architects established a dialogue with their neighbours, re-

peating the rhythms, directions and lines of the elevations,

also maintaining a similar scale; their corners were accen-

tuated by a characteristic detail, roof form, gable, attic, bay

window, balcony or turret, thanks to which they functioned

as a visual dominant in the wider urban context; the details

The Corner Townhouse

at 35 Karmelicka Street / 28 Batorego Street

SCALE 1:2000

Krakow-based outstanding architects’ houses from the turn of the 19

and the 20

century 25

Fig. 12. Townhouse at 40 Karmelicka Street / 25 Krasińskiego Avenue – map (source: OpenStreetMap) with marked observation posts

(elaborated by A. Kulig, photo by B. Makowska A. Kulig)

Il. 12. Kamienica przy ul. Piłsudskiego 40 / Krasińskiego 25 – mapa (źródło: OpenStreetMap) z zaznaczonymi stanowiskami obserwacji

(oprac. A. Kulig, fot. B. Makowska, A. Kulig)

Fig. 13. Townhouse at 11 Karmelicka Street / 2 Krasińskiego Avenue – map (source: OpenStreetMap) with marked observation posts

(elaborated by A. Kulig, photo by B. Makowska)

Il. 13. Kamienica przy ul. Łobzowskiej 11 / Biskupiej 2 – mapa (źródło: OpenStreetMap) z zaznaczonymi stanowiskami obserwacji

(oprac. A. Kulig, fot. B. Makowska)

of Talowski’s and Ekielski’s townhouses refer to those of

Wawel Castle, while Zawiejski’s are a creative interpreta-

tion of Renaissance motifs.

8. The features of the historic townhouses described

here are aligned with contemporary design recommenda-

tions developed by Christopher Alexander and colleagues,

described as positive patterns making buildings lively plac-

es, where people like and want to stay, appreciating both

their interior

qualities and their exterior forms.

Summary

The townhouses shown are a valuable heritage asset, in-

uencing the further development of architecture. The de -

signs of prominent architects contributed to the popu la ri-

sation of a more freeform way of building (plans, elevations)

and foreshadowed later Modernist trends. They emphasised

how important it is to create a positive relationship be-

tween the townhouses and the historical and urban

context.

SCALE 1:2000

The Corner Townhouse

at 11 Łobzowska Street / 2 Biskupia Street

The Corner Townhouse

at 40 Piłsudskiego Street / 25 Krasińskiego Street

26 Beata Elżbieta Makowska, Anna Kulig

Preserved in good condition, the townhouses illustrate the

architectural and cultural conditions that existed in that

era. The novelty of this study is based on an analysis of the

forms of the townhouses from a contemporary perspective

and their assessment using Alexander’s criteria, in addition

to an analysis in a wider urban context and comparing them

to other corner solutions from this period.

This study draws attention to the need to protect the

architects’ own precious houses, their original forms of

detailing and decoration, and to popularise this heritage

among the wider public.

Translated by

Krzysztof Barnaś

References

Alexander, Christopher. A pattern language: towns, buildings, construc-

tion. Oxford University Press, 1977.

Archiwum Narodowe w Krakowie [ANK]:

ANK, ABM Karmelicka 35, fsc. 361.

ANK, ABM Krasińskiego 15, fsc. 446.

ANK, ABM Krasińskiego 17, fsc. 446.

ANK, ABM Krupnicza 30, fsc. 253.

ANK, ABM Łobzowska 11, fsc. 535.

ANK, ABM Piłsudskiego 40, fsc. 447.

ANK, ABM Piłsudskiego 26, fsc. 560.

ANK, ABM Studencka 1, fsc. 689.

ANK, ABM Studencka 14, fsc. 921.

Bałus, Wojciech. “«Dom – przybytek – nastrój dawności». O kilku kamie-

nicach Teodora Talowskiego.” In Klejnoty i sekrety Krakowa, edited

by Róża Godula. Wydawnictwo Wawelskie, 1994.

Bałus, Wojciech, ed. Sztuka Krakowa i Galicji w wieku XIX. Universitas, 1991.

Beiersdorf, Zbigniew. “Architekt Teodor M. Talowski. Charakterystyka

twórczości.” In Sztuka 2. połowy XIX wieku, materiały Sesji Stowa-

rzyszenia Historyków Sztuki, Łódź, listopad 1971, edited by Teresa

Hrankowska. PWN, 1973.

Białkiewicz, Zbigniew. Przemiany architektury krakowskiej w połowie

XIX wieku. Wydawnictwo PK, 1994.

Broniowska, Maria, and Sławomir Tabkowski, ed. Album fotograi daw-

nego Krakowa z Atelier Ignacego Kriegera. KAW, 1989.

Chwalibóg, Feliks. Brzydki Kraków. Skład Główny w Księgarni S. A. Krzy -

żanowskiego, 1908.

Danilczyk, Leszek, Grażyna Dreścik, Maria Kasprzyk, Waldemar Komo-

rowski, Bogusław Krasnowolski, Aldona Sudacka, and Ewa Goras.

Kraków. Studium waloryzacji przestrzeni publicznych dawnych dziel-

nic Nowy Świat i Piasek. T. 2. Kraków, 2004 [Manuscript in: Pracow-

nie Konserwacji Zabytków „Arkona”, Kraków].

Danilczyk, Leszek, and Maria Kasprzyk. Kraków. Studium waloryzacji

przestrzeni publicznych. Miasto pomnik część północna. Obszar daw-

nych dzielnic Piasek i Kleparz. T. 2. Kraków, 2005 [Manuscript in:

Pracownie Konserwacji Zabytków „Arkona”, Kraków].

Demel, Janusz. “Kraków na przełomie XIX i XX wieku.” In Kraków.

Studia nad rozwojem miasta, edited by Jan Dąbrowski. Wydawnic-

two Literackie, 1957.

“Dom własny arch. W. Ekielski.” Architekt, 11 (1902): 62–63.

Ekielski, Władysław. “Bibliograa”. Architekt, 10 (1904): 155–156.

Fabiański, Marcin, and Jacek Purchla. Historia architektury Krakowa

w zarysie. Wydawnictwo Literackie, 2001.

Frysztak, Anna. “Ewolucja planu i środowiska mieszkaniowego w Kra-

kowie.” Teka Komisji Urbanistyki i Architektury 29 (1997): 51–61.

Gaczoł, Ewa, and Teresa Kwiatkowska. Ignacy Krieger. Muzeum Histo-

ryczne Miasta Krakowa, 2019.

Grajewski, Grzegorz. “Poszukiwania stylu narodowego w twórczości

Władysława Ekielskiego (1855–1927).” In Sztuka Krakowa i Galicji

w XIX wieku, edited by Wojciech Bałus. Universitas, 1991.

Grzechnik-Correale, Grażyna. Krakowskie wariacje w fotograi Antonie-

go Pawlikowskiego i Franciszka Kleina. Muzeum UJ, Wydawnictwo

Kier, 2017.

Krakowski, Piotr. “Okres eklektyzmu i historyzmu w architekturze kra-

kowskiej 1850–1900.” In Problemy ochrony architektury najnowszej

1850–1939. Materiały z konferencji, Poznań 19–20 listopada 1970 r.,

edited by W. Dołęga-Lewandowska. Ministerstwo Kultury i Sztuki.

Zarząd Muzeów i Ochrony Zabytków, 1971.

Łoza, Stanisław. Architekci i budowniczowie w Polsce. Budownictwo

i Architektura, 1954.

Makowska, Beata. Kamienice krakowskie z przełomu XIX i XX w. i okresu

międzywojennego położone na obszarze pomiędzy pierwszą i drugą ob-

wodnicą – charakterystyka form i ich ewolucja. Wydawnictwo PK, 2014.

“Miasta-ogrody.” Architekt, 8 (1912): 82–83.

Purchla, Jacek. Jak powstał nowoczesny Kraków. Wydawnictwo Literac-

kie, 1990.

Purchla, Jacek. Jan Zawiejski – architekt przełomu XIX i XX wieku.

PWN, 1986.

Samek, Jan. “Ze studiów nad oeuvre architekta krakowskiego Teodora

Talowskiego.” Krzysztofory, z. 12 (1985): 41–46.

“Sprawa budowy Ratusza Krakowskiego.” Architekt, 12 (1902): 160.

Sudacka, Aldona. “Karta ewidencyjna zabytków architektury i budow-

nictwa ul. Piłsudskiego 40.” Kraków, 1979 [Manuscript in: Pracow-

nie Konserwacji Zabytków „Arkona” w Krakowie].

Tablice historyczne. Oprac. Witold Mizerski. Adamantan, 1996.

W.E. [Ekielski, Władysław]. “Teodor Talowski.” Architekt, 5 (1910): 83.

Wejchert, Kazimierz. Elementy kompozycji urbanistycznej. Arkady, 1984.

Streszczenie

Krakowskie domy własne wybitnych architektów z przełomu XIX i XX w.

– analiza oryginalnych narożnych kamienic z historycznej i współczesnej perspektywy

W artykule omówiono kamienice krakowskie z przełomu XIX i XX w. zaprojektowane przez Teodora Talowskiego, Władysława Ekielskiego i Jana

Zawiejskiego. Projekty te, będące ich domami własnymi, dały im możliwość swobody twórczej, która zaowocowała powstaniem oryginalnych i wybit-

nych form. Nośnikiem nowatorskich i nieschematycznych rozwiązań kamienic było także ich narożne położenie na nieregularnych działkach o szcze-

gólnej konguracji przestrzennej (układ koncentryczno-radialny Krakowa) i lokalizacja przy ważniejszych ulicach. W opracowaniu projektów dla

architektów ważne było uwzględnienie istniejącego kontekstu, a także dbałość o kontakt z naturą poprawiającą jakość życia mieszkańców („zielone

elewacje”, loggie, przedogródek).

Celem autorek artykułu była szczegółowa analiza kamienic – ich fasad, układu rzutów, konstrukcji i funkcji, a także odpowiedź na pytania, jak są

one dziś użytkowane, oceniane i adaptowane. Praca oparta została na dokumentacji historycznej i fotogracznej kamienic, badaniach in situ, analizie

dostępnych opracowań naukowych i innych (studia waloryzacji przestrzeni, karty obiektów).

W wyniku badań wyciągnięto wnioski, że narożne domy własne architektów stanowią wyróżniające się rozwiązania formalne, które współcześnie

nie straciły na wartości artystycznej i użytkowej. Analiza charakterystycznych w urbanistyce miasta form o rozpoznawalnych detalach ze współczesnej

perspektywy wydaje się ważna, ponieważ są one cennym dziedzictwem architektonicznym, które należy chronić i popularyzować.

Słowa kluczowe: architektura Krakowa, kamienica narożna, detal architektoniczny