126 Krzysztof Mycielski
[1] Klimczak D., Życie i przestrzeń. Grupa 5 Architekci, Grupa 5 Ar-
chitekci, Warszawa 2018.
[2] Leszczyński M., Od demiurga do twórczego koordynatora. Ewolu-
cja warsztatu architekta po 1995 r., PhD thesis, Wydział Architek-
tury Politechniki Gdańskiej, Gdańsk 2022.
[3] Piątek G., Trybuś J., Lukier i mięso, wokół architektury w Polsce po
1989 roku, 40 000 Malarzy, Warszawa 2012.
[4] Trammer H., Strumykowa, “Architektura Murator” 2002, nr 11(98),
20–23.
[5] Bielecki C., Ciągłość w architekturze, “Architektura” 1978, nr 3–4,
26–75.
[6] Stiasny G., Młodzi realistami?, “Architektura Murator” 2003,
nr 9(108), 40.
[7] Ciarkowski B., Non-modern modernity? Neomodern architecture,
“Art Inquiry. Recherches sur les arts” 2016, Vol. 18, 87–97.
[8] Mycielski K., Do the Bauhaus ideas t into Polish reality of the
21
st
century? The inuence of the works of Walter Gropius and Mies
van der Rohe on contemporary projects on the example of build-
ings designed by Grupa 5 Architekci, “Architectus” 2020, nr 4(64),
61–74, doi: 10.37190/arc200406.
[9] Bauman Z., Ponowoczesność jako źródło cierpień, Wydawnictwo
Sic!, Warszawa 2000.
[10] Solarek K., Współczesne koncepcje rozwoju miasta, “Kwartalnik
Architektury i Urbanistyki” 2011, nr 4(56), 51–71.
[11] Koolhaas R., Śmieciowa przestrzeń, Centrum Architektury, War-
szawa 2017.
[12]
Karta Nowej Urbanistyki, tłum. M.M. Mycielski, G. Buczek, P. Choy-
nowski,
Wydawnictwo Urbanista, Warszawa 2005.
[13] Trybuś J., Wyszpiński P., Książnica-Atlas. Plan Warszawy 1939,
Muzeum Warszawy, Warszawa 2015.
[14] Krier L., Architektura wspólnoty, Słowo/obraz terytoria, Gdańsk
2011.
[15]
Kiciński A., Lekcja romantycznego racjonalizmu Kolonii Lubeckie-
go/Staszica, “Kwartalnik Architektury i Urbanistyki” 2001, nr 2(46),
192–203.
[16] Lewicki J., Roman Feliński: architekt i urbanista, pionier nowo-
czesnej architektury, Wydawnictwo Neriton, Warszawa 2007.
[17]
Feliński R., Miasta, wsie, uzdrowiska w osiedleńczej organizacji kra -
ju z 105 rycinami, Nasza Księgarnia, Związek Nauczycielstwa Pol -
skiego, Warszawa 1935.
[18] Dybczyńska-Bułyszko A., Architektura Warszawy II Rzeczpospoli-
tej, Ocyna Wydawnicza PW, Warszawa 2010.
[19] Środoń M., Konikt wokół problemów zagospodarowania prze-
strzennego – rola internetu jako narzędzia politycznej samoorgani-
zacji społeczności lokalnej. Przypadek Starej Ochoty w Warszawie,
[in:] B. Lewenstein, J. Schindler, R. Skrzypiec (red.), Partycypacja
społeczna i aktywizacja w rozwiązywaniu problemów społeczności
lokalnych, Wydawnictwo UW, Warszawa 2010, 143–163.
References
the courtyards with the landscape of public spaces. Accord-
ing to the competition description by Justyna Dzie dziej-
ko, a landscape designer cooperating with the Grupa 5
Architekci studio, […] the concept of “Śródmieś cie Leś-
ne” merges the idea of combining modern architecture and
nature. […] Linear parks have the character of landscape
gardens. […] Courtyards within quarters have a develop-
ment character dierent from linear parks and a more ur-
ban landscape style [24, pp. 14–15].
On the other hand, in the concept of the Nowe Jeziorki
housing estate, the intended advantage of the project was
the layout of the courtyards on real land, not on under-
ground garages, thanks to the location of all housing estate
parking spaces outside the quarters in separately designed
parking buildings. This allowed for the introduction of
high greenery with a park character into the space of the
courtyards.
Distinctive signs for both concepts were natural reten-
tion reservoirs in the form of ponds designed in the public
space. All the above solutions in the eld of landscape
architecture are related to the use of species biodiversi-
ty postulated in the context of climate warming and the
avoidance of the so-called heat islands by increasing the
porosity of the urban tissue.
Summary. Design philosophy
Concentrating on a fragment of our creative search,
in this case regarding the model of quarter development,
I tried to show how spatial solutions, which are most often
the result of a specic architectural task contracted, can
aect the beliefs of designers.
In autumn 2019, architects from Grupa 5 presented their
achievements at a meeting in the Zodiak architecture pa vi-
lion
in Warsaw. For the rst time, they decided to summa-
rize their shared approach to the profession in the form of
several theses, which became a pretext for discussion with
the audience. By referring to them, even in the journalistic
form in which they were written, we can arrive at a sum-
mary of this article as follows:
1. Design is a complex process involving many archi-
tects and engineers with dierent competencies. For this
reason, a modern architectural studio should be based
on perfect partnership cooperation between people. The
strength of such a model is the exchange of ideas, and
above all diversity, which is in contradiction with the star
image of the architect promoted by the media.
2. We do not die for architecture (which we emphasize
at every interview with job candidates). We do not have
to prove anything with our work, let alone be avant-gar-
de. An architect must have time for himself, time needed
to experience ordinary everyday reality, from which he
draws reection and inspiration for design.
3.
It is not our goal to design visual gadgets or spectacu-
lar spaces that look good in visualizations and photos. What
we aim at is to create a valuable environment for life – to
live, to work, to study, to spend time in the city… An envi-
ronment with which a person will identify. Equally import-
ant to us as the buildings themselves is the space between
them and what can happen between people in it [25]. It is
not a coincidence that the title of the book devoted to our
studio does not include buildings, only “life and space”.
4. When we design in the existing context, to us as im-
portant as genius loci is the user’s sense of identity with
the place.
Translated by
Bogusław Setkowicz