diplomová práce

Růst dovnitř: Zpátky do vnitrobloků!

Text práce 39.45 MB Příloha 985.65 kB

Autor práce: Bc. Klára Mikulcová

Ak. rok: 2025/2026

Vedoucí: Zuzanna Irena Mielczarek, MSc

Oponent: Mgr. Ing. Wojciech Lesiak

Abstrakt:

Situace bydlení v Brně je stále napjatější v důsledku trvalého nedostatku dostupných bytů a dramaticky rostoucích cen. Soukromí developeři realizují převážně projekty orientované na zisk, produkují malé investiční jednotky, které jsou často určeny spíše pro krátkodobé pronájmy (např. Airbnb) než pro dlouhodobé obyvatele, či zůstávají úplně nevyužité. Desítky let privatizace znatelně snížily fond městského bydlení, čímž zranitelné skupiny – rodiny s malými dětmi, samoživitelsto, seniorstvo a marginalizované komunity – vytlačily na okraje města, což prohlubuje socio-prostorové nerovnosti. Mnohé vnitrobloky v širším centru města zůstávají nevyužité nebo zanedbané, dominují jim parkovací stání a postrádají zeleň a komunitní prostory určené pro sociální interakci. Tato diplomová práce zkoumá, jak může mezigenerační dostupné bydlení nabídnout sociálně udržitelnou alternativu ke komerční výstavbě v brněnské čtvrti Zábrdovice. Zabývá se potenciálem revitalizace vnitrobloků na sdílená veřejné a poloveřejné prostory, které podporují každodenní setkávání, spolupráci a vzájemnou podporu mezi obyvateli různého věku i širší komunitou. Projekt obhajuje zahušťování a zkvalitňování stávající výstavby – adaptaci a revitalizaci nevyužitých vnitrobloků – namísto expanze města do krajiny. Návrh předkládá model mezigeneračního bydlení založený na vzájemné podpoře a péči, kde seniorstvo poskytuje péči o děti nebo sdílí praktické dovednosti a zkušenosti, zatímco mladší obyvatelstvo přispívá digitální gramotností, pomocí s nákupem každodenních nezbytností nebo organizací komunitních aktivit. Prostřednictvím prostorových strategií, sdílené vybavenosti a přístupných zelených ploch projekt nově definuje tradiční vnitroblok jako prostředí pro solidaritu, učení a propojení.

Klíčová slova:

Dostupné bydlení, mezigenerační bydlení, sociální bydlení, obecní bydlení, družstevní bydlení, getrifikace, Brno - Zábrdovice, revitalizace vnitrobloku, zahušťování zástavby

Termín obhajoby

26.05.2026

Výsledek obhajoby

obhájeno (práce byla úspěšně obhájena)

znamkaBznamka

Klasifikace

B

Průběh obhajoby

Studentka zahajuje prezentaci. Dostává dostatečný prostor pro dokončení prezentace. studentka reaguje na otázku oponenta připravenou odpovědí. Písaříková má doplnující otázku. Studentka reaguje. Gale upozoruje na výškový rozdíl mezi vnitroblokema ulicí černopolní. Gale s doptává na parkování aut ve vnitroblokua ptá se na řešení problémů. Toman doplnuje otázku, jak se budou řešit parkovací místa, která se zruší. Studentka reaguje. Sedlák navazuje na otázku z hlediska majetkových vztahů. Studentka reaguje. Toman upozornuje na dispoziční problémy. gale upozornuje na okna do sousední parcely, na problematiku výstavby pavlačového domu v dnešní době. Studentka reaguje Sedlák přitakává. Toman upozornuje na více chyb. V diplomové práci. Sedlák se dotazuje na komunikační schema vnitrobloku, uzavření štítu nového průrazu pro prodloužení slepé. CElá komise dále diskutuje nad tímto tematem. Sedlák se doptává na to, zda není gentrifikace, když se vymete "punk" ze dvora? Studentka reaguje. Následuje neveřejná část zasedání komise. Komise se usnesla, že studnetka obhájila bez připomínek.

Jazyk práce

angličtina

Fakulta

Ústav

Studijní program

Architektura a urbanismus (N_A+U)

Složení komise

Ing. arch. Roman Gale (předseda)
Ing. arch. Radek Toman, Ph.D. (člen)
Ing. arch. Jaroslav Sedlák, Ph.D. (člen)
MgA.,MA.,Dott. Karin Písaříková, Ph.D. et Ph.D. (člen)
Ing. arch. Petr Bořecký (člen)

The student efficiently analyzed and diagnosed the housing problems in Brno and proposed a solution that is socially and urbanistically thoughtful, responsible, and well suited to the specific context of the city. Brno is in urgent need of new social housing, and the city center is precisely the right location for such investments. Filling gaps within the dense urban fabric allows for the creation of an excellent social mix within the urban block, where young people, seniors, students, and families can coexist and integrate. The student also recognized that although interesting social housing developments already exist or are developed in the district, for example new municipal project by Chybik + Kristof; expensive developer-led housing still predominates, contributing more to social stratification than to social diversity.

The student also addresses the issue of urban sprawl, in which peripheral social housing developments could become complicit. Therefore, she proposes densifying a large urban block within the city itself. Klara carried out both an inventory of the existing urban fabric and an analysis of local planning regulations. She identified temporary, deteriorated, or architecturally weak structures for demolition, selected a building suitable for adaptation, and designated locations for new residential fabric. She took into account aspects such as mobility - opening the block and introducing pedestrian and bicycle connections — as well as providing car parking in ways that would minimize interference with the shared green space of the block.

Although the planned extension of Slepá Street between Francouzská and Merhautova, included in the city’s planning documents, is acknowledged in Klara’s masterplan, it is not fully resolved in the more detailed drawings. This aspect would require further refinement, which would certainly be possible within the proposed urban arrangement - for example through relocating some surface parking along Slepá Street near Merhautova - and through further development of this street as an important pedestrian passage cutting through the quarter and providing access to social infrastructure such as the kindergarten or sports center. I had expected this street to function as a more prominent public passage.

The distribution of additional social functions aimed at residents within the ground floors of the urban villas located deeper inside the block is sensible. Infrastructure intended for a broader public - such as the sports center in the adapted building, as well as the kindergarten and student dormitory positioned along an accessible route - is also well located.

The plans presenting the building layouts are graphically strong, although, as I had already pointed out earlier to the student, the outlines of neighboring buildings should be represented in a stronger graphic manner - not merely as delicate lines, but as clearly defined masses. This is crucial because the project relies heavily on infill interventions, and it must therefore be immediately clear where party walls exist and where they do not. As the supervisor, I understand this logic, but for an external viewer it should be communicated more clearly, since it often explains design decisions such as the absence of windows in certain locations.

The apartment layouts are, in most cases, reasonable and provide good daylight access and, whenever possible, cross-ventilation, although within this urban configuration achieving that was not always an easy challenge. Overall, there is clearly visible progress compared to the student’s initial proposals. I could point out some weaknesses like the long shared corridor in the student dormitory, or the senior housing building where one has to pass the external gallery to reach the dining hall. Although the residential units contain their own kitchenettes, the dining hall remains an important communal space in such a facility. This issue could potentially be resolved through gallery panels providing protection from weather conditions. These shortcomings are not errors per se, but rather aspects that could still be further refined.

The visualizations prepared by the student effectively communicate her vision both for the numerous residential buildings she designed and for the communal spaces within the green block. I consider it attractive and resident-friendly. The architecture is modest, yet it also demonstrates the student’s aesthetic sensitivity. Had the student been more organized from the very beginning, the project could potentially have become exemplary. Nevertheless, I am satisfied and consider this to have been a strong, highly varied, and ultimately thoughtfully resolved design exercise for the student. I am pleased that during the second half of the semester she became motivated and engaged in bringing the complex and diverse project to a satisfactory conclusion which required a lot of work.
Kritérium hodnocení Slovní hodnocení Známka
Přístup studenta ke zpracování Klara chose a highly relevant topic from the perspective of housing policy and urban development. She decided to densify a city block in the Brno-Zábrdovice district by infilling it with residential structures of varying morphology and typology (infill buildings, urban villas, rows of buildings) within the framework of social and cooperative housing aimed at families, seniors, young people, and students, accompanied by additional social infrastructure such as a new kindergarten or the adaptive reuse of an existing sports building. She implemented this concept well and realistically. Although collaboration during the first part of the semester was not entirely exemplary - the student occasionally decided to travel without discussing these plans with the supervisor in advance, which certainly slowed down her work, caused additional stress, and somewhat reduced the available working time, forcing some revisions to be made hastily or abandoned altogether - I must admit that halfway through the semester the student experienced a remarkable acceleration in focus and productivity. This reassured and pleased me, as I could clearly observe her significant development. Considering the time constraints we were working under, I believe the final result is satisfying and complex. I also believe that if the student had remained fully focused and committed throughout the entire semester, the outcome could have been even stronger, particularly in terms of architectural and urban detail diversification. B
Výsledný počet bodů navržený vedoucím: 81

Známka navržená vedoucím: B

Posudek oponenta
Mgr. Ing. Wojciech Lesiak

Research

The research component of the thesis is thorough and constitutes an interesting study of the topic of accessible housing. The research demonstrates the student’s strong analytical skills and high social sensitivity. The very choice of the topic deserves recognition due to its importance in the current housing situation in Europe.

Design

Particular recognition should be given to the choice of location. Inner-city urban blocks are areas where revitalization is urgently needed, while also offering strong potential as new zones for the development of residential architecture.

The student operates very effectively with different typologies and building scales, adapting them appropriately to the urban context. Special attention should be paid to the successful placement of functions within different locations across the site.

The proposed passages through the block, providing access to the newly designed buildings, are interesting. The introduction of appropriately scaled new buildings within the interior of the block is a strong aspect of the project, creating opportunities for new public and semi-public spaces while increasing residential density within the existing urban fabric.

The newly designed greenery responds, in scale and character, to the challenges currently faced by cities in the era of climate change.

Recognition should also be given to the introduction of diverse forms of housing within the block, ranging from student housing and social housing to housing cooperatives. The student carefully selects complementary service functions that enrich the program of the quarter and improve the quality of life within the city center.

Functional Solutions and Floor Plans

The proposed typologies are appropriate to their intended functions.

Within the housing cooperative buildings, the student developed simple yet highly efficient apartment layouts. In the social housing buildings, however, the living areas in the largest apartments should be more spacious, especially considering the higher number of bedrooms, which suggests accommodation for larger households.

In the student housing building, the opening of the shared ground-floor spaces towards the garden and the combination of student housing with a kindergarten are particularly interesting. The layouts of the student housing units are correct and functional.

The urban villas are designed very skillfully, with exceptionally efficient use of space and the successful creation of comfortable multi-room family apartments within very limited floor areas.

The sports center is designed correctly and appears to complement the functioning of the urban block in an interesting way.

The least effective element of the proposal is the starter housing. The narrow buildings, with two external walls in each unit, appear energetically inefficient.

The project creates attractive public and semi-public spaces within the interior of the block. However, the circulation systems, greenery design, and landscape elements within the quarter could have been developed in greater detail, especially considering the revitalization character of the project.

The project is presented in an aesthetic and clear manner, and the drawings are legible while revealing a distinctive visual style. The layout and graphic design of the entire book are particularly attractive and well developed. Otázky k obhajobě:
  1. How would you envision the phasing of the entire housing estate? Please justify your choice.
Výsledný počet bodů navržený oponentem: 80

Známka navržená oponentem: B

Odpovědnost: Mgr. et Mgr. Hana Odstrčilová