Zálabí School

The lack of school capacities was felt by the city of Hradec Králové already in the early 1930s, when architect Josef Gočár was asked to design of a girls’ common and town school, which would be part of the school complex in Lipky. Compared to the original conceptual design, Gočár expanded the project in terms of capacity, but the city apparently did not have the means to build the schools because of the economic crisis.
 

The desperately inadequate school capacity could not be solved until after WWII. In the first two-year plan and the first five-year plan, construction was supposed to solve the housing crisis, so school construction did not take place until the second five-year plan. The task was entrusted to the Hradec Králové-based Stavoprojekt, whose design department was headed by architect Jan Rejchl. The school was designed by Václav Rohlíček. The design was completed in the spirit of Gočár, probably because the East Bohemian Stavoprojekt employed a number of architects from the interwar period who had known, collaborated or been taught by this architect, which was also the case with Rejchl.
 

The project is dated 28 June 1955 and it was an area mirroring the former boys’ school from 1926–1928 designed by Josef Gočár. The project also included the modification of the indoor playground, where a tennis court, handball court, running track and long jump track were to be built. Rohlíček also thought of a new planting plan that included clusters of smaller trees and larger juniper bushes. The surrounding area of the complex was to be complemented by other buildings. Towards the nearby congregation, between the old and new school buildings, a ground floor basement dwelling unit was to be built with two apartments for two caretakers. This building was also to include a school training garden. In front of the kindergarten, a new “kindergarten auxiliary building” was to be built, which was to be smaller than the one standing on its site until then. In the area between the new school and the Lab, an auxiliary playground (probably for football and tennis) was designed with a new “auxiliary changing room building with facilities.”
 

In contrast to Gočár’s plans, Rohlíček’s school has two basements: in the second basement, the southern wing (closer to the Elbe River) contains the boiler room and facilities; the northern wing (closer to the congregation) contains two military shelters. The first basement contained changing rooms in the north and south wings, a large coal store in the south wing and one of the gymnasiums with changing rooms in the middle wing. The elevated ground floor in the south wing contained a specialized chemistry classroom with a cabinet, a physics cabinet, three classrooms, and a youth union clubhouse with a library. In the middle wing, there was a two-storey gym with s gallery with restrooms, classrooms, and a principal’s office on the sides. The north wing housed four classrooms, a history room, restrooms, the school physician’s office, and a choir room. In the north wing, five classrooms and a larger room – “a drawing and biology room” – were designed. On the first floor in the south wing, there were five classrooms with a Czech language room; in the middle wing there was another, larger (auxiliary) gym with facilities. The second floor did not have a middle wing, only a north and south wing. Both contained five classrooms and toilets. In the small additions on the roof there was also an expansion tank in the southern part, a “civil defense observation room” and a “civil defense supplies store” in the northern part.
 

While the exterior of Gočár’s opposite school from 1926–1928 consists of unplastered masonry, Rohlíček’s school, built in 1956–1959, is clad with unglazed clay tiles of the same size as the bricks and in the same color.
 

The project to complete the school complex is especially appreciated for the humble attempt of the architects in the 1950s to faithfully complete Gočár’s plan. Architectural historian Marie Benešová comments: “The stylistic unity of the complex, given by its adaptation to its pre-war form, happily avoided the pressures of historicizing tendencies.“
 

LZL