Exploring residential developments built from 1960 to 1980 in Kraków in the context of the 15-minute city concept

Dominika Cenda, Justyna Kobylarczyk, Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich

doi:10.37190/arc250307

Abstract

The 15-minute city concept is gaining traction as urban planners worldwide seek solutions to combat climate change and create more pedestrian-friendly environments. Its core idea is that residents should have access to essential services within a short walking distance – typically 15 minutes. During the communist era, many residential developments were designed as “structural housing units” – self-contained residential areas that included all basic facilities (such as services, leisure, and transport) within a 500-meter radius. This research aims to compare these two visions.

The study examines pedestrian accessibility to selected services in three residential developments in Kraków, Poland, built between 1960 and 1980, and evaluates whether these developments meet the requirements of the 15-minute city.

First, amenities from selected categories were mapped. Then, access paths were analyzed to determine the longest routes from residential buildings to the nearest facility of each type. Combining these two aspects provided insights into the spatial and functional characteristics of each development.

The results indicate that most of the amenities are accessible within a 15-minute walk, suggesting that these developments share many features of 15-minute city components. This finding reframes the legacy of communist-era housing estates, positioning them as valuable elements of modern urban structures. The analysis could serve as a useful guideline for city planners engaged in complex modernization projects or for private investors seeking to identify and address gaps in urban functionality.

Keywords

15-minute city, urban planning, walkability, communism, residential developments

Full article view is only available on bigger screens.

2025

3(83)

Dominika Cenda*, Justyna Kobylarczyk**,

Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich***

Exploring residential developments built from 1960 to 1980 in Kraków

in the context of the 15-minute city concept

DOI: 10.37190/arc250307

Published in open access. CC BY NC ND license

Abstract

The 15-minute city concept is gaining traction as urban planners worldwide seek solutions to combat climate change and create more pedestrian-

friendly environments. Its core idea is that residents should have access to essential services within a short walking distance – typically 15 minutes.

During the communist era, many residential developments were designed as “structural housing units” – self-contained residential areas that included all

basic facilities (such as services, leisure, and transport) within a 500-meter radius. This research aims to compare these two visions.

The study examines pedestrian accessibility to selected services in three residential developments in Kraków, Poland, built between 1960 and 1980,

and evaluates whether these developments meet the requirements of the 15-minute city.

First, amenities from selected categories were mapped. Then, access paths were analyzed to determine the longest routes from residential buildings

to the nearest facility of each type. Combining these two aspects provided insights into the spatial and functional characteristics of each development.

The results indicate that most of the amenities are accessible within a 15-minute walk, suggesting that these developments share many features of

15-minute city components. This nding reframes the legacy of communist-era housing estates, positioning them as valuable elements of modern urban

structures. The analysis could serve as a useful guideline for city planners engaged in complex modernization projects or for private investors seeking to

identify and address gaps in urban functionality.

Key words: 15-minute city, urban planning, walkability, communism, residential developments

Introduction

Research problem

A 15-minute city is an urban planning concept rooted in

“chrono-urbanism”, whose main assumption is that every in-

habitant should have access to facilities meeting their basic

needs within a short walking distance (typically 15 mi nutes)

(Moreno et al. 2021). During the communist era in Poland,

many residential developments in large and medium-sized

cities were designed as structural housing units (Pol. struk-

turalna jednostka mieszkaniowa): […] self-contained resi-

dential developments with all the basic facilities (such as

services, leisure and transport) within a 500-meter radius

(Szafrańska 2016, 33).

This study aims to compare these two visions. It exam-

ines pedestrian accessibility to selected services in three

residential developments located in Kraków (Poland) and

seeks to determine whether they align with the principles

of the 15-minute city.

Current relevance and purpose of the research

The estates selected for analysis exhibit typical charac-

teristics of architecture and urban planning from the com-

munist era. They are multi-family housing complexes com -

posed of repetitive apartment blocks, accompanied by a basic

range of services. Similar developments from the commu-

nist pe riod can be found throughout urban landscapes across

* ORCID:

0009-0002-5666-1732. Faculty of Architecture, Cra-

cow University of Technology, Poland, e-mail: dominika.cenda@ doktorant.

pk.edu.pl

** ORCID: 0000-0002-3358-3762. Faculty of Architecture, Cra-

cow University of Technology, Poland.

*** ORCID: 0000-0002-9610-7288. Faculty of Architecture, Cra-

cow University of Technology, Poland.

72 Dominika Cenda, Justyna Kobylarczyk, Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich

Poland. At the beginning of the 21

century, seven to eight

million Poles lived in such neighbourhoods, accounting for

approximately one-fth of the country’s population (Basista

2001).

Today, although still habitable, these estates face an un-

certain future. After 1989, with the emergence of new res-

idential areas shaped by the free market, the perception of

post-communist housing estates has signicantly declined,

despite their many advantages (Szafrańska 2016). This could

represent the rst step towards degradation, similar to what

has occurred with comparable developments in Western Eu-

rope. Are the housing estates from the 1960s, 1970s, and

1980s

a problematic legacy or a place of great potential?

One key characteristic that distinguishes developments

built between the 1960s and 1980s from modern ones is their

multi-functionality. These developments were designed as

structural housing units (a concept derived from Clarence

Perry’s neighbourhood unit model) and were intended to

meet all the basic needs of their residents. This is particularly

relevant today, as the ideas of walkability and pedestrian ac-

cessibility are experiencing a signicant resurgence through

the rise of the 15-minute city concept and its derivatives.

The purpose of this research is to examine selected res-

idential developments in the context of the 15-minute city

concept. We aim to assess their potential by closely eval-

uating their functionality and walkability. Do these devel-

opments oer all the amenities necessary to meet the basic

needs of their residents? If so, are these facilities within

a 15-minute walking distance? Perhaps the 15-minute city

and the structural housing unit are simply dierent realiza-

tions of the same fundamental idea – that a well-designed

city should allow its inhabitants to complete their daily

tasks without leaving their neighbourhood.

Theoretical background and state of the art

15-minute city – its origins, historical connotations

and implementations

The 15-minute city is a concept rst introduced in 2016

by Carlos Moreno, a professor of urban planning at the

Sorbonne. The main principle behind this idea is that res-

idents should have access to all essential amenities within

a 15-minute walk (or bike ride). The goal of this concept is

to create more sustainable and user-friendly cities by reduc-

ing trac, air pollution, and carbon emissions, while pro-

moting pedestrian and bicycle mobility. The key features of

the 15-minute city are:

– Proximity – Short distances between homes and es-

sential amenities encourage physical activity and social

interaction.

– Diversity – A wide range of cultural and recreational

opportunities motivates residents to stay active and engage

with their community.

– Density – High population density supports more e-

cient land use and encourages walking as the primary mode

of transportation.

– Digitalization – Online services such as e-commerce

and telemedicine further reduce the need for commuting

(Fronczak 2023).

The concept of the 15-minute city draws from various

urban theories, including the garden city, eco-urbanism,

and the neighbourhood unit introduced by Clarence Perry

in 1923 (Khavarian-Garmsir et al. 2023). Known by dier

ent names, this similar idea is currently being implemented

in cities worldwide, from the “city of a quarter of an hour”

in Paris to the “20-minute neighbourhood” in Melbourne

and the “15-minute community-life circle” in Shanghai.

Several researchers have examined dierent implemen-

tations of the 15-minute city concept or its derivatives.

Denise Capasso Da Silva, David A. King, and Shea Le-

mar studied the case of Tempe, Arizona, where city plan-

ners prioritized accessibility using a 20-minute threshold

(2020). Luis A. Guzman et al. measured the geographical

proximity of services and facilities in Bogotá, Colombia,

and described how the 15-minute city concept impacts so-

cial and spatial inequalities (2021). Lee-Anne Khor et al.

proposed the 20-minute city as a key element in the future

plans for metropolitan Melbourne, discussing the benets

and challenges of such a model (2013). In our research, we

use the 15-minute city framework to assess the existing ur-

ban fabric, focusing on residential developments from the

1960s to 1980s.

Structural housing unit

The housing developments analyzed in this research were

designed and constructed during the period of the People’s

Republic of Poland (Polska Rzeczpospolita Ludowa), the

communist era in Polish history that lasted from 1944 to

1989. During this time, the construction of multifamily

housing was exclusively managed by the public sector and

organized by the central government through housing coop-

eratives (Basista 2001). In the 1970s, new housing develop-

ments in Poland began to be planned as structural housing

units (strukturalna jednostka mieszkaniowa) – functionally

and spatially distinct multi-family residential estates with

basic services, recreational facilities, and transportation in-

frastructure within a 500-meter radius. The term was rst

introduced in 1974 as part of the urban planning norm and

became an ocial guideline for residential development

across Poland (Szafrańska 2016).

Assessing walkability and proximity of services

Dierent approaches to assessing walkability are currently

being developed. Alexandros Bartzokas-Tsiompras and Ef thi-

mios Ba kogiannis created a 15-Minute-Walking-City

index,

which they used to evaluate the walkability of 121 me t-

ropo litan areas in Europe (2022). Min Weng et al. proposed

a method for measuring walkable neighbourhoods based on

the Walk Score metric and applied it to Shanghai (2019).

Dongh wan Ki et al. developed a novel walkability index that,

using Google Street View and computer vision algorithms,

focuses on pedestrians’ walking satisfaction (2023).

Few studies have been conducted on the concept of the

15-minute city in the Polish context, especially when com-

pared to the volume of research from Western Europe or

Asia. However, there are some notable exceptions. Alek-

sander Noworól et al. analyzed the proximity of services in

Exploring residential developments built from 1960 to 1980 in Kraków in the context of the 15-minute city concept 73

Kraków (2022). Aleksander Małachowski, Maciej Dąbski

and Waldemar Wilk examined whether the availability of

public services aects property prices, using Warsaw as

a case study (2020). Wojciech Bartoszczuk, Agnieszka

Cieś la and Katarzyna Rędzińska assessed selected neigh-

bourhoods in Warsaw in terms of access to basic public ser-

vices and green spaces (2024). Damian Poklewski-Koziełł,

Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich and Carlos Marmolejo Duar-

te investigated walkability measures, comparing the newly

built Garnizon development in Gdańsk with urban districts

in Western Europe (2023).

This research diers from the studies presented above

in its approach to assessing walkability. Instead of relying

on straight-line distances to facilities, we based our results

on actual access routes, taking into account urban barriers.

Methods

The analysis included three residential developments in

Kraków: Nowogrzegórzecka, Krowodrza Górka, and Oś-

wiecenia (Fig. 1). The table below presents key data for the

housing estates analyzed (Table 1).

To determine whether residents of the analyzed neigh-

bourhoods can meet their basic needs within a 15-minute

walk, it was necessary to rst dene what is meant by “basic

needs”. For this, we used the “essential urban social func-

tions” outlined by Moreno, the creator of the 15-minute city

concept: living, working, commerce, healthcare, education,

and entertainment (Moreno et al. 2021). However, some ad-

justments were made. In this study, “living” serves as our

reference point, rather than being categorized as a specic

facility. The category of “working” was excluded, as these

developments were planned during a time when large in-

dustrial plants were the primary sources of employment.

Thus, it was not ideal to place work and residential areas in

close proximity. Additionally, analyzing workplace proxim-

ity would have required surveying residents to identify their

places of employment – an interesting direction for future

research. However, this aspect was not included in the cur-

Development Nowogrzegórzecka Krowodrza Górka Oświecenia

Time of design and construction 1957–1969 1968–1976 1985–1988

Area [ha] 15.9 42.2 22.8

Number of residential buildings

in the original layout*

22 36 27

Residential buildings’ height

distribution [stories]

9 × 5

3 × 7

3 × 11

7 × 12

10 × 5

26 × 11

5 × 419 × 5

3 × 12

Distance to city centre [km] 1.8 2.5 4.7

Dimensions [m] 400 × 450 630 × 830 × 730

Fig. 1. Location of chosen developments:

1 – Nowogrzegórzecka, 2 – Krowodrza Górka

and 3 – Oświecenia in relation to the city centre (A)

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 1. Lokalizacja wybranych osiedli:

1 – Nowogrzegórzecka, 2 – Krowodrza Górka

i 3 – Oświecenia względem centrum miasta (A)

(oprac. D. Cenda)

Table 1. Developments’ specification and comparison

(elaborated by D. Cenda based on own measurements and archival design documentation; Włodarczyk 2014)

Tabela 1. Charakterystyka i porównanie osiedli

(oprac. D. Cenda na podstawie własnych pomiarów oraz archiwalnej dokumentacji projektowej; Włodarczyk 2014)

* Buildings constructed later, filling in the gaps in the original development, were not considered.

Note: The rest of the data comes from visual inspection or measuring dimensions on developments’ maps.

rent study. “Entertainment” was divided into two categories:

“Community and Culture” and “Recreation”. Facilities in

these categories share the role of fostering community en-

gagement, social well-being, and, respectively, cultural or

physical development.

After these adjustments, we decided to map amenities in

the following categories:

– Education – nurseries, kindergartens, primary schools,

high schools.

– Commerce – general stores, restaurants.

– Community and culture – churches, libraries, seniors’

clubs, culture houses.

– Healthcare – health centres.

– Recreation – sports facilities, parks and playgrounds,

allotment gardens.

Nurseries and kindergartens were analyzed twice: rst,

including all facilities, and second, focusing only on pub-

lic institutions. This decision was made because private

74 Dominika Cenda, Justyna Kobylarczyk, Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich

institutions in Poland are often costly and not aordable for

the majority of the population. In the commerce category,

small or specialized shops (e.g., bakeries, greengrocers) were

excluded. Only large and medium-sized general stores were

considered. A “culture house” refers to a public facility where

various activities (e.g., dance classes, arts and crafts, language

lessons) are organized, typically for youth and children. In

the health category, only general health clinics oering spe-

cialists in various elds were analyzed. Individual medical

practices were excluded. Re garding playgrounds, only larger

facilities, often linked to parks, were considered; smaller or

private playgrounds were not included in the analysis.

It is important to note that what is considered basic or

secondary amenities can vary from person to person, par-

ticularly when taking into account dierent age groups and

lifestyles (Kobylarczyk 2018). This research makes a gen-

eralization in this regard, assuming that all inhabitants re-

quire the same facilities to the same extent.

The facilities were identied through onsite visits and on-

line research (primarily using Google Maps). They were lo-

cated within the development and its surrounding area (rang-

ing from 300 to 500 m from the development’s boundaries,

depending on the density of available amenities and urban

barriers). The analysis was conducted in the second quarter

of 2023, reecting the actual situation during that period.

Next, each type of facility was analyzed, and the longest

access paths to any residential building within the devel-

opment were identied and marked. These paths were de-

scribed both in terms of distance (in meters) and travel time

(in minutes). The same analysis was repeated for each type

of facility across all the analyzed developments. The de-

scribed methodology is illustrated in Figure 2.

The lengths of the routes were determined by measur-

ing the polylines marking the walking paths on the map.

Travel time was calculated based on onsite visits and map

analysis in AutoCAD, with the assistance of Google Maps

(using the “Walking” tool). In our analysis, we assumed an

average walking speed of 5 km/h (as used by Google Maps)

and basic mobility to navigate urban barriers such as stairs

and high curbs. However, it is important to note that these

parameters may pose challenges for certain groups of res-

idents, such as the elderly, disabled individuals, or parents

with young children (particularly those in strollers). Re-

search indicates that dierent groups of residents – adults,

children, seniors, and individuals with impaired mobility

– exhibit signicant variations in their walking capabilities

and accessibility needs (Moura, Cambra and Gonçalves

2017). For these groups, further mapping of the analyzed

developments would be necessary to assess how these ob-

stacles impact the length of access routes.

Results

Below we present the results of the functional analysis of

the housing estates. The maps show the existing amenities

within these areas, as well as in their surroundings, cate-

gorized according to the previously dened groups. Each

housing estate is presented in a separate diagram (Figs. 3–5).

The furthest access paths were measured for 16 types

of facilities across 3 developments, resulting in a total of

48 analyses. Below, we present a graphical example of one

of these analyses (Fig. 6), along with a summary of all the

results (Table 2).

Results exceeding the 15-minute limit are highlighted

and underlined. Facilities that could not be reached with-

in a 25-minute walk were marked with a “–” as this was

considered the maximum acceptable walking distance. As

shown, most results fall within the 15-minute limit – 35 out

of 42 (83%). Interestingly, even when we set a 10-minute

limit, the majority of facilities still fall below it – 74% of

all facilities and 67% of public ones. Only three results ex-

ceeded the 15-minute threshold, and just two were marked

as inaccessible within the given range.

Regarding specic categories, 100% of commercial and

healthcare facilities are within a 15-minute walk, 92% of

educational facilities, and 89% of recreational ones. The low-

est results were found in the “Community and Culture” cate-

gory, where only 75% of facilities were within the 15-minute

limit, and only 33% were within 10 minutes. The shortest

walk was to reach a general store: 6 minutes for both the

Nowogrzegórzecka and Krowodrza Górka developments,

and just 4 minutes for the Oświecenia development.

Each development has its strengths and weaknesses in

terms of the results achieved. Nowogrzegórzecka (Fig. 7)

has the lowest average time (8.87 minutes), with consis-

tently short access times, except for one missing facility

(the seniors’ club). Sports facilities and kindergartens are

particularly well-located, being accessible in under 5 min-

utes. The “Community and Culture” category is the most

poorly represented, with all facilities located more than 10

minutes away, outside the development.

Krowodrza Górka (Fig. 8) also has a relatively low

aver age access time (9.18 minutes), with only one facility

(high school) located beyond the 15-minute reach. The best

Fig. 2. Research structure and methods

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 2. Metodyka i struktura badań

(oprac. D. Cenda)

Exploring residential developments built from 1960 to 1980 in Kraków in the context of the 15-minute city concept 75

Fig. 3. Map of amenities

– Nowogrzegórzecka development

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 3. Mapa dostępności usług

– osiedle Nowogrzegórzecka

(oprac. D. Cenda)

Fig. 4. Map of amenities

– Krowodrza Górka development

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 4. Mapa dostępności usług

– osiedle Krowodrza Górka

(oprac. D. Cenda)

76 Dominika Cenda, Justyna Kobylarczyk, Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich

Fig. 5. Map of amenities

– Oświecenia development

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 5. Mapa dostępności usług

– osiedle Oświecenia

(oprac. D. Cenda)

Fig. 6. Exemplary access path

analysis – kindergartens in

Nowogrzegórzecka development

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 6. Przykładowa analiza

dróg dojścia – przedszkola

na osiedlu Nowogrzegórzecka

(oprac. D. Cenda)

Exploring residential developments built from 1960 to 1980 in Kraków in the context of the 15-minute city concept 77

Table 2. The furthest walk to each type of facility, in minutes (elaborated by D. Cenda)

Tabela 2. Najdłuższe drogi dojścia dla poszczególnych obiektów, w minutach (oprac. D. Cenda)

Category Facility

Development

Francesco Nullo Krowodrza Górka Oświecenia

Education

nursery 6/11* 8/12* 6/12*

kindergarten 4/8* 6/7* 7/7*

primary school 7 7 8

high school 6

Commerce

general store 6 6 4

restaurant 8 5 9

Community

and culture

church 10 13 11

library 10 10

seniors’ club – 8

culture house 11 13 12

Healthcare health centre 10 9 9

Recreation

sports facility 4 6 8

park and playground 8 7 3

allotment gardens 8 10 –

* Only public facilities.

Note: Results exceeding the 15-minute limit are shown in bold font.

Fig. 8. The furthest walk to each type of facility – Krowodrza Górka

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 8. Najdłuższe drogi dojścia dla poszczególnych obiektów

– osiedle Krowodrza Górka (oprac. D. Cenda)

Fig. 7. The furthest walk to each type of facility – Nowogrzegórzecka

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 7. Najdłuższe drogi dojścia dla poszczególnych obiektów

– osiedle Nowogrzegórzecka (oprac. D. Cenda)

result was observed for gastronomy, with a restaurant with-

in a 5-minute walk from every point in the development.

There is a slight shortage of public nurseries, and only one

church and one cultural center, which resulted in relatively

higher access times for these facilities. It’s worth noting that

Krowodrza Górka is the largest of the analyzed develop-

ments, meaning that it takes time to even travel from one

end to the other. Nevertheless, in most cases, at least one

facility from each category is located within the develop-

ment itself.

Of all the developments, Oświecenia (Fig. 9) has the

most missing facilities – it takes 16 minutes to reach the

library or seniors’ club, and allotment gardens are absent. It

also has the highest average access time, at 10.37 minutes.

However, two types of facilities stand out with exception-

ally good results: a general store is just 4 minutes away,

Fig. 9. The furthest walk to each type of facility – Oświecenia

(elaborated by D. Cenda)

Il. 9. Najdłuższe drogi dojścia dla poszczególnych obiektów

– osiedle Oświecenia (oprac. D. Cenda)

78 Dominika Cenda, Justyna Kobylarczyk, Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich

and a park or playground is only 3 minutes away. It’s worth

noting that this development benets from its proximity to

the nearby Mistrzejowice, which is rich in public amenities,

particularly in terms of cultural and educational facilities.

Conclusions

The results indicate that the analyzed developments

could be considered components of a 15-minute city, with

only minor adjustments needed. Most of the access times are

within 15 minutes. Additionally, it is important to note that

the missing facilities (seniors’ clubs, library, high school,

and allotment gardens) are not considered basic necessities.

One could argue that these amenities may not be used daily

by residents (e.g., library), or they may only be needed by

specic age groups (e.g., high school or seniors’ club). More

essential amenities, such as general stores, parks, and kin-

dergartens, are all within a 15-minute walk, with the average

access times for these facilities closer to the 5-minute range.

These results appear optimal, as research indicates that

only 50% of people are comfortable walking 400 m for gro-

cery shopping, and this gure drops to just 20% at a distance

of 600 m (Kesarovski, Hernández-Palacio 2023). Even

among Nordic populations, generally considered to be phys-

ically active, research has shown that the majority (68%) are

only willing to walk distances of up to 1 km, equivalent to

approximately 12 minutes (Hjorthol, Engebretsen and Uteng

2014). The concepts of 10-, 15-, or 20-minute cities often

assume uniform maximum distances for all facilities. How-

ever, this is an oversimplication. Studies suggest that some

amenities, such as grocery stores, should be within a 5-min-

ute walk, while others, like educational facilities, can reason-

ably be located up to 15 minutes away (Logan et al. 2022).

Although e

ach development has an average result well

under the 15-minute threshold, an interesting pattern emerg-

es: the older the development, the better the results. This

may be because older neighbourhoods are situated more

centrally, in areas that are already well-equipped with ame-

nities. Another, perhaps simpler, explanation is that older

developments have had more time to improve their func-

tionality, even if they initially faced some deciencies.

Given the favourable results, one might question whether

the 15-minute city standard is ambitious enough for a mid-

sized European city. The analyzed developments demon-

strate potential to provide an even higher level of conve-

nience for their residents. With an average access time

of 9.47 minutes and only 26% of facilities exceeding the

10-minute threshold, these neighborhoods could realistical-

ly aim to meet the criteria of a 10-minute city. Achieving

this would require only minor enhancements to their func-

tionality.

Summary

This research reveals a striking similarity between the

design of developments built in the 1960s–1980s and the

principles of the 15-minute city concept. This connection

holds signicant potential, particularly today, as the im-

portance of proximity and walkability is once again at the

forefront of urban planning. These developments could be

considered early examples of 15-minute city components,

oering valuable opportunities for exploration and exper-

imentation. By studying them, we can rene the concept

further and establish guidelines for future implementations.

This is especially relevant in Poland, where the 15-minute

city concept has yet to be fully embraced.

The presented methodology serves as a replicable assess-

ment tool that can be applied to other areas. It is suitable for

evaluating both existing urban structures and planned de-

velopments. However, its eectiveness relies on a detailed

analysis of existing urban barriers and pedestrian pathways.

The multifunctionality of the analyzed developments

oers a signicant advantage over their modern counter-

parts. This characteristic highlights their potential as areas

deserving complex modernization eorts aimed at enhanc-

ing their strengths (such as urban layout and functionality)

while addressing their weaknesses (such as monotonous

architecture, aging infrastructure, and lower technical stan-

dards). This research could serve as a guideline for aug-

menting functionality in these neighbourhoods in cases of

planned modernization initiated by public entities or hous-

ing cooperatives.

For better or worse, the era of centrally planned resi-

dential developments is long past. Today, most of the ana-

lyzed areas are either fully developed or in private owner-

ship. The construction of public facilities has become more

complex and less common. However, the private sector can

also benet from this research, as such analyses highlight

areas lacking specic amenities (such as private nurseries

or restaurants), presenting potential opportunities for prof-

itable investments.

Future research could be expanded by analyzing a larger

number of developments across various cities or countries.

It would also be valuable to compare developments built be-

tween 1960–1980 with more recent ones. How do the func-

tions oered in modern residential areas compare to those

from the communist era, both in terms of scope and quanti-

ty? Has the shift from centrally managed to privately devel-

oped housing resulted in better functionality for residents?

This research conrms that the analyzed developments

can be interpreted as components of a 15-minute city. They

were built with a similar principle in mind – that residents

should have access to all the facilities they use daily within

a short distance. In communist-era urban planning, this was

dened by physical distance; today, it is framed by the time

of the journey. At the time of their construction, car-orient-

ed design seemed impractical, as few people owned cars.

In today’s world, pedestrian accessibility has once again

become crucial and warrants further study.

Translated by

Dominika Cenda

Exploring residential developments built from 1960 to 1980 in Kraków in the context of the 15-minute city concept 79

References

Bartoszczuk, Wojciech, Agnieszka Cieśla, and Katarzyna Rędzińska. “Ac-

cessibility to Public Services and Green Areas in Warsaw Housing

Estates in the Context of the Covid-19 Pandemic and the 10-Minute

Neighbourhood Concept.” Środowisko Mieszkaniowe/Housing Envi-

ronment 45, no. 4 (2024): 19–32. https://doi.org/10.4467/25438700

SM.23.026.19126.

Bartzokas-Tsiompras, Alexandros, and Efthimios Bakogiannis. “Quanti-

fying and Visualizing the 15-Minute Walkable City Concept across

Europe: A Multicriteria Approach.” Journal of Maps 19, no. 1 (2022):

1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2022.2141143.

Basista, Andrzej. Betonowe dziedzictwo. Architektura w Polsce czasów

komunizmu. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 2001.

Capasso Da Silva, Denise, David A. King, and Shea Lemar. “Accessi bi lity

in Practice: 20-Minute City as a Sustainability Planning Goal.” Sus-

tainability 12 (1) (2020): 129. https://doi.org/10.3390/su 12010129.

Fronczak, Monika. “15-Minute City – Genesis – Inspiration – Realisation.

Introduction to Research in a Form of Overview.” Przestrzeń Ur-

banistyka Architektura 1, (2023): 139–55. https://doi.org/10.37705/

PUA/1/2023/10.

Guzman, Luis A., Julian Arellana, Daniel Oviedo, and Carlos Alberto

Moncada Aristizábal. “COVID-19, Activity and Mobility Patterns in

Bogotá. Are We Ready for a ‘15-Minute City’?” Travel Behaviour and

Society 24, (2021): 245–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2021.04.008.

Hjorthol, Randi, Øystein Engebretsen, and Tanu Priya Uteng. “Den na sjo -

nale reisevaneundersøkelsen 2013/14 – nøkkelrapport.” Institute of

Transport Economics, Norwegian Centre of Transport Research, 2014.

Accessed March 3, 2023, at https://www.toi.no/getle.php?mmleid

39511.

Kesarovski, Todor, and Fabio Hernández-Palacio. “Time, the Other Di-

mension of Urban Form: Measuring the Relationship between Urban

Density and Accessibility to Grocery Shops in the 10-Minute City.”

Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 50,

no. 1 (2023): 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/23998083221103259.

Khavarian-Garmsir, Amir Reza, Ayyoob Shari, Mohammad Hajian Hos-

sein Abadi, and Zahra Moradi. “From Garden City to 15-Minute City:

A Historical Perspective and Critical Assessment.” Land 12, (2023):

1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12020512.

Khor, Lee-Anne, Shane Murray, Kim Dovey, Ian Woodcock, and Rutger

Pasman. “New Urban Territories: Spatial Assemblies for the 20-Mi-

nu te City.” In 6th State of Australian Cities Conference, 26–29 No-

vember 2013, Sydney, Australia. Published November 29, 2013. Ac-

cessed March 15, 2023, at https://apo.org.au/node/59859.

Ki, Donghwan, Zhenhua Chen, Sugie Lee, and Seungjae Lieu. “A Novel

Walkability Index Using Google Street View and Deep Learning.”

Sustainable Cities and Society 99, (2023): 104896. https://doi.org/

10.1016/j.scs.2023.104896.

Kobylarczyk, Justyna. Uwarunkowania środowiskowe w projektowaniu

obszarów mieszkaniowych. Wydawnictwo PK, 2018.

Logan, Tom, Matthew Hobbs, Lindsey Conrow, Nick Reid, R.A. Young, and

Mitchell Anderson. “The X-Minute City: Measuring the 10, 15, 20-Min-

ute City and an Evaluation of Its Use for Sustainable Urban Design.”

Cities 131, (2022): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103924.

Małachowski, Aleksander, Maciej Dąbski, and Waldemar Wilk. “Acces-

sibility of Public Services in Districts of Warsaw: A Comparative

Study.” Miscellanea Geographica 24, no. 3 (2020): 176–82. https://

doi.org/10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0019.

Moreno, Carlos, Zaheer Allam, Didier Chabaud, Catherine Gall, and Flo-

rent Pratlong. “Introducing the ‘15-Minute City’: Sustainability, Re-

silience and Place Identity in Future Post-Pandemic Cities.” Smart

Cities 4, (2021): 93–111. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities4010006.

Moura, Filipe, Paulo Cambra, and Alexandre B. Gonçalves. “Measuring

Walkability for Distinct Pedestrian Groups with a Participatory Assess-

ment Method: A Case Study in Lisbon.” Landscape and Urban Planning

157, (2017): 282–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan. 2016.07.002.

Noworól, Aleksander, Piotr Kopyciński, Paweł Hałat, Jeremiasz Sala -

mon, and Artur Hołuj. “The 15-Minute City – The Geographical

Pro xi mity of Services in Krakow.” Sustainability 14, (2022): 1–34.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127103.

Poklewski-Koziełł, Damian, Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich, and Carlos Mar -

molejo Duarte. “Investigating Urban Form, and Walkability Mea su res

in the New Developments. The Case Study of Garnizon in Gdansk.”

Land Use Policy 125, (2023): 1–19. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.landuse-

pol.2022.106471.

Szafrańska, Ewa. Wielkie osiedla mieszkaniowe w mieście postsocjali-

stycznym. Geneza, rozwój, przemiany, percepcja. Wydawnictwo Uni-

wersytetu Łódzkiego, 2016.

Weng, Min, Ning Ding, Jing Li, Xianfeng Jin, He Xiao, Zhiming He, and

Shiliang Su. “The 15-Minute Walkable Neighborhoods: Measure-

ment, Social Inequalities and Implications for Building Healthy Com-

munities in Urban China.” Journal of Transport & Health 13, (2019):

259–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.05.005.

Włodarczyk, Małgorzata, ed. Krakowskie osiedla modernizmu lat 1945–

1990. Wybrane przykłady: lista obiektów architektonicznych i urbani-

stycznych SARP Oddział Kraków. SARP Kraków, 2014.

Streszczenie

Krakowskie osiedla mieszkaniowe z lat 1960–1980 w kontekście koncepcji miasta 15-minutowego

Urbaniści z całego świata poszukują sposobów walki ze zmianami klimatycznymi oraz tworzenia otoczenia przyjaznego dla pieszych. Jednym z nich

może być zyskująca na popularności idea miasta 15-minutowego. Jej głównym założeniem jest dostępność podstawowych udogodnień w zasięgu krót-

kiego spaceru (najczęściej do 15 minut). W okresie komunizmu w Polsce wiele inwestycji mieszkaniowych miało być projektowanych jako jednostki

mieszkaniowe – wydzielone strukturalnie osiedla mieszkaniowe ze wszystkimi podstawowymi udogodnieniami (usługi, rekreacja i transport) dostępny-

mi w promieniu 500 metrów. Celem niniejszych badań jest porównanie tych dwóch wizji.

Przeprowadzone badania skoncentrowano na dostępności pieszej wybranych usług w trzech osiedlach mieszkaniowych położonych w Krakowie,

zbudowanych w latach 1960–1980. Miały na celu sprawdzenie, czy analizowane obszary spełniają wymagania komponentów miasta 15-minutowego.

W trakcie prac przeprowadzono analizę funkcjonalną w celu zlokalizowania udogodnień z wybranych kategorii. Następnie wykonano analizę ście-

żek dostępu, aby określić najdłuższe trasy pomiędzy budynkami mieszkalnymi a najbliższym obiektem danego rodzaju. Połączenie tych dwóch analiz

dało wiedzę na temat właściwości przestrzennych i funkcjonalnych każdego osiedla.

Na podstawie otrzymanych wyników można stwierdzić, że większość analizowanych udogodnień jest dostępna w zasięgu 15-minutowego spaceru.

Dowodzi to, że przedmiotowe obszary mają wiele cech wspólnych z komponentami miasta 15-minutowego. Pozwala to spojrzeć na komunistyczne osie-

dla z innego punktu widzenia – jako na cenne elementy współczesnej struktury miejskiej. Ten rodzaj analizy może służyć jako wytyczne dla urbanistów

w przypadku kompleksowych modernizacji lub dla inwestorów prywatnych do identykacji funkcjonalnych braków.

Słowa kluczowe: miasto 15-minutowe, urbanistyka, miasto przyjazne dla pieszych, komunizm, osiedla mieszkaniowe