kwartalnik 'studia regionalne i lokalne' - urban renewal and...
TRANSCRIPT
Agnieszka BiedaAGHUniversityofScienceandTechnology,DepartmentofGeomatics,ul.Mickiewicza30, 30-059Kraków;e-mail:[email protected]
uRban Renewal and the value of Real pRopeRtieS*
Abstract: Thearticleaims toverify therelationshipbetween thevalueof realestateandurbanrenewal.Theanalysiswasconducted forundeveloped landproperties tradedbetween2006and2014.Inthatperiod,atimetrendwassetfortherealestatefromtheareascoveredbytheLocalRevitalizationProgrammesandtheareaslocatedintheirimmediatevicinity.TheobservedtrendsofthechangeswerecomparedwiththoseoccurringatthesametimethroughoutKrakow,aswellasintheareasspecifiedintheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowaspotentialrevitalizationcomplexes, forwhichno localrevitalizationprogrammeswereeventuallyprepared.Inaddition,theauthoranalyzedhowtransactionpricesweredistributedinspaceoverthespecificyears.TheobtainedlandvaluemapswerecomparedwiththerecordsofthedocumentswhichformedthebasisfortheurbanrenewalofKrakow.
Keywords:LocalRevitalizationProgramme,landvaluemap,UrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow,urbanrenewal,realestatevalue,timeseries
Rewitalizacja pRzeStRzeni miejSkiej a wartość nieruchomości
Streszczenie: Celemartykułujestsprawdzenieistnieniazależnościpomiędzywartościąnierucho-mościadziałaniamirewitalizacyjnymi.Analizęprzeprowadzonodlanieruchomościgruntowychniezabudowanych, które były przedmiotem obrotu w latach 2006–2014.W przyjętym okresieustalonotrendczasowydlanieruchomościzobszarówobjętychlokalnymiprogramamirewitali-zacjiorazterenówpołożonychwichbezpośrednimsąsiedztwie.Zaobserwowanetendencjezmianporównanoztymi,jakiezachodziływtymsamymczasiewcałymKrakowieoraznaobszarachopisanychwMiejskimProgramieRewitalizacjiKrakowajakopotencjalnezespołyrewitalizacyjne,dlaktórychostatecznienie sporządzono lokalnychprogramówrewitalizacji.Dodatkowospraw-dzono,jakwwybranychlatachcenytransakcyjnerozkładałysięwprzestrzeni.Otrzymanemapycennościporównanozzapisamidokumentów,napodstawiektórychwykonywanajestrewitalizacjiKrakowa.
Słowa kluczowe:LokalnyProgramRewitalizacji,mapacenności,MiejskiProgramRewitalizacjiKrakowa,rewitalizacjaprzestrzenimiejskiej,wartośćnieruchomości,szeregiczasowe
A R T Y K U Ł Y
* Thisstudyhasreceivedthefinancialsupportfromthestatutoryresearchno.11.11.150.006.
Studia Regionalne i LokalneNr 3(69)/2017
ISSN 1509–4995doi: 10.7366/1509499536901
AGNIESZKABIEDA6
1. Introduction
It is stated in (Herbst 2008) that “revitalization is a word with a long his-tory”.Theconceptofrevitalizationoriginatedin theUnitedStatesofAmericainthemid-twentiethcentury,anditwasprimarilyconcernedwiththeactivitiesundertakenbythelocaladministrationcooperatingwithprivatecompanies.Thiscooperationwasaimedateconomicrevitalizationofspecificareasandincreasingtheincometherefrom(Petersenetal.2002).TheexampleoftheUnitedStateswas followed bymany countrieswhere urban renewal became a standard formanagingneglectedneighbourhoods(Herbst2008).ThemostfamousexamplesoftheEuropeanredevelopmentsincludetheregenerationoftheLondondocks(Kaczmarek 1991) and theKreuzberg district inBerlin (Małkowski,Woźniak2004).Theconceptofrevitalizationhasrecentlybeenmakingasuddencareeralso
inPoland.However,thereisashortageofbasicframeworksorinstrumentsthatwouldfacilitategoodredevelopment(Herbst2008).Thefirstnormativeactonrevitalizationintherankofalawenteredintoforceattheendof2015(Act2015).This,however,doesnotdecreasetheimportanceoftheurbanrenewalcarriedoutinPolandearlier.Revitalizationisaprocessundertakeninthepublicinterest.Itconcernsspa-
tial,technical,socialandeconomicchangesinaregeneratedarea(Chmielewski2016).Itspurposeistoincreasetheattractivenessofthisareaforitsresidentsandpotentialinvestors(Jadach-Sepioło2016).Itsaimistosaveanareaaffectedbyrecessionaryconditionsbyrestoringold
functionsorintroducingnewones,whichwillcreateconditionsforfurtherde-velopmentof the revitalizedareausing its currentdevelopment (Chmielewski2016).Inthelattercase,degradedareasareusuallysubjecttorevitalization,es-peciallyindustrialareasandwarehouses,post-industrialwastelandfillsites,post-miningareas,aswellasformerrailwayandmilitaryareas.Takingintoaccountfrequentchangesoflegislationrelatedtobroadlyunder-
stoodspatialeconomyandthepaceofcivilizationdevelopment,itseemsnaturalthatthesameareaoftenchangesitsintendedpurposeandfunction(Adamczyk,Bieda2014).Fromthefinancialpointofview,degradedareasarethebestsitesto initiatesuchventures,as themainmotivatingfactor forpost-industrialpro-jectsisthelowvalueoflandresultingfromrelativelyhighrevitalizationcosts(Konowalczuk,Ramian2008)aswellaslowliquidityintherealestatemarket(Jadach-Sepioło2016).Themainmeasureofrevitalization’seffectsisprimarilyanincreaseinthenum-
berofworkplacesintheregeneratedarea.Inaddition,conclusionscanbedrawnfromthebehaviourofthepeopleresidingintherevitalizedspace(Chmielewski2016)andfromtheaesthetizationofurbanspaces(Palickietal.2015).Itmaybestatedthaturbanrenewaliseffectiveiftherearepeopleintherevitalizedspacewhowanttostaythere,andtogetherwithchangesintheirappearance,commer-cialandserviceoffers,standardsimproveandthespacebecomesmorediverse,actsofvandalismarescarce,thereisorder,thesurroundingsaretakencareof,
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 7
andtheareaismoreaestheticandseemssafer.However,measuringtheeffectsofrevitalizationisverycomplex(Sztando2008).Therefore,thearticleaimstover-ifywhetherthereisarelationshipbetweenrealestatevalueandurbanrenewal,whichcouldbeusedasameasureoftheresultsofrevitalization.Althoughrecognizedstudiespointtovariousindiceswhichshouldbetaken
intoaccountforrealestatemarketanalysis(Dąbrowski2009), therelationshipbetweenrealpropertyvalueandtheprocessofrevitalizationhaspreviouslybeenanalyzed on individual examples by (Emery 2006), (Palicki 2013) (Olbińska2014)(Palicki,Rącka2016).Thesestudiesdonotcoverwholecities,however.Theinfluenceofactivitiesrelatedtotheestablishmentoflocallaw,whichisthebasisonwhichtheprocessofurbanrenewaliscarriedout,hasnotbeenverifiedeither.Theanalyzedresearchstudiescoverundevelopedrealestateintendedforresi-
dentialdevelopment,subjecttopropertylaws.Ithasbeenstatedthattheanalysisusing land informationwillbesufficientbecause thevalueof this typeof realestateusuallychangesintimeandspace,analogouslytoothertypesofrealestate(c.f.researchstudies–Żelazowski2008).
2. Urban renewal in Krakow
The issue of urban renewal was already tackled in Krakow in the 1990s(Świerczewska-Pietras2008).Thefirst revitalizationprogrammewaspreparedintheyears1993–1994forKazimierz,thehistoricalpartofKrakow,incoopera-tionwithEdinburgh andBerlinunder theEuropeanUnionprogrammeECOS(EuropeanEnvironmentalCitizensOrganisationforStandardisation).Subsequentprojectsconcernedtherevitalizationofthefollowingpost-industrialareas:− Branice,formanyyearslocatedwithintheboundariesoftheprotectionzoneofTadeuszSendzimirSteelworks,
− theso-called“WhiteSeas”,whichistheKrakowSodaFactory“Solvay”loca-tedbetweentwodistrictsofKrakow:BorekFałęckiandŁagiewniki,
− Zabłocie,degradedbothsocially(reducednumberofworkplaces)andspatially(dilapidatedemptybuildings)aftertheshutdownofmanyofitsbusinesses.Ofthesethreeareas,onlyZabłociewasgrantedarevitalizationprogramme.It
wasadoptedonOctober25,2006(Resolution2006).Thecurrent revitalizationactivities in the city arebasedonResolutionNo.
XCII/926/05oftheKrakowCityCouncilof26October2005ontheelaborationof theUrbanRevitalizationProgramme– theLocalRevitalizationProgramme(LPR).Accordingtothetermscontainedtherein,therevitalizationprogrammeinquestioncoverstheentirecity.Therefore,asaresultoftheresolution,adocumentwaspreparedwhichwascalledtheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow(MPRK).ThescheduleforitsimplementationisshowninTable1.
AGNIESZKABIEDA8
Tab. 1. Planned implementation schedule of the Resolution on the elaboration of the Urban Revitalization Programme for Krakow – the Local Revitalization Programme
Date Task28 February 2006 Presentation of the premises for the Revitalization Programme to
the City Council31 July 2006 Conducting social consultations30 September 2006 Presentation of the project of the Revitalization Programme to the
City Council
Source: own study based on (Resolution 2005).
Followingtheschedule,ateamofexpertsdevelopedthepremisesfortheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowandthenselectedeightareaswhichshouldbeincludedintheurbanrenewalinthefirstplace(Świerczewska-Pietras2008).Theseareaswereselectedusing thecriteria takendirectly from the IntegratedRegionalDevelopmentOperational Programme for the years 2004–2006.Theareasqualifiedforrevitalizationwerecharacterizedbyatleastthreeofthefol-lowingtraits,verifiedforthewholecountry:− highunemploymentrateamongtheinhabitants,− highlevelofpovertyanddifficultlivingconditions,− highlevelofcrime,− lowlevelofeducationoftheinhabitants,− lowlevelofentrepreneurshipoftheinhabitants,− highleveloftechnicaldegradationoftheinfrastructureandbuildings,− highlevelofenvironmentalpollution.Figure1illustratestheboundariesoftheareasselectedbytheexperts.Their
characteristicsaredemonstratedinTable2.
Fig. 1. Revitalization areas selected in the Urban Revitalization ProgrammeSource: own study based on the data provided by the Geodetic and Cartographic Documentation Centre in Krakow and the City Development Department of the City of Krakow.
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 9
Tab. 2. Revitalization areas selected in the Urban Revitalization Programme
Designation RangeI Old Town, Kleparz, Piasek, Nowy Świat, Stradom, Wesoła Zachód, Kazimierz,
part of Grzegórzki Zachód and Półwsie ZwierzynieckieII Stare Podgórze, Zabłocie, Mateczny, Bonarka, Krakus Mound, Heltmana, part
of Grzegórzki Wschód and Grzegórzki Północ, Plaszow Pond (Płaszów)III Zakrzówek, Dębniki Zachód, Przegorzały Wschód and Przegorzały Południe
(Polnych Kwiatów/Ks. Józefa)IV Krowodrza Południe, southern part of Krowodrza Wschód and Północ, Azory
Wschód, northern part of Bronowice Małe Wschód, Krowodrza Nowa Wieś (western part), Nowa Wieś Południe (western part), Małe Błonie (north-eastern part), Czarna Wieś (western part)
V All urban units of the old part of Nowa Huta, Na Skarpie (Nowa Huta Me-adows), Mogiła (eastern part)
VI Płaszów (Bagry Lake), industrial and railway areas (Zarzecze, Rybitwy, Pod-gaje)
VII Borek Fałęcki Wschód, Łagiewniki (Sanctuary of Divine Mercy/White Seas)VIII Tadeusz Sendzimir Steelworks, Mogiła Wschód (north-eastern part), Pleszów-
-Kujawy (northern part), Branice (northern part)
Source: (Urban Revitalization Programme 2008).
Therevitalizationareasoccupyatotalofabout5677ha,whichisabout17.4%oftheareaofKrakow.InOctober2006, thecompetition foraconceptof theUrbanRevitalization
Programmewassettled.ThedraftversionoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowwaspresentedforconsultationinAugust2007.Unfortunately,itco-incidedwiththepublicationbytheMałopolskaProvinceOfficeof“Methodologyofpreparationandevaluationof therevitalizationprogramundertheRegionalOperationalProgramforMałopolskafortheyears2007–2013”(Świerczewska-Pietras2008).Thisdocumentcalledfor the identificationofdegradedareas incitieswithmorethan20000inhabitants,forwhichseparaterevitalizationpro-grammesshouldbedeveloped.Asaresult,theUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeservedasabasisforthepreparationofLocalRevitalizationProgrammesforse-lected areas ofKrakow (UrbanRevitalizationProgramme2008). PrioritywasgiventotheareaoftheOldTownwithintheso-calledSecondRingRoadandStarePodgórze, theoldpartofNowaHutawiththeneighbouringgreenareas,aswellasZabłocie.Theothercomplexeswereevaluatedasequal.AppropriateresolutionswereadoptedonOctober8,2008(LocalRevitalizationProgrammefortheOldTownandLocalRevitalizationProgrammefortheoldpartofNowaHuta)andonJanuary13,2010(LocalRevitalizationProgrammeforZabłocie).TheboundariesofthecurrentLocalRevitalizationProgrammesinKrakoware
showninFigure2.Table3demonstratestheircharacteristics.
AGNIESZKABIEDA10
Fig. 2. Boundaries of the Local Revitalization Programmes in KrakowSource: own study based on the data provided by the Geodetic and Cartographic Documentation Centre in Krakow and the City Development Department of the City of Krakow.
Table 3. Local Revitalization Programmes in Krakow
Local Revitalization Programme Percentage of the area of Krakow
Number of projects included in the Local Revitalization Programmes
Old Town 2.03% 92Old part of Nowa Huta 1.04% 36Zabłocie 0.53% 20
Source: own study based on (Resolution 2008b), (Resolution 2008c) and (Resolution 2010).
Almost all of the projects whichwere included in local revitalization pro-grammeswereeitherofspatialorofecologicaltype.Interestingly,socialprojectsaccountedformerely12%ofalltheprojectsproposedforimplementation.Attheendof2014,aspartofamonitoringprocedure,alltheprojectsentered
intolocalrevitalizationprogrammeswereanalyzed(Report2014).ByDecember31,2014,29projectsincludedintheLocalRevitalizationProgrammefortheOldTown,eightintheProgrammefor“old”NowaHuta,andsixintheProgrammeforZabłociewere implemented.Theyconcernedvarious typesofconstructionprocesses.Noneofthemreferredtothesocialsphere.ThecurrentlybindingresolutionsforthemunicipalityofKrakowareasfol-
lows:
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 11
− UrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowofOctober8,2008(Resolution2008a),
− Local Revitalization Programme for the Old Town of October 8, 2008(Resolution2008b),
− LocalRevitalizationProgrammefortheoldpartofNowaHutaofOctober8,2008(Resolution2008c),
− LocalRevitalizationProgrammeforZabłocieofJanuary13,2010(Resolution2010).These documents are constantly updated. Following the changes to the
UrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowof2014(Resolution2014),2016(Resolution2016)and2017(Resolution2017),worksarebeingcarriedoutonupdatingalltheLocalRevitalizationProgrammes.Theirplannednewboundariesareshown inFigure3 (in thebackground, thereare thecontoursof theLocalRevitalizationProgrammeswhicharecurrentlyinforce).
Fig. 3. Updated boundaries of the Local Revitalization Programmes in KrakowSource: own study based on the data provided by the Geodetic and Cartographic Documentation Centre in Krakow and the City Development Department of the City of Krakow.
InKrakow, investors’preferenceshavenotchangedover theyears.Despitetheelaborationofvariousplanningdocuments,somepartsofthecityhavenotmanagedtobecomeattractive(Bieda,Parzych2013).LegislativeactionsoftheKrakowCityCouncilconcerningtheurbanrenewal,however,haveresultedinmoreandmoremanifestationsof therevitalizationprocessbeingnoticeableinthecity.Theadoptedresolutionshavebroughtaboutasignificantrenewalofthedegradedareas.Figure4showsanexampleofrevitalizationaspartoftheLocalRevitalizationProgrammeforZabłocie.
AGNIESZKABIEDA12
2006 2014
Fig. 4. An example of revitalization – closed down mills and cosmetic plant converted into residential buildingsSource: (Resolution 2010) and (Google Street View 2014).
3. Data and Methods
The analyses presented in this articlewere carried out on the basis of dataprovidedbyGeodeticandCartographicDocumentationCentre inKrakowandtheCityDevelopmentDepartmentoftheCityofKrakow.ThedatanecessarytodeterminetherelationshipbetweenrevitalizationofurbanspaceinKrakowandthevalueofitsrealestateinclude:− RegistryofPropertyPricesandValues,whichincludesdataonalltypesofrealpropertiestradedbetweenJanuary2006andDecember2014,
− spatialdataoncadastralparcelswithin theadministrativeboundariesof thecityofKrakow,
− spatial data on revitalization areas specified in the Urban RevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow,
− spatialdataontheboundariesoftheLocalRevitalizationProgrammesinforceinKrakow.Itwasverifiedwhethertherewas(ornot)arelationshipatspecificpointsin
timebetweenunit transactionpricesandlocationofaproperty in theareapo-tentiallyorpracticallydevotedtorevitalization.Thus,revitalizationwastreatedasoneoftheattributesthatcoulddescribetherealestatemarketforstatisticalanalysis of volatilityof transactionprices.Due to the fact that such attributesareassumedtobeindependent(Parzych,Czaja2015),otherattributesthatmayappearrelevanttoapotentialbuyerhavebeenomittedinthepresentedanalyses.Theinfluenceofotherattributeshasalreadybeenstudied,andtheresultsofsuchstudiescanbefounde.g.in(Bieda,Brzozowski2007).
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 13
Thediscussedresearchstudiescoverundevelopedlandpropertiesintendedforresidentialdevelopment,subjecttopropertylaw.Thesepropertiesweretotheob-jectoffreemarkettransactions.Speciallegalentitieswereneverpartiesthereto.Intheanalyzedperiod(January1,2006–December31,2014),therewere4505transactionsinvolvingthistypeofrealestateinKrakow.ThedistributionoftherecordedunittransactionpricesintimeisshowninFigure5,whilethebasicde-scriptivestatisticsofthecollecteddatabasearecontainedinTable4.
11/2
005
02/2
006
05/2
006
08/2
006
11/2
006
02/2
007
05/2
007
08/2
007
11/2
007
02/2
008
05/2
008
08/2
008
11/2
008
02/2
009
05/2
009
08/2
009
11/2
009
02/2
010
05/2
010
08/2
010
11/2
010
02/2
011
05/2
011
08/2
011
11/2
011
02/2
012
05/2
012
08/2
012
11/2
012
02/2
013
05/2
013
08/2
013
11/2
013
02/2
014
05/2
014
08/2
014
11/2
014
02/2
015
date
0
2 000
4 000
6 000
8 000
10 000
12 000
14 000
unit
pric
e [P
LN/m
2 ]
Fig. 5. Distribution of unit transaction prices for undeveloped land properties intended for residential development in Krakow in 2006–2014Source: own study.
Tab. 4. Basic descriptive statistics of the database of unit transaction prices for undeveloped land properties intended for residential development in Krakow in 2006–2014
Average Median Minimal Maximal Standard deviation
389.38 237.77 20.00 11556.60 582.64Coefficient of variation Skewness Kurtosis Percentile 10% Percentile 90%
1.49 6.96 81.65 79.04 771.60
Source: own study.
In itsoriginal form, the informationcollected iscompletelyuseless.This isprovenbye.g.thecoefficientofvariation,fromwhichitfollowsthattheanalyzedbaseiscompletelyinconsistent(Parzych,Czaja2015).However,duetothesmallPearson’scorrelationcoefficient(r=0.05)ofunit
transactionpricesandtime,whichsuggestsnoeffectoftimeontransactionpric-es,theauthordecidedtocreatealandvaluemapoftheanalyzedland,takingintoaccountalltherealproperties(Fig.6).
AGNIESZKABIEDA14
100 PLN/m2
350 PLN/m2
600 PLN/m2
850 PLN/m2
1100 PLN/m2
Fig. 6. Land value map of undeveloped real properties intended for residential development in Krakow, 2006–2014Source: own study.
Themapwascreatedusingthespatialinterpolationmethod.Thisisasolutionwhichhasbeentestedinthestudiesoftherealestatemarketbye.g.(Kulczycki,Ligas2007),(Cichociński2011),(Montero,Larraz2011),(Walaciketal.2013),(Cellmeretal.2014),(Ogryzek,Kurowska2016)and(Polny,Wójciak2017).Allof the landvaluemapspresentedin thisarticlewerecreatedusingtheInverseDistanceWeightingmethod(IDW).Theauthordecidednottoinsertalineofdis-continuity,whichundoubtedlyistheVistulaRiver.ItisassociatedwiththefactthatsomeoftheareasdefinedasrevitalizationareasintheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowandintheLocalRevitalizationProgrammesarelocatedonbothsidesoftheVistulaRiver.Theindividualpartsoftherevitalizationareaswhich look separatedby the riverareundoubtedlyconnected.Over theyears,manyroadandpedestriancrossingsovertheVistulaRiverhavebeencreated.Foreasier interpretation, theboundariesof the revitalizationareas from the
UrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowwereplottedonthegeneratedras-ter.Onthepreparedlandvaluemap,itcanbenotedthatthehighesttransactionpricesinKrakowareobtainedforlandpropertieslocatedinthehistoriccentreandinitsimmediatevicinity.Since long-termanalysiswasapplied, theconductedstudywasadditionally
basedonthetimeseriesofaveragemonthlyunittransactionprices.Suchanap-proachcanbefoundinrealestateresearchstudiescontainedintheworkssuchas(Żelazowski2008),(Dittmann2013),(Trojanek2013)and(Bełej,Kulesza2015).ThetimeseriescreatedonthebasisofallthecollecteddataisshowninFigure7,anditsbasicdescriptivecharacteristicsinTable6.
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 15
01/2
006
07/2
006
01/2
007
07/2
007
01/2
008
07/2
008
01/2
009
07/2
009
01/2
010
07/2
010
01/2
011
07/2
011
01/2
012
07/2
012
01/2
013
07/2
013
01/2
014
07/2
014
average unit price smoothed �me series
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1 000
1 100un
it pr
ice
[PLN
/m2 ]
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1 000
1 100
Fig. 7. Time series of average monthly unit transaction prices for undeveloped land properties intended for residential development in Krakow in 2006–2014Source: own study.
AccordingtothevaluesillustratedinthegraphinFig.7,thelowestaveragemonthlyunittransactionpricewasrecordedinJune2006(215PLN/m²),andthehighestinDecember2008(958PLN/m²).Thesametimeserieswasalsopresentedagainstthebackgroundoftheseries
ofaveragemonthlytransactionpricesobtainedforundevelopedlandpropertiesinKrakow,2006–2014,smoothedbymeansofmovingaveragesforfiveneigh-bouringperiods.Itwasnecessarytocarryoutthreeiterationsforsuchaseries.Adescriptionof themethod canbe found e.g. in theworksby (Box, Jenkins1983),(Hamilton1994)and(Brockwell,Davis1996).Based on the smoothed time series, the analyzedmarket can be defined as
characterized by a constant price level and cyclical fluctuations (Adamczyk,Bieda2015).Afterthesmoothing,themaximumoftheanalyzedseriesisinMay2008(586PLN/m²),andtheminimuminJuly2006(261PLN/m²).
Tab. 5. Basic descriptive statistics of the time series of average monthly unit transaction prices for undeveloped land properties intended for residential development in Krakow in 2006–2014
Average Median Minimal Maximal Standard deviation
403.26 369.39 215.25 957.94 147.07Coefficient of variation Skewness Kurtosis Percentile 10% Percentile 90%
0.36 1.45 2.55 248.24 595.17
Source: own study.
AGNIESZKABIEDA16
However,analysingthewholesetdoesnotseemreasonable.Theinterpretationoftheaboveresultsonlyprovesthatitisnecessarytodividethedataintosmallerpartsinorderto:1. Compare the landvaluemapof the entireKrakowat thebeginningof the
urbanrenewalprocesswiththeboundariesoftheareaswhichshouldberevi-talized,selectedintheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow,todeter-minewhetherthereisarelationshipbetweenthevalueoflandpropertiesandtheirlocationintheareasrecognizedasbeinginarecessionarycondition.
2. Comparethetimeseriesofaveragemonthlyunittransactionpricesfortherealestatelocatedwithintherevitalizationareasandintheirimmediatevicinitybetweentheindividualareas,andwiththetimeseriesoftheaveragemonthlytransactionpricesfortherealpropertieslocatedthroughoutthecity,inordertoverifywhetherdefiningtheareaasbeingintherecessionarycondition,andthenthepossibleimplementationofarecoveryplanintheformoftheLocalRevitalizationProgramme,hascausedpricefluctuations in local realestatemarkets.
4. Empirical results
Inordertoproperlydividetheanalyzeddatasetintosmallerones,andtode-terminethedatesoftheeventsthatcouldhavehadaneffectontransactionprices,atimelinewaspresentedwhichdepictsthecourseofcreatingthelegalbasisfortheurbanrenewalinKrakow(Fig.8).
Resolu�on onthe UrbanRevitaliza�onProgrammefor Kraków
Dra� of theUrbanRevitaliza�onProgrammefor Kraków
Resolu�on on theLocal Revitaliza�onProgrammefor Zabłocie
Selec�on of the areasfor revitaliza�on
Resolu�ons on the Urban Revitaliza�on Programme for Kraków aswell as the Local Revitaliza�on Programme for the Old Town and theLocal Revitaliza�on Programme for the od part of Nowa Huta
10/2005 08/2007
02/2006
01/2010
10/2008
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Fig. 8. Timeline of creating the legal basis for urban renewal in KrakowSource: own study.
Onthebasisoftheabovetimeline,itwasfoundthat,atthebeginningoftheprocessofurbanrenewal,thelandvaluemapofthewholeKrakowshouldhavebeen prepared according to the data from2006.The public consultations car-riedoutlaterinordertocreateaprojectoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowcouldhavesignificantlyinfluencedrealestatetransactionpricesbypointingoutaqualitywhichwouldpositivelyaffecttheirvalue–possiblefuturerevitalizationofthearea.
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 17
Thetimelinealsohelpedtodeterminethedatesaroundwhichaveragemonthlyunittransactionpricesfortherealpropertieslocatedwithintherevitalizationar-easandintheirimmediatevicinityshouldbecompared.Inordertoseeifurbanrenewalaffectsthevalueofrealestate,thepointsfromtheabovetimelinewillbe confrontedwith the dates atwhich the time series reach theirminima andmaxima.
4.1. Theinfluenceofpropertyvaluesondeterminingrevitalizationareas
Inordertodeterminethedependencebetweentransactionpricesobtainedforlandpropertiesandthelocationofthepropertiesintheareasmeanttoberevital-ized,asampleof820wasanalyzed.TheirdistributionisshowninFig.9.
Fig. 9. Distribution of undeveloped land properties intended for residential development which were traded in 2006Source: own study.
Itisevidentthatmostoftherealpropertiessoldin2006arelocatedoutsideoftheareaswhichwereconsideredtobedegradedandrequiringrenewalintheUrbanRevitalizationProgramme.The reasons behind the lack of transactionsrecordedindegradedareasvarydependingonthearea.Inthecitycentre(areasI,IIandIV)demandforlandpropertiessurpassestheirsupply.Inotherareas,thesituation is reversed.Ownersofproperties located indegradedareasput themonsalereadily,butunfortunatelynotmanypeopleareinterestedinbuyingthem.Therefore,inordertodeterminetherelationshipbetweenthetransactionpricesand the location ina revitalizationarea,price interpolationwas repeatedoncemoreusingtheInverseDistanceWeightingmethod(Fig.10).
AGNIESZKABIEDA18
A map was prepared based on transaction prices without time correction.Pearson’scorrelationcoefficientbetweentheunittransactionpricesandthetrans-actiondatein2006was0.04.
70 PLN/m2
225 PLN/m2
380 PLN/m2
535 PLN/m2
690 PLN/m2
Fig. 10. Land value map of undeveloped land properties intended for residential development in 2006Source: own study.
Basedonthelandvaluemapwithboundariesofrevitalizationareas,itcanbenotedthat,contrarytoexpectations, theyarenotalwayslocatedinthoseareasofthecitywhererealestateisinexpensive.Thehighestunittransactionpricescanbe noted in the vicinity of the communications centre1and in fashionablelocations,mainlyontherepresentativestreetsofKrakow.TheseareasfrequentlyneighbourthoselateridentifiedasbeinginarecessionaryconditionintheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowanddenotedasI,IIandIV.Otherrevitalizationareas(III,V,VI,VIIandVIII)arelocatedoutsidethecity
centre.Thetransactionpricesrecordedintheirinfluencezonesdonotdifferfromthoserecordedoutsidetherevitalizationareas.
4.2. Theinfluenceofurbanrenewalonthevalueofrealestate
Inordertoverifywhetherpricechangesonthelocalmarketofundevelopedlandpropertiesintendedforresidentialdevelopmentweretheresultofdefininganareaasbeinginrecessionarycondition,andthenpossiblyimplementingarecov-eryplanintheformoftheLocalRevitalizationProgramme,theauthordecidedtobuildatimeseriesofaveragemonthlyunittransactionpricesfortheproperties
1 ThecommunicationscentreisabiginvestmentaimedatimprovingcommunicationinthecentreofKrakow.Itencompassesanundergroundhallofarailwaystation,abusstation,afasttramtunnel,aroadtunnelandtwonewstreets.
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 19
locatedwithintherevitalizationareas.However,sinceintheyears2006–2014,landpropertytransactionsinthemajorityoftherevitalizedareaswerereportedtobeextremelyrare(cf.Fig.11),informationonpropertysalesintheimmediatevicinityoftheseareaswasaddedtothetransactionsintherevitalizationareas.
Fig. 11. Distribution of undeveloped land properties intended for residential development which were traded between 2006 and 2014Source: own study.
Tab. 6. Basic descriptive statistics of the time series of average quarterly unit transaction prices for undeveloped land properties intended for housing development in individual revitalization areas in 2006–2014
Area Average Median Minimal Maximal Standard deviation
Coefficient of variation Skewness Kurtosis
I 2223.97 1719.78 210.08 10682.49 2179.25 0.98 2.37 7.06II 1151.16 840.60 292.10 3329.15 828.12 0.72 1.17 0.88III 430.19 354.27 142.83 1158.73 204.95 0.48 1.46 3.21IV 903.72 806.03 46.82 2915.45 575.88 0.64 1.46 3.66V 328.94 281.57 61.46 1127.71 210.34 0.64 1.89 5.06VI 313.33 237.20 97.18 1120.14 195.78 0.62 2.40 7.97VII 359.56 362.70 104.82 946.16 173.11 0.48 1.01 3.05VIII 113.44 108.47 35.99 260.23 55.58 0.49 1.16 1.17Kra-kow
403.26 393.64 245.23 581.67 98.27 0.24 0.17 –1.03
Source: own study.
Eachofthetimeserieswasbuiltwithseveralhundredtransactionsrecordedintheanalyzedperiod.Duetodatagaps,theauthordecidedtodetermineaveragequarterlyunitprices.Alltheseriesweresmoothedusingmovingaverages(for
AGNIESZKABIEDA20
threeneighbouringperiods,inthreeiterations).ThecharacteristicsoftheseriesarecontainedinTable6.ThetimeseriesareshowninFig.12and13.
Area I Area II Area III Area IV Area V Area VI Area VII Area VIII Krakow
IV/2
006
II/20
07
IV/2
007
II/20
08
IV/2
008
II/20
09
IV/2
009
II/20
10
IV/2
010
II/20
11
IV/2
011
II/20
12
IV/2
012
II/20
13
IV/2
013
quarter
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
unit
pric
e [P
LN/m
2 ]
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
Fig. 12. Smoothed time series of average monthly transaction prices for undeveloped land properties in the areas selected for revitalization in the Urban Revitalization Programme for Krakow in the years 2006–2014Source: own study.
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 21
Thetimeseriesofaveragequarterlyunitpricesinallrevitalizationareas,aswellas theseriesofaveragemonthlypricesfor thewholeofKrakow,aresta-bleandarecharacterizedbycyclicalorseasonalfluctuations.TheirextremesaresummarizedinTable7.
Tab. 7. Extremes of the time series of average quarterly unit transaction prices for undeveloped land properties intended for residential development in individual revitalization areas in the years 2006–2014
AreaMaximal Minimal
quarter unit price [PLN/m2] quarter unit price
[PLN/m2]I III/2008 4 356 IV/2012 1 035II IV/2008 2 446 II/2010 547III IV/2010 702 IV/2006 260IV I/2011 1 984 IV/2012 496V III/2007 541 III/2010 236VI I/2013 513 I/2013 212VII III/2013 491 IV/2006 253VIII IV/2008 177 IV/2006 69Krakow II/2008 548 IV/2006 292
Source: own study.
InalltheareasselectedfortheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow,transactionpricesbegantoincreaseaftertheurbanrenewalhadstarted.Thepric-esinareaVreachedtheirmaximafirst,withtheaveragetransactionpriceofPLN541/m²inthethirdquarterof2007.Thebuyers’euphoria,however,droppedquiterapidlyandwhentheLocalRevitalizationPlanfortheoldpartofNowaHutawasadopted,transactionpricesplummetedtocircaPLN300/m²,andthencontinuedtodecreaseuntilthethirdquarterof2010.Whentheyreachedtheminimum,thepricesinareaVstartedtogoupagain.Thelocalmaximumofthesecondcyclewas456PLN/m².InareasIandII,themaximaofthetimeseriesoccurredinthesecondhalfof
2008(forareaI–4356PLN/m²,forareaII–2446PLN/m²),whichcoincidedwiththeadoptionoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow.Attheturnof2009and2010,theminimacouldbeobservedinbothcases(forareaI–thelo-calminimaamountingto1158PLN/m²,forareaII–theglobalminimaamount-ingto547PLN/m²).Otherlocalextremeswerethemaximainthethirdquarterof2011(forareaI–2916PLN/m²,forareaII–1596PLN/m²).ThemaximumvalueforthetimeseriesofareaIV(1984PLN/m²)wasabouthalfayearaheadofthem.Earlier,whenthepriceseriesforareasIandIIreachedtheirmaxima,theseriesforareaIVreachedthevalueofPLN1007/m²(inthesecondquarterof2008).
AGNIESZKABIEDA22
ThetimeseriesdemonstratedinFig.13arethesameasinFig.12.However,theywereselectedandscaledtomakeiteasiertoanalyzethevaluesfortheareaswithloweraveragetransactionprices.
Area III Area V Area VI Area VII Area VIII Krakow
IV/2
006
II/20
07
IV/2
007
II/20
08
IV/2
008
II/20
09
IV/2
009
II/20
10
IV/2
010
II/20
11
IV/2
011
II/20
12
IV/2
012
II/20
13
IV/2
013
quarter
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
unit
pric
e [P
LN/m
2 ]
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Fig. 13. Smoothed time series of average monthly unit transaction prices for undeveloped land properties in specific areas selected for revitalization in the Urban Revitalization Programme for Krakow in 2006–2014Source: own study.
TheseriesofquarterlyaveragetransactionpricesinareasIII,V,VI,VIIandVIIIaresignificantlylowerthaninareasI,IIandIV.ThisisassociatedwiththelocationofthelatterintheverycentreofKrakow.InareaVI,theinfluenceofurbanrenewalontransactionpricesisnegligible.
Theseriesofaveragequarterlytransactionpricesforthisareadoesnotexhibitanyexplicitextremeswhichcouldbelinkedtothedatesimportantforrevitaliza-tioninKrakow.Theprices inareaVII increasedsignificantlyafter theUrbanRevitalization
ProgrammeforKrakowhadbeenintroduced,i.e.attheturnof2007and2008,soaringtoPLN486/m².InareaVIII,itoccurredonlyayearlater,i.e.aftertheadoptionoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow(177PLN/m²).The extreme of the transaction price series in area IIIwas observed in the
fourthquarterof2010(702PLN/m²).Thisisacompletelyunexpectedvalueand
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 23
itismostlikelyrelatedtotheinclusionofrealpropertiesfromtheinfluencezoneofareaIII,alsoaffectedbyareasIandII,intothecalculations.For comparison, average unit prices for land properties in provincial cities
remainedataconstantlevelfromtheendof2007tothebeginningof2010(cf.Report2016).Well-visiblemaximaofthetimeseriesofaveragequarterlyunitpricesinallrevitalizationareassuggestthatlegislativeactionsresultedinanin-creaseofthepriceswhichhadalreadybeenhigh.TheirlevelinKrakowroseevenhigherthaninotherprovincialcities,however,thelackofactionsleadingtotherealizationoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammebroughtKrakowpricesdowntothelevelofthewholecountry.Finally,toseehowthemarketreactedtothecreationoftheLocalRevitalization
Programmes,alandvaluemapwaspreparedbasedonthedatafromtheyears2010–2014 (Fig. 14). The raster, as before, was generated using the InverseDistanceWeightingmethod.2278transactionpriceslocatedthroughoutKrakowwereusedforthecalculations.Duetothelackofanyrelationshipbetweenthetransactiondateandtheunittransactionprice,thepriceswerenotadjustedforthetimeelapsed.
115 PLN/m2
355 PLN/m2
595 PLN/m2
835 PLN/m2
1075 PLN/m2
Fig. 14. Land value map of the undeveloped land properties intended for residential development in 2010–2014Source: own study.
TheabovelandvaluemapprovesthaturbanrenewalaffectedthedistributionoftransactionpricesinKrakow.AsaresultoftherevitalizationofZabłocie,thetransactionpricesinthisareahaveincreasedsignificantly(cf.Fig.10and14).
AGNIESZKABIEDA24
5. Discussion and conclusions
BasedontheanalysescarriedoutinKrakowintheyears2006–2014,itmaybeconcludedthatthevalueofundevelopedlandintendedforresidentialdevelop-mentisassociatedwithurbanrenewal.Thisisduetothefactthatrevitalizationhasapositiveeffectonqualitiessuchas“standard”,“environment”and“fash-ion”,whicharetypicallyusedbypropertyappraiserstodescriberealpropertiesintheirvaluationprocess(cf.Parzych,Czaja2015).Asithasalreadybeennotedearlier,inalltheareasidentifiedasbeinginare-
cessionaryconditionandintendedforrevitalization,transactionpricesbegantoincreaseassoonas theprocedurefor theUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowcommenced.The real estatemarketbegan todiscount futuregains inspace.The time series of the quarterly unit transaction prices for these areas,however,reachedtheirmaximaatdifferenttimes.The maxima were reached first in area V (later: the Local Revitalization
ProgrammefortheoldpartofNowaHuta),justafterthecreationoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow,i.e.inthethirdquarterof2007.InareasI (later: the LocalRevitalization Programme for theOldTown) and II (later:the Local Revitalization Programme for Zabłocie), for which adoption LocalRevitalizationProgrammeshadbeendecided,anincrease in transactionpriceswasnotedonlyaftertheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakowwasintro-duced,i.e.inthesecondhalfof2008.Additionally,apriceincreaseinareaIIalsooccurred after theupdateof theLocalRevitalizationProgramme forZabłociein January 2010. In the second quarter of 2010, the prices in this area begantoriseagain.UrbanrenewalofKrakowresultedinincreasedtransactionpricesinthecity
centre.Asaresultoftheregenerationofpost-industrialareas,Zabłociebecameafashionable,andthusexpensive,placetolive(Biedaetal.2017).Therefore,theintroductionoftheLocalRevitalizationProgrammeforZabłocieresultedinashiftofthecentreofgravityoftransactionpricesfromthevicinityofthecom-municationcentretothesouth,towardstheKazimierzandPodgórzedistricts.ItisalsonoticeablethatfailuretorevitalizeareaIV(Krowodrza)hadnovis-
ible effecton transactionprices.Despite the fact that theLocalRevitalizationProgrammehadnot been implemented for this particular district, in the years2010–2014thepricestherewereequaltothepricesintheareascoveredbytheLocalRevitalizationProgrammefortheOldTownandtheLocalRevitalizationProgrammeforZabłocie.Spatialvariations,relatedmainlytoadecreaseinrail-wayareas,whichinfluencedtheperceptionofthemarketpotential,contributedtothisphenomenon.However, Krakow’s urban renewal did not stimulate the landmarket. The
numberoftransactionsintheareasidentifiedasrevitalizationareasremainedlowovertheyearswhencomparedtotherestofthecity(cf.Fig.9and11).Insomeareas(II,VI,VIIandVIII)therewerehardlyanylandpropertytransactions.
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 25
AlthoughintheareaslocatedintheverycentreofKrakow(areasI,IIandIV)unittransactionpriceswereveryhigh,theydidnotsignificantlyaffectaveragecityprices.Itshouldberememberedthattheperformedanalysesserveexclusivelytode-
scribethephenomenonofurbanrenewal.Therealestatedatabasesbasedonthetransactionsconductedoveraperiodofnineyearscannotbeusedforvaluationingeneral.
References
Adamczyk,T.,Bieda,A.,2015,“Theapplicabilityoftimeseriesanalysisinrealestatevaluation,”Geomatics and Environmental Engineering,9(2):15–25.
Adamczyk,T.,Bieda,A.,2014,“Intendeduseofrealestateasatimechangeableattributefordeterminingcompensationfornationalizedandexpropriatedlands,”Real Estate Management and Valuation,22(4):35–50.
Bieda, A., Brzozowski, Ł., 2007, “Analiza krakowskiego rynku nieruchomościgruntowych (Analysis of market of ground estates in Cracow),” Geomatics and Environmental Engineering,1(4):21–30.
Bieda,A.,Magoń, K., Siudem, B., 2017, “Wpływ lokalnych planów rewitalizacji nawartośćnieruchomościnaprzykładziekrakowskiegoZabłocia”[Impactof localre-vitalizationplansonthevalueofrealestatebasedontheCracowAreaofZabłocie],in:Przemianyprzestrzenipublicznejmiasta [Transformationofpublic space in thecity],Kalisz:WydawnictwoPaństwowejWyższejSzkołyZawodowejim.PrezydentaStanisławaWojciechowskiegowKaliszu,pp.157–183.
Bieda,A., Parzych, P., 2013, “Development of spatial politics of monumental townsbasedonKrakowexample,”InternationalMultidisciplinaryScientificGeoConference:16–22,June,2013,Albena,Bulgaria,conferenceproceedings.SurveyingGeology&MiningEcologyManagement,vol.2,pp.143-150.
Bełej,M.,Kulesza,S.,2015,“Thedynamicsoftimeseriesofrealestateprices,”Real Estate Management and Valuation,23(4):35–43.
Box,G.E.P., Jenkins,G.M.,1983,Analiza szeregów czasowych. Prognozowanie i ste-rowanie [TimeSeriesAnalysis.ForecastingandControl],Warszawa:PWN.
Brockwell,P.J.,Davis,R.A.,1996, Introduction to Time Series and Forecasting,NewYork:Springer-Verlag.
Cellmer,R.,Bełej,M.,Źróbek,S.,Bubic-Kovac,M.,2014,“Urbanlandvaluemaps–amethodologicalapproach,”Geodetski Vestnik,58(3):535–551.
Cichociński,P., 2011, “Porównaniemetod interpolacjiprzestrzennejwodniesieniudowartościnieruchomości”[Comparisonofspatialinterpolationmethodsforrealestatevalues],Studia i Materiały Towarzystwa Naukowego Nieruchomości,19(3):120–125.
Chmielewski, J.M., 2016,Teoria i praktyka planowania przestrzennego. Urbanistyka Europy [Theory andpracticeof spatial planning.UrbanismofEurope].Warszawa:OficynaWydawniczaPolitechnikiWarszawskiej.
Dąbrowski,J.,2009,“Zastosowaniemetodialgorytmówstatystycznychdowyznaczeniaparametrów globalnych dla potrzeb badania rynku iwyceny nieruchomości” [Realestatemarketanalysisandestimatingmarketvaluecarriedoutbasedonstatisticalmo-delsbuiltonthebasisofglobalattributes],Studia i Materiały Towarzystwa Naukowego Nieruchomości,17(1):31–47.
AGNIESZKABIEDA26
Dittmann,I.,2013,“PrimaryandsecondaryresidentialrealestatemarketsinPoland–analogiesinofferandtransactionpricedevelopment,”Real Estate Management and Valuation,21(1):39–48.
Emery,J.,2006,“Bullring:Acasestudyofretail-ledurbanrenewalanditscontributiontocitycentreregeneration,”Journal of Retail and Leisure Property,5(2):121–133.
Jadach-Sepioło,A., 2016, “Warunki ograniczające i stymulujące inwestycje w nieru-chomości naobszarach rewitalizacjiwmiastachobjętychprojektamipilotażowymi(Bytom,Wałbrzych,Łódź)”[Conditionslimitingandstimulatinginvestmentinrege-nerationareas incities includedinpilotprojects(Bytom,Wałbrzych,Łódź)],Świat Nieruchomości,3(97):5–8.
Hamilton,J.D.,1994,Time Series Analysis,Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.Herbst,K.,2008,Społeczny sens rewitalizacji[Socialsenseofrevitalization],Ekonomia
Społeczna Teksty, nr 3, http://www.ekonomiaspoleczna.pl/files/ekonomiaspoleczna.pl/public/Biblioteka/2008.39.pdf(access:1.04.2017).
GoogleStreetView,2014,https://www.google.pl/maps/@50.0501878,19.9613341,3a,75y,193.79h,80.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sijSnZVSYM5pUah4fT1gPLw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656(access:1.04.2017).
Kaczmarek,S., 1999, “Przekształceniaprzestrzenne i funkcjonalneobszarówprzemy-słowychwmiastach brytyjskich. Przykład dokówwLondynie” [Spatial and func-tionalchangesofindustrialareasinbritishcities:ThecaseofLondondocklands],Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Geographica Socio-Oeconomica,2:125–134.
Konowalczuk,J.,Ramian,T.,2008,“Motywacjeuczestnikówprocesurewitalizacjinie-ruchomościpoprzemysłowych”[Themotivationsofparticipantsinthebrownfieldre-developmentproces],Świat Nieruchomości,4(66):60–65.
Kulczycki,M.,Ligas,M.,2007,“Regresjaważonageograficzniejakonarzędzieanalizyrynkunieruchomości” [Geographicallyweighted regressionasa tool for realestatemarketanalysis],Geomatics and Environmental Engineering,1(2):59–68.
Małkowski,A.,Woźniak, P., 2004, “RewitalizacjaBerlina (Revitalization ofBerlin)”,Przegląd Zachodni,1:127–141.
Montero,J.,Larraz,B.,2011,“Interpolationmethodsforgeographicaldata:Housingandcommercialestablishmentmarkets,”Journal of Real Estate Research,33(2):233–244.
Ogryzek, M., Kurowska, K., 2016, “Opracowanie map średnich cen transakcyjnychgruntówrolnychniezabudowanychzbywanychzzasobuANROTOlsztynzwykor-zystanieminterpolacjimetodąIDW”[Preparationofaveragetransactionpricesmapsforundevelopedagricultural landsfromAgriculturalRealEstateAgencyResourcesinOlsztynusinginterpolationIDWmethod],Studiai PraceWNEiZUS,45,vol.2:355–365.
Olbińska,K.,2014,“Theinfluenceofrealestateonitssurroundingsbasedontheexam-pleoftheManufakturacomplexinLodz,”Real Estate Management and Valuation, 22(4):5–16.
Palicki,S.,Rącka,I.,2016,“InfluenceofurbanRenewalontheAssessmentofHousingMarketintheContextofSustainableSocioeconomicCityDevelopment,”in:Smart City 360°,SpringerInternationalPublishing,pp.851–860.
Palicki,S.,2013,“Rewitalizacjaaryneknieruchomościmieszkaniowych.Przypadekpo-znańskiejŚródki[Revitalizationandthehousingmarket.AcasestudyofthePoznańdistrictofŚródka],Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny,75(3):209–228.
Palicki,S.,Rącka,I.,Kostov,I.,2015,“AestheticdimensionofurbanrevitalisationinPolishandBulgariancities,”Świat Nieruchomości,10(94):67–72.
URBANRENEWALANDTHEVALUEOFREALPROPERTIES 27
Parzych,P.,Czaja,J.,2015,Szacowanie rynkowej wartości nieruchomości[Estimationofrealestatemarketvalue],Kraków:WydawnictwaAGH.
Petersen, P., Frank, K., Frank, K., 2002, Historic Preservation in the USA, Berlin:SpringerVerlag.
Polny, L.,Wójciak, E., 2017, “The conception theory pseudo-radiation local emittersvalueofpropertieswith adifferential propagationofpriceswave,”Geomatics and Environmental Engineering,11(2):49–59.
Register of Real Estate Prices and Values kept by the Kraków City Office (access:15.06.2016).
Report– realizationof revitalizationprojectsasof31December2014,http://rewitali-zacja.krakow.pl/zalacznik/241047(access:15.07.2017).
Report – the land market in 2016, http://www.pkobp.pl/media_files/70b956eb-e72b-4b33-934f-2f52c3637471.pdf(access:15.07.2017).
Sztando,A.,2008,“Pomiarrezultatówprogramurewitalizacjimiasta”[Measurementoftheresultsofacityrevitalizationprogramme],Samorząd Terytorialny,9:41–57.
Świerczewska-Pietras, K., 2008, “Serce miasta” [The heart of the city],Czasopismo Techniczne. Architektura,105(4-A):175–179.
Trojanek,R.,2013,“AnattempttoidentifytheseasonalityofhousingpricesinselectedPolishcitiesin1996–2012,” Real Estate Management and Valuation,21(4):96–109.
UchwałaNrXCII/926/05RadyMiastaKrakowazdnia26października2005r.wspra-wie przystąpienia do opracowania Miejskiego Programu Rewitalizacji Krakowa –LokalnegoProgramuRewitalizacji[ResolutionNo.XCII/926/05oftheKrakowCityCouncilof26October2005ontheelaborationoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow–theLocalRevitalizationProgramme].
UchwałaNrCXIX/1284/06RadyMiastaKrakowazdnia25października2006r.wspra-wie przyjęcia Lokalnego programu rewitalizacji i aktywizacji poprzemysłowegoobszaruZabłocia [ResolutionNo.CXIX/1284/06oftheKrakowCityCouncilof25October2006ontheadoptionoftheLocalRevitalizationandActivationProgrammeforthepost-industrialareaofZabłocie].
UchwałaNrLIII/672/08RadyMiastaKrakowazdnia8października2008r.wsprawieprzyjęciaMiejskiegoProgramuRewitalizacjiKrakowa [ResolutionNo.LIII/672/08oftheKrakowCityCouncilof8October2008ontheadoptionoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow].
UchwałaNrLIII/673/08RadyMiastaKrakowazdnia8października2008 r.wspra-wie przyjęcia Lokalnego Programu Rewitalizacji Starego Miasta [Resolution No.LIII/673/08of theKrakowCityCouncilof8October2008on theadoptionof theLocalRevitalizationProgrammefortheOldTown].
UchwałaNrLIII/674/08RadyMiastaKrakowazdnia8października2008r.wsprawieprzyjęcia Lokalnego ProgramuRewitalizacji „starej”NowejHuty [ResolutionNo.LIII/673/08of theKrakowCityCouncilof8October2008on theadoptionof theLocalRevitalizationProgrammefortheoldpartofNowaHuta].
UchwałaNrXC/1193/10RadyMiastaKrakowazdnia13stycznia2010r.wsprawieprzyjęciaaktualizacjiProgramurewitalizacjiiaktywizacjipoprzemysłowegoobszaruZabłocia [ResolutionNo.XC/1193/10oftheKrakowCityCouncilof13January2010ontheadoptionoftheupdateoftheRevitalizationandActivationProgrammeforthepost-industrialareaofZabłocie].
UchwałaNrCXXI/1906/14RadyMiastaKrakowazdnia5listopada2014r.wsprawieprzyjęciaMiejskiegoProgramuRewitalizacjiKrakowa[ResolutionNo.CXXI/1906/14
AGNIESZKABIEDA28
of the Krakow City Council of 5 November 2014 on the adoption of the UrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow].
UchwałaNrLIX/1288/16RadyMiastaKrakowa z dnia 7 grudnia 2016 r.w sprawieprzyjęciaaktualizacjiMiejskiegoProgramuRewitalizacjiKrakowa[ResolutionNo.LIX/1288/16oftheKrakowCityCouncilof7December2016ontheadoptionoftheupdateoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow].
UchwałaNrLXII/1373/17RadyMiastaKrakowazdnia11stycznia2017r.wsprawieprzyjęcia aktualizacji Miejskiego Programu Rewitalizacji Krakowa [ResolutionNoLXII/1373/17oftheKrakowCityCouncilof11January2017ontheadoptionoftheupdateoftheUrbanRevitalizationProgrammeforKrakow].
Ustawazdnia9października2015r.orewitalizacji,Dz.U.z2015r.,poz.1777,zpózn.zm.[Actof9October2015onrevitalization,JournalofLaws,2015,item1777,asamended].
Walacik,M.,Cellmer,R.,Źróbek,S.,2013,“Massappraisal–internationalbackground,Polishsolutionsandproposalofnewmethodsapplication,”Geodetski List,67(90):255–269.
Żelazowski,K.,2010,“Statystycznaanalizałódzkiegorynkunieruchomości”[StatisticalanalysisoftherealestatemarketinŁódź],Journal of the Polish Real Estate Scientific Society,18(1):133–144.