Exploring the transparency of street frontages in Krakow

Anna Agata Kantarek

doi:10.37190/arc230409

Abstract

The ground floor activities that define the street space play a key role both in traditional and contemporary public space. They provide an inward and outward relationship and contribute to both liveliness of the street and a sense of security. Thus, frontage transparency is crucial for the relationship between the open public space and the internal functions at the edge of the street, as well as for the production and maintenance of a vital public domain. This paper summarises the results of a study on the transparency of street frontages in public space using selected sequences of radial streets in Krakow as an example. The research measures building front transparency in two radial sequences of streets coming from Krakow’s inner city, using inventory of a shop window in two categories – degree of windows transparency and premises uses. The study reveals the basic characteristics of the street frontage transparency and the functional preferences of its degrees.

Full article view is only available on bigger screens.

2023

4(76)

Anna Agata Kantarek*

Exploring the transparency of street frontages in Krakow

Introduction

Public spaces are the obvious bloodstream of the city

[1]–[4]. Their condition (functional, formal, technical)

determines the ecient organization of life in the city.

Particularly important is the proper functioning of the

layout of public zones in downtown areas. Urban sprawl

is changing the quantity and dynamics of movements in

these spaces, which, in view of the dominance of vehic-

ular trac becomes an important challenge for the city’s

spatial policy.

Much has been written about the role of the automobile

in breaking down the cohesion of the city’s public spaces.

The expanding arteries of vehicular transportation in tran-

sit rst break up the local connections of street sequences

[5] and consequently lead to the sectorization of space.

The weakening of public zones has also its source in the

centralization of services in large commercial complexes,

which is also a consequence of car use.

Contemporary eorts to free up the public spaces of

city centers for both pedestrian trac and places of safe,

social interaction in open space show many eective and

successful solutions [6]. The planned balancing between

vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle trac is carried out

both through prohibitions (legal or planning regulations)

and through the eective denition of functional and for-

mal solutions [7]–[9].

It is important to see the urban space between the de-

nition of both space and place. This distinction by i-Tuan

[10, pp. 16, 23, 24, 75] between space – abstract, unknown

and boundless – and place – inhabited, familiarised, with

given values – leads to the possibility of dening the ur-

ban space in relation to both context and thematic scopes,

more or less related to three-dimensional reality.

DOI: 10.37190/arc230409

Published in open access. CC BY NC ND license

The idea of transparency and multiplied spatial rela-

tions draws much from the ideas of the years of modern-

ism and is present in 20

century thinking about space.

The postulated liberation of solids and their placement in

free space [4], [11] was realized by modernism with the in-

tensication of accessibility at the scale of the urban com

plex. A spatial attractiveness was the main motive here.

The distinction between being able to access, see or

feel the space became very important [12]. This involves

the negation of the traditional street [13] and its shape

with the associated breakdown of the urban block, as well

as an increase in the scale of built complexes using nega-

tive space

(according to Ch. Alexander et al. terminolo-

gy, [14]) like superblocks and housing estates. And this

comes at the expense of the comfort of being present in

the street space – the ability to have a good space orienta-

tion and a general sense of safety.

For orientation in space, the basic perceptual dimen-

sion is 6 m – this is the distance of “safety” in which a per-

son monitors activities and decides what is comfortable

for him [15]. The informational context of the detail in the

direct contact space is also important [16].

Seeing the transparency of building edge in this con-

text means both safety and comfort of urban space [17,

pp. 29–35].

Street frontage transparency is rarely an element of ur-

ban law.

We can recall Stockholm or Copenhagen examples [17,

pp. 29–34].

The problem of street frontage transparency also de-

serves attention in North America.

New Urbanism reminds us of the need for such solutions

– it is necessary to open up the view of commercial spaces.

The Smart Code proposes transparency of at least 70% of

ground level elevations [18, pp. 28, 32]. Alex Lehnerer, in

his book on grand urban rules [19], presents the case of

Seattle, where since 1963 the urban code regulations have

* ORCID: 0000000324223797. Faculty of Architecture, Cracow

University of Technology, Poland, email: anna.kantarek@pk.edu.pl

96 Anna Agata Kantarek

included arrangements for ground level transparency for

downtown commercial streets [19, p. 203 .]. The regu-

lations specify requirements for the continuity of service

ground level, as well as the class of transparency of the

ground levels of these streets. Based on these regulations,

Lehnerer formulates one of 115 urban planning principles

– Façade Transparency [19, p. 27]. Class I streets are 60%

transparent façades, and Class II streets are 30%, with max-

imum blind façade lengths of 4.6 and 9.1 m, respectively.

Current regulations for Seattle maintain these values [20].

In Vancouver, this ratio is higher – 75% of the com-

mercial façade is to be transparent [21]. The standards for

San Francisco [22] stipulate that the façade must be 60%

transparent. This applies to heights of 1.2–2.4 m. Visibil-

ity should be provided up to 1.2 m in depth at 75% of the

site area. Even greater ground level transparency (up to

90%) is proposed by Glenn Pape [23].

Concern for the condition of pedestrian public spaces

seems to be increasingly appreciated and prioritized in plan-

ning strategies. This is not easy, especially in city centers,

burdened by the relationships of the entire urban body and

its expanding structure. The dynamics of the relationship

between locality and transit still requires new arrangements

in the dimension of both service and transit trac adjust-

ments [24, pp. 164–170]. Also, the functional content of

both open spaces and volumes that serve them is constantly

transforming and often, as already mentioned, weakening.

At the same time the transparency of storefronts of com-

mercial premises is not the subject of general legal provi-

sions in Poland.

Detailed plans [25] do not give detailed guidance on the

degree of transparency of ground oor partitions although

they do indicate the function of the street enclosure as

commercial or residential with services. There are, how-

ever, indications concerning the preservation of historic

shop fronts – both in form and size – for a part of Staro

wiślna Street they specify that a glazed shop window may

not be larger than 70% of the ground oor elevation of

the building. There is also a guideline concerning and the

possibility of placing advertisements – for shop windows

in the Old Town (Szewska, Sienna) and for part of Królew

ska Street. The site cannot be covered by more than 20%

(Szewska, Sienna) and 30% (Królewska, Starowiślna) of

the advertising. These principles are the result of the entry

into force of Uchwała krajobrazowa – Zasady i warunki

sytuowania obiektów małej architektury, tablic reklamo

wych i urządzeń reklamowych oraz ogrodzeń [Landscape

resolution – Principles and conditions of placing small ar-

chitecture objects, billboards and advertising devices, and

fences] [26] for Krakow, which came into force in 2020

and concerns, among other things, the placement of adver-

tising. The Inventory indicated that these principles are not

yet applied everywhere.

The issue addressed in this study relates to the transpar-

ency of street frontages, one of the important determinants

of the relationship of the person present in the space to the

elements surrounding it.

The main questions posed in the paper are:

a) how is the street frontages transparency developed on

selected street sequences,

b) what is the relationship between the premises func-

tion and street frontages transparency,

c) whether the distance from the center and the nature

of the movements in the street have an impact on this

transparency,

d) what is the activity of the street buildings function

as measured by the number of entrances to the buildings.

Materials and methods

Context of the research

The paper presents the research on the role of street

frontage transparency in the public space using selected

street sequences, coming radially out of the center of Kra-

kow

(Fig. 1). The study presented here is a continuation

of research conducted in 2018 [27].

The inventory was carried out in November and De-

cember 2022. It focused on both the amount and types of

services and on the classication of premises openings.

The study shows the ground level of pedestrian zones

along two dierent radial routes: Szewska, Karmelicka, and

Królewska Streets

and Sienna with Starowiślna Streets

(Figs. 1, 2), leading radially from the center of Krakow in

two directions – northwest and southeast.

Szewska Street leading northwestwards from the Main

Market Square and its radial continuation – Karmelicka

and Królewska Streets – constitute the most important se-

quence linking the districts located on the western part of

the city. Historically it was also an important direction of

the city relation towards the Royal Palace in Łobzów which

became the dominant westward extension of city structure.

Sienna Street leading southeastward from the Main

Mar ket Square and its radial continuation – Starowiślna

Street – constitute the most important sequence linking the

districts located on the eastern part of the city. Historically

it was an important direction of the city.

The selected street sequences are the only ones that

lead out of the centre into the area beyond the second

Krakow as a Poland’s second largest city and the capital of Ma ło

polska region is one of the most important cities of culture and science,

both historically and because of its contemporary role. Being for centu-

ries the capital of Poland, today it is one of the best developing cities in

Poland – with services for business, one of the biggest railway and air

transport hubs in Poland and the second largest (after Warsaw) for oce

space. Its Old Town is listed in the UNESCO World Heritage (1978).

The core of the city is its historical zone with Wawel Hill, Okół (a medi-

eval settlement by the Wawel) and Cracovia (chartered town from 1257,

with an orthogonal grid and a spacious market square 200 × 200 m).

Szewska Street – founded in 1257 as one of streets of Cracovia

chartered city (leading to the West); its name derives from shoemak-

ers, who lived there; until 1820 closed with Szewska Gate (Shoemak-

ers Guild’s Gate) in the fortications (today Planty Park); Karmelicka

Street – a 14

-century main street of Piasek suburb (later on Garbary)

led to Szewska Gate next to the Carmelite church and monastery and

leading to Czarna Wieś and Łobzów; Królewska Street – built in parts

since 1924. In 1940s the Germans extended it as far as to Podchorążych

Street (a German district) [28]. An end part of this street was built up after

World War II.

Sienna Street – founded in 1257 as one of streets of Cracovia

chartered city (leading to the East); Starowiślna Street – known from

century was prolonged in 1913 by bridge over Vistula River [28].

Exploring the transparency of street frontages in Krakow 97

Fig. 1. Study of conditions and directions of planning development of Krakow:

a) Board K1 – Spatial Structure. Development Directions and Principles, b) diagram of the location of the surveyed streets

(elaborated by A. Kantarek based on [29])

Il. 1. Studium uwarunkowań i kierunków zagospodarowania przestrzennego Krakowa: a) K1 – Struktura przestrzenna – kierunki i zasady rozwoju,

b) diagram z lokalizacją badanych ulic (oprac. A. Kantarek na podstawie [29])

Fig. 2. An urban block structure: a) Szewska, Karmelicka, Królewska Streets – a westnorth axis,

b) Sienna, Starowiślna Streets – an eastsouth axis (elaborated by A. Kantarek, source of the map: https://msip.um.krakow.pl/)

Il. 2. Struktura kwartałów: a) Szewska, Karmelicka, Królewska – kierunek północnozachodni,

b) Sienna, Starowiślna – kierunek południowowschodni (oprac. A. Kantarek, źródło mapy: https://msip.um.krakow.pl/)

a b

trac ring

and at the same time provide a continuous,

active pedestrian space with an active service ground

oor level

That is, outside the ring of streets: Aleja Trzech Wieszczów, Wita

Stwosza, Aleja Lubomirskiego, Aleja Powstania Warszawskiego, J. Diet

la, M. Konopnickiej, Dębnicki Bridge, which partly coincide with the 2

bypass of the City [30].

Cracow Old Town and its everyday activities as a cultural center

is also a subject to a lot of research related to culture and sociology, for

example [31], [32].

Methodology

The problem addressed in this study is related to the

question of the state of the visual relationship between

an open street space and the enclosing volume contain-

ing functions directly serving the street. In the traditional

public space of city these storefronts played an important

role, providing an opportunity to learn about the store’s

oerings and view of the interior. Those inside, in turn,

allowed people to observe the street. The transparency of

the storefronts is crucial here for describing the “inout”

98 Anna Agata Kantarek

Karmelicka Street is ca. 15.5 to 22.5 m wide, with care-

fully designed car and pedestrian trac zones and parking

areas. The pedestrian lanes are more or less even on both

sides of the street (6.5–7.00 m) with narrowings to 3 m.

The street has a small amount of plantings. From Planty

to Garbarska Street, there are some trees planted along the

street frontage; in other sections greenery is found only

where buildings are set back from the frontage line.

The width of Królewska Street varies – from ca. 30 m

to over 50 m. But the part intended for car and tram trac

is constant – ca. 12.5 m. The sidewalks are of variable

width with a lot of space for pedestrian trac and green-

ery. Along the entire length of the street, we can nd a sin-

gle or double line of trees.

Starowiślna Street has two sequences with slightly

dierent street section distribution. The rst part is ca.

18.5 m wide with car/tram strip of 9 m and sidewalks

4.5–5.0 m with narrowings to 3 m.

The second part is ca. 19.0 m wide with car/tram strip

of 11.5 m and with narrow sidewalks (3–4.5 m).

On several fragments on Królewska and Starowiślna

sidewalks, lanes for bicycles are separated.

In both street sequences the width of the sidewalks is

further restricted by the cars parked there. There are also

few food gardens – 11 on each of the sequences.

Szewska, Sienna, Karmelicka and Starowiślna Streets

are enclosed by tenement houses with strict street line

with several withdrawals from the street line. Królewska

Street presents a diverse type of enclosure, both with ten-

ement houses as well as with free standing buildings or

additional squares open to the street.

In Table 1 main urban indicators of the streets were col-

lected – an average number of oors at the frontage and

street and frontage length [in m]. The percentage of the

frontages/street length were calculated.

Ad 2

Premises openings were classied as follows (Figs. 3–5):

– view into the interior,

– no insight – a blind window,

– no insight – a high ground level,

– display of goods,

– advertising with insight or display of goods,

– large format advertising.

In this study, only the rst category is treated as trans-

parency, as it not only provides an attraction to the pedes-

trians, but also allows interaction of visibility of both the

interior from the street and the street from the interior. It

is important to recall here the denition of Jan Gehl, who

understands façade transparency more broadly: Façade

transparency is dened in part by glassed areas vs. closed

areas, by the opportunities to look into the ground oor

area, and by the integration of activities on the ground

oor with the street space [34, pp. 74, 75]. In this ap-

proach, the next distinguished categories will be transpar-

ency (display of goods, advertising with insight or display

of goods).

The following functions were distinguished:

– banks,

– restaurants, cafes, bars, catering facilities,

– grocery, bakeries,

relationship of the public open space and the functions in-

side the volume. It becomes a measure of the generation

and maintenance of both activity and vitality as well as

safety of the public domain.

The method chosen for the research is simple and

lowvectorial.

The method boils down to:

1) the selection of street sequences and collection of

their general characteristics,

2) dening the degree of relationship between the prem-

ises and the street space from the point of view of transpar-

ency and the categories of functions,

3) measuring the degree of shop window transparency

and the types of uses of services located on chosen streets,

4) showing the relations of types of uses and types of

shop window transparency,

5) calculating the number of entrances to buildings,

6) calculating the relation between the number of trans-

parent openings (view into the interior) for 100 m of each

urban block frontage (T index).

Research and design process, data specification

The following is an elaboration of the points set out

above.

Ad 1

Figure 1 shows the location of chosen streets in the

center of Krakow and their radial role in the tissue.

A plan from the Studium uwarunkowań i kierunków za-

gospodarowania przestrzennego Miasta Krakowa [Study

of conditions and directions of planning development of

Krakow]

[29] presents the development directions and

principles for the city, as well as its postulated spatial

structure. Respecting the dominant role of the historic city,

the main shopping thoroughfares are represented and un-

derstood as radial sequences of pedestrianised public spac-

es structuring the city’s various districts (Fig. 1, in red).

In addition, in the study’s guidelines on public space

and its enclosure – in the conditions included for individu-

al urban units – the requirement is set out To create repre-

sentative public space enclosed by services in the ground

levels of buildings based on the main trac routes [33,

pp. 19, 25, 47].

The streets surveyed have dierent characteristics in

terms of type and volume of trac.

Szewska Street and part of Sienna Street are pedestrian

zones, with limited trac allowed for residents and de-

liveries (during the morning hours). Therefore, the entire

width of Szewska Street (with a width of 11.6 m) and part

of Sienna Street (with a width of 8.2–9.4 m) is available

for pedestrians. Despite this, there is no space for greenery.

Karmelicka, Królewska and Starowiślna Streets are

streets open to car trac, with a tram line. All the streets

are within the paid parking zone.

Study of conditions and directions of planning development [29]

is the main planning tool in Poland. It has no legal status. Synthetic in

character, it sets out the main strategic principles, also in the form of

a spatial record, relating to the directions of development. It is not a Mas-

ter Plan.

Exploring the transparency of street frontages in Krakow 99

– other shops,

– other services.

Additionally, premises to let or out of use were also

noted (but not calculated in the stock).

In the number of other shops we can nd clothing,

cheap clothing, vintage, shoes, pharmacy, drugstore, sou-

venirs, bookshops, antique shops, technical equipment,

household goods, stationery, orists and in other services

– travel agencies, theaters, watchmakers, ophthalmolo-

gists, hairdresser, beautician, tattoo studios, tailor, print-

ing, telephone services, photographic services, oces,

art galleries, workshops and coworking areas, religious

facilities, libraries, educational services.

And types of entrances were dierentiated as:

– entrance to premises,

– house entrance,

– entrance with car access, service path, entrance to the

passage.

Ad 3

A detailed inventory for each street has been made by

the degree of frontage transparency and the types of uses

of services (Figs. 3, 4).

Ad 4

Figure 4 shows details of relation between types of

uses and degree of windows transparency.

Ad 5

An important indicator for measuring the relationship

between open spaces and the volume that denes them

is the ground level quality index of building façades, de-

ned by Gehl in a study for Melbourne [35]. The Mel-

bourne study used a scale from A to E, depending on sev-

eral parameters. These include the number of doors and

windows, the layout of features, the absence of blind and

passive walls, the diversity of façade modelling, and the

quality of materials and details. Thus, it is mainly a mea-

sure of the dynamics of movement between volume and

open space. In this study, the Gehl index was calculated

according to the number of entrances.

Here are the quantities of entries suggested by Gehl [6,

p. 241] for the category:

A – active – 15–20 doors per 100 m,

B – friendly – 10–14 doors per 100 m,

C – mixture – 6–10 doors per 100 m,

D – boring – 2–5 doors per 100 m,

E – inactive – 0–2 doors per 100 m.

Ad 6

Figure 6 shows T index for each urban block.

Results and findings

The following are the most important data that result

from the collected inventory materials.

The average heights of buildings broken down into in-

dividual urban blocks are presented. They are, respective-

ly, 3.4, 3.6 and 5.3 for the Szewska, Karmelicka, Królew

ska sequence and 3.2 and 4.1 for Sienna, Starowiślna. The

height of the buildings increases with distance from the

centre (Table 1).

The inll of the frontages varies on individual streets

although it is similar in both sequences (77% for Szewska,

Karmelicka, Królewska and 78.6% for Sienna, Staro wiśl

na, Table 1).

Street

Average number of

floors at the frontage

Street length

[m]

Frontage length

[m]

Percentage of

the frontage to the street

[%]

Westnorth direction from Krakow Main Marketplace

Szewska 3.422 289.1 386.8/2=193.4 66.9

Urban blocks S.1, S.2 3.719 289.1 189.9 65.7

Urban blocks SA, S.B 3.125 289.1 196.9 68.1

Karmelicka 3.575 768.6 1373.5/2=686.8 89.4

Urban blocks K.1K.5 3.512 768.6 694.4 90.3

Urban blocks K.0K.D 3.638 768.6 679.1 88.4

Królewska 5.373 1279.9 1840.8/2=920.4 71.9

Urban blocks KR.1KR.9 5.756 1279.9 925.2 72.3

Urban blocks KR.AKR.G 4.989 1279.9 915.6 71.5

Total 2337.6 3601.1/2=1800.6 77.0

Eastsouth direction from Krakow Main Marketplace

Sienna 3.271 342.8 391.2/2=195.6 57.1

Urban blocks SI.1, KR.2 3.625 342.8 176.2 51.4

Urban blocks KR.A, KR.B 2.917 342.8 215.0 62.7

Starowiślna 4.139 1298.5 2189.1/2=1094.6 84.3

Urban blocks ST.1ST.8 4.682 1298.5 1046.4 80.6

Urban blocks ST.AST.G 3.595 1298.5 1142.7 88.0

Total 1641.3 2580.3/2=1290.2 78.6

Table 1. Main urban indicators of the streets (elaborated by A. Kantarek)

Tabela 1. Główne parametry urbanistyczne ulic (oprac. A. Kantarek)

100 Anna Agata Kantarek

Fig. 3. Szewska, Karmelicka

and Królewska, Sienna

and Starowiślna Streets with

the types of frontage transparency

(elaborated by A. Kantarek)

Il. 3. Ulice Szewska, Karmelicka

and Królewska, Sienna

i Starowiślna

– typy przezroczystości pierzei

(oprac. A. Kantarek)

Fig. 4. The juxtaposition of

functions with the types of

frontage transparency:

a) Szewska Street,

b) Karmelicka Street,

c) Królewska Street,

d) Sienna Street,

e) Starowiślna Street

(elaborated by A. Kantarek)

Il. 4. Zestawienie funkcji

z rodzajami przejrzystości

pierzei, ulice:

a) Szewska,

b) Karmelicka,

c) Królewska,

d) Sienna,

e) Starowiślna

(oprac. A. Kantarek)

number of

premises

Szewska

Karmelicka

13 13

2 2 2

0 0

195

135

114

150

200

250

100

Królewska Sienna

Starowiślna

display of

goods

advertising

with insight

or display

of goods

large format

advertising

view into

the interior

no insight

a blind

window

no insight

a high

ground level

Exploring the transparency of street frontages in Krakow 101

Fig. 4 cont. The juxtaposition of

functions with the types of

frontage transparency:

a) Szewska Street,

b) Karmelicka Street,

c) Królewska Street,

d) Sienna Street,

e) Starowiślna Street

(elaborated by A. Kantarek)

Il. 4 cd. Zestawienie funkcji

z rodzajami przejrzystości

pierzei, ulice:

a) Szewska,

b) Karmelicka,

c) Królewska,

d) Sienna,

e) Starowiślna

(oprac. A. Kantarek)

102 Anna Agata Kantarek

Both street sequences contain a similar number of

premises – 290 for Szewska, Karmelicka, Królewska and

227 for Sienna, Starowiślna (Table 2).

The number of premises closed – to let or out of use

– was also counted. Their number on both sequences of

streets is similar – 12–13% (Table 2).

Also similar for both sequences is the intensity of

premises distribution measured in the number of running

metres of street frontages on one premise (12.4 and 11.4,

respectively).

In Figure 3 and Table 3 the number of premises is pre-

sented with a breakdown by type of premises openings.

In the sequence Szewska, Karmelicka, Królewska view

into the interior constitutes 27.9% of premises and in the

sequence Sienna, Starowiślna – 30.4%.

However, the largest number of premises is the display

of goods category with amounts to 29% and 38.8% re-

spectively.

Table 3 sums up the most frequent uses and premises

openings categories on given streets.

Figure 6 shows an important result of the research – the

distribution of transparent premises openings by street ur-

ban blocks.

The presented material provides answers to the ques-

tions posed in the nal part of Introduction.

How is the street frontages transparency

developed on selected street sequences?

Of the presented categories (view into the interior, no

insight – a blind window, no insight – a high ground lev-

el, display of goods, advertising with insight or display

of goods and large format advertising) only view into the

interior is considered transparent.

The number of such openings is calculated in rela-

tion to the total number of premises and in relation to the

length of the street (the urban block) (T index).

In the rst case the number of premises with view into

the interior is second after display of goods and is similar

on both street sequences – 27.9% for Szewska, Karmelicka,

Street

No. of premises

north

No. of premises

south

No. of premises

total

No. of premises

to let or out of

use, north

No. of premises

to let or out of

use, south

No. of premises to let

or out of use, total

Szewska 19 22 41 4 1 5

Karmelicka 72 63 135 5 20 25

Królewska 51 63 114 2 8 10

Total 142 148 290 11 29 40 (12% of all)

Sienna 9 23 32 0 2 2

Starowiślna 109 86 195 10 21 31

Total 118 109 227 10 23 33 (13% of all premises)

Table 2. Number of service premises along selected streets (elaborated by A. Kantarek)

Tabela 2. Liczba usług na badanych ulicach (oprac. A. Kantarek)

Table 3. Street characteristics – the most frequent uses and types of frontage transparency (elaborated by A. Kantarek)

Tabela 3. Charakterystyka ulicy – najczęstsze zastosowania i rodzaje przejrzystości pierzei (oprac. A. Kantarek)

Street

1 The most frequent type of uses

type [%]

Szewska

1. restaurants, cafés, bars… 48.8

Karmelicka

1. other shops 32.6

2. other services 28.2

3. restaurants, cafés, bars… 25.2

Królewska 1. other services 48.3

Total

1. other services 34.8

2. other shops 27.2

3. restaurants, cafés, bars… 23.1

Sienna

1. other shops 40.6

2. restaurants, cafés, bars… 31.3

Starowiślna

1. other shops 37.4

2. other services 32.3

Total

a. other shops 37.9

b. other services 30.8

c. restaurants, cafés, bars … 21.6

1 The most frequent type of frontage transparency

type [%]

1. view into the interior 43.9

2. display of goods 31.7

1. display of goods 31.1

2. view into the interior 24.4

1. view into the interior 26.3

2. display of goods 25.5

1. display of goods 29.0

2. view into the interior 27.9

1. display of goods 40.6

2. view into the interior 31.3

1. display of goods 38.5

2. view into the interior 30.3

1. display of goods 38.8

2. view into the interior 30.4

Exploring the transparency of street frontages in Krakow 103

Fig. 5. Examples of types of shop windows: a) view into the interior, b) no insight – a blind window, c) no insight – a high ground level,

d) display of goods, e) advertising with insight or display of goods, f) large format advertising (photo by A. Kantarek)

Il. 5. Przykłady typów witryn: a) wgląd do wewnątrz, b) brak wglądu – ślepa witryna, c) brak wglądu – wysoki parter, d) wystawa towaru,

e) reklama z wglądem do wewnątrz lub wystawą towaru, f) reklama wielkoformatowa (fot. A. Kantarek)

a d

b e

c f

104 Anna Agata Kantarek

Królewska and 30.4% for Sienna and Starowiślna. The max-

imum rate is reached on Szewska Street – 43.9% (Table 3).

In the second calculation the index T is shown for each

urban block frontage with reference to its length (number

of units/100 m). The results are presented in Figure 6.

What is the relationship between the premises

function and street frontages transparency?

As it is seen in Figure 4 and Table 3 the biggest number

of premises with transparent frontage is restaurants, cafes,

bars, catering facilities for Szewska, Karmelicka, Królew

ska sequence (38 premises for 81 total) and other services

for Sienna, Starowiślna sequence (27 premises for 69 total).

Here restaurants, cafes, bars, catering facilities category is

on the second position with 26 premises for 69 total.

Whether the distance from the center

has an impact on this transparency?

When the distance is measured with accuracy to the

streets in sequences studied and related to the whole num-

ber of premises, the percentage of services with full trans-

parency varies depending on the distance from the centre.

For the sequence of Szewska, Karmelicka, Królewska it is

43.9%, 24.4% and 26.3%, respectively, i.e. for Szewska it

is signicantly higher than for the other streets.

For the Sienna and Starowiślna Streets sequence, we

also see a reduction, but a slight one – 31.3% and 30.3%,

respectively.

A breakdown of data by street urban blocks shows that

on Sienna and Starowiślna sequence a reduction is evenly

distributed, while on Szewska, Karmelicka and Królew

ska sequence we see concentrations at the beginning of

Karmelicka Street and at the end of Królewska Street.

The conclusion is that distance from the city center has

an impact on the percentage of services with a transparent

site, although it varies in both sequences.

When we consider the T index, relating the number

of transparent openings to the length of the urban block

(transparent premises / 100 m), we can see a much larger

variation. Figure 6 shows the dierences in the distribu-

tion by urban blocks.

What is the activity of the street buildings function

as measured by the number of entrances

to the buildings?

The sequences of streets studied here are important in

creating an active public space connecting the city with its

downtown districts. A summary of street activity is mea-

sured here by the Gehl index [6]. It was compiled in rela-

tion to the number of entrances on each street section. The

total index for both street routes is B and it is not aected

by the distance from the center and varies for individual

street block sections.

It is also interesting to mention some additional nd-

ings of the inventory (Fig. 4, Table 3).

Szewska Street is dominated by catering functions

(48.8%). 75% of catering functions has view into the in-

terior.

In Karmelicka Street other shops (nongrocery) are

the most common function (32.6%). The type of frontage

transparency most common in these shops is display of

goods (69.8%).

In Królewska Street the largest group of premises are oth-

er services (48.3%) and the most common type of frontage

transparency in this services is view into interior (27.3%).

In summary the northwest sequence of streets is dom-

inated by other services (34.8%).

Sienna Street is dominated by catering functions (31.0%).

60% of catering functions has view into the interior.

Fig. 6. T index – the distribution of transparent openings

by urban blocks (view into the interior, premises/100 m):

a) Szewska, Karmelicka, Królewska Streets,

b) Sienna, Starowiślna Streets (elaborated by A. Kantarek)

Il. 6. T index – rozkład otworów transparentnych w blokach miejskich

(wgląd do wewnątrz, lokal/100 m),

ulice: a) Szewska, Karmelicka, Królewska,

b) Sienna, Starowiślna (oprac. A. Kantarek)

Exploring the transparency of street frontages in Krakow 105

In Starowiślna Street other shops (nongrocery) are the

most common function (37.4%). The type of frontage

trans parency most common in these shops is display of

goods (76.7%).

In Sienna and Starowiślna Streets sequence the most

common functions are other shops (37.9%).

An important characteristic of the streets is the occur-

rence of premises out of use (for rent, under renovation).

They account for 12–13% of the number of premises.

Discussion

The discussion covers topics from main thematic areas

– state of research, planning regulations and trends in ur-

banism.

It should be noted that the criteria adopted in the study

narrow the concept of transparency to situations where the

interiorstreet relationship is possible from the user’s point

of view and a glass window is not obscured by a display

of goods or advertising. It is not used in other research.

Such studies have not been popularised to date with the

exception of earlier studies of the sequence of Szewska,

Karmelicka, Królewska streets which was the subject of

a study in 2018/2019 [27] done by the author of this re-

search. The number of premises was smaller then – 260 to

290 as it is now. View into the interior was then concerned

with 20% of frontages with the most for restaurants, ca-

fes, bars, catering facilities (59% of 20%). Interestingly,

view into the interior was only in third place after display

of goods (37%) and large format advertising (25%).

We also see a similar approach to frontage transparen-

cy in the already cited regulations of selected North Amer-

ican and Scandinavian cities [18]–[22].

In the majority of studies, transparency is considered

more broadly, as a lack of full barrier in relation to the

ground oor volume. The already quoted Gehl, in some of

his works, denes transparency more broadly [34], [17].

The transparency is also mentioned when researching

public spaces in relation to eye level research [17].

While talking about the role and the power of legal doc-

uments we have to remember that Studium uwarunkowań

i kierunków zagospodarowania przestrzennego Miasta Kra 

kowa guidelines [29] underlines the crucial role of select-

ed street sequences in terms of linking the City of Krakow

(Old Town) with the innercity districts located to the west

(Krowodrza, Bronowice) and to the east of the (Downtown,

Podgórze). This applies to both cars, trams, and pedestri

an trac. They also full an ordering and powering role

in local transverse relations, providing the active pedestri-

an zone. At the same time the range of services is created

spontaneously both in response to demand and accord-

ing to the possibilities of investors and property owners.

A new act – Uchwała krajobrazowa [26] is an oppor-

tunity to improve the situation from the point of view of

reducing advertising spaces in the city space, which may

involve an increase in transparent surfaces.

Conclusions

The research carried out was intended to check to what

extent the ground level premises of the observed streets are

transparent in relation to the space of the street itself. This

transparency is understood as basis for easy contact regard-

ing the uses of the proposed services and goods, but also an

additional attraction for both the open space of the street and

the interiors. It is also important for users’ sense of safety.

The analysis has shown that the transparency of shop

windows is not very developed and does not even cover

half of the premises in the streets surveyed. Opportunities

for visual contact are therefore limited.

The study has shown that the highest number of trans-

parent shop windows is associated with catering functions.

It is also found that the distance from the centre has an

impact on this transparency. The percentage of premises

with a transparent opening decreases with distance from

the centre, although it varies in the two sequences. T in-

dex, introduced in the research, shows the more detailed

relation of transparency distribution.

In addition, to broaden the characterisation of the streets,

the activity of frontages was examined according to the

Gehl index as measured by the number of entrances to the

buildings. It came out that the index is B.

The above research can be used to formulate legislative

recommendations for new development plans. A proposal

for Krakow, for example, would be the principle of main-

taining transparency in the range of 0.9–2.4 m in height with

100% of the window area for catering functions and 50%

for others. This allows transparency to be combined with

other forms of openings (display of goods, advertising).

Translated by

Anna A. Kantarek

[1] Ustawa z dnia 27 marca 2003 r. o planowaniu i zagospodarowaniu

przestrzennym z poprawkami, DzU 2003 Nr 80, poz. 717, https://

isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20220000503/U/

D20220503Lj.pdf [accessed: 7.02.2023].

[2]

Carmona M., Heath T., Oc T., Tiesdell S., Public places Urban spaces.

The dimension of urban design, Elsevier, Architectural Press, Ox-

ford 2005.

[3] Chermaye S., Alexander Ch., Intimitié et vie communautaire.

Vers un nouvel humanisme architecturale, Dunod, Paris 1972.

[4] Jacobs J., The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Random

House, New York 1961.

[5] Salingaros N.A., Principles of Urban Structure, Techne Press, DSP,

Amsterdam 2005.

[6] Gehl J., Cities for People, Island Press, Washington–Covelo–Lon-

don 2010.

[7]

Walton D., Lally M., Septiana H., Taylor D., Thorne R., Cameron A., Urban

Design Compendium, Llewelyn Davies, English Partnerships, The Hous

ing

Corporation, London 2007, https://webapps.stoke.gov.uk/uploaded

les/Urban%20Design%20Compendium%201.pdf

[accessed: 7.02.2023].

[8] Planning and Urban Design Standards. Students Edition, F. Steiner,

K. Butler, E. Sendich (eds.), American Planning Association, John

Wiley & Sons, New Jersey 2007.

References

106 Anna Agata Kantarek

Abstract

Exploring the transparency of street frontages in Krakow

The ground oor activities that dene the street space play a key role both in traditional and contemporary public space. They provide an inward

and outward relationship and contribute to both liveliness of the street and a sense of security. Thus, frontage transparency is crucial for the relationship

between the open public space and the internal functions at the edge of the street, as well as for the production and maintenance of a vital public domain.

This paper summarises the results of a study on the transparency of street frontages in public space using selected sequences of radial streets in

Krakow as an example.

The research measures building front transparency in two radial sequences of streets coming from Krakow’s inner city, using inventory of a shop

window in two categories – degree of windows transparency and premises uses.

The study reveals the basic characteristics of the street frontage transparency and the functional preferences of its degrees.

Key words: street frontage transparency, public space, streetscape, urban design, Krakow

Streszczenie

Badanie przejrzystości pierzei ulicznych w Krakowie

Różne rodzaje aktywności w parterach budynków deniujących przestrzeń ulicy odgrywają kluczową rolę zarówno w tradycyjnej, jak i współ

czes nej stree publicznej. Zapewniają relację do wewnątrz i na zewnątrz oraz przyczyniają się zarówno do ożywienia ulicy, jak i do poczucia bez-

pieczeństwa. Przejrzystość pierzei ma zatem kluczowe znaczenie dla relacji między otwartą przestrzenią publiczną a funkcjami wewnętrznymi na

krawędzi ulicy, a także dla tworzenia i utrzymywania żywotnej domeny publicznej.

W niniejszym artykule podsumowano wyniki badania przejrzystości pierzei ulicznych w przestrzeni publicznej na przykładzie wybranych ciągów

ulic w Krakowie. W badaniu dokonano pomiaru transparentności frontów budynków w dwóch radialnych ciągach ulic wychodzących ze ścisłego cen-

trum Krakowa, wykorzystując inwentaryzację witryn sklepowych w dwóch kategoriach – stopnia transparentności witryn oraz przeznaczenia lokali.

Badania ukazują podstawowe cechy przejrzystości pierzei ulicznej i preferencje funkcjonalne różnych jej rodzajów.

Słowa kluczowe: przejrzystość pierzei ulicznych, przestrzeń publiczna, krajobraz ulicy, projektowanie urbanistyczne, Kraków

[9] Furchtlehner J., Lehner D., Lička L., Sustainable Streetscapes: De-

sign Approaches and Examples of Viennese Practice, “Sustainabil-

ity” 2022, 14(2), 961, doi: 10.3390/su14020961.

[10] Tuan Y.F., Przestrzeń i miejsce, PIW, Warszawa 1987.

[11] Giedion S., Przestrzeń, czas i architektura. Narodziny nowej trady-

cji, PWN, Warszawa 1968.

[12] Martinez D., Van Der Werf F., Tissus urbains et règlements d’ur-

banisme, “Cahiers de l’Institut d’Aménagement et d’Urbanisme de

la Région Parisien” 1971, Vol. 24, 1–216.

[13] Samuels I., Panerai Ph., Castex J., Depaule J.Ch., Urban Forms. The

death and Life of the Urban Block, Architectural Press, London 2002.

[14]

Alexander Ch., Ishikawa S., Silverstein M., A pattern language, towns,

buildings, construction, Oxford University Press, New York 1977.

[15] Kantarek A.A., On orientation in The Space of the City, LAP Lam-

bert Academic Publishing, London 2013.

[16] Salingaros N.A., A theory of Architecture, UmbauVerlag, Deutsch-

land, 2008.

[17] Gehl J., Johansen Kaefer L., Reigstad S., Close encounters with

buildings, [in:] H. Karssenberg, J. Laven, M. Glaser, M. Van ‘t Hof

(eds.), The City at eye level, Eburon Academic Publishers, Delft

2016, 29–35.

[18]

Smart Code 9.2, https://transect.org/codes.html [accessed: 13.02.2023].

[19] Lehnerer A., Grand Urban Rules, 010 Publisher, Rotterdam 2009.

[20] Seattle Municipal Code, The Charter of The City of Seattle, City

of Seattle, 2023, https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/mu-

nicipal_code?nodeId=TIT23LAUSCO_SUBTITLE_IIILAUSRE_

CH23.49DOZO_SUBCHAPTER_VIINDIMI_23.49.210INDI-

MISTFARE [accessed: 13.02.2023].

[21] Vancouver Municipal Code, A codication of the General Ordi-

nances of the City of Vancouver, Washington, City of Washington,

2023, https://vancouver.municipal.codes/VMC/20.670.040 [ac-

cessed: 13.02.2023].

[22]

San Francisco Planning Department, Standards for Storefront Trans 

parency, San Francisco 2023, https://sfplanning.org/resource/stan

dards-storefront-transparency [accessed: 13.02.2023].

[23] Pape G., Getting a clear picture on façade transparency, https://

www.canr.msu.edu/news/getting_a_clear_picture_on_facade_

transparency [accessed: 13.02.2023].

[24] Kantarek A.A., Tranzyt a spójność formy miasta, “Czasopismo

Techniczne. Architektura” 2010, R. 107, z. 1A, 164–170.

[25] Miasto Kraków, Lista planów obowiązujących, https://www.bip.

krakow.pl/?mmi=417 [accesssed: 28.04.2023].

[26] Uchwała krajobrazowa – Zasady i warunki sytuowania obiektów

małej architektury, tablic reklamowych i urządzeń reklamowych

oraz ogrodzeń, Kraków

2020, https://www.bip.krakow.pl/?bip_

id=1&mmi=22515 [accessed: 28.04.2023].

[27] Kantarek A.A., Public space and shop windows, “IOP Conference

Series: Materials Science and Engineering” 2019, 471, 09207, https://

iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757899X/471/9/092074/pdf

[accessed: 28.04.2023].

[28] Supranowicz E., Nazwy ulic Krakowa, PAN, Kraków 1995.

[29] Studium uwarunkowań i kierunków zagospodarowania przestrzen-

nego Miasta Krakowa, Kraków 2014, https://www.bip.krakow.

pl/?id=48 [accessed: 13.03.2023].

[30] Obwodnice Krakowa, https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obwodnice_

Krakowa [accessed: 6.05.2023].

[31] Kubicki P., Miasto w sieci znaczeń. Kraków i jego tożsamości, So-

cietas, Kraków 2010.

[32] Kantarek A.A., Urban Spatiality – Tradition and Contemporaneity,

[in:] T. Jeleński, S. Juchnowicz, E. WoźniakSzpakiewicz (eds.),

Tradition and heritage in the contemporary image of the city,

Vol. 1, Wydawnictwo PK, Kraków 2015, 89–94.

[33] Studium – strukturalne jednostki urbanistyczne, https://www.bip.

krakow.pl/?dok_id=63717 [accessed: 13.02.2023].

[34] Gehl J., Johansen Kaefer L., Reigstad S., Close encounters with

buildings, “Urbanistika ir Architektûra Town Planning and Archi-

tecture”, 2005, t. 29, Nr. 2, 70–80.

[35] Gehl J., Places for People, City of Melbourne, Melbourne 2015,

https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/plac-

es-for-people-2015.pdf [accessed: 17.03.2023].