Liveability in large housing estates in Germany – Identifying differences based on a novel concept for a walkable city.

• We assess walkability, accessibility and morphology in Large Housing Estates (LHE). • Types of German LHE: structured low-density, socialistic, urbanity by density. • Walkability depends more on environmental or artificial barriers than urban layout. • Accessibility and morphology in LHE are highly dependent on planning paradigms. • Urbanity by density based LHEs are the most liveable among the three types. In times of rapid urban expansion, urgent demand for housing and simultaneously efforts to minimise the use of urban land are competing objectives. The concept of large housing estates (LHE) has therefore regained interest. This resurgence raises questions about the living conditions within these historically stigmatised complexes. While liveability studies often rely on surveys, we present a globally applicable quantitative approach to assess liveability along the dimensions of walkability, accessibility and built-up morphology. Using geospatial data and a delineation framework based on walking distances, we identify disparities in liveability. We identified three different planning paradigms for LHEs in Germany: the 'structured and low-dense' type, the 'urbanity by density' type in Western Germany and the 'socialistic city' type in Eastern Germany. Our analysis reveals significant differences in accessibility and morphology, that can be attributed to the historical guiding principles. Walkability, in contrast, seems to be influenced more by environmental elements (rivers, forests) and artificial barriers (railway lines, motorways) than by planning paradigms. The 'structured' type is characterised by monofunctionality, limited access to urban infrastructure, low building density, but a high proportion of green spaces. The 'urbanity by density' type has significantly higher building densities, better accessibility, but less urban green. The 'socialistic' urban type could not be clearly categorised, but seems to be a mixture of the other two types. In our analysis, the ' urbanity by density' typology predominantly performed the best and, as such, emerges as the most liveable typology, potentially serving as a guiding model for future construction projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]