One of the main goal of prefab multiapartment buildings was to place workforce closer to the workplace.

Also, all necessary utilities - public transport, shops, kindergardens, everything people need was also build in that areas.

But contrary to 15 min cities idea, there was no any limits or restrictions on travel or whatever.

Also, it should be taken in account, that this khruschovka districts was built very sparse - each apartment building have a lot of space around, for gardens, parks, parkings, playgrounds, sport fields and so on. Schools and kindergardens often placed in the center of such district. There was a rumor that such sparse building positioning was choosen to avoid falling of buildings one on another in case of nuclear bombing. Anyway, as one who grew in such khruschevka district, I state that in any case, this districts was really cool from the useability point of view. You had everything you need right on your doorway, with plenty of nature in between. I find them much more comfortable than modern urban districts where buildings rised one on each other and there is no place for anything. Things get worse when renovation came to that khruschovka districts. Instead of one 5-storey building developers began to build 2-3 17-22-storey buildings. So, no any gardens and parks at your dorway anymore. In the best case there will be small car parking and degraded playground, not even talking about hockey box or tennis court. This was one of the reasons I moved into rural area.

Overall, the only drawbacks of khruschovka districts was the size of apartments (~40 sq.meters for 2-room apartment on average) and medium quality of buildings. Everything else was very comfortable.

After USSR fall nearly all apartments become a property of inhabitants, so, yes, most Russians own their apartments. Rural houses was personal propertiy always, even in USSR times. I'm too lazy to look for proper value, but 85% of home ownership looks close to the truth. Also, take in account that noticeable part of tenants really own realty in another town. Most part of tenants are youth who want to separate from parents and those who moved recently looking for better job. With high probability they will buy an apartment in future.

When free market came, suddenly, land in town become a very expensive thing, so developers start to increase density of apartments per square kilomenter of land to insane levels. There are still some khruschovka districts even in Moscow or Petersburg, but they will not last forever. Developers, sooner or later, will destroy them and build their stone jungles for profit.

I think that this stupidity about land in towns and developers trying to build apartments as dense as possible is one of the worst consequences of capitalism. Realty, in whole, turns very weird mess if you apply all that "free market" things to heavily social area like urban life. Growing number of town inhabitants rise the price of land and realty, so developers trying to make maximum profit just escalate things further, and you end with a dense megapolis with trafic jams, insane density, overpriced housing and all that problems. Some cities tried to solve that problem, like Munich in Germany where developer can't build more than 5-storey building and have other restrictions, but any of such solutions are always criticized by developers and realtors as uncapitalistic, soviet and so on.

All in all, Soviet khruschovka districts have nothing common with that 15-minute cities of NWO. They was quite opposite phenomena, resulted from industrialisation and soviet approach to solve the post-WWII housing crisis in the fastest and cheapest possible ways along with absence of city land price restriction. And they are not failed, really. They was destroyed by developers driven by greed. If developers would have been forced to build only more comfortable and reliable replacements for khruschovkas, this districts could become the best possible urban realty you could think of.

One of the main goal of prefab multiapartment buildings was to place workforce closer to the workplace.

Also, all necessary utilities - public transport, shops, kindergardens, everything people need was also build in that areas.

But contrary to 15 min cities idea, there was no any limits or restrictions on travel or whatever.

Also, it should be taken in account, that this khruschovka districts was built very sparse - each apartment building have a lot of space around, for gardens, parks, parkings, playgrounds, sport fields and so on. Schools and kindergardens often placed in the center of such district. There was a rumor that such sparse building positioning was choosen to avoid falling of buildings one on another in case of nuclear bombing. Anyway, as one who grew in such khruschevka district, In any case, this districts was really cool from the useability point of view. You had everything you need right on your doorway, with plenty of nature in between. I find them much more comfortable than modern urban districts where buildings rised one on each other and there is no place for anything. Things get worse when renovation came to that khruschovka districts. Instead of one 5-storey building developers began to build 2-3 17-22-storey buildings. So, no any gardens and parks at your dorway anymore. In the best case there will be small car parking and degraded playground, not even talking about hockey box or tennis court. This was one of the reasons I moved into rural area.

Overall, the only drawbacks of khruschovka districts was the size of apartments (~40 sq.meters for 2-room apartment on average) and medium quality of buildings. Everything else was very comfortable.

After USSR fall nearly all apartments become a property of inhabitants, so, yes, most Russians own their apartments. Rural houses was personal propertiy always, even in USSR times. I'm too lazy to look for proper value, but 85% of home ownership looks close to the truth. Also, take in account that noticeable part of tenants really own realty in another town. Most part of tenants are youth who want to separate from parents and those who moved recently looking for better job. With high probability they will buy an apartment in future.

When free market came, suddenly, land in town become a very expensive thing, so developers start to increase density of apartments per square kilomenter of land to insane levels. There are still some khruschovka districts even in Moscow or Petersburg, but they will not last forever. Developers, sooner or later, will destroy them and build their stone jungles for profit.

I think that this stupidity about land in towns and developers trying to build apartments as dense as possible is one of the worst consequences of capitalism. Realty, in whole, turns very weird mess if you apply all that "free market" things to heavily social area like urban life. Growing number of town inhabitants rise the price of land and realty, so developers trying to make maximum profit just escalate things further, and you end with a dense megapolis with trafic jams, insane density, overpriced housing and all that problems. Some cities tried to solve that problem, like Munich in Germany where developer can't build more than 5-storey building and have other restrictions, but any of such solutions are always criticized by developers and realtors as uncapitalistic, soviet and so on.

All in all, Soviet khruschovka districts have nothing common with that 15-minute cities of NWO. They was quite opposite phenomena, resulted from industrialisation and soviet approach to solve the post-WWII housing crisis in the fastest and cheapest possible ways along with absence of city land price restriction. And they are not failed, really. They was destroyed by developers driven by greed. If developers would have been forced to build only more comfortable and reliable replacements for khruschovkas, this districts could become the best possible urban realty you could think of.