Will the Ukrainian capital finally start being developed according to a professional master plan?

Most of the Ukrainian capital’s planning projects in recent years could be summed up as “we’ll build no matter what,” regardless of the status of separate territories or responses from the populace, not even sharp reactions from international organizations. And so the fact that the City Planning Council did not approve the ideas of two so-called design organizations to build in the territory stretching from the Dnipro Embankment to the Poshtova Ploshcha [Postal Square], filling it with housing blocks and office premises, could be regarded as an extraordinary occurrence.

The mentioned project, known as the European Union Embankment project, embraces an area stretching for 2.8 km, and its estimated cost is close to UAH 1.2 billion. It envisages the construction of 45 diplomatic offices of EU countries. Interfax further reports that it would include up to 56,000 sq. m. floor space and 28,000 sq. m. office premises, along with shopping centers. Transport should be provided using an eight-lane highway overhung by a pedestrian precinct. It would be open, looking on the Dnipro, with a special structure to be erected in the vicinity of the Dnipro Metro Station, equipped to capture exhaust fumes. Vertical connections with downtown uphill would be organized at five points: on European Square, at the start of the Petrovska Aleya, in the vicinity of Maryinsky Park, Arsenalna Metro Station, and possibly close to Ploshcha Slavy [Glory Square with the Obelisk of the Unknown Soldier]. A religious structure and a five-story building would emerge up the Dnipro hills there.

Anatoly Karminsky, head of the State Expert Board, says the stated European Embankment project does not even conform to the only existing urban-planning document, the Master Plan of Kyiv featuring only the transport network. Therefore, according to him, another detailed project is required for the development of the embankment and Dnipro hills, one subject to approval by the City Hall. Interfax further quotes Volodymyr Chekman, one of the master plan authors, as saying that the embankment is the principal transport axis linking the northern and southern sectors of the Ukrainian capital. Therefore, relieving it of regular transportation payload would result in critical overloads downtown. Even now, because of intensive office and elite housing construction underway in the historical city center, many experts invariable describe the situation there as verging on total collapse. Also, talking of those downtown prestigious and costly construction projects, the said master plan envisage expanding Kyiv in breadth, rather than in height, The Day was told so by Kyivproekt in no uncertain words two years ago.

Getting back to the European Project, Volodymyr Chekman says that the boulevard will have to be raised by fourteen or fifteen meters to secure adequate traffic. Moreover, the master plan boils down to upholding steady development at the capital, as practiced in all civilized countries; there should be some balance kept between ecology, correct urban planning, and so on. To this end, the master plan reads that the hills should be preserved as a major green belt of the city.

Aside from ecology, there is a no less important aesthetic aspect. To begin with, architect Larysa Skoryk is convinced that the whole thing is “an incredible kitsch incorporating unbelievably different styles and trends ranging from the sixteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries.” Second, if and when implemented, this project would forever isolate the Dnieper hills from the river. Third, there is Resolution No. 920, adopted by the State Committee for the Protection of Historical Monuments, reading that the Dnipro Hills are to be specially preserved as special historical and architectural sites.

A year ago, UNESCO experts visited Kyiv and reminded that the city landscape had special historical value. Mrs. Skoryk says this landscape must be preserved if we want to keep our capital city’s original image, rather than violate it so rudely. In view of this, the very fact of the city state administration’s chief economic directorate announcing a tender for a project such as this one looks weird.

Kyiv’s new Chief Architect Vasyl Prysiazhniuk sums up the debate: Kyiv needs a detailed urban development plan in the first place; after that other projects could be submitted, so we would be sure to make no further blunders here.

Such admonitions are known to have been repeatedly made previously by those actively in circulation, trying their best to make the city look even more attractive, and those believed by the former to be throwing monkey wrenches in the works. Besides, any of the above could be never included into, and formulated as, a single document for want of time and funds. However, the opponents insist that such a document could have been produced, but for purposeful obstruction. So far, experts regard the new chief architect of Kyiv as a principled individual and believe that he can fill in the legislative gaps.