The overdue general plan: Does it need Kyiv

The overdue general plan: Does it need Kyiv

The current general plan of Kyiv ends in 2020. It would seem, nothing terrible, because here’s a must adopt a new one. But this “here is what” lasts for a year, and by 2025 (the validity period of the unplanned master plan is still valid) there is nothing left.

There is a paradoxical situation: some developers rely on the existing master plan when developing new projects, others – not yet approved, because, unlike the current one, though it is partially, it still corresponds to the reality and plans of the city.

Let’s look at the situation that has developed more globally than in the context of several decades. Even if the master plan is to be done “correctly”, it is not at all the instrument in which you want to lay out how to develop the city for 30, 40 or 50 years.

The world is so variable that it is possible to plan only in the short run. Accept a document for a term of 30 years and then have a moratorium on making changes to it – absolutely wrong. The task of the general plan is to provide resources, not to prescribe what to build. But, unfortunately, there is no strategic management in Kyiv. Instead, we accept small-town SBCs, which, with each new document, only remove the Ukrainian capital from large-scale development.

If for some cities the format of planning by general plan, zoning and SBC works, then for Kyiv no. We have a purely nomenclature and a torn piece of life, which, however, requires a law. But it is impossible to prescribe that for several decades in certain territories it is necessary to build a number of bridges, roads or housing. The world is developing too fast for such fundamental documents.

We are now working on the initiative to abolish the purpose of land. Our vision provides only two options: you can build and can not be built. And the target destination of the plot should be determined by the land user. If he considers it necessary to build a residential complex on a certain plot – there should be a residential complex, if, in his opinion, there is an efficient office center location, which means there should be an office center. No project institute can predict for decades what will be relevant in one place or another.

But I want to please you. If the government fails to approve the new master plan, the disaster will not happen. It will be the same as now – everyone will continue to work in manual mode. Even now, with the presence of zoning or SBC, you can build new objects, ignoring the master plan. Then why, in the XIXI century, are we trying to prescribe in it every parking space and every tree?

Andriy Ryzhykov, SEO and Managing Partner of DC Evolution

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.