How to Make Ukrainian Cities More Livable: Findings from Forbes Development

During the panel discussion “You Can’t (or Can’t You?) Live Like This: How to Give Cities Back to the People” at the Forbes Development Forum, participants discussed how to change the approach to urban development. The discussion was moderated by Ihor Raikov, founder of the “Kyiv School of Development.” Speakers included Ivan Molchanov, co-owner of Stolitsa Group, and Dmytro Vasilyev, founder and CEO of the architectural firm “Archimatika.”

Cities are built for investors, not for people

Igor Raikov opened the discussion by stating that Ukrainian cities today are shaped not by people’s need to live comfortably, but by the investment logic of developers.

Dmitry Vasilyev agreed, but added an important point: the problem lies not only with the developers, but also in the city’s lack of a strong position as a representative of residents’ interests.

“Developers and businesses currently have the greatest influence on the city. They are the ones who are now directing and creating the development we see. But in all our cities, the city government itself has minimal involvement—not the mayor personally, but the authorities as the de facto representatives of the community, who should be advocating for residents’ interests and doing so professionally. People are always opposed to new construction—and this is logical, because over the past few decades, you can count on the fingers of one hand the projects that have actually improved their city. People see this difference: historic architecture creates a more comfortable atmosphere, while new developments do not. And this is precisely where the local government’s expert guidance is lacking—it is the government’s role to regulate and ensure that the city develops properly in the future,” he noted.

First meaning, then space

Ivan Molchanov suggested that the city's development should begin not with spatial solutions, but with an answer to the question: What is this city really about? 

“Right now, we don’t have a crisis of space—we have a crisis of meaning. Because meaning comes first, and then the substance. I would start a major development strategy precisely by infusing it with meaning. There’s a really great methodology created by Andriy Melnyk and Oleksandr Filonenko—a methodology for defining a city’s identity. They applied it to Zaporizhzhia and defined its identity. And once you know that identity, it becomes easier to answer questions about what the city is about and what value it offers. From there, you can make spatial decisions and establish the legislative framework to support them.”

He also noted that today, all stakeholders in urban development—the community, developers, the city, and urban planners—are effectively on different sides and are not listening to one another.

“We lack an established dialogue among all of the city’s stakeholders. We’re on different sides of the fence—the community, developers, the city, and urban planners. And there are very few spaces and platforms for building this dialogue and listening to one another. Everyone shares a common desire to improve the city, but there is no shared vision. And it is precisely by forming a shared vision and clear rules of the game that we can achieve results. We need to bring everyone to the same table. I know how difficult this is. But starting with things like forming a strategic vision for the city’s development—that is the first step.”

FAR as an Alternative to Master Plans

Separately, the participants discussed the FAR system—the floor area ratio used in the United States, Japan, and other developed countries. Unlike Ukrainian master plans, where the rules are often opaque, the FAR provides every developer with a clear answer: how many square meters can be built on a specific lot.

“FAR is a really cool system used in developed countries (Japan, the U.S.). It’s one of the potential approaches that can serve as the basis for urban planning. You can control building height and see how much flexibility you have for a specific plot of land. And another plus—you can increase this coefficient if you make a contribution to infrastructure or social services. Then the coefficient goes up, and you can build more accordingly. It’s a very interesting concept,” said Ivan Molchanov.

The participants agreed that the situation can only be changed through dialogue among all stakeholders and the development of a shared vision.

“We all influence the city in one way or another. And if we promote the right values, demand that the authorities uphold them, and understand that we bear responsibility for what is being built now and how it is used, then as a society we will achieve the right outcome,” Vasilyev concluded.