Historical background

Ukraine, having been a part of the USSR for a long time, inherited certain features of the Soviet approach to territorial planning. As in many European countries, the USSR realised the importance and legitimisation of  territorial planning around the 1920s. In 1915 (the ‘pre-Soviet’ period), the Commission for the Study of Natural Productive Forces, headed by Vernadsky, was established. Subsequently, the so-called GOELRO plan was developed – a long-term plan for the USSR, for the whole country of Ukraine and for eight large oblasts, which included a sectoral and territorial structure and an electrification project. The formation of a unified system of planning, planning bodies, and a methodology for territorial economic research was initiated. At the same time, some authors note a number of negative changes in the 1930s. After the Second World War and postwar recovery, certain planning activities were eventually reformed. The 1960s and 1970s was the period when the methodology was developed for drawing up one of the most important and, seemingly, viable plans – the district planning scheme (Bogorad 1965), which to some extent corresponded to modern territorial planning schemes, providing for integrated spatial development while taking into account natural and socio-economic conditions. During the same period and until the 1980s, there was a transition to drawing up long-term comprehensive schemes for the development and distribution of productive forces and, on their basis, the General Scheme for the Distribution of Productive Forces, the practical implementation of which remains dubious. At the same time, ‘territorial planning at the grassroots and middle levels [was] actually being destroyed’ (Pavlenko 1984), and planning structures were inefficient and inconsistent. It is worth emphasising that a significant part of the developed plans remained ineffective, which is explained primarily by the specific limitations of the centralised planned economy in the USSR. Considering the planning system of the Soviet period from a formal perspective, it is impossible to deny the complexity and diversity of the plans. But, as rightly noted in the assessment of the quality of regional and district planning in the USSR, ‘the implementation of the theoretical ideas laid down in these documents was not consistent enough and their practical implementation can be discussed only in some cases’ (Alekseenko; Drozdov 2011).

Thus, after the declaration of independence, it became necessary to solve a number of urgent issues related to changing methodological approaches and the creation of Ukraine’s own planning system. This had to take into account the complexities of changing the forms of ownership, restructuring economic relations, the lack of financial resources, and, of course, the processes of fundamental change in public administration in general. In general, the current system of territorial planning in Ukraine combines the experience of Soviet and post-Soviet planning and some elements of European practices, but systematic integration of the CEMAT conference decisions and the principles of the European Spatial Development Perspective and the Territorial Agenda has not yet taken place. 

Fundamentals of spatial planning in Ukraine

Among the positive features of spatial planning in Ukraine, we should first of all highlight the hierarchy and subsidiarity of different levels of planning: planning documents at the national level (General Scheme of Planning of the Territory of Ukraine) are the basis for planning at a lower hierarchical level – the level of the oblasts – and these, in turn, are the basis for planning decisions at the level of districts.

Among the main problems that still exist are the lack of coherence between regional development strategies and spatial plans, a lower priority of the environmental component than in the EU, problems with harmonising plans at different levels, and a lack of attention to supporting particular types of area, such as agglomerations. New challenges are also brought by the war, which, on the one hand, sets new tasks for the restoration of territories, and, on the other hand, increases the risks of uncontrolled construction.

The legal framework for spatial planning in Ukraine is formed by more than a hundred legislative acts (the Constitution, codes, laws, resolutions of the Verkhovna Rada and the Cabinet of Ministers, orders of the Ministry of Regional Development, Construction, Housing and Communal Services). At the same time, despite the fact that developers of plans usually take into account the requirements of numerous legislative acts of ‘interagency regulation’, in practice, the development of programmes in accordance with them often takes place without (or with incomplete) consideration of planning schemes. One of the key documents adopted in the early 1990s is the Law of Ukraine ‘On the Fundamentals of Urban Planning’ (1992, in force). The main document regulating relations in urban development and spatial planning is the Law of Ukraine ‘On the Regulation of Urban Development Activities’ (2011). The law defines three levels of planning: national, regional, and local.

The General Scheme of Spatial Planning in Ukraine (Law of 2002, amended in 2012) corresponds to the national level, as well as planning schemes for individual parts of the country. 

Spatial planning at the regional level is carried out through the development of planning schemes for the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, oblasts, and districts, and at the local level through the development and approval of master plans for settlements, zoning plans, and detailed plans for specific areas. The content of planning documents is defined by law and by the State Construction Standards of Ukraine and comprises maps and explanatory texts.

Spatial planning at the local level is carried out through the development and approval of comprehensive plans for the spatial development of the territories of the local territorial communities, master plans of settlements, and detailed plans of the area, as well as updates and amendments to them.

Urban plans at the local level are developed taking into account information from the State Land Cadastre.

In the future, the information should be entered into the Urban Planning Cadastre (Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 559 of 2011 ‘On the Urban Planning Cadastre’), and its upkeep is coordinated with the tasks of creating and developing the state land cadastre, national geospatial data infrastructure, and the National Informatisation Programme.

There are relevant councils for the professional review and discussion of urban planning documentation which are established under the responsible ministry or administrations of all levels. The results of the council’s consideration are taken into account during the further finalisation and approval of the projects.

Planning at the national level

In the context of European integration, the aforementioned General Scheme is the most important document that defines the provisions for the planning and rational use of land our country; for maintaining a fulfilling living environment; for ensuring sustainable development; for protecting the environment and historical, architectural and cultural monuments; and for defining state priorities and conditions for the development of individual oblasts and settlement units. The development of the General Scheme of Spatial Planning was an important step in national urban planning. Today, it is the basis for the development of spatial planning documents at the regional and local levels, as it defines the strategic directions for the development of the settlement system, transport infrastructure, economic complex, and other areas at different hierarchical levels. The provisions of the General Scheme were used in the development of planning schemes for the territories of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, certain oblasts, cross-border oblasts, administrative districts, and for master plans for settlement units (Palekha 2020).

The Law defined the main directions of the use of land in Ukraine by:

1. Defining the prerequisites for land use throughout the country 
2. Outlining the intentions and needs for the use of certain areas 
3. Defining areas by types of predominant use
4. Improving settlement systems and 
5. Identifying areas whose development requires state support
6. Developing social infrastructure 
7. Developing engineering and transport infrastructure, including the development of international transport corridors
8. Creating a national ecological network   

The following existing and prospective facilities are being transferred from the General Scheme to the regional level:

routes of international transport corridors;

• roads and railways of national and international importance
• the main oil, gas and product pipelines;
• renewable energy facilities;
• state border crossing points;
• large engineering infrastructure facilities;
• ports;
• international airports;
• land reclamation systems;
• nuclear power facilities, high-risk facilities, and hydraulic structures, accidents at which may cause catastrophic flooding of the area;
• facilities of the National Ecological Network;
• urban agglomerations;
• centres of settlement systems;
• elements of the national planning structure (planning axes and centres).

Spatial planning documents at the state level are subject to expert reviews and a strategic environmental assessment.

The General Scheme was designed to be implemented in two stages: 2001-2010 and 2011-2020. Its implementation was monitored. At the same time, due to a number of problems with interagency communication, the Scheme’s potential was not exploited to the fullest extent, and the proposed planning solutions were often ignored in certain sectors.

Discussions are currently underway to update the document, given the expiration of the Scheme’s implementation period in 2021. This is also necessary in the context of the country’s EU candidate status. In addition, the consequences of Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine and the destruction of some settlement units and infrastructure require the development and approval of a new General Scheme, which will include the main activities for the spatial development of our country after our victory, as noted in separate publications (Maruniak; Palekha; Kryshtop 2022).

Spatial planning at the regional level

At the regional level, two types of spatial plans are developed: a regional (oblast, Autonomous Republic of Crimea) planning scheme and a district planning scheme. The regional planning scheme is more general in nature, while the rayonplanning scheme is more detailed. The provisions of the regional planning scheme are to be taken into account in the district planning scheme. The provisions of the district planning scheme function as the direct conditions and restrictions for planning at the local level. However, after the administrative-territorial reform (decentralisation) in Ukraine, district planning schemes are not being developed. Almost all the provisions of the district planning scheme are taken up in the comprehensive plan for the spatial development of communities at the local level.

The regional spatial plan is approved by the regional council. It determines the fundamental decisions on the development, planning, construction, and land use within administrative-territorial units, including at the local level. The provisions of the regional spatial plan should be transferred to the urban planning cadastre for their further use as regional conditions and restrictions by the authorities in districts and territorial communities. These plans have a direct impact on the planning structure.

The regional planning scheme includes zoning. It is part of the project plan and includes:

• the main and auxiliary planning axes related to the European planning framework; planning centres at different levels;
• the boundaries of administrative districts;
• the boundaries of territorial communities;
• cities, towns and villages with the allocation of centres in district and inter-district settlement systems;
• suburban areas of cities with a population of more than 100,000 people;
• existing and prospective resorts; significant areas of mass recreation;
• existing and projected areas and land owned or managed by the nature reserve fund;
• World Heritage sites; cultural heritage monuments of national importance;
• protected zones;
• special regime zones;
• areas owned or managed by the forest fund;
• international transport corridors, roads of national and regional importance, and the main communications infrastructure.

Given the circumstances of the war, the Programme for the Comprehensive Restoration of the Oblast was added to the plans at the regional level, developed by a decree of the head of the regional state administration.

Spatial planning at the local level

In the 30 years since Ukraine gained independence, the main tool for spatial planning has been the master plan of a settlement unit – the urban plan at the local level which defines the fundamental provisions on the development, planning, construction, and other land use within a settlement unit. The essence of the plan was reflected in one of the first state building codes – DBN B.1-3-97. Until recently, master plans remained a significant problem.

Starting from 2021, in accordance with the amendments to the Law ‘On the Regulation of Urban Development Activities’, a key tool has been the comprehensive (complex) plan for the spatial development of the catchment area of a territorial community (On Amendments 2020). The concept and content of this plan is described in detail in the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine ‘On the Approval of the Procedure for the Development, Update, Amendment and Approval of Urban Planning Documents’ (2021). A comprehensive plan is both an urban plan at the local level and a land management plan that defines the planning structure; functional land designation; the basic principles and directions for a unified system of public services; the street and road network; engineering and transport infrastructure; infrastructure development and improvement; civil protection; the protection of land and other components of the natural environment; the creation of an ecological network; and the protection and preservation of cultural heritage and traditional life. The comprehensive plan has no expiry date. It may be changed based on the monitoring of its implementation, but not more than once a year.

Among the sections of the comprehensive plan, the Landscape Planning section is particularly noteworthy. This tool was introduced in Ukraine based on the adaptation of European (German) experience (The UBA 2015, 2017, 2021) and is currently applicable only at the local level.

In 2020, the possibility of developing a strategy for the integrated development of the catchment area of a territorial community was also considered, which would be part of the strategic planning and serve as a starting point for the development of urban planning at the local level. 

The comprehensive plan sets the framework for other planning instruments at the local level, including master plans and detailed plans (for examples, see Table 3 in Attachments). The zoning plan is part of the comprehensive plan for the spatial development of the catchment area of a territorial community or the master plan for a settlement; it defines the conditions and restrictions for land use within certain functional zones – residential areas, industrial areas, resort areas, green areas, etc. (Attachment 2 in Attachments). Historical and architectural reference plans of the historical areas in the settlement units included in the List of Historical Settlement Units of Ukraine are also incorporated into the comprehensive plan as integral components of the master plans of the respective settlement units.

As at the regional level, an additional planning document, the Programme for the Comprehensive Restoration of the Territorial Community, has also emerged at the local level, which is developed based on a decision of the executive body of a village, town, or city council. Both plans (the comprehensive plan and the above-mentioned programme) have been criticised by the expert community for their apparently insufficient level of preparation, which could increase the risk of rapid and poor-quality construction. A comparison of the main features of the comprehensive plan and the programme for the comprehensive restoration of territorial community is presented in Table 2 (see Attachments).

In general, it should be noted that despite the positive aspects of the transformation of the system of planning instruments at the local level (new approaches, participatory approach), their ‘impact on the transformation of localities remains very debatable and is associated with the following main challenges: the relevance of urban plans and their compliance with the updated legislation; the quality of urban plans, in particular, the relevance of their provisions on design; the feasibility of the assessments of the socio-economic and urban planning situation; the adherence to the principles of the balance of public and private interests; and the transparency of the development and approval processes, which largely determine the future prospects of each developed planning instrument’ (Lytvynchuk; Denysenko; Melnychuk 2020).

Draft urban planning documents at the local level are subject to public debates and participation. The debates must be held not earlier than ten days from the date of the publication of the plan on the community website. The results of the assessment of the public feedback to draft urban plans at the local level are presented within two weeks.

Practical examples of planning at different levels are presented in the relevant fact sheets. In particular, they provide information on the development and features of the General Scheme of Spatial Planning in Ukraine; the regional planning scheme (Volyn Oblast), which was developed relatively recently and updated in 2020; and the comprehensive plan for the spatial development of the territorial community (Rohan rural community in Kharkiv Oblast). The development of the comprehensive plan for the spatial development of the Rohan rural community was completed at the end of 2021 and is one of the few completed (but as yet not approved) in Ukraine. The war has significantly slowed down, if not suspended, the development of this new type of urban plan. 

An example of soft or informal planning in Ukraine is the concept of integrated urban development. Several such strategies have been developed within the framework of a GIZ (German Agency for International Cooperation) project to support local development and administrations, and to identify strategic vectors for urban development. The model areas covered by the project were Vinnytsia, Chernivtsi, Poltava, Lviv, Zhytomyr, Kharkiv, Melitopol, Mykolaiv, and the Podil district of Kyiv. 

Thus, the Concept of Integrated Urban Development (IUDC) of Poltava 2030 is a comprehensive plan that envisages the long-term development of the city in the coming decade with due regard to all its characteristics. It is a guideline that lays the groundwork for detailed development programmes in the short and medium term that will identify specific measures to achieve the set objectives. The document reflects many of the main provisions of the EU planning agenda, including a sustainable urban mobility plan, the creation of green zones, and climate change issues.

Dozens of strategies for integrated spatial development have been developed at the territorial community level, focusing (for example, in the CANactions School programme) on the following goals: social and engineering infrastructure; mobility; the economy and production; ecology and the environment; culture, sports, tourism and local identity; governance and inter-municipal cooperation.

Generally in the first decades of its independence, Ukraine was slow to implement the principles of the EU’s spatial development policy (European Spatial Development Perspective, Territorial Agendas), and the spatial planning process featured many relics of Soviet planning. At the same time, there has been a gradual reform of the system, which has accelerated since 2014 with the signing of the Association Agreement with the EU and the intensification of information exchange in all areas of cooperation. 

In recent years, reforms at the local level have become the most visible. The process of decentralisation, the creation of new territorial communities, accompanied by the large-scale work of international organisations and the implementation of an unprecedented number of relevant projects, has provided the needed momentum for changes in the legislative sphere. Hence, planning at the local level is now more in line with European practices. At the same time, trends such as increased transparency, digitalisation, and the greening of the planning process are taking place at all levels to varying degrees.

The military operations as a result of Russia’s aggression, which began de facto in 2014, has had large-scale consequences for society and nature, both direct and indirect, with varying territorial spreads, degrees, and durations. In combination with the spatial development problems that existed in the pre-war period (Rudenko et al. 2016), this creates an extremely complex challenge that will obviously be addressed and discussed by society in the post-war period. The planning tools proposed for rapid recovery are largely imperfect, although they are already playing a role in oblasts and communities that have suffered significant damage.

Draft Law No. 5655 ‘On Urban Planning Reform’ has become one of the most controversial in the field of spatial planning in recent years. Its authors presented the draft law as one which would increase the efficiency of control and management in urban planning. At the same time, many experts believe that such a law could lead to restrictions on local government functions, and increase corruption risks and uncontrolled development (support for large developers). It was opposed by civil society organisations, the National Union of Architects, and the Association of Ukrainian Cities, including mayors of large cities.

We should also expect the alignment of planning activities in Ukraine with European standards in the context of the harmonisation of Ukrainian legislation with EU law. A necessary step will be the practical introduction of the NUTS and LAU classification of territorial units in Ukraine, and greater attention to planning the development of different types of functional area, which was rather slow in the pre-war period.

Further literature concerning the planning system in Ukraine

• Palekha, Yu. M. (2020): Oblastal planning: Methodical guidelines. Kyiv.
• Berdanova, O. V.; Vakulenko, V. M.; Valentiuk, I. V.; Tkachuk, A. F. (2017): Strategic planning of the development of the united territorial community: a textbook. Kyiv. 
• Topchiev, O. G.; Malchykova, D. S. (2014): Spatial planning: a textbook. Kherson.
• Tretyak, A. M.; Tretyak, V. M.; Pryadka, T. M.; Tretyak, N. A. (2021): Territorial and spatial planning: basic principles of theory, methodology, practice. Bila Tserkva. 
• Rudenko, L. G.; Maruniak, Eu. O.; Palekha,Yu. M.; Golubtsov, O. G.; Heiland, S.; May, A.; Jacoby, C.; Kryshtop, T.; Chekhniy, V.; Farion, Yu.; Aylikova, A. (2020): Integration of the environmental component into community spatial plans (guidelines). Kyiv.
• Maruniak, Eu. O. (2018): Geospatial research and planning practice: Ukraine against the background of world trends. Kyiv.
• Rudenko, L. G.; Maruniak, Eu. O.; Palekha,Yu. M.; Golubtsov, O. G.; Heiland, S.; May, A.; Jacoby, C.; Chekhniy, V.; Farion, Yu.; Aylikova, A.; (2016): Methodology for the integration of the environmental component of development into spatial planning in Ukraine (oblast level). Kyiv.
• Bogacheva, N.; Didenko, V.; Dubova, K.; Dudarenko, M.; Kobzar, O.; Kovtun, A.; Kraft, J.; Kryshtop, T.; Lysiuk, G.; Mokhort, N.; Pelovina, Yu.; Reznikova, K.; Khanenko, O.; Stemberg, O.; Yaremenko, L.; Kubach, S. (2021): How to develop a comprehensive community plan. A guideline for professionals. Kyiv.