VILNIUS TECH Associate Professor Dr Kateryna Didenko more than a decade researches postsocialist monotowns and analyses possible actions in order towns to revive, meet contemporary needs and preserve their uniqueness. Latest case study of researcher is Piatykhatky town in Ukraine.
Recommendations for revitalisation based on research project findings
Piatykhatky in Ukraine was developed between the late 1950s and the early 1990s to serve the Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology and its research and educational community. This created an urban environment in which scientific research, housing, community life and green spaces are closely connected. These relationships define Piatykhatky’s distinctive character and should inform renewal. Here, revitalisation means sustaining and restoring opportunities to live, work, socialise and use the urban environment, while conserving its valuable features and the memory of the place.
The recommendations are based on research into Piatykhatky’s layout and architecture, interviews and a comparison with the experience of five European towns and districts. The materials cover the period up to and including 2026. The study documented the continuing research function alongside war-related damage and changes in everyday life. On this basis, four interrelated areas of action are proposed.
Preserve Piatykhatky’s unique character during renewal
Before a building is repaired or altered, its condition and valuable architectural features should be assessed: its volume, façade composition, entrances and relationship with the courtyard and street. Standard-design buildings should be assessed together with their surroundings: Piatykhatky’s distinctive character owes much to the combination of buildings, public spaces, greenery and pedestrian connections.
A map explaining the value of buildings and spaces, prepared by specialists and informed by residents’ memories and experiences, could provide a practical basis. It would help establish what should be conserved and which changes are compatible with the character of each part of the area. Its findings, together with condition surveys, should inform requirements for repair and improvements to accessibility and energy efficiency. The aim is to reconcile the renewal of individual buildings with the integrity of the block and the needs of its users.
Reveal Piatykhatky’s history through places and people’s experiences
The history of science should be presented in relation to architecture and everyday life: housing allocation, work, cultural and sporting activities, walks and local place names. Archival materials and oral histories should be linked to specific buildings, courtyards, public spaces and green spaces.
This could underpin digital routes, exhibitions and educational events that help people understand the significance of familiar places. The museum, researchers and residents could develop this programme together and refine its content. It is important to involve younger and new residents, as well as people without professional ties to research institutions. The collected accounts should also inform decisions on the conservation and future use of these places. Participants’ consent must be respected when presenting their accounts, while on-site events must take accessibility and safety into account.
Improve spaces for everyday use
The condition and actual use of courtyards, passageways, public spaces and green spaces need to be examined. In the early blocks, the focus is on connections between buildings, courtyards and passageways; in the second stage of development, on open spaces and sites where the original design was only partly realised. Existing uses must be considered when discussing new possibilities.
Small changes should be trialled on agreed, safe sites: temporary wayfinding, educational use or shared care. These actions should help assess whether new uses are needed and whether they are compatible with established routes. Individual pilot repairs could demonstrate how technical improvements can be combined with the conservation of architectural character. Following the trials, it is important to collect feedback and decide what to continue, adjust or discontinue.
Coordinate decisions and responsibilities
Revitalisation requires cooperation between residents, the museum, research and educational institutions, specialists, owners and Kharkiv’s municipal bodies. For each initiative, it is advisable to identify who makes decisions, who has the necessary powers and resources, and who will be responsible for ongoing care.
The National Science Centre ‘Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology’ could provide research and archival materials. The UFTI Museum and Cultural Complex and researchers could help interpret the history of places and participate in developing revitalisation projects. Residents could contribute their experience of using these places, while owners and municipal bodies could act within their powers. Specific roles need to be agreed jointly. The collected spatial, historical and technical materials should inform coordinated decisions, with clearly defined conditions for data access. Valuable features should be reflected in repair briefs, users’ needs in spatial decisions, and responsibility for maintenance in agreements between participants.
Putting the recommendations into practice
Archival and local history work, together with coordination of participation, can proceed alongside urgent recovery. Planned spatial changes require up-to-date surveys, safety checks, and clarification of powers and resources. Following initial investigations and small-scale trials, further projects can be justified, agreements formalised and outcomes assessed.
The four areas can develop concurrently. It is important to review regularly how changes affect use, the conservation of architectural features and different people’s experiences. The recommendations provide a research basis for discussion and decision-making. Their implementation should reconcile Piatykhatky’s contemporary needs with the value of its established urban environment.
The study was funded by the Research Council of Lithuania, project No. S-PD-24-119, project title „RETHINKING OF POSTSOCIALIST MONOTOWNS’ IDENTITY – CASE STUDY PIATYKHATKY IN UKRAINE“
Read more:
Author: Assoc Prof Dr Kateryna Didenko
Photo: Model of Visaginas, VNIIPIET
