Nature as infrastructure: a European framework
The key question — how to develop housing where the main resource is not the land itself, but the ecosystem — has long been translated into a system of specific principles in European practice. Natural areas are considered not as an “empty reserve” for development, but as infrastructure with its own boundaries and modes of use.
In the European Commission documents, green infrastructure is defined as a network of natural and semi-natural areas that provide ecosystem services - from climate regulation and water balance to recreation and health of residents. It is important that we are talking about a network, and not about isolated "green spots". Forests, reservoirs, parks, farmland and even linear elements such as alleys or coastal zones are considered as an interconnected structure.
First: the green framework is planned before the talk of building begins. Under the EU Green Infrastructure Strategy and the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, states are obliged to integrate this network into spatial planning, including master plans, environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and strategic environmental assessments (SEAs). This means that ecosystems acquire a status comparable to transport or engineering infrastructure.
Illustration from the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, which proposes a new status for ecosystems. Photo: Marc Schulte, Unsplash
Second: the building restrictions apply regardless of the form of ownership. At the EU level, the Natura 2000 network covers about 18% of the Union's land area and forms the "skeleton" of green infrastructure. The guidelines from the European Commission are of a recommendatory nature, and each country already adopts laws at the national level. In Germany, for example, the Federal Nature Conservation Act (Bundesnaturschutzgesetz) establishes the creation of a biotope network that must cover at least 10% of the country's area, and all subsequent planning decisions must take this into account. If the project contradicts landscape planning, this requires a separate justification.
Third: density instead of extensive growth. In the UK, this approach is institutionalized through the Green Belt policy, zones where there is a presumption against development, to restrain urban sprawl and stimulate the redevelopment of post-industrial areas. In Germany and Scandinavia, a similar function is performed by landscape plans and systems of ecological corridors, which physically limit urbanization.
Nature is starting to compete effectively with “gray” infrastructure. Restoring floodplains or wetlands can be cheaper and more effective than building engineered flood protection systems.
Fourth: access to nature is a public good, not a private bonus of the project. This is especially noticeable in Scandinavian practice, where coastal zones, forest areas and water systems are not privatized by housing complexes, but are integrated into an open network of routes and public spaces. In the logic of the EU, this is connected with the concept of ecosystem services: nature should work for all residents, and not increase the value of individual objects.
Finally, the fifth and perhaps key point: nature begins to effectively compete with "gray" infrastructure. European recommendations directly indicate that the restoration of river floodplains or marshes can be cheaper and more effective than the construction of engineering flood protection systems. Preservation of the ecosystem becomes not a limitation, but part of the functional and financial model.
A promenade along the Bucha River in Irpin will be created in parallel with the construction of the BURGUNDIA 3 residential complex. The project was developed by Domus Corporation. Image courtesy of MOLODIST IG
Between comfort and vulnerability: the price of closeness to nature
Living by the water or near the forest remains attractive not only as an image, but also as a tangible quality of the environment. Natural oases shape the microclimate, work as natural regulators, and together - as a ready-made recreational infrastructure within walking distance.
"Proximity to water or a forest is definitely a plus in terms of microclimate and lowering the temperature in the hot season. Even fountains in the city have a positive effect, not to mention natural reservoirs," he explains. Iryna Oya, architect, urban planner, member of the Union of Architects of Ukraine, founder of the architectural bureau OIA architects. — It is important to preserve all this, but it will never be superfluous to add greenery. Especially around the perimeter of the building to deflect the flow of hot air from the asphalt. It is worth reducing the area of the asphalt and increasing the area of the landscaping. Forests and other areas with plants can form “green corridors”. Each of us felt the difference in the heat between the shade near the reservoir and an open area without a single tree. Therefore, I am very concerned about active logging and development, because we may suddenly find ourselves on a large asphalt frying pan.
Iryna Oya, architect, urban planner, member of the Union of Architects of Ukraine, founder of the architectural bureau OIA architects
For investors, the proximity of the object to nature is a strong competitive advantage and added value factor. As market participants themselves note, the buyer expects not just square meters, but a certain lifestyle, where the natural landscape becomes part of the product.
Anton Myronchuk, co-founder of MOLODIST IG: “The war reduced demand, but did not change the buyer’s approaches to choosing housing. Everyone who chooses housing in the suburbs expects to receive the most comfortable conditions. After all, the suburban real estate market was formed, in particular, due to the overpopulation of Kyiv: people were fleeing the city bustle. This stimulated developers in the suburbs to compete with the quality of projects, responding to such a request. That is why the priority of proximity to nature did not fade into the background.
Anton Myronchuk, co-founder of MOLODIST IG
When buying a home, a client tries to get the widest possible range of benefits. The ability to walk out of the entrance into a beautiful courtyard, walk through a park or square, or stroll along the embankment next to the house is undoubtedly a big plus. That is why developers are trying to actively buy up land plots that border such infrastructure facilities."
But nature, especially aquatic and forest ecosystems, is sensitive to any intervention — even if it occurs formally nearby, rather than within their borders, warns Serhiy Khara, Acting Head of the Department of Ecological and Educational Work of the Holosiivskyi National Nature Park: “Let’s imagine a valuable natural area, sufficiently isolated from people, with specific conditions — a swampy forest, to which rare and endangered species of flora and fauna have adapted over many centuries. The ecosystem itself is self-sufficient, and it can support and regulate itself. But already outside its borders, a person has decided to build residential areas. To lay the foundation, it is necessary to change the hydrological regime. Simply put, to drain the site for construction. And when this begins, water from the soils of the surrounding areas is also lost. As a result, the hydrological regime of the swampy forest also changes: swamps and rivers dry up, vegetation changes, and animals that lived there disappear. In addition, such an ecosystem ceases to play its role in minimizing the consequences of global climate change to the fullest extent and even has a greater chance of suffering from fire.
Serhiy Khara, Acting Head of the Department of Ecological and Educational Work of the Holosiivskyi National Nature Park
Another example. A developer creates a non-residential/industrial/commercial facility next to a natural ecosystem and residential neighborhoods. A path through the forest, previously used only by residents, turns into a highway with a constant flow of trucks on it. As a result, residents create new paths through the forest (increasing anthropogenic pressure on the ecosystem), dust, dirt and construction debris from the newly created road get into the environment. Even if the developer started the project outside the green zone, the impact on it can be significant.
From the ecologist's point of view, the best solution would be to completely abandon construction near valuable natural areas: "If the residential complex has 6000 apartments, then this is at least 12,000 people who will visit the ecosystem: walk, ride bicycles, have picnics, etc. Obviously, this will be a collapse for this natural location. If valuable natural areas are located inside the city, the best option would be to create protected zones around them with a certain defined regime or buffer zones in the form of squares, city parks, areas for quiet relaxation, dog walks, cultural spaces, etc."
While for ecologists, of course, the key factor is preserving the balance of ecosystems, for architects and urban planners the starting point remains the person - the city dweller, who today lives under constant pressure from noise, density, overheating and a shortage of quality public space. That is why proximity to water or a forest is perceived as an unconditional benefit. But in modern practice, these two approaches can no longer exist in parallel, they need to be coordinated.
After reconstruction, the Irpin city embankment has become one of the most popular places to relax. Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
Ukrainian context: why does conflict arise?
The problem of unsystematic urbanization of once rural suburbs, according to experts, begins with the lack of clear logic at the planning level and manifests itself at the level of each individual decision.
Iryna Oya notes: “The main problem is that only buildings are developing, while the infrastructure is standing still. A city is a complex organism that must perform many functions. Ideally, it should develop according to the concept of a 15-minute city. Now, plots of land are often bought up for estate development, and high-rise buildings are built in their place. Public transport is limping on both legs, everyone prefers private cars, which is why they get into huge traffic jams every morning and evening. And the issue is not being addressed at all, only buildings are being added. And the documents that regulate building work not on the side of the townspeople, but on the side of the developers. It is important to have a vision that will be subject to public discussions in the city.
So far, an unpopular topic in Ukraine is global warming and CO2 emissions. Although everyone is already feeling the consequences. This is directly affected by the ratio of the area of greenery to the area of asphalt pavement and the number of trees and the area of buildings. After all, asphalt heats up more and gives off more heat, just like buildings. There must be a vision of the development of the city in order to understand whether such a large amount of new housing is needed at all. Similarly, the sprawl of cities in terms of area is very expensive, and it also ties people to cars, as distances increase (after all, short walking distances to key objects become inaccessible to them). It is worth noting that the high-rise buildings that are already appearing there do not correlate with the image of a green city.
For investors, the proximity of the object to nature is a strong competitive advantage and added value factor. As market participants themselves note, the buyer expects not just square meters, but a certain lifestyle
When development occurs in a fragmented manner and without clear rules, conflicts between developers and the community become almost inevitable, and in Ukrainian suburbs this is more the norm than the exception. Most often, scandals flare up when the project enters the physical phase: a fence appears, work begins, and it is at this moment that residents first learn what will happen on the neighboring plot. The reaction is usually harsh: protests, construction blockades, protracted legal proceedings, and, as a result, instead of a high-quality environment, the city receives frozen sites and unfinished buildings that deform the space for years. Ideally, this scenario should look different, when control and discussion begin much earlier, at the stage of the first concepts and visualizations. It is then that not conflict becomes possible, but a conversation about the essence: about the impact on the environment, the limits of what is permissible, and the quality of the future space. And here the key question arises: by what signs can one understand at the very beginning whether a project is environmentally responsible?
According to the plans of MOLODIST Group, a bicycle route will connect the Irpin embankment and a new promenade along the Bucha River. The project was developed by Domus Corporation. Image provided by MOLODIST Group
Serhiy Khara says: “The first and, perhaps, the main marker of a developer’s environmental culture is a careful choice of a location for a project, taking into account the surrounding ecosystems and their characteristics. It is worth mentioning the materials that the developer uses separately. Nowadays, any construction cannot do without environmentally toxic components. However, modern technologies allow us to reduce their use. This is more expensive, but has a smaller overall negative impact on the environment.
There is a practice of using old (often Soviet) electricity and water supply and drainage networks during the construction of new residential complexes. This also carries a danger, both in environmental and social aspects. In Kyiv, there are cases when a new residential complex “crashed” into an old water supply system that is not designed for such capacities. Therefore, we have breakthroughs, soil contamination and a crisis at the social level, in particular in the form of problems with housing and communal services. The solution is to restore existing communications and/or strengthen them.
An assessment of the environment from a cultural, social and ecological point of view is important. If the developer has chosen an already anthropogenic area for the project, it is better than a completely wild area. But, again, there are nearby ecosystems that can be affected. If the choice is between building a conditional residential complex near a monoculture pine forest and a forest with a diverse composition of tree species, then it is obvious that the damage to biodiversity in the pine forest will be less, because the biodiversity there is already poor compared to a forest with different species.
Water-based installations and recreation areas. The project was developed by Domus Corporation. Image courtesy of Domus Corporation
Often these things can be assessed before construction begins. You shouldn’t believe only the pretty pictures from the project visualization. This is marketing, let’s be honest. Therefore, first of all, you need to monitor the developer’s completion of the environmental impact assessment procedure and the transparency and honesty of the results of this procedure. During the EIA procedure, a wide range of experts should work, who will say how and what the construction project will affect.”
At the same time, as Serhiy Khara notes, even formally correct assessment tools do not always provide a complete picture of the impact. In particular, the environmental impact assessment procedure focuses primarily on the boundaries of a specific site and is unable to fully take into account the consequences for neighboring ecosystems. That is why, according to him, it is important to look more broadly: analyze the history of the land plot's intended purpose and respond to attempts to change it, for example, from forest land to residential development zones.
Rules of the game: how the city fixes the balance
Irpin has one of the highest, and possibly the highest, ratios of residential development to green areas in the Kyiv region. As explained by Mykhailo Sapon, Chief Architect of the Irpin City Council, back in 2014–2015, when the city received a large number of displaced people from Luhansk and Donetsk regions, which created an additional infrastructure burden, spatial plans and the general development plan were revised.
Mykhailo Sapon, Chief Architect of the Irpin City Council
Mykhailo Sapon says: "Back in 2018, a list of green zones was recorded. Moreover, in the period 2015–2018, the Irpin City Council formalized ownership of each of these objects. That is, the community did not simply declare their existence, but legally secured this status in order to avoid the temptation to change their purpose in the future.
The 2018 Master Plan took these decisions into account and designated green areas as recreational areas. In addition, some of the areas that were previously considered for apartment buildings but were actually covered with forests were also transferred to recreational areas.
Thus, at the general plan level, these areas received a clear status. And the detailed plans of the territories, which were approved after 2018, did not provide for a change in this purpose - they only specified the parameters of development, without affecting the very principle of preserving green zones."
The problem of unsystematic urbanization of once rural suburbs, according to experts, begins with the lack of clear logic at the planning level and manifests itself at the level of each individual decision.
Investors need clear long-term rules of the game from the city and the state regarding green landscapes and spatial development. Anton Myronchuk notes: “When a developer understands that the city has determined where exactly there are recreational zones and where there is space for business, then it is much easier to communicate with active residents of the community and, in particular, to conduct economic activities. In the case when there is no approved detailed plan of the territory of the settlement, a general or spatial plan, this creates misunderstandings both on the part of business and on the part of the city.
It is very important that communities, when adopting their master and spatial plans, conduct a broad public debate, communicate decisions to their residents, and hold public discussions. This is necessary so that people understand: some lands are recreational zones, and some are investment zones.
"Any businessman, having familiarized himself with the spatial or general plan of the community, wants to come and clearly understand that it is here that one can buy land. Such an approach is as transparent as possible and provides understanding to both the residents of the community and the business, which, when buying a land plot in such a place, will at least be protected by law."
A modern skatepark is one of the planned locations for the promenade along the Bucha River. The project was developed by Domus Corporation. Image courtesy of Domus Corporation
However, even with clear rules, the issue of balance is not eliminated - it just moves to another level. It is no longer just about not violating defined boundaries, but about how development can interact with the natural environment. How difficult is it to combine the need for new housing and infrastructure with the preservation of the landscape? Where is the line of compromise?
Mykhailo Sapon notes: "This is not so much a question of the limits of compromise as a question of responsibility - the social responsibility of the developers themselves. In Irpin, they mainly pay attention to this, because a resident who chooses Irpin comes with the expectation of living in a green zone. And when a developer hands over a facility without taking into account such expectations, it is usually a situational developer. All complex developers in Irpin, when designing facilities, not only preserve existing green zones, but also create new ones.
Even with clear rules, the question of balance is not removed. It is about how development can work with the natural environment.
It is also worth noting that Irpin was largely formed in the state that remained from the post-Soviet period. Back in 1991–2010, the vast majority of the territories of camps or sanatoriums, which activists and community residents often refer to, were transferred to private ownership with the purpose of housing development - both private and multi-apartment.
Therefore, when the owner has all the necessary documents, and they are not challenged and reinforced by urban planning documentation issued before 2010, it is very difficult to explain to residents why the city does not have the right or obligation to issue urban planning conditions or construction permits. The only effective tool in this situation remains communication with developers so that they preserve green spaces as much as possible.
Skating and kickscootering are favorite sports of young people in Irpen. Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
According to Mykhailo Sapon, conflicts between residents and developers should not be interpreted unambiguously as a negative phenomenon. On the contrary, they are often an indicator of an established urban culture, where the community does not remain indifferent to changes in its environment. The reaction to the appearance of a construction fence or the felling of trees indicates an increase in sensitivity to the quality of space and a willingness to defend it.
At the same time, such activity creates a new reality for investors: even when working on private land, they are forced to take into account community expectations and carefully approach landscape solutions. Preservation of existing green spaces ceases to be an option and becomes a necessary condition, otherwise any project risks facing public opposition.
Bionic design for a playground on the new embankment along the Bucha River. The project was developed by Domus Corporation. Image courtesy of Domus Corporation
From private to public: between improvement and intervention
The conversation about responsible development today is increasingly moving from declarations to the plane of concrete solutions - and already at the design stage it becomes clear how the developer works with the natural environment. One such example is the Irpin residential complex BURGUNDIA 3, where the accessibility of the landscape along the river is laid out as part of the concept.
"Absolutely, this is a common, public space, and it will not be closed in any way. All citizens will have full access to this embankment," he assures. Volodymyr Spivak, Director of the MOLODIST Group and the BRAVE Society. — The idea came about very simply. The Bucha River, although it is a small river according to the classification, is popular among residents of both Bucha and Irpin: people come here with pleasure to fish and enjoy walking. Following the example of the Irpin River embankment, the idea arose to create an embankment here as well. Several organizations are working on developing proposals for the embankment project, including the architectural and construction company Domus Corporation. Work in this direction is ongoing, the final version of the project and the contractor have not yet been agreed upon. As part of the large-scale cycling concept, it is planned to connect these locations with a bike path, ensuring the possibility of pedestrian and bicycle traffic between the two embankments. The residential complex itself provides for a large park area and a spacious boulevard with separate landscape solutions, which organically fits into the embankment.
Volodymyr Spivak, director of the MOLODIST Group and the BRAVE Society
In parallel, the developer is forming an internal “framework” for recreation — an alley with fountains with an area of over 1,3 hectares, developed in collaboration with the Vovk+Partners Architects bureau. This is a fairly rich scenario of use: children's and sports playgrounds, a parkour zone, a pump track, an open-air cinema, recreation areas integrated into a green space with landscape accents and small architectural forms. In fact, this forms a full-fledged public center of the microdistrict, not “developing” the territory next to the water, but its inclusion in the urban fabric as an open resource. A similar approach, but on a different scale, is demonstrated by the RIVER PORT residential complex, which is about returning to the city a natural area that had previously actually fallen out of active use.
Volodymyr Spivak notes: "A large number of natural areas are not used directly by residents, as they are often in a cluttered state. The same happened with the Irpin River. Until the construction of the embankment, it was not used so actively for recreation. Today it is one of the most visited infrastructure facilities in the city. The situation is similar with lakes: those lakes, near which the RIVER PORT residential complex is currently being built, have actually been improved in only one small area and are used as a city beach.
Alley with fountains - the interior space of the BURGUNDIA 3 residential complex. The project was developed by Vovk+Partners Architects. Image provided by IG «MOLODIST»
Our idea was that any construction companies that build something next to such objects should take on a social burden - to improve the surrounding areas, create recreation areas for all residents, so that the appearance of such objects increases people's interest and desire to visit these locations. The most difficult were the approaches and the scale of the embankment between the object and the lake. This project was extremely expensive, and we had to decide whether to simplify it or leave the planned level. We decided to ensure the highest quality approach to the construction of public areas and left all the key elements, including public spaces, infrastructure and landscaping.
The developer takes on the function that urban infrastructure should ideally perform: transforming “empty” or neglected landscapes into well-maintained public spaces.
In this case, the developer takes on the function that urban infrastructure should ideally perform: transforming “empty” or neglected landscapes into developed public spaces. Both cases show a shift towards a more complex model of interaction with nature, when it is actively “reprogrammed” for new urban scenarios. And it is at this point that such projects inevitably come under increased attention.
Between public control and information pressure
On the one hand, the public's distrust of generous promises and bright visualizations has its roots: for example, people would rightly like guarantees that open spaces will not one day be fenced off with reference to the "decision of co-owners-residents", and the developer will formally be useless. Similar scenarios, for example, have been repeatedly implemented in Kyiv. On the other hand, along with professional discussion, other, less obvious forms of resistance are increasingly appearing.
Oleksandra Naryzhna, founder of the Urban Reform NGO and co-founder of the Urban Reform School, emphasizes: “Conflict is not a problem, often thanks to conflicts new discoveries are made and something not obviously better is born. The problem is that conflict begins to escalate when a decision is made, when there is no room for change and when no one really wants to hear each other. Changes should be discussed at an early stage, and this process should be truly open and honest. Then a conflict of interest can give the developer additional value to the project, and people - the opportunity to use and enjoy public space.”
Oleksandra Naryzhna, founder of the Urban Reform NGO and co-founder of the Urban Reform School
Volodymyr Spivak also emphasizes that interest in environmental issues often arises at the stage of active construction, and not at the analysis stage: "Unfortunately, very few people pay attention to what exactly is happening near these reservoirs or on them before the start of construction. For example, if we take a facility like RIVER PORT, then before the start of work there was a huge amount of illegal discharges into the river, we discovered dozens of them when we started cleaning the bank and studying the issues of landscaping in detail. We drew the attention of local authorities and the public to this, and as of today, virtually all of these channels are blocked.
We are always open to dialogue, we have repeatedly initiated round tables ourselves and found common ground within their framework. If people have another task, in particular, spreading negative information about the company, then dialogue with such people is usually impossible. In such cases, the outcome is predetermined for them. For example, environmental inspections have repeatedly visited RIVER PORT. We have the results of these inspections and are ready to provide them if necessary.
Preserving existing green spaces is no longer an option and becomes a prerequisite, otherwise any project risks facing public opposition.
A separate dimension of this situation is public accusations that can spread quickly in the information space, regardless of the stage of project implementation. In early 2026, public accusations emerged regarding the possible discharge of wastewater from the construction site into the Bucha River.
Volodymyr Spivak: "The residential complex BURGUNDIA 3 has not been put into operation and is not inhabited, therefore any discharges from it are physically impossible. We have provided a comprehensive refutation and publicly explained the situation. Moreover, the company, on the contrary, acts in the interests of the community: we allocated the facade part of the territory and transferred it to the city for the construction of a sewage pumping station. We also financed the purchase of the necessary materials for its construction and repeatedly initiated cooperation with the city council and Irpinvodokanal.
The total area of the fountain alley in the BURGUNDIA 3 residential complex is over 1,3 hectares. The project was developed by Vovk+Partners Architects. Image provided by IG «MOLODIST»
"In fact, there was and could not be any sewage discharges from our residential complex, but we are already facing a wave of negative information. In our opinion, this is mainly due to unfair competition."
Conflicts surrounding the development of natural areas can have different origins: from real environmental risks to information campaigns in which the line between community concerns and pressure tools becomes less obvious.
After the project: how the culture of using space is formed
The issue of interaction with nature does not end at the design or construction stage. Even the most well-planned spaces can quickly lose their value if they are not supported by a culture of use. And here the responsibility shifts from the developer to the community - to those who use these territories every day.
Oleksandra Naryzhna speaks about this through the experience of direct participation of residents in creating the space: “Last year, we created a pop-up space in Alexandria in one day together with 70 residents of the city. It was a temporary space, but the people who participated in the arrangement considered it their own and felt responsible for it. Some of them walked by every day to check if everything was okay and to fix it if something happened.
Futuristic gazebos will decorate the promenade along the Bucha River. The project was developed by Domus Corporation. Image courtesy of Domus Corporation
This works the same way with public spaces in general. If people are included in the process of their creation, they feel they are theirs. Not “gifts from the mayor”, but taking into account real interests and the opportunity to influence change form a responsibility that only accumulates and spreads over time.”
At the same time, in the suburbs, this process is complicated by the different experiences of the residents themselves - from urban to rural, sometimes with practices that directly harm the environment (for example, burning with dead wood). And here, according to Naryzhna, culture does not arise by itself: "Traditions and shared experience give rise to culture, precisely the one that manifests itself in a common space. If people live side by side but do not form common practices, then there will be no culture. Dissemination of ideas of a careful attitude towards nature through festivals, joint events, educational products can lay the foundation, and joint action, for example, the tradition of joint cleaning, also provides practical experience."
Conflicts surrounding the development of natural areas can have different origins: from real environmental risks to information campaigns
Serhiy Khara complements the topic with a more structural view. A culture of responsible use, in his opinion, is impossible without a combination of control, responsibility, and education: "Security services and the police must monitor cases of harmful human impact on natural objects. This allows us to record violations and crimes against nature. Then - bringing to justice. If a person understands the consequences of his actions and knows that control is real, he behaves differently with the environment.
Education is also important - from the family to educational institutions. For example, national natural parks, through educational programs, involve children and adults in environmental protection activities, forming an understanding of the interdependence of man and nature. Through such practices, not only knowledge arises, but also a personal connection with the environment.
Benches with canopies on the new embankment in Irpin will allow you to relax in the shade even on the hottest day. The project was developed by Domus Corporation. Image provided by Domus Corporation
Even the best urban solutions do not work in a vacuum. The preservation and development of green areas in the suburbs is always a shared responsibility, where the rules of the game are set at the level of legislation, spatial planning and community involvement at the initial stage. The project in this system no longer defines, but rather interprets these frameworks, adapting the environment to the person. But it is the daily behavior of residents that determines what this interaction with nature becomes in practice.
