The Riverfront as a Mirror: The Case of the Transformations in Post‐Soviet Cities

Abstract

Cities that have gone through the long period of integration in the ex‐Soviet Union naturally incorporated a set of principles that are now under pressure. It's in this context that we review the central question of the relationship between river and city.Tbilisi, Georgia, is representative of the challenges faced by cities that experienced the fast transition from state‐controlled to open‐market economies. Territorial planning, as a single system of state spatial planning, is presently still highly unstructured and has very little practical influence, with several urban planning decisions being made with little regard for formal urban planning agencies. One of the key issues in the capital city, Tbilisi, is the lack of green/recreational zones, which is also expressed in the loss of public space along the urban riverfront.Undermanaged growth of post‐Soviet city, expiration of the term of the last general plan, and disregard for historical traditions of city planning resulted in an abnormal and complex problem of interplay between Tbilisi and River Kura. The river has been, in the last few decades, striped of its architectural planning significance.Interrelation between Tbilisi city and the River Kura constitutes a complex and challenging urban problem but their transformation is related also with political aims. Kura, as an essential active element of the landscape, is being used to influence the city's planning character and as political instrument.This presentation highlights, through an overview of some relevant examples from Tbilisi of planning and design, how the interface zones between river and surrounding plots of land have been transformed to increase urban–river connectivity. Yet, this transformation also results in the emergence of urban projects that symbolize more political and economic powers that the aspiration of the people to appropriate public spaces.