The problem of preservation, and optimal demonstration of it to local residents and tourists of architectural monuments, is of constant scientific and public interest. Two concepts coexist in dialectical interaction: conservation to preserve the monument in the form in which it has come down to in our times, and restoration of the monument with the restoration of lost details. In each case, one or another decision is made, which finds both supporters and opponents. One of the aspects of this problem is the attitude to buildings that have long breaks in the history of conduct in their construction works. An interesting example of such a monument is the mausoleum-khanaka of Ahmed Yassawi in Turkestan, which remains unfinished. Given its importance for the self-determination of the culture of modern Kazakhstan, it seems appropriate to consider the planned design, which remains unrealized. For the first time, the article suggests, by way of discussion, several options proposed by the authors for solving the main facade of the mausoleum-khanaka and the shape of the central dome.

The article discusses the available modern resources for teaching design thinking in an online format in the context of effective teaching strategies, the demand for the course, the course program on the example of the popular distance learning website Edx, YouTube, podcasts and popular social networks Instagram, Telegram. The article illustrates and categorizes the main tools and elements for creating a design thinking curriculum for design students.

Rapid and often chaotic urbanisation in post-Soviet cities such as Almaty challenges the quality, availability, and accessibility of public spaces for residents, given the cities’ historical development. Meanwhile, global research is focused on the concepts of Third Places, coworking spaces in the Western context, and urban experience in cities with transitional economies, but the heritage of centrally planned urban development lacks spatial explicit analysis. The purpose of the current study is to analyse the evolution, current situation, and distribution of collaborative spaces (public spaces that combine work and connectedness) in Almaty. The methodology includes four phases of qualitative analysis: (1) a historical–typological analysis of architectural functions since the beginning of the 20th century until the 2025, (2) spatial mapping analysis of the existing typologies such as libraries, museums, coworking spaces, research and development (R&D) institutions and universities, and community centres, (3) longitudinal statistical analysis, and (4) historical graphic analysis. Analysis is conducted through the lens of advanced levels of human needs that concern self-education and self-development. This approach helped to propose a new definition of collaborative space. The results also show examples of sustainable urban structure with collaborative spaces in Almaty’s old centre (“Zolotoi Kvadrat”—Golden Square) and a critical deficit of new multifunctional spaces for work and socialisation in recently developed districts. The study reveals that Almaty’s evolution occurred through incremental infill development over the old grid, without the integrated development of the public realm and existing structural connections. As a result, the research explores the connection between collaborative spaces and their indirect influence on the general well-being in Almaty.

The 1960s to early 1990s marked a pivotal era in Kazakhstan’s mass housing history, particularly in Almaty, which was driven by a sector-wide policy shift toward apartment-based occupancy, regulated space standards, full utility provision, and organised residential courtyards. Large-panel buildings from this period still comprise over one-third of Almaty’s housing stock, yet their alignment with modern comfort standards remains understudied. This study establishes a historical periodisation of Almaty’s large-panel housing and assesses its comfort levels at apartment and built-environment scales. The two-part methodology combined a theoretical strand (comfort-level theory, literature review, historical retrospective, and periodisation) with an analytical strand (comparative graphical-analytical assessment of series 1Kz-464-AS, 1Kz-464-DS, 69, E-147 and 158), converging in a Basic–Supplementary–Advanced comfort classification. The results of the current study showed that three sub-periods emerged. Series 1Kz-464-AS and 1Kz-464-DS used a narrow-bay (2.6–3.2 m), economy-driven two-bay system with minimal zoning. Series 69 widened bays to 3.6–5.4 m, improving spatial comfort and utility provision. Series E-147 and 158 introduced a three-bay scheme with an added 2.1 m bay and raised ceilings (3.0 m), yielding the most flexible layouts. At the urban scale, microdistrict planning enlarged planning units by 7–10 times, preserved green connectivity through mid-rise buildings, and shielded courtyards using perimeter high-rises, supporting walkable, infrastructure-rich neighbourhoods. Apartment-scale comfort improved incrementally through bay widening rather than layout diversification, leaving persistent redevelopment constraints from panel structures. Built-environment comfort, however, reached a comparatively advanced, durable standard. Adaptive reuse should prioritise structural refurbishment, reduced occupancy density, courtyard–microdistrict continuity, and diversified public-space functions. This study’s results can inform renovation strategies for Soviet-era housing across post-Soviet cities.

Alongside the urgent need to address large-scale urban population growth and adapt housing to the natural and climatic conditions of the region, the first attempts to incorporate elements of the national architectural heritage emerged from the mid-1930s in Almaty, leaving a distinctive mark on the city’s residential architecture. Through the analysis, generalisation, and synthesis of theoretical and historical sources - primarily the works of architects and eyewitness researchers of the period -this study explores the directions of theoretical searches for a new architectural course in connection with the formation of Kazakhstan’s regional style. Examples of residential buildings in Almaty of the 1930s and early 1950s are presented to illustrate the practical embodiment of the “synthesis of the arts”, reflected in regional elements of residential architecture and in the broader organisation of the city’s living environment. The article examines methods of shaping the residential environment in Almaty and identifies approaches to creating a harmonious, identity-reflective urban environment through regional stylistic features. These include the incorporation of architectural details such as cornices, balconies, and loggias; landscaping and irrigation of residential quarters; the integration of ornamental compositions as a link with national cultural traditions; and, more generally, the creation of coherent urban ensembles and interiors. The findings of the study may be applied to the contemporary formation of the residential environment of modern Almaty.