The double-gabled kindergarten/school is a type that is found in meurneoba as well as in other rural contexts. For example, this kindergarten type is scattered across western regions of Georgia--particularly Imereti and Samegrelo--where it can be found at rural crossroads and roadsides as well as in structured state farm contexts.

Its dual entrance has allowed it to be easily transformed into a contingent duplex house type--following a common patter of housing Internally Displaced families from adjacent regions.

Architecturally, it is legible through it steeply pitched double-gable roof, as well as its high plinth--setting the building off from almost every context in which it is found

Bretis meurneoba is sited in the wide, open alluvial fan of the Kartli valley north of Gori. A highly productive region, Breti was organized around primary agricultural and crop production. Named after an organic village of the same name, Breti was part of a large-scale land reorganization that saw the traditional field patterns reconfigured into large rectangular blocks more amenable to the scale and technologies of newly mechanized cultivation and harvest. This rectangular field pattern is still legible in relation to the more topographically and historically defined patterns that surround it.

The meurneoba is organized around a simple crossroads where five different housing types and civic/administrative buildings are distributed across three of the quadrants, with the fourth dedicated to agricultural processing and production.

"A general view of the Digomi Training and Experimental Farm of the Georgian Agricultural Institute.

Professor A. Menagharishvili developed an important innovation in the field of fertilizers and plant growth regulators. Here he is working in the institute’s laboratory.

M. Iakobashvili, a postgraduate researcher (aspirant) of the Department of Agrochemistry, is studying the effectiveness of boron application rates in soil.

Scientists of the Agricultural Institute, representing various specializations, are successfully fulfilling their specific responsibilities: they provide practical assistance to collective farms (kolkhozes) and state farms (sovkhozes) in the effort to further increase agricultural and livestock production."

During research, a significant discrepancies were uncovered between the official plans from the 1950s and the actual built structures. This divergence led us to question the planning and execution of Soviet housing projects and provided a deeper understanding of the living conditions in this era. Ultimately, research shed light on the realities of communal living in Soviet-era housing, where efficiency and standardization often dictated design choices. By unraveling the layers of history embedded in these buildings, we gained a deeper appreciation for the social, architectural, and material conditions that shaped the everyday lives of their residents.

Circulation patterns played a crucial role in differentiating the two housing types. Type 1 houses featured a staircase that led directly into the building before opening onto a centrally positioned balcony, while in Type 2 houses, residents accessed the second floor by ascending a staircase that led to a side balcony, from which they entered their respective living spaces. In contrast, Each house contained two balconies, but their placement differed: Type 1 balconies occupied the central façade, whereas Type 2 balconies were located on the sides of the building, These distinctions in circulation and balcony orientation influenced the experience of movement and access within the housing units. Additionally, both housing types featured a solid dividing wall at the center of each building, eliminating interior connections between the two halves. To move between sections, residents had to exit the building and re-enter from another entrance, reinforcing the separation between living spaces.

Despite their similarities, Type 1 and Type 2 houses exhibited distinct differences in circulation,
balconies, and façade elements. Both were two-store structures, initially assumed to house four families each (two per floor). However, our observations revealed a denser occupancy pattern, with each house accommodating up to eight families—each family residing in a single room. This high density reflected the communal living conditions often imposed by Soviet housing policies, prioritizing maximum efficiency over individual comfort.

Our study of Soviet-era housing in Dighomi Meurneoba revealed an intricate relationship between architectural planning, material reality, and lived experience. The discovery that official plans did not match the built environment underscored the complexities of Soviet construction practices, where pragmatic decisions often overrode initial designs.

Our research identified two primary housing types within the studied area: Type 1, consisting of four
houses, and Type 2, consisting of twelve houses. The four Type 1 buildings were centrally positioned within the settlement, surrounded by a variety of communal facilities. These included a school, a club, a public canteen, a medical point, an administration building, and several other structures. The presence of these institutions indicated a self-sufficient community, characteristic of Soviet-era planning, where residential areas were designed to accommodate all essential social functions.

A woman from the Gali region talks about her old life and her struggles regarding family relations and her current living situation.

The Afterlife of Ingiri’s Soviet Guesthouse

As we step into what was once the Ingiri Tea State Farm, traces of its Soviet past linger in the air. Among the first buildings that come into view is the former guesthouse. Rare in the landscape of Soviet state farms, its presence hints at the cultural weight Ingiri once carried. In post-Soviet Ingiri, what form does the afterlife of this building take, and how have its meanings and affective resonances transformed through the everyday lives of IDPs from the Abkhazian war?

The guesthouse stands as a two-story building, its upper and main floors supported by concrete pillars. Stone stairs, still bearing traces of faded blue patterns, lead to the second floor. The steps of the staircase are fractured, their corners chipped and uneven.

Half of the windows are broken, their glass either shattered or missing entirely from the frames. Thin plastic sheets cover the windows where glass used to be, fluttering with every gust of wind. Torn curtains hang from within, and the surface of the façade is partially peeled away, revealing the scars of time.

“As others say, this used to be a great building, a guesthouse, but once I arrived it was already all destroyed, it got ruined during the beginning of 90s, but when I arrived it was already like this” – says an IDP from Otobaia, village in Abkhazia, who has lived here for 25 years. She repaired the place from the inside as best she could; the state offered no help, but her family and neighbors became her pillars of support.

As we interview her a water pipe bursts beside the drying clothes; water gushes through layers of plastic bags that once held it in place. “Kids bumped into it with the bikes, and we were not able to mend it yet” – explains the lady in front of the camera with a low steady voice, staying unsurprised -the burst pipe just another small disturbance in the order of things.

Random objects - some stripped of their function, gathering dust, others untouched, their colors contrasting with the surrounding clutter - are scattered across the ground floor.

Rain seeps into every room upstairs, except for the lady’s, with whom we stand talking. She points to the empty rooms, tracing the paths of water along the walls. “Those rooms where the water comes in are abandoned now,” she says. One resident moved out to a room the state rented for them outside the guesthouse, and two others were given away, she explains. Above us, the roof sags on metal and wooden beams, a wide hole framing the sky, letting in gleaming sunlight.

Once a guesthouse, the building now shelters refugees from Abkhazia, their lives shaped by memories of hometowns where families shared homes, farmed their land, and lived in spaces they could call their own. In Ingiri, none of that remains. Yet, amid the peeling paint, broken beams, and scattered objects, life persists in quiet, stubborn rhythms. Time stretches in endless waiting for stability and a better life, a future always anticipated but never recognized by the state.

The building’s afterlife is not only a testament to loss but also to the ways people inhabit, adapt, and animate spaces left behind by history. Here, the past and present coexist in tension, and even in its fractured existence, the guesthouse holds the traces of human endurance - a fragile monument to memory, displacement, and the small acts of care that sustain life.

Population View: The original residents who stayed and oversaw the decline in the state of the settlement are reminiscent of the days when the streets were lined with lush greenery, the settlement was taken care of and organized, and the administrative and cultural elements still functioned. DPs are eager to relocate to better homes with the help of the government, as they already moved into buildings marauded by Mkhedrioni. As the condition continuously deteriorates, with no resources to upkeep the living spaces, it slowly becomes impossible to live in.

“tea leaf picking world record. In the Zugdidi region, Comrade Kionia Sarsania, a renowned green tea leaf picking craftsman and a member of Ingiri Tea Sovkhoz, who was honored with the Lenin Order, achieved a remarkable feat on May 28th. He collected 806 kilograms of green tea leaves, far surpassing the expected 16 kilograms, exceeding his daily workload by an astonishing 5037%, earning 75.5 days' worth of salary, which amounted to 490 manets. This year, from the beginning of the tea picking season until now, Comrade Kionia has gathered a total of 4023 kilograms of tea leaves. This achievement corresponds to 491 days' worth of work.”

The Ingiri State Farm is composed of standardized buildings that serve a variety of functions. The settlement features multifamily apartment blocks, administrative and educational facilities, retail shops, and a guest house. While the guest house was added later, the majority of the buildings were constructed during the initial phase of development. Today, the surviving structures are primarily utilized as residential spaces.

Designed by the Soviet design institute Saqsopelqalaqmshenproeqti—which oversaw most rural architectural and planning projects in Georgia—the Ingiri Guest House utilizes a standardized building typology slightly adapted for its specific site. Originally, the facility provided temporary accommodation for visiting researchers and other field experts. Since the early 1990s, the building has housed internally displaced persons (IDPs) from Abkhazia, and it was recently purchased by a local investor.

The main body of the structure is elevated, resting on four massive pillars. The building is accessed via a central courtyard that leads into an inner corridor, around which the interior spaces are arranged. The building's facade was originally clad in limestone tiles, remnants of which are still visible today. While the original structure and materials remain largely intact, the roof was recently replaced to address water leaks.

Established in 1930, the Ingiri Tea Sovkhoz is located five kilometers southeast of Zugdidi. Spanning 830 hectares, the site sits at the intersection of a road linking Zugdidi to Anaklia and a railway line connecting Tbilisi to Sokhumi (part of the broader route from Baku to Odessa). The tea plantations, named after Lavrentiy Beria, extend to the north and south of the residential zone. Meanwhile, the tea factory is situated across the main road, directly opposite the settlement's administrative center.

The settlement was designed according to a standardized Soviet framework that dictated everything from road dimensions to overall zoning. The master plan's key principles prioritized easy access to both the plantations and the factory, a centralized administrative and cultural hub, and a linear residential zone situated parallel to the industrial facilities.

Everything was meticulously calculated, to ensure that the zoning met the soviet standards. In the case of Ingiri, according to a general plan of the residential area (1940) - the housing complexes should have taken up 46.7% (23 hectares), administrative – 13.5%, citrus, and vegetable gardens – 15.1%, streets -14.6%, farm yard 10.1%. However, given that the construction was halted, general plan of 1968 provides different numbers.

Rozen Beraia, an engineer at the Kheta State Farm, was responsible for overseeing building construction and maintenance throughout the facility's active years.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the farm continued to function as an agricultural settlement, but faced a rapid decline in population and resources. Following the 1991 civil war, Abkhazian refugees settled in the residential buildings once occupied by farm workers, continuing agricultural activities. However, due to increasing urbanization, much of the population eventually migrated to cities, leaving Kheta, once a thriving state farm, largely overlooked. Those who remained have continued to cultivate citrus and, primarily, laurel, preserving the agricultural legacy of the area.

"A residential building was constructed for the workers and employees of the Khobi factory. The upper floor was occupied by factory workers and engineering-technical staff. The ground floor houses the factory administration, the party bureau, the factory trade union committee, and the committee of "Komkavshiri".

"In the Soviet citrus farm of Kheta, the construction of cultural and community service buildings is expanding more and more widely. Recently, a new club building was put into operation here, whose auditorium accommodates 250 people.
The club, which cost 200,000 rubles, includes a library, a billiard room, and a cinema hall.
In the photo: the new club building of the Kheta Soviet citrus farm

Photo: M. Tatarashvili"

In addition to individual projects, construction since the 1940s has often utilized standardized designs, most notably the famous Series 209 by architect L. Sumbadze. This series gained immense popularity not only within the republic (such as in the Kutaisi Auto Plant settlement, the Gori Cotton Combine settlement, and various state farms) but also abroad. For instance, residential houses based on this design were built in Victoria, Romania. The series features four variations: four-, eight-, twelve-, and ten-apartment corner layouts. All houses in the series are constructed using two types of side sections and one corner section.

The rooms are flexibly connected and, alongside the bathroom and kitchen block, form a compact apartment. A defining feature of this design is the open stairwell that extends directly onto the balcony. In Kheta, however, the design departs from the typical configuration: exterior stairs are attached to the corner of the building, and the main entrance is accessed through a portico beneath a protruding balcony.

Recent privatization of the area has led to the demolition of most existing buildings, including all residential blocks. According to our interviews with local residents, a new wellness complex is planned for construction on the site of the former Meurneoba.

In the 1940s, after Kheta was selected for citrus and laurel cultivation, the transformation of the land began. Previously overgrown with weeds, the area was systematically reorganized into productive plantations. During this same period, infrastructure and housing for farm workers were developed under the direction of the Georgian architect Solomon Kurdiani, who created the master plan for the settlement. The infrastructure included a network of main and secondary roads connecting plantations, storage facilities, and the primary transit route of the Khobi municipality.

In addition to infrastructure, Kurdiani was responsible for the layout of residential, administrative, and educational buildings within the farm. While he defined the overall linear expansion of the settlement, the typology of the residential buildings - known as type 209 - was designed by another prominent Georgian architect, Longinos Sumbadze.

At its height, Kheta was characterized by a dispersed settlement pattern without clearly defined boundaries. Buildings such as a hotel, state farm offices, and a kindergarten were scattered along the mountainside, surrounded by dense southern vegetation. Field roads followed the natural contours of the landscape, intersecting throughout the village. Additional elements: stone stairways, retaining walls, ponds, and pedestrian paths were carefully integrated into the terrain, forming a cohesive network of connections between structures. The main street, relatively short and linear, was densely lined with standardized housing and framed by a clubhouse and a sequence of individual residences. Despite some shortcomings in planning and development, the overall organization of the village can be considered largely successful.

The location of the state farm was deliberately chosen by Soviet agronomists and agricultural scientists, based on the land’s suitability for cultivating both citrus and laurel. The area offered ideal conditions: favorable climate, appropriate relative humidity, fertile agricultural soil, and a subtropical environment. Just as importantly, the site held historical significance. The village of Kheta is home to the “Mtavarangelozi” temple, reconstructed in 1885, though it is believed that an earlier pre-Christian temple once stood on the same site. Archaeological surveys have uncovered ancient hoes and other agricultural tools here, further emphasizing the land’s long-standing connection to cultivation.

Passing through the two entrance pillars and ascending Mount Urta, one moves among laurel plants and tangerine trees - the defining elements of Kheta, once a thriving Soviet state farm specializing in citrus and laurel production. This collective farm was among the most efficient and profitable in the Soviet Union, and therefore in Georgia as well. Even beyond its economic success, Kheta functioned as a well-organized rural settlement. However, before reaching its agricultural peak, the village underwent a long process of development that shaped its identity.

The locals of Khirsa today, display and express the key trials and tribulations of the village as well as many former soviet agricultural hubs of Georgia. While many of them expressed their admiration for the past and surviving agriculture of Khirsa as well as the work ethic of workers from the population, a lot of local residents added to the discussion of economic and infrastructural struggles of the region. Many expressed their troubles about damaged houses, roofs and roads of the village, as well as limited resources. Many locals additionally discussed the overall diminishing population of the village, as most of the past residents have either fully moved into larger populations, villages and cities, or either work there. The lack of available transportation and road infrastructure was also mentioned as an everyday struggle for locals, with the singular Khirsa-Rustavi “marshrutka” that operates once a day, being the main source of public transportation in the village. 

The image of Khirsa as an agricultural, social, and cultural hub, though seemingly grew faint in the present due to the rapid urbanization, centralization, economic changes and the fall in many rural settlements of Georgia, Khirsa has a diminished population, resources and support from the government. Today, Khirsas population amounts to about 350 people, with most still working in agriculture. The remaining and present architecture of the village, though, is still a great indicator and a display of the past agricultural achievements and the performance of Khirsa. With most of the remaining infrastructure being built in the 20th century, it is a great indicator of how Khirsa looked and operated during its prime.

During the soviet union, Khirsa became a winemaking hub of Georgia and in turn - the whole soviet union. After it was rebuilt and resuscitated, Meurneoba of Khirsa was established in 1932 and occupied 1072 hectares, while the vineyards were cultivated from 520 hectares.

During its prime, the village of Khirsa had a thriving wine factory, Auxiliary cattle farm, decor park, orchard garden, dispensary, post office, pharmacy, library, nursery school, middle/elementary school, evening school, cult goods, industrial and grocery stores, workers’ canteen and a night club. The degree of winemaking, the quality of the wine and the overall product of the Khirsa agriculture granted it the “Order of Honor” in 1971. 

In the Sighnaghi municipality of Kakheti region, a main road lined with pine trees brings us into the center of Khirsa, a once thriving agricultural hub that unfortunately shares the same fate as most other rural settlements in Georgia. Khirsa as its legend suggests got its name from King Erekle of Georgia, who, exhausted, decided to rest and urged a peasant to bring him wine. Even though the peasant was late with his request, upon tasting, the king exclaimed: "ღირსო” (ghirso) or it was worth it. 

The territory of the Khirsa settlement today has a vast and long history that begins even before its winemaking. According to the Georgian Soviet Encyclopedia, in about 1000 BC, the territory harbored a large town-type settlement where the production of ceramics was developed. Even after the gradual decline of the town in the 6th century BC, the territory still played a great role in the religious life of Kakheti, due to the monastery founded here by Stefane Kizikeli (Stephane Khirseli) in the 6th century. 

"Mejvriskhevi Poultry Farm Primary School (incomplete secondary school)

On October 10, 1973, a primary school was opened for the children of workers of the newly built Mejvriskhevi Poultry Farm. Its head was appointed to be a young teacher with great organizational talent, Nino Iluridze. She made significant efforts in establishing the new school.

Initially, the school had only 24 students. Over time, the number of students increased, and new teachers joined the school.

On August 20, 1987, the primary school was transformed into an incomplete secondary school, and Mzia Sukhishvili was appointed as its director. Mrs. Mzia initiated many positive developments and established excellent traditions within the school."

"Under the leadership and authorship of Irakli Marghishvili, together with other architect colleagues, a poultry farm settlement was designed and implemented, including residential houses and public buildings such as a club-canteen, a kindergarten, a shop, an administrative building, and other facilities. This farm settlement was awarded a gold medal at the All-Union Agricultural Exhibition. Under his leadership, and together with other authors of the project, during the 1980s–1990s a project was developed for the restoration and reconstruction of the Eristavi Palace (Manana Eristavi). In 1999, I. Marghishvili was awarded the Order of Honour.

Simon Guluashvili"

On the road to Mejvriskhevi, the only sign of a once-thriving settlement hidden behind the poplar trees is an obelisk topped with a bronze rooster. The highway divides the area into two parts: a factory and its facilities located on the east side of the road, and a work village on the west. The bronze rooster symbolizes this poultry factory, which consists of several abandoned buildings that used to produce meat and eggs. The toponym of the village, "Pabrikis Dasakhleba" (translated as "Factory Settlement"), points out the significance of the industry to the community. To those unfamiliar with the Soviet Union, the notion of a work village might be unclear. It is a semi-urban locality, fully dedicated to the nearby industries and built for the employees of these facilities.

According to the 2014 Georgian census, the population had decreased to 370 people. The abandoned houses, the destroyed town hall, and the malfunctioning public infrastructure are indications of this decline. Since 2018, the settlement has no longer existed as a separate administrative unit and has merged with Mejvriskhevi. The economic recession caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union, ethnic conflicts with Ossetians (who made up the majority of the factory's workforce), and an overall urbanization trend are the major causes of the Pabrika settlement's decline. The resettlement of internally displaced people from the Tskhinvali region did little to stop it.

Two identical houses facing each other are located at the entrance of the residential sector of the Mejvriskhevi poultry farm. This housing type is characterized by a clerestory roof and a carved-out central space with a dividing wall. Each two-story house contains two apartments, symmetrically placed along the central axis. Each apartment has an internal staircase for circulation and an exterior staircase leading to the attic. Bedrooms and living rooms face the road, while service spaces overlook the garden. The carved-out space in the center was designed for outdoor activities, as indicated by the built-in fireplace in the wall dividing the two apartments.

Structurally, the building utilizes a concrete frame infilled with brick walls, topped by a timber roof structure. Over time, residents heavily modified most of these buildings by constructing extensions and frequently walling off the central recessed space. While similar architectural typologies can be found at other state farms, such as the poultry farm in Koda, this specific design is less prevalent than simpler models due to its relatively complex spatial layout and structural system.

Gable-roofed buildings represent another prevalent housing typology found in Mejvriskhevi and other state farms constructed during the 1980s. In this design, two apartments are housed under a single roof, separated by a dividing wall that extends across the entire property line. The building's core contains a service area and a staircase leading to living spaces and bedrooms distributed across three distinct split levels. All bedrooms are situated on the second floor; the smaller rooms feature access to private balconies, while the primary bedroom offers views of both the street and the garden.

The centrally divided building occupies two narrow plots partitioned by a low concrete wall. These plots are further subdivided into functional zones for various agricultural uses, terminating in a shed designed for equipment storage. As with other structures in Mejvriskhevi, these houses have undergone extensive modifications to accommodate the needs of their current occupants.

The factory settlement, also known by the name of its regional center, Mejvriskhevi, is located in the Gori municipality. It was built in the 1970s by SakSoplMshenSakhProekti, the Soviet Georgian institute dedicated to rural architecture. The architects of the settlement were I. Margishvili, D. Mordebadze, L. Mchedlishvili, N. Kurdiani, and T. Kvertskhishvili (Tbilisi Architecture Archive, n.d.). Due to an unfortunate lack of recorded data on the settlement, most information is either provided verbally by locals or based on observations of the area's current condition. According to locals, the poultry factory employed about 1,500 workers, approximately 80% of whom were ethnic Ossetians.

The Mejvriskhevi settlement and its industrial zone are physically divided by a road, effectively separating the residential and working environments. The residential sector primarily consists of various housing typologies and educational facilities. The local club building, once a vital community gathering place, was gradually demolished in the early 2000s as the settlement was slowly abandoned.

In Soviet times, this plantation used to generate real income. Today, Verena Sulmanidze maintains it only for her own needs and to share the harvest with neighbors and friends. Around 25 trees, 500 kilos of mandarins; that was last year’s yield. Everyone who could lend a hand came to help harvest the trees, which were weighed down with fruit. She is proud of them. And once again this year, she is plan5ng new trees to replace those lost to the winter. Even if they no longer bring in money, her love for the fruits hasn’t faded.

Seventy-three-year-old Valiko Shanidze is cutting grass for his cows. He has worked in agriculture all his life. Today, he feels, his work is barely appreciated anymore. That isn’t fair, he says, because the job is tough and tiring. Surviving on the harvest is getting harder and harder. These days he earns only 5 lari per kilo of hazelnuts. That used to be different. Politicians have millions, he says, while he’s expected to be grateful that his wage barely keeps him alive.

"A Dream Come True,
The vision of Soviet engineers is being successfully realized

Tea Leaf Harvesting Machines! These machines testify to the boundless achievements and capabilities of Soviet technology. They are machines with enormous potential - machines of the future. At present, they are undergoing extensive production trials on the tea plantations of our district. Designers and mechanics, scientific researchers and agronomists, ordinary tea growers and other agricultural specialists are carefully and attentively observing the operation, studying the shortcomings of these machineries and the ways to overcome them.

A broad road ahead for the harvesting machines - these newest heroes of tea plantation mechanization! May we soon see them operating smoothly on every tea plantation, proudly moving along the rows of tea bushes and filling the approaches to the tea factories with an abundance of “green gold”!

In the photograph: Production testing of tea leaf harvesting machines on the tea plantations of our district."

"Farm workers and collective farm employees! Widely introduce the preparation of peat-manure composts in your farms. In this way, you will increase the amount of high quality organic fertilizers in your farm by one third.

For every one ton of peat, mix: 20 kg of lime or 20–30 kg of phosphate rock flour, 300 kg to 1000 kg of manure.

With the systematic use of peat-manure composts under tea and citrus crops, you will ensure high and stable yields of tea and citrus crops."

"Students of the agricultural technical school of the Goraberejouli (Chokhatauri district) are actively helping the workers of the Soviet farm in Nasakirali with picking tea leaves.

In the photo: third-year students of the horticulture and vegetable-growing department of the technical school in a tea plantation. In the foreground - a transitional red banner established for students of the leading brigade.

Photo by N. Erkomashvili"

"Georgian Tea
It is superior in quality, aroma, taste, and brew.

Georgian Tea is prepared from the delicate leaves of the tea bush grown in our Soviet subtropics in the Georgian SSR. The leaves of the tea bush are processed into tea at special tea factories of the trust "Chay Gruzii" (Tea of Georgia), equipped according to the latest word in global technology.
Unskillful brewing can ruin the quality of the prepared tea.

Remember and follow these rules:

1. Store tea in a glass or tin container, tightly closing the lid. To avoid the absorption of foreign odors, store tea in a dry place and away from strong-smelling products and substances.
2. For tea, take only fresh water, do not reheat cooled boiled water.
3. The teapot must be perfectly clean, heat the teapot before brewing (rinse with boiling water).
4. After pouring the tea into the teapot, pour boiling water over it no more than two-thirds of the teapot's capacity.
5. Cover the teapot with a towel or a napkin and keep it closed for 5 minutes.
6. After this, top it up with boiling water, and you will get a wonderful tea with a pleasant aroma and taste."

"In the photo: the View of the House of Culture of the Naruja Tea Meurneoba

Photos by Z. Samsonia"

The building is a two-story, L-shaped structure defined by a prominent, curved central focal point where its two rectangular wings converge. This central hinge acts as the main entrance and features a grand portico with four tall, classical-style columns that support a series of arches extending to the full height of the facade.

The building's interior layout places a main staircase near this central entrance, leading into a series of regular, rectangular rooms that extend down the length of each wing. The exterior facade, depicted with a pale stucco finish and a red roof in the architectural scale model, displays a distinct fenestration hierarchy. The ground level is punctuated by standard rectangular windows, while the upper level is distinguished by arched windows, several of which open onto small, individual balconies enclosed by metal railings.

The Naruja farm was established in 1946. It was formed by consolidating agricultural territories from Laituri, Anaseuli, parts of Adjara, Lashe, and Zvani. The enterprise operated as a highly profitable economic center in Guria. It managed 550 hectares of high-quality tea plantations. Harvested tea was processed in a local factory and exported throughout the Soviet Union, including to Kazakhstan. The complex maintained diverse agricultural production, featuring separate mandarin and lemon orchards, feijoa plantings, and a 21-hectare vineyard. It also operated extensive livestock facilities, fish ponds, and beehives. Following the dissolution of the Soviet system, the farm's inventory and machinery were auctioned to local residents. Significant portions of the spatial infrastructure were dismantled, including the large community club and the tea processing facilities, while the original plantations were largely cleared.

The social and architectural core of the settlement included an administrative building, a school, a store, and a brigade house that functioned as a dormitory for visiting students. A large community club was also built on the site, designed to accommodate approximately 450 people.

For now, the difference between past and present settlement is highly drastic. It’s easy to notice what kind of importance this soviet regime had for this settlement. Sovkhoz-based settlements have now completely changed towards mere residential settlements with additional objects associated with nowadays (Product shop “Magniti” instead of the public cafeteria, beer factory instead of the consumer service factory). Some characteristic changes consist, also building a church in the middle of the utility yard, like after the Soviet Union was demolished people had freedom in their religion. 

Some buildings had been demolished and in their place, were built new buildings with the same function. A clear example is the kindergarten which for now is demolished completely and in its place is built a new modern kindergarten. Some buildings are maintained as they were from the start but have changed programs. In place of the club, now there is a sports center and building where in the past there was a clinic, now it has residential purpose. In the industrial sector, where wine factories and fruit packing factories were located, most buildings were maintained, but instead, now there are “Magniti” and “Gvirila” companies’ offices. 

Especially noticeable is the quantity of additions to the buildings, which nearly completely covered the real facades of the original buildings. Also small residential buildings, warehouses, and garages, literally covered 90% of open green spaces which existed between or behind the buildings. Most of the private single-floor buildings are half demolished, which significantly altered their appearance. Instead of the standard façade, each building now has a ‘unique’ facade, which now depends on the resident, not on the Soviet government. 

Even though Varketili is part of Tbilisi, the lifestyle in this particular region is similar to the countryside lifestyle, like some people still have cattle, own farming animals, etc.  As for vineyards and orchards, the reason for which this farming was built, exists no more. 

"The farm strictly follows regional agricultural regulations, implementing advanced farming techniques based on the latest scientific research and proven industry best practices."

"Orchards are treated with pesticides using specialized equipment, reaching a mechanization level of 80 to 85 percent. The farm boasts hundreds of tractors of various makes, 50 trucks and specialized vehicles, and a wide array of other agricultural machinery."

"Brigadier Revaz Barbakadze gives an assignment to tractor driver Shota Devsurashvili"

"In accordance with agricultural regulations, all soil cultivation, fertilizer application, and pest and disease control are performed within optimal seasonal timeframes."

"Agronomist V. Tsiklauri (left) gives an assignment to machine operator M."

"High availability of agricultural machinery has boosted efficiency, allowing each production worker to manage an average of two hectares of perennial crops."

"These types of reservoirs are used to store Wine of Varketili"

"The Varketili production zone comprises several enterprises, including a primary winemaking facility capable of processing 4,000 tons of grapes per season."

"Fruit yields average 8 to 9 metric tons per hectare. Once the Varketili orchards reach full production capacity, the farm will yield 4,500 tons of fruit annually."

"Winemakers Z. Tkemaladze and J. Kvaratskava"

"Worker Keto Gogiashvili and foremanKetevan Buadze picking apples."

"Autumn is a golden season in Varketili. Fleet after fleet of trucks depart the farm, heavily laden with fragrant, juicy produce. To serve the capital, the farm operates its own flagship store, offering fresh fruits and grapes directly to city residents."

"The manager of the 4th agricultural department, A. Keldishvili (lett), and the agronomist, V. Ardzhevanidze, checking the quality of apples."

"Leading fruit picker Meri Tutiashvili"

"Grapes and tree fruit are the farm's primary crops, with vineyards covering 700 hectares and orchards occupying another 650. Staggered fruit ripening times help extend the sales season, ensuring a steady supply of fresh produce for the public.
In the Picture: Varketili’s young agricultural workers, Manana Tauri (left) and Manoli Kordzadze."

"The fruit harvest in Varketili runs from May through the end of October. From apples, pears, and quince to figs, pomegranates, peaches, plums, and apricots—it is difficult to list all the diverse fruits and varieties grown on the farm.

In the Picture: A mass apple harvest in progress."

"The premises of the Varketili Soviet viticulture farm has been further beautified by the new school building. On September 1, students will celebrate the start of the academic year in well - equipped, bright classrooms.

The beautiful two-story building has ten classrooms for 320 students, physics and chemistry labs, a Pioneers' room, a sports club, a training workshop, a cafeteria, and other auxiliary spaces; It is equipped with central heating. The Soviet farm has already provided the school with educational equipment worth 8,950 rubles, and a piano for the sports club.

The school building is designed for a secondary school. Until now, there was only an eight-year school here. From September 1, it will become a full secondary school. The construction of the school has been directly supervised by the director of the Varketili Soviet viticulture farm, I. Kaviladze.

Z. Ramisvhili"

In the case of the central settlement, for seasonal workers, two 3-floor houses were built, each for 106 men, with living space 1149.7 km2. As for permanent workers, in whole ‘Sovkhoz’ (it includes the population of Lilo Sovkhoz) had to be built: 
•8 houses: 3 sections with 18 apartments, with 574m2 living space each. 
•9 houses: 2 sections with 12 apartments, with 382m2 living space each. 
•2 houses: single apartments with living space 49.08m2 each. 
Altogether common living space required 8136m2. 

In the expansion, there was a public cafeteria with 50 seats, a bakery for 0.6tn bread for each shift, a bathhouse, and a laundry with 12 seats and 170 linen. Also built a consumer service factory (kombinat bitavova obslujvane), a club with seats for 200 people, a fire station for 1 car and sports core (sportivnoe yadro) with complex for sports equipment: football square, running path, light athletics sector, tribune, pavilion (dressing rooms with showers), toilet, etc. 

All residential and public utility buildings were designed with capital: 
•Foundations were with rubble concrete 
•The walls were with bricks 
•Floors were from reinforced concrete, prefabricated monolithic. 
•Roof with asbestos plywood, partially rolled. 
The square under the residential and communal sector consisted of 23.22ha.

This building complex is made up of four identical, square structures lined up in a row. They are all connected by a long, covered walkway. In the center, a fifth, larger rectangular building is attached to the walkway and functions as an administrative unit.

All the buildings are single-story with gently sloping roofs. The four smaller buildings feature large windows to let in plenty of natural light, along with small, raised porches by the front doors.

“Varketili Sovkhoz” was planted in the “Valley of Samgori” (Samgoris veli), which at first was called “Verketila” (“no good”, “no kind”) because of the desert and drought that was in this place. Only one tree with a little stream and three salty lakes (Kukia Lake, Avlabari Lake, and Ialguniani Lake) was like a little oasis in this place. Everything changed after the construction of the Samgori’s irrigation channel, which channeled water of the Iori River to one of the lakes which then created the “Tbilisi Sea” (Tbilisi reservoir, or Samgori reservoir). Construction was in progress from 1946-1950 and finished in the Spring of 1951.

In 1960 the local Georgian Soviet Union government decided to expand the whole territory of Varketili Sovkhoz at the cost of the territories of Lilo Sovkhoz. After expansion, the whole territory of Varketili Sovkhoz was 2728.8 ha, which consisted of plots for several vineyards, several kinds of orchards, and also a central settlement, an industrial site and utility yard, a farm of animal husbandry, a settlement of “Patara Lilo”, and a forest park near the central settlement. In the case of the farming territories, they planned to add some new farming cultures such as animal husbandry and milk production culture.

Each type of farming culture had its sector which was protected from strong winds by protective lines of evergreen trees. The last mentioned was considered by typology of plots, whether they were irrigated or rain-fed. For the first one strips were associated with the irrigation canal and were projected: as eight-row, four-row, and double-row. As for the rain-fed zone, there were only four-row and double-row. 

The creation of Varketili Sovkhoz (“Varketilis Meurneoba”) drove major changes in Tbilisi’s expansion and the creation of two new landmarks. It was an important part of the whole Soviet Union Kolkhoz.

In 1952, the Georgian council of the Soviet Union issued a decree to begin the construction of the Varketili Sovkhoz, and by 1957, a state farm dedicated to vineyards and orchards was officially established on the territory. Workers from various agricultural regions of Georgia—who had initially been brought in to construct the Samgori Channel—settled in small communities near the sovkhoz. During this period, the area's name shifted from "Verketila" to "Varketili" (meaning "good" or "kind"). Initially, the total territory of the sovkhoz spanned approximately 2,000 hectares.

During this period, the workforce continued to grow. Once it exceeded 800 men, construction began on Varketili’s Central Settlement (Tsentralnaya Usadzba Varketili). The master plan included 46 two-story residential buildings alongside various cultural, communal, and industrial facilities. The development featured a sports complex with a stadium, a middle school for 320 students, and a combined nursery and kindergarten accommodating 135 children.

A researcher offers insights into her work in the institute's laboratories.

Dr. Temur Revishvili gives a tour of the grounds and explains the architectural features of the Tea Institute.

Dr. Temur Revishvili talks about his work in the Institute of Tea, Subtropical Cultures and Tea Production

On the site of the ancient village of Ozurseti, the city of Makharadze grew up, the center of the largest tea-growing region

In 1951, on Stalin’s initiative, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) adopted a historic resolution on the broad development of tea culture.

During Stalin's five-year plans, the All-Union Scientific Research Institute of Tea and Subtropical Crops was established.

Researchers at the institute are studying the biochemical properties of tea.

The Institute maintains continuous contact with collective farms. Candidate of Sciences S.Kh. Piruhalaishvili conducts a discussion at a collective farm with the team of Hero of Socialist Labor D. Takidve.