Vilniaus miesto centrinės dalies vizualinio identiteto apsaugos prioritetai

LTPateikiami kai kurie atlikto tyrimo rezultatai, atskleidžiantys centrinės sostinės dalies vizualinio identiteto struktūrą, jos elementų hierarchiją ir svarbiausius apsaugos uždavinius. Atliekant darbą buvo analizuojami pasaulinėje urbanistikoje žinomi darbai (tarp jų ir taikyti skirtingoms ekonominės plėtros sistemoms), įvertinami esminiai Vilniaus miesto urbanistinės raidos ir gamtinės aplinkos ypatumai, apibrėžiamas probleminės plėtros arealas ir vizualiniam identitetui keliančios grėsmę tendencijos. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Apsauga; Hierarchija; Hierarchija, Vilniaus miestas; Miesto vaizdas; Miestovaizdis; Plėtra; Urbanistinė morfostruktūra; Vilnius; Vizualinis identitetas; Development; Hierarchy, Vilnius city; Protection; Townscape; Urban morphologic structure; Vilnius; Visual identity; Visual identity, townscape, urban morphologic structure, development, protection, hierarchy.

ENThe article presents specific results of the accomplished investigation that reveals the structure of visual identity of the central area of Vilnius city as well as the hierarchy of its elements, and the main tasks of its protection. Analysis of similar urban practices in the world (including those at different systems of economic development) was carried out during the process of the work. Substantial characteristics of the urban development and natural environment of Vilnius were evaluated. The area of problematic development was defined considering the tendencies that make a threat against the city's identity. The visual identity of bigger towns is predetermined first of all by the environmental distinctiveness of their central districts. Together with the physical quality of the centre environment, a significant role is played by the variety of social activities that marks the overall potential of cultural life in a city. It is observed that the ranking positions of the most of European cities are established not by their size but rather by the specific features that describe the identity of their central areas (e.g. Strasbourg, Geneva, Weimar, Krakow, etc.). Especially central areas in capital cities receive most of attention. They are identified structurally and considered in detail. Being diverse by their own urban content, multifunctional activities, and proportions of both built-up and open spaces, visual characteristics of townscape and urban development perspectives, the central areas of cities require enhanced attention towards well-considered and consistent development. [Text from author]The methods of protecting the visual identity of Vilnius city and prognoses for its upcoming changes still remain insufficiently analysed problems. Great differences in natural and urban morphogenesis that exist among cities demand special investigation of identity characteristics for each city, and individual strategy is required for its protection. The area of Vilnius city under study is over 56 sq. km or 14% of the total area of the city. A huge variety of represented images in the area was developed by the influence of unique natural and urban features through the ages of history. Comparison of important image parameters (housing type in districts, the height of housing, positioning of vertical dominant buildings with respect to natural elements, etc.) led to a conclusion that allowed to describe this area as a rich mosaic of different townscapes. Aiming at protecting and sustaining this exceptional urban structure, its texture was identified and its composites were ranked under the hierarchy of both value and sustainability. The following conclusions were made: a) A strong accent in the morphological structure of the area is the Upper Castle and its environment that makes a visual and semantic dominant, marks crossing of the main historic compositional axes and serves as an "entrance" to the historic centre.It is also the most important overview point of the city's panorama. b) Ideas for the further development of the central area of the capital city should not change the natural and urban morphostructure destructively but rather enhance it in the urban and semantic field. c) The physical parameters of high-rise buildings should not level the existing diversity of townscapes. Possible places for insertion of such buildings should be determined by the principles which under the established hierarchy protect the elements of urban structure determining the visual identity of the city. d) There is need for a system of regulations working according to self-regulating principles and protecting priority values without setting limitations on investment initiative in the spheres where such activities are possible within certain parameters. [Text from author]

• Sociologija / Sociology
• Istorija / History