www.ssoar.info

Gentrification in (): the example of Uzupis Standl, Harald; Krupickaitė, Dovilė

Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article

Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Standl, H., & Krupickaitė, D. (2004). Gentrification in Vilnius (Lithuania): the example of Uzupis. Europa Regional, 12.2004(1), 42-51. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-48092-5

Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Deposit-Lizenz (Keine This document is made available under Deposit Licence (No Weiterverbreitung - keine Bearbeitung) zur Verfügung gestellt. Redistribution - no modifications). We grant a non-exclusive, non- Gewährt wird ein nicht exklusives, nicht übertragbares, transferable, individual and limited right to using this document. persönliches und beschränktes Recht auf Nutzung dieses This document is solely intended for your personal, non- Dokuments. Dieses Dokument ist ausschließlich für commercial use. All of the copies of this documents must retain den persönlichen, nicht-kommerziellen Gebrauch bestimmt. all copyright information and other information regarding legal Auf sämtlichen Kopien dieses Dokuments müssen alle protection. You are not allowed to alter this document in any Urheberrechtshinweise und sonstigen Hinweise auf gesetzlichen way, to copy it for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the Schutz beibehalten werden. Sie dürfen dieses Dokument document in public, to perform, distribute or otherwise use the nicht in irgendeiner Weise abändern, noch dürfen Sie document in public. dieses Dokument für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke By using this particular document, you accept the above-stated vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, aufführen, vertreiben oder conditions of use. anderweitig nutzen. Mit der Verwendung dieses Dokuments erkennen Sie die Nutzungsbedingungen an. Gentrification in Vilnius (Lithuania) – the example of Užupis

.. HARALD STANDL and DOVILE KRUPICKAITE

Introduction “With the fall of the iron curtain and the economic liberalization that fol- lowed, gentrification has also become a feature of eastern European cities …” (LEES 2000, p. 390), but in the Location of the meantime, not much research has of Vilnius and of Uzupis been done to analyse the process, and publications on this topic are still rare. However, due to the studies prepared, V iln for example by HARDTH, HERLYN and ia SCHELLER (1996), WEISKE (1996) or HERFERT (2003), the knowledge of

t changes in some East German cities is e

e

r t quite good. The fieldwork for this s

s street e io research-project on Vilnius was done i up l i Uz in July and August 2003 with the help P of students at , Dept. of Geography and supervised by the authors. Approx. 260 house- holds were interviewed in two differ- ent parts of the historical centre of Vilnius (see Map 1), especially in the middle-age suburb of Užupis (200 interviews). The control-area (60 in- terviews) is located in the Old Town, east of Pilies (Castle) street. The questions focused on living-conditions of the inhabitants and on recent socio- economic changes. Due to the fact that each point can not be presented Old Town of Vilnius in detail, this paper will show the Area of former castles Uzupis (main research area) main trends occurring in Užupis, with Old Town area compared Boundary of the World Heritage Site to Uzupis specific reference to those trends in Boundary of the Old Town (formerly fortified) the centre of the Old Town of Vilnius, Main historic routes River 0 500m IfL 2004 providing that extreme structural dif- Cartography: H.Steffgen-Belz, R.Bräuer ferences can be observed. The main goal is two-fold: 1) To determine if Map 1: Location of the Old Town of Vilnius and of Užupis gentrification has already started and Source: Revitalisation... 2003 2) to analyse what stage of develop- ment has been achieved in restructur- sovereignties, inviting merchants, - until the merger of Lithuania and ing the historical part of the Lithua- men and representatives of the Catho- in 1569. “After the Great Fire of nian capital twelve years after Lithua- lic Church to Vilnius, to build up a 1471 new streets were built and in nia gained independence from the town next to his newly founded castle. 1503 - 1522 a five gate defence wall . In fact, the number of inhabitants in was erected, enclosing the most dense- Vilnius increased rapidly, especially ly populated part of the city and History of the Old Town of Vilnius after the final defeat of the Livonian protecting it from possible Tartar inva- The name of Vilnius was first men- (German) Order in 1410, which led to sions.” (Vilnius Old Town Revitalisa- tioned in 1323 in a letter written by the long-lasting political stability and tion … 2003, p. 5). The area south of , the Grand Duke of Lithua- rise of Lithuania as a leading power in the and Neris cov- nia, addressed to European cities and Eastern . Vilnius was its capital ered 300 ha. In 1579, the Vilnius

42 EUROPA REGIONAL 12(2004)1 University was established, which still 1959, 1972 - 1974 and 1988 - 1992), tion of these buildings was often in dominates the northern part of the only small amounts of money were extreme disrepair, they nevertheless Old Town (west of ). Al- invested for repairs such as patching often stood under protection as histor- though Vilnius had lost its political roofs and walls or repairing windows ical monuments or ensembles and power to , it had developed and doors. In the beginning of the could not be torn down. Hence, at the into a cultural centre of the large , most of the buildings in the Old beginning of 1996 nearly 120 buildings Middle and North European Region, Town of Vilnius, which had been remained unused and in disrepair in famous for its religious tolerance and nationalized or expropriated during the Old Town, (i. e. without windows, diversity. Besides the community of Soviet time, were in deplorable sani- doors or a waterproof roof). In the the (and the Jesuit tary condition or even uninhabitable. meantime, a large number could be Order), the Jewish community was What happened to the real estate renovated (partly by using foreign most active. At the end of the 19th in 1991, the year of national indepen- loans) under supervision of the mu- century, approx. 100 synagogues and dence? Although a restitution law was nicipality and sold afterwards to in- religious schools existed in Vilne (the passed on June 18, giving those vestors. As a result, the central part of Jiddish name for Vilnius). The town individuals who had up-to-date Lithua- the Old Town (around Pilies street as was first called “The Jerusalem of the nian nationality and a permanent the main N-S-axis) underwent a fast North” by , as the legend residency the chance to lay appropri- economic revitalisation during the says, on his campaign to . The ate claims to regain illegitimately lost mid 1990s (STANDL 2002, 2003), boost- majority of inhabitants spoke Polish titles, less than 200 residential build- ed by a growing number of interna- and lived in quite poor circumstances. ings were returned to their former tional tourists visiting the impressive During the 18th century, the small class owners in Vilnius (STANDL 2002). In churches and profound buildings with of rich aristocrats donated money for most cases, only various churches their magnificent courtyards. erecting impressive churches, built in could gain beneficence from this kind style. After the third and last of restitution of property rights. Fur- Some special aspects of the medieval division of the Lithuanian-Polish state thermore, the Lithuanian legislation suburb Užupis in 1795, the majority of Lithuania went invoked extensive exceptions as well Užupis is the oldest suburb of Vilnius, to Russia and Vilnius became a prov- as requirements in order to provide located on a hill east of the (formerly) ince-centre ruled by a General Gover- restitution by national compensatory walled Old Town. The picturesque nor. Shortly thereafter (in 1799 - 1805), payments. But most of the buildings relief was formed by a meandering of the defence wall and its gates were underwent the so-called ‘Mass Privati- the small river called Vilnia. Histori- destroyed. But the most harmful peri- sation’, under the “Law on Privatisa- ans believe that Užupis had already od for the town was during World War tion of Flats” (May 28, 1991). In the existed as a settlement long ago, but II. Under Nazi-German occupation, course of this extremely accelerated the suburb was first mentioned in the two large were established and privatisation process the past tenants 15th century in a foundation-docu- subsequently destroyed in 1943 when, were shifted into an unprecedented ment of a monastery. The special during , their inhabitants state of legal affairs. So-called ‘Invest- location of Užupis, separated from the were killed in the surrounding . ment Cheques’, distributed for free to lower Old Town by the river, but The genocide served to drastically the inhabitants of Lithuania by the connected by two, and later, three influence the urban structure of the state, could be used to acquire new bridges leading to two different town Old Town. After the occupation by the dwellings at a relatively inexpensive gates, resulted in a relatively different Soviet army and the integration of price. After privatisation, the new socio-economic development in a Lithuania into the USSR, Vilnius be- owners were then allowed complete unique (sub-)urban structure. The main came the capital of a newly created freedom to decide on the use of their street-axis (in direction W-E), today Soviet Republic. But due to the fact new dwelling, including options to known as Užupio und Polocko street, that the Jewish community had been rent, lease or even resell the dwelling. was a part of an important route as far extinguished and many Polish inhabit- This form of mass privatisation of back as the middle-ages, connecting ants had taken flight, the majority of former state property was accom- Vilnius with famous Russian trade- the buildings stood empty at the end plished in Lithuania quickly and centres like Vitebsk und Polotsk. of World War II. The area of the consistently. As a result, a rapidly Since the 17th century, the upper part former ghettos was cleared from its growing real estate market emerged of this main street in Užupis belonged burnt down ruins and partly built up (STANDL 2003). But still, the market to the . into a modern (or a-historic) function- for leasing flats and houses in Vilnius Many clerical officials lived there in al style. Socio-economically weak indi- (and in Lithuania overall) was not buildings. The eastern banks of viduals from the surroundings of Vilnius significant. In fact, only a few foreign the Vilnia were settled by craftsmen and even from Belorussia and Russia companies rented for their who used the water power for produc- moved into the remaining houses in employees. The buildings which were tion of wooden, iron and leather the Old Town, which contributed to its not denationalised, usually consisting goods. They usually lived in small long lasting period of decline. Al- of uninhabited or otherwise unusable wooden houses, which remain partly though three separate plans for reno- houses in the Old Town of Vilnius, standing until now. vating the Old Town were drafted remained in possession of the munic- During the end of the 19th and the during the Soviet Period (in 1958 - ipality. Although the structural condi- beginning of the 20th century, rich

43 inhabitants of Vilnius recognized preparing annual programs for Old lic of Užupis”, which was founded in Užupis as an attractive place to live Town revitalisation like the develop- 1998. Looking for “authenticity”, with its beautiful views of the Old ment of infrastructure which included “peace” and “nature”, he was one of Town, especially from the northern the repair of street lights, and also the first newcomers in an slope. They erected villas mainly along allocated subsidies to renew the that had an extremely bad reputation. Užupio street, where a tramway-line façades and roofs of Old Town build- Only “social outsiders” were living was established to connect the suburb ings. One of the main problems there at that time, which made it “the with the centre of the city. But still this caused by mass-privatisation of flats highest and lowest place in Vilnius” quarter was more socio-economically in 1991 and 1992 was the fact that the (high in topography and low in separated from, rather than integrated legislature (until July 2001) had not society), with a community of inhabit- with the rest of the town. managed to address the questions of ants “waiting for changes”. But the This very special infrastructure of who was to be financially and effec- self-defined role of an artist like Užupis became even more diversified tively responsible for executing re- Romas was not a missionary one, but with the opening of the new building pairs on the façades and roofs of the rather of self-realization. for the Academy of Fine Arts in 1981. multi-family-buildings. Due to that After he was unlucky in finding a Hundreds of students graduated from omission, the owners and inhabitants house on the top of the hill, Mr. this academy, and many were fascinat- of the private houses were not very Lileikis decided to live near the river ed with Užupis, both by the liberal motivated in spending money on Vilnia as a symbol of the “circle of atmosphere and by the opportunity to repairing the façades of their build- nature” of “constancy and change”, occupy empty houses waiting for ings. As a result, most of the houses in which also “creates an island” inside them. Thus, they were the first en- the Old Town of Vilnius exhibited the urban space. Anyway it was cheap trants in the beginning process of unsightly staircases, roofs and cellars to live in Užupis, and the pioneers had gentrification. Many others followed which were in very bad disrepair. no money to expend. Thus, many their example and moved to Užupis, However, in order to benefit from the followed Romas’ example and simply intensively changing the social struc- subsidies, private homeowners had to occupied empty houses, mainly along ture of the quarter. sign partnership agreements with the romantic river, located near the OTRA, stating that they would in- Academy of Fine Arts (see Map 2). The influence and results of the deed invest the money in the renova- The reaction of the “autochthonic” “Vilnius Old Town Revitalisation tion of their along with the people at first was quite reserved, at Program” restoration of the rest of the building. best, and sometimes even aggressive, After the historic city centre of Vilnius This method proved to be a successful at worst. “They were afraid that we was included into the UNESCO World vehicle in encouraging the owners of were going to destroy their world, and Heritage List in December 1994, there flats to spend money on repairing the some of them even attacked me with came an increase in international and whole building, instead of executing knives. My was broken up several national political pressure on local repairs only on their own apartments. times by vandals, but due to the fact authorities to renew and revitalise the The results achieved since 1998 are that I constantly spoke to my neigh- Old Town. In 1995, the Republic of summarised in the “Old Town Revital- bours in Russian, I was able to create Lithuania – in the name of the City of isation Programme … 2003”. The an atmosphere of trust and tolerance. Vilnius – successfully appealed to the majority of public money invested Anyway, I tried to integrate myself in International Bank for Reconstruc- (1999: 22 Mio. LTL or 5.5 Mio US $; their society” (Romas Lileikis). tion and Development (IBRD) for 2000 - 2002: Approx. 4 Mio. LTL or But the most helpful aspect in Mr. technical and financial assistance to 1,160 Mio. per year) was Lileikis eyes was the fact that the prepare the urgently needed “Vilnius allocated from the State budget. The people of Užupis recognized that the Old Town Revitalisation Strategy”. In strategy was to primarily upgrade the prices for flats in Užupis were increas- 1995 and 1996 an international group most frequented part of Vilnius’ Old ing. Selling an or a house of Danish, Scottish and Lithuanian Town, especially along the tourist could be a profitable deal, especially experts, supported by the Norwegian routes and later to upgrade the for an impoverished homeowner. On and Danish government as well as by periphery of the town to make it more the other hand, a buyer could make a the Old Town Renewal attractive. In the year 2000, the small fortune in finding a seller, who Trust, worked on this planning docu- renovations in Užupis commenced was extremely short of money or ment, covering aspects like architec- (see below). unable to realize the market value of tural conservation, urban develop- his flat. (Until now, there are rumours ment and socio-economic upgrading. The philosophy of the pioneers and that alcoholics lost their for The strategy was approved by the of a new image: some bottles of vodka to “clever Vilnius City Council in September “The Free Republic of Užupis” and guys”). 1996 and in 1997 by the Government “The Montmartre of Vilnius” During the second half of the 1990s of the Republic of Lithuania. In the beginning of the 1990s, artists, an alternative community grew and The following year, in 1998, the who liked to live here already before increasingly diversified when new City of Vilnius established the Vilnius World War II, (re-)discovered Užupis. groups of different lifestyles, such as a “Old Town Renewal Agency” (OTRA) One of them was Mr. Romas Lileikis, youth subculture known as “punks”, and commissioned it with the task of the recent “President” of the “Repub- invaded.

44 EUROPA REGIONAL 12(2004)1 Uzupis (Vilnius) Services and retail trade P 0 100 200m August 2003

O

t O A A e O e tr O O s O L L iþ iv O O O P Kr C X C C L P Academy of G Fine Arts R P A P Artists’ ateliers K Polocko street C (occupied houses) K K A X A F O M H R F F G Uzupio street G Services and Offices L G F Retail trad e C X G C Café, Restaurant, Pub Food-store and shop of minor importance X F (stationary, pharmacy) X C F T X X R Real estate agent, Architect F L Lawyer, Notary, Chartered accountant T H L C A Advertising agent G H Hairdresser, Beauty parlour G Art gallery, Antiques, Bookshop X P Public service and K Kiosk (school, library, post-office, ) G Closed outlet, in renovation or under G O Company office and firms (mainly joint-ventures) X V construction

i M Miscellaneous l Building area n Green area i St. Bartholomew’s Church a (possession of the Bellorussian Catholic community) IfL 2004 Base map: Land Research Office, Vilnius Main streets Draft: H.Standl Cartography: H.Steffgen-Belz, R.Bräuer

Map 2: Location of services and retail trade outlets in Užupis (August 2003) Source: Author’s field work

Cultural events were celebrated in local schools and inhabitants of Užupis the constitution-text in Lithuanian Užupis to attract visitors from other to guests from other parts of the town. and English. In the meantime, the parts of town, as potential buyers of During the day of celebration open- informal parliament of Užupis also art, presented in small exhibitions. air concerts and films are presented introduced a calendar for all the The more guests came, the more there and the artists of the town dress events celebrated during the year, was the need to be better organized outlandishly. In April 1, 2003, the marking another step in formalizing for such events and festivals. In 1998, “Republic of Užupis” symbolical the low-budget and non-profit mar- a group of artists birthed an idea to joined the and the keting of “The Republic of Užupis” build a new monument in the main “Užupis-EURO” was printed, which (Photo 1). square, replacing a long lost sculpture could be exchanged at the “Border- The “Republic” even has some relief of St. Mary. They also created a Checkpoints”. Guests were able to buy honorary freemen. The most popular constitution for a free “Republic of beer using only the new kind of of them is the Dalai Lama, who Užupis” to show a philosophy to the currency. The previous year, the mon- visited Vilnius in June 2001 and rest of the world that there is an ument of “The Angel” made of supported the idea of a peaceful “island of peace and freedom for Chinese marble, was unveiled as well Užupis by accepting the title. The everybody”. Although most paragraphs as a stone-plate with the inscription of “Republic’s” parliament and cultural in this constitution were largely writ- ten in jest it nevertheless included Photo 1: The Angel of Užupis, a monument many human rights (and those of designed by a local artist, animals). To collect money for the erected in 2002. At the new monument, the “Statue of an same time, the main road angel”, designed by a local artist, the (Užupio St.) and also the members of Užupis “parliament” cel- façades of the surrounding ebrated the first “Day of Indepen- buildings were painted dence” on April 1, 1998. This was also with the support of the the day, when the “constitution” was Vilnius Old Town officially declaimed. To this day, a Renovation Agency (OTRA). In the quarter, procession still moves through the many art galleries, cafés streets of “the Republic” every year and restaurants were on April 1, integrating many different opened recently. groups of participants from pupils of Photo: STANDL 2003

45 Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 total Number sold 1176841627879445 Average price per sq meter (LTL) 1,261 1,837 1,742 1,794 1,82 2,158 1,725 Min. price per sq meter (LTL) 379 365 346 619 609 825 – Max. price per sq meter (LTL) 3,201 3,026 3,942 4,754 4,132 4,831 – Tab. 1: Number of flats sold in Užupis and average price achieved per square meter (1998 - 2003) Source: Data calculation by Register of Land Property, Vilnius Annotation: While the Lithuanian currency (LTL = ) was directly connected to the US $ until 2001 (1 US $ = 4 LTL), the exchange-rate since Jan. 1, 2002 is fixed to the Euro (1 € = 3,4528 LTL). centre is a pub on Užupio street, – besides some first pioneers like Mr. amount of one or two-family-houses is located at the entrance to Užupis, Lileikis – started in 1995 and has revealed by the answers of those next to the bridge over the Vilnia in a accelerated since 1998. Most of the interviewed. One quarter of the new containing approx. a new inhabitants (80 %) came from households in Užupis live in these dozen ateliers. The (mainly young) other parts of Vilnius (25 % from kinds of buildings (double the amount artists had occupied most of these suburbs dominated by mass-housing), of the older households!), but al- buildings illegally in 1997/1998. After the rest mainly from other Lithuanian though the multi-family-buildings dom- a difficult fight with the municipality, towns, which means the vast majority inate in the Old Town (97 %), the they were recently successful in gain- already had an urban background. The average housing space is a bit higher ing official leasing contracts, limited main reasons for leaving their former (78 sq meter versus 71 sq meter) than to a period of five years. Many of the place of residence included “unattrac- in Užupis. artists not only work here, but also tiveness of the old flat” (37 %), Table 1 shows the number of flats live an alternative lifestyle. This high “private motives” (30 %), and reasons sold in Užupis and average prices concentration of ateliers and the connected to the job (9 %). (officially) achieved in these transac- newly opened art-galleries on Užupio The newcomers chose Užupis be- tions between the years 1998 and street (next to the “Angel”) has led to cause of its special “spirit” (29 %) and 2003. In this period, the prices for real a new image of this quarter, as the quality of living (28 %), while more estate rose by more than 70 %, with “The Montmartre of Vilnius”. This than half of the new migrants into the the exception of the years 1998 and title of honour might sound a bit too Old Town moved to this area because 2000, when due to a small economic ambitious, but the community of of its unique atmosphere. As men- crises in Lithuania, the number of artists keeps informal contacts with tioned above, the vast majority of apartments sold sank compared to the colleagues in . households in Vilnius live on their previous year. In 2003, the maximum Since Užupis was intensively pro- own property (in Užupis 88 % and in price achieved per square meter was moted by the artists, the public the Old Town up to 96 %). In Užupis, 4,831 LTL (or 1,400 Euro), the opinion towards this place shifted 22 % of all newcomers rent their flats, cheapest flats were available for only from “dirty”, “socially low”, “very approx. half of them from the munic- 825 LTL (approx. 240 Euro) per sq (Belo-)Russian” and “full of alcohol- ipality or from their employers. Dis- meter. ics” to “quite interesting” and “charm- similarities between the two areas The extreme variation in dwelling ing”. The and even some studied can be found concerning the costs arises from the considerable rich, young businessmen or national way the new inhabitants found their range of quality. One evident indica- TV stars found it “chique” to move to dwellings. Whereas in the Old Town tor for the quality of a flat is the kind this quarter. Thus, a second wave of 40 % of all the flats were transferred of heating provided. In Užupis, nearly intruders, now real gentrifiers, started since 1991 via real-estate agents, in half the dwellings (46 %) are heated to flow into Užupis since 1998. Užupis this was of minor relevance with wood or coal in old stoves. In (9 %). Here, many of the flats were those households existing before 1991, The main motives of the new inhabi- found through advertisements in local up to 58 % still use this kind of tants to move to Užupis newspapers (28 %) or through friends heating. In new households, we can A third of all households in Užupis (28 % as well). This result is a find different kind of heating systems, have moved there since 1991, the year significant sign that the inhabited area approx. half of them traditional ones of independence from the Soviet of Užupis is still trailing in its (24 % wood or coal; 20 % single Union. In the reference-area of the development towards mass-gentrifica- stoves heated with oil) and the re- Old Town, even 40 % are new inhab- tion. Professional real-estate agents maining half of them modern ones itants. On the other hand, 25 % of the are not as active there as they are in (20 % central heating with oil or gas, people interviewed in Užupis have the Old Town, where most of their 15 % electric oven, and only 12 % of lived there at least 40 years, and 50 % income is generated by the office- the households is connected to the of the total number of households market. central heating-plants built up during have existed there more than 20 years. Soviet time); a small percentage (9 %) That is, the structure of inhabitants The characteristics of dwellings uses mixed systems. In the reference was quite stable before the “intruders” The fact that the types of buildings in area in the Old Town, the situation is started to “conquer” this urban area. Užupis are a bit smaller than in the much better, due to the fact that The recent trend in moving to Užupis Old Town, but contain a higher nearly 40 % of all buildings is sup-

46 EUROPA REGIONAL 12(2004)1 Photo 2: Many Uzupis (Lithuania) State of flats in July 2003 houses in Užupis are still in Percent 100 deplorable conditions. 90 Photo: STANDL 2003

80 very bad 70

60 bad

50 average 40

good 30

20 very good

10

0 Photo 3: Dozens Total Old New of buildings are households* households only uninhabitable * existing before 1991 IfL 2004 Draft: H.Standl Graphics: R.Bräuer ruins. Photo: STANDL 2003 Fig. 1: State of flats in Užupis Source: Authors’data (July 2003) plied with steam from small power plants (built before 1991), and that one third of all the buildings now come equipped with modern central heating systems. In general, the state of the overall buildings can differ considerably from the condition of the individual flats (see the data in Fig. 1 and 2 for Užupis). In total, 25 % of all the flats were appraised as “very good” or Photo 4: Towards “good” condition, but only 12 % the end of the 1990s students and graduates of the Uzupis (Lithuania) State of dwelling-houses in July 2003 Academy of Fine Arts squatted Percent 100 empty houses near the river Vilnia, 90 where they live and work – a situation 80 very bad that has now been 70 legalised. The photo shows a 60 bad film-crew during a

50 shooting inside an average atelier. 40 Photo: STANDL 2003

good 30

20 very good received the same appraisal regarding situation concerning the responsibility the dwelling as a whole. In the for the public parts of the buildings 10 opinion of the inhabitants the condi- (cellars, stairs, façades and roofs). This 0 tion of the whole house is at least is not exclusive to the two studied Total Old New households* households “bad” (34 %) or even “very bad” urban areas, but is a general problem * existing before 1991 IfL 2004 Draft: H.Standl (17 %). In the reference-area of the in Lithuania and many other east Graphics: R.Bräuer Old Town, the situation isn’t much European countries. Private expendi- Fig. 2: State of dwelling-houses in better (Photos 2 - 4). tures for improvements are usually Užupis As mentioned above, mass-privati- only invested inside the flats. The rest Source: Author’s data (July 2003) sation of flats led to a very chaotic of the building remained in as-is

47 condition, until the municipality de- all (total average: 78 %; old house- Uzupis (Lithuania) cided to improve the situation (in holds: 83 %). Level of education of household- Vilnius via public-private-partner- In light of this statistic, is it safe to heads in July 2003 Percent ships). Only since July 1, 2001, the say “gentrifcation” in Užupis is under- 100 responsibility for dwelling houses is way? Not, if we look at the status of regulated by a new national law. disrepair in the city’s dwellings. But 90 The distinctions regarding the qual- this statistic is not crucial in measur- 80 ity of dwellings are significant be- ing the intensity of gentrification, tween pre-existing households and especially in east-European cities, 70 60 University more recently created ones (who where the process of transition from degree moved in since 1991, Fig. 1). The state planned to market economy has re- 50 High of flats inhabited by newcomers is sulted in extreme loss of savings due school much better; nearly half of them are to high inflation in the first half of the 40 exam Secondary in “good” (32 %) or “very good” 1990s and to the lowered income of 30 condition (16 %), but those of pre- the middleclass. So, lack of private existing households are seldom rated capital to invest in modernizing the 20 Primary

“very good” (1 %) and only rarely flats is still quite prevalent in most 10 “good” (13 %). Not surprisingly, only households. For that reason, we have 0 minor differences of opinion exist to look at other kind of socio- Total Old New concerning the conditions of the build- economic indicators to uncover the households* households * existing before 1991 IfL 2004 Draft: H.Standl ing as a whole (Fig. 2). Generally, all hidden distinctions between old in- Graphics: R.Bräuer the inhabitants in Užupis argued in habitants and newcomers. unison that the main things in urgent Fig.3: Level of education of household- need of renovations are roofs (50 %) Socio-economic indicators heads in Užupis and façades (48 %), whereas staircas- In western urban societies, the num- Source: Authors’data (July 2003) es (43 %) are in slightly better condi- ber of single-households is constantly much younger than the autochthonic tion, where new households are con- growing, especially in gentrified areas, population, with a higher portion of cerned (see Ta b. 2). The total negative but not in Užupis, where only 17 % of unmarried adults (28 % versus 20 % ranking is followed by an interior all households are single (newcomers: within the “old household” group) but rating for windows (42 %), floors 16 %). In contrast, the typical struc- also with a much higher amount of (41 %), the walls and ceilings (34 %), ture of the new households is charac- married couples (66 % versus 48 %), water-pipes (also 34 %), electricity terized by families with one child while 19 % of all heads of households mains (21 %), heating-systems (18 %) (27 %) or two children (21 %). The are widowed (none in the new ones). and the bathrooms/lavatories (18 %). average age for the head of a house- One of the most important features But although things in general are hold is about 44 years old, as opposed to be studied in a system of potential worse in old households, the situation to only 33 years old in new house- social transformation is the level of in the new households is far from holds, i. e. 17 years less than in old education. Looking at the intensity of being called perfect, because during households (50 years). Even if we changes since 1991 (Fig. 3), we can the last 10 years, only minor renova- compare these results with the aver- that at least in this aspect, there tions were done there, too, as two out age length of stay in Užupis, the main is little doubt that gentrification has of three were not able to modernize at trend is evident: The newcomers are taken place in Užupis, because nearly two out of three heads of “new Needs renovation … Total average Old households New households households” (65 %) have attained a (%) (%) (%) university degree (versus only 12 % of Roof 50 48 57 heads of “old households”) (Ta b. 3 ). Façades 49 48 52 The same processes of social upgrad- Staircases 43 50 32 ing we observed from former studies Windows 42 48 32 on gentrification are occurring here, too. The amount of well educated and Floors 41 51 25 high-ranking employees living in the Walls and ceilings 34 41 22 gentrified area is growing, as well as Water-pipes 34 39 27 those of independent businessmen Electricity mains 21 20 22 and artists. The latter are mainly early Heating-system 18 21 7 intruders, leading to a very mixed Bathroom/lavatory 18 26 3 society in which we can also find Cellar 17 22 9 unemployed persons (even in new Isolation of the house 16 20 9 households), reflecting the ongoing Others 15 15 15 stressed economic situation in Lithua- Tab. 2: Things in buildings or inside flats, which need urgent renovation in Užupis nia. Nearly 60 % of all the old (n = 187; more than one aspect could be named) households don’t own a vehicle (new Source: Author’s data, collected in July 2003 ones: 24%) therefore rendering them

48 EUROPA REGIONAL 12(2004)1 Profession Total average Old households New households in general, much less mobile, 58 % of (%) (%) (%) this group can hardly imagine moving Worker 21 27 9 away from here, and 15% would do so Employee/Clerk 19 14 28 only under cogent circumstances. How- Official 10 11 9 ever although new households are more flexible, it is likely that half of Independent businessman/Entrepreneur 6 2 14 them will stay in Užupis (32 %) or Independent craftsman 2 1 3 only change their living situation Artist 4 0 12 under forced circumstances (19 %). Retired / Pensioner 18 27 3 Concerning the ranking of desir- Student / In education 7 6 8 able features in Užupis by its inhabit- ants (Ta b. 4), we can once again Unemployed 13 12 14 observe some differences between the Total 100 100 100 group of old inhabitants and that of Tab. 3: Household-heads’ professional status in Užupis (n = 187) newcomers. For new households, the Source: Author’s data, collected in July 2003 central location of the living area is of mostly confined to their homes (Pho- place in the central business district of great importance (49 %) as opposed tos 5 and 6). Vilnius where 32 % of them are to old households (36 %). The latter Although the distances to work employed in office-type jobs. group prefers a short distance be- places (or schools, universities etc.) tween their home and other locations, are very brief for most members of The (new) inhabitants’ attitude such as the work place (34 % versus new households (average between towards the residential area 17 %). Nature and environmental as- 3,5 km to 2,5 km for the adults and Newcomers feel a measure of solidar- pects are nearly of equal significance, 2,0 km for the kids), 40 % use auto- ity towards Užupis as follows: “Very while every fourth newcomer pointed mobiles, while only 33 % walk and strong” (10 %) or “strong” (40 %). out that the special spirit (image) of 25 % use public transportation. Mem- The emotional ties of those towards Užupis is of great importance for him/ bers of old households primarily take their community who have lived in her, as well as peace and silence the local busses (41 %) or walk Užupis for a longer time is weaker: (29 %) and the architectural style of (38 %), and only a minor portion “Very strong” (also 10 %) and “strong” the buildings (21 %) located there. (20 %) use a vehicle. Mostly, newcom- (32 %). On both sides, 44 % are An indication that the socio-eco- ers choose Užupis (or the Old Town indifferent towards this aspect. Due to nomic gap between old inhabitants area), because it is close to the work the fact that the older households are, and newcomers also influences the mutual opinion is derived from the answers given to the question regard- Photo 5: New inhabitants of Užupis in ing what the interviewees dislike in front of a modern Užupis. The most important aspects supermarket. The complained about by new inhabitants gentrifiers are mainly were the presence of “unsocial peo- young middle-class ple” and “alcoholics” (27 %) and the families with children. fact that there are still too many ruins In general, the and a bad infrastructure (24 %) household heads are (Ta b. 5 ). On the other hand, those well educated and hold people who live here for a longer time well-paid “white-collar” jobs in the nearby are unhappy because of an intensified central business district. traffic and a lack of parking places in Photo: STANDL 2003 the streets, both problems of growing importance to those who had spent a long time in quietness before the mid Photo 6: The old 1990s. At any rate, this group also woman, born in Belorussia, is an recognizes the positive changes that example of the have occured, especially during the “autochthonous” people. last five years (Ta b. 6 ): Very often old She moved to Užupis in inhabitants stress the fact that streets the early 1950s, worked were improved (54 %) and façades or in one of the complete houses renovated (45 %). near the river, never Two out of ten (mainly young people) learned the Lithuanian are also happy about the opening of language, and is now new cafés, pubs and restaurants, which forced to live on an extremely small pension were previously absent. A feature in a rundown building. which is also worth mentioning for the Photo: STANDL 2003 gentrifiers is the positive changes in

49 Aspects Old households New households and very well educated journalist (%) (%) went into private business in 1994, The central location of Užupis 36 49 first as general franchiser of “United The short distance to other locations 34 17 Colours of Benetton” for Lithuania and in two years later also for The nature 25 28 McDonald’s. He and his wife current- The whole environment 25 20 ly run more than half a dozen joint- The spirit/image of Užupis 12 24 venture companies, mainly dealing The people living here 17 15 with the import of goods. In order to The silence 11 29 concentrate their offices at one place The architecture 11 21 and to occupy one of the most The good traffic connections 9 8 exciting views over the Old Town, Mr. Tab. 4: The main aspects liked in Užupis by the inhabitants Zuokas purchased a few houses on (n = 187; more than one aspect could be named) the upper part of Užupio street, and Source: Author’s data, collected in July 2003 invested a lot of money in renewing Note: Only 8,5 % of all households named no positive aspect at all. the building-complex for his own purposes. Today, many people belief Aspects Old households New households that the complete renovation of the (%) (%) main street (Užupio) in 2001 was Unsocial inhabitants; alcoholics 16 27 influenced by his political decisions, Ruins and bad infrastructure 15 24 as well as the fact that many houses Intensive traffic/Missing parking places 22 11 along this street were integrated into Bad or less work done by the municipality 12 9 the Vilnius Old Town Revitalisation Neighbours in general 6 11 Programme. However, public opinion Too much noise 8 9 also says that the presence of Mr. Zuokas can also bring disadvantages Tab. 5: The main aspects disliked in Užupis by the inhabitants for Užupis, as well, in that any public (n = 187; more than one aspect could be named) Source: Author’s data, collected in July 2003 investment in the quarter is under Note: More than 36 % of all households named no negative aspect at all. very intense observation of the mass media. As a result, the Mayor has to Changes Old households New households keep his distance from Užupis in (%) (%) order not to be blamed for public Renovation of streets 54 38 sponsorship. However, it is obvious Renovation of facades/houses 45 49 that may inhabitants of the quarter Improvements in the technical infrastructure 12 25 admire his local politics, although he and his wife are not very much New shops and cafés 18 22 integrated into the community Užupis. Changes in the structure of inhabitants 4 16 Like Mr. Zuokas, many other famous Angel of Užupis 13 4 (TV-stars and actors) Tab. 6: Positive changes in Užupis during the last five years chose this quarter as their new resi- (n = 187; more than one aspect could be named) dential area. Not surprisingly, the Source: Author’s data, collected in July 2003 invaders also take credit for their own Note: 27 % of all households named no positive changes. positive role (19 %) and the fact that Aspects Old households New households the changes in the image and status of (%) (%) Užupis, which also pushed tourism, affected the whole area in a positive Mr. Zuokas, the mayor of Vilnius 34 26 way. A large majority (80 %) of The (new) image/status of Užupis/Tourists 8 26 people living there did not name any The inhabitants of Uzupis themselves 8 19 negative trend to be observed during Rich owners of real estate/Investors 5 12 the past five years, and those that did Municipality and its administration 6 7 mainly spoke about the traffic prob- Government, UNESCO 5 1 lems (12 %) mentioned above.

Tab. 7: Who is responsible for the positive changes in Užupis during the last five New economic activities years? (n = 187; more than one aspect could be named) One indication of gentrification is the Source: Author’s data, collected in July 2003 upgrading of private service activities, Note: 42 % of all interviewed persons were not able to find an answer to this question following the new customers who the social structure imported by them- inhabitants name the prominent Mr. previously moved in the area before. selves. Arturos Zuokas, who has been Mayor This process happened in Užupis as When asked, who is responsible for of Vilnius since November 2000. well. While most small shops had been the positive changes, both groups of (Ta b. 7 ). This young (born in 1968) closed during Soviet period, many

50 EUROPA REGIONAL 12(2004)1 new ones opened here, particularly down buildings schungsergebnisse. Opladen, pp. 167 - since 1998. Even one of the well • Low rents and prices for real estate 191. known supermarket chain (“IKI”) • People moving in and buying charm- HERFERT, G. (2003): Zwischen Gentrifica- tion und Abwärtsspirale. Sozialräumli- located an outlet recently on the ing, but run-down houses cheaply che Differenzierung in Wohnquartie- corner of Užupio and Paupio street. • Some buildings were just occupied ren sächsischer Großstadtregionen In the summer of 2003, eight cafés • Retarded and inadequate renovation Ende der 1990er Jahre. In: Raumfor- and restaurants could be found along of the houses (“sweat equality invest- schung und Raumordnung 61, No. 3, the main street axis (see Map 2), ment”), because of the pioneers have pp.170 - 184. creating an active night live, and a lack of capital even to buy the LEES, L. (2000): A reappraisal of gentrifi- attracting dinks and yuppies from materials for repairing cation: towards a ‘geography of gentri- Vilnius as well as international tour- • Changes are hardly recognised by fication‘. In: Progress in Human Geo- graphy 24, 3, pp. 389 - 408. ists. The latter ones are also the the public LISAUKAS, V. (2002): Vilnius – praeities ir economic basis for five art galleries, • Changes are taking place in an area șiu dienu vaizdai. Užupis ir gretimos exhibiting pictures and sculptures of of two to three houses (in Užupis: erdves. (Vilnius of the past and present. local artists, which also can be found occupied buildings next to the river Užupis and neighbouring areas). Vilni- in the numerous ateliers, most of them Vilnia) us. integrated in the artists’ flats. Even • No displacements MARENBACH C. (2003): Baltische Länder. more important in quantity are the Phase 2: Mid of the 1990s (especially Lettland, Litauen, Estland. Erlangen. private offices, where professional since 1998) through 2003 SMITH, N. (1996) The new urban frontier: gentrification and the revanchist city. services such as lawyers and notaries • of the same groups as . (4), one architect and four marketing in phase 1, but also households with STANDL, H. (1998): Der post-sozialistische agents are attempting to stay in an average income, e. g. independent Transformationsprozeß im großstädti- business. The most intensive concen- entrepreneurs and professionals schen Einzelhandel Ostmittel- und Ost- tration of enterprise offices can be • The new group is economically not europas. Der Versuch einer Typenbil- found in Užupio street 30, where Mr. so much risk-orientated, but wants dung zum jüngsten Wandel der Innen- Zuokas and his wife are running their (partly) to speculate in real estate stadtstrukturen sowie einer modellhaf- ten Darstellung der sie beeinflussenden companies (Map 2). Some of the • Low (but slowly rising) prices for Determinanten. In: Europa Regional 6, rooms are also rented by other enter- the flats are the main attraction in No. 3, pp. 2 - 15. prises. It is to be expected that the that area. STANDL, H. (2002): Divergenzen und Kon- trend towards opening new service • Newcomers do not refuse to be part vergenzen in der post-sozialistischen activities in that area will continue. of a social mix, but hope that the Entwicklung der drei baltischen Haupt- “problem” will be solved in midterm städte (, und Vilnius). In: Summary range Geographie und Schule 136 (= „Trans- formation ehemals sozialistischer Städ- LEES (2000, p. 397) is definitely • Number of empty flats is still high te“), pp. 15 - 23. correct in her assessment that: “Gen- • The quantity of modernization in the STANDL, H. (2003): Vilnius’ Long Way in trification is not the same everywhere. dwelling-houses (roofs, façades and Forming a Modern City-Centre. In: Of course there are generalizable staircases in multi-family-buildings) Geografija No. 39, 1 (Vilnius), p. 46 - 54. features, both internationally and with- is still low, even in gentrified ones UZUN, C. N. (2001): Gentrification in Istan- in single cities, but there are also • Only few estate agents are showing bul: a diagnostic study. (=Nederlandse many important specificities that are their interest in the area; and not much Geografische Studies 285). Utrecht. equally important in any analysis of speculative modernisation is being WEESEP, J. van (1994): Gentrification as a research frontier. In: Progress in Hu- gentrification …” Comparing the gen- undertaken by small companies man Geography 18, 1, pp. 74 - 83. eral phases of gentrification in living WEISKE, C. (1996): Gentrification and In- areas designed by FRIEDRICHS (1996, p. cumbent Upgrading in . In: FRIED- 19) with those in Užupis, many Literature RICHS, J. a. R. KECSKES (Ed.): Gentrifi- convergent trends are to be observed, DIJOKIENE, D. (2002): Istoriniai priemies- cation. Theorie und Forschungsergeb- along with many divergent aspects (set čiai: geneze, raida, verte, tvarkymas nisse. Opladen, pp. 193 - 226. off in italic letters). (Lietuvos miestu pavyzdžiu), Daktaro Vilnius Old Town Revitalisation 1998 - Since 1991, when Lithuania won disertacija (Historical suburbs: genesis, 2003. Vilnius (May) 2003. development, value, maintenance (On back its independence from the former the example of Lithuanian towns), Doc- Priv.-Doz. Dr. Harald Standl Soviet Union, the changes in Užupis toral Dissertation). Vilnius. Universität Bamberg can be grouped into two periods: BUTLER, T. (1997): Gentrification and the Institut für Geographie Phase 1: Beginning of the 1990s up to middle classes. Aldershot. Am Kranen 12 the mid 1990s FRIEDRICHS, J. a. R. KECSKES (Ed.) (1996): D-96045 Bamberg • Only few households, most of them Gentrification. Theorie und Forschungs- [email protected] ergebnisse. Opladen. singles or without children, are Dr. Dovilë Krupickaitë HARDTH, A., U. HERLYN a. G. SCHELLER moving in Vilnius University (1996): Ostdeutsche Städte auf Gentri- Dept. of Regional Geography • Pioneers are artists ficationkurs? Empirische Befunde zur Čiurlionio g. 21/27 • They actually wanted to live amongst „gespaltenen” Gentrification in Mag- LT-2009 Vilnius ethnic minorities deburg. In: FRIEDRICHS, J. a. R. KECSKES • A high level of empty flats and run- (Ed.): Gentrification. Theorie und For- [email protected]

51