Miruna Stroe
The “renovation” of central housing areas was also a new topic, but the subject
was always approached from the point of view of improper housing conditions
that should be entirely changed and not restored. Only the architectural
monuments would be restored and preserved.
The industrial development also changed parameters, towards a limited growth
principle. Industrial development had to be limited, in order to diminish the rate
of population growth, a situation that became worrying for the authorities, as
in the period between 1948 and 1970, the population increase was 40% (from
1.1 million to 1.55). Later on, there would be a constant struggle to limit the
population of Bucharest, manifested by the refusal to acknowledge domicile
changes and issue identification documents and by apportionment of work
places in other towns in Romania for new university graduates.
The 1960’s and early 1970’s are seen as a period of relative liberalization, which
also saw a reconnection to the planning strategies abroad. Architects could
travel more and take part in international meetings. For instance, in 1966 the
International Union of Architects held a colloquium in Bucharest, on the topic
of housing. Information was easier available, but decision-making was still
discretionary and political, so not much of the criticism of modernism could be
applied in actual planning.
The theoretical approach to urban planning is visible, as well as the existence
of educated specialists for it. The desire to justify scientifically all decisions,
also affected urban planning. The designing teams involved in urban planning
became more complex, including, for the first time, sociologists.
But while all these seemed to have a more or less natural course, Ceauşescu’s
famous visit in North Korea and China in 1971, radically changed his involvement
in architectural and urban problems, towards more control.
The laws of 1974In 1973 and 1974 the historic center of Bucharest was subject to a detailed
restoration project. As a methodological premiere, a professional inquiry was
conducted in order to investigate the center of Bucharest.^15 The debate on
the definition of the center is acknowledged for the first time and taken into
account. But, while the scientific and professional aspects of urban planning
seem to be heading into a reasonable direction, with debates of sorts, the
political milieu would soon change all that.
Two important laws impact on urban systematization and, in the mind of many
professionals of the time, they signal the downfall of planning of the era: the
law for territorial and urban and rural settlement systematization (no. 58/1974)
and the so-called “streets law” (no. 37/1975) on the systematization, planning
and realization of thoroughfares in urban and rural settlements.