CEU eTD Collection Redefining UrbanCentralityinBra In partial fulfillment oftherequiremen An ArcheologyofaCivicCenter Department ofSociology andSocialAnthropology Central EuropeanUniversity Professor VladNaumescu Professor JuditBodnar Budapest, Hungary Sergiu Novac Submitted to: Supervisors: 2011 By

ts forthedegreeofMasterArts ș ov duringSocialism CEU eTD Collection it failedtofulfillreasons why itsideological function–re-centeringthecity. ca project center” question of“civic how aspecific planning solution in Romanian socialism atthelevel of ideology, whichit will then connect tothe ofthe“civiccenter” focusonthedevelopment itscitizens.Thethesis will local planners,thestateand urbancentr andhowsocialist plan wasarticulated Civic CenterforBraș power configurations of uncertain historical of be frameda technicalandpolitical as actthathad the function of freezing temporarily shifting visions socialistregimes forredefining used by urban centrality. Building socialismwill civic centersduring This thesisinquires into the urban planning notion regardingitasa ofmain tool “civiccenters”,by ov project, will analyze thewayinwhicha ov project,typical example ofhigh willanalyze modernist Abstract relations.Thecasestudythat will bediscussed,the ii ality was negotiated at the intersection between wasnegotiated attheintersectionbetween ality me into being at ground level and reveal the me intobeingatground levelandrevealthe CEU eTD Collection ANNEXES BIBLIOGRAPHY CONCLUSIONS 4. “POST-MODERNITY’S” GRIN:FROM ACIVICTO A“TEMPORARY” CENTER PARK 3. MODERNITY’S DECEIVING SMILE: A CIVIC CENTER FOR BRASOV PHASE 2. THE CIVIC CENTER: URBAN CENTRALITY AND ROMANIAN SOCIALISM IN ITS SECOND OFPLACE THESITE:A HISTORY DECONSTRUCTING 1. INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT Interviewees mentioned in this paper Interviewees mentioned Illustrations: plan the subverting for centrality, Aspiring 3.3 3.2 Seeinglike aplanner, actinglikea state 3.1 Introducing the actors and the methods 1.3When periphery becomes central 10 1.2 A working class neighborhood on the outskirts of town...... 1.1 “Endstation Kronstadt” – ARailway Station at the Periphery of the Empire ...... 15 ...... 75 ...... II ...... 63 ...... 75 ...... 66 ...... 1 ...... III ...... Table ofContents ...... 88 ...... 11 ...... 30 ...... 32 ...... 43 ...... iii ...... 7 ...... 30 ...... 7 ...... 51 ......

CEU eTD Collection and againto the samematter;to determines thetone and bearingofgenuineremini He whoseekstoapproach hisownburiedpast Source: Center ofBrasov; www.orasulmemorabil.ro) (Photo taken in 1987 duringthe demolition oftheprocess areathatwouldbecomeCivic theNew

(Benjamin, 1978: 26) prosaic roomsofourlater insights. earlier associations, that stand - likepreciousfragm examination what constitutes therealtreasurehidden adeposit,stratu merely For thematteritselfis scatter it as onescattersearth,totu True, for successful excavationsaplanisneeded. True, forsuccessful iv scences. Theymustnotbe must conduct himself likeaman digging. This m, whichyieldsonlytothemostmeticulous ents ortorsosin a collector's gallery-inthe within theearth: rn itoverasone turns over soil. images, severed fromall images, severed afraid toreturnagain

CEU eTD Collection recreate thetension betweenthe ideological cha parallel withthedevelopment of centers. Byarticulating thedevelopment of th process ofredefiningandshapin the dominance ofthecitycenter”(Andruszet. environment. AsHäussermann pointsout,“aprinci plan ofcreatingorreshapingurbansociet importance of thisunitinplanning willbe reve regards aciviccenteraske experiment inEasternEurope.Partiallyfollowing Buchli(1999)inmethodandscope,it cities” andthelegacies thatthese citiesha reasons forhowandwhyhighmodernism faile high modernism anditisinpractices of urbanplanningthat thisthesis willsearch for the locus project, meant tobringaboutthenew“sociali Scott (1998) theargument willframe theCivicCenteras anexemplary highmodernist general picturethattheresear excavating – aprojectthatnevergot tobecompleted. TheCivicCenter willbeapproached bymeans of urban development projectthatgotunderwayin of powerinthecity.Urbanplanningwillbe The present researchcontributes toabodyof This thesis willfocus on theCivicCenter thepast,eachstratum removedrevealingyetanothermeaning andaddingtothe ch willattempt toreconstruc y structuralelement urbandevelopment.The ofsocialist the sitethatrepresen g urbancentralityduringRoma Introduction 1 ve leftbehindafterth st urbansociety”bychangingthebureaucratic y wasaimed atreshapingtheurbanbuild e civiccenter notionin d toredefinethecenterofcity. Al, 1996:217), thereforemyfocuswillbethe llenges posedtourban 1987andwassupposedtore-centerthecity aled bylooking athowpartof thesocialist in the Romanian cityofBrasov, asocialist pal characteristic of thesocialist city was regarded asatoolmeant tobringabout ts thecasestudyforth literature thatdeal t. FollowingHolston(1989)and nian socialism, usingcivic e end ofthesocialist Romanian planningin planning bysocialism is research, I will is research,Iwill s with“socialist CEU eTD Collection high-modernist) open-endedprocess ofcontro negotiations oflocalactorssurround planning processbehindit,th start the storyof afailed attempt; therefore themain part ofmy analysiswilltakeastepback and reshaping society byreshaping the built environmen why itsconstruction was necessary asking whataciviccenteractually is,whatmake “civic center”?What wastheplanbe apparent disarrayonthesiteof“center”. bricolage ofunfinished,decayingbuildings andultra-modern sky-rises-thatwerelocatedin city. Thefirstseriesof questionsthatIstar built environment ofthesitethatwassupposedtoconstituteacohesive newcenterforthe to thespecific pathdependencyth historically inspiredsociologica restructuring inthe direction setout bytheso through whichthisprojectwasnegotiatedan devices throughwhichurbancentralitywass Center project,understoodasa ideology intoreality. and thechallengesthatplanners excavating I understandtheCivicCenter In ordertoanswerthesequestions,my My firstencounterwiththeCivicCenter The main aim of thisthesisistoexplor yet anotherlayerofthe e different plansthatwere l critiqueofurbanrestructurin werefacingongroundlevelin complex ofspatial,economic, at thecityisinscribedupon. and howthis project integrated ing thecompletion oftheplan. hind the project and why did it fail? hind theprojectandwhydiditfail? project(s)aspartofan project inorder toansw Why was this supposed to be a center? WhyWhy wasthissupposedto beacenter? a 2 ted off with were directed at the objects – a ted offwithweredirectedattheobjects–a e thepointsofarticulationBrasov’sCivic upposed tocome intobeing,andtheways excavation cialist state. Myquestions areframed asa d implemented inordertochannelurban took place through thematerial stratum, the l overnatureandbodi s itdifferent tothehist t. Thestoryof Brasov’s Civic Centerisa proceeded toanotherstratum by proposed andcontestedthe g inBrasov,whichwillgoback ampler (from hereoncalled social andculturalplanning their attempt totranslatethe inthesocialist program of er myquestions–the oric centeroftown, es, aspartofa CEU eTD Collection means tochannelurbaninvestment planners willbethekey repr is willbeasked.Forthesocialis to putforward,andwhatmeans theyusefor Byfurther imagining thecity“asarealexpression ofsome landbasedelite” (Molotch, 1976:309),thequestionofhowlocal elit advancement “socialist society”hadtonegotiatevarious at was negotiatingthepoliticsofur specific At thesame time, thisfield willbe“aesthetical”, meaning that thesame collective actor that points actors andtofollowtheformation ofthenetwor in 1996: 56)andcontested,therefore,myfirstaim in time. to bepolitical Center project(s), willbeiden field ofurbandevelopment, andmorespecifi actor (Koch,2010).Forth general, thisbeingthemain reasonwhyIargue statement much very appliestohighmodernism according tochanging historicalconfiguratio historical configurationsofpow political document thathadthefunctionoffr consequence ofthisperspective,Iseethepl of variousandsometimes conflictinginst continuous productionofspaceandknowledge,bei The plan(s)forBrasov’s newcenterwillbe the extentthatclaims at reason,thenetworks tified andmapped forthesocialis esentatives ofthe“land base t period,whichrepresentsthemain er relations, yet atthesame tim ban planninginordertoe s inspecificdirec oftheactorsinvolved shaping thevisionaboutwhatgoodurbanliving eezing temporarily shiftingvisionsofuncertain an behind theCivic Centerasatechnical and 3 itutional rationalities and practices. Asa cally involvedinputti that theCivic Center isanexemplary case. ns ofpowerrelations. Ibelievethatthis ks throughwhichtheynegotiatetheirclaims. styles that weremeant torepresent this as a(failed)projectof theanalysispartwillbetoidentifythese es come intobeing,whatintereststheytry created byvariousacto ng atthesame time asourceand aresult approached asthe productofacollective tions andtopersonally d elite”,havingthepower and nhance the advancement ofthe t period.Thisfieldwillprove e asadocument thatshifted willbepublic(Verdery, focusofthisthesis,local ng togethertheCivic reshapingsociety in decideuponwhat rs involvedinthe CEU eTD Collection the peripheryofanempire to of Brasov’sdevelopment inthe20 “prehistory” of whatwould later become theCivi towards thecenter byactorsthat felt misrepre important, becausethey willopenup thewayforotherforms ofopencontestationand claims aimed atnegotiatingcentralityinanadvantag through minor subversions oftheplanbyre community regardingtheCivicCenterproject within thecity. Asitwillturn intersection asthemain roots being representedintheurbanizationplan,bycons “right tothecity”(Harvey,2008) understanding oftheplan their interests tobeproperly represented inthefinal document. Asafully relational involved -localcommunities orothercompetin Ahigh-modernistfuture? planofsuchambition isgenerallycontestedbysome oftheactors And,subsequently,whosecitywastheplan initially made? represent the topic of the final chapter of thisthesis. earlier mentioned collective actor in devising theplan and newactorswillcome urban centrality should looklike. During post-socialism planners willloose their key position Chapter one of thisthesiswillintroducethe readerto thesiteby offering a Another question that this thesis willtrytoanswer willbe for whomtheplanwas

dictates, Iwillidentify thepotentially diverging claims for the a highlyindustrialized of differentforms ofmemor out, contestationduringsocialism from theside of thelocal of otheractors, andthesources oftheirsuccessor failure in th and of theinterests that itre centuryfrom amerchantsandtraders outpost locatedat sented inthe“plan”aftersocialism. 4 was neveropenlyvoiced. into the picture, reshaping the image of the eous form. Yettheseminorsubversions are g landbasedelites- c Center. Itwillalso sk located residents, subv tantly considering class, ethnicity and their cityanddrawupon y, belonging,and(dis)possession

intended tobringaboutinthe presents –anissuethatwill which donotperceive etch out an overview It wasrathervoiced ersions thatwillbe this development to CEU eTD Collection reasons whyinpractice theproject failed tobe completed. Urban plannerswillactasagents negotiations thatbrought about different solutionsthatwere introduce the main actors thatwere negotiating the methodology thesis,afterwhichitwill build uponthepreviouschapters usedforthis and project of highmodernism –atleastintheory.Atfirst itwillgiveashort overview of the detail byfocusingonBrasov’sCivicCenterproject. an issuethat willcreate thebridgetochapter an attempt todealwiththeinternal contradictio will alsopoint inthedirection of howthecons academic literature concerningtherelationbetween socialismandurbancenters.This chapter connected tointernationalist in literature inthefield. These internal debates on socialism andthemain voiceswillbethose focus of thischapter willbe onideas that were circulated inRomanian planning during literature review,aswellachapter that clea by integrating itin the broaderdebate regard Chaptertwo willtake a stepbackandfr discussed inthepreviouschapterbyintroducing upon andattempted tomaterializeac development ofBrasovprovided,preconditionsthatstatesocialis of thethesisbecauseitwill became thesite ofthe new center. This chapte show howtheimportance ofthesiteshifted Chapter three willanalyze theCivicCenterproject for Brasovasan exemplary reconstruct thepreconditionsfor proposedandeventuallydi fluences, bothWesternandSoviet,aswelltothebroader the actualCivicCenter project from 1987andpointtothe odn oisonielg. cording toitsownideology. 5 r willbe important forthefurther development tant refinement of planningsolutionswasalso three, where thisissuewillbeapproached in in thegeographyof ns ofplanninginacentralizedsocialiststate, of Romanian planners planning inRomanian socialism willbe then ing socialist cities. It willserve bothasa rs thewayforrestofanalysis. The the planningcategoryof ame thehistorical development thatwas re-centering ofthecit scuss indepththecomplex centrality thatthe industrial m initslatephaseseized thatwereproducing y. Itwillexplorethe “civiccenters”and city untilitfinally CEU eTD Collection Theconclusionswillrounduptheargument andsuggestapotentialfurtherpathfor analysis. finally dismissed andrenderedasunsuitableforthecity. urban centrality idea that the CivicCenterpr Civic Center duringpost-socialism. Thescopew This lastchapter willnotaimatreconstituting the entire field of planning thatsurrounded the continue topushfortheprojectundercirc regime and itconcentratesuponthedemise ofth Chapterfour describes some of theattempts fall of socialism. Itintroduces new actors thatcame intothe picture under thenew urban feeding theurbanaspirations of “high-modernism”, circumventing boththere ofthelocalcommunity. oject wasbased on uptothepointwhenitwas 6 umstances ofamarket directed urban regime. ill only be tofollow the fragmentation of the strictions imposed bythe state,aswell e “plan”andtheinabili to finishtheCivic Centerprojectafterthe ty ofplannersto CEU eTD Collection the railwaystation,atin with onlyonenoteworthystructure,theLuckhard 2 1 towns toBra “highway”, ofhighengineeringqu leading intotown.TheSzentgyörgyroadwasofhighimportance,beingHungary’sfirst called “Blumenau” had beenbuiltoutsideof thecitylimits (SeeFig. was atthattime theeasternmost pointofth that willbediscussedin introduce some of themainworking concepts an importance ofthesiteshiftedingeography of anempire toahighlyindus development in the20 Thischapter willintroduce the reader to would laterbecome theCivicCenter.Itwill “Brassó” andthe Romanian name; name, Bra “Bolonya”in Hungarian, “Blum - terminological for Finalreasons Station” of “Brasov, 1.1 “EndstationKronstadt” The firstrailwaystationinBra șov;older documentsthat were consultedswitch 1. Deconstructing thesite: 1. Deconstructing A historyofplace ș ov throughastraight,widetraffic artery, while theTömös road,of much lower 2 –the FlowerMeadow. Blumenau itsel th centuryfrom amerchantsandtrad depthinchaptertwo. ă

tersection betweentheTömös a na” inRomanian;

trialized cityanddrawuponthis ality (InterviewwithG.H.), 1 –ARailway Stationat ș ov wasopenedin1873,connec Empire e Austrian-HungarianEmpi

7 ease, in what follows this paper follows Romanian ease, in what the will use alsosketch outanoverview ofBrasov’s 1), onanemptyplotnear theareaof thecity d practicesofplanning the sitebyofferinga“prehistory”ofwhat t summer gardenandvilla,locatednextto thecity.Atsame time, itwillbriefly between the German “Kronstadt”, the Hungarian ers outpostlocatedattheperiphery f wasjust ameadow atthispoint, nd Szentgyörgyroadsthatwere development toshowhowthe that connectedtheSzeklerland thePeriphery ofthe re. Therailwaystation ting Budapesttowhat relevant forthecase CEU eTD Collection 5 4 3 from theverydensedataprovidedbyannexesofthese documents of thetownbycreatingseveralnewexportroutes was toconnectBrasovtheDanubeportofGala to negotiatethearrival of therailwaytoBras Manufacture andTradesendstwosuccessiveme new traderoutes.DuringtheabsolutistHabsburgmonarchy, theBrasovChamberfor vibrant artisanproductiona Ironically, Brasovwasalatecomer tocapitalist also keptthemain enemyoftheguildsystem, aspects, itsucceeded.But, bysucceedinginma maintain itsautonomy towardsthecrowndurin the contrary,asseveralhist not developinBrasovatimely mannernotbecauseofadeclineinurbanautonomy they hadbeenproducingforcenturies.Capitalis directed towards revitalizing or guild system–andautonomy towardsthecrow and craftsmeninBrasov sawmechanized produc the entrypointintoindustrialcapitalism Bra strategic importanceatthispoint,wasturn Transylvania, the Saxon city of Sibiu (Hermannstad Sibiu cityof Saxon the Transylvania, traded, the typeofmerchandise that Brasov could trade in this port etc. As Szelenyi (1981)suggests that it was theca Dense statistics about the number offoreign ships going through the port of Galati, the type of merchandise At the same time, another railway route was being negotiated by the eternal rival ofBrasov in Southern ș ov tothe Romanian capital ofBucharest. The moment isimportant becausethearrivalof The Transylvanianrailwaynetworkwasseen nd tradeenvironment. orians (Szász,2003;Pál,1999)suggest,Brasovfoughthardto

expandingtheirtradebasedonthetypeofmerchandise that se forallurban centers “East ofthe Elbe”; (Berend, 1982; Szasz, 2003). However, merchants (Berend, 1982;Szasz,2003).However,merchants t), which should have connected itto Bucharest;

ov. Thepurpose,asthedocuments clearlystate, ing northtoamountainous pass,connecting 8 mechanized industrialpr industrial productionbecauseitalreadyhada intaining itsautonomy thecrown,it towards g the19thcenturyand,inmany important m, initswesternurbanindustrialform, did mos (1855,1865)totheroyalcrown,trying tion asthe main enemy thatwaskillingthe n. Subsequently,theirmain effortswere ti andthusenhanceth 4 . Atthesame time, asitbecomes clear onlyasanopportunityforopeningup the railwayinacity

oduction, atadistance. e tradingcapabilities is usually seenas 5 , therewasno

3 . On CEU eTD Collection important externaltradingpartnerinthese industries oftheSaxonswerereceivingase because of theeconomic depression did not 7 6 bank branchesfrom Brasovhadtoclosedow one aftertheothe when therailwaystation openedintown,banking trade opportunities,asthelocalChamber forManufactureandTradewished.Atthetime investment neededforindustrialdevelopment, Brasov, inpracticalterms, wasthattherailway policies, Europeanempires returntostrong Szasz, 2003).Afteraperiodofintensemarket crashes’ triggeringthestart were goingoninEuropeand had verymuchtodowiththegeneralized stopped there, failingtoconnectth after seriousscandalsoffinancialspecu sufficient to make this dream happen.TheHu goods towardsamechanized industrialtypeofproduction. intention from theBrasovrepresentatives toch Volkswirtschaftlichen Leben” (1875); Leben” Volkswirtschaftlichen (1873)and “Die Actionäreder Ungarischen Ostbahn undder Hungarische Staat:Ein Drama aus dem led to the crisis, see L. Schönberger’s reports “Die ungarische Ostbahn: Ein Eisenbahn- und Finanz-scandal” bubb thespeculative with theconnections and Transylvania For a detailed explanation of the speculations behind city as “Königliche referto the Alldocuments But thefactthatlargescalemechanized The yearthe railwayreachedBrasov isimpor But theinfluenceofrepresentatives ofthe“RoyalFreeCityBrasov” r allaroundEuropeandthemain Vie of whatisnowcalledthe“LongDepression”(Berend,1982;

the US aroundthattime. In1

e citytoanyof theDanubeports Freistadt Kronstadt” up tothe First World War; lation andhighcorruption(Berend,1982),it n ormove theiroperations(Szasz,2003). speculations surroundingrailwaybuildingthat 9 cond partofthe19th the construction of the Eastern Hungarian Railway in Railwayin the Eastern Hungarian of the construction ngarian railwayreachedBrasovin1873, only protectionist measures. Whatthismeant for ange ordiversifythei cond chanceforprosperity.Brasov’smost industrial productiondidnotstartinBrasov as thefinanciersexpected,nortoenhance stationwas unabletotriggerthelevelof andinvestment institutions were collapsing le around railway construction in Europe, that in Europe, partly le around railway construction liberalization reforms andfreemonetarist mean that the traditional manufacturing tant foraseriesof nna andBudapestbasedinvestment 873 theViennaStockExchange 7 . r typeofmanufactured century remained the otherreasons,that

6 wasnot CEU eTD Collection 8 mineral waters-andwintertourism -becauseofthemountainous location the Empire, havingahigh potentialbothforsummer tourism -becauseofitsthermal and Brasov atthis point initshistory isbeingplanned according toan important tourism resortof located outsideoftheoldcitywallsand 1910 competition forthemaster planofthe redevelopment projectsisthe the urban changestaking placein thenewly magazine „DerStädtebau”,editedinBerlin, starts tochangeitsappearancefollowing theturnofcentury.Thearchitecturaland urban finally being forced intoadmitting that thetimes of themedieval guildssystem wereover. merchants from Brasov. ThesouthernTransylvanian Saxonsfrom thelate19thcenturywere additional taxes(Szasz,2003), affected bythismove. Romania reactedandimpos and theonly onethatwasalready mechanized on cattleimported from Romania. The textilein The „customs war”(1879)betweentheempire southern tradingpartnerandwaspushedback protectionist measures ontradefrom theAu southern newlyforming stateofRomania. Followingthecrisisandimposition ofnew coming intothe citiestreasuryfrom der Königlichen Freistradt Brasso, 1892-1905); The yearlyreports ofthecity admini Brasov entersaperiodofrelativeprosperity afterthe„LongDepression”andcity 1.2 Aworking class neighborho

Hungarian engineerandplanne tourism exceeded those fr stration during that period confirm this fact by showing that the revenues the revenues that showing factby confirm this period that during stration which signaledthefinaldissolutionofcraftsmen and

10 reports inthreeconsecu stro-Hungarian Empire, Brasovlostitsmain new integratedsewagesystem. Thefutureof and Romaniabeganwithanimposed embargo city, thedesignfornewpoliticalcenter, andproducingfordistan into tradingopportunities with itshinterland. dustry inBrasov,themainindustrialbranch, developing city.The mastermind ofthese od ontheoutskirts oftown ed anothersetofcustoms restrictionsand om industry andmanuf r Imre Forbath,who winsthe tive years(1909-1911) t markets, wasvery acturing (Jahresberichte 8 . CEU eTD Collection second afterBucharest in the further major industrialinvestme period, andalreadyarelatively developed industrialbase,evenifincomparab sense, becoming acentraltrafficandrailw located approximately atthetopographiccenter central importance inthegeography ofRomani located furtheroutoftown. new tram lineisbeingbuiltthat connects thecity centerto therailstation andtovillages anymore, butwasconnectingBudapesttoBuch an important trafficnodethatbythistime Around thesame periodtherailwaystationitself isbeingexpandedandimproved, becoming day, whileother scatteredresidentialzonesare zoning, theElisabethstreetalrea warehouses ordepotsofthetrainstation.Atsame time, there Albina Enterprises,the City Machine Building Factory, locatedon theformer to itsindustrialbase.The main additionstoth to theperiodwhenstationwasfirstopened economy ofthecity.The1910map oftherailway At thesametime, industrialproductionstar From beingaperiphery,“stationattheend 1.3 When periphery becomes central GasFactoryandseveralot consistentskilledlaborpool, countries statisticsinterms dy havingthecompact form thatit nts. Startingwiththeearly th wasnotlocated„attheendofEmpire” 11 ay nodeinthecountry.Havinganalready e map arethe newlyrelocatedSchielBrothers (Fig. 1),the cityhadbeengrowingandadding also noticeable around theareaof railway. arest byrail.Newstreet ly weakerthanWester a –centralbothinsy of thenewstateborders plot oftheLuckhardtSummer Gardens,the station area(Fig.2)showsthat,asopposed of theEmpire”, thecity willbecome of ts playinganincreasingroleinthe of industrialdevelopment and her smaller zoned areasfor the citybecomes theplaceof irties Brasovwi is anincreaseinresidential willmaintain uptothis n citiesofthesame s arebeingcutanda mbolic sense, being , andinastrategic ll bealways CEU eTD Collection applied (see chapter 4) number that continued toincreaseafte continued that number grand ensembles, completedthesixties, whereto indesigned 9 inter-war city the twoneighborhoods,takentogether,islarger constitute thenewperipheryofcity.Butit main industrialfacilitie of theperiod,planners factory, followingthefa ensemble, neighborhood willbelocated neighborhoods, the period following theSecondWorld War, untiltheear changing theirlinesofproductionafterthewa 24.795 in1939(MonografiaJudetuluiBrasov,1981:88). At thesame time, thenumber oflaborers em producing facilities andseveralothersmaller plan only aircraftproducingplant,traincarriages thirties theBrasovareawillbe industrial plantsoutsideofth (Monografia Judetului Brasov, 1981). The1920’s number of skilledworkers,apositionthat

In 1948 the total population of Brasov was 82.984 (Monografia Judetului Brasov, 1981:166), while thetwo while 1981:166), Brasov, Judetului (Monografia Brasov 82.984 was of thetotalpopulation In 1948 Socialism onlycapitalizesupontheexistingin These twomain factories, together withth the “Tractorul” neighborhood, iswillspringupnexttothetractorproducing 9 . Paralleling thecompletion of the grand ensembles, placethetwo biggestnewresident s ofthecityafter thenationaliz ctory housingestatemodel. Consequenttothe

e citylimits andintheurban the main machinery productionsiteofthecountry,having next totheRedFlagtruc r the new regulations regarding densitie regarding r thenewregulations arebeingbuiltaroundthes 12 ployed inindustryrisesfrom 5.676in1919to it willnotlooseuntiltheendof socialism isapeculiarperiphery,forthepopulationof r, withoutopeninganynewones.From the innumber thantheentirepopulationof and trainenginesub-partplants,weapons grand residentialensembles and 1930’s willwitness theopening ofnew ts thatwereserving e residential areas located next tothem, house in the firstphas ation of theindustrialassets. dustrial facilitiesandexpandsthem by ly sixties,thenew socialistresidential ial neighborhoodsnexttothetwo k factory,whiletheother satellites andbytheendof s per squaremeters per tobe started e factories.TheRed Flag these biggerfactories. microraion e 40.000 people each, a , cityauthorities principles grand CEU eTD Collection every Romanian city,following with th A.T.). However, as well(Interview upon decided planners willqualifythis areaas“desistema From thispointon,thesitethat the newtrainstationwithothermain axes along withthenewhousingestate close tothesite(SeeFig. 3, train stationisrelocatedandanewresident providing arguments thatwere from aroundthetrainstationthathad receivedits forgrowthandtheworkingclassneighborhoodwithsinglefamily houses find newsolutions that dividestheoldtownfrom thenewtown.Bu central point ofthecityinjusttwentyyears, Brasov inthetrafficandsettlement networkofthecounty. them, intheareaoftrainstati connect Bucharest). Allthisroads,as country toBrasov,theoneconnectingNo become of maximal nationalimportance (thena been mentioned inthebeginning ofthischapter, trafficarteriesthatinthemeantime have city center. residential high-rises,encroachesupontheold has tobechanneledinwards, towards thecitycenter. Thenewsocialist city,withitsconcrete beyond whichnothingcanbebuiltunderanycircumstances. What thismeans isthatgrowth 10 and plannersdecidetolimit th a In new master1961, plan for the perimeter is made,the isbeing built where future ofBrasov development The train stationarea, from beinglocated Inward growthischanneledalongaseriesof the Systematization Law of wellasthenewresidentialne

where thenewboulevardleading e spatial growthof thecityby setting up abuiltperimeter good enoughinorderforitto Ifocusonwillalwaysbeseenasbeing“inthe way”,and , arevisible)cuttinganewboulevardthatwasconnecting on, reproducingonacityscalethecentralityof tizat” -tobesystematized orredeveloped. themain traffic intersection andthebuffer zone ial neighborhoodwithhigh-risesisbeingbuilt 13 of thecityinearlie town by pushing everclosertothemedievaltown bypushing rthwest andtheoneconnectingSouth- is type of urban regulation will become the norm for will become the regulation urban is of type tional roadconnecting t plannersfrom Brasovinthesixtieshadto final shape in the interwar period, was not finalshapeintheinterwarperiod,wasnot 1974chapter); (seefollowing at the outskirts of town,willbecome the main axes, boulevardsthathavealready ighborhoods thatappearalongside be preserved.In1961-62the to thenewrail r mentionedtraffic node. the Northeast ofthe

way station, 10 , CEU eTD Collection idea gottoimposeitselfagainstot Thefollowing chapter willpick up this poi in theRomanian planning context,what solutions wereavailableandhow theCivicCenter her alternative pl 14 nt and explain whatsystematization meant anning solutions. CEU eTD Collection talking about Romanian planning; 12 11 through theestablishmentof“communitycenters center”, anagglomerationpublic ofdifferent the most beingtheelementary suitable forsmall school areasandtheso-called “community 1931). Communityfeelinghastobestimulated planners alsohavetothinkofwaysthroughwh in an urban space.For him, itisnotenoughto 1930’s intheUnitedStates,envisi affiliated withtheChicagoSchoolofurban notion ofpublicspaceisC.A.Perry’sideatheneighborhoodunit.Perry,whowas modernist urbanplanning. on some oftherelevant features dealt within theliterature onsocialistcities and high development. Atthesame time, itoffers thefr planning wasrevealingaboutRoma and, secondly,tosketchsome ofthecontradi reconstruct thetensionbetween literature onurbanplanninginRomania from the1970’s and1980’s Romania. In doingthat,itconnectsinacri solutions relatedtopublicspacesinurbane Constantinescu (1970), Cucu (1977) and Oroveanu (1986); (1986); and Oroveanu (1977) Cucu (1970), Constantinescu This chapter will use as a use basis primarywill literature chapter This the itss termswill use in chapter This “socialism 2. TheCivicCenter:UrbancentralityandRomanian The recurrentstartingpointforRomanian pl This chaptertracesback theideaof“civiccenters” bylooking atdifferentplanning socialism inits secondphase

thenotionof“nei oned vicinityasthemain ch nian socialism,whileitwas econd phase” and “high modernism” alternatively when when alternatively modernism” “high and econd phase” the works of Derer (1985), Jurov (1979), Stahl (1969), (1969), Stahl Jurov the (1979), Derer (1985), of works ecology andwasmainly activeinthe1920’sand 15 nvironments, withaspecialfocusonsocialist amework foranalysisofthispaperbyfocusing build proper housingfortheurban dwellers; tical manner mainly toprimary sources of by some sort ofpublicinstitutionby some –forPerry sort services, forbiggerresidentialareas.Only ich tocreateafeelingofcommunity(Perry, ctions thatthe“civiccenter”approachin ghborhood unit”andthatof“civiccenters” ” couldthetransitory anners inthe1970’sth aracteristic ofhuman contacts entering itssecondstageof 11 12 andattempts firstly to

characterofurban at dealwiththe CEU eTD Collection evening and decided to followit.The pointthat (1969:39). This happenedonlyafter theGerman the occupying German army almost oneyearto he encounteredduringhisfieldwork,werevery country, HenriStahlrec a popularizationbookconcerningthenewsocialis interwar period,albeititwasusedmainly when mass housing.However,thecommunitycenterwa the rapidindustrializationands neighborhood unitdidnotbecome importantuntil 1985:77-78). considered tobethe modebasic ofstructural cohesion that explainswhy Perry’s proposal (and center) use ofservices(school,shops,community The daily determines. thesizeofwhichit ofacommunity tothedemands according of socialservices, andthe individual be organization of thecommunity The “structural differentiation of theurban Americanization center”(1920).Atthesame guidance oftheNationalEducati “Community CenterSessions”,andheldonthe26 that in“Contributions to CommunityCenterProgress”,compiled byPerryhimself after the public socialinteractions werebeing filtered After all,thenei democracies andnationalsocialis very attractivetoalmost allofthehighm encounters betransformed intomeaningful,face neighborhood the unit ofambient, accepts relations betweenthetype theexistenceofcausal On Romanian groundtheurbancommun ghborhood unitsuitedthepaternalisticwe ounts withsarcasm howthepeasants ubsequent urbanizationofthec on Association, themotto states t regimes, up tothepost-warso organism” (Derer,1985:77)verywell. odernist political regimes, frominterwar social differentiation in the contemporary city. (Derer, city.(Derer, differentiationinthecontemporary 16 through astateinstitution. Itisnot bychance it came to“rationalizing” proudofthefactthat havior. These relations lead totherationalization havior. Theserelationslead s sawacowwandering through thehillsone time, Perry’s solu the various versionsthat followed it)was realize there wasa settlement inthearea gives lifeintheneighborhood unit a certain Stahl makes is that, contrary to what the to facehuman interactions. Thisideawas after theSecondWorld s notacompletely unknowntopicinthe th t territorialorganizationprogramofthe ity center and the debate around the ity centerandthedebatearound February1920inClevelandunderthe lfare statesvery inamountainous village,that ountry andtheacuteneedfor : “Acommunitycenterisan cialists intheEasternblock. tion came tosuitthe duringthewarittook ruralsettlements.In War, togetherwith well, forallthe CEU eTD Collection 13 mentioned institutions – togettogetherand all theother leading members of the community community intoaculturalcomm center plays aleading role inthis brought together inoneplace,order topr the medical facility,thelocal the sociologist’simprovement strategies(1938: nation building,Gustiarguesthathealth,work, an attempt tomake outof culture(rural or about, howvillagesandcities The main concernforthis militant approach is “Introduction topoliticalsociology” ( terminology usedbyGusti,engagedsociology isasomewhat mild term, becausehis engaged sciencewasthe reached alevelofdevelopment thatwashighen limitations, whereasStahlarguesthatbythetim structural, Gusti notbeingable sociological schoolofDimitrie Gusti,active for inspiration,becausethisissuewasalread program. Atthesame time, StahlnotesthatRoma industrial productionthathadto settlements wasabigproblem peasants perceived asareasonforpride,the In original called called In original A leadingroleinwhatGusticalled“cultu c ă min cultural, cultural center ‘cultural home’.

administrations’ headqua toput hisplans into action can bebiologicallyandcultur for planners,becauseitmade them unsuitableformodern, unity” (1938:332),creatingthe institutional frameworkunity” for be givenahighpriorityin context, for itis the institution that transforms a“social 1935) isactuallythesubtitle to . cultivate 13 17 The only difference was in theinterwarperiod.Theonlydifferencewas urban) themiddle term betweeneugenics and tofindouthow“cultura Ifonewantstobefaithfultheoriginal operly organize communitylife.Thecultural 324).Inotherwords,theschool,church, ough toputGusti’sideas y ofmainconcernforthefirstRomanian the soulandmind shouldbethefocusof scattered structureofmostRomanian rural – mainly representatives oftheother earlier nian plannersdonothave e hewaswriting,theso the people. ral action”(1938)ofsociologyasan rters andthecultur because of political and economic because ofpoliticalandeconomic ally improved?” (1938:321).In the newterritorialorganization “Sociologia Militans”. l actioncanbe brought into practice (1969). al centershouldbe cialist societyhad tosearchveryfar CEU eTD Collection Romanian cities, but these represented rather exceptions these exceptions but rather represented cities, Romanian long enduringplanningschemes ofthe20 working conceptininternationa time thatGusti waswriting,thelate30s,th 15 14 proposed, initsrela that wouldprove more elastic At the1959 regional competition inMoscow anewty Khrushchev inhisfamous 1954speech“OnuselessThingsinArchitecture”. monumentality overcost-efficiency, aproblem rationalist quarterbecause Systematization Lawof1974(Derer,1985:154).The microraions different wavesofapproachesduringsocialism Romania, interms ofplanningresidentia Soviet center, itwas the latter rather than thefo Romanization center wasanAmericanization meet, whilebeingunderthehubofstate. national “cultural community”bycreatingthe sp face-to-face interactions –as TheproblemforGusti,whowasmainlyc much tocreatecommunity bycreatingaspacefo their ownneedsandinthe spiritof health andspiritsofthesocialun will raisethe foreachtownandThis way, village acultural willbecreated,made center upfrom which thelocals, Despite Stahl’ssomewhat biased suggestion; alre lowexisted residential quarters closed for Zoning microraion experiments ortheworkingclasshousin While Gusti’sculturalcenterdoesbear (1958-1975)andtheso-calledresidentialcomplexes center.

the latterwasbasedonanaestheticapproachfavoring ituation thatwas alreadygiven invillages –buttocreatea their specific reality.(1938:333) l modernist planning, center”, underGusti’ssupervis rmer thatinspiredlatersocialistplanners it throughtheirown struggling and work,accordingto th e neighborhoodunithadalreadybecome abasic l areas,theneighborhoodunitinspiredthree century:Corbusier’s 18 to the into the termsrule of (Derer, planning 1985:139). IfunderPerry’ssupe tion tothecity, easiertoadaptthe natural ace wherepeoplecouldandwouldwantto many resemblances toPerry’scommunity oncerned withruralsettlements, wasnotso ady in the interwar in interwar period some of the inthe ady bigger r dwellerswheretheycouldmeet andhave thatwasputunderdirectattackby pe oforganization forresidential zoneswas 15 creating some ofthemost and famous : residentialqua microraion imposed itself overthe g estatesofViennaorBerlin.In ion, aculturalcenterwas unite dehabilitation, rvision “acommunity rters (1952-1960), , followingthe 14 . By the the CEU eTD Collection specific contextofRomaniaother socialistcountries).(Derer,1985:146). (aswellas and industrial development) and Brasov (high urban and industrial development); 17 16 were citiesthathaddifferentlevelsofurba the urbanlifeinnewlycreatedsocialistne Process inRomania” University ofBucharest,aseriesthreem Under thesupervisionofMir as well,beingoneoftheveryfewsites created industrialworkingcla experimented withthemostup-to-dateSoviet microraion basis,beingone Ro the building againstthecity.Thetheoreticalfoundationof – among neighborhoodnoteworthy role,fortheprimacy unitplays thesethe ofbecause itstands akey to so ofthe city attempts toreducethecomplexity LeCorbusier’s structures. ofarborescent ‘invitationsto critics as arehypostases monasticism’, Le Corbusier’s‘ideal size’, or Perry’s ‘self-su facilities being spreadacross the territor unities –sectors,neighborhoods,microraions, re building ofthefirst organized inhierarchicalstructuralunits elements ofthe‘neighborhood unit’ theory, productive. Organizing residentialareasaccording to environment, ofindustrial constructiontechniquesand,foremost,more accordingtothestandards vehicle traffic should be minimized asmuch as (…) It institutions providing services socio-cultural daily the shows a clear connection tothese ideas.(Derer,1985:171). grand ensembles,showsaclearconnection The three regions that were dealtw “The microraion isanorganic residential ensemble, ș u (RedFlag)neighborhoodinBra For several reasons, one of the exemplary For severalreasons,oneoftheexemplary The microraion constitutesthebasicurbanunitinacitythatisperceivedasbeing grand residentialensembles 17 wereproducedinthelate60’s,m ss. Buttheneighborhoodisexempl

on Constantinescu,theheadof ith were:Slatina-Olt (a newlycreated urbancenter), Vaslui (mediumurban of thenewresidentialneig possible inside the microraion” (Derer, 1985:150); y accordingtogeometricalcriteria.

16 ș of urbanethnographyconductedduringthatperiod. contributed onestep further toadapting planning tothe ov: forone,theneighborhoodwasbuilton . Thisshift inplanningresidential areas ledtothe ighborhoods inthecountry. onographs, genericallyentitl n andindustrialdevelopment andthegoalof fficiency’ of the neighborhood, catalogued someby 19 planningtechniques,meant tohousethenewly mebasic components, seenas‘urbandominants’, is meant to be a unity whose population is connected with is connected population whose beaunity to meant , functionallydividedintocomplex structural is delineated by collecting streets or objects; natural streetsor collecting by isdelineated sidential groups–withthesocio-cultural grand residentialensembles microraions onographs thatweremeantonographs tostudy microraion, hborhoods inthecountrythat theSociologyFacultyof , byreinterpretingsomeofthe ary fromanotherperspective partially takenover forthe The threecasestudies ed “TheUrbanization is theSteagu CEU eTD Collection could improve theirsatisfaction.Among thethr research was to establish howthenewurbaniteswereadapting as inactualplanningstrategies notion ofthe“neighborhoodunit”,inRomanian 13.1% appreciatetheaestheticqua that only19.7%oftheresident further development ofaharmonious urbanhabita without puttingtoomuch pressureonthecitycenterisonlyviablewaytoensure hierarchical placement ofinstitutions andservices,according tourban focalpoints and start” (1970:389).Theydrawattentiontothef the authorsconcludethatcompared tothepopu commercial areas,onecinema, onepostaloffice, when theresearchwasconducted(1968-19 nei continuity” (1970:388).TheRedFlag neighborhood isthebasiccollectiv individual inopposition tothecommunityandisanexpression ofsocialdiscontinuity, the human scale” (Constantinescuet.All,1970:298) neighborhood wasbuiltshouldfitMumford’sst “neighborhood unit”intheirresear industrialization. a highlydevelopedcity,wayabovethenati Bra ș ov, andmorespecificallywiththeRedFlag The moment describedaboveisimportant becau Constantinescu andhisgroupstartfrom s are satisfied withtheservices that are provided, while only . Startingwiththe1970’s, social lities ontheenvironment (390). e unitencounteredin ch, statingthat the idealacco ghborhood, whichhoused40.000peopleatthetime 20 lation number, thisis ee monographs, thecasest onal averageinterms ofurbanizationand 69), hadoneneighborhoodcenter,three neighborhood,wastheonerepresentativeof threeschoolsandfive act thatplannersshou t. Yet, at thesame timethe research shows andard of “small communities,built ata . “Aftertheapartment, whichsetsthe scientificliterature thesame basicpremise ofPerry’s se itsignalsoneofth daily life,astandard to citylifeandhowplanners rding to whichtheRedFlag ism entersitssecondphase not enough,it kindergartens.While onplanning,aswell ld notforgetthata udy thatdealtwith e lastusesofthe form ofsocial is “agood CEU eTD Collection complex way thantheneighborhoodcomplex way unit. (Jurov, 1979:23). ofinteractionsbe allows fortheestablishment fundamentally different fromcommunitarian theneighborhood contactpromoted by the idea. It modernism haddiedat3.32p.m. “dialectical connections” mixed integration (Derer, 1985:103).Thealternative artistic values,thatshouldnot not justsimpleobjectstobeconsumed,butdepo structures, asCorbusier’sdogma dictating, was complete erasureofthe oldandthereplacem which acontinuouspolarization of space (…)Inacollectivespace,urbani urbanity in a public space:socialcontactsbased In contemporary urbanism therecanbedistingui strategy usedbetween1945-1970,didnotseem appropriateanymore. war recoveryeconomy. Althoughuseful Romania was now acountryofmedium developm this meant wasthatplanningha development”, aphasethatwasmeant tolast until around1990-2000(Derer,1985). What thatcountry, doubtful. the (Derer,1985:152). resultsare territory into a big park for theresidences.Inpr meant toisolatethehousingestatesfrommain av the The ideaofthe representative ofapastworkingconceptthathasprovento and leavestheneighborhoodunit Even ifRomanian socialistplanners might The ideaof radicalcontrastbetweenold Romanian planners acknowledgethecount grand ensembles , bygivingcredittoownlawsofdevelopment ofareasand establishing between oldandnew. beeliminated eveninthemo stemmed from a series of principles used in international practices, ofprinciplesusedininternational series practices, froma stemmed people can be attained, a people canbe d tobethoughtofinadiffer on 15July1972,whenthe Prui solution thatisbeingsuggestedaroundtime isthatof ty isinfluencedbysome spa behind, drawinguponitjustin andefficient,thefunctional actice ithasbeen proven, atleastforthecaseofour tween people and public spaces in a much tween peopleandpublicspacesina more 21 on the neighborhood unit andthoseof a collective shed twotendencies regardingthe creationof sitories ofanamalgam ofsocial,cultural and ent withlegible,ob was notanoptionanymore.“Oldcitiesare and newstructures,orinmany casesthe ent, whichhadsurpassedthefirstphaseof enues, withtheintention oftransformingthe nothavebeen awareofthefactthat ries entryintoits“secondphaseof fluctuation beunfeasibleinreality. st radicaldevelopment programs” tial-constructive premises, through premises, tial-constructive ent manner, consideringthat tt-Igoe housingestatein St. of them(…)Thisintentionis acriticalmanner, asa jective andcontinuous grand ensembles CEU eTD Collection 18 of additional residential areas inside ofthebui residential areas,“flanking”ofma approach weremainly: “filling” of front lines,“thickening” and“plating”of spread out techniques ofplanning. limitations ofhighmodernism andopenurbanism complex, which Ialreadybrieflymentioned, was intellectual shiftthatwas were having thechancetoparticipate in planning and,more generally,development stud 58/1974, 59/1974,37/1975)theintellectualproducti the packageoflawsthatwasmeant toreor state wasasourceofoptimism forRomanian with special attention given tospecific local traditions traditional radically differentincontent,Ceau Architects in1971.Similarly intonetoKhrushchev’smodernistmanifesto in1954,but from Ceau seem surprising,butthefirst“post- somewhat “post-modern” stancearoundthattime, althoughth suggestions intheirwritings.Evenmoreso, were definitelytakingovertheinternationa Louis wasdeemed asanuninhabitableenvi concept” (Ceausescu, 1971 in Zahariade, 2003:77); 2003:77); inZahariade, 1971 (Ceausescu, concept” “Blocks of flats are placed randomly, withoutcreatin Having alocalequivalentofJaneJacobsas When itcame to ș locus escu himself, duringhisopeningspeech ofthe3 ofthesocialinRomanian culture, taking placearoundthattime residential complexes

in trafficarteries,“framing” ș escu insisted thatmodernism hadkilledthestreet, ronment anddynamited (Harvey,1989:39),they 22 the toneofsome writerswastakingonavery lding perimeter ofcities (Derer, 1985:173-179). ternational conferences l critiqueofhighmodernism throughsome modern” attackagainsthighmodernism came planners. Aroundtheperiod ofthepassing ganize theterritoryof g streets and boulevards, according to aclear urban ies, experiencedaboom. Romanian planners , thekeywordsusedtoexplainnew byusingmixed (contextualist)integration a head of the Communist Party and of the aheadoftheCommunistPartyand one example oftryingtoovercome the and insistedupona“ret e term washardlyeverused.Itmight 18 (Zahariade,2003:77). on in the field of urban and rural on inthefieldofurbanand in worldarchitecture.The rd of main squaresandinsertion ConventionoftheUnion thecountry(4/1973, and gottoknowthe urn to the street” urn tothestreet” residential CEU eTD Collection 19 entire settlement network– hierarchy of goods,information andlabornotonly law. (Sampson, 1984:75) and localpotentialitiesaretobeharmonized intoa involves an organizationalsystematization structur (or insomecases phasingout)eachsettlementin fromthe country, tometropolis. hamlet Third, planning ( villages andtowns. Itis,firstly, anideal ofhow In theRomanian context, settlements” (1979)-systematization al development –something thatisveryexplicitinJurov’sbookon“CivicCentersforsmall settlements andtobalancethe being usedmainly asatoolthatwassuppos the flowofin-migration toalreadydevel had arrivedinEasternEurope onlyintheearly systematization broughtallthese 1984:58) should not societies beconsideredplannedsocieti action, towhichindividuals, households,localitiesa Socialist planningisnottotalplanning, but itis the dominantmode ofsocial,politicalandeconomic meant tobuildaunifiednetworkofsettlement Systematization Law( neighborhood unittowardsamobile, flexiblehi on thestreetandinpublicsquare. Public spacewasnottobelocatedinsideofth Meaning,“to systematize”; Sistematizare While theurbanplanningstrategiesthat In theoretical terms, thisshift wasan atte planificare ) andsocialistdevelopment. Second,syst 19

legea sistematiz had thepurposeofcreatingear sistematizare something thatthelocalizedneighborhoodunitcould havenever

geographical imbalances ofthe interests attheleve is more is thanjust amethod for thephysical transformationof ării so hadamuchmore pervasivescope: ) represented ashift inparadigm becauseitwas oped industrialcenters spatial planningshould beintegrated witheconomic 23 s intheentireterritoryofcountry. e in whichnationalobjectives,regional imbalances e housingprojectsanymore, es but instead ‘societies with aplan’.(Sampson,es butinstead‘societies ed toacceleratethedevelopment ofsmaller sixties andwasbeingusedmainly toprevent mpt tomovefrom thefixedhierarchyof centrally administered State policy, codifiedby policy, administeredState centrally nd enterprises mustMoreover,socialist adapt. erarchy ofstreetsa were discusseduntilnowlocalized, at anurbanlevel,bu l ofspatialplanni ematization isaprogramfor developing lier mentioned mobile, flexible country interms ofeconomic (Sampson, 1984).While nd public squares. The nd publicsquares.The ng. Spatialplanning t atthelevelof but atstreetlevel, CEU eTD Collection of lifethatisbeyond 1984:58)its scope.(Sampson, through allregions andall atanylevel.In intervening sectors ofthesociety, connected through the Systematization Law all the public and private spheres of life under a common hub; 20 meant tohousethenewlyurbanizingindustrial period ofsocialism.de After opportunity tostartle both oneofcontent,andscale. Systematization Law.Thus theshift inparadi represented bythenewurbancenters,villagesprom cities ofthecountry–Bra capital, theseconddegreecentersare17muni importance ofthesettlement thatisinques These polarizingnodesareciviccentersthatcan polarizing nodesthatwouldeventuallyconvergeintoa more ambitious andmorepervasive thancapitalist or nonsocialist development ideological legitimationandthepracticalnecessities above. Rather,it is thesum totaland wide scopein which they areapplied, combined with Marxism's What distinguishes socialistplanning isnotany particular quality among thenine featureselaborated human life to planners.Throughsystematization, planningofficiallypenetrated aware ofthepowerthatalega economy” 1979:58).Romanian (Jurov, planners,like represents a political act, which ispossibleonlyinasocialsystem basedonaplanned functional throughadifferentbuiltenvironment. accomplished. Andthisunified, systematic network had tobe represented and made An involvement of the state which arguably had always been there, especially under socialism, but which At thesametime, thesystematization lawprovided –atleast intheory-an What this meant was thatthenetwor 20 withtheintentofchangingthem: ver theimbalances thathadbeenproducedaturbanlevelinthefirst ș aling foralongperiodoftime withresidentia

ov beingamong them -,whilethesixthdegreecentersare lly enforcedsystematization pr tion (Cucu,1977).Thefirstdegreecenteristhe gm representedbytheSy 24 k ofsettlements shouldbeconnectedby “Itiswell knownthatsuchanapproach of "buildingsocialism." Socialistplanning is be ofsixdifferenttypes,accordingtothe cipalities existingatthattime, themain working class,planne oted tothestatusoftownsaspart Jurov inthepreviousquote,werefully hierarchical polinuclearsystem ogram ofthecountrywasgiving intoalloftheaspects stematization Law was theory thereisnoaspect theory planning. Itpenetrates rs couldstartto l neighborhoods . CEU eTD Collection a strong (one might even say muscle-bound) version of th of version say muscle-bound) even might (one a strong scientific understanding laws.” natural of (1998: 89-90) understanding scientific humanneeds, and,least, not increasing an control over nature(including humannature) commensurate with technical knowledge, the expansion of production, the rational design of social order, the growing satisfaction of At itscenterwasasupreme self-confidence about continue an Europe Western in industrialization with associated question thatwasplaguingthefield.While about post-modernity,ifwedidn’tevenhave 23 22 21 stepping up thepaceof growthbasedonarch Romanian politicalandeconomic realitywasheadinginacomple on ashift from afordist type 1991) wasidentifyingashif architecture andthepoliticaleconomic r period feelincreasinglytrapped betweenthetensionofinte rather juststepping into it. “Socialistpost-modernity” Romania wasnotsteppingoutofthesecondstag modernity”, soonturnedouttobejustacoincidence,tempor modernist centralization, much li urban infrastructureandolderre of thestatespushtowardsrapidindustrialization andanalmo did notshow much interest towards urbancentralityuntilthe earlysixties,especiallybecause and applythem forcentralurbanareas. experiment withtheideasthatweredevel significance is outlined in the inthe is outlined significance 1950. These state: ‘The centre is the heart of the city, it is the political centre for its citizens. state: itscitizens. The These isthe centrefor 1950. ‘Theheart centre ofthe city, itisthe political Squares are the structural basis for urban development.” (Andrusz et. Al, 1996:217) in the big (skyscrapers buildings voluptuous and demonstrations, parades and festivalson public holidays arein establishments cultural and administrative political, I refer to “Postmodern socialism: Romanticism, City andState” by P.Beilharz (1994) This thesis uses “high modernism” asaworking concept following Scott’s definition: “It is best conceived as “A principal characteristic of the However, inrealitytheSystematization Lawsignaledarenewedshifttowardsstrong 22 state(Scott,1988).What ke anyotherprojectundertheau Sixteen principksdevelopment of urban t intheculturalproductionofadva socialist city concept is the dominance of the city centre. Its citycentre. special ofthe isthedominance cityconcept socialist

sidential areas, reasons that production to“flexible accumulation” incapitalism, the at firstsightlookedlikea of silhouette cities) architectual the determines As opposedtoothe oped aroundpublicspacesfortheseneighborhoods d in North America from roughly 1830 until World War I. War World until 1830 Americafromroughly North in d 25 ealities ofthecountry. western scholarship(H take place. The citycentre with squares, main avenues propermodernity?” (InterviewG.H.)wasa e beliefs in scientific and and in scientific e beliefs the city centre. On the central central citycentre. squares, On the political the etypical fordistheavyindustries(Crowther, d linear progress, the development of scientific and e ofmature industrialdevelopment; itwas 23 made Romanian plannersof this ,

established by the by GDR established were alreadymentioned here. r socialistcountries thoritarian gazeofanyhigh st generalizedneglecttowards nced capitalistsocieties,based rnational criticaldebates in ary similarity indiscourses. tely differentdirection,by potential entryinto“post- technical progress that were “How couldonespeak arvey, 1989;Jameson,

the city.

government in in government most important 21 , Romania CEU eTD Collection (French and Hamilton, 1979). the value of agricultural land by preventing urban sprawl and to minimize the costs of urban infrastructure built perimeter of citiesbytheSystematization Law respecting strict principles of alignment toth residential housing estates –most ofthem bu integration While theprinciplesoffilling,thickening,fl to thestreet”manifesto from 1971–broughta 25 24 increasing riskofaSovietinvasionth series ofauthors(Crowther,1989;Sampson, 1984) Romania wasinsisting evermore on itsnationa national identity,spannedacrossmorethan socialism wasthe history of th has tobe said that the shift from anintern mixed integration, razing entireneighborhoods were afterwards beingdevelopedintoreside manipulating thebuiltperimeter byconsidering forest areas orriverbanks aspartof it,which could bebuiltonlyunder veryspecialandof production, distributionand attempt tocreatethehighmodernist idealof“l was tocentralizealltheplanni 1989). What theSystematization Lawof1974and A measure that was being applied in most countries of the socialist block in order to protect and fully exploit to exploit order fully inmost block in protect and of the Ameasure countries socialist thatapplied was being Part of alarger package of laws thatare generally At citylevel, whattheStreet Law The secondargument, relatedtothehistoric onlymeant thatnewresidentialbuildings was putinpracticearatherpeculi movement oflaborona with lowdensityhousing.

ng activitiesofthecountryinto asystematic activityandto e working class, to adiscours to class, e working 24 e country,followingRomania’s turntowardsthe referred to asthe Systemati (1975)–thelegalframing ofCeau anking etc.werethemain strategiesused, 26 ntial areas,orthroughcreativedestruction,by e main avenues.Thestrict enforcement ofthe ationalist discourse,in ilt inthepreviousdecades ofsocialism -by just architecturalst egibility andsimplifica ten difficultcircumstances –eitherthrough l identity – ashift th bout, barelyresembled as anattemptofthe ist approachinplanningbytechniquesof 25 the subsequentlaws,connectedtoitdid, nation widelevel. meant thatentirelynewneighborhoods werebeingaddedtoalreadyexisting ar way,too.However, e thatstressedever morethe zation Law in this Lawinthis paper; zation yles. Duringthe1970’s whichthehistoryof at wasexplainedbya tion” (Scott,1998)of state tocounteractthe state the initialcritique. at thispointit ș escu’s “back mixed CEU eTD Collection indicators of history that are written into the State.” (Poulantzas, 2000:114) are the into 2000:114) that State.”(Poulantzas, written history of indicators aterritory markingsbecome of the in thenation-States; concretized tradition aterritorialnational short, - in 26 towns thelocaltradition thatthe official nationalist discourse was referring back to, was of Transylvanianurbancenterscomplicated thesi national state -thisapproach of history”–inotherwords,buildingnewur close aspossible totheideal built environment andthefacili aspirations ofthenewresidentsandtochanne Constantinescu andhiscollabora Constantinescu’s earliermentioned monogra class was inthemaking inthe advancing onthestagesoftechnologicaldevelo was onethat wasexplicitly oriented towardsthe future, towards modernizing societyand because ofseveralreasons. Forone,theapproa return tolocal traditions inarchitectural st planners putintopracticethesuggestionlaun to theideologyofplanninginactualpr different levels ofbureaucratsfrom asocialistst 2000:114), thenthehistoricityof this actwastraversedbyase that “becomes historicity ofaterrito attempted tobesolved,atanurbanlevel? the questionofhowthesecontradictionswere West initseconomic policiesandpoliticalalliances. “National unity or the modem unity thereby becomes histor However, interms ofrepresentingthe“histo If findingtheunityofurban,through ofsocialism’s “newman”.

could notgive any satisfactory aesthetic solutions. Thelegacy ties offeredbytheneighborhood– tors (1970)themainwas tounderstandtheurban question grand ensembles ry andterritorializationofhistory” yles andplanningpractices ph ontheRedFlagneighborhoodofBrasov.For 27 actice ofplanning.To ban centersthatshouldproperlyrepresentthe ched by the first party secretary in 1971 of a ched bythefirstpartysecretaryin1971ofa l theseaspirations–mainly byimproving the ate had to engage with, in order to be faithful ate hadtoengagewith,inorderbefaithful ch ofdialecticalmaterialism towardshistory beingsolvedthrough pment. Thehistoryof tuation forplannerseven more, forinthese icity of a territory and terr and icity ofaterritory Yetwhatisofreleva construction ofanewcenter,isprocess ricity of aterritory and territorialization , anissuethatisparamountin ries ofcontradictionsthat in ordertobringthem as start with,howcould ? Thetensionisreal ? the socialistworking planning, oratleast itorialization of a history history ofa itorialization nce forthispaperis 26 (Poulantzas, CEU eTD Collection character (personal interviews); theref and city “commercial”center the was a traditional st the to tried replicate that buildings the Mures, Secessionistwhere landmark from citycenter intowas integrated the amodernist central complex of state, whichcreatedthe unity between these threeethni three towers thatwere smaller insizerepresented the thr the was that while this solution for explanation size.The three by equal lowertowers surrounded of point, at this housing the main administrative offices of the city, one of them being the highest structure in Transylvania even in instance, towns.For Transylvanian Even inthecaseofsecond degreeurban centers The interestofthestatetowardssocio-culturalfacilitiesandciviccen already existing implied, asalreadynoted,densificationofresi was toaccomplish theestablished norm ofapar to whathadhappenedin“socia investments incitieswerebeingdirectedmainly towardshousingagain,inasimilar manner aesthetical potentialof civiccenters tosh planners werefacedwithaseriesofother stitch togethernationalidentity. 2003), socialism hadtointerpret or reinvented traditions –inanattempt tor the focusshiftedbacktowards thehistorical cente negotiated byplanners.Contrarytowhathappe present and intotheshaping oftheprojected 27 compact protestant“Saxonness”everythingbutthefutureorientedRomanian socialiststate it impossible to lookforsolutionsinthemediev promoted bythenationalistdiscourse.Incas usually thetraditionofadifferentethnicgrou At this point, I find it worth mentioning some ofthe peculiar solutions that were used for civic centers in A historicistapproachthatwouldhavetried By thetime Romania wasrunningdeeperinto microraions or

yle ofthe original building. InBrasov grand ensembles lism inits first phase”andthemain challenge for planners Satu-Mare, the civic center is represented by four modernist towers, local traditions with a specific blind eye in its attempt to local traditionswithaspecificblindeyeinitsattempt to problems thatcomplicatedthe debatesaroundthe econstruct national identity(Czaplicka and Ruble, ape publicconsciousness evenmore: themain 28 dential zonesthroughvari ee ethnic groupsthecity, of ned inurban centers inpost-socialism, where ore the new civic center should stress the commercial c groups. Another interesting solution is that of Tg. isthat Tg. of solution interesting Another c groups. this situation madee ofBrasov,forinstance,thissituation p andadifferentsocialclassthantheone andtheuseofcheap,st al citycenter,whichrepresentedthroughits , wheretheplansfor civiccenterofthe future was adifficult taskthathad tobe rs andlocal traditions tments to bebuiltannually. This mainly to incorporate thehistorical pastintothe economic crisis,intheearlyeighties, , planners insisted uponthe idea that ters wasfallingbehind. the high tower stood for the the for stood tower the high ous techniquesofthe – evenifconstructed andardized materials. 27 . CEU eTD Collection by the state with a high level priority; level aof the by state with high was and funded the 1980’s of period entire the across spanned Romania, which in toconducted be ever program relation to the plan, inor around these plans. At thesame time, itwillin Brasov andlookattheplansfor Romanian socialist citymeant, Thefollowing chapter willpick up the story of thesite that has been described in chapter one.Alreadyhavinginthebackground 28 construction of theproject did notnecessarily meanthat city hadtobeapproveddirectlybyapresid The exception to this rule is provided by the Civic theCivic by is rule provided this to exception The 28 (see chapter 3). der toseehowhigh-modernism workedongroundlevel.

thefollowingchapter willcontinue theexcavationprocessin the civiccenterofcity and theplannersnegotiations ential decree(Sampson,1984),anactualapproval Center project forBucharest, the biggest urban “renewal” the necessaryfunding wouldbegranted forthe 29 troduce the localperspective and put itin an overviewofwhataciviccenterfor CEU eTD Collection themselves as“post-modernists”. modernists –although,asitwillbethecas modernists thatwereactivemainly inthe1960’sand1970’s, whilethesecondwerehigh- generations asbeingpartof Following theanalysisthathasbeendrawnout different claims onhowtheCivi generations ofplannersfrom Brasovthatgot the otherfrom 1987.Indoingthat,itwillalso Brasov cameintobeing, thefirstsubchapter periods oftime. Whilecreatingatimeline th that ofthelocalplannersfrom Brasovthatwe Theargument of thischapterwillbe builtaround aseriesof actorsthat weredirectly involved intheCivicCenter project. Inthefirs reincorporated intoit. were neglectedfrom theplanandhowtheya on groundlevel.Itwillalsolookathowtheresidents oftheoldrailwaystationneighborhood actors andthendescribehowthedifferentplans fortheprojectwereproducedandnegotiated Thischapterprovidesthefirstpartof about theplansforCivicCe 3. Modernity’s DeceivingSmile: A CivicCenterforBrasov 3.1 Introducing the actors andthemethods c Centershouldlooklikeandwhat different architectural school nter inBrasovduring ttempted throughsubvertin will mainly stopattwoprojects,onefrom 1968, 30 e forthe1987project,theywerepromoting rough whichtheideaofCivicCenterfor involved intheproject,eachofthemhaving re directlyinvolvedin t partoftheanalysis, thefrontstagewillbe inthesecond chapter,onecanseethetwo analysis oftheempirical material andspeaks suggestatensionbetweentwodifferent socialism. Itwill s, thefirst being moderate functionsithastoprovide. the projectinvarious g practicestobecome first introducethe CEU eTD Collection urban historiansandplannersinthelocal fall of socialism. town, inmost of theredevelopment projects for theCivicCenter that were attempted after the the eightiesandisstilldesigni architectural field(InterviewwithG.H.).N.T. active inBrasov,whocreatedanumber ofproj 31 30 29 negotiated theirrelocationinorde were relocatedaspartoftheCivicCenter proj neighborhood andthenfocusesonthemoment provide intheannexofthesis. material ontheprojects, material that willbe same time,myintervieweeswerekindenough order toprovideabetterpictur the groupthatgatheredaroundIancuR of theteam of architects thatdesigned the early sixties and laterreturned to the CivicCenter. A.T.wasamember ofthe project, whilethesecond, N.T.,wasamember Thispartof theanalysiswillbe backedmainlybytwointerviews thatIhave conducted. Thefirstinterviewee,A.T., wasone county), through the the new Territori through county), Brasov, Sibiu and Fagaras; For a detailed description of the interviews that I have conducted, seethe that conducted, Ihave Annex thesis; ofthepart interviews this of description Foradetailed “I did notfind myplacethere. Iwas an architect, I need

The raion These sources of datawillbebacked byaseries of otherinterviews witharchitects, The secondsubchapteraims atreconstruc was the Soviet inspired basic territorial organization unit, which was replaced by the

al Organization Law. The Brasov

ng inBrasov,beingalsoinvol e ofthenegotiations r tobecome partofaplan th the localplanning officeofthecity ă dă planningofficeofBrasovduringsocialism 1968 CivicCenterproject.He wasaffiliatedwith cin 31 raional ect. Itattempts tounderstandhowtheresidents ă referred to during thischapter andthat I will of theteam thatwonthe1987 competition for became active inthelocal planningoffice in ed projects, I wanted to desied projects,Iwantedto , maybe the mostfamous modernist planner when theresidentsofoldneighborhood of theplannersinteam forthe1968 to provideme anddetailedvisual plans ting thesocial inthe old railway station ects thatwerehighlyappreciatedinthe 29 around thetwodifferent

planning committee forBrasovinthe raion ved, among otherkeyprojectsin consisted of threemicroregions, at wasneglectingthem, andby 30 gn.” (InterviewwithA.T.) , becoming amember stories.Atthe jude ț (the 31 , in CEU eTD Collection idea of centrality, whichbegantobe referred to what mainly differed wasthetransformation and whichdeemed everyplanunsuitable bythetime itwas abouttobeactuallybuilt. But to changingprognosesabouturbangrowththat influences inarchitecturalstyl differed verymuch fromeachother,beinginfl had tomeet threemain targets:traffic,housingandcentrality. from Brasov.Inverybroadstrokes,theplanning Hidromecanica area,afterthefactoryinarea intersection of town,thearea of theold boulevardthatconnectedthenewrailwaystationwiththemain trafficopening upofanew argument thatIam buildingupon. However, thispartwillnotbeincludedinchapter,foritexceeded thescopeof while beingonthesite–anexpe join me onawalk intheCivicCenterand maps ofthe oldneighborhoodandtalkaboutthem before thedemolitions andonthemoment ofrelo Center areaaswell.Iconductedintervie identified mainlyresidentsfrom theoldne doing thissubvertedtheplaninawaythatplayedtheiradvantage.ForchapterI However, thedifferentsolutionsthatwere Starting withtherelocation oftheoldrailway 3.2 Seeing likeaplanne es thatthedifferentteams of riment that Iwould have wished ws withthem, bothontheneighborhood focusing try toremember theoldneighborhoodasitwas ighborhood thatbecame relocatedintheCivic 32 mainly interms of political centrality. gradual transformation and insistence on the gradual transformation and insistenceonthe railway station(from hereoncalledthe were drawnoutbythecentraladministration uenced bya seriesoffactors,starting from r, actinglikeastate solutionthathadtobeappliedforthearea ) became ofmain interestfortheplanners . Some ofmy intervie cation. Ialsoaskedseveralpeople todraw appliedinsolving station intheear planners involvedwereusing,up toconductmore indepth. wees alsoacceptedto these three problems ly 1960’sandthe CEU eTD Collection 32 discussions abouttransforming one ofthetwotr the oldcenterwithnewra solution wasnotbasedontheideaofaradialc all thefunctions of the oldcenter, butjust act asa complement toit.Furthermore, this the ideaofa“bipolarcenter”, Center forBrasov”appeared in1968 (SeeFig. there wasno talkabout a newcenterinthearea. centered byatrafficroundaboutconnectingtheim been crowded(InterviewwithA.T.).The intersection”, whereastheplandidnotspecify leading outoftown.Theinitialideafo Asalreadymentioned, theareawasofhighinterestbecause itwasthe connecting point oftwomain trafficarteries whereas the focalpointof urbanradiation systematization ofcities. The1960sketchforBrasovwasbasedontheideaofaradialcity, the centralplanningcommittee forplanni knowledge tomake thisreorderingof spaceha systematization beputtouseinreality and possible only inaplannedsociety,because West, calledurbanplanning”.(InterviewwithA. people forget,thefactthat systematization isnot “Systematization meant toputinorder what wasscattered a pune înr “apuneordineceeste ceea original In The firstsystematization sketchforthetownwasputonpaperin1961. The firstplanningsolution fortheareathat whichmeant thatthenewcente

thatwereleading intothecity centerand twotraffic arteries ilway stationthroughastraig ă v ăș it”; should havebeenthe Hidromecanica area. r the1961projectwas solution wastocreate 33 only planners hadthemeans andthetechnical ppen. In1960,thegeneraltheme coming from with whatobjectstheintersection should have ng officesaroundthecountrywas ity anymore, butofalinearcity,connecting 3). Thesolutionforthis oneandthesame withwhattheydidinthe only therecouldthe integrativetoolsof affic arteriesthatc T.)Inotherwords,systematization was portant arteries.However,atthispoint was referredto specifically asa“Civic 32 (…)Itissomething thatmany r wasnotsupposedtotakeover anewneighborhoodunit, ht line.Therewerealso onnected theoldcenter only a“neighborhood projectplayedwith CEU eTD Collection into onesinglepoint,whilethebuildingswere for thepopulation. 34 33 point to bring anyofthepolitic there wasnointentionatthis was meant tohouseahotel,library,commun should havebeenasocio-culturalcomplex the relocationoftrainstat neighborhood, builtinthe continuation oftheal the background. of theboulevard,andwould havefocused onBr perspective. Theeyewouldhaveskimmed a over grand boulevardopeningupinfrontofhim, with environment. Thevisitorcoming toBrasovexi time, usedthelocationofnewrailwaysta perspective andtraffic”.(InterviewwithA.T.)It will bediscussedinthefollowingparagraphs.“The civiccenter of1968hadtwoadvantages: This statementalsoworksasaveiledcritique (Interview withA.T.) the city. further develop.Everybody knows thatyoudo not base intime.a good solutionforthatit was specificpoint The solution we thoughtofmight notha commercial valueoftheareainbetweenthreepoints with thenew civiccenterintoapedestri I theuse term the literaturethe following sameof planning period; The old center, the new cent The projectitselfwasaT-shapedtrafficinte On onesideoftheT-shapedintersecti er and the railway station; the railway station; er and

ion thatflankedtheboulevard,wh ve beenviableforthefuturetr 34 . AccordingtoA.T.,thesocio-cultural complex 34 againsttheciviccent an artery,which wouldhaveenhancedthe located atthecornersofthisintersection. tion toenhance theaesthetic qualities of the ity centerandacommercial center.However, ready existing neighborhood builtparallel to And the project gave room for theciviccentertoAnd theprojectgaveroom ting therailwaystationwouldhaveseena asov’s landmark, theTâmpa Hill,locatedin solvedthetrafficproblem and,atthesame thenewciviccenterat on thereshouldhavebeenaresidential tall apartment blockrightattheotherend rsection thatconnected themain arteries a center in the busiest traffic intersection of inthebusiesttrafficintersection center a 33 andmade ita lotmore attractive al-administrative headquartersin affic predictions of the city, but affic predictionsofthecity, ile ontheothersidethere er projectof1987,which theotherendof CEU eTD Collection administrative functions could have been added later on; region. However,according totheSystematizatio activity of therespective countiesand wereestablishing the systematization plans for their main citiesofthecountry.The Planning”. Thedetailsfortheprojectwereesta be approved bythe“Central Committeefor Party andState for Regional,TownandVillage (Interview withN.T.)From pers anorganizational three important citiesshouldha considerable amountAccordingtotheupda oftime. the latterareaopenforredevelopment. by clearinganareaconsiderab part oftheperimeter. Thisstrategyenabled was constructed bymanipulating the builtperimeter of thecity andcounting aforest areaas 36 35 that wasunderwayinanotherpartoftown,theR 80’s theareahadbeenignoredby systematized” alreadyintheearlysixties, the during the70’s,thesenevermade itasfar correspond tothegrowthpredictionsanymore. (InterviewwithA.T.) funding wasnotavailable.When fundinghad project waspassedbythecentralplanning co future growthpredictionsthatwerecalcu neighborhood centerto aciviccenter withadmini the newcenter 5000 rooms per year (Interview with N. N. with (Interview year per rooms 5000 But, considering that “the project gave room forthe civic center to further develop” (interview with A.T.), By 1987 the civic center project for Brasov had been part of the “plan” for a By 1987theciviccenterprojectforBrasovhadbeenpartof“plan”a While thereexistedaseriesofotherpr 35 . Inaway,theprojectof1968representedtransitionalphasefrom a

ly larger thantheHidrom ve receivedaciviccenter:Br Planning Institutescoordinated the entireregional planning Ț.) plannersbecau lated forthefollowing15yearsand,although planners tofulfillth 35 actual projectwasnotstarteduntil87’.Inthe mmittee, nothing elseeverhappened because blished bythelocalPlanningInstitutesof the 68’project. Evenifthearea was “tobe ojects on paperfor theHidromecanica area n Lawfrom 1974,largescaleplans, beitfor strative functions.Itwasmade accordingto pective, theprojectfo ă se ofanother ted nationalagenda,inthatfiveyearplan become available, theprojectdidnot c ă dă ecanica neighborhoodandpreserving u neighborhood.Thisneighborhood asov, Timisoara andAlba-Iulia. e norm ofhousingperyear grand residential ensemble r civiccentershadto 36 ,

CEU eTD Collection and placingthem onthemezzanine of th by placing roofs on blocks of flats, but at the same time using the type of windows typical for Saxon house roofs Organic industrial styles were combined

38 37 with their project, leav him thatheunderstood. something (Interview withN.T. have held himhis speeches.Ibelievethisimpressed made andhim liketheproject.Wehadto give center shouldhavehadabalcony,opening uptoward s theplaza, where theleaderof party could We includedagrandplaza aspartoftheproject Ceau congratulatedby was personally of thetime.I It ofhigh was aproject that year. quality, doneacco UnionofArchitects Romanian prizefromthe proposed received thefirst The projectthatourteam the siteinBrasov. architecture Committee in1987(SeeFig.4and5)attempte under veryspecialcircumstances andsometimes followingintensenegotiations. were allstateinstitutionsandfundingcouldhave center wasfundedbythePeople’sCounciletc.Ho were fundedbyvariouscooperativesthat the residentialbuildingswerefundedby responsible forit’sexecution.Inaciviccenter, functions that wasincluded inthe detailed had tobeprovidedonlybythelocaladministra name forthe localadministration (Sampson, execution oftheprojectbepa TheCivicCenterproject wasoneexample of suchlargescaleproj plan wasdiscussedbythelocalplanningoffice regional orurbandevelopment, hadtobepers N. Ț.isone of thearchitects that pa that See to got in Fig. influences, thebe built. X visible constructions ofthe“post-modern” for illustration On thelocallevelitcameasasurpriseth The projectforaciviccenterBrasovthatwaspassed bytheCentral Planning 37 withtheolder imperatives ofcivic centers, adapted tothe local specificity of ing older,more establishedplanne

ssed ontothehandsof“P rticipated in the winning inthe project winning rticipated with juxtaposed elements of tradi elements of juxtaposed with e building,instead of the rooftop; national housingfund,thecommercialbuildings systematization planadifferent institution was 36 onally approvedbythepresidentofcountry. 1984:82-85). This for mass gatherings. The political-administrative formass gatherings.Thepolitical-administrative ș which wasbringingtoge rding to the standardsofpost-modernrding architecture tion, because for each building with different tion, becauseforeachbuildingwithdifferent escu when we received the prize in Bucharest (…) prize inBucharest(…) received the whenwe escu and ratifiedbyhigherauthorities,couldthe fundingthem, thepolitical-administrative at ateamofveryy beenmade availableatanytime –evenif d tocombine elements of“post-modern” 38 wever, onehastoremember thatthese ) rs inBrasovempty-handed(personal fortheciviccenter in 1987; tional localarchitecture – for instance, eople’s Council”, thesocialist doesnotmean thatfunding oung architectshadwon ther severalfunctions, ects. Only after the CEU eTD Collection e brutality and class biases and of Haussmann’sthe brutality avoid and gradual be would the process But the citywasplaced inthe hands ofarchitects, who woul 40 39 “luxury” commercialarea,verymuch lik galleries”, anenclosed sidewalkatthebase exploited in thisproject aswell,bydirectingthetransit intotheso-called “commercial The pedestrianflowfrom theoldtonewce time thefocal pointwas thenewcenter,while oldcenterretained onlyitshistorical value. areas, withan interesting twist. The groundfloorsoftheresidentialbuildings of thepolitical-administrative centerandmade administrative center.The high-rises enclosed a corollary of themain functionthatthecivic cen best thatBrasovcouldofferattime in punctured byresidentialhousing,high-riseapar all themain arteries intothecenter traffic problembycreatinganurbanisland,surrounded byatrafficroundaboutthatconnected the onesinprojectof1968,but political-administrative cen hill inthebackground, butitwas intentionall the newrailwaystationwasnotskimmingoverciviccenter idea ofcentralitythroug interview). Atthesame time, thesolutionthat to further develop; As opposed to the previous project, where this wasinte this where project, previous tothe As opposed “ The state would own all the property, eliminating property speculation and landlordism. The reshaping of reshaping The landlordism. and property speculation eliminating property, allthe own statewould The The projectof1987maintained theideaof The problems thathadtobesolved bythecivic centerwereprettymuch thesame as h allthefunctionalelementsthat ter locatedattheothe

39 thistime thescalewasdiffe . Onbothsidesofthetrafficcircleciviccenter was e thefirstParisianarcadeprojects terms ofmodernist housing.Buthousingwasonly 37 took onthefunctionof of theresidentialbuildi was proposedintheprojecttriedtosuggest public speeches and big assemblies possible. a grandsquarewhich nter andcontinuingto d remove dilapidated slums andunhygienic structures. ntionally avoided, in order to give room forthe center y blockedby theimposing building ofthe tment buildingswhichshouldhavebeenthe r endoftheboulevard. ter should have fulfilled -that of apolitical- a bipolarcentrality forBrasov, butthis it wasusing.Theperspectivefrom anymoreandfocusingonthe rent. Theprojectsolvedthe commercial andcultural faced theopenbalcony ngs transformedintoa the railwaystationwas 40 . Ontheopposite CEU eTD Collection phalanstères, dom be ultimately would fabric urban The demolitions. the main of features the “local urban tradition” (seechapter two).Brasov hadtraditionally the CivicCenter.Plannersinvolvedinproject paper couldhardlybetranslated seemed functionalsolutionadaptedin acoherent high-school, creatingbotha involved theexpansionofelementary school role forthewholeregionthatitwassupposedtosupply.Atsame time,theproject civic center (seechapter2),ha residents outofsight.Theneedforhousingwascombined withthef and maintain the aesthetic qualitiesof thesquare bykeeping the everyday life activities of underground parkinglots,whichweresupposedto loisir supposed tobethesite ofthesocial,butth people directly into the keypointsoftheciviccen creating undergroundpassagewaysat supposed tobethe“houseoffa commercial arealocated atthebaseofaco structure ofanenclosedsidewalkwithnatu combined everydaycommercialfunctionswith side ofthesquare,facingcommercial galle activities. Connectivity within the city the within Connectivity activities. under the very best environmental conditions.” (Harvey, 2003:279) (Harvey, 2003:279) conditions.” very environmental the best under on the ground floor and, light and airy in design, ensured work system ofcommunication for the whole of the urban popu and passages and serviced with elevators. This provided connected shopping and walking spaces and a sheltered , commercialandculturalfunctions. The solutionproposedsoughttostressthecommercialandpolit The projectalsoincludedtwounderground square blocks of housing with acentralspace square orthe commercial galleries. new “neighborhoodunit”andane ving apolitical-administrative would be assured by second-floor second-floor by beassured would into something similar inreality. shion”. Pedestrianandmotorized ral lighting.Thetriangle 38 ese enclosedpassagewaysthatcombined both mplex ofthreeotherhigh-rises,which was lation (ideal fortheflaneu alreadyexistingin stressedthecommercialcharacterasoneof ries wasanothersim a culturalcenter,maintaining the arcade lever thepressureof of gardens and courtyards to anaesthetic architectural language on inated by structures reminiscent of Fourier’s of Fourier’s reminiscent structures by inated supply andwastedisposaltunnels Itwasnotthesquarethat and aculturalcommercial arcades linked together with bridges with bridges together linked arcades ter “island”,whichdirected trafficwerekeptapartby w urban center. But what w urbancenter.Butwhat unctions ofasecondtier the neighborhoodintoa r). Workshops werelocated was closedbyanother traffic atgroundlevel ilar structure, which for social and common ical characterof

CEU eTD Collection the site wasneveraproblem inthisequation, scarce resources thatthestate between them: oneof theactual technicalities goods wasbasicallydeadlocked? imposing structureswithprimary commercial paradox was thereforestructural aswell:whyst luxury andotherlowfrequencyuseitems were commercial activitiesof allkinds,spanningfrom day-to-dayse paradox thatplannershadto at leastlefttheimpression ofbeingsemi-open. public festivities andgatheringsconducted bythe could nottakeplaceintheopen into aplacewherepublicandprivatecollide, place wherepublicandprivatecollid directed inanenclosedspace.What Benjamin different language.Firstofall,thecommercialfunction wa functions –exceptforthechurchwayth next tothecityhallandgothiccathedral power. Thesquareinthe medieval partof to aesthetic productionwascombined “local tradition”wasinterpretedintheprojec front stage.However,onecan identify aseries been amerchant’s townandthenewcenterwas Planners inBrasovwerefaced Secondly, stressingthecommercialcharacter was providinginorderto accomp deal with.Bythe square next to thegalleries, whichwas reserved solely for with theattempt tore-cente e, wastranslated inthecaseof CivicCenterarcades with aneedtoact wn hadbeenthe traditional openmarket, located fortheHidromecanica 39 t, whichareverytelling . Even if the new center was using the same . Evenifthenewcenterwasusingsame (1999) identifiedintheParisianarcadesas functions whenthecommercewithconsumer but underthesupervisionofstate.Trade of urbanplanningandth ress the commercial characterandbuild three being severelyrationalizedbythestate.The at thesefunctionswereintegratedspokea time thatthe1987planwasputonpaper, of interesting features inthe waythatthis party, buthadtobeenclosedinaspace that supposed tobringthisfeaturebackthe of theCivicCenter underlinedanother in twodistinct fieldsandnegotiate s notopenanymore, butwas lish theplan.The“history” of r thebureaucraticlocusof rvices andreachingupto area hadonly“veryfew about howthefieldof e otherofusingthe CEU eTD Collection was thecreativeelement inanactthat “put order the civic center had apersonalinterest inseeing according to hisartisticviews(Holston,1989;Sc thought oftheurbanplannerasphilosophe 41 the pre-establishedcons Residential buildingsthat faced funding wouldeventuallybecome availableforthem aswell. were theresidentialhigh-rises. this reason,thefirstbuildingsth basically nofundingatall.For pushing hardonlyinthedirectionof economic crisisthatRomanian socialism spir state institutionsthatweresupposedtofinance urban centrality onpaper wasinrealityanintr have been financeddirectly by thestate. What administrative centerwasbeingputindoubt,be the time thedemolitions oftheoldneighborhood began,thefutureofpolitical- for civiccenters,althoughtheywereincluded recognition fortheauthors. built, aproject ofsuchmagnitude would represented the neighborhood. What beyondthetr was buildings ofhigharchitectural Turkish word for neighborhood, havingthe common meaning of ghettoineveryday Romanian; Planners hadfewoptionsavailablein However, theproblem wasthatthecentralauthoritieswe mahala 41 truction fundforadditional ornament ”. (Interview withN.T.)Ina similar manner tohowLeCorbusier

Therestofthebuildingswe important avenues werereceiv quality,therestbeingat acks, astherulegoesfor housing fund,leavingothe 40 aled into,thecentral icate networkofcooperation betweendifferent seemed tobeacohesive have broughtimportant material gainsand separate buildings. By 1987, at the peak of the separate buildings.By1987,atthepeakof in thenationaldevelopment plan.Alreadyby cause itwastheonlyc the projectcome tolife.Forone,again,there ordertoovercome thefundingproblem. r-king thatwasentitled into whatwasscattered” ott, 1998),theauthors ofthe1987planfor re beingpostponed,hopingthat al detailson thefacades.In ypical lowdensityresidential ing a5% surplusinfundingto re nothavingaspecialfund at startedtobeconstructed most citiesintheworld, planning committee was planning committee onstruction thatshould projectofredesigning r cooperativeswith –and,ofcourseif to changethecity CEU eTD Collection 1989. September 1990(InterviewN.T),remained untouc visit, andnotaccordingtopl Half oftheHidromecanica neighborhoodwasdemo speech atthe openingoftheacademic yearin apparently workedonpaper,it how important theprojectwasandtoconvin interviews (Sz., G.H.)thatthe demolitions were Committee andconvincethem toallocatemore reserved fortheupperechelonof high-end loft apartments that the threehi that the reason whythispartoftheproject was (Interviewwas stillhavingfundsavailable” informal withG.H.),other interviewssuggested residential buildings. While itseemed that“f adjacent threeresidential towerswerestartedand the “houseoffashion”,forwhichCraf Cooperative andtheWorkers Unionwereresponsi construction, thecommercialgalleriesandth But thiswasnotenough–subsequently, other thantheblocksofflats,inorderto case ofthe civiccenter, this 5%was usually The othersolutionforfundingwouldhavebeentoimpresstheCentralParty an. Theotherhalf,whichshould didnotworkinreality.Ceau the localpartyadministration. get thewholeprojectgoing gh-rises provided,apartments whichhadbeen tsmen’s Cooperativewasresponsible,andthe 41 e cultural center, for which theConsumption or some reason, theCraftsmen’s Cooperative the UniversityofBrasov,inSeptember1987. while theapartment buildingswereunder pushed fasterthantherestwasbecauseof redirected into the c ce him toallocatefunding.While thishad money. Some peopleevenstatedduringthe rushed inordertoprov even finished long before some oftheother ble, couldnotbestar hed following the fall of the regime in hed followingthefallofregime in lished inAugust1987, justbeforethis sescu wasexpectedtohavea have beendemolished onlyin onstruction ofbuildings (Interview with G.H.). (Interview withG.H.). ted. Surprisingly,only e totheparty leader CEU eTD Collection leader’s strongdisliketowards Brasov; confirmed this idea general workers. Other interviewees during hi and prisonerinBrasov political 42 administrative center.Butatthatpoint,therewasstilltime theplancouldwait–nobody and would eventuallybemadeavailablefortheot punished. from workerstounion leaders tolocalparty reacted aftertheseevents andbrutally repres Flag truckfactory,whichtookplaceonthe15 personal grudgeofsome partysecretary,but Brasov actually goton the„blacklist” ofth a fewmonths afterthedemolition ofthefi interviews made aspecificreferencetothisconnection,possibleexpl continuously delayedandunderfinancedbe that thisthesisverymuch wantstoavoid. “totalitarian” attempt meanttoenforcecomplete sided critique of highmodernism would argue curtains andnotasare Yet, Iseethisas astrategy meant toveil th is notallowedtobewassomething thatIhave the stringsattached tohishandsanddecidedac have become available. Referingbacktothefi last minute. However,thisdoesnotsaymuch convinced that Ceau Another aspect thatwas revealed Ceausescu cancelled the visitto Br Planners had toconstruct thecivic center One couldactuallythinkofseveralreasons șescu had a personal hatred towards Brasov. Du ference thatshouldbetakenasit

during almost all interviews with planners was that everybody was everybody wasthat with planners almostduring allinterviews s as visits president he was always made theand fun by sabotaged of tween theyears1987-1989.Althoughnoneofmy asov scheduledforthefollowingmonth e Central Party Committee. Andnotbecauseofa 42 sed theuprising. Anentirechain ofcommand, e realnegotiations that because oftheworkersuprisingfrom theRed rst partoftheHidromecanica neighborhood, abouttheactualwayinwhichfundingcould encounteredveryoftenduringmy interviews. rst partysecretary asto cording to his ownfree will whatisand that the population of the city had regarding party the regarding cityhad of the that population the leaders were heldresponsible and severely controloversociety. her structures, especiallyforthepolitical- th ofNovember 1987.Thestatepromptly out of bitsandpieces,hoping thatfunding only for thedestructive character of this whytheconstructionworkshavebeen ring theringinterwar period hewasa heldas is –inasimilar manner asaone- tookplacebehindthe And thisissomething someone thathadall anation wouldbethat 42 atthe CEU eTD Collection 43 floor, wasbecause A. corri the had ourbathroomon we reason why The house evenhadawordtosaywhenthewas built: land thatheownedandtobuildrentalhousingon them, alumberwarehouse, waslocatedinthe area Bartha Elemér, entrepreneurwithse wasan in ordertoberentedoutworkersfrom the men bythe employed railwaycompany. Thehous of sixfamilies werefrom thesame villagelocated nearArad andfour outof sixfamilies had Lazar Street47(SeeFig. 6),a they came ruralareasofthec from thesame wave oftheinterwarperiod.No or mixed Hungarian-Romanian thatmove families that residentsusedinordertosubverttheplan. as itwasatthetime ofthede Civic Center. experiment inRomania and,ther really expectedthat only twoyearslaterhist E.N.) otherwise therentwouldrise andtheir would family The neighbor from theapartmen The firstgenerationofresidentswasformi The followingparagraphs willreconstruct 3.3 Aspiring for centrality,subvertingtheplan 43 specifically askedforittobethiswayfrom that fearing specifically Bartha Elemér, t located on the same the floor; on t located

molition, afterwhichthefocuswill three storeyhouse withtwoap t onlydidmost ofthem shar efore, theprematureendof thehighmodernist planforthe the area.Thedeveloper,NagyborosnyoiésDólnoki ory wouldmark theendof ountry. Forinstance,in 43 veral industrialfaciliti dor, shared between the two apartments of each dor, shared between thetwoapartmentsofeach not be ableto affordthe place. (Interview with ng a relatively compact ng arelatively the social composition oftheneighborhood, some plots.Thefuturetenantsofthe ofthe of therail tracks. He d intothecityaroundindustrialization e itself hadbeenbuilt inthelatethirties e workplaces,butinmany cases artments oneachfloor,five out turntospecificstrategies es aroundtown;oneof the caseofhouseon theplannedsocialist decided torezonethe groupofHungarian CEU eTD Collection generation of people that were having a somewhat better education. (Interview with E.N.) education.(Interviewwith generation of better people thatwerehavingasomewhat movedemployees that intotowninthe thir were alsoalotmore mixed ethnically,most of where nobodyhadauniversitydegree(personalin skilled work,many ofthemhavingauniversity under socialism andhadmuch more diverseem them factthattherepresentativesof wasthe or houseowners,andofnewcomers tothe bought housesthathadbeenbuiltearlier. period andbuilttheirownhousesonplotsthatth owned byextendedfamilies,Hungarianaswell, ownership from theverybeginning,althoughthey 45 44 of ethnicity.(Personal interviews) timesum up,bythat theHidromecanica areawasmixed, bothinterms ofclassandinterms generation wereyoungcouplesat demolition oftheneighborhoodcommenced, in1987,mostresidentsfrom thesecond overcrowding. (MatthewsinFrench&Hamiltion, 1979)Aroundthetime whenthe experiencing thesame processasmostofthe untouched, withnosubstantialupgradesbeing a small number ofnewbuildings werebuilt, andthe oldhousingstock wasleftmostly then thereCFR By weretwogenerations;thefirst,older residents,mostly The name thatthe former SchielMachin RailwayCompany; Romanian The The “secondgeneration”consis Alongside therentedmulti-family houses,the However, intheprocessofsecondwa

eCompany Building received undersocialism; the peakoftheir ted eitherof children of th ties andsettledintheneighborhood,asecond 44 thenewcomers totheareabeingRomanian. neighborhood. Butwhatmainly distinguished thesecondgenerationwere alreadyeducated made. Thismeant thattheneighborhoodwas old residential areas in ployment thanthefirstgeneration–diverse ve ofin-migration totheneighborhood,only whichcameintothecityaroundsame degree, asopposedtothefirstgeneration, werefewerinnumber. Theywereusually terviews). Thesecondgenerationresidents ey bought (SeeFig. 6,right),or directly career andalreadyhavingchildren.To area hadhousesthat e firstgenerationoftenants thesocialistblock– 44 orHidromecanica wereinprivate

45

CEU eTD Collection demolition oftheneighborhoodwasabout totakeplace“sometime soon”,thedecision taken receiving anotherhouse inanotherpartof another stateownedapartment andreceivingafixe apartments etc.Families thatwereowninga were entitled toatwo-room apartment;fam or inprivate property,and thenumber of children pernuclear family: families withonechild the demolitions. Themain criteriaused inthere center. (InterviewwithE.N.) grow up in suchanenvironment. Weimmediatel While weweregoingupmy husband the staircase whispered tomethathedoesnotwanthischild heard them speakingand we wereterrified.They in frontofthe entranceofthebuilding a we saw At firstthey area.Wewenttheretosee allocated usanapartmentinthe‘Zorilor’ itandwhenwegot aspiration forcentralitywasinthemaking atthesame time as the aspirationsofresidentshadchanged, had remained peripheralandpoorlyequippedwith future development urbanenvironment ofthe in grand ensambles second phasedidnotsucceedtostitchthecityback togetherafterthe at thattime in townandthebestconnection to decisive factorbecausethenewcenterwassupposed tohavethebesthousing stockavailable which wasdetermining many residents toseek relocation inthesame area.Mainly, itwasa the growing importance oftheideacentrality series of other factors became important duringtheprocess.What Iwilltrytostress hereis order tosecurebetterhousing.While intheo residents of theHidromecanica neighborhood before andduring the time in ofdemolition, The nextparagraphs willconcentrate onthedifferent strategies deployedbythe The relocationprocesswasdonewithliststimed accordingtothedifferentstagesof . ContrarytowhatCons tantinescu (1970)wass ry therelocationwasdone 45 town.Althoughtheresidents knewthatthe ilies withtwochildren were giventhree-room house couldchoosebetweenbeingrelocatedin determining them toseekcentralhousing.The group of children playing. Whengroup ofchildrenplaying. wegotcloser y started consideringothery options, closertothe were swearingandtalking about horrible things. hismonograph, thefactoryestatesofcity distribution werethetype ofhousing, rented awiderangeofservices.Socialisminits ofthespacethathad toberedeveloped, d sum ofmoneyinreturn forthehouse,or socio-culturalfacilities.Inthemeantime, thecenterwasinmaking. uggesting asapotential modernist period of the modernist periodofthe accordingtoneeds,a CEU eTD Collection apartment wanted togiveus,asking thatthey for intimidate peopleandhe immediatelystartedtoyell camebackafterwevisitedthe atus.We from thehousingauthority and anofficer from the a lady was takingplace,there relocations were were the entered theoffice hall,whenwe “At thecity represented animportant step they seizeduponthemoment tobeablefu family members thatmoved tomulti-family rental to keepsomesortofproximity totheneighbo generation tenantswereaspiring because theydidnothavetheresourcesto negotiate foracentralapartment, second preferred similar multi-family rentalhousesaro resource whichmost families didnot haveandfor securing analternativeresidenc apartments wereunfinishedatthattime an the allocatedspacecouldanotherfamily hopeto families that werenotsatisfied withthealloca they werenot yetfinished. Thismeant that some apartments wouldbecome availablefor time thedemolitions started, most oftheapar important factor in the contextof thenewlyco higher quality–andthey had most soughtafterinthisnegotiationprocess,be apartment –whichwasveryoftenthecase. they wanted toquestion theofficialallocati surprise. Whatthismeant wasthatallofas by plannersandcityauthori While theolderfirstgenerationtenantsav The apartmentblocksbuilt aspart of theciviccenterproject(SeeFig. 7)werethe ties inAugust1987tohasten forward onthesocialladder. e foratleast oneyear,until th for apartment lifeinblocksof the advantageofa“central” d thereforeaccepting theofferwouldhavemeant on ofanewresidencean 46 udden residentshadtopromptlyreact,incase another one. We asked for a three room apartment, another one.Weaskedfor athreeroomapartment, rhood andmaintain family tion procedure, butonlyif afamily gave upon tments hadalready been distributed,although und theareathathadtobedemolished mainly lfill thedreamofafam nstituted central area of thecity.But atthe cause theywerealotmorespaciousandof receive itinstead.Ontheotherhand,these which thestate didnot giveanyassistance. housesinthesame area,atthesame time Securitate. TheSecuritate wasthereto guy oided relocation inblocksofflatsand the processtookeverybodyby e buildingswerecompleted –a flats.Althoughthelattertried location, which became an d negotiateforanother ily apartment, which tieswiththeirolder CEU eTD Collection not registeredatthe cadastreoffice– my mother E. N.) whole wing, but wegotwhatwanted,threeroom one up. It was on the fifth floor, where P. floor, where one up.Itwasonthefifth managed togetanapartmentinthegood buildings, at apartment. another house intown,orreceiving money different and gavethem more spacefornegotia (Interview withE.N.). partly becausetheplumbing andpowergridfo water werebeingrationalized totheextreme, par relocation. It wasoneyear in which thecentral heating was notinstalled yetandpower and cohabitated withtheworkersthatwereadding despite the fact thattheyhadtomove in time. Theysuccessfullynegotia tenants inmulti-family houses.Theywereall interviewee referstowerelivingonthesa 47 46 a decent house.Wetriedbuy todothesame, butth to thechildren,sothatthey w people weredoingwasto intw split uptheproperty asinglefamily, sowhat most ownedby But houseswere anewhouseintown. was notenoughtobuy “They weregivingafixed of80.000Leiforeachhousethat they weretearing sum down. Themoney but thenS. given away, All theapartmentsonthiswingwere lucky. did. (…)Ithinkwewerejust move Whichwe theworkersarestillthere. would haveto inwhile solution, but it wouldinvolvealotofsacrifice might get bea Thenshesaidthatthere we won’t anywhere. because should notinsistwithhim, so wehadtoleavetheroom.cam Butthenthelady husband isa andthatheneeds scientific researcher totheinstituteandbr I willgodirectly face that although wehadonly one child.This made him very but then he took that one, soweended up here, P.lived three houses away in the old neighborhood; S.lived two houses away in the old neighborhood;

Homeowners werefacedwith Homeowners Ten outof twenty-onefamilies thatreceived apartments onthewingthatprevious ould receive twice or three times as much.ould receivetwiceorthreetimesWiththat moneyonecould as

ted theircentralityandreceiv anotherdilemma, whichmade thesituationsomewhat 47 is now living. P. was supposed to come in our apartment, tocomeinourapartment, isnowliving.P.wassupposed from us, because the apartment isunfinishedandwe us,becausetheapartment from 47 as compensation andaplaceinstateowned me streetinthedemolished neighborhoodas young coupleswithoneortwochildrenatthat the worse apartment onthe theworseapartment at thesixthfloor.It’s to anunfinishedbuildingandprettymuch ing a certificate on the next day, saying that my that saying onthenextday, ing acertificate a study rooma study forhimself. startedthreateningus, He hadjustignored thisfact because it wasnever en werealizedhad o oreventhree separateproperties andtransfer it s and a central location in town.” (Interview with s andacentrallocationintown.” (Interviewwith tion. Theyhad thechoicebetweenreceiving r thebuilding werenot fully completed yet the finishingtouchesforoneyearafter tly because ofgeneralra e outofthe officeafterusandtold us thatwe angry. But Idid not give up.Itold him inhis the other side of the civic center. He gave this He the othersideofciviccenter. 46 , who received an apartment here, anapartment , whoreceived ed arelativelygoodapartment, a problem. Ourhousewas tionings offacilities, CEU eTD Collection social statusmade themfeel the entireneighborhoodincontextofth initiative. This broughtthem inasimilar stat the secondgenerationactuallywantedbetterhousing,butcouldnotmove outoftheir own preferred forrevealingthecomplexity ofthepro in 1987,Iwillusethenotionofurbanaspi from theHidromecanica area,whosehousesweredemolished forthenewciviccenter project were adultswhenithappened,butstill, the entirestre his house.Hewasoldand lived therefor along woulddemolishhishouse thatsumme heard thatthey There weretragedies,too.Wehadaneighbor on the they couldnotmobilize them attherightmoment. order tobeablenegotiatetheplaninthei all theresidents. Thedemolitionsmeantthat residents hadtomobilize all their resources in central location.However,thisdoesnotmean to demolished neighborhoodandcouldnegotiateeas and didnothaveyoungchildrenan wing astheyoungtenantsthatIspokeabouton anymore.property O. to helpus registerthe houseandwe gotthemoney. Butwedidnothave timetosplitupthe and Iwasprocuring medicine thathadaheartdiseasehim thatheneeded. the sokind lawyer Hewas important forher.Thisway,wewould not have receiveda dime.But I hadaclientatthea pharmacy, problems. Soweendedup here”. (Interviewwithth weresoakedwithwa checked thewallsandthey law (…)Theyfirst offered usa house el somewhere restitutionlot aftersocialism,property la withthe property transfer scheme more than twenty years ago. right next to theirs in the building. The difference is that 48

While mentioningO.,Sz.points withhisfinger tothewall.O., his former neighb Both families that theprevious interview In describingwhatMarcusecallsthestate 48 , for instance, he did succeed! He got twice the money. And then he even got money. Andthenhe even a the gottwice He succeed! , for instance, hedid

entitled to better housing – one mightentitled tobetterhousing–one evensaythat theyhad ymore, theyhadtheprivileg

r favor.Notallpeopledidhavetheseresources,or time. Hischildren found him …Imean, thechildren O. owns two apartments in the building after succeeding in the 48 e changinggeographyofthecity.While their us ofin-betweennessastheonementioned for w. But we got some money back as well with thatw. Butwegot money backaswell some rations. Thereasonw e Sz. Family, residents from thefirstgeneration) e Sz.Family,residents from ter. Thebuilding wasold; we didnot want any e paragraphearlier.A say that the relocation was advantageous for saythattherelocationwasadvantageousfor et heard about that tragedy. (InterviewwithSz.) et heardaboutthattragedy. cess of relocation isthat street that was affected very seriously. seriously. When hestreet thatwasaffectedvery se. It was nice, with a big garden. But then we se. Itwasnice,withabiggarden.Butthenwe r, he hanged himself from the inner staircase of the innerstaircaseof r, hehangedhimselffrom mentions were allocated flats onthe same directed relocation( ier forabetterqualityapartment ina e ofbeinghomeownersinthe or, nowlives in the apartment located hy urbanaspirations lthough theywere older 1985) oftheresidents mostresidents from

is CEU eTD Collection Onethe otherhand,Idonottendtoin community” ascohesive elements that countered for theirown advantage. to countertheplan,orusespaceswithin the disillusionment followingbelief entitledciti aspirations thatwereonlypartlytheproductof contradicting this rhetoric. Thefragmentation of the “newman”, realsocialismwasencount official rhetoricwascontinuingtopromote disillusioned onehadtohavebelievedin programs producedfragmentation intheaspira shortages thatthestatewasf modernist tooloflateRomani the statecanneverfullyincorporate initstotalizingplan. Scott placesattheotherendof techniquesof willfittheir observation. (82) a peopleandlandscapethat modern nation-statedonotmerely The buildersofthe . ‘civillizing mission’ rhetoric, asa inimperialproject ofinternalcolonization,oftenglossed,asitis The aspirationtosuch uniformity and order alertsus Continuing onthesame lineof sourcesofjudgment.(93) disallow othercompeting improvement ofthehuman condition with theauth The troubling featuresofhigh modernism derive,forthemost part,from itsclaim tospeakabout the improving theurbanenvironment. AsScott(1998)putsit: relocate theresidents because this waspart represent their “terri middle-class aspirations High modernism, inthe form of lateRoma torial history”. -many ofthem weretrapped inaneighborhoodthatdidnot acing. Afragmentedlinearityin argument, he addsthat: an socialism, wasbecoming fragmented becauseof internal ahigh-modernist projectloca the unhinderedprogressandcoming aboutof the first place”.(Kotki 49 of thebigger“plan”toimprove societyby the planthatremained “illegible”forthestate ority ofscientificknowledgeanditstendencyority to zens todeploysubversivestrategiesinorder the officialrhetoric.Th the plan created spacefordifferenttypes of tions ofits citizensas well.“Tobecome the intention of thest to the fact that modern statecraft is largely tothefactthatmoderna islargely statecraft describe, observe and map; they strive to shape strivetoshape map; they describe, observeand ering everdeeperproblems thatwere nian socialism, couldclaim the rightto terpret “localknowledge” and“local l knowledge,which,heargues, state directedurbanplanning Sistematizare n, 1995:360)Whilethe ate. Onecouldhardly e otherpartwasthat , asthehigh- CEU eTD Collection neighborhood, internalizedandproce chapter analyzedthewayinwhich“local and stylisticsense,wouldbringaboutanewur credo related tofinancingoftheproject,elements and thathadtobenegotiatedinorderge Thischapter hasdiscussedthedifferent Center ofBrasov.Indoingthat,itfocusedonavari citizenship –onewhichwaspushingthem toseekrelocation inthesame area. element inshapingtheaspirationsofrelocatedresidentsforanupgradedform ofurban modernist statewascreatingby foresee whenitcame therelocationprocess.Thecentralurbanspacethathigh to options availabletovoiceopposition ortothinkof openly voiceopposition towardstheerasureofneighborhood.Yettherewereaseries of for theresidents.Everybodyhadtogowith Subversionswereminor inthesensethattheywerecasespecific.Theyminor because theydidnotcountinthegrandscheme common languageofprotestag the demolitions startedandaspi speak ofsuchacommunity inthe caseof that the optimal integrationof theidea of ce is h rjc. ainst theproject. erasingtheformer neighborhood rations wereverydiverseand ssed theplanandnegotiatedthei the Hidromecanica neighborhood bythetime that 50 thatwerehavingtodo community”, therelocated residents from the t theprojectgoing,from of systematization; howevertheywerecrucial ban societyinBrasov.Atthesame time, this solutions proposedbyplannersfortheCivic plan inthesensethat ntrality into theproject, bothin afunctional alternative tacticsthattheplancould not ety ofelements thatwerepartof theplan could notbevoicedintoone functioned asastructural r centralityaccordingly. with thehigh modernist therewasnowayto structural elements CEU eTD Collection lose out.(HarloeinAndrusz et.All,1996:10) addition, and with valuableprivatization providessome financial,property assetisthesocialcapita a key cases order. Inmany whatresourcesthey which differinggroupsdeploy a conflictual wesee capitalism, idealized Western economic, politicalandsocialstructuresofstateso and current conjunctures. Ratherthansome andimmediateprocessofabolitionthe simplistic path dependent,that isit is shap be thatIwasnotgranted permission to interv redevelopment projectof thesi socialism -andpartlyoninterv that werealreadymentioned inthispaper–that remained activeinthe fieldofplanning after centrality setupbytheprev interventions inthesite bycertainactorsthat this wouldbesomething thatwouldexceedth configurations ofactorsthatbecameinvolvedin centrality. The purposeofthischapter isnot mainly throughthelensofwhatIprefertoca urban development. However,themain thread or underthenewregime, oftheactorsinvolveda transformation ofthesitewillpick uponthe“soc play inthe process ofre for Brasov.Indoingthat,itwilldrawupontheshif

4. “Post-modernity’s” toa Grin:FromaCivicCenter The material for this chapter isbased partly This chapter willconcentrate onthelegacyth To summarize, the transformation now taking place in the former state socialist nationsis socialist state nowtakingplaceintheformer thetransformation To summarize, ious socialistplan. ed by cross-nationally (and sub-nationally) variant historical legacies developing thesite.Thedisc te. Oneofthemethodological lim “Temporary” Park iews withotherkeyactorsthatbecame involvedinthe

51 ll the“symbolic capital”of iew keyactorsfrom fina were following the path specificity of urban werefollowingthepathspecificityofurban willfollow thepreviously mentioned topics have availabletosecuretheirpositionin the new to reconstitute thewhole spaceof the new and contradictory complex ofsocialactionsin l which was accrued in the previous regime. In accrued inthepreviousregime.In l whichwas e scopeofthepaper,but topick outkey theprojectafterfallofsocialism –for nd onissuesofprivatizationandmarketled cialism theirreplacement those and by ofan ial capital”,accruedintheprevious regime ting configurationofactorsthatcame into onsome of theinterviews withplanners at thesocialist CivicCenter project left ussion of thepost-socialist itations ofthischapterwill other assets, while others while other assets, ncial institutions that thesiteitself–its CEU eTD Collection 49 order couldprovide.The paradoxwasonlythat,wh and thathadtohousethemost colorfulcombin ornamented, filledwith meanings andstructuresthatshouldrepresent thenewsocialorder that everybody was“seeinginto”, becauseitwa fish tankduring the twenty years of post-socialism thatthis chapter deals with; afish tank become apartof theprocess of “planning thece conflicts around theplan intheir attempt to“s relations thatinfluenceplan that hadbeen made availableafter the demolition. the onlyviablesolutionwastobreakupinitial demolishing thisareaaswellwasoutofquestion there werestilltwostreetsfromtheoldne reality thattheplanleftbehind,inwhichhalf shape to the newcenterof town.Thisissue ha civic centerprojectaswell.Ononehand,therewastheneedto “historical legaciesand current conjunctures”, material. information that Icouldnotextractfrom thein Civic Center toalarge extentinthelarg Civic Center.However,thelocalpresshascove were involvedinrelocatingthelocalheadquarters For a full listing ofthe Primary articles seethe part listing ofthe that Sources Bibliography; Forafull were consulted, The pathdependencyofBrasovafterthe On theotherhand“pathdependency”does 49

ning. Newactorscome intopl

ighborhood thatwereleftbehind.Theoptionof e twenty years andIwilladdthosepieces of 52 oftheareawas“readyforconstruction”,while terviews withinformation from thenewspaper d tobetackled byadapting tothefragmented which influencedthepathdependencyof ecure theirposition in the neworder”andto nter”. The civiccenter will workasan empty ation ofspeciesthatthewinnersnew red thesubjectofredevelopment ofthe from theverybeginning.What remained as s centrallylocated.Ithadtobeproperly plan andto readaptitaccordingtothearea of the firms theywererepresentinginthe of thefirms fall ofsocialism wasindeedshapedby suggest aprocessofrearrangingpower ile inthepreviousregime theimage of ay andproducenewtypesof finish theprojectandgivea CEU eTD Collection Diamantul, Marka, Sebastian, ICIM” (Teac 50 that itstillownedin of theCentralPlanning Committee investment. Eventhelocalplanningoffice(“Inst important players,butbyallso operate onlocallevelinthenexttwentyyears. politicians (T interested parties, spanning from private in construction. Until1993,113suchcontractswe advantageous opportunityforinvestors.Theonl commercial galleries.Thelease wasestabl structures forwhichtheconstructionshadal investors thatweresupposed in the“center”ofcity, whichitcould not administration. Thenewlocaladmi construction of theCivic Center were transferred completely into the handsof the local the collapseofhighmodernist stateproject, skyline with unfinishedconcreteand steelstructures, waiting toreceive ashape. Following site ofthenewcenterwasawasteland,anisla cleared andonlyafewofthere should looklike–or,forthatmatter, w the orderthatitshouldhaverepresented,whilenobodyreallyknewhoweitherofthem order –the“plan”wasalreadythere,now “Thalia, Leonro,Aurora, Luca, ICCO, Aurora,Raliv Consequently, during1991-1993thelocaladmi In 1990theciviccenterproject ă nă soiu, 2005).Among thesefirms wereth the civiccenter,inan

to finish the buildings. These contractsinvolvedonlythe to finishthebuildings.These rts ofprivateinvestorsthatsaw sidential high-riseswe during socialism, wentintore ă nistration realizedthatitow , 2005); , 2005); ho thefishandwhoviewerswere. came toahalt.Onlyhalf attempttofindfunding developbecausefundingwasnotavailable. 53 ready begun:theresidentialhigh-risesand vestors tonewly established local firms and y conditionwas thatthey plan wasinthemaking atthesame time with ished for99years,tryingtocreatean nd inthemiddle ofth thefiscalresponsibil itut Proiect Brasov”),the local representative 50 , Ambient, Oligopol, Optica, Bio Plant, Plant, BADR, Bio Optica, , Ambient, Oligopol, Butleases werenot re made bythecityhallwithvarious nistration auctioned re in the process of construction. The re intheprocessofconstruction.The e main economic actorsthatwould ned avaluablepieceofland this tobeaprofitable future al estateandleasedsurfaces of thelandareahadbeen opportunities forapublic ities forcontinuingthe e city,puncturingthe wouldcomplete the contracted only by only contracted lease contractsfor CEU eTD Collection specifically forapiece of land Civic Center. working-class movements ofsoci order tobuilduppolit the sideofnewlyemerging conservativepart it gatheredaroundanumber local ofimportant figures thatwentintopolitics–mainly on brutallyrepressedbyth November 1987andwas towards theworkersuprisingfrom theRed S.) sends anofficial request totheCityHall,aski February 1990,barelyamonth afterthere city halldecidedwhatthenextstepstowards redevelopment wouldbe.Asearlyasthe2ndof church. Thefirstinitiativetowardsbuildingach of socialismdidnot come from aprivateinve other opportunitiesforinvestment. However,thefi construction andthosethatwere not specifynewbuildingsfor constructions, putonpaperbyth established anewmaster planforthearea with G.H.). institution thatwasb The associationfirst asked foralocation in This civicassociationwas Following thedistributionofparcelsth The empty plotsintheciviccenterhad b ecoming redundantafterthe ical capital.Thisassociation,th alreadyincludedintheorigin the civic center, other than those thatwerealreadyunder the civiccenter,otherthan e same architect thatauthored alist Romania, became themain supporterofachurchinthe that occupiedpartlywhat s established inordertocommemorate andmake justice volution, the“15Novemb 54 stor, butfromapublic Flag factory,which ng forlandinthecivic that wassettingthenorms for thefuture y –andusedtheanti-communist discoursein een kept underpublic ownership, waiting for urch intheciviccentercame the longbefore e socialistregime. Rightaftertherevolution fall ofstatecentralized rst claim foraplotintheareaafterfall theperimeter oftheCivic Center, more at hadtobedeveloped,thecityhall at commemorated oneofthefewat commemorated al plan–withoneexception. hould havebeenthepolitical- the1987project.Theplandid took placeonthe15 institution: the orthodox center. (Interviewwith er 1987”association er planning.(Interview th of CEU eTD Collection party thatran thecityin thefirst years after the main bodyofthecathedralassociation as hand, themainrepresentativesof“15Nove workers thatwerekilled intheuprisings and wereafterwards declared with thesecular“HeroesDay”holiday.There association, waschosenbecausetheorthodoxho memory andreligion.Thepatronforthenew the restofstructure(InterviewwithS.). lots andonefora“BiblicalMuseum” –whileth take upthecostsforthreeundergroundfloorsofcathedral–two levelsforparking partnership betweenthecity that theOrthodoxChurchhadtocomplete center projectfrom 1987,N.T.).Theconditions the newmaster planof theareafrom 1993(byth be heavilybackedbythe“15November1987”a was thenewlyestablished association “Ascension referred toasachurchanymore, butasacathed administration -andby1993itwasdecidedtobri the oldcivic center project –whichwasstillbeing officially promoted bythelocal thesiteofspecific plotoflandwas thenew offered anotherplotoflandthat officials triedtonegotiatethisclaim bypassing administrative center(sic!),partlytheopens The partnershipwastheresultofanin The requestwasgranted fortheinitial su and theOrthodoxChurch,throughwhichcitypromised to itwasadministrating, adjacent socialism. Thevice-mayor, anarchitect himself, the cathedralby1996.Theprojectinvolveda 55 headquarters ofthenationalbankaccordingto well, formed thebackboneofconservative quare, totaling4995squaremeters. Thecity ral. Theownerofthelease,made99years, for the requesttolocalplanningoffice,which e churchwassupposedtosupportthecostfor mber 1987”Association,whichwerepartof of thefreeleasesetup liday bearing thesame name wascoinciding ng thechurchbackinciviccenter. ligious aspectcouldth ssociation. Thecathedralwasintroducedin rface andbythis time theproject wasnot ofVirginMary”,whichwascontinuingto cathedral, thesame asthenameof teresting combination betweenpolitics, e same architectthatauthoredthecivic to theciviccenter.Yetthat by theCityHallwere heroes.Ontheother us belinkedtothe CEU eTD Collection well; there, too, the cathedral was supposed – and still is – to be built in the socialist civic center; civic center; inthesocialist to stillis– be built and – cathedral was supposed too,the well; there, 51 was notabletogathertherequi from themunicipalityby1996ifnothingwouldha cathedral projectbecomesthreatened.Inlegal past andthereby omitted thelocal. trying toincorporatethe“loc uprising againstsocialism.Theciviccenterpr socialist regime, whilethecathe orthodox cathedralasthe The argument circlesinanironic geography ofthecity,newcen historic center, thisview reinforces theimportance of thecentrality of thesite.Innew town.” (InterviewwithS.) all theboulevards runningintothecenter.Basi (…)Itwouldhavebeenbeautiful have oneaswell? citi the Transylvanian center.Evenmostof city struggling aloneall, justtoseeitbuilt(…)After dear that became very “The cathedralwassomething main religious actorbehindtheprojectstated: wouldbestberepresentedthrough.Asthe back tothequestionofwhat“urbancentrality” site that emerged through thecreation ofthe city. mentioned associations, whichexplainssome of was oneofthemain supportersofthecathedral An argument thatwas frequently usedfor the constr In 1995theconservativepartylo Although biased,because itcompletely ignor The intereststhatinvolvedthenewlyemerging cities centrallandmark al”, whilethecathedralproject

red funds forraisingtheconstr dral was supposed tomakedral wassupposed acl way,usingEurope’shistoriche ter shouldberepresentedby ses thelocalelectionsinfa es do have such a cathedral. Why wouldn’t Brasov wouldn’t Why havesuchacathedral. es do 56 Civic Center.ThemainCivic cally, itwould have beenvisiblefrom around cally, all uction ofthe Grand Orthodox Cathedral ofBucharest as every European capital has its own cathedral inthe owncathedral Europeancapitalhasits every oject from 1987waslookingintothefuture by project and founding memb projectandfounding theverygenerousconditionsimposed bythe terms, thechurchwouldhavelostlease to be able to see the tower of the cathedral from ofthecathedralfrom to beableseethetower 51 tomy heart andbytheend of itallI was left ve beenbuiltinthe meantime. TheChurch , onasitethathadb es thegothic cathedral from Brasov’s local elitesplayedonattributesofthe from 1993waslookingintothe uction, butatthesame time the an imposing religiousbuilding. ear statement fortheworkers ritage in order to justify an vor oftheliberalsand argument was referring een made centralbya er ofbothearlier CEU eTD Collection be made permanent by a wooden church. (See Fig. 8); cathe orthodox clocktower, the temporality the the of on repainted was intoeternity) godflows of (The inaeternum” manet word “verbum domini Reformation, Lutheran Center. While after the renovations of the gothic cathe of thegothic renovations afterthe Center. While cathedrals, the gothic cathedral from competing struggle for claims around the “historicity of a territory” can be brought further by the two competing 52 existed in thecivic center. This wasnotan Putting inorder whatwasscattered first meant The civiccenterisanuglyfaçade regime changed,butinanadvancedstateofdecay. actually built.Theconstructionwo be different. Tenyearsafterthefirst leasecont The questionhadtobepickedupagainbylocalofficials,butthistime themeans usedhadto visions andclaims aboutwhatthecentershouldlooklike church onthesiteofCivicCenterwascreatedunderauspices neighborhood parish,seatedinthe“temporar constructed onthesite,andanewpriest cathedral. Still,thecity hallcannotclaim thelandback,becauseastructure hadbeen priest ispushedoutfromtheprojectandheco be rapidlyassembled anddisassembled”. (Interview withS.) Following this incident, the church (SeeFig.8,right)wasmade of“preassemb order tobuilda“temporary” woodenchurc intervene onhisownand built. Risking loosing the lease contract, S.,the parcel ofland.Thefoundationthecathedral local administration didnotkeepitspromise area. All that was missing were horses and carriages! (Interview with Mayor Scripcaru,T withMayor andcarriages!(Interview missing werehorses was area. Allthat how many trucksoftrashwehadtoremove from th 2005) th of temporalities theshifting comparison between The “Systematization means toputinorderthatwhichisscattered”,asA.T.hadit. raises money from hisownparishlo

for our city, looking morefor ourcity, likea the historic center and the orthodox rks wereatthe same stageastheywere whenthepolitical h, thuslayingclaim onthepieceofland.The 57 issue during the firstten years aftersocialism , withthethreeunderg dral was constantly being put under question and had to and had put under question being dral wasconstantly to clarifyonceagaintheproperty regimes that racts hadbeenestablishednotmuch been had either, forallitdidwastoexcavateasmall mpletely gives up anyattempt directed atthe y” woodenchurch.Thepermanence ofthe comes intothepictureandforms anew dral conducted duringthe priest responsible for the project decides to ere? Even the homeless started togather inthe Eventhehomelessere? led unitsthat werespecifically designedto e sites of the two center e sitesofthetwo 52 . cated inanotherpartof townin bat’s nest. Do you have any idea have any nest.Doyou bat’s cathedral (project)from theCivic round floors,wasnever oftemporary shifting nineties the motto of the ofthe motto the nineties s that reentered into a into reentered s that ă n ă soiu CEU eTD Collection (Interview with DanielCincu,T (Interview with Ibelievethatthecontr contracts onthelandand (…)Ifindit policy normal thatthe city nowwa acoherentinvestment are lacking isnot we money being circulated,because But despiteofthis,the main developers (the latter building was rented out to Siemens after the redevelopment); contracts, orcompletely invalidate them andsearchfornewinvestors. different solutionsavailable:ei private investorsandcityauthor most contractors. in thesame building–thiswasthecasemainly for the“commercial galleries”, which hadthe in ordertomake profitbutnotbe The restof theinvestors weremostly speculatin 53 financial power tobuyofftitlesand tostartre their titlestootherparties, had todealwith220contractors.(T courts ofjustice, itwasrevealedthatfrom finally complete theconstruction works andstarte after theleasecontractswereestablished. After declared ina press interview: After theyear2000 buried underawaitinggame thatwouldmake th nineties, realestatewa because therewerenosubstantia Two of the main Romanian banks – BCR and BRD, the City Hall and a Hotel Chain from Bucharest a BRD,from Chain were theHotel Bucharest theCityHalland BCRand – banks Romanian the main Two of During thefirstyearsofnewmillennium, intensenegotiationstookplacebetween However, as itturned out many of thecont It isobvious that thisis the rightmoment. Thereare large amounts ofmoney on themarket. s notalucrative business andtheenti situation hadrapidlych without notifying the authorities. Veryfew firms actuallyhadthe ă

n ă ther directly sellthebuildings soiu 2001) ities regarding thestatusofleasecontracts. Therewere ing abletofind acommon stra l intereststhatjustifiedo ă nă soiu, 2005)Mostoftheinitialcontractorshadsold

an initialnumber of113contractors,thecitynow 58 developing separate buildingsindependently the cityhall started pus nts toattractmore taxrevenuesfromthelease g withtheir titles,buy acts can be modified by bilateral agreements. agreements. modified bilateral can be by acts d official investigations anged. Asthechiefar e redevelopment profitable forinvestors. ractors couldnotbeidentifiedtenyears fficial involvement. Duringthe re redistributionoftheplotsgot tegy inordertostartinvesting to investors,renegotiatethe ing orselling them off hing thecontractorsto andprosecutionsin chitect ofthecity 53 . CEU eTD Collection 55 54 commercial purposeswhilethecentral plot,whic same time, itrendersthe“tempor passed intoprivateproperty–whileallothe further development. Itincludesaheightregime into thearea.In2007anewmaster planis Afterputting atleastthefuzzyproperty(Verdery, 2004)issueintoorder,cityofficials were hopingthattheycouldfinallyattracttheinterestofdeve situation ofthecontr problem interms ofconstructionworksremain 2007: Fig.9,10).Atthispoint,most oftheresidentialhigh-riseswerecompleted, theonly which theywerealreadyhavingle land parcels werereturned to political-administrative centershoul Finally,by2004 thepropertyregimes ofthesitehadbecome somewhat clearer.The central part of theCivic Centersite remained intheproperty of theCityHall–where before 1989bytheyear2004 law thatforcedalllocaladministrations tofi landscape of interests on thesite. two important lawswerepassedbytheRomani works didnothavetodoonlywithinterestsre (Interview Scripcaru,Ola2003) withMayor advanced decay. thatnothingy hasbeenbuilttherefor (…) Nowonder York and level ofNew Brasov therentsareat Paris rents–around100$ meterin ayear per square The taxrevenue problem hasto discussed be seriously Law 149/2002; Law149/2002; Law10/2001; However, thepushoflocaladministra acts wasstillunclear. 55

. former owners and investors were keepingthebuildingson former ownersandinvestorswere ase contracts(Seethemaster pl One wasthepropertyrestitutionlaw ary” woodenchurchasillegal d havebeenlocatedintheol 59 r buildingsarearoundtenstorieshigh.Atthe nish constructionworksthathadbeenstarted lated totaxrevenues.Aroundthesameperiod, being established,whichshouldregulatethe ing withthecommercial an government thatsign of30storiesforonethezonesthatwas ears! Some of the buildings are now in a state of astate of thebuildingsarenowin ears! Some tion towardscompletion oftheconstruction h remained inthepropertyofcity,is . Itis not normal that in the civiccenter of lopers forfutureinvestments d project – most of the other d project–most ofthe an fortheciviccenterfrom andtheareaiszonedfor ificantly changedthe 54 galleries, where the ; theother was the CEU eTD Collection orthodox church is not “illegal” atall; is “illegal” not church orthodox et of Catholics Hungarian are members familypracticing so the claim Church, interfere we with not did land”. that City Hallonlyfromthe pieceoflandwhere theroad is, because that’s what we asked for. don’tWe wantto The otherit. halfwasoccupyingWell, halfof what city the by back taken been metershaving sq 4995 the the former by claimed the back rest owners, only been not of actually is has built church the where land the that 58 57 56 but areanything galleries now.Theygalleries’ Even theopportunity for alandareawithhigh all sums upto speculationsthatdidnotBucharest. It of thelocation(…) takeintoaccountthereality importantBrasov inorder headquarters in company notenough demand.simply A lotofthosebuildingsstandempty. There is space. Thereareno There isnosenseinbuilding more from theCivicCenter,N.T.signals of thesitereceivesaverystr because realestatemarket Ironically, afterthepropertyissuehad traffic. biggest trafficroundaboutofthecountry same time, trafficregulations forthecity “temporary” woodenchurch playground forchildren,anda“temporary” a “temporary” shapeto theCivicCenter,by be suggestive foracitycenter.While waitingfo could notbebroughttogetheronlybyregulating the unevenvolume ofinvestments Regulatingthepropertyregime finally receiveashape. Fragmentation didnot with 2Dand3Dplansforthearea) zoned formixedculturalandco of facilitatingthepedestrianflow–lookatitnow, They, the investors; Brasov City Hall(www.brasovcity.ro); the the of website on thatisspecified Information isfor several interesting the church of situation The experiences anewrecessionafte ong sense ofpermanence. Talking abouttherecent developments 56

tooccupythelandfortime being(Vintil mmercial purposes.(SeeFig.10 office spaceinthearea. the potentiale in realestateaswell.The s didnotmean, however,th 58 57 is now the access road. We received money back from the havesplit theinitialideaup the space,theydestroyed are changedand theCivi , completely isolating thearea from pedestrian 60 hall: “Our house was where the wooden church is now. isnow. church the wooden house was where “Our hall: they aredoingbusiness designing a“temporary” park,a“temporary” reasons. Accidentally, anin commercial value is now lost. The ‘commercial lost. The‘commercial isnow commercial value refer onlytothefuzzinessofproperty,but r newinvestments, the Mayordecides togive (Interview (Interview with the Sz. family). As aside Sz. the note, property –andleastnotinaformthatwould open airparkinglot hnicity. According to this information, the wooden wooden the information, to this According hnicity. nd oftheproject: been settled,investments failedtoappear to justify those spaces. All of them are in are in thosespaces.Allofthem to justify Already there isanoversupplyAlready ofoffice r 2007.The“temporary” character different rhythms ofthesite and 11ofthemaster plan, at theCivicCenter could underground, because they underground, because terview has revealed to me to revealed has terview c Center becomes the the becomes c Center and byleavingthe ă , 2002).Atthe CEU eTD Collection bought the land, planning to 59 taking theriskatherage. Yet,shecame along that wouldhavemattered forheranymore and was locatedjustatatwo minute walkingdistancefrom herhouse.Therewasnothingthere neighborhood thatshelivedinalmost allofher answer my questions, felt at first that there wasnotmuchleft tosayabout the old himself likeaman digging.”(26)Shewhosoughttoapproachherown used tointroducemy metaphor of be doneanymore. Endof(Interviewstory! withS.U) wecan To putitsimply, lot firmer intheiropinion: involved inplanningduri However, thereisaclearsignofpessi that thisprojectmight neverpassbeyondthedr the CivicCenterbycombininginonebuilding many ways,the project for the“cultural mall” trie of thecityundersame roof mall” project (SeeFig.11,12),wh continues to work onsolutions that follow thelineofanurbancentralarea.The“cultural mall there aregoingtoopenupa lot (…)Andifthey did notrespect eveninwhatshould thezoning have beentheparking spaces and openedcommercial civic center, but they aregoingtodestroythe but they civic center, down,the shut the HidromecanicaGerman after completely Cora retail company In 2010, factory has been Before turningtothefinalconclusionofth The architecturefirm ofth excavating research: “Hewhoseeks not speakaboutaciviccenter.Thatis not acenter!Thereisnothingthatcan open up a shopping mall onitsplacein thenearfuture; thepastthatquotefrom “A ng socialism andleftthefieldafte

, istheirmost recent project.Althoughthesitehaschangedin ich issupposedtobringsevera e plannerthatdesignedthe old historic center as well” (Interview withN.T) old historicwell”(Interview centeras 61 with me,with hopingthatshe couldbeofanyhelp, to approachhisownbur cultural functions withcommercial functions. crossing thebusystreetwasnotreallyworth life. Shedidnotgothereinyears,althoughit mism thepreviousinterviewthatsuggests in 59 awing table.Othervoice they are not only going to destroy the idea of a theideaofa goingto destroy arenotonly they s to partially perpetuate theinitial ideaof e thesis Iwishtopickuponce againthe Berlin Chronicle”(Benjamin, 1978) r thechangeofregime area 1987 CivicCenterproject l oftheculturalinstitutions ied pastmust conduct buried past,tryingto s thatwerealready CEU eTD Collection shifting visionsofuncertainhistoricalconfigurationspowerrelations. nothing more thanaparkdesignedinhasteand 1988) socialorganism liesinruin,beingthe should havere-centeredthecity an attempt tocreate thefuture, anattempt th down, butitsstillthere.” (Interview withK.E.) to anoldtreewithoutanyleafs,“that’swh around againandcontinued:“NowIknow,it’sth from ourgardenwasone ofthefewthatwe Some yearsago itwasstill easy to tell, they around here,wherewestandnow.ButIamnotve office buildings,thechurchanddecrepitcons Civic CenterofBrasov,tryingtofind thefamiliar intheunfamiliar image ofthepark,tall was, whotheneighborswereandhowtheirho started byaskingquestionsabouttheneighborh the areawhereheroldhousewaslocated,cros although neitherofuswasverysurewhatwe High modernism hasonlypartiallyfulfilledits and bringittogetherasaunita ere thehousewas.Ithought at didnotmaterialize anymore. Thesitethat re still standing. Butnow…”Shepaused, looked exact oppositeofwhatitwassupposedtobe– 62 did notplant trees in the park yet andthetree meant tofreezeyetanothe werelookingfor.We slowlywalkedtowards ood, aboutwherethestreetthatshelivedon uses lookedlike.Shearoundatthe sed thestreetandsatdownonabench.I at oneoverthere!”shepointswithherhand ry sure.Icouldn’ttellwhere thehousewas. truction site.“Thestreetshouldhavebeen scope inBrasov. Iterased thepast in ry “simple andlegible”(Scott, theyhadchoppedit r setoftemporarily CEU eTD Collection integrated itinthebroader debate regarding so phase onlyseizeduponandattempted toma development ofBrasovpriortostatesocialism, how thepreconditionsforcentralityofsi Thepresentpaperhasansweredthese questions byconnectingaspecificplan,the Civic CenterprojectforBrasov,intotwohistor the plan. from theirfield andthestructural limitations that thescarcity inresources wasimposing on the tensionsbetweenofficialideologyofstatesocialism, theinternaldebatesonplanning constantly negotiatingtheirhighlypoliticized shown howplanners,astechnocraticexpertsac has putonthefrontstageaspecificcategory of properly representandfurtherpromoteth notion intoitsideologyandpromoted itforcreatingnewurbancentersthatweresupposedto wider program ofreshapingthe the direction setout bythe socialist state.It st which this project wasnegotiated and implemente through whichurbancentralitywas supposedtocome intobeing,andthewaysthrough project, understoodasacomplex ofspatial,eco On theother handitintr By framing theciviccenter The main aim of thisthesiswastoexplor built environmentofthecountr oduced theplanningcategor into thelanguageofarchitect Conclusions e advancement socialist ofthe society. terialize according 63 arted outbyaskinghowsocialism, aspartofa field throughcontinuousat cialist cities. Theinternal debateson planning ical frameworks. Ononehandithasrevealed te werealreadyprovi nomic, socialandculturalplanningdevices preconditions thatstatesocialism initslate e thepointsofarticula tive inthefieldofur d inordertochannelurbanrestructuring actors:urbanplanners.Theresearchhas to itsownideology. y, integratedtheciviccenter ure andplanning,thispaper y of“civiccenters”and ded bytheindustrial tion ofaciviccenter ban expertise,were tempts ofresolving CEU eTD Collection does notexploitinasufficien connects tothesecondlimitation, which isbot completion andthecentrality of thecityhasbe however, isnotthenorm the case, an unfinished attempt of building aCivic Center, creates aninteresting case, which, disconnected atthepeakofso points thatshouldhavearticulatedtheplanin and how,contrarytowhatthe reasons forwhichtheactualplanredefi plan andnegotiatedtheircentrality accordingl community”, therelocatedresidentsfrom th urban societyinBrasov.Atthesame time,this centrality into the project, both in a functiona were havingtodowiththehighmodernist project going,from structuralel articulation oftheCivicCenterpr environments. becoming amain tool ofmaterializing socia systematization into programofthecountry, a centralizedsocialiststate.The backboneofthispartwasrepr planning solutionswasalsoanattempt todealwi Soviet withthepurposeofpoi in Romanian socialism wereconnectedtoin I believe that thisthesis islimited because of tworeasons:for one,thespecificity of The ethnographicpartofthethesisfocu formostsocialistcities,wher cialism initssecondphase. high modernistprojectofsystem t manner theexceptionofcas ements related tofinancing of theproject, to elements that nting inthedirection of how oject for Brasov that had to be ning urbancentralitywa credo e neighborhood,internaliz 64 l andstylistic sense, lism initssecondphaseRomanian urban h methodological andanalytical.My research en successfullyrenegotia ternationalist influe withtheCivicCenterwasincorporated, y. Thefindingsofthispartsuggestedthe to acohesivepoliticalactwerebecoming partanalyzed theway inwhichthe“local th theinternal contradi that theoptimal integration of theideaof sed ontheearlierme ntioned pointsof e theplanhasbeenbroughtto esented by a discussion of the esented byadiscussionofthe atization waspushingfor,the negotiated inordertogetthe the constantrefinement of e bygoingdeeperinto the would bringaboutanew nces, bothWestern and s becoming fragmented, ed andprocessedthe ted bythestate.This ctions ofplanningin CEU eTD Collection development oftheCivi what extend thechanges in power configur post-socialist transformations of c CenterinBrasov. centrality andurban restructuring, giving onlyahint asto 65 ations ofvariousac tors influenced the CEU eTD Collection ----- 1865. ----- 1871. ----- 1855. ----- 1911. ----- 1864. Primary Sources: Walachia uptotheDanube).Kronstadt:DruckGött. Kronstadt; Associationof Transylv Siebenbürgische Landeskunde nebst deraltenOrts-Constitutionen dieserStadt:Festgabe ... desVereinsfür Buchdruck. (Memo abouttheprojectedrailwaytrackvon Kronstadt merchants andcraftsmen chamber einer Eisenbahn vonKronstadtin Bra the 1864session).Kronstadt:Gött. Session.(Memos abouttheTransylvanianrailway siebenbürger Landtageundimbetreffe ş Übersichtliche DarstellungderälterenGe Memorandum überdieprojectirteEisenbahn Anträge, BerichteundVerhandlungenbezüglichderSiebenbürgerEisenbahnim C Denkschrift derKronstädterHandels ov: Tip.Gött. ăl ăuza pentruBrassóUngaria:1911 Bibliography .(General outline of theolder townconstitution of anian geography).Kronstadt: Gött. dieWalacheibisanDonau 66 nden Landtagsausschusseinder1864-er - undGewerbe-KammerüberdieFührung .(Trip advisorforBrasso,Hungary:1911) for arailwaytrack meinde-Verfassung derStadtKronstadt M.-Szigeth toKronstadt)[Pest]:Pester linie vonM.-SzigethnachKronstadt in theTransilvaniangovernment at throug Kronstadtin . (Memo ofthe . CEU eTD Collection B B B Banaru, Balea, Claudia,2003, Bucure ----- 2007.PlanUrbanisticZonal: Centru B B Banaru, Cârstea, Mihaela,2002,Primãria Bra Becke, CarlFranz.1864.DieSiebenbürgerEisenbahnfrage ă ă ă ă ă ilă ilă ilă ilă ilă , Cristina,2008, , Cristina,2008,Avertisment pentrucon final , Cristina,2006,Nouafa , Cristina,2008,UnaltCentru subCentrulCivi , Cristina,2005,Parcare for thecontractorsfrom theCivicCenter) ZIUA BRA shows interestforBrasov’sCivicCenter) TRANSILVANIA Expres ZIUA BRA Center inthefocusofgovernment) BUNÃ ZIUABRA attention) February; (The BrasovCityHall does notknowallth und im VerlagbeiJohannGött. Railway questionfromtheperspectiveof österreichischen auswärtigenHandelsvonC.F.v.Becke,.. TRANSILVANIA Expres Ș Ș tefan, 2004,"Centrulcivic"încentrulaten tefan, 2003,CentrulCivicalBra , GAZETAdeTransilvania Ș Ș OV OV Resistematizare înCentrul Civic(Redevelopment intheCivicCenter), , 20April; , 28June; ȘOV , 25September; ț ã aCentrului Civic(Thene ș , 05March; , 22April; tenii interesa Civic (AnotherCenter) ș ov nucunoaș , 1March; ț ș 67 i deCentrulCivicalBra , GAZETAdeTransilvania ovului, înaten c (ParkinglotundertheCivicCenter) , OBIECTIV , BUNÃZIUABRA l Civic(MasterPlan:Center), cesionarii dinCentrul Civic (Finalwarning the Austriantrade).Kronstadt:Gedruckt te to ț e contractorsfromthe Civic Center) iei (The CivicCenterinthecenterof w faceoftheCivicCenter), ț i concesionariidinCentrulCivic , 27February; ț ia guvernului(Brasov’sCivic aus demGesichtspunktedes , BUNÃ ZIUABRA Ș OV (TheTransylvanian , 11April; , 9January; ș ovului (Bucharest ȘOV , BUNÃ BUNÃ , 26 ,

CEU eTD Collection Ola, Marius, 2003,Centrul Civicva deveni...civic(TheCiviccente Morgovan, Monica,2006,Adioproiectuluideca Chicomban, Mihaela,2008,Primãr Ola, Marius,2003,DeceCentrulCivicnuecivi Sebeni, Mariana,2008,Amenzi uria Popa, R Popa, Cornelius,2001, Popa, Cornelius,2000,Preten Popa, Cornelius,2001,CentrulCivic-oru Popa, Cornelius,2002,CespuneScripcaru. Civic,viitorPaul, Andrei,2008,Centrul centru Oprea, Marcela,2004,Sediileprincipalelor bã project intheCivicCenter) the plots from theCivic Center) OBIECTIV OBIECTIV the contractorsinCivic Center) March; scandal: Twistedbusinesses) for Brasov), center) Expres headquarters ofthemain banksc and mud –TheCivicCenter) does) ă zvan, 2002,Miliardeînmormântate (Buriedbillions) , GAZETAdeTransilvania, , MONITORUL Expres , 25October; , 18September; , 12Nov; GAZETA deTransilvania Scandalul Centrului Civic: Afaceriîntortocheate (TheCivicCenter ț ii occidentale , TRANSILVANIAExpres ia vindeterenuriledinCentru , GAZETAdeTransilvania ș , GAZETAdeTransilvania e pentruconcesionariidin Ce , 26February; , BUNÃ ZIUA BRA 20 September; , oncentrate intheCivicCenter) MONITORUL Expres MONITORUL ș ș ine aBra , 29August; 68 i mocirlã. (CentrulCivic)(Occidentalpretences Ș i ceface(What Scripcar nci seconcentreazãîn tedralã înCentrul Civic(Goodbyecathedral cultural (TheCivicCenter,future c? (Whyc? isn’ttheCi ș ovului (TheCivicCe ȘOV , 26September; , , 6February; , 26September; , 11May; MONITORUL deBra , 11april; l Civic(TheCityHallsells ntrul Civic (Huge fines for ntrul Civic(Hugefinesfor r willbecome…civic) u says.Andwhathe CentrulCivic (The vic Centercivic?), , nter –adisgrace TRANSILVANIA TRANSILVANIA ș ov , 13 ,

CEU eTD Collection Andrusz, GregoryD,MichaelHarl Secondary Sources: Terciu, Georgeta,2002,Catedrala T T T T T T Vintil Uzina Hidromecanica Bras ă ă ă ă ă ă nă nă nă nă nă nă soiu, Andreea, 2006, CLaaprobatPUZ-ulCe soiu, Andreea,2005,Municipalitateavreasã soiu, Andreea,2005, Concursdeideipentru amenajarea Centrului Civic (Design soiu, Andreea,2003, BlocuriledinCentrulCivi soiu, Andreea,2003, AdevãrataPrimãrie esteîn soiu, Andreea, 2003, 20deconcesionari din ă , Lucia,2002,ParcînCentrulCi Blackwell. Urban andRegionalChange andConflic from theCivicCenter willcost 5millions) the master plan fortheCivic Center) Expres Center), TRANSILVANIA Centrul Civic (TheCitywantstosell competition for theCivic Center) Civic Center willbefinished) the CivicCenter) February; contractors from theCivicCenter will become legal) 26 July; Factory Brasov)Bras , TRANSILVANIA Expres,27February; ̦ov. 1971. ̦ov.

din Centrul Civicva costa cinci milioane (Thecathedral oe, andIvánSzelényi,eds.1996.CitiesAfter Socialism: , TRANSILVANIAExpres Uzina “Hidromecanca”Bras vic (ParkintheCivicCenter) , 8September; TRANSILVANIA Expres , TRANSILVANIA , TRANSILVANIAExpres 69 , MONITORULdeBra thecontractorsplotsfrom theCivic ntrului Civic(Thelocal councilapproved Centrul Civicvorintra înlegalitate (20 t inPost-Socialist Societies c vorfifinalizate(Thebuildings inthe CentrulCivic(The trueCityHallisin vândã concesionarilor terenurile din , 13May; , TRANSILVANIA Expres , TRANSILVANIA , 19January; ̦ov , , 18July;

BUNÃ ZIUABRA . (The Hidromecanica Hidromecanica . (The ș ov , 3May; . Oxford: ȘOV , 6 , CEU eTD Collection Constantinescu, Mironed. 1970. Catrina, Constantin,IonLupu,andS Calhoun, CraigJ,andRich Buchli, Victor.1999. Brenner, Neil,andBobJessop,eds.2003. Boyer, M.Christine.1994.TheCityofCollectiveMemory: ItsHistoricalImageryand Bodnar, Judit,andJozsefBorocz.1998.“HousingAdvantagesfortheBetterConnected? Bodnár, Judit.2001. Benjamin, Walter.1999. Benjamin, Walter.1978. Beilharz, Peter.1994. Monograph). Bucures Oxon: Routledge. Architectural Entertainments. Cambridge, Mass:MITPress. March 9,2011. Late State-SocialistHousing Inequalities.” SocialForces Institutional Segmentation, Settlement Type University Press. York: SchockenBooks. Melbourne UniversityPress. Minneapolis: University of MinnesotaPress. An ArcheologyofSocialism. Postmodern Socialism:Ro Fin DeMillénaireBudapest: MetamorphosesofUrbanLife The ArcadesProject Reflections: Essays,Aphorisms ard Sennett,eds.2007. ̦ti: Sport-Turism. Procesul DeUrbanizare înRomânia:ZonaBras ̦tefan ABanaru,eds.1981.Bras State/Space: AReader 70 . Cambridge, Mass:BelknapPressofHarvard manticism, CityandState.Carlton,Victoria: Oxford:Berg. Practicing Culture.MiltonPark,Abingdon, and SocialNetwork EffectsinHungary’s , AutobiographicalWritings . Oxford:BlackwellPub. 76(4):1275-1304.Retrieved ̦ov: Monografie . (Brasov: ̦ov . New . (The . (The . CEU eTD Collection Hamilton, F.E.Ian,Kaliopa Dimitrovska Gusti, Dimitrie. 1934.SociologiaMilitans. Gusti, Dimitrie. 1938. French, R.A,andF.E.IanHamilton, eds.1979. Derer, Peter.1985. Czaplicka, John,BlairARuble, Czaplicka, John,NidaMGelazis, Cucu, Vasile.1977. Crowther, William E.1988. Sketch foranevolutionaryapproach).Bucures urbanization processinRomani Transformation ofCities inCentral Urban Policy.Chichester: Wiley. Press. and theConstitution of CivicIdentities geographical viewpoints).Bucures Geografice. (Thesystemmatization of theterritory Praeger. Romaneasca. D.C: Woodrow Wilson CenterPress. Communism: ReshapingCulturalLandscapesandEuropeanIdentity Locuirea Urbana Sistematizarea Teritoriului S Elemente desociologie. The PoliticalEconomyofRomanianSocialism and LaurenCrabtree,eds.2003. andBlairARuble,eds.2009. ̆: Schit a: TheBrasovregion).Bucures Andrews,andNatašaPichler-Milanovi ̦ti: EdituraS ̦ă PentruOAbordareEvolutiv Bucuresti: Editura Institutului Cultural Roman. 71 and EasternEurope:Towards Globalization . Washington, D.C:WoodrowWilson Center (Elements ofsociology).Bucuresti:Cartea The SocialistCity:SpatialStructureand ̦i Localit ̦ti: EdituraTehnic ̦tiint andofthesettlements ofRomania: ̦ific ă s ăt ̦i Enciclopedic ̦ilor DinRomânia:Repere Composing UrbanHistory Cities After theFallof ̦ti: Editura Politic ă . ă. (Urbanhabitation: ă . Washington, . . New York: . NewYork: ć , eds.2005. ă . . CEU eTD Collection Jurov, Cosma.1979.CentreCivice:Contribut Jameson, Fredric.1996. Holston, James. 1989. Harvey, David.2008.TheRighttotheCity.NewLeftReview Harvey, David.2003. Harvey, David.1994. Harvey, David.1985b. Harvey, David.1985a. Harvey, David.1973. Koch, Florian.2010.DieeuropäischeStadtinTransformation: Stadtplanung und Tokyo: UnitedNationsUniversityPress. Verso. University ofChicagoPress. Cultural Change Capitalist Urbanization. Baltimore, Md:JohnHopkinsUniversity Press. Theory ofCapitalistUrbanization transformation: Cityplanningandcity developmentpoliticsinpos Stadtentwicklungspolitik im settlements). Bucures Contributions todefining andcreating multifunctional civic centers for future small Centre CiviceMultifunct Paris, CapitalofModernity Social JusticeandtheCity The Modernist City:AnAnthropological Critique ofBrasília Consciousness andtheUrbanExperience The ConditionofPostmodernity:AnEnquiryintotheOrigins . Oxford[England]:Blackwell. The UrbanizationofCapital: StudiesintheHistoryandTheory of Postmodernism, or,TheCultura ̦ti: EdituraTehnic ̦ionale PentruViitoareleOras postsozialistischen Warschau . Baltimore, Md:JohnHopkinsUniversity Press. 72 ă ̦ii LaDefinirea S . . London:EdwardArnold. . NewYork:Routledge. l Logic ofLate Capitalism 53:23-40. ̦i ConcepereaUnorTipuriDe : StudiesintheHistoryand ̦e Mici.(CivicCenters: .(The European cityin t-socialist Warsaw). . Chicago: . London: CEU eTD Collection Poulantzas, Nicos.2000. Perry, ClarenceArthur, and Perry, ClarenceArthur.1920. Oroveanu, MihaiT.1986. Molotch, Harvey. 1976.“TheCityasaGrowth Marcuse, Peter. 1985.Gentrifi Lefebvre, Henri.2003.The UrbanRevolution Lefebvre, Henri.2004. Kotkin, Stephen.1995. 1st ed.Wiesbaden: VS,Verl.fürSozialwiss. Their CommunityPolicy Foundation. Cleveland, February,1920. NewYorkCity:Department Community CenterSessionsattheN.E.A., Enciclopedic systematization in the Socialist Republic Romania). Bucures Republicii SocialisteRomânia Place.” and policyresponsesinNewYorkCity. 195–240 Continuum. of CaliforniaPress. The AmericanJournalofSociology ă . Magnetic Mountain:Stalin State, power,socialism. Rhythmanalysis: Space,Time,andEverydayLife Marguerita PWilliams. 1931. Contributions toCommunityCent Organizarea Administrativă cation, abandonment anddisplacement: connections, causes . NewYork:RussellSage Foundaton. . (Administrative organization andterritory 73 . Minneapolis:University ofMinnesotaPress. Journal ofUrbanandContemporaryLaw Machine:TowardaPoliticalEconomy of London: Verso. 82(2):309-332.RetrievedMarch14,2011. ism asaCivilization Department ofSuperintendenceMeeting, S New YorkSchoolCentersand ̦i Sistematizarea Teritoriului er Progress;aReportonthe ofRecreation,RussellSage ̦ti: Editura S . Berkeley:University ̦tiint . London: ̦ific 28, ă s ̦i CEU eTD Collection Verdery, Katherine, andCaroline Humphrey, eds.2004. Verdery, Katherine.1996. Verdery, Katherine.1999. Szelényi, Iván.1983. Stanilov, Kiril,ed.2007. Stahl, HenriH.1969. Scott, James C.1998.SeeingLikeaState:HowCertai Sampson, StevenL.1984.NationalIntegrationThrough Ronnas, Per.1984.UrbanizationinRomania:AGeography Transformation in the Globaleconomy Princeton University Press. Change Press. Verlag. Central andEasternEuropeAfterSocialism (Territorial administrative organization:Sociological Condition Have Failed Monographs. Anthropological StudyofaRomanianNewTown School ofEconomics. Since Independence s ̦tiin ţ ific . NewYork:Columbia UniversityPress. ă . Urban InequalitiesUnderStateSocialism The Post-SocialistCity:UrbanFo Organizarea Administrativ-Teritoriala . Stockholm, Sweden:Economic ResearchInstitute,Stockholm The PoliticalLives ofDeadBo What WasSocialismandComesNext? . NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress. 74 . Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer . Englished.Oxford: Berg. n SchemestoImprovetheHuman rm andSpaceTransformations in . Boulder,Colo:EastEuropean ofSocialandEconomicChange dies: ReburialandPostsocialist Comments). Bucures Property inQuestion: Value . Oxford: Oxford University ̆: ComentariiSociologice Socialist Planning:An Princeton,NJ: ̦ti : Editura . CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 1:Theareaoftherailwaystationbefore1880 Illustrations: Annexes 75

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 2:Therailwaystationareain1910 76

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 3: Civic Center ProjectfromFig. 3:CivicCenter 1968 77

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 4:CivicCenterProjectof1987(a) 78

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 5:CivicCenter 79 Project from 1987(b)

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 6:Housesfrom theHidromecanica neighborhood; Lazar street 47(left),Leninstreet67 (right) 80

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 7:Socialist“post-modernity”–comple architectural plan 81 ted buildingsthat followed the original

CEU eTD Collection

Inscription ontheclocktowerofBlackChurch(down); Fig. 8:TheBlackChurch,inth The churchinthecivic center(left); 82 e historiccenter(right);

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 9:NewofficebuildingsintheCivicCenter 83

CEU eTD Collection

Yellow: Areathatdidnotgettobedemolished in1987; Fig. 10:Planforrezoning Green: privatepropertyzones; Red: PublicProperty; 84 the CivicCenter(2007);

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 11:CulturalCenterprojec 85 t intheCivicCenter(2008);

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 12:3DplanfortheCivicCenter,with “cultural mall” andhigh-riseofficebuildings; 86

CEU eTD Collection

Google Mapssatelliteviewof Fig. 13:ArialviewoftheCivi 87 the CivicCenter–2008(down) c Centerinthe1990’s(up)

CEU eTD Collection built social capital through theassociation inorder to pushfor hisproject. became sociallyandpolitically active aspart Other interviews mentioned the same apartment blockasE.N.andI.C. the same apartment blockasE.N. multi-family apartment houseinthe same area; same area; Residents Planners - - - -

- S.:priest,main religiousactorbehindth - M.Sz.:First generationhomeowner fr - I.C.:Secondgenerationhomeowner from - K.E.:Firstgenerationtenantfrom - professor intheSociologyDept. S. U.:sociologist,former member oftheBrasovPlanningInstitute; currently planning institute during socialism; G.H.: architectandurbanhistorianworki Brasov RaionalPlanning Committee; currently retired; A.T.: urbanplanner,winnerofthe1968Ci Brasov, leadinghisownarchitecturalfirm; N.T.: urbanplanner,winnerofthe1987Ci E.N.:Secondgenerationtenantsfrom theneighborhood,Romanian relocatedinthe Interviewees mentio of theUniversityBrasov; 88 the neighborhood,Hungarian,relocatedina ofthe“15November 1987”associationand om theneighborhood,Hunga ng onBrasov;former member ofthelocal vic Centerproject,former headofthe vic Centerproject;currentlyactivein ned inthispaper e cathedral project from theCivicCenter; the neighborhood,Romanian, relocatedin : rian, relocatedin