Legislative and planning normative framework on heritage and landscape - the Romanian case Presented during the VIVA EAST Thematic Seminar on "Methodology for Urban Planning and Design of minor Historic Centres Territorial Cultural Systems, Bari, Italy, Oct. 2012

1. LEGISLATIVE AND
PLANNING NORMATIVE
FRAMEWORK ON
HERITAGE AND
LANDSCAPE
THE ROMANIAN CASE

2. Regulatory framework on heritage and landscape was mainly developed in
Romania after 1989.
• first law concerning historical monument was created in 1892 and a French
model of the Commission of Historical Monuments
• 1948 – the Commission of Historical Monuments is suspended
• 1959 – a new Direction of Historical Monuments is in charge with heritage
protection
• 1980 – the body responsible for heritage is suspended again
• 1990 – the domain of heritage was affected by legislative instability and absence
of regulatory dispositions.

3. During 1990-2000 decade, decrees and laws are promoted referring to the
acceptance and ratification of European or UNESCO conventions.
• Decree nr.187/30.03.90 for the acceptance of the Convention for protection of
World Heritage, cultural and natural, General Conference of UNESCO, Paris
16.11.1972
• Law nr. 50/97 regarding the ratification of European Convention for the protection
of archaeological heritage, La Valetta, 16.01.92
• Law nr. 157/97 for ratification of the Convention for the protection of architectural
heritage of Europe, adopted in Granada, 03.10.1985

4. New legislation concerning heritage had to start with a basic legislative
structure - 2 main laws:
• Law 422/2001 – Law for the protection of historical monuments, republished in
2006, O.M.938/20.11.2006
• Law 378/2001 – Law concerning the protection of archaeological heritage and
declaring of some archaeological sites as areas of national interest
In the field of mobile heritage, Law 182/2000 – Law concerning the protection of
mobile national heritage
and Law 311/2003 – Law of museums and public collections completed the legal
general frame.

5. The law regarding immobile heritage introduced rules referring to inventory,
classification, modalities of intervention, institutions and professional
bodies, obligations and rights of the owners, local authorities attributions,
financing and sanctions but needed to be completed by methodological
standards:
Ministerial Order nr.2682/2003 regarding the approval of methodological
standards for classification and inventory of historical monuments, the List of
Historical Monuments, the analytical accounting fiche for historical monuments
or for a specific heritage – World Heritage Monuments:
Law 564/2001 approving the GO nr. 47/2000 concerning the protection measures
for historical monuments being of the WH List.
In the following years the legal system for special categories of heritage was a
priority- Ordinance nr. 43/30.01.2000 concerning the protection of architectural
heritage and declaration of architectural sites as areas of national interest, Law
454/2006 for the approval of GO nr. 21/2006 regarding the concession system for
historical monuments, Law nr. 6/2008 for the legal system of technical and
industrial heritage .

6. Urban and territorial planning were the fields where legal provisions were
introduced as a new way of tackling also the context of heritage objects –
areas with architectural or ambient values.
The first territorial document was the Spatial Plan for National Territory (PATN)-
Section III – Protected Areas approved by a special law - Law5/2000.
Since that point, at all levels of planning-county, zone, central area or area of
historical/architectural significance, plans concerned with the inventory and
protection of built heritage were promoted: PATJ – county level, PUG – city or
village level, PUZ – central or built values areas.
The main objectives of these plans are to link territorial development of a region,
an area or a community to heritage valuation and enhancement, to provide an
adequate protection but also a sustainable development of the territory concerned.
As areas of architectural and urban value were existing in most of historic cities all
over Romania, by the Minister Order nr.562/2003 was approved the technical
regulation of Methodology for the elaboration and framework of urban documents
for Protected Built Areas – in use since today for these urban studies and plans.

7. The field of Landscape was less fortunate:
Law 451/2002 is in force for ratification of the European Convention of Landscape,
adopted in Florence at 20 October 2000 but since, no methodological
documents in view of an adapted application were produced.
Although the Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism initiated a pilot project
and a methodology to be developed in 2007, these documents were not
transposed into the legal framework.
In the urban plans, a chapter is related to landscape protection (PUG, PUZ) but
the provisions included in their set of rules and regulations can hardly be applied in
the absence of a methodology.

8. Legal context for urban planning
LAW 350/2001
REGULATORY PLANNING
General Master Plan - PUG
Zonal Master Plan - PUZ
Detailed Master Plan - PUD
Derogatory procedures: allowed for exceptional cases, but used intensely,
especially in the years of real estate development booming.
Too much room left to private side!
Passive attitude of local public authorities.
Little negotiation for getting advantages in public interest.

9. Legal context for urban planning
STRATEGIC PLANNING
Supposedly part of PUG – strategic dimension.
No obligation for elaborating local development strategies or other sectorial
strategies (housing, transportation, green...)
Financial support from USAID, EU, international cooperation programs...
Consultancy companies and foreign experts: short visits
Documents in the shelf

10. Legal context for urban planning
TERRITORIAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS:
STRATEGIC PLANNING + REGULATORY FRAME
PATZ – Valea Hartibaciului
RESTRUCTURAREA RELAŢIEI URBAN-RURAL
IN CONTEXTUL COEZIUNII TERITORIALE
Phase 1 – 2009, Environment impact report 2010 ....
October 2012: Regional Environment Agency evaluation
Pilot financed by the Ministry of Regional Development
+ an active GAL – Local Action Group – grouping of local authorities

12. CONCLUSIONS:
legal and institutional frame
Lack of
interest
Lack of for
resources “planning”
Technical
for
argument
reliable Political will Not aware
and of the use
relevant of
data territorial
approach
common “collective” interest has
interests of the negative connotations from the
local communist regime
DISCONNECTIONS community

13. CONCLUSIONS:
needs for changes of legal and institutional frame
usually following the
CHANGES OF ATTITUDES AND WAYS OF DOING Building up accessible
and clear arguments
Technical Political will
argument
opening
of
professionals
towards
participation Local democracy
and wakening common at work:
from apathy for local interests of the better chances in
stakeholders local small communities
community Accountability
CONNECTIONS