SOS!!! Str.Dionisie Lupu 70-72 in grave danger

(Photo source: Calin Bota) This is not the first time str. Dionisie Lupu, 70-72 has made the news. Built in 1890, this house was one of the residences of the Vacarescu family - famous boyars, scholars, poets and linguists - intellectuals of Romania, amongst them and to name just a few, Barbu, Elena and Ienachita. Back in 2009, the house was a topic on one or two serious blogs concerning Bucharest's patrimony, history and heritage as well as in the press. An SOS went out once more yesterday via Facebook. After more than a century, this beautiful building like so many others in Bucharest, is about to become rubble unless something can be done to stop it. Not due to natural causes, heavens, no - but by the usual method. Bulldozers.

For many decades, this house has figured on the capital's list of historic monuments and continues to do so (MCPNC Decree no. 2328/28.07.2009). Back in 2009, however, annexes in the courtyards of 70 and 72 were demolished. They did not feature on the list of historic monuments since they were considered to have no architectural nor historic value. The main buildings in danger today however ARE listed and therefore any attack on them is ILLEGAL.

Can anyone imagine this happening to Kafka's house in Prague (he had a few), Moliere's ancient birthplace in Paris or Murillo's home in Seville? Of course not. But in Bucharest, admirable personalities of national culture end up with no memorial house while other monuments of heritage and historic value are also destroyed. They are simply demolished (eg. Casa Prager, Casa Simona Lahovary, and the house of General Gheorghe Zizi Cantacuzino - for more info see HERE), left to auto-destruct through wilful neglect (eg. Casa Nenitescu, Casa Miclescu, the home of Bacovia), 'helped' to decay by illegal squatters sent by the owners (eg. Muzeul Spiru Haret, Hala Matache) - often foreign investors who have no idea what they have actually bought or, just as often, shameful Romanian owners who simply don't give a damn - or set ablaze (Visarion, 8) which is, by far, the most efficient way to rid oneself of a house that's in the way. Charges for arson never seem to be brought and a typical example of that was seen recently on str Franceza at Casa Miron Vlasto in the centre of the old city when a building was engulfed by flames not once but TWICE in as many months. The roof was almost completely destroyed - the winter elements will do the rest. The owner is no other than City Hall. The building was not listed and did not belong to anyone famous, neither past nor present, but it had once been beautiful. City Hall own most of str Franceza and it is common knowledge that they wish to build on it. Do not be surprised if the whole street ends up as ashes.

Yes indeed, to be a figurehead of Romanian culture whether it be science, art, history, linguistics, mathematics or even architecture is really quite something. Instead of having school children walking, awe-inspired, through your study and your compatriots remember you with honour and respect, gypsies graffiti your walls, break your windows, pull up your floor-boards and thieves steal anything they think they can sell, particularly metal beams that support a building causng it to collapse - the case at Hala Matache today.

But I digress. Back to str Dionisie Lupu, 70-72: In place of this majestic house, an eight-storey block is planned to be built by the same company who tried to grace Bucharest with the 200m high Dorobanti Tower.... Now there's a happy omen...with taste like that and such concern for the atmosphere and local ambiance, who needs beauty anyway. Hack away!

The annexes of the building demolished in 2009 were authorised by Chiliman, the Mayor of Sector 1 who, incidentally, has been behind rather a lot of demolitions lately - the most recent being Casa Rosetti, also on str Dionisie Lupu a little further along at 53. A notice to demolish has remained on the wall at 70-72 ever since 2009.

(Photo sources: Calin Bota) In addition to being listed monuments, this area is also a PROTECTED zone. It is NOT POSSIBLE for str.Dionisie Lupu, 70-72 to be LEGALLY demolished. It simply cannot be.

Judging by the photographs seen on Facebook yesterday in an album entitled demolare in pregatire str.Dionisie Lupu7072/18.12.2011 however, preparation for demolition (those cars look dangerously vulnerable) has already begun... And it must be stopped before it goes any further.

The question is, will the owners, SMARTOWN INVESTMENTS, be prepared to risk committing an illegal act, particularly when they know full well that NGOs for patrimony are watching?

An urgent plea from a member of the NGO, ProDoMo:  "Please, if you see the slightest sign of demolition taking place on buildings on this street, call the police on 112. They HAVE to go and stop it - or at the very least, verify the documents." She also advises people to take as many photographs as possible and to post information on the social networks such as Facebook.

If this is anything like the 'porcherie' performed at nr.53 on 8th November, demolition papers will have either EXPIRED or simply not exist - or even perhaps for another building, another number... who knows how these low-life mitocani work nor what they are prepared to do in order to manipulate and trample all over the law in their determination to destroy OUR city.

You heard the lady - if you see ANYTHING that looks like a demolition going on at str Dionisie Lupu, call 112. It is very possible that 'Apolodor' (the demolition company, extremely active in Bucharest for the last couple of years) will take advantage of the Christmas holiday and reduce the house to nothing whilst your backs are turned. PLEASE do not let that happen. Not again. 

Comments

[sairj]

"IN DL 70-72 they do not demolish the front but the rear buildings (located in the midle of the plot and some of them conected to the no 72. The main building remain listed, not only its facade." Exactly. that's what I've been saying and what is written above... but the main, listed building on the street is today wrapped up in tarpaulin and at great risk of being demolished!!! Take a look at the pictures. From what I have understood from various sources, the buildings behind have already been demolished. there is nothing left to go of this property but that which stands on the street - protected, listed but nevertheless about to be razed if the situation remains the same as when the post above was written.



Re: 56: Indeed, they could have done a lot of things, but in today's Bucharest and real estate mafiosa as it stands, money does not equal sense, taste or morality! As for the zonal commission, I dont know but the PUZ etc was nowhere to be found because of the expiration and thus, nonexistence. The papers had expired a few days before the demolition took place, please see my post here: http://sarahinromania.canalblog.com/archives/2011/11/05/22588185.html For Gutenburg 3A I do not know for I did not follow the story, most unfortunately. If you have any info on that so I may pick up the threads, I'd be grateful.



Thanks Adrian! Always good to read you!

[Adrian]

In DL 56 it seems that they acted just before the papers expired (as i understand) exactly as in the case of Gutenberg 3A (even more controversal)



IN DL 70-72 they do not demolish the front but the rear bildings (located in the midle of the plot and some of them conected to the no 72. The main building remain listed, not only its facade.



For the P+4 at no 56 there is a question of taste that can not be exactly defined by the local regulations. As long it does not exceed the coeficient and does not display a facade made of glass or pink paint ... difficult to argue on the estetics. It is though stupid tat they are placing the building on the street line, from neighbour to neighbour, a continous block. They could have kept the fence, a front garden and still build their maximum sized building. I do not know if this case was debated in the zonal commission for historic monuments as it should have been ...

[sairj]

Dear Adrian,

'In the case of the shameful demolition at number 56 that was also a legal one as it was authorised, included with the ministry of culture permit.' But...the papers to demolish were out of date and thus not legal. How can papers be legal if they have expired? In addition, they were for a building round the back of 56 and NOT for the building demolished.



As for the replacement P4 on DL70-72, are there not laws about what can and cannot be built in a protected zone given how it blends in with its surroundings? Aoleu....



Re demolition of 70-72, I still dont understand how it can be legal if it is the facades, ie, the buildings on the street, to be razed - and they are on the protected list. I have been told several times that these buildings were not removed from the protective register despite pressure put on by SMART. Thus...illegal once again.

[adrian]

This is a misconception about protected areas or monuments - demolishing to be ilegal. Part of this property was taken out of the list and, as i know, monument remained only the front buildings. In the case of the shameful demoliton at number 56 that was also a legal one as it was authorised, included with the ministry of culture permit. The protected area was only recently analised and received a proper regulation that is on its way to receive the General Council of Municipaliti's aprouval. If that regulation was in force at the time of the demolition permit, this demolition would not have happened. It is even more to be concerned about the new building to be realised there, a disgraceful P+4 with no architectural quality ... so double lose. But technicaly legal unfortunately.

[sairj]

For Adriam, thank you for commenting. The main building on the street is still wrapped up in stripey covering (very festive...) and heavens knows what is going on beneath it, nor when the bulldozers will appear, for appear they will, I am sure. Indeed the building project has been in situ for a while as mentioned in the post and the sign to demolish at the back remained following the courtyard buildings demise up until lately. A friend of mine even took a photo of it the day DL56 was razed so shamefully (and also illegally) to the ground. However, the main 70-72 IS a listed building AND in a protected area. Therefore it is illegal to demolish. There is no way that legality for such an act can be sought nor proven. Despite efforts to remove the house from the list so that it could be demolished, the declassification was NOT granted. Demolition is unauthorised and a criminal act.



Today, 5th January, I have no news as to the situation. Since there has been no outcry via the social networks, I can only imagine (and hope) that 70-72 remains standing.