Romanian Court Orders Skyscraper Demolished to Protect Catholic Cathedral

NC Register ^ | February 4, 2013 | VICTOR GAETAN

[NYer]

BUCHAREST, Romania — David defeated Goliath, again, last week in Romania’s capital city when an appeals court issued a final ruling in favor of a humble cathedral pitted against a gigantic steel office tower, concluding a seven-year legal and political struggle.

In an unprecedented, definitive decision, the court ordered a 19-story skyscraper demolished and the land restored to its prior condition — a small, city park.

Concurring with several lower court decisions, the judge concluded that the office tower, known as Cathedral Plaza, was illegally constructed without proper permits or authorizations in a brazen gesture that threatened the cathedral’s physical security while limiting the ability of citizens to exercise religious freedom.

“Many people thought the power of money was enough to defeat the power of ideals, the power of law, the power of truth and justice, and primarily, the power of God,” declared Archbishop Ioan Robu, 68, at a Jan. 25 press conference in Bucharest.

Instead, the archbishop said, “Because God exists, his wishes are achieved.”

Entrusted with shepherding the archdiocese since he was named bishop by Pope John Paul II in 1984, Archbishop Robu led a high-profile public campaign to protect the Cathedral of St. Joseph.

Thousands of priests and parishioners marched through downtown Bucharest to protest the illegal construction, which began to rise in the air in 2006, just 26 feet from the cathedral’s unreinforced brick walls. Thousands more signed petitions addressed to the government.

Catholic churches around the country hung bold black and red banners on their facades, equating protecting the cathedral with protecting the nation’s cultural values.

The Romanian Orthodox Church, representing 86% of the population, participated in the Catholic Church’s campaign in a quiet working relationship coordinated by the Catholic archbishop, who thanked the Orthodox Church at his press conference.

[AnAmericanMother]

When a wealthy and influential contractor decides he's going to "buy" your property and put up a building on it, and he's bribed the city government to do so, other than making a lot of noise there's little you can do.

You'll see this in this country, a developer will go into "hurry up" mode to try to get grading and foundations done before the neighbors catch on. But here, we have stop work orders and judges that will enforce them if the county building department won't. Not every country in the world has an independent judiciary or city/county officials.

It speaks well for the archbishop that he was persistent.

And, yes, if somebody builds in violation of an order, they have to tear it down. It's "build at your own risk" if you violate the building code.

[SampleMan]

Yes. If someone builds a 16 story bldg on your property you are worse than an idiot, you are a moron. To let this get to the point where they are now going to do what? Tear it down? Pathetic.

You didn't read the article did you? The building was constructed in an illegal method outside of the proper procedures (the Chicago way), and the construction was protested from the very beginning. Only after a long legal battle did they win. How exactly does this qualify as "let it get to this point"?

The party who built the building now has to except the consequences of their actions. They gambled that they would get away with it, and they lost that bet.

This sort of thing goes on in the U.S. on a regular basis, where the well connected construct a building outside of normal zoning laws and then expect it to be approved after the fact, because 'hey, whatchya gonna do?'.

[demshateGod]

That’s a good point. My response, however, was to a post focusing on aesthetics.

I’m an architect. As such we spend considerable time and brain damage negotiating codes and permits. I have no sympathy for those who get caught circumventing building codes.

[AnAmericanMother]

I'm not an architect -- but my family always employs an architect when we build (parents have built four times, we've built twice). Spec builders don't necessarily understand things like "A Pattern Language" or "The Not So Big House".

I do understand what you're saying - but in the architect's defense, this is a primarily Orthodox country, so he's not used to working in the RC idiom. Sort of like 19th c. Southern vernacular interpretations of the Parthenon. At least that would be my defense. :-)

[demshateGod]

You sound like the client architects dream of having.

[AnAmericanMother]

We believe in hiring folks who know what they're doing! :-)

We have always had great relationships with our architects -- the man who designed my parents' first house and his wife are still dear friends of my parents. He's 92, an Austrian who barely escaped the Nazis, great practical designs with a timeless contemporary look.

Unfortunately the gorgeous 1950s vaguely Neutra-ish (but in wood) house that he designed for my folks was wrecked out by a couple with a lot more money than sense, and a SIXTEEN MILLION DOLLAR pseudo-Italianate monstrosity erected in its place.

[dangus]

This is Romania. I’m pretty sure they got transistor radios some time in the late 1990s.