Urban Sprawl Characteristics and Typologies in Romania

Abstract

Urban sprawl limitation, moderate use of agricultural fields and ensuring the social mix are objectives of public policy of all European Community documents refering to urban and territorial planning, housing policies and territorial cohesion. In post-communist Romania the most obvious spatial effect of the liberalization of political and economical life is the multiplication of constructions from the periurban areas. The urban sprawl characteristics have an important role in the localities’ sustainable development and consequently in ensuring territorial cohesion.

Full text

HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography
(2010) 4.2, 79-87
www.humangeographies.org.ro
URBAN SPRAWL CHARACTERISTICS AND TYPOLOGIES IN ROMANIA
Bogdan Suditua*, Anca Ginavarb, Ana Muicăc, Crenguţa Iordăchescuc,
Amalia Vârdolc, Bogdan Ghineac
aDepartment of Geography, Bucharest University, & General Direction of Territorial Development, Ministry of Regional
Development and Tourism, Bucharest, Romania
bFaculty of Urban Planning, ‘Ion Mincu’ University of Architecture and Urbanism & General Direction of Territorial
Development, Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism, Bucharest, Romania
cGeneral Direction of Territorial Development, Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism, Bucharest, Romania
Abstract: Urban sprawl limitation, moderate use of agricultural fields and ensuring the social mix are
objectives of public policy of all European Community documents refering to urban and territorial
planning, housing policies and territorial cohesion. In post-communist Romania the most obvious
spatial effect of the liberalization of political and economical life is the multiplication of constructions
from the periurban areas. The urban sprawl characteristics have an important role in the localities’
sustainable development and consequently in ensuring territorial cohesion.
Key words: Urban sprawl, Romanian cities and towns, Mobilities, Residential areas, New factories and
Commercial buildings areas, Urban development.
Introduction
The theme of urban sprawl is an urgent
contemporary problem on the agenda of
national and European institutions. In the
specialised literature, the urban sprawl refers
to the pavilion type of residential
developments, outside the cities, together
with other activities that lead to important
environment, functional and landscape
changes. The urban sprawl is presently
regarded as one of the major common
challenges facing urban Europe today. By
multiplying the mobility forms, the quality of
transport systems, the land price, the
individual housing preferences, the
demographic trends, the cultural traditions
and constraints, the attractiveness of existing
urban areas, all these play a key role in the
way an urban area develops.
The present mobility trends towards
new, low-density urban areas lead to an
increased consumption. The amount of space
per person in the cities of Europe doubled
over the past 50 years. In the last 20 years, the
extent of the built-up areas in many western
and eastern European countries increased by
20%, while the population increased by only
6% (EEA, 2006). The transportation and the
other mobility forms remain crucial
challenges for urban planning and
management. But the strategies and
instruments for controlling the urban sprawl
strongly depend on today's realities of
multiple and interacting levels of governance,
from local to European ones. In post-
communist Romania the most obvious spatial
effect of the liberalization of political and
economical life is the multiplication of the
mobilities and the outburst of residential
constructions from the periurban areas.
The issues of the new residential
development were studied by Popescu C.,
Damian N., (2003), Nae M. (2007, 2009), Rufat
S. (2008), Suditu B. (2009), Patroescu M., Ioja
C., Vanau G. (2009). The first study exclusively
*Corresponding author:
Email: b_suditu@yahoo.fr

BOGDAN SUDITU ET AL.
HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, (2010) 4.2, 79-87
80
dedicated to the habitat in the periurban
areas, developed as a result of the urban
sprawl, was made by the urbanist C. Sarbu
(2005). A synthesis on the urban sprawl theme
and awareness in Europe was made by the
European Environment Agency (2006).
Methodology
The present study is based on the
questionnaire „Urban Planning, Urban Land
Management and Housing”, developed in
2008 by the Ministry of Regional Development
and Tourism through the General Direction of
Territorial Development, with the support of
the Ministry of Administration and Interior.
The subject of the questionnaire and the
related study was the reflection of the issues
and the field of urban development, urban
land management and housing through the
administrative structures of the local public
authorities in the Romanian cities. The study
was also intended to collect relevant
information necessary for the substantiation
of housing and urban planning public policies.
The questionnaire on which this study is
based was developed based on the proposals
made within the Territorial Cohesion and
Urban Matters - "Urban and development
sprawl" working group, coordinated by the
European Commission – DG Regio, and on the
discussions with other EU Member States
during the housing focal point meetings. The
urban sprawl is a subject of great interest,
included on the agendas of the Housing and
Urban Development Ministers’ Meetings,
organised under the French and Spanish
Presidencies in November 2008 in Marseille
and June 2010 in Toledo.
The questionnaire was developed by the
authors, experts within the General Direction
of Territorial Development, and sent to all
mayoralties of towns, cities and communes,
directly or through the Prefect’s Offices. The
same team of technical experts within the
General Direction of Territorial Development
did the statistics and cartographical
treatments, as well as the outcomes’ analysis.
The study’s objectives were: assessing the way
in which the elements of the programmes
managed by the Ministry of Regional
Development and Tourism are reflected in the
field; identifying the structures with
responsibilities in the field of urban planning,
urban land management and housing within
the local public authorities in the view of
assessing their training needs; getting specific
information for the ante-mentioned fields,
including information regarding the evolution
of built-up areas of localities and of their
urban sprawl phenomena. 2224 out of 2861
communes and 250 out of 319 towns and cities
(78,1% from all cities and towns in Romania)
answered the questionnaire.
At the origin of the urban sprawl –
between ideological paradigms and
post-communist legislative
transformations
The urban sprawl is a phenomenon that can
be precisely dated in Romania. In the context
of restrictive regulations concerning the urban
sprawl, the built-up limits of the localities
during the communist period and their
abrogation by the first law decree in 1989 built
the framework for a new development type of
the localities. The transformations of the last
two decades witness this development process
of residential, industrial or services buildings
constructions, in the areas surrounding the
cities, under their pressure and influence. The
clear-cut and stable limits of the built areas of
the localities from the communist period are
replaced by fragmentations and perpetual
transformations of these ones. There is an
intense construction activity, the built
perimeters are extending, being more and
more fragmented and the former perimeters
are also transformed by densifications and
replacements of the ancient buildings. But the
most obvious phenomenon remains the
multiplication of the constructions and the
expansion of the built-up perimeters and
implicitly the diminishing of the agricultural
area. The new residential developments are
functionally linked to the urban presence,
being the reflection of its socio-professional
transformations and the result of the
incoherence or even of the lack of public
policies concerning urban housing.

URBAN SPRAWL CHARACTERISTICS AND TYPOLOGIES
HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, (2010) 4.2, 79-87
81
During the post-communist period, the
political changes allowed the modification of
the construction and housing allocation
mechanisms and principles, with immediate
effects in the reconfiguration of the urban
socio-spatial structures and of the residential
relations between the cities and the
neighbouring rural areas. The elimination of
the mobility restrictions, of those linked to the
access to property, to the liberty to build using
the own means, the freedom of choosing the
desired place of residence, are fundamental
elements which transformed the city structure
and the neighbouring cities.
In the study regarding the residential
mobilities and the urban sprawl in Bucharest,
B. Suditu (2009) identifies three distinctive
periods which shaped the dynamics of the
periurban territories: a) 1990-1992: regulations
concerning the settling down at a legal
address in “closed cities” and the law
concerning the systematisation of rural and
urban localities are abrogated. This involved
the elimination of the former legal plans and
and creation of new transition instruments
concerning urban planning and land
management for over a decade; the restriction
which allowed the owning of only one
property is eliminated, favouring the
appearance of the real estate market; the law
concerning the retrocession of agricultural
fields is approved, leading to the creation of a
land market and to the possibility of
purchasing agricultural fields whose use will
be subsequently changed into built-up land;
b) 1992-2000: in this period, alongside or near
the main traffic routes and the surrounding
peripheral road of the city, in the limits of
neighbouring communes, new factories and
commercial buildings will settle down,
transforming the perspective on the
peripheral urban areas, as well as the
economic structure of the localities situated in
the proximity of large cities; c) 2001- present:
the promoting of the urban and land planning
law, which regulated the framework for the
urban plans development and the general
framework of the urban sprawl; the
development of the construction sector and
the increase in the number of real estate
developers; the increase in the number of
mortgage and construction loans, implicitly
the exponential increase of constructions in
the areas situated in the proximity of cities etc
The urban sprawl is the result of the
search for alternatives to the housing and
urban environment. By constructive or
mobility initiatives, those involved looked for
a housing solution as closer to nature as
possible. But through their actions, in the
absence of public coordination (transport
infrastructure, public transport, technical
infrastructure, urban planning), they
contributed to the rural zones transformation,
to the destruction of some natural elements
and to excessive densification of the qualified
areas as rural through chaotic or high-density
constructions or constructions which do not
respect the specificity of the place and the
regulated volumetry, situated inside and
outside the villages. The mobility practices
and the new residential developments
modified the social-economic and
organizational elements from the periurban
areas, with consequences on the way of life of
all those involved, either new ex-urban
residents or former rural inhabitants. A simple
visit to these territories makes it clear that the
attempt of coming closer to nature has
actually led to its destruction. The agricultural
fields are fragmented and transformed into
built plots.
Economic and geo-demographic
differentiations in the dynamics of the
Romanian cities
Out of 250 cities that answered the
questionnaire, 215 (representing 86%)
confirmed they are facing the urban sprawl
phenomenon. The information analysis
confirms the fact that the urban sprawl
phenomenon appears in most of the cities,
being strictly dependent on the population
size and the economic importance of the
cities. At the same time it can be noticed that
all cities which, during the analysed period,
didn’t register any increase of the built-up
area, are less representative, only 14%. Most of
them are very small cities situated in

BOGDAN SUDITU ET AL.
HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, (2010) 4.2, 79-87
82
peripheral geographical areas (mountain
areas: Brad, Baia de Arieş, Zlatna, Oţelul Roşu,
Băile Tuşnad, Borsec, Bălan, Baia de Aramă,
Negreşti-Oaş; areas with low levels of urban
development from Moldavia: Bucecea, Târgu
Frumos, Siret, Solca; in the centre of
Transilvania: Agnita; in Bărăgan and Dobrogea:
Făurei, Însurăţei, Babadag, Măcin), but also
mid-size cities affected by a strong economic
downturn and consequently by a population
loss (Anina, Dorohoi, Turnu Măgurele, Petroşani,
Dumbrăveni, Isaccea, Buziaş and Drăgăşani).
The urban sprawl phenomenon is often
associated with the development of new
residential areas outside the limits of the
built-up areas created during the communist
period. If the residential development and the
real-estate pressure are the only sources
generating an extension of the built-up areas
for 46 cities, meaning 21% of all cities that
answered the questionnaire, the same
phenomenon is an integral part of the
combined phenomena leading to urban sprawl
in other 136 cities (64%). It’s not always easy
to identify the sources generating the urban
sprawl, especially because the ante-mentioned
phenomena are complementary. The
economic activities (new areas or industrial
sites, commercial centres etc.) lead to an
increase in the built-up areas for 19 cities,
meaning 9% of all cities.
As mentioned before, the biggest part of
the new built-up areas is generated by
combined phenomena, favoured by the
localities’ demographic and economic
dynamics and their attractiveness. This
category includes all county capital cities, but
also many of the cities situated in the area of
influence of the previous ones (phenomenon
present in Braşov, Alba Iulia, Deva, Focşani,
Suceava, Cluj Napoca, Oradea, Slobozia), as
well as those cities situated alongside
important traffic routes (the roads in the Olt
Valley, the Mureş Valley, E85 or E70), the
resort cities or those situated in areas well-
known for the environment quality (sub-
Carpathian areas around Rîmnicu Vâlcea,
Prahova Valley and the neighbouring sub-
Carpathian area, Constanţa and the other
seaside cities).
The new satellite developments
alongside the economically dynamic cities
took advantage of their proximity, becoming
favoured spaces for new residencies or
vacation houses, the locations being chosen in
the proximity of economic points (jobs, trade,
sanitary and educational services), but outside
the influence area of the real-estate pressure
exerted by the ante-mentioned centres. In
numerous cases, this logic of location led to
the demographic and economic rejuvenation
of some localities within the polarization area
of medium and large cities.
Regarding the cities’ expansion of the
built-up areas, it can be noticed that it is
predominantly discontinuous. The
questionnaire outcome confirms that, in more
than half of the cities, the urban sprawl took
place in a dispersed way (92 cities, meaning
44% of the cities) or alongside some interest
areas (20 cities, meaning 9%). As mentioned
before, in most of the cases this situation is
due to local characteristics making some sites
more interesting and recently urbanised,
being attractive through their inherent
features of accessibility or environment. In
many situations, the dispersion was shaped by
the new function that induced an increase of
the built-up area. In this respect, the locations
of the big commercial or services surfaces
outside the cities were significant.
The most obvious sprawl type of the
cities’ limits was the one alongside the traffic
routes in their penetration area. This is the
case for 47 cities (22% from total cities). In
many of these cases, the initial function that
determined the sprawl was the housing
function, but shortly after, starting with the
1990s, the economic functions (wholesales and
services) became dominant, in many cases
leading to functional changes of recently built
residential areas. The speed of this
phenomenon and the complexity of the
resulted forms make it difficult to determine
very strictly the typology of the urban sprawl.
Therefore we consider relevant the fact that a
quarter of the cities identified a mixed type of
sprawl.

URBAN SPRAWL CHARACTERISTICS AND TYPOLOGIES
HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, (2010) 4.2, 79-87
83
Figure 1. Cities and towns confronted with urban sprawl phenomenon
Figure 2. Factors that generated urban sprawl in the Romanian cites and towns

BOGDAN SUDITU ET AL.
HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, (2010) 4.2, 79-87
84
Increase of the urban built-up surfaces
– between economic and sustainable
development reasons
The analysis of the increase in the built-up
surfaces of the cities during 1990-2008, as well
as their increase rate implies a methodological
and contextual clarification. For most of the
cities and towns, the expansion of the limits of
the built-up areas is an indicator that has to
be correlated with the increase of the built-up
areas in the neighbouring rural localities. The
cities’ surfaces increased, but the highest
intensity of the urban sprawl phenomenon
was done on the neighbouring rural lands.
The urban sprawl phenomenon in periurban
perimeters is directly proportional to the
demographic size and the economic
importance of the nucleus city.
Another technical element that has to
be clarified refers to the meaning of the „built-
up limits”. Following a number of initiatives of
some inhabitants or societies owning
agricultural land or initiative of the mayor’s
office, the limits set in the General Urban Plan
were modified in gradual phases in order to
introduce different lands into the „built-up
area”. The agreement request for the inclusion
in the built-up area automatically leads to the
change of the land function and its urban and
fiscal regimen. In fact, not all the lands
included in the cities’ built-up perimeter were
occupied by constructions. Many public
initiatives encouraged this initiative to enlarge
the limits of the built-up areas exactly for
facilitating the local development in order to
attract new residents in the locality. For
others, it was a purely economic measure
meant to change the level and the category of
the respective land tax.
The statistics information regarding the
built-up area of the localities during 1990-2008
confirms the remarkable dynamics of the
built-up surfaces. It is surprising the reduction
of the built-up surfaces. It is surprising the
reduction of the built-up area of some cities
(Anina, Făgăraş and Solca), situation due to
the modification of the territorial-
administrative limits of the localities leading
to the administrative transfer of the old brown
fields to the neighbouring communes. For the
other cities, significant increases can be
noticed, 209 cities (83,6% of the cities) having
an increase of up to 60% of their initial
surface. Amongst these, restricted dynamics
characterise small cities: Pâncota 6,64%,
Făurei 14,6%, Ianca1 42%, Însurăţei 4,61%,
Figure 3. Urban sprawl types in the Romanian cities and towns

URBAN SPRAWL CHARACTERISTICS AND TYPOLOGIES
HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, (2010) 4.2, 79-87
85
Figure 4. The growth percentage of the city built area between 1990-2008
Figure 5. City built area (ha)

BOGDAN SUDITU ET AL.
HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, (2010) 4.2, 79-87
86
Table 1. The growth percentage of the city built area between 1990-2008
NO.
CITY AND TOWNS
CITY BUILT AREA
1990
CITY BUILT AREA
2008
GROWTH
PERCENTAGE
2008 - 1990 (%)
1
Alba Iulia
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
2
Alexandria
N.D.
1080,50
N.D.
3
Arad
3983,27
6373,06
60,00
4
Bacău
3414
3516
2,99
5
Baia Mare
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
6
Bistriţa
981
2560,9
161,05
7
Botoşani
1352,5
1937,8
43,28
8
Brăila
3996
3997
0,03
9
Braşov
N.D.
10410,7
N.D.
10
Buftea
707
1457
106,08
11
Buzău
N.D.
4446,71
N.D.
12
Călăraşi
2808
N.D.
N.D.
13
Cluj-Napoca
4069
9300
128,56
14
Constanţa
4257
7664
80,03
15
Craiova
6765
6982
3,21
16
Deva
N.D.
1737,83
N.D.
17
Drobeta-TurnuSeverin
1716
2104
22,61
18
Focşani
1192,65
1483,19
24,36
19
Galaţi
N.D.
5848
N.D.
20
Giurgiu
2271
2352
3,57
21
Iaşi
3880
6741
73,74
22
MiercureaCiuc
1538
1784
15,99
23
Oradea
6897
7796,7
13,04
24
Piatra Neamţ
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
25
Piteşti
2270
2805
23,57
26
Ploieşti
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
27
RâmnicuVâlcea
1287
3589,18
178,88
28
Reşiţa
1904
1982,86
4,14
29
Satu Mare
2565
4192
63,43
30
Sfântu Gheorghe
960
1425
48,44
31
Sibiu
3478,6
4482,87
28,87
32
Slatina
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
33
Slobozia
632,08
1519,53
140,40
34
Suceava
1850
3256
76,00
35
Târgovişte
1890
2116
11,96
36
TârguJiu
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
37
TârguMures
3210,03
3245,88
1,12
38
Timişoara
6944,16
7306,87
5,22
39
Tulcea
1350
1695,75
25,61
40
Vaslui
N.D.
1965,84
N.D.
41
Zalău
1319,38
N.D.
N.D.

URBAN SPRAWL CHARACTERISTICS AND TYPOLOGIES
HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, (2010) 4.2, 79-87
87
Băileşti 2%, Săcele 56,2%, Zărneşti 60%,
Râşnov 22,36% etc., but also medium or large
cities that didn’t preserve their attractiveness
during the post-communist period (Rm.Sărat
1%, Giurgiu 3,57%, Petroşani 11%, Cîmpulung
17,5%, Tulcea 25,6%, Botoşani 45%, Olteniţa
45%, Sf.Gheorghe 48%) or cities which, due to
their location in contact areas (hilly or
mountain ones), entered in competition for
residency with the smaller near-by cities:
Reşiţa 4%, Oradea 13,4%, Târgovişte 11,6%,
Piteşti 23,5%, Sibiu 28,87% etc.
In Romania, 33 cities registered
significant dynamics, meaning 13,2% of the
cities that answered the questionnaire; for
these cities the expansion of the built-up
surfaces varies between 60% and 200%.
Amongst these ones, there are some cities
with administrative functions, Arad 60%, Satu
Mare 63,4%, Iaşi 73,7%, Suceava 76%, Slobozia
140,4%, Rm. Vâlcea 178%, but also small and
medium ones situated within the polarization
aria of some important cities: Mioveni 136%,
Moineşti 181%, Rupea 113,6%, Mihaileşti
106,3%, Bragadiru 114,6%, Buftea 106%, Ardud
99%, Cisnădie 102%, Ocna Sibiului 72,5%,
BăileOlăneşti 125,5% etc.
The following 8 cities registered
excessive urban sprawl values: Întorsura
Buzăului 297,4%, Vişeul de Sus 288,8%,
Dragomireşti 315,7%, Tăuţii-Măgheruş 316,9%,
Şomcuţa Mare 492,13%, Borşa 527,3%,
Miercurea Nirajului 478,8% and Măgurele
872,4%. As previously mentioned, these values
are due to their proximity to important urban
centres (cities near-by Bucharest) or they are
the result of some excessive public practices
meant to facilitate the local development and
to attract new residents within the locality
(cities from Maramureş county: Vişeul de Sus,
Dragomireşti, Tăuţii-Măgheruş, Şomcuţa
Mare, Borşa).
Conclusions
The high values of the city built area’s
boundaries that have expanded over the past
two decades are confirming the importance of
this phenomenon and the present need to
revise the legislation and the operational tools
for urban planning and housing. Ensuring the
coherent development of the settlements is a
key element to ensure a high level of quality of
life and thus territorial cohesion. The study’s
results contribute to substantiate the public
policies in the field of urban planning and
housing. The issue of a better management of
the urban-rural relationship and the urban
sprawl limitation can be found within the
Strategic Concept of the Spatial Development
in Romania, document approved in 2008 by
the Government of Romania, which
substantiate the project of the Territorial
Development National Strategy, included in
the legislative priorities’ list of the Romanian
Government for the period 2009-2012.
Bibliography
European Environment Agency 2006, 'Urban
sprawl in Europe. The ignored challenge', in
EEA Report, no.10 www.eea.europa.eu
Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban
Development 2007, Territorial Agenda of the
European Union. Towards a More Competitive
and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions,
Agreed on the occasion of the Informal
Ministerial Meeting on Urban Development
and Territorial Cohesion, Leipzig
Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban
Development 2007, Leipzig Charter on
Sustainable European Cities, Agreed on the
occasion of the Informal Ministerial Meeting on
Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion,
Leipzig
Nuissl, H & Rink, D 2005,'The 'production' of urban
sprawl in eastern Germany as a phenomenon of
post-socialist transformation' in Cities,
22(2):123–134.
Ott, T 2001, ‘From concentration to
deconcentration - migration patterns in the
post-socialist city ’in Cities, 18(6):403–412.
Sârbu, C 2005, Habitatul urban în expansiune
periurbană, Bucuresti, Editura Universitară Ion
Mincu.
Suditu, B 2009, ‘Urban sprawl and residential
mobilities in the Bucharest area –
reconfiguration of a new residential geography’,
in Human Geographies, vol. IV, 2, p. 79-93.