The Transylvania TrustHeritage preservation, rural tourism and sustainable development

ÂrpâdFuru

14 5 - 1 6 9

Ârpâd Furu - engineer and conservator (Technical Univer­

sity of Cluj-Napoca, Babes Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca, Technical University of Budapest). He was a designing engi­neer, member of the conservation team in the u t i l i t a s His­toric Building Conservation Centre (1993-2002) and Press Officer of the Transylvanian Historic Buildings Conservation­

ist’s Society (1997-2004). Since 1996 he has been Programme Director o f the Transylvania Trust Foundation and Associ­

ate lecturer at the Babes Bolyai University from Cluj-Napoca (Since 2003). Since 2012 has been the architectural advisor of

the Transylvanian Unitarian Church. He teaches Vernacular Architecture at different faculties o f the Babeç Bolyai Univer­

sity of Cluj-Napoca. He was involved in Research Projects of: Transylvanian Castles (1994), The Inventory and Research of

Transylvanian Vernacular Architecture (since 1999) and Rim- etea Heritage Conservation Project (since 1996). As a project director, awarded with Europa Nostra Medal 1999. He has been

a Member of the Europa Nostra Council since 2001.

The Transylvania TrustHeritage preservation, rural tourism and sustainable development

Ârpâd Furu

Over the last 15 years the Rimetea Heritage Conservation Project has en­couraged the proactive conservation o f the area’s architectural heritage. This project was initiated by heritage professionals to stop the unsym ­

pathetic adaptation of Rimetea’s most valuable but greatly threatened historic buildings. Following a recommendation by former i c o m o s

vice-president, Dr. Andras Roman, in 1996, the City Council of Budapest’s

5th district decided to financially support the architectural heritage of two Transylvanian villages. These villages were Rimetea and Inlaceni. The principal tool o f this conservation programme is a grant system coor­

dinated by the Transylvania Trust Foundation.

Why is the architectural heritage of Rimetea (Torockó) special?Rimetea (originally Torockó in Hungarian) is unique due to its picturesque

setting and its high quality architectural heritage. More than 65 per cent o f the houses are traditional buildings surrounded by traditional barns

and other ancillary buildings. They form traditional squares and rows.

The village of Rimetea is situated within a narrow valley between the steep scarps of Buru Pass and Cheile Aiudului, and is located 25 to 30 kilome­tres from the towns of Turda and Aiud. To the south, the stark crags of

the 1128-metre high Coltii Trascäului (Piatra Secuiului or Szekler's Rock) form a backdrop to the settlement. Towards the Aries Valley in the north, mixed forests of pine and deciduous trees surround the 1250-metre high Ardoscheia.

The land around Rimetea was iron rich, and the settlement’s develop­

ment is inextricably linked to the extraction and processing of this metal. During the Medieval Period the iron mining and processing techniques

employed in Rimetea were famous beyond the region. This led to a rise

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 147

Rimetea and its surroundings © Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

in the settlement’s socio-economic development.1 The settlement’s dual

lifestyle in the 19th century, with the rapid urban development on the one

hand and a strong connection to rural traditions on the other,2 is reflected

in Rimetea’s architecture and form. Rimetea’s unified appearance and its celebrated high status 19th-century architecture contributes significantly to the area’s character. The 19th-century buildings frame all four sides of

the village square and are decorated in a classicist manner in line with the taste of the local bourgeoisie. The large village square is rectangular

in plan, and the regular arrangement of plots around this space suggests

that the settlement's form was the result of a relatively short colonisation rather than a gradual organic development.3

The white buildings are one of the most important parts of Rimetea’s architectural heritage. The first of these Classicist Bourgeois Houses was

1 Zsigmond Jakó, "A torockói legenda születése és kritikśja", in: fräs, könyv, értelmiség,Bucharest 1976, pp. 62-79. Dr. Karoly Kós, “Torockói vasmüvesség", in: Népélet ésnéphagyomâny, Bucharest 1972, pp. 52-80.

2 Balâzs Orbân, A Székelyfôld leirâsa V, Budapest 1871.

3 Ârpâd Furu, Népi épitészet, inŁ Torockói népmüvészet, Bucharest 2002, pp. 355-409.

148 I Ârpâd Furu

The map of Rimetea (traditional houses are marked with red) © Transylvania Trust Foundation

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 149

Houses on the Upper Market Row © Ärpad Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

constructed in the 1820s. Most are built from stone which became more

widespread as a construction material in the settlement after a fire razed

40 properties in 1870. The layout of the white buildings preserves the tradi­tional three cell linear form. This arrangement normally comprises a front

room, a kitchen and a rear room. Sometimes the position of the kitchen and rear room is switched. Later extensions are also characteristic of this building type.

The façades o f the properties, particularly the proportions and deco­

ration, provide the character of this building type. The cellar doors that

face the street have arched, moulded limestone surrounds. The doors

are constructed from timber panelling, hinged boards or wrought-iron sheets. The two vertical, or horizontal, rectangular cellar windows have

150 I ÂrpâdFuru

The Unitarian Church© Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

wrought-iron grilles and exterior shutters. The lime-washed façades have

two windows with shutters and decorative framing on two or three sides,

sometimes with segmental arches. Elevations are broken up horizontally with simple stringcourses and ornate cornices, occasionally with den­tils. Fluted or rusticated pilasters with decorative capitals, arches and

rustication, all made from plaster, decorate the spaces between the w in­dows. Plain or geometrical glass is decorated with band courses. Above

the windows, there are rich, traditional floral designs within semi-circular

surrounds. These features are framed with scribed rectangular plaster

motifs or curved mouldings that extend the whole width of the façade. Normally, a window-sized opening can be found in gables built from lime-washed bricks. A variety of ironmongery was produced in the village,

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 151

Classicist mannered houses © Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

such as wrought-iron latches, handles, doorknobs, door-hinges, bolts, ar­row-shaped window grilles and other iron fittings.

The second group o f white stone buildings in the settlement are known as the Eclectic Bourgeois Houses. These are closely associated with the Classicist-mannered buildings, mentioned above. Although the structure and plan o f these two building types are similar their ex­ternal appearance is not the same as they are decorated differently, and

the ornamentation used on the “Eclectic" buildings is more characteristic

of urban architecture. This building type retains a wider, plastered door

and window reveals, pediments, fluted double colonnades, ornate glass, moulded cornices and quoins. A new feature that was introduced with this building type was the L-shaped plan. The longest elevation of the house

152 I Ârpâd Furu

Serf house built in 1668 © Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

now ran parallel with the street and the cellars of the two-storied build­ings faced the road.

The 18th-century serf houses are relatively unique to Rimetea. This

building type is clearly distinguishable by its structure and elevation details. These properties can be seen in the upper part of the settlement. Externally, these log buildings are plastered and lime-washed up to the window sill level, while above this height the logs remain exposed. Window frames are carved and together with the window surrounds are

painted red in memory o f a massacre in 1702. House plans are usually

formed from three cells, a front room called the front house, a kitchen

(pitvar in Hungarian), where the oven is situated, and a pantry. This also serves as a living space.

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 153

Serf house built in 1749 © Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

Log walls with intersecting joints support plank ceilings that finish

with a principal beam in the front room. The floors are usually formed from beaten earth or timber boards. Original gambrel roofs were later changed to simple half hipped roofs with triangular trusses and collar

beams. Timber shingles were replaced with tiles. The windows are always randomly arranged in elevations facing the street.

In the 19th century, Rimetea’s lower classes remained separate from

the civic process. Their architecture imitated the proportions and some of the features of bourgeois structures. Early peasant houses normally had

wooden ceilings that were laid on logs or plank walls. They have simple half-hipped roofs covered with clay tiles. Shingles were seldom used to

cover the roofs of this building type. Rendered elevations are lime-washed

154 ] Ârpâd Furu

' 'H

MIi

Wlii

'ili'

The Market Square with the Seckler Rock © Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

and are almost free of decoration. Occasionally, simple or double plaster mouldings occur. The windows retain jambs but there are no surrounds or

wooden shutters. This building type has a two or three cell plan in a linear arrangement. There are also some examples which consist of a single room.

Large-scale cross-barns enclose many of Rimetea’s yards and form

continuous rows with adjacent barns. Ancillary structures, such as bake-houses, pantries, granaries or pig-sties are sited behind the house. Only small ancillary buildings face the houses and are occasionally built

next to the street. Some of these structures have public or commercial

uses, for example a butcher’s shop, a grocer’s shop, a post office or pub.It should also be mentioned that the street structure of the settlement

is medieval in origin.

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 155

At the beginning of the 20th century, mining activity in Rimetea was stopped and the economy of the town decreased. Gradually, about half of the population left to more prosperous areas, and those who remained tried to live on agriculture. There was no financial base for house recon­struction, and further more, the good quality 19th-century stone houses

met the requirements of the average standards of living. This is how a large number of historic buildings survived the dark years o f commu­

nism. Happily, the village demolishment plans of the Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceauçescu that stopped any intervention and even repair on hous­

es failed together with the regime, leaving behind an extremely valuable

heritage in great need of repair and conservation.

Why was a conservation programme needed?After the political changes of 1989, more and more inhabitants expressed their care for their houses by making various interventions and func­

tional changes. These were not controlled, and were mostly carried out to the detriment of the heritage value o f the whole of the historic village. It became obvious that without any external control the value derived from the authenticity of the architectural ensemble would be strongly di­

minished. Under these circumstances, the initiative of Dr. Andras Roman,

the former i c o m o s vice-president arrived, who in his status as local coun­cil member of the 5th district (one of the richest districts) of the centre of

Budapest proposed a twinned relationship, materialising in financial sup­port for Rimetea. The Transylvania Trust was designated to manage and

direct the grant scheme generated from this political relationship called

the Rimetea Heritage Conservation Programme.

Since 1996, a conservation grant (Grant A) has been offered annually to between 130 to 140 o f Rimetea’s historic building owners. All the par­

ties involved in the conservation agreement sign the three conditions attached to the grant. The historic building owners assure that good con­servation practice will be carried out on the property. The owners also

agree not to change any o f the valuable architectural features on the plot. Finally, in cases where changes and/or new developments are proposed,

the owner will take professional advice from the Transylvania Trust. A restoration grant (Grant B) for larger work can also be obtained through application.

The Rimetea Heritage Conservation Programme is based on a suc­

cessful partnership between the local authorities and the owners of

the historic buildings. The programme’s strategy was established to

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 157

Traditional baking oven © Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

protect the character o f the settlement. There is no strong desire to re­

store the buildings to their former periods nor to rigidly preserve them. The programme’s principal objective is to promote sustainable heritage

conservation and demonstrate how this has an important role in a com­munity’s socio-economic development. This approach means that solu­

tions differ from case to case, normally based on compromise.At the beginning, the programme’s main objective was to stop unsym­

pathetic changes (alterations to different parts of the settlement suggested

a negative trend that could have severely harmed the architectural herit­age's integrity, and likewise to the neighbouring Coltesti). In many cases

the conservation grant helped avoid this threat. Furthermore, proposed conservation and maintenance work helped secure buildings, and more importantly, the attitude of the owners of the buildings changed. Today,

Rimetea’s inhabitants are no longer ashamed to live in historic buildings but actively work towards their preservation.

Results

The first 15 years of this grant scheme have produced promising results. All the conditions of the conservation agreements were met in the case of

96 per cent of the grant-aided properties - the appropriate maintenance

158 I Ârpâd Furu

I

Reconstructed timber gate © Arpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

work was carried out and the valuable architectural and street features1

were conserved. Generally, sums of between 100 to 150 per cent greater than the grant were spent on maintenance and repairs. More than 70

buildings obtained restoration grants following a successful application process (inspired by the Europa Nostra Awards ceremony, 111 conservation

works, among which 20 substantial façade restorations were completed in just one summer during 2000).

Part of this programme's strategy is the protection of architectural her­

itage through ownership. The sponsor (the 5th District Municipality of Bu­dapest), using the legal framework of the Transylvania Trust, purchased

a Classicist-style house on the corner o f the Main Square (Rimetea no. 15) in 1998. This building was condemned for demolition but the sponsor's action saved this structure which was important both architecturally and

to the streetscape. The restoration and refurbishment o f this building as a holiday home for the sponsors was completed in 2004.

The Transylvania Trust purchased two endangered properties in 2000.

The first, a house built in 1749, is considered to be the most authentical­

ly preserved vernacular building in the Rimetean ethnographic region.The other property was a serf’s house, dating from 1668, and is one of

the oldest peasant houses in the Carpathian Basin. This property was in

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 159

диашмйяв ΡΜΡί i

Façade omament© Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

a very poor condition. The structural repair work for this house was car­ried out in the summer of 2002 within the Built Heritage Conservation Training Project, organised in collaboration with the i h b c (institute for Historic Building Conservation in the United Kingdom). The restoration of

both buildings, including the reconstruction of the traditional fire places

was finished thanks to a us Ambassadors Grant in 2011.A 19th-century dwelling, situated on the same plot as the 1749 prop­

erty, was purchased and restored with the support of the i h b c between 2001 and 2004. This also allowed for the re-instatement o f the original

plot. The property has been used as accommodation for students and

160 I Ârpâd Furu

Façade ornament© Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

researchers since 2005. The income generated by this accommodation

facility covers the maintenance expenses of the whole plot.The scientific foundation of the programme is a database containing

architectural and structural information on 160 buildings. This informa­tion is continually being updated with new research and survey work.

An architectural survey of Rimetea’s buildings was carried out between 1996 and 1998. This survey work served as an important educational tool

by familiarising 41 students who participated in the surveys, not only with surveying techniques but also with the general principles on vernacular architecture and historic building conservation.

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 16 1

The Conservation work provided employment for local craftsmen and the possibility of teaching and learning traditional skills necessary for historic building conservation.

Rural tourismSince the beginning of the conservation programme, the Transylvania Trust

has used the long-term goal of the development of rural tourism, which uses historic buildings as its infrastructure, along with the short-term fi­nancial benefits of the grant scheme. Visitor numbers in Rimetea have in­

creased as a result of the conservation programme. In addition, since 1998

more than 50 owners aided by the programme, and with the professional help and support of the Transylvania Trust, have obtained the licenses required for rural tourism. Tourism is now a market leading activity in Rimetea. However, tourism is seasonal and only operates between May and

September, excluding some special events during the winter.On the other hand, tourism is quite a pressure on historic buildings,

as some owners would like to accommodate more people than the house allows, or would like to make many more severe transformations as is ap­

propriate. A balance can be assured by permanent negotiation and an ef­ficiently applied legal preservation system.

The development of rural tourism generates an increasing demand for

development, change to the existing dwellings, and the construction of new houses. The Transylvania Trust answered this challenge by partially

grant-aiding new design and establishing a legal framework for protect­

ing the area.A conservation urban study of Rimetea, later included in the Urban De­

velopment Plan, was financed by the Transylvania Trust Foundation. This

was followed by a request to the Ministry of Culture to designate Rimetea a protected area, and as a result, Rimetea was designated a Conservation

Area in 2000. Consequently, all new development proposed in the village, or located in a large buffer zone around it, must be authorised by a commis­sion for the Ministry of Culture. Furthermore, this governmental body in­

vited the Transylvania Trust Foundation to control all schemes proposed in the area. In this way the Transylvania Trust's pro-active work could be com­plemented by the statutory development control measures. Unfortunately,

enforcement of the legal framework is worryingly flexible in Rimetea.The Rimetea Heritage Conservation Programme was awarded with

the Europa Nostra Medal in 1999, the highest European award at that

time. This accolade acknowledges that the Rimetea programme offers

162 I ÂrpâdFuru

Tourist pension© Ärpad Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

an example of viable conservation change based on partnership between

local communities and non-governmental organisations. This occurred in a region where heritage is threatened by rapid socio-economic change.

Conservation worksA wide variety of conservation work has been completed on more than

t 160 of Rimetea’s historic buildings.4 This work was generally carried out

4 Ärpad Furu, Built Heritage Conservation in Ri meta, Cluj Napoca 2006, pp. 96-109.

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 163

in phases. The conservation of a whole building was rarely possible due to the considerably high costs. Most of the works comprised façade restora­tion, roof repairs, as well as structural and/or emergency work. In order to improve the townscape, historic gates were repaired and modern metal gates were replaced with traditional timber ones. External work to more modern dwellings, mainly re-rendering, were also grant-aided for the same

reason. Over the last two years the cemetery has also become the focus of

our activities. Matters concerning the public realm, ie squares and streets, were dealt with through design and consultation. However, the Transylva­

nia Trust will also consider grant-aiding the revitalisation of public wells in the future.

Most work carried out under this programme was initiated and some­times even completed by the owners. The Transylvania Trust sometimes suggested the type of work needed to the owner, although in the case of

work assisted through the conservation grants (Grant A), the owners did not have to adhere to deadlines or prepare financial reports. However, there were more restrictions with the restoration grants (Grant B). The co­ordinating committee received between 40 to 60 applications annually,

with only 8 to 12 of the best applications being selected. These were based on criteria related to the importance and sustainability of the work, along

with the architectural value of the buildings. The Transylvania Trust su­

pervised the implementation of the work but the owners also had a great deal of input. If any deadlines or requirements of the conservation agree­

ment were not met, the owners of the historic buildings were legally forced to refund the grant.

Façade restorations. These were common during the programme. Most of the defects in the façades were caused by a lack of regular maintenance.

The inhabitants o f Rimetea used to whitewash their houses bi-annually,

before Easter and before the autumn festival of Thanksgiving. This tradi­tion was broken during the Communist era, and most of the façades of the buildings looked neglected and cracked with failures even more ap­

parent on the houses rendered in clay.Most of the work carried out on façades comprised repair and main­

tenance, improving the building’s technical and aesthetic qualities and

conserving its historic merit. Repairs were carried out with lime-based mortar and whitewashing was also undertaken in a traditional manner.

The original colour schemes, mainly white, were restored. The original decoration, fenestrations and/or carved stone details were restored, re­

constructed and re-instated, all based on thorough research.

164 I Ârpâd Furu

Wall repair (before and after)© Ärpäd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

Street façades were at the top of both the Transylvania Trust Founda­

tion’s and the owner’s priorities. The repair of façades was carried out on most o f the houses within the programme’s first year. Gradually, an in­

creasing number of courtyard façades were also repaired. The third step,

assisted by the grant process, was that elevations facing neighbouring properties started to be repaired. For this reason five properties in one row were grant-aided. The aesthetically pleasing appearance of this row

and the success of the work acted as a catalyst for further work.The repair o f clay renders needed a wider knowledge of traditional

methods. This work was traditionally carried out by members of the Roma

community, or by very poor people, and therefore, even today, many crafts­men refuse such jobs. Larger clay rendering schemes required a work force from the Open Air Ethnographic Museum in Cluj.

In recent times, more work is being completed on non-traditional buildings. This has been partly motivated by the hope o f future grants or simply by the restoration “mood” in the settlement. Some of the modern

buildings were plastered and whitewashed without any grant assistance. The enhancement of the urban fabric is now also encouraged by a special grant scheme.

Roof repairs. Clay tiles are the predominant roof covering in Rim-

etea. Repairs normally entail the re-fixing of tiles and the replacement

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 165

Crack repair (before and after)© Arpad Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

of damaged ones. Round edged tiles are difficult to buy, and a few own­

ers have re-used old tiles from demolished structures. The roofs of 18th-century structures were covered with split pine shingles made in the Mot Land,5 the neighbouring highlands. Total restoration involved

the complete recovering of roofs with new shingles. This was carried out

on three of the houses in the village. Master craftsmen from Varsag made

the new shingles in line with the size and form of original ones. Site re­search helped determine the form of the roofs, as well as the angles and decoration. Smoke holes were located in their original positions but their

form was determined by similar precedents.The relatively few tin roofs in Rimetea were repaired using traditional

repair methods. Missing or corroded sections were replaced. The roof was then cleaned and painted. The school’s metal cladding has been replaced but not within the framework of this grant programme. The shiny fin­

ish of the cladding was not considered appropriate for a building in this

sensitive location.

5 Romanian ethnographic region in the high mountains of the Transylvanian Carpathians.

166 I Ârpâd Furu

Structural works. Repairs to roof structures were carried out when the shingle roof coverings were being restored. The complete reconstruc­tion o f a roof structure was only carried out in two instances. A more sympathetic approach, based upon minimal intervention, was applied to the house built in 1668. Here, only the damaged elements were replaced, with traditional methods being used to dress and join new timbers.

The original roof forms of two properties that had been altered dur­ing the last few decades were restored, and special emergency work was required on house no. 78.

Cracks in the stonewalls and vaults were generally caused by the weak­

ness of the mortar, irregularities of the stone blocks, or the uneven displace­ment of different wall sections and foundations. Work to the foundations was rarely possible and we, therefore, had to carry out local repairs to cracks.

Damage to timber walls was mainly caused by the biological failure o f the material itself. The Transylvania Trust always proposed solutions that only replaced the damaged parts and conserved the remainder of

the structure.

Functional changes. The refurbishment o f structures improved the comfort of apartments and the development of rural tourism. More

often, new bathrooms were required. The Transylvania Trust tried to be present and take a strong stance on the decisions made about the loca­

tion of new bathrooms. The use of existing rooms was preferred instead o f new subdivisions, while additions were proposed in some cases. There

are examples where bathrooms were installed in timber-walled buildings or ancillary structures. The original fabric o f these walls was carefully

conserved and the visibly historic surfaces were kept. Wherever possible, the traditional doors and windows were maintained. The pipe-work was

commissioned, and in many cases even completed, by the owners them­selves, although this varied in quality. The second most frequent demand

on the buildings from tourism was the arrangement of guest bedrooms, but this did not involve considerable structural change. The cellars were

gradually refurbished, and two successful restaurants, gift shops and w in­eries were opened. It is also worth mentioning that some later partitions were removed so that the original layouts could be reinstated.

Complete restoration. Ten cases o f large-scale conservation work

have been carried out in this programme so far. Three of these were pos­sible due to the fact that they were endangered buildings purchased by

the Transylvania Trust Foundation. The rest was enabled by a beneficial change in the ownership of the buildings or were linked to tourism.

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 167

Dr. Andrea H. Schuler, the former Executive president of Europa Nostra presents the Europa Nostra Medal© Ârpâd Furu, Transylvania Trust Foundation

Gate restoration and replacement. The restoration of traditional gates

had been planned since the start of the programme, and the large gate

at house no.285 and the popular dragon-handled gate at plot no.12 had been on the Transylvania Trust's grant list since 1997. Initially, craftsmen

that could carry out the appropriate works couldn't be found. However, this situation was resolved when a small team of three craftsmen re­

ceived professional training in 2000. The two important jobs, mentioned above, were completed in 2002. The work was guided by the principle of

minimum intervention. The posts and boards were repaired and not re­

placed, and the joints were carefully repaired (the minimum intervention meant that only rotten elements were replaced and for years this principle

has been the largest obstacle in the restoration process. The owners and the craftsmen did not initially accept the partial repair of the gates as they

believed that only large-scale replacement would bring successful results). The timber was treated and the appropriate colour schemes were chosen.

The colours often matched the original, making sure that new elements

were recognisable.The replacement of modern metal gates with traditional ones was suc­

cessfully launched in conjunction with the repair of the existing gates, and

this initial work improved the streetscape of the main square and other

168 I Ârpâd Furu

important streets. New materials and traditional methods were used in

the scheme, and in some cases hardwood posts were fixed to the metal posts o f former gates.

Epilogue

As a result of the experiences over the last decade we can conclude that his­toric building conservation has become an important activity in everyday

life in Rimetea. Undoubtedly, the historical integrity of the architectural heritage has been preserved thanks to the grant scheme. The condition

of Rimetea’s buildings has been improved and rural tourism has created

conditions for the sustainable development of heritage conservation. Most importantly, Rimetea’s inhabitants now appreciate traditional values and acknowledge that the conservation of historic architecture is not just a cul­tural obligation but also an economical opportunity. On the other hand we

also have to concede that as tourism develops, it is not only beneficial but may also be a threat. The battle to designate the village as an u n e s c o

World Heritage Site, to protect the cultural landscape around the settle­ment, and to control the architectural quality o f the new development in

the village, is still undecided. The possibility of losing historic buildings through demolition is decreasing, although we have to be aware o f inap­

propriate decoration, poor additions and unsympathetic new buildings.

Although almost every participant of the public life of Rimetea is inter­ested in successful heritage conservation, there are major differences as far as the methodology is concerned, and this can be a risk.

It is therefore obvious that Rimetea's heritage conservation programme

still faces many tasks and challenges, and we hope that the diminishing financial support will not force the Transylvania Trust to give up its ob­

jectives. We hope that the forthcoming decade will bring new results and accomplishments just like the first ten years did.

The 1st Heritage Forum of Central Europe | 169