The first attempt to systematize the central area of Buzau took place in the mid – 1930s, when mayor Stan Săraru concluded a contract with the architect professor Duiliu Marcu, which provided for the realization of the project for the Central Square and the modernization of the city center. On September 24, 1942, the mayor of Buzău, G. Marinescu approved the systematization plan proposed by architect Duiliu Marcu, as well as the proposals made by the Technical Ser-vice within the City Hall. In the central area of Buzau, Duiliu Marcu wanted, among other things, to build an Administrative Palace, a theater and a museum. The events that followed prevented this plan from being realized. In 1960, the first project of systematization of the city of Buzau was carried out. In the vision of the architect Leon Haber, the center had an urban character, with the necessary administrative and commercial facilities. It was also much more equipped from a technical and municipal point of view, compared to the city's neighborhoods, which did not have sewerage, running water network or were not connected to the electricity supply network. However, even in the central area, there were quite a few buildings with a high degree of wear. Leon Haber considered that the city of Buzau did not have many constructions of architectural and historical value. With the exception of the Mănăilă house, which was in an advanced state of degradation, all the other monuments of the city had a religious character, such as the Bishopric of Buzau, the churches of the Holy Angels, Ban and Broşteni, all in a good condition. In 1968, a detail of systematization of the central area of Buzau municipality was elaborated by the Institute of Studies and Design for Constructions, Architecture and Systematization (ISCAS) București.The authors of the study wanted the preservation, restoration and arrangement of old build-ings with traditional character, such as the former inns on Dobrogeanu-Gherea Street and Faith Street, as well as the "route of the old fair". Also, it was wanted to build a "central representative ensemble", with groups of facilities, "with ani-mated routes and different angles of perspective", which would strengthen the personality of the city. It was important to connect the compositional ensemble with the new living areas that were to be realized in the future. Unfortunately, this detail of systematization confirms the intention of the communist authorities to restructure the central area of the city through massive demolitions, without taking into account their historical or architectural value. For the communist re-gime, only churches built before 1800 were included in historical monuments. All the other buildings, erected in the XIX century and the first half of the XX century did not matter unless they were in a good condition. Not even the Com-munal Palace, which was and is the emblem building of the city, was considered a historical monument. Thus, the communist regime could afford to demolish, without remorse, any building that stood in front of the plans to build new en-sembles of blocks of flats, in order to host the new workers.