Liverpool school of Architecture
ARCH221 URBAN STUDIES, 2021-2022

Essay Topics
The essay accounts for 70% of your total module mark. Please choose one topic from the list
below. Please note the bullet points under each topic don’t suggest a structure of the paper but
are prompts for you to develop your thoughts. You should not just answer these questions in the
bullet points.

Essay length: 2000 words including references (both in-text information and a reference list at the
end) (10% flexibility allowed).

For learning difficult students: Please include a cover sheet stating I confirm that I have a Student
Support Information Sheet (SSIS) which recommends ‘Appropriate marking for spelling and written expression for students with Specific Learning Difficulties’.

Topic 1: Can cities become metaphors of political ambition?

• Select an example of cities that were planned primarily according to a particular political
  agenda or ideology. Please do not choose Chinese capital cities in the imperial period,
  Chandigarh in India or Tema in Ghana which have been discussed in the lectures. You may
  choose other examples around the world as your case study.
• Describe how the physical elements of your example fit with the political agenda/ideology.
• What they intended to represent and why?
• Give your arguments and what designers can learn from the case.

Can cities become metaphors of political ambition?

Introduction

Overwhelmed by the need to fulfill the needs of the constitution and create a city that was centrally located and which was of Brazillian origin rather than the ones formerly used by colonizers, former Brazilian President Juecelino Kubitschek embarked on a project to build a city in the center of the country. He sought to equalize the state’s power, renew Amazon exploration and build a highway that traversed the country which would merge the vast Brazilian region. Although he completed the plan before the predetermined date, it raises the question of whether he was so much engulfed in meeting the constitution and political ambitions that he underestimated the task. In this essay, we will look at whether cities can become metaphors of political ambition. Under the slogan “Fifty years development in five years” plan, former Brazilian President Juecelino Kubitschek launched an ambitious plan to build a new, state-of-the-art capital to present to the world of Brazil. The city offers Brazil an opportunity to enhance its reputation by exporting Brazilian culture and showcasing its recent industrial advancements, while at home committing to addressing unresolved issues of national identity and uneven growth that have long divided the country.[1]The strong desire to build a monument recognizable as purely Brazilian stems from Brazil’s history of cultural dependence, which originated in the first century after independence, when the country struggled to build a coherent national identity. Confused by Brazil’s ethnic diversity and overwhelmed by trends that tend to adopt European styles, Brazil’s national identity remains ambiguous and problematic for nationalists. Although it also originated in Europe, the modernist movement of the 20th century gave Brazilians a style of their own, ultimately making Brasilia a national symbol of cultural autonomy and creativity. [2].

Throughout the construction of Brasilia, Kubitscheck’s other goal was to dismantle, especially among Brazilians as well as the international public, that Brazil is a group of uninhabited countries. As the country transitioned into a republic in the 20th century, regional competition among the various regions of the country continued to intensify.

Rio de Janeiro, Minas Gerais, and São Paulo claimed to be the main political and economic authorities, while the crop-dependent northeast and the largely undeveloped Amazon remain marginal. In deciding to put his new capital at the center of the nation, Kubitschek sought to balance the powers of the states, rekindle interest in exploring the Amazon, and facilitate a gigantic highway that emerged four and a half centuries after its discovery in Brazil, eventually merging a vast and largely unexplored country. Brasilia is committed to promoting equality and connection between the North and the South, the coast, and the interior[3].

Background

“President [Juscelino] Kubitschek wanted to build a new capital. But he didn’t want to build just any old capital. He wanted to build a city that would represent Brazil. So I dedicated myself to finding a new solution, something that would attract attention,” said Niemeyer in an interview with the BBC in 2000[4].

On April 21, 1960, Brazil moved its capital from Rio De Janeiro to Brasilia. Rio de Janeiro was the capital of Brazil since 1572 and the capital of Portugal from 1808 to 1821. In 1891, Brazil drafted its first republican constitution, which contained a provision capital should be moved from southeastern Brazil to the center of the country. The new capital would be more cut off from foreign influence, will become economical stimulate intra-country, and reduce regional and the rule of the old capital Rio de Janeiro and other Southeast cities such as São Paulo, Niteroi, Porto Alegre, and Curitiba. President Giusellino Kubitschek de Oliveira undertook the task of building Brasilia, completed in 2001, 41 months under his “five-year prosperity” plan to Modernize the country[5]

Brasilia has grown into a symbol of change representing the Brazilian movement’s entrance into a new era that transcends problems, including classism, racism, poverty, unjust housing, and corruption.[6] Lucio Costa, the engineer and urban planner of the winning project, developed a superb plan for all core elements of the territory were included. The original project was inspired by the concept of the city. Modernism is idealized from rational and functional planning based on the road traffic system.

Figure 1 Built area land use in the Federal District (2017). Source: Adapted from Urban Land and Territorial Tax Report (SEGETH, 2017)

Therefore, Brasilia’s pilot program “Report” of 1957 is considered to be Urban regulation in the region. In addition to creating satellite cities, later known as “Administrative regions” – these overarching elements help to confirm Brasilia’s programmatic role, as envisaged by Costa the center that would influence the production of agglomeration spaces in the future. In 1964, there was a military coup in the country (the first important external condition affecting territorial governance). Time would bring new interest in consolidating Brasilia’s status as Brazil’s capital amid backlash from political opponents Jucelino Kubitscheck, former president in charge of the construction of Brasilia . Also between  1960 and 1964, the city had 7 different mayors, and public institutions faced multiple administrations and structural changes. Immigration was intense but fast during this time of political uncertainty and was controlled by the military. Housing as part of a strategy to recoup investments in Brasilia. The financial system (Law No. 4380 of August 21, 1964) was created to meet the housing needs of the state, especially in the lower and middle-income segments of the population.[7]

Literature review

During the post-World War II period from 1945 to 1964, the Brazilian government implemented a growth strategy known as Import Substitution Industrialization (ISI). Initially, the results were surprising: Brazil’s GDP grew at a compound annual rate of 7%, the industry grew by 9%, and agriculture by 4.5% [8] (Peet, Hartwick 2015, p. 78). With these astonishing growth rates, President Kubitschek believed that it was feasible to build Brasilia in the Brazilian highlands, according to an 1892 survey by Luis Krul. This approach was short-sighted, as Brazil’s growth relied on massive amounts of foreign capital, leading to foreign debt and runaway inflation. Between 1962 and 1967, the annual growth rate of GDP fell to 4% and that of industries to 3.9% [9]. Brazil’s ISI policy resulted in a shortage of manufacturing workers, leading to a massive exodus of an estimated 7 million people (21% of the rural population), eventually moving to towns in the early 1950s. This rural exodus continued into the 1960s when those unable to find traditional housing settled in informal settlements called slums on the outskirts of cities. Brasilia’s supporters believed they could solve the housing crisis by developing a new city designed according to egalitarian principles. This was achieved through a development program that encouraged residents of all classes to live together in dormitories[10].

Figure 2Montage of photographs of Brasilia, Brazil (2009), courtesy of Heitor Carvalho Jorge

Analysis of case studies

A Case Study of Social Spatial Segregation shows that as cities move away from historic centers, so do the cores of integration. Compared to the lower-income classes who use less public space, the old town has lost its role as a “heterogeneous sphere of social contact and land use patterns” and has become socially homogenized. The conversion of historic buildings, for example into cultural centers, has had a sporadic and weak impact on the use of space in the area[11].

In their detailed analysis of 19th century London using segmental analysis[12], (VAUGHAN et al. 2005, pp. 379-394) showed how “the middle class can explore the potential of a more integrated axis to support their economic activity, however locally very poor street clusters are isolated from urban life” in the lower street extension. Brasilia, Brazil, partly supports and partly disagrees with these results. On the one hand, studies on traffic flow predictability have shown that syntactic segmentation analysis outperforms traffic assignment models, on the other hand, the intensity of these flows does not match the urban center.

Discussion

At its inception, the Federal District faced a period of territorial chaos Governance due to an unstable political environment at the local and national levels. There was no systematic approach to regional development for a long time. Also, local authorities must tackle illegal residents by building satellites in a city far from the city center. These practices lead to disjointed regional networks, no adequate integrated infrastructure, and cause unnecessary land consumption[13].

In Brasilia, we have no dangerous situations, but we have plans and production processes unusual but by no means exclude space in the capital. But market forces are at work here they do so under strict conditions. The pilot program was frozen by law: existing volume typologies buildings cannot be modified, and open space is subject to strict rules about what can be built. Architects bemoan the limits of their creativity: anything can be designed in an apartment building. It is the cosmetic of the façade – the volume attribute has long been planned and the land is defined, and the purpose is predetermined. Urban norms leave little room for individual initiative, among which, how, and where to build.

As Hillier[14] once said, Brasilia belongs to the trend of ‘foreign’ cities. Although structural features are discussed in later texts, these cities suggest an overelaboration of the rules that limit individual initiative. The same is true for other Brazilian examples, whether small towns listed as cultural heritage or specific areas of larger cities that deserve special attention – such as cities like Recife, Natal, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Porto Alegre, etc. Centers and renovations jeopardized the historic quality of these places.

Strict rules must be enforced here to determine what and how to build. As has become apparent, individual initiatives or “markets” will ultimately lead to the loss of valuable construction inventory. Often, these centers that were once at the heart of urban integration are now at the periphery, and the process is irreversible, as it is impossible to reorganize the metropolitan network to make them central again.

Figure 3 Late modernism in Brasilia: Taguatinga satellite town (left) and the new suburban

All attention should now turn to local real estate to reverse the recession, it is possible, as international experience and some recent examples from Brazil show[15] (GEHL & GEMZOE, 2002, KUNSTLER, 1996, VARGAS & Castillo, 2006) Various circumstances led to the realization of specific types of buildings in easily accessible areas of the city – in particular, the “JK” buildings and the Vila Planalto. They represent opportunities and constraints that mean getting into the place from places that don’t match the income brackets a few yards away. The range of opportunities they offer and the opportunity to build homes in stages, like gated communities in Colorado boroughs go far beyond what Lucio Costa calls for unity in terms of diversity and sex he complained about the planned apartment since its inception.

Conclusion

Designers can learn to leave space for future change and modification, for example, the existing open plots that the state insists should be reserved for planned developments. They also learn that they should plan for uncertainties like the drought that caused massive immigration putting pressure on the resources and creating slum settlements. Brasilia also being a 20th-century city shows that planners and designers should put into consideration new developments like the for example the Construction of the New York Underground rail while the city stood and the smart cities concept. There is also a need to understand that some concepts just look good on paper and their actualization might not bring the expected results.

Although local government autonomy is undoubtedly a form of democracy, the progress made due to the new federal constitution of 1988 should be the metropolitan area of ​​Brasilia coordinated by regional planning including central government and local authorities. To achieve proper territorial governance, this study argues that more must be given to administrative autonomy of local government urban development departments. Current administrative structures with urban development strategies linked to political interests, it is not conducive to the long-term sustainable development of the city. In addition, it is important to strengthen mixed-use development policies. Although mixed-use practices gain attention in current practice in master planning, they still exist poor execution. Transport infrastructure investment is only for public transport and does not integrate different sectors such as housing and land use. The resulting housing land use will never lead to socially acceptable development. and the following other purpose-built capitals, such as Putrajaya, reflect segregation caused by previous housing arrangements. The policies followed by the population gap between satellite cities and Brasilia must be a consideration in Brasilia’s future development plans.

List of figures

Figure 1 Built area land use in the Federal District (2017). Source: Adapted from Urban Land and Territorial Tax Report (SEGETH, 2017). 5

Figure 2Montage of photographs of Brasilia, Brazil (2009), courtesy of Heitor Carvalho Jorge. 8

Figure 3 Late modernism in Brasilia: Taguatinga satellite town (left) and the new suburban. 11

References

[1] Thomas Skidmore Skidmore. “Brazil: Five Centuries of Change.” Brazil Five Centuries of Change. Accessed June 3, 2022. https://library.brown.edu/create/fivecenturiesofchange/.

[2] Modern latin america. Accessed June 3, 2022. https://library.brown.edu/create/modernlatinamerica/chapters/chapter-11-brazil/moments-in-brazilian-history-2/brasilia-constructing-a-modern-identity/.

[3] Modern latin america. Accessed June 3, 2022. https://library.brown.edu/create/modernlatinamerica/chapters/chapter-11-brazil/moments-in-brazilian-history-2/brasilia-constructing-a-modern-identity/.

[4] Banerji, Robin. “Niemeyer’s Brasilia: Does It Work as a City?” BBC News. BBC, December 7, 2012. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20632277.

[5] Hochman, Gilberto. ““O Brasil não é só doença”: o programa de saúde pública de Juscelino Kubitschek.” História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos 16 (2009).

[6] Jared Kelly. “The City Sprouted: The Rise of Brasília – Jstor Home.” Accessed June 3, 2022. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26924964.pdf.

[7] Costa, Cayo, and Sugie Lee. “The Evolution of Urban Spatial Structure in Brasília: Focusing on the Role of Urban Development Policies.” Sustainability 11, no. 2 (2019): 553. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020553.

[8] Peet, Richard. “Theories of Development: Contentions, Arguments, Alternatives.” Google Books. Guilford Press, February 23, 2009. https://books.google.com/books/about/Theories_of_Development.html?id=f0xavJRgCtYC.

[9] Shei Ue. “The Course of the Brazilian Economy – Gwu.edu,” 1997. https://www2.gwu.edu/~ibi/minerva/Spring1997/tzung.shei.ue.pdf.

[10] Kroll, Christian. “Brasilia or the Limits of Theory.” Deep Blue Repositories. A. Alfred Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning, January 1, 1970. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/120326. 23-27

[11] “Brasilia Turns 50 – Lecture Series – Lanic.” Accessed June 3, 2022. http://lanic.utexas.edu/project/etext/llilas/vrp/holanda.pdf.

[12]VAUGHAN, Laura, CLARK, David, SAHBAZ, Ozlem (2005). “Space and Exclusion: Does Urban Morphology Play a Part in Social …” Accessed June 3, 2022. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/882/1/Vaughanetal_2005a.pdf.

[13] Costa, Cayo, and Sugie Lee. “The Evolution of Urban Spatial Structure in Brasília: Focusing on the Role of Urban Development Policies.” Sustainability 11, no. 2 (2019): 553. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020553.

[14] Hillier, Jean. “Stretching beyond the Horizon,” 2017. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315242255. Pg 25

[15] VARGAS, Heliana Comin, CASTILHO, Ana Luisa Howard de (2006) Intervenções em centros urbanos – objetivos, estratégias e resultados. Barueri: Editora Manole Ltda.