RETHINKING THE URBAN: LESSONS AND CHALLENGES FOR THE FUTURE OF BRAZILIAN CITIES

The urban planning of Brasília, an icon of modernism in Brazil, embodies an urban ideology that aimed to create a functional and efficient society. Designed by Lúcio Costa and with contributions from Oscar Niemeyer, the city was conceived under the principles of modernism, an architectural movement that prioritized functionality, segregation of functions and spatial uniformity. The city, built from scratch in the heart of Brazil, was intended to be a representation of a more just, innovative and progressive future. However, the modernist promises of social harmony and urban functionality failed to be realized, resulting in an urban structure that favored the segregation and distancing of social classes, alienating its inhabitants and fragmenting the social fabric.

Brasília was conceived as a utopian city, with the purpose of being the symbol of a new era of development and social justice in Brazil. However, instead of promoting social integration and improving quality of life, the city crystallized urban segregation and increased inequality. The modernist urban planning of Brasília reflects an authoritarian vision, in which decisions were made from the top down, without public consultation or community participation. Jan Gehl, a critic of this model, argues that cities like Brasília exemplify a dehumanizing form of urbanism, in which urban space is designed based on a technocratic vision that prioritizes functionality over daily life and social interaction.

This critique of modernist urbanism is supported by the way Brasília was organized. The city was planned to function in a functionalist manner, with a clear separation between residential, commercial and leisure areas. One of the critical points in the design of Brasília is the authoritarian way in which planning decisions were made, as argued by Jan Gehl and other critics of the city. Modernist urbanism operated on a top-down logic, where architects and planners designed the city from a bird's eye view, disregarding the needs of pedestrians and daily life. This model separated residential, commercial and leisure areas into distinct zones, creating a dichotomy between spaces and compromising the fluidity of human and social interactions. The result was a fragmented urban environment, where daily life moved between “islands” of isolated functionality, creating barriers to social interaction and the dynamism of a vibrant urban life.

Brasília is not an isolated case. The modernist influence on urban planning was replicated in several Brazilian cities, resulting in segregated neighborhoods that repeat this logic of compartmentalization and distancing. This modernist legacy created inhospitable environments, dominated by wide avenues and superblocks, prioritizing the automobile and isolating pedestrians. Unlike cities like New York, London or Paris, which, despite the apparent “chaos”, demonstrated greater resilience, adaptability and inclusiveness, cities like Brasília, Salvador and Porto Alegre followed the modernist paradigm and still face the challenges of exclusionary and car-dependent urbanization.The urban planning of Brasília, an icon of modernism in Brazil, embodies an urban ideology that aimed to create a functional and efficient society. Designed by Lúcio Costa and with contributions from Oscar Niemeyer, the city was conceived under the principles of modernism, an architectural movement that prioritized functionality, segregation of functions and spatial uniformity. The city, built from scratch in the heart of Brazil, was intended to be a representation of a more just, innovative and progressive future. However, the modernist promises of social harmony and urban functionality failed to be realized, resulting in an urban structure that favored the segregation and distancing of social classes, alienating its inhabitants and fragmenting the social fabric.

Brasília was conceived as a utopian city, with the purpose of being the symbol of a new era of development and social justice in Brazil. However, instead of promoting social integration and improving quality of life, the city crystallized urban segregation and increased inequality. The modernist urban planning of Brasília reflects an authoritarian vision, in which decisions were made from the top down, without public consultation or community participation. Jan Gehl, a critic of this model, argues that cities like Brasília exemplify a dehumanizing form of urbanism, in which urban space is designed based on a technocratic vision that prioritizes functionality over daily life and social interaction.

This critique of modernist urbanism is supported by the way Brasília was organized. The city was planned to function in a functionalist manner, with a clear separation between residential, commercial and leisure areas. One of the critical points in the design of Brasília is the authoritarian way in which planning decisions were made, as argued by Jan Gehl and other critics of the city. Modernist urbanism operated on a top-down logic, where architects and planners designed the city from a bird's eye view, disregarding the needs of pedestrians and daily life. This model separated residential, commercial and leisure areas into distinct zones, creating a dichotomy between spaces and compromising the fluidity of human and social interactions. The result was a fragmented urban environment, where daily life moved between “islands” of isolated functionality, creating barriers to social interaction and the dynamism of a vibrant urban life.

Brasília is not an isolated case. The modernist influence on urban planning was replicated in several Brazilian cities, resulting in segregated neighborhoods that repeat this logic of compartmentalization and distancing. This modernist legacy created inhospitable environments, dominated by wide avenues and superblocks, prioritizing the automobile and isolating pedestrians. Unlike cities like New York, London or Paris, which, despite the apparent “chaos”, demonstrated greater resilience, adaptability and inclusiveness, cities like Brasília, Salvador and Porto Alegre followed the modernist paradigm and still face the challenges of exclusionary and car-dependent urbanization.

Car Culture and Its Impacts

A clear byproduct of modernist urbanism is the car culture. Brasília, with its wide avenues and prioritization of individual transportation, symbolizes this dependence. Designed for the extensive use of cars, the city reflects the ideals of an era that saw the automobile as the ultimate symbol of progress and modernity. This urban choice, however, exacerbated social and environmental inequality, creating an unsustainable and exclusionary city. The automobile, instead of liberating citizens, created new types of imprisonment: traffic jams, pollution, and an urban environment inhospitable to pedestrians.

This phenomenon is not exclusive to Brasília. In S?o Paulo, the Minhoc?o, an elevated highway built in the 1970s, represents the embodiment of the prioritization of cars over people. Inspired by international road projects, such as those by Robert Moses in New York, the Minhoc?o was built in a context of accelerated development, without due consideration for social and environmental implications. As in Brasília, the car was elevated to the status of a central element of urban life, isolating public spaces and promoting the disintegration of spontaneous social interaction. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to reconsider these urban choices, with several cities around the world investing in more sustainable transportation alternatives, such as bike paths and public spaces for pedestrians.

On the other hand, progressive cities such as Medellín, Mexico City and Buenos Aires have promoted urban revolutions by prioritizing pedestrians and public transportation. These cities have adopted planning models focused on social inclusion, with projects that create vibrant and accessible public spaces. In Brazil, however, this transition has been slower and more limited. Even in cities with a history of urban innovation, such as Curitiba, the expansion of public transportation and cycling infrastructure has not kept pace with the growing demand for sustainable alternatives to individual transportation.The urban planning of Brasília, an icon of modernism in Brazil, embodies an urban ideology that aimed to create a functional and efficient society. Designed by Lúcio Costa and with contributions from Oscar Niemeyer, the city was conceived under the principles of modernism, an architectural movement that prioritized functionality, segregation of functions and spatial uniformity. The city, built from scratch in the heart of Brazil, was intended to be a representation of a more just, innovative and progressive future. However, the modernist promises of social harmony and urban functionality failed to be realized, resulting in an urban structure that favored the segregation and distancing of social classes, alienating its inhabitants and fragmenting the social fabric. Brasília was conceived as a utopian city, with the purpose of being the symbol of a new era of development and social justice in Brazil. However, instead of promoting social integration and improving quality of life, the city crystallized urban segregation and increased inequality. The modernist urban planning of Brasília reflects an authoritarian vision, in which decisions were made from the top down, without public consultation or community participation. Jan Gehl, a critic of this model, argues that cities like Brasília exemplify a dehumanizing form of urbanism, in which urban space is designed based on a technocratic vision that prioritizes functionality over daily life and social interaction. This critique of modernist urbanism is supported by the way Brasília was organized. The city was planned to function in a functionalist manner, with a clear separation between residential, commercial and leisure areas. One of the critical points in the design of Brasília is the authoritarian way in which planning decisions were made, as argued by Jan Gehl and other critics of the city. Modernist urbanism operated on a top-down logic, where architects and planners designed the city from a bird's eye view, disregarding the needs of pedestrians and daily life. This model separated residential, commercial and leisure areas into distinct zones, creating a dichotomy between spaces and compromising the fluidity of human and social interactions. The result was a fragmented urban environment, where daily life moved between “islands” of isolated functionality, creating barriers to social interaction and the dynamism of a vibrant urban life.

Brasília is not an isolated case. The modernist influence on urban planning was replicated in several Brazilian cities, resulting in segregated neighborhoods that repeat this logic of compartmentalization and distancing. This modernist legacy created inhospitable environments, dominated by wide avenues and superblocks, prioritizing the automobile and isolating pedestrians. Unlike cities like New York, London or Paris, which, despite the apparent “chaos”, demonstrated greater resilience, adaptability and inclusiveness, cities like Brasília, Salvador and Porto Alegre followed the modernist paradigm and still face the challenges of exclusionary and car-dependent urbanization.

Car Culture and Its Impacts

A clear byproduct of modernist urbanism is the car culture. Brasília, with its wide avenues and prioritization of individual transportation, symbolizes this dependence. Designed for the extensive use of cars, the city reflects the ideals of an era that saw the automobile as the ultimate symbol of progress and modernity. This urban choice, however, exacerbated social and environmental inequality, creating an unsustainable and exclusionary city. The automobile, instead of liberating citizens, created new types of imprisonment: traffic jams, pollution, and an urban environment inhospitable to pedestrians.

This phenomenon is not exclusive to Brasília. In S?o Paulo, the Minhoc?o, an elevated highway built in the 1970s, represents the embodiment of the prioritization of cars over people. Inspired by international road projects, such as those by Robert Moses in New York, the Minhoc?o was built in a context of accelerated development, without due consideration for social and environmental implications. As in Brasília, the car was elevated to the status of a central element of urban life, isolating public spaces and promoting the disintegration of spontaneous social interaction. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to reconsider these urban choices, with several cities around the world investing in more sustainable transportation alternatives, such as bike paths and public spaces for pedestrians.

On the other hand, progressive cities such as Medellín, Mexico City and Buenos Aires have promoted urban revolutions by prioritizing pedestrians and public transportation. These cities have adopted planning models focused on social inclusion, with projects that create vibrant and accessible public spaces. In Brazil, however, this transition has been slower and more limited. Even in cities with a history of urban innovation, such as Curitiba, the expansion of public transportation and cycling infrastructure has not kept pace with the growing demand for sustainable alternatives to individual transportation.

The Need to Reevaluate Brazilian Urban Planning

Criticism of modernist urbanism is not new. Since the 1960s, figures such as Jane Jacobs in the United States and Jaime Lerner in Brazil have proposed more humane alternatives to technocratic urban planning. Jacobs, in her work "The Death and Life of Great American Cities", criticized the authoritarian vision of urban planners such as Robert Moses, who sought to redesign New York to favor the automobile. She defended the importance of dynamic and diverse public spaces where people could interact and build a community. In Brazil, Jaime Lerner applied similar principles in Curitiba, creating a network of parks and green areas that promoted social interaction and environmental sustainability.

Brazil as a whole remains stuck in an urbanization model that prioritizes cars, spatial segregation, and uncontrolled urban development. Many infrastructure projects still follow modernist precepts, even in the face of evidence that these approaches perpetuate inequalities and environmental problems. Housing policies, for example, continue to promote the displacement of the poorest populations to peripheral areas, where the lack of basic infrastructure worsens social exclusion. The “Minha Casa, Minha Vida” program, criticized by urban planners such as Jaime Lerner, perpetuates this logic by building housing complexes far from urban centers and poorly connected to transportation networks.

This geographic distance creates a cycle of dependence on motorized transportation, increasing mobility costs and increasing social segregation. The solution to these challenges requires a complete reassessment of the urban planning model adopted in Brazil. It is necessary to promote densification in the central areas of cities, taking advantage of underutilized spaces and rethinking zoning legislation. Cities like New York and London have already shown that urban densification can be a viable and sustainable solution, by transforming old houses into affordable apartments and promoting proximity between work and housing.

Another important aspect of this transformation is the revitalization and adaptation of obsolete urban properties and infrastructure. During the pandemic, many cities abroad took the opportunity to convert large commercial areas into housing. In Brazil, however, bureaucracy and legal barriers hinder this process, perpetuating the existence of empty buildings while the housing crisis intensifies. Adopting more flexible and efficient legislation can be an important step towards solving urban problems and promoting more inclusive and sustainable urbanization.

Success Stories: Jaime Lerner's Urbanism

Jaime Lerner's urbanism, implemented in Curitiba, offers a concrete example of how urban planning can be more sustainable, inclusive and people-oriented. His ideas, especially sponge parks and bus corridors, stand out for their simplicity and effectiveness. Instead of resorting to expensive and inefficient solutions, such as concrete reservoirs, during his terms as mayor, Lerner developed a series of parks, such as Barigui, S?o Louren?o and Jardim Botanico, which not only served as leisure spaces, but also as innovative solutions to environmental problems, such as flooding. His projects, known as "sponge parks", integrated local hydrography into urban planning, creating green areas that absorbed rainwater and prevented flooding. These solutions not only improved the quality of life of the population, but also proved to be more financially viable in the long term.

Furthermore, the network of cycle paths and the prioritization of public transportation in Curitiba were innovations that inspired cities around the world. Unfortunately, the expansion of these networks has stagnated in recent years, and car use has grown significantly, even in a city that was a pioneer in sustainable transportation alternatives. This setback highlights the need for continuity in public policies aimed at urban mobility and the importance of not losing sight of the innovative solutions that have already proven effective.

Where are Brazilian Cities Headed?

The future of Brazilian cities depends on a change in mentality. Urban planning needs to stop being a tool for exclusion and segregation and become an instrument for inclusion and social justice. Cities should be designed for people, not for cars. This means rethinking road infrastructure, housing projects and, above all, prioritizing the creation of quality public spaces where social interaction is encouraged.

Inspired by thinkers such as Jan Gehl and Jaime Lerner, Brazilian urban planners need to adopt a more human vision of urban space. Cities should be places where people want to walk, meet and interact. The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the importance of public spaces and the need for more balanced urban planning that takes into account both human needs and environmental demands.

In recent years, progressive cities around the world have begun to adopt more inclusive and sustainable urban planning models that seek to combat urban inequality and make urban space more accessible to all. Minneapolis and Portland, in the United States, have relaxed their zoning rules, allowing the construction of housing units in areas previously restricted to single-family homes. These measures aim to increase urban density and make cities more inclusive and accessible, especially for the working classes and marginalized.

In Brazil, however, urban planning faces additional challenges, such as bureaucracy and restrictive legislation, which make it difficult to adapt and densify cities. The preservation of historical heritage, for example, is often used as a pretext to prevent urban development and the creation of affordable housing. Furthermore, many listed properties remain empty and underused, while the housing crisis worsens in large cities. The lack of an effective urban policy and resistance to structural changes perpetuate social exclusion and spatial segregation in Brazil.

The question that arises is: where do we want to go as a society? If the goal is to build more just, humane and sustainable cities, it is necessary to adopt a more inclusive and participatory approach to urban planning. Reduce dependence on vehicles, create more accessible public spaces and promote urban densification in a balanced way. Cities such as New York and London, which have already undergone densification processes, show that it is possible to create dynamic and inclusive urban environments, where people can live, work and travel efficiently and sustainably.

Brazil, in turn, has the potential to move in this direction, but it needs to break with the past and embrace a more sustainable and inclusive future.