arquitetura

 

Urbanism

Urbanism

 

Architecture - This page is in construction and not yet it was formatted, to see the site of architect Patricia Mellilo and to read more on architecture architectural and visits its site official. It sees architecture 01, architecture 02, 03 architecture and architecture 04 to know more. House and Construction

 

House Architecture and Construction


Escritório de Arquitetura Patricia Mellilo - Fazendo do seu Projeto a realização do seu Sonho. Rua Coronel Rodrigues Simões n 620 São Manuel - SP. Visite nosso novo site www.patriciamellilo.com.br ou entre em contato pelo telefone (14) 3841-5334 ou pelo e-mail patriciamellilo@gmail.com

arquitetura

It knows more on architecture, decoration, paisagismo, urbanism, civil construction in general in our new site: www.patriciamellilo.com.br

 

Urbanism

Urbanism is the activity of study, regulation, control and planning of the city (in its ampler direction) and of the urbanization. Urbanism reveals, therefore, as a science human being applied inserted in the context of a world in constant demographic growth and answering to one strong pressure of civilization and urbanity, facing its demands and problems. In a simplista perspective, Urbanism corresponds to the action to project and to command the cities. However, under a ampler point of view, Urbanism can in such a way be understood as a set of practical or ideas, how much as an ideological form that it aims at to reproduce the general conditions in the way of capitalist production. According to this point of view, currently in such a way the Capital how much the State if appropriates of the practical one and theory (understanding them as ideology) of Urbanism as a generating mechanism of profit.

Therefore, the study of Urbanism it must be an activity highly to multidiscipline and complex that dialogues mainly with the architecture (in its more common direction), with the architecture of the landscape, design and with the politics. It needs the contribution of areas of the knowledge as the social ecology, geology, sciences, geography and other sciences.

The word was used for the first time for Catalan engineer Ildefons Cerdà, responsible for the project of magnifying of Barcelona in the decade of 1860. Cerdà, during the period, synthecized the some studies on the existing cities and its project in its general Theory of the urbanization, in which it presented the term, in 1867.

Urbanism and city

The city is had as the main object of study of Urbanism (what it discloses a dualism), being much more of what an agglomeration of people and constructions in one determined territorial space. It is the place to where it converges the flow of economic capital, social, financial, happened of some localities that establish with it social relations, economic politics and, and at last, where if they concentrate the goods of reproduction of the capital and the force of work. This demonstrates the complexity of what it is the city. In the city intense social relations of exchange happen, of movement, being able and therefore she is dynamic. Its spaces are dynamic and if they transform into elapsing of the time in virtue of all these and other factors.

The society where we live became essentially urban from the period of the end of séc. XIX, industrial after-revolution, and thus the urban problems had started if to accent, ahead of the increase of the population in the cities decurrent of the agricultural exodus, in search of work chances and without worthy conditions of quality of life. From then on some cities had grown in size and population and if they had transformed into metropolises, surpassing its territorial limits forming conurbações (some continuous related Inter cities in one fabric urban). Then proposals in the attempt appear to search solutions for these problems, with a scientific pretension, and also if they create models of urban development for the cities, many of utopian them in order to organize the spaces of the city, its territories, its diverse activities. In this context it is that Urbanism appears.

From séc. XIX some models had appeared of urban development, in brainstorming for the decurrent problems of the great process of urbanization of the européias cities, in the attempt of if creating the ideal city, had as theories, that if had become utopian, the example of the ideas of Fourier, with the falanstério, of Howard whom the City-garden idealized, and of Tony Garnier, with the theory of the industrial city (CHOAY, 1965). At that time, great cities as London and Paris, presented sped up population growth sufficiently, in the period of the Industrial Revolution, when great population contingents migravam of the field for the city in work search, and then great population accumulations had been created in which the people who belonged to the laboring classroom lived in péssimas life conditions, mainly of hygiene, many of them without having where to live, or inhabiting in unhealthy places and you discomforted. It had then from then on a great quarrel in diverse areas of the knowledge in the search for solutions for these calls “urban problems”. At that time, of the industrial revolution, the social movements and the rationalisms that emerged, not yet if it had a concept of improved Urbanism, and nor the same he was considered as an area of the knowledge or science of organization of the urban spaces, what it only happens some years later, at the beginning of séc. XX (CHOAY, 1965).

The comment and the reflection on the problems of the city still assume in century XIX, other sources of thought. One of them would be descriptive, observing the facts separately commanding them in quantitative way, eats application of the Statistics to rising Sociology then in order to formulate theories of growth of the city. One another one would be constituted by thinkers politicians and would bring the polemização on the problems of hygiene and the great American européias industrial cities and north, as well as the habitation of the deriving population of the favored social classrooms less. Some of these thinkers as Marx and Engels had inside analyzed these problems of a referring logic to the economic and social order for the organization of the urban space promoted by the industrialization not associated with the logic of the development of the economy, but for the production and commercialization on a large scale and the concentration of the capital generated in the ruling classes.

The territory of the city is formed by the flows of merchandises and people, having been it (the city) the configuration of the social structure, and the materialization of this structure in the territory. The transformations in the urban space are fruit not alone of the intra-urban relations, but of regional and global ralações, since the city is not a closed place in itself, it assumes relations that exceed the local and regional sphere, and this demands that if she has a vision of the inserted city in a more including politician-economic context.

The ideal city if presents as fruit of the ethical, philosophical and sociological values of each culture and each time. The theories of the city evolve and enrich, therefore it is difficult to know as it is the ideal city, since some time after its definition it already does not go to correspond to the expectations of the time. Thus, Urbanism cannot be observed only under the point of view of one technique of study and physical intervention of the space, therefore when intervém in its morphology, it it needs to be studied and to be planned knowing sociological, philosophical, historical the aspects, etc. and being that a city is resulted of the diverse changes that occur in the society, and that transformations impose it.

It has of if understanding, however, that the set of action of intervention in the urban space historicamente many times is come back toward the domination and of being able politician for the 4 elites [], causing the partner-space segregation. Thus the study of Urbanism it deserves a critical boarding while science, area of knowledge or instrument of intervention in 5 the urban space [], turning itself mainly toward as its concept is understood in Brazil and other countries, therefore a science or field of the knowledge of great complexity is about.

3. The Sprouting of Urbanism and the formation of its concept

Urbanism is considered as a science that was born in the end of century XIX, for the study, the organization and intervention in the urban space, as practical of the necessary transformations to the chaotic reality of the conditions of habitation and salubrity where the inhabitants of great européias cities lived, at the time of the industrial revolution. However a bigger theoretical maturity was only reached then in the end of century XX. As area of the independent knowledge it can be considered recent (BONNET RUNS, 1989). It appeared to study and to search solutions for the problems of the city, being this a space in permanent transformation, that, however will have been observed during a short period of time can seem static.

Some versions for the sprouting of the term exist “Urbanism”, however the most spread out it is of French origin. Segundo Bardet (1990) this term appeared for 1910 return, in France, the Bulletin of la Societé Geographique to call a “new science” that if it differentiated of previous the urban arts for its critical character and reflective e, for its scientific pretension, being epistemologicamente the study of the city (urbe, of the Latin means city). Alfred Agache, an architect (or architect-city planner), if autodenomina as creative of the term, and appraises Urbanism as:

“A science, and an art and, over all a social philosophy. It is understood for Urbanism, the set of rules applied to the improvement of the constructions, the arruamento, the circulation and the descongestionamento of the public arteries. It is the remodelling, the extension and the embelezamento of a city, taken the effect, by means of a methodical study of geography human being and the urban topography without relinquishing the financial solutions”.

However, the term Urbanism would have been created in 1868, when Cerdá wrote the General Theory of la Urbanización. Its sprouting would have happened in 1910, when he would have been presented in the Congress of London where if several of the studious pioneers in the field of Urbanism had congregated. In this year “Urbanism” would be used the term for the first time and if it carried through the first exposition on the same, that it had place in Berlin, in Germany.

In accordance with the concept of Agache, is possible to perceive that Urbanism had, of beginning, a concern with the plastic composition in agreement with the dominant values of the society, and that it was placed in way if favored to the collective way of life in the city as well as the power of the institutions, and the organization or order of the occupation of the ground, the façades, the security, and the circulation, what it can be observed since the old age.

The study, as well as the practical professional of Urbanism, initially it was associated with the Architecture and the beautiful arts (therefore the Architecture appeared of the Beautiful Arts), for this many times if give emphasis to the aspects constructive and artistic, or aesthetic, and for this still if it has a vacant agreement, as scientific and professional field. It is understood by many, still, as mere complement of the Architecture and the Design, directed to the project of the urban tracing.

For other studious o Urbanism brings notion that it encloses it of form that it is so old how much civilization urban, as if the term already existed since that when the man creates a morphologic organization for the space of the cities, therefore since that the first communities had appeared had indications of a hierarchic organization of spaces of being able (the example of Polis Greek and the Civitas Roman, in the old civilization), or for the defense of the territory, what in takes believing that Urbanism already if practised as action of order of the territory, however without a scientific character.

4. Considerações on the theory and the practical one of the Urbanism inside of a historical boarding

It is observed that it had great technician-scientific quarrels on Urbanism in the carried through CIAM´s and other international congresses in the first half of séc. XX, when many of the basic postulates had been argued, followed later for many planners in diverse parts of the world, mainly in ocidente.

In 1933, in the CIAM - International Congress of Modern Architecture - carried through in Atenas, if they had established the principles of “Modern Urbanism”, and if it produced a document that was known as the Letter of Atenas. This document is fruit of the meetings of the CIAM, having been published eight years later, in Paris, becoming reference for many city planners per many years, under strong influence of the French chain mainly of the funcionalistas ideas of Le Corbusier (great promoter and divulgador of these ideas), being the version more known of the CIAM in the 7 world []. Other congresses beyond the CIAM had still existed, as the CIRPAC, that had at the time also argued Urbanism while practical scientific professional and and whose content much less is known of what the Letter of Atenas, and that it brought a differentiated content.

In this way Urbanism still conserved some of its traditional bases of thought. It is considered still by many as of domain of the architects, who are had as “specialists in the subject”, however generally on the basis of practical and despolitizadas applications according to Choay (1965), and considered still according to many technician (architects and engineers) a science “in function of new techniques of construction and the style of life and the proper necessities of man of séc. XX”, that they would be the functions established for the Letter of Atenas (To inhabit, To circulate, To work, To cultivate the body and the spirit), being this the form of if thinking the city of séc. XX, after 2a World-wide War, when the reconstruction of many européias cities became. Under this theoretical and professional vision, pioneering in the practical one of Urbanism, the city is seen as an object technician, determined and accurate, without a bigger attention for the social matters, historical and cultural that permeiam the urban space.

Segundo Sampaio (2001), Urbanism, mainly from the time of the call “Modernismo”, enters the decades of 30 and 40, séc. XX it was studied and practised in accordance with the desire of insertion of the architects in problematic the urban one, in an attempt to dislocate the speech architectural (of the works of art) for the urbanístico field, however the professional activity was divided enters the paradigm of the individualism of the project and the paradigm of Urbanism to multidiscipline. This could exactly be considered the chain division between architects, or “architect-city planners”, that] would have a vision next to the individualism of 8 project [, and of the city planners, more worried about the character to multidiscipline in the analysis and brainstorming on the problems of the city (Sampaio, 2001).

However many consider, equivocadamente, as if Urbanism was, “in fact and of essentially pertaining right to the tradition of knowing architectural” Souza (2002) based in the premises of Le Corbusier (1984: 4, apud.: SOUZA, 2002) that he affirmed:

“(...) the city planning nothing more he is that the architect. The first one organizes the spaces architectural, fixes the place and the destination of the constructed continents, binds to all the things in the time and the space by means of me the net of circulações. E the other, the architect, despite interested in a simple habitation and, in this habitation in a mere kitchen, also it constructs continents, creates spaces, decides on circulações. In the plan of the creative act the one alone architect and the city planner are (...)”.

The interesting one is that this premise is used until the current days, equivocadamente, for many studious and professional ones, when they are mentioned to Urbanism, and affirmed many times as form still to keep it as mere extension of the Architecture, in the theory and the practical one. In accordance with this premise the city is thought and planned functionally as if it was a construction. Thus such premises disclose a normative concern very rigid and exceeded by disrespecting that the activities can coexist harmoniously in the urban space, without as much functional rigidity and still the aspects social politicians and who influence in its configuration.

On the basis of a document sufficiently current resultant of studies on Urbanism developed in the Europe and other countries we can arrive at the conclusion of that a distinction between Architecture and Urbanism really exists how much to the study elements, of intervention and decision taking:

“… the urban composition differs basically from the architecture for the fact of that the “city” and the “building” do not have secular rhythm the same. Whereas the Architecture if renews quickly the urban space in itself more is vocacionado for the long duration. Therefore, the data that lead to the decision taking different urban architectural or when being in its essence imply to know different capable to organize and to use these same data (...) Equally we must relate one another difference that is basic. The scale of the urban project engloba “all”, to the step that the scale architectural corresponds eventually to the building and to its next redor. To draw the urban space with the tools of the architecture is to produce formal a space desenraizado of the framings that we relate. This “all” is the society and territory in its set, enrolled in a past (of the memory), gift (that it is lived) and perspective future that if. (...) (ULHT, 2003).

A difference is noticed then enters the scales of space and secular intervention of the Architecture and the Urbanism, that are distinct scales. They are two distinct areas of the knowledge, and not one only, but that they have relations interdisciplinares.

Some authors try to define Urbanism as something that is not science, nor art, but that understand everything that says respect to the social life of the man, as isolated individual and as part of the collective and that the same he is to multidiscipline, and for having this diversity De Campos, he demands that some professionals work in set, in order to arrive itself at a not fragmented solution or that he leaves to approach some question specific, in way that the set of the partial solutions leads 9 a satisfactory complex solution []. Long ago, many times if place the term as one technique of urban planning, stricto sensu, that it aims at to discipline and/or to command the growth of the city in result of the urbanization process, taking care of to the increasing demand for infrastructure, services and supplying, thus aiming at to improve the quality of life of the urban population, and the concretion of this offers of infrastructure, the urbanificação, would be the measure of intervention in the urban space, that would have to mainly reach the layers most devoid of the society.

Lacaze, in its book Methods of Urbanism (LACAZE, 1993) place that Urbanism cannot be considered as a science, nor neither as one technique, and the same if does not reduce to an art of drawing of urban forms, having to be studied and to be analyzed as an act of being able. In this same workmanship, the cited author questions thus the cientificidade of Urbanism, on the basis of the experiences of intervention in the urban space developed between the decades of 1960 and 1990, when it affirms that Urbanism cannot intend to be a science that is enough to justify the choice of thematic solutions, since the same it comes being, since its sprouting while science or technique, an instrument for the urbanística reform, promoting the control social of the urban space, that if conceives as ordinance of the urban space. Mazzaroli (Op. Cit.: Mukai, 1989), define Urbanism as: “(...) the science that if worry about the systematization and development of the city, searching to determine the best position of the streets, of the buildings and public works, of private habitation, way that the population can enjoy of a situation sã, cômoda and estimate (...)”

In accordance with the classic funcionalista concept of Urbanism, the city is seen as an alive organism, that functions as determined a space and social system that would have in accordance with to be commanded a concrete methodology. From there great and extraordinary urbanísticos plans of (re) qualification of the urban space under the space-constructive aspect had resulted, for the renewal or construction of cities, planned inside of aprioristic models (SOUZA, 2003), many estimated utopian times that brought the creation of said as necessary for the performance of the “urban functions” or “social functions” of the city (already cited previously) submitted the intentions politics, social or solely artistic. These functions were made use in the famous Letter of Atenas, as universal postulate, and would have to be espacialiazadas in the city, that is, separate in the urban space, what it would be the segregation the activities in reason of a supposed functional order. From there Urbanism appears Modern, that if it bases on the premises that considered the urban interventions must be made with intention to eliminate “males” proceeding from the urbanization process as if they were “surgical actions”, where simply eliminate the degraded spaces or if they transform these spaces into salubrious beautiful spaces e. This thought if would adjust to a progressive called chain (CHOAY, 1965) that it disrespects partner-cultural and historical elements, in the search for an ideal city, and thus searchs the reproduction of the space to demonstrate an image that are not perhaps condizente with its reality, sufficiently spread out by Le Corbusier, in some parts of the world as Urbanism model.

This “model of Urbanism”, called from Modern Urbanism, suffered many critical ones, for the rationalism and the reducionismo brought of the theoretical models created (SOUZA, 2003), since they would not be applicable to any part of the world as universal premises for the “modernization of the urban space”, therefore each place has its necessities and specific, passíveis problems of analysis and interventions that can be different of a place for another one.

However, with its development in elapsing of the time and the magnifying of its areas of performance, Urbanism exceeded the restricted vision to the plans of 12 urbanificação [], therefore also a infinity of concepts exists, that treat-in the one of more including, different form of the derivations most common and inherited interpretations of its first concepts, come of the first half of séc. XX, that they concentrate the boarding on the decurrent urban problems of this period (migrations field-city, sanitary hygiene, infrastructure…). It started to have then, in its essence, the concern with the study of the relations of the city with the society that in it lives, and vice versa and of the inserted city in a regional and global context, having its space as resultant of social transformations, economic politics and of the capitalist world, also of the paper of the State and other agents whom they act in the urban space (the companies, the institutions and are clearly the population) and encloses still the question of the socioambiental sustentabilidade (GRAZIA and QUEIROZ, 2001).

Of this prism it is perceived then that Urbanism wide exceeded the sphere of the morphologic order, if not limiting to a simple technique of the engineer or the architect. It would start to accumulate of stocks the field of the community, of the social planning, therefore the city reflects the state of the society and in it one is express also determined conception of the world, having always to be based, in first plan, the improvement of the conditions of life to the inhabitants of the city (BONET CORREA, 1989).

Thinking about these conditions of life must enclose aesthetic diverse factors that are not only technician and, or aesthetic-funconais. This does not want to say that the questions aesthetic techniques and leave to have importance, for the the opposite, must be analysis object, therefore they intervene directly with the structure, the landscape, and the quality of life of the urban space, however they do not have to be the center of the urbanística question, in a reducionista perspective, as many consider.

The interesting one is that under a ampler vision it must be searched to understand Urbanism as the set of actions directed to the planning, the management of the city and to the order of the use and occupation of the ground urban in some scales since the local scale to the regional one, however having to have a boarding to multidiscipline concerning the territory (under its historical, cultural, economic aspects), in transversal and multireferencial way, involving some areas the knowledge and, over all the questions politics, thus if can reach the urban partner-ambient sustentabilidade.

4.1 The diverse existing possible denominations then

In Brazil, as well as in other parts of the world, Urbanism it receives, to the times, diverse distinct denominations, and an example is the denomination urban planning, being that this last one if applies individually to the planning of a city enclosing all the action of the state on the urban one and the process of urbanization, that would be the urban planning latu sense, being a more recent denomination, and many times used as substitution to the first one in the last few decades.

Valley to stand out that these confusions of terminologies related to Urbanism and the Urban Planning would be reason for one another deepened boarding more, therefore in countries as England and United States the terminology used for calls it is “Urban Planing”, “Town Planing” or “Urban Regional Planing”. However it is standed out that as Souza (2002) Urbanism and Urban Planning would not be synonymous: “the (...) nor first one depletes as. Unhappyly, exactly planning compromised with a socially critical thought, when architects, costumam, in Brazil, to confuse the two things (...)”.

Although for the most part of the Brazilian universities to have “a reificada” conception of the term, as indissociável of “modern” the ideological representation of the city while physical space of eminently aesthetic transformations, or simply as “architecture of the urban spaces” (RODRIGUES, 1986), slowly occurs a process of matureness of a conception that if approaches to a more including vision on the urban question in a form to multidiscipline on Urbanism. Important to also argue its entailing or confusion with the Urban Drawing (Urban Design), that a specific field of Urbanism can be considered (in a scale of intermediate planning), despite many to disagree.

In relation to the Urban Drawing, Kevyn Lynch (1960.1981, apud would say on the basis of.: DEL RIVER, 1990) that it would have as objective main to study and to consider solutions for the urban space in accordance with the necessity to form categories of analysis for the production of the physical form (urban form) inside of a shorter scale of time and lesser performance of what the urban planning, therefore for this has a search for determining the localization of the infrastructure of the estruturantes elements of the city, not only in territorial the physical aspect, but for strategical laws and projects analyzing for in such a way the territorial economy that it would be a base for this planning. Segundo Del Rio (1990, p.52), Drawing Urban can to be understood as area specific of performance of Urbanism, however reevaluation would fit “and recovery academic” of Urbanism, since it has a treatment limited in this direction, that can approach the way city to multidiscipline, with concern come back toward the ambient organization and the social processes.

The urban Planning generally is understood as distinct of the Urban Drawing, being this comumente associated to the questions of project in the urban scale, and that one as being more tied with the strategical politics. Already Urbanism, for many would englobaria the Urban Planning as Urban Drawing, therefore in accordance with the traditional way that if the city planner practises the same would develop then works in both the scales, and by this Urbanism is used many times as synonymous for the two terms.

Valley to also point out the existence of what it could be a new denomination, however can be considered a chain that appeared in the decade of 80, after World War II, in U.S.A., was the call New Urbanism (New Urbanism), inhaled in the standards used before World War II, that it did not leave of being conservative in its premises, this considering its aspects philosophical politicians and, According to Souza (2002, p.144):

“Its central idea-force is, in the truth, an effort of compatibilização of urban development, in its capitalist direction, with certain “communitarian” values and a certain scale human being, at last almost a species of synthesis between the antimodernista tradition, symbolized for Jane Jacobs so well (1994) and the pragmatismo mercadófilo, and this everything if adding the style after-modernista”.

The New Urbanism can be considered as come back toward a physicist-territorial planning (classic and elitist), more restricted, perhaps for that is that the Congress of New Urbanism (1999), carried through into U.S.A., incurs of its opening to interdisciplinar, although in the deep one livened up for a type of professional, the “architect-city planner” (Souza, 2002). This demonstrates as some concepts can exist, is they reproducing traditional ideas of the past, or trying to renew it in certain way with these ideas, searching, who it knows, to bring a theoretical evolution or even though to reinventar the concept of Urbanism inside of a thought chain.

It is observed then that denominations around an Urbanism are diverse servants, either in the scientific field or technician (professional), what it can be an object of a not deepened epistemológica question, that does not have as to argue in its totality in a brief article as this.

4.2 Some considerações on Urbanism in Brazil

It is observed that in Brazil it more has the knowledge of few registers of deepened quarrels on Urbanism while field of the knowledge and its epistemologia. Many scholars only consider the same as mere complementary branch of the Architecture or “Architecture-Urbanism” and had reduced it many times the projects architectural, or of large-scale engineering.

A quarrel example to interdisciplinar that it happened was the Week of 1935 Urbanism, in Salvador, where treated between the main subjects, Urbanism while new field of the knowledge and area of performance. One searched to clarify what it would be Urbanism as one of the objectives of this event, although not to have enough theoretical references, then the same would be appraised by the Commission of the Plan of the City of Salvador as “science to command and to harmonize the static and dynamic elements of the city” (Commission of Planning of the City of Salvador, 1937). Inside of this concept the zoning is pointed as one of the essential instruments with respect to the order of the cities, even so this known instrument of physicist-territorial planning is used for functional organization of the urban space favoring to a space segregation, what it distorts it, politically, as instrument of urban planning.

This page is in construction and not yet it was formatted, to see the site of architect Patricia Mellilo and to read more on architecture architectural and visits its site official. It sees architecture 01, architecture 02, 03 architecture and architecture 04 to know more.

It knows more having access http://www.patriciamellilo.com.br