Abstract proposal for 2019 IGU Urban Commission Meeting Luxembourg – 4th- 9th August 2019

2019 IGU Urban Commission Annual Meeting Urban Challenges in a complex World The urban geographies of the new economy, services industries and financial marketplaces

BENEDITO TADEU DE OLIVEIRA, PhD in restoration of monuments by the University of Rome, director of IPHAN (2002-2009), Ouro Preto − MG, architect at the Ministry of Health (Fiocruz), . CARINA AMORIM DUTRA, PhD candidate in Geography, École Doctorale de Géographie de Paris, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne − Paris 1, France

Ouro Preto, past and present

Session 10- Urban Heritage and Conservation

• Theoretical background Ouro Preto is one of the most important and symbolic cities in Brazilian history and culture. Like other “ cities” in , Ouro Preto has a singular layout which does not conform to the radial urban structures or traditional nuclei of . Its organic and linear configuration anticipated the type of urban development known as conurbation, i.e., the formation of a city through the connection of many close urban centres. The linkage of the surrounding villages was consolidated in the second quarter of the XVIII century through significant urban interventions promoted by Governor Gomes Freire de Andrade, Count of Bobadela (1735-63). The town of Ouro Preto is located between two ranges of mountains: the Southern slope of Serra de Ouro Preto and the Northern slope of Serra de Itacolomi. The region comprises significant archaeological, historical and landscape heritage, besides relevant environmental values represented by its fauna and flora, geological features and the important existence of water springs. Due to the mountainous topography and altitudes reaching 1,116 meters above sea level, the implantation of urban settlements in the region is not appropriate. However, the abundance of gold explains the establishment of Ouro Preto, which means black gold, in such an adverse place for human occupation. It is noteworthy that the state of Minas Gerais was responsible for approximately 50% of gold production worldwide in the 18th century and this resource contributed to the financial funding of the English industrial revolution. Despite the adverse conditions, our ancestors were able to build the town of Ouro Preto respecting the physical and topographic conditions of the area, thus originating a harmonious relationship between architecture and nature – which is one of the main characteristics of the town. In Ouro Preto “the constructions fit perfectly to the local

1 topography, enhancing the contours, colors and shapes of roofs, mingling ground and roof ridges, valuing the hills or rising the natural mounts” (Vasconcellos, 1977). In the early 20th century the press voiced the opinion of those who alerted to the abandonment of the cultural heritage of the Minas Gerais and the need to take actions for its preservation. From the 1920s onwards, Ouro Preto was visited by architects and urbanists – Lúcio Costa and Oscar Niemeyer among them – and poets as Manoel Bandeira, Cecília Meirelles and Carlos Drummnond de Andrade, inspiring the modernists who, led by the intellectual Mário de Andrade, identified it as one the birthplaces of Brazilian national identity. The city was declared a National Monument in 1933; the architectural, urban and landscape ensemble was listed by the National Historic and Artistic Heritage Institute (Instituto do Patrimônio Histórico e Artístico Nacional – IPHAN) in 1938 and it became the first Brazilian city included in the World Heritage List by UNESCO in 1980. Considering that in Brazil there is an institutional apparatus for the protection of urban and architectural heritage, why is the protection of Ouro Preto such a challenging issue?

• Research questions The first physical and economic decline of the town occurred at the end of the 18th century due to the gold mines depletion and the supply crisis, which resulted in economic decay and population exodus. With the proclamation of the Republican regime in 1889, the image of the Imperial City of Ouro Preto became inadequate for the positivistic ideas and the republican scientific rationality. The move of the state of Minas Gerais capital to in 1897 engendered an exodus of almost 50% of the population and resulted in the towns’ physical and economic decay, thus characterizing the second decline of Ouro Preto. As in other examples in the history of cities, Ouro Preto had its physical and formal integrity preserved due to its distance from development areas that underwent urban renovation. However, since the 1960s rapid urban transformation has drawn the attention of national public opinion, particularly the start of disordered occupation around the historic architectural nucleus, which initiated the loss of original features of its surroundings and cultural landscape that are protected both by IPHAN and UNESCO. In such a scenario, this article proposes some essential questions: Are the measures established for the restoration and conservation of Ouro Preto’s cultural and environmental heritage capable of halting the uncontrolled and destructive expansion and setting the town on a route of development and sustainable preservation? Do the challenges to reconcile urban development and cultural heritage protection pertain only to Ouro Preto or do they also apply to other historical towns? What has been done for the conservation of Ouro Preto’s architectural, urban and landscape ensemble?

• Methodology By means of a geohistorical approach, researches were conducted on the initiatives carried out since the 1960s for the conservation of Ouro Preto. The diagnosis of the degradation process in Ouro Preto was done timely, i.e., in the early moment of the

2 disordered expansion process. A possible solution to stop the development of this degradation process was also timely formulated, i.e., urban planning. At the time, the reformulation of conservation concepts preconized in the 1964 Venice Charter elected planning as the chief instrument for the safeguard of cultural works and stimulated public agencies to design plans for the protection of Ouro Preto’s cultural heritage. The first plan was developed in 1968 by Portuguese architect Viana de Lima, thanks to the contacts of Rodrigo Melo Franco de Andrade (founder and first director of IPHAN) with UNESCO. Another attempt was the Plan for the Conservation, Enhancement and Development of Ouro Preto and Mariana (1973−75), designed by João Pinheiro Foundation. These plans could have reduced the degradation of Ouro Preto’s cultural and environmental heritage or could at least have avoided it reaching the level of degradation currently observed. However, those plans were neglected by the municipal administration along the years and were never implemented. This resulted in an intensive environmental degradation process of the town. The most recent attempts to conciliate the town’s urban development with the protection of its cultural and environmental heritage were made by initiative of the municipal administration in the periods 1993−96 and 2003−2006. The latter was elaborated following the visit in April 2003 of a technical mission of the World Heritage Center UNESCO to carry out a survey on the existing problems and identify the necessary measures to halt the alarming deterioration of its cultural and environmental heritage. The latest initiatives to preserve Ouro Preto were unsuccessful due to the lack of human resources and infrastructure of the public agencies responsible for urban development management and surveillance. In addition to these hindrances, there is the political instability resulting from the changes in municipal administration that alternate periods of some interest in cultural and architectural heritage conservation, namely for purposes, with a complete carelessness with the phenomenon of the town’s loss of character. Finally, one more question: To what extent does the patrimonialization policy currently carried out in Ouro Preto respect the recommendations of UNESCO?

• Results/findings Ouro Preto belongs to the inestimable Brazilian memory and it is a universal value landmark of human creation; but in recent decades is has been pressed by a process of uncontrolled growth, with the occupation of hillsides and geological risk areas, transformation of hills into favelas, and invasion of green areas and archaeological sites. The cultural value is recognized to such extent that initiatives for the protection of the town’s heritage were held by several institutions including UNESCO. With the alterations of the harmonious relationship between nature and architecture, it can be considered that the town has been undergoing a systematic and permanent process that combines urban expansion and deprivation of its historic and cultural features.

3 Besides the deterioration of the quality of life in the town, this degradation process also produces the loss of characteristics of its architectonic, urbanistic and landscape ensemble. It is not possible to deny that patrimonialization produces territories and organizes the geographic space according to the market value assumed during the past decades. Ouro Preto is a significant laboratory for the observation of the current dynamics of the “marketability of history”, namely through tourism. In a dialectic process in which heritage feeds the market it is foreseeable that the market either produces or neglects heritage. Thus, most profitable territorial projects are more likely to be justified than those expressed in heritage conservation.

• Significant/general conclusions The conclusion is that in Brazil the promotion of urban planning and the implementation of master plans are still arduous tasks. Towns comprising listed heritage ensembles have most of the urban growth planning initiatives made unfeasible due to political and economic interests and intensive real estate speculation process. Finally, it should be stressed that even planned cities as Belo Horizonte, MG (1897), Goiânia, GO (1942) and Brasília, DF (1960), the latter also included in UNESCO World Heritage List, have not been capable of keeping to their original urban planning.

• References BANDEIRA, Manoel. Guia de Ouro Preto. : Ministério da Educação e Saúde - MES, 1938. DUTRA, Carina Amorim. O poder simbólico das representações sociais: territorialidades conflitivas nas relações homem e natureza no distrito de Novas-MG. Viçosa, MG: Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade Federal de Viçosa - UFV, 2012. MELLO, Suzy de. Barroco mineiro. São Paulo: Editora Brasiliense, 1985. MENICONI, Rodrigo Otávio de Marco. A construção de uma cidade monumento: o caso de Ouro Preto. Belo Horizonte: Dissertação de mestrado, Escola de Arquitetura e Urbanismo, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - UFMG, 1999. MOTTA, Lia. A SPHAN em Ouro Preto; uma história de conceitos e critérios. Revista do Patrimônio nº 22, p. 108 a 122. Rio de Janeiro: 1987. OLIVEIRA, Benedito Tadeu de. Em defesa de Ouro Preto. Revista Arquitetura e Urbanismo (interseção), p. 63/66, nº 113, 2003, São Paulo, S P: 2003. VASCONCELLOS, Sylvio de. Vila Rica. São Paulo: Editora Perspectiva, 1977.

4