Urban mobility: Modernist city versus Traditional city The cases of Brasília and Budapest

Budapest University of Technology and Economics

Nágila Monique Silva RamosFaculty of Architecture l Architectural Research for exchange students

Tutor: Prof. Dr. Ferenc VidorBudapest, May 2014

Preface

Budapest and Brasília took part in my life because of the passion about architecture. Coming from a small city in the Brazilian countryside, they were my choice for study architecture and urbanism and both were new experiences for me. Besides the incredible beauty of them, what take most my attention is how people here and there move through the cities, how is the traffic, the walkability, the public transportation. This topic is that what I most admire in Budapest and most dislike in Brasilia. Brasília, a monumental new city designed by Lucio Costa in the 60’s according principles of Modernism to be the new Brazilian Capital is a beautiful place, with a strong symbolic character for the nation, however in general it is not comfortable for pedestrians and the use of public transportation is really difficult. Budapest has been developed through the Danube river since ancient times, having in your urban structure from medieval streets to contemporary squares. Here I found that most of times is really comfortable walk and the public transport works well. Starting from these personal impressions, I decide to investigate about it. What distinguish these cities? Are those aspects regarding mobility really better in Budapest? And why? Trying to answer these questions, I propose here a general comparison of both cities, including features which could give some reasons to explain those different perceptions.

Introduction

Most of people in the world live in cities, complex spatial structures with a high level of accumulation and concentration of economic, academic, leisure and other activities, which are important generators and attractors of movements. The ways and the reasons has been changed during the time, mainly because of technology and communication evolutions and revolutions. But people need to move. Urban mobility is one great issue specially for big cities. Public transportation and nonmotorized ways of transit are really important, as they influence quality of life and sustainability of cities, so that it is the focus here. It is considered that there are many aspects which could impact how people move, from the scale of the city to the scale of the street, from economic to social aspects. Meanwhile, for this study it is analysed just few of them, focusing on the city scale. Budapest and Brasília are national capitals, surrounded by huge metropolitan areas, with similar population, almost 3.5 million people each. It is clear that those cities have completely distinct histories, urban structures, social, cultural and natural environment contexts. However, the comparison between the Brazilian Modern city and the Hungarian Millenary city could be interesting. These cities are the case of studies here representing two different kind of cities, the designed modern city and the traditional city. First it is included a brief description of both cities for contextualization. After that, it is presented some statistics which can be parameters for evaluate how people move in this cities. Than, it is shown information about general urban spatial configuration, including main road systems, spatial distribution of functions, urban densities and social classes; besides public transportation systems. There are general information about the entire Budapest and Federal District, but sometimes the focus is the central areas of this cities. The final section present a discussion and conclusions about the comparison between the cities.

Summary

Brief description of the cities

How people move in the cities

Urban spatial configuration

Public transportation systems

Discussion and Conclusions

Bibliographical references

page 4

page 8

page 9

page 19

page 22

page 24

4

Brief description of the cities

Brasília

Brasília is located at the Federal District, a different federative unit which is not divided in municipalities like the other states, it is just one entity subdivide in 31 administrative regions.

These regions are improperly called “cities” or “towns”. We should rather call them boroughs of the metropolis – that is what they actually are. The elements initially proposed by Lucio Costa’s Plan (Costa, 1995) constitute only a small part of the whole city today and are situated in three regions, officially called “Brasilia”, “South Lake” and “North Lake”, in which only circa 12% of the metropolitan population live. 1

The Federal District has 5 780 km² of area and its population is about 2 563 000 inhabitants (2010). Here Brasília and Federal District are used as synonymous, as it is considered one city, by Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). The Metropolitan Area of Brasília (AMB) is composed by the Federal District and more 10 municipalities, its entire population is 3 477 254 inhabitants (2010) and its area is 23862 km². The Federal District is the administrative center of Brazil, however unlike Budapest it is not the main cultural and economic center of the country. The most important economic center is São Paulo and there are several important cultural centers such as Rio de Janeiro and Salvador.Brasília was inaugurated in 1960 to be the new capital of Brazil. The deployment of Brasilia in the Central Plateau was part of the project Juscelino Kubitschek (1956/1960) for the modernization of Brazil. At that time the country was seeking leave the agro-export model toward a process of industrialization. So bring development to the interior of Brazil was required to achieve this goal, expanding the network of Brazilian cities inland.

1 HOLANDA, Frederico Rosa Borges, Ribeiro R., MEDEIROS, Valério Augusto Soares. Brasilia: costs of dispersion. 44th ISOCARP Congress 2008.

Figures 2 and 3. Brasilia concepted by Lúcio Costa. Source: Relatório do Plano Piloto. Brasília, 1957 and <http://www.vitruvius.com.br/revistas/read/arquitextos/11.125/3629> .

Figure 1: Brasília at Brazil. Source: <http://noticias.bol.uol.com.br/copa/2010/selecoes/brasil/>.

5

A public competition was held in 1956 to the design of the new Brazilian capital, which should reflect how the country was becoming modern, integrated into the world economy and advancing technologically. Lúcio Costa, a respected Brazilian architect was the winner. He designed a city based monumentality, traffic road system for cars and spatial segregation of uses. The Pilot Plan was designed as an utopian city, to have an optimum size and there were no plans for expansion. The estimated population was 500.000, which was achieved in 1970 . As migration from other regions occurred, were being implemented the satellite cities today named administrative regions. These neighborhoods were built far from the center of the Pilot Plan in order to maintain the original design of the ideal city.

Figure 4. Evolution of Federal District urban occupation. Source: Plano Diretor de Transporte Urbano e Mobilidade do Distrito Federal e Entorno.

Figure 5. Federal District divided in Administrative regions and current urban occupation. Source: <http://oversolanoverso.blogspot.hu/2010_11_01_archive.html> .

6

Budapest Budapest is the biggest city in Hungary, it is the economical, political and cultural center of the country. The city itself has 525 km2 and 1.729 million people (2011) and its is divided in districts. The Budapest Metropolitan Area (Budapesti agglomeráció) consists of Budapest capital and the surrounding suburbs (81 settlements). It has a population of 2.525 million (2010) and holds 2,538 km2. The real periphery of Budapest, named Budapest Commuter Area was established by the government in 2005. It englobes 193 settlements around the city, most of them are in Pest County while some are Budapest- surrounding cities generating huge commuter traffic with the capital. The total size of the area is 7,626 km2 and has nearly 3.3 million inhabitants (one-third of Hungary’s total population). Budapest was created in 1873 with the unification of three cities: Buda, Óbuda and Pest. The history of the city started in ancient times with the occupation of Aquincum, a Celtic settlement which became a Roman city. However, hungarians arrived in the region in the 9th century. The main period of economical and cultural prosperity was the 18th and 19th centuries. It was the second capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which existed from 1867 to 1918, the end of World War I. Started in the late eighteenth century, a national reform movement was launched for the political and economic transformation of the country, for Hungarian language and culture. Pest became the industrial and commercial centre of the country, which was in a period of rapid political, social, cultural and economic development. In Pest, the urban expansion of the medieval city following the Paris model, with rings and radial roads and the buildings was based in the Neoclassical style, which grew out of the Enlightenment. These features are predominant in the central area of the city. In the 20th century the city kept growing and there were established a serie of modern housing estates areas and also many new public buildings were constructed in different styles. The urban expansion in Budapest occurred radial to the city center. There is no large gaps between neighborhoods, even in Buda where the topography is rugged.With more than thousand years, the plan of the city is a collage of many historical layers, from the medieval to the contemporary neighborhoods.

Figure 6: Budapest in Hungary. Source: <http://geography.about.com/library/cia/blchungary.htm>.

Figure 7: Medieval Buda and Pest. Source: Arpad, Szabo DLA, Fragments of the Urban History - Budapest.

7

Figure 8. Evolution of the urban occupation. In gray the current urban occupation. (adapted) .Source: Budapest városszerkezete <http://budapest.hu/Lapok/Hivatal/Varosfejlesztes.aspx>

Figure 9. Budapest and surroundings which compound the Budapest Metropolitan Area (Budapesti Agglomeráció). In gray the land with urban occupation. Source: <http://www.terport.hu> . Access in 2014/05/14.

8

How people move in the cities

One source of information about how people move within the cities is statistics. Two main information are the modal split and the motorization rate. Modal split or modal share represents the varying proportions of different transport modes which may be used at any one time. Modes of transport may be seen as competing services, and particularly so in the rivalry between the private car and public transport systems. The choices of modes may be determined by the costs, destinations, capacities, and frequencies of the modes. According the EPOMM (European Platform on Mobility Management) Modal split tool, in Budapest, in 2011, 20% of trips were done by private cars, 47% by public transport and 33% by nonmotorized ways of transport. It was reported by Citilabs that between the motorized trips, within the limits of Budapest, 40 % of the trips were done by private transport and between Budapest and its surroundings, this number increase to 67%. In Brasília, in 2009, according Secretaria de Transportes (Transport Secretariat of the Federal District) 43% of the trips were done by private vehicles, 36% by public transport and 23% by nonmotorized transport. The final report of the Master Plan for Urban Transport and Mobility of 2010, shows that journeys by private vehicles corresponded to 77% of the motorized ones inside the Federal District and 53% between the capital and its surroundings. This discrepancy may represent that the lower income classes live in the most remote locations of the center and has been in the greatest users of public transportation.

Figure 10: Comparison: Modal Split in Budapest (2011) and Brasília (2009).

Figure 11: Comparison: Evolution of use of private vehicles considering motorized trips in Budapest and Brasília.

9

The graphs (figures 10 and 11) summarize the comparison between Budapest and Brasília. In Budapest, both non motorized and public transport figures are larger than in Brasília. However in both cities the percentage of use of private cars has been expanded in the recent years, the tax of increase is higher than in Budapest. The motorization rate is defined as the number of passenger cars per 1,000 inhabitants. It is a common indicator in international comparisons of economic development and environmental issues. In Budapest, data from Hungarian Central Statistical Office shows that in 2012, Budapest had 330 private motor vehicles for each 1000 inhabitants. The Federal District had in July of 2012 a total vehicle fleet of 1.385.229, what means that the motorization rate is 523, according a report of Observatório das Metrópoles. The graph below shows a comparison between the figures of both cities from 2001 and 2012. Brasília has about 67% more cars proportionally to the population than Budapest.

Figure 12 : Comparison: Motorization rate in Budapest and Brasília, between 2001 and 2012.

Other important observation is that in this period, while the population growth rate in the majority of the Brazilian metropolitan areas was of 10.7%, the increase in the number of automobiles was of 66%. And in Budapest, the proportion between population and motorization rate from 2001 to 2012 was almost constant. Among many aspects which influence this figures of modal split and motorization rate, such as economic and cultural context, it should be also considered that the use of public transport and nonmotorized transport and the number of cars can be reflections of the form-space configuration of the cities, quality and coverage of public transportation and also walkability in the city.

Urban spatial configuration

Lúcio Costa designed Brasília based on its transport road system, a city for the automobile as it was aspirated by the president Kubitschek at that time. The plan proposed have two main axes with fast traffic without intersections, intended for motorized transport. In the cross of the main axis, which are the Monumental and the Road axis there are the main station of the city, Pilot Plan Terminal Station and in the eastern end of the Monumental axis is located the Esplanade of Ministries and Three Powers square, which are the center of the federal government. In the central area, Pilot Plan, the main road system is composed mostly by longitudinal axes south-north and one important cross-link which is the Monumental Axis. The crosslinks in the Asa Sul and Asa Norte residential areas are made through the collecting of local trade routes.

10

From the main roads of the Pilot Plan, there are roads linking it to the other administrative regions, which does not follow a geometric design scrolling through long distances and having part of their extension without urban environment, as the urban occupation is sprawled in a large territory (figure 15). Travel from the central terminal station (Pilot Plan Terminal Station) to the the farthest administrative regions means travel almost 50 km. Inside the other administrative regions the design of traffic road network follow the same ideas of Pilot Plan. There is no mixed use, there are huge main avenues crossing the areas, where is located the local commerce and local roads often landlocked to access the residential blocks. Regarding the land use, Lucio Costa divided the plan of the city in four scales, which reflects a spatial division of the territory: a monumental scale, a gregarious scale, a residential scale, and a bucolic scale (figure 13). The monumental scale goes through the Monumental axis, in this area is located the main government palaces. The gregarious and residential scales are disposed symmetrically in relation to the monumental scale. The residential scale composed mainly by the super quarters and corridors of local commerce between each two of them which means 600m. Lucio Costa did not mention that the mixed use is not permitted, but the result of his plan is that there are defined use for each sector (figure 14). Government offices, banks, public services, shopping malls and industries are located in specific areas without residential use. In the other administrative regions the pattern is the same, sectorization of functions.

Monumental ResidencialGregariousBucolic

ResidencialCommerceEmbassiesBig public buildingsRadio-TVMedicalBanksGovernment officesCultureEntertainmentHotels

Figure 13. Four scales of Brasilia. Source: <http://mdc.arq.br/2011/02/17/da-insustentabilidade-do-plano-piloto/>.

Figure 14. Sectorization of function at Asa Sul. Source: Base map: <http://www.acheiweb.com.br/>.

11

Figure 15 Map of urban occupation and main road system of Federal District. Source: Plano Diretor de Transporte Urbano e Mobilidade do Distrito Federal e Entorno.

Figure 16. Road network in the Pilot Plan. Source: Google earth. Access in 2014/05/12.

Brasília has huge monumental squares, besides many empty spaces between buildings without a proper use and vast amount of land for cars: large roads and extensive parking plots in the center. For instance most of the superior platform at the Pilot Plan Terminal Station and at the Esplanade of Ministries are use for parking (figures 17 to 20). Even in the residential areas (figures 21 and 22), despite of the use of pilotis in the super quarters which permit the free walk through the blocks, bigger distances for the sectorization and the lack of ground floor activities do not incentive walking.

12

Figures 17 and 18. Gregarious and Monumental scale in the center of Brasília. Sources: <http://murderiseverywhere.blogspot.hu/2013/09/age-of-achie-vement.html> and <http://www.skyscraperlife.com/city-versus-city/89356-brasile%D1-3%BA-6%BA-vs-hispanics-2014-a-26.html>.

Figures 19 and 20. Pilot Plan Terminal Station and Parking lots at the Esplanade of Ministries. Sources: <http://

pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodovi%C3%A1ria_do_Plano_Pi-loto> and <http://brasiledesenvolvimento.wordpress.

com/2013/02/20/10-mil-vagas-ideias-de-como-governar/>.

13

Figures 21 and 22. Super quarters in Brasília. Sources: <http://www.route777.com.br/2011/10/as-tais-superquadras-em-brasilia.html> and <https://www.behance.net/gallery/14337539/Ceus-e-Cobogos-Skies-and-Cobogos>

Figure 23. Urban density at the Federal District. Source: Plano Diretor de Transporte Urbano e Mobilidade do Distrito Federal e Entorno.

Figure 24. Spatial distribution of jobs in 2007. The darker colors represent more concentration of jobs. Source: Plano Diretor de Transporte Urbano e Mobilidade do Distrito Federal e Entorno.

14

Figure 25. Average income by Administrative region in Brasília. The dark colours represent highest average income. Source: SILVA, Carolina Pescatori Candido, BOWNS, Caru. Transporte e eqüidade: ampliando o conceito de sustentabilidade pelo estudo de caso de

Brasília. cadernos metrópole 19 , São Paulo, 2008.

Looking the maps of spatial distribution of urban densities (figure 23), jobs (figure 24) and social classes by the average income (figure 25), the general situation is clearly understandable. The Pilot Plan, which is the political and economical center of the city, where most of jobs are located is the place with lowest densities. The density is this area variates between 50 and 100 inhabitants per hectare. It occurs because of the spatial segregation between the neighborhoods and also because there are no mixed functions in the city. Besides that the low classes live far from the jobs, which can say that most of workers depends on motorized transport. This panorama is valued as an obstacle to the urban mobility:

There are serious problems concerning low urban densities, dispersion of occupied areas with no man’s land in between, and a perverse relation between location of jobs and homes (82% of formal jobs, and 44% of total jobs concentrated in an area in which only 10% of the metropolitan population live). Socioeconomic implications of these attributes are serious. Urban infrastructure is underused, intense commuting between peripheral areas and the urban core is a daily nuisance, and urban configuration does not favor transit systems.1²

Budapest has in general a radial urban traffic system. The main roads are systematic distributed, composed by rings and radial wide axis radiating out from the center. The rings exist in the Pest area, however in Buda the steep and irregular topography make difficult the continuation of them. As the area of urban occupation is more condensed than in the Federal District, these main roads goes through much less distance. For instance, going from the CBD (Central Business District) consider by BERTAUD¹ as the cross of Karoly Krt. and Kiraly U. to the limits of the city means no more than 21 km. Inside the districts there are different patterns of quarters, most of them with a grid of local narrow streets connected among them and also with the main roads. In the center people have to pay for parking and there are less offer than in Brasília. In the center of the city, in the medieval Pest, there are also pedestrian streets.

2 HOLANDA, Frederico Rosa Borges, Ribeiro R., MEDEIROS, Valério Augusto Soares. Brasilia: costs of dispersion. 44th ISOCARP Congress 2008.

15

Figure 26. High dense center of Budapest. Source: <http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest>.

Figure 27. Budapest: Main road network related to the urban density. Source: Budapest 2030 - Hosszú Távú Városfejlestési Koncepció. <http://budapest.hu/Lapok/Hivatal/Varosfejlesztes.aspx>

The density of the city is in general higher than in Brasília, and like Brasília there are one strong center, where are the CBD of the city anso the highest densities.

The current city structure is strongly monocentric. The high-density core of Budapest includes about 500 000 people or 26% of the city population. (...) The density drops suddenly at a suburban level at only 4 kilometers from the center of the CBD. This density drop is caused by the large areas of non-residential use and by the low density of part of the housing stock located in this area.1³

3 BERTAUD, Alain. The spatial development of Budapest. January 1999.

16

This large areas without residences cited are green parks, industrial and railway areas. The densities decrease progressively from the center to the periphery as it is shown on the figure 33. However there are some distant focus of high density, usually located along the radial main roads, which link these areas to the center. In Budapest the functions are mixed in the city center as in most of European cities. There are in the same region high density residential areas, commerce and institutional buildings. Through the areas indicated as numbers 2 and 3 in the map below, the predominant use is residential, but there are also mixed use and commercial streets among them. The industrial, railway and agricultural areas are segregated. Though the city there less green space than in Brasília and no huge lacks of empty areas between buildings. In the core of the city most of buildings, with the exception of important public buildings, are geminated and has commerce or services in the ground floor. It was not found a map of spatial distribution of jobs in Budapest, however based on the function map it is possible to argue that the jobs are more distributed through the city than in Brasília. The distribution of social classes according the average income is also less sectorized than in Brasília, there are more areas with middle and low classes near the center o f the city.

Figure 28. Main road system in the city center. Source: Google Earth. Access in 2014/05/12

17

Figures 29 and 30. Teréz Körútt (ring of the main road system) and Pedestrian street in Budapest. Sources: <http://www.netkeptar.hu/index.nof?egy=1&kepid=484#bu-dapest,_terez_korut> and <http://www.fthmotors.com/>

Figure 31. Functional map of Budapest. Source: < http://tranzit.blog.hu/2010/07/30/tezisek_a_varos_peremen>.

18

Figure 32. Average income by district in Budapest. Source: <http://ceinvest.hu/2013/04/income-map-of-budapest/>.

Concerning the density of the cities BERTAUD and MALPEZZI studied in 2003 the density profile with the distantes from the city center. The graphs below shows that most of people in Budapest lives in the center and in Brasília, it happens just the opposite situation. In the same studied they made a comparison of several cities and Budapest has the default behavior of most cities, but Brasília is an exception. In other study made in 2010, BERTAUD studies again the case of Brasília. In that study he explain the default pattern as a natural one and for him, the unusual density profile of Brasília reflects a negative point to the development of the city:

This profile is found in strongly monocentric cities as well as in polycentric cities. This convergence in urban spatial structure across continent is not created by urban planners’ design but through the self-organizing forces created by supply and demand for land and floor space. In some cities, infrastructure and topography may disturb the symmetry of density gradients but the decrease of densities with distance is encountered everywhere.The profile of population densities in the built-up areas of Brasilia, measured from the city center of the Plano Piloto toward the periphery explain the structural problem faced today by the inhabitants of Brasilia and by the cities managers who have to deliver efficient transport and urban services . This peculiar spatial pattern lengthens transport distance and commuting trips and the length of infrastructure networks. Because of the dispersed low density that characterizes Brasilia, cars will always be an important part of the transport system.14

4 BERTAUD, Alain. Brasilia spatial structure: Between the Cult of Design and Markets. August 2010.

19

Figure 33. Density profile of Brasilia and Budapest. Source: BERTAUD, Alain, MALPEZZI Stephen. The Spatial Distribution of Population in 48 World Cities: Implications for Economies in Transition. December 17, 2003.

Public transportation systems

The public transportation system at the Federal District is composed by 982 bus lines (2009), one BRT (Bus rapid transit) axis and two metro lines. The average number of passengers was 1,267 million passengers per day in 2009. The bus service cover the entire area with urban occupation (figure 34) and served that time about 1,103 million passengers per day in 2009, which means 87% of the total of passengers. However the total capacity of the buses was 1,760 million per day, according DFTrans (Urban Transport of the Federal District) managing agency of public transport.

Figure 34. Map of Public transportation at the Federal District. In blue, bus lines and in red, the metro lines. Source: Plano Diretor de Transporte Urbano e Mobilidade do Distrito Federal e Entorno.

20

The metro lines were inaugurated in 2001. They connects the central area to the south and southwest region of the Federal District. The lines start at the Pilot Plan Terminal Station and one ends in Ceilândia and the other one in Samambaia (the most populated administrative regions) (picture 35). Nowadays, the metro system has 42.38 kilometers of extension and serves about 151 thousand passengers per day (weekdays). The BRT line, called BRT Sul, is an axis with 43 km (35 km with exclusive track for buses), which have capacity for 20.000 passengers per hour during peak hours and per day 87000 passengers. It was inaugurated in April 2014 and it is not in fully operation. It is under construction the structure for three more BRT axis, one Light Rail line, called VLT (it will connects the north part of the Pilot Plan to the airport) and the extension of the metro line towards the north until the end of Asa Norte. The main point of departure and arrival of intercity buses within the Federal District and also the metro first station is the Pilot Plan Terminal Station (Rodoviária do Plano Piloto), which is located in the cross of the two main axis of this city, the first lines of Lucio Costa. This central station links Pilot Plan region to all other administrative regions and the neighboring municipalities. Most of buses goes from the Federal District to some extreme of the urbanized area. So that, people usually have to switch buses in the central station. There also intercity terminals in most administrative regions.

Budapest has 1,159 km of public transport lines. The system is composed by metro, buses, trolleybuses and trams (superficial trains), suburban railway lines and boat service, besides some special modes: a cogwheel railway, a funicular, and a chairlift. The public transport network of Budapest, like those of other major cities, is hierarchically structured, with the high-speed rail network at the top. In 2008 the average number of users was around 3,5 million per day. The high-speed rail network (figure 36) is composed by four metro lines which arranged in a central area and eight suburban railway lines, which goes to the suburbs. The tram lines (figure 36) complement the high-speed rail network. The tram network is extensive, 32 lines, and there are some types based on their role in the network: circular lines (4 and 6 on Nagykörút, 61 on Budai körút, 1 on Hungária körút, 3 on the outside circle on the Pest side), radial lines (18, 47, 49), lines serving access to the core network: radial lines (14, 28, 37, 42, 50, 51) and transversal lines (partially, 52). The bus network (figure 37) is composed by 237 lines plus 15 lines of trolley buses, which cover the entire area of Budapest. The network is mostly made up of:

exploratory lines and lines serving access to the core network in a radial or transverse direction, although it also contains lines that connect central locations, radial lines and transversal lines serving as core lines and transit lines (e.g. 7-173 family). Trolleybus lines are designed to provide access to the city centre and the core network. 15

5 BKK Automated Fare Collection System : Feasibility pre-study. Budapest, December 2011.

Figure 35. Map of metro lines at the Federal District. In light green is represented the expansion under construction towards the end of Asa

Norte. Source: <http://www.metro.df.gov.br/>.

21

Figures 36 and 37. Budapest: Metro, railway and tram network with the average time of travel and Buses network related to the urban density. Source: Budapest 2030 - Hosszú Távú Városfejlestési Koncepció. <http://budapest.hu/Lapok/Hivatal/Varosfejlesztes.aspx>.

22

Discussion and Conclusions

The statistics presented shows that in Budapest people use more public and non motorized transport than in Brasilia, where the use of private vehicles is the predominant one and the proportion of cars for population is around 67% more than in Budapest. It is considered that there are a range of motifs which could explain it. Even though, it was analyzed some of them regarding the spatial configuration of the cities and the public transportation systems implemented. The Budapest plan (as usually historical cities) has some morphic types that correspond to periods of time, the city has been expanded since medieval period, around the center without ruge lacks of land without proper use. The case of Brasilia is specific, the city was designed to have a determined shape and population and the expansion occurred with establishment of new neighborhoods sharply separated in space and there are large zones of no man’s land in between them and the Pilot Plan, where is the CBD of the city. In both cities the suburbanization has been increased in recent years, there are new residential and also industrial and commercial areas far from the original center which means more distances. The growth of suburbanization can be associated with increased use of private cars, what it is seen in both cities. Even so, the situation of each case is different. Regarding urban density, it is high in the center and decreases toward the suburbs in Budapest and Brasília present the opposite situation, the density is low in the central area and high in the suburbs, where most of workers live. Added to this, Budapest has mixed use in the city center, there are high residential density where is the CBD of the city, which naturally concentrate a lot of jobs and Brasília does not have mixed use in the central area, on the contrary, the activities are strictly regulated. It important to point that the distribution of uses in Budapest has some problems, for instance industrial areas between the center and suburban residential areas, it may compromise the mobility in the city, since it imposes barriers and longer distances for the movement of pedestrians and public transport. However the situation in Brasília is more severe because of the flattening and the occurrence of large uninhabited areas is higher than in Budapest. In Budapest the main road system integrates all the urban occupation with radial axes and rings. The use of private cars in Brasilia is more attractive than in Budapest, since there are wide roads with little or no interruption, besides the large offer of free parking. It can be one of the motifs for the higher motorization rate in Brasília.

Every city got precisely as much traffic as space would allow. In every case, attempts to relieve traffic pressure by building more roads and parking garages have generated more traffic and more congestion. The volume of car traffic almost everywhere is more or less arbitrary, depending on the available transportation infrastructure. Because we can always find new ways to increase our car use, building extra roads is a direct invitation to buy and drive more cars.1 6

One factor that can explain the difference between the level of public transportation use is that the network of Budapest is more diverse and cover a higher portion of the territory with modals of priority circulation such as light rail and trains. It is possible to conclude the capacity is also higher is Budapest, as there averaged 3,5 million of passengers use the service per day in 2008 and in Brasília, this number was 1,267 million in 2009. Likewise it is important ponder that the majority of the poorest people live far from their workplaces in Brasilia, much of this population does not own a car and need to use public transport, even if it has no good quality. It means that the use of public transport could be even lower if there was a more equality distribution of social classes in the city.

6 GELH, Jan. Cities for people. Island Press. 2010.

23

Concerning pedestrianism it is possible to say that it is lower in Brasília as usually wide-open spaces and lack of ground floor functions do not attract people to walk and it is higher in Budapest because of the lower distances and mixed uses:

A city that invites people to walk must by definition have a reasonably cohesive structure that offers short walking distances, attractive public spaces and a variation of urban functions. These elements increase activity and the feeling of security in and around city spaces.2 7

A challenge of the metropolis is to attain sustainability in its three dimensions: economic, environmental and social. Improving sustainability in relation to urban mobility means reducing the social and environmental impacts, ie, limit the excessive use of private motor vehicles, encouraging the use of public transport and non-motorized transport. Also contributes to sustainable mobility better distribution of uses and employment centers and education through the territory of the city, so that the distances and ease of access are more equitable (SILVA, BOWNS, 2008). From the comparison between the two cities, it is possible to conclude that where there are more mixed use, more equal distribution of jobs and less distances between workplaces and residential areas, the urban mobility tend to be better than in cities with long distances and spatial segregation of functions. With lower distances, the length of city infrastructure is lower, public transportation could be better distributed and faster with less costs and also less motorized transport is needed. So that, the examples confirm that the traditional organic urban spatial configuration that exists in Budapest allows a better development of urban mobility than the Modernist design of Brasília.

7 GELH, Jan. Cities for people. Island Press. 2010.

24

Bibliographical references

A Country Study: Hungary. <http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/hutoc.html>

A gazdasági folyamatok regionális különbségei, 2012.<http://www.ksh.hu/docs/hun/xftp/idoszaki/regiok/debrecengazdfejl/debrecengazdfejl12.pdf>.

BERTAUD, Alain, MALPEZZI Stephen. The Spatial Distribution of Population in 48 World Cities: Implications for Economies in Transition. December 2003.

BERTAUD, Alain. Brasilia spatial structure: Between the Cult of Design and Markets. August 2010.

BERTAUD, Alain. The spatial development of Budapest. January 1999.

BKK Automated Fare Collection System : Feasibility pre-study. Budapest, December 2011.

Brazilian Federal District Government website. <http://www.df.gov.br/>

Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics website. <http://www.ibge.gov.br/>

Budapest 2030 - Hosszú Távú Városfejlestési Koncepció. <http://budapest.hu/Lapok/Hivatal/Varosfejlesztes.aspx>

COSTA, Lucio. Relatório do Plano Piloto. Brasília, 1957.

EPOMM (European Platform on Mobility Management) Modal split tool. <http://epomm.eu/tems/index.phtml?Main_ID=2928>

Evolução da Frota de Automóveis e Motos no Brasil 2001 – 2012. Observatório das Metrópoles. <http://www.observatoriodasmetropoles.net/download/auto_motos2013.pdf >

GELH, Jan. Cities for people. Island Press. 2010.

HOLANDA, Frederico Rosa Borges, Ribeiro R., MEDEIROS, Valério Augusto Soares. Brasilia: costs of dispersion. 44th ISOCARP Congress 2008.

Hungarian Central Statistical Office website. <http://www.ksh.hu/>

LAMMERS, Camila de Carvalho Pires. The potential of transportation demand management in Brasilia. Sixth Urban Research and Knowledge Symposium 2012.

MEDEIROS, Valério Augusto Soares, HOLANDA, Frederico Rosa Borges. Urbis Brasiliae: investigating topological and geometrical features in Brazilian cities. University of Brasília, Brazil.

Plano Diretor de Transporte Urbano e Mobilidade do Distrito Federal e Entorno - PDTU (Master

Plan for Urban Transport and Mobility). Final Report. <http://editais.st.df.gov.br/pdtu/final/relatorio_final.pdf>

25

ROCHA NETO, Osvaldo Assis. Mobilidade Urbana e Cultura do automóvel na singularidade da metrópole modernista Brasileira.<http://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/11560>.

RODRIGUE, Jean-Paul. The geography of transport systems. <http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch6en/conc6en/ch6c4en.html>

SILVA, Carolina Pescatori Candido, BOWNS, Caru. Transporte e eqüidade: ampliando o conceito de sustentabilidade pelo estudo de caso de Brasília. cadernos metrópole 19 , São Paulo, 2008.

SPECK, Jeff. Walkable city: How Downtown can save america, one step at a time. New York, 2012.

The Budapest Transportation Planning Model. A Cube Cloud demonstration model. Citilabs <www.citilabs.com/sites/default/files/files/Day1A_2.pptx>.