Environmental Impacts on Lagoon Tijuca and Lagoon Camorim: Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro City, Brazil Gabriela da Costa Silva Faculdade de Arquitetura e Urbanismo (FAU), Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Brasil The theme of this paper is the study of the environmental impacts on Lagoons Tijuca and Camorim, in the region of Barra da Tijuca, in Rio de Janeiro City. Taking into account that the environmental degradation of these two lagoons is the most serious in the region, as a result of an inadequate environmental policy, it is vital to examine the attitude of the public administration towards these environmental impacts in the last thirty years. Since the 1970’s, Barra da Tijuca has turned into an object of huge investments from both the public and the private sectors, achieving significant economic development. However, its fast urbanization caused the appearance of not only indiscriminate earth embankment but also legal and illegal occupation of canals, rivers and lagoons edges. This contradictory dynamics has been occurring regardless the lack of a region sanitary sewer system, thus, contributing enormously to the pollution of bodies of water due to the discharges of effluent from industrial and, mainly, domestic source. As a result, the region lagoons are seriously polluted, in particular, Lagoon Tijuca and Lagoon Camorim, which receive 60% of the volume of effluents discharges of the region (COPPETEC, 2001). Nevertheless, despite the efforts of the community and the public administration in minimizing this serious environmental situation, there is a huge gap between the investments in sewerage services in relation to other public services, such as water supply, lightning, transportation, etc. The inefficiency in sanitary facilities in the region leads to the pollution of water bodies of rivers and canals, which cross huge areas of high population density with no sewage and, therefore, brings domestic effluents to the lagoons. In fact, the problem of water pollution in the lagoons of Barra da Tijuca is not only related to low-income class communities, in slums, but also to high-income class population, in apartment buildings, as well as industrial and commercial establishments. Thus, the purpose of this study is; first, to analyze the urban development of Barra da Tijuca, in order to understand the criteria used for land occupation. The second point is to evaluate environmental impacts of the urban expansion on Lagoons Tijuca and Camorim. The last goal is to examine the limits and the perspectives of the public administration in minimizing these impacts. arq.gcsilva@ig.com.br 1  INTRODUCTION The study of the environmental impacts on Lagoons Tijuca and Camorim, in the region of Barra da Tijuca, in Rio de Janeiro City, relates to the impressing urban development of the region since the 70´s. In this sense, it is vital to consider the fact that the houses in the region have no sanitary facilities, leading to the pollution of water bodies by domestic effluents. According to the oceanographer David Zee, Lowlands Jacarepaguá, which includes the region of Barra da Tijuca and Jacarepaguá, has around 650,000 inhabitants whose domestic effluents sum up 1,881 liters per second (ZEE, 2003). These substances are harmful to the environment since they are not treated before being discharged into the rivers and the canals, and then, into the lagoons and the sea. For that reason, it is also essential to examine the commitment of the public administration to programs created to minimize the environmental degradation of these two lagoons. BARRA DA TIJUCA: URBAN DEVELOPMENT The region of Barra da Tijuca, in the city of Rio de Janeiro, has had a recent urban development (Illustration 1). Until the end of the 60´s, Barra da Tijuca had been very little occupied due to its geomorphologic characteristics, surrounded by the Massifs Pedra Branca and Tijuca, which made difficult the access to the region. However, in the last thirty years, the region, which used to be mainly residential and rural, has been expanding its urban fabric not only because of the accomplishment of important real state agencies in selling houses and apartments to high income classes, but also due to the expansion of the slums, where lives the low-income population (Table 1). Consequently, the demographic growth of the region of Barra da Tijuca is one of the most impressing in the last few decades in the city of Rio de Janeiro. According to the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), in 1960 there were 2,580 inhabitants. This number increased to 5,779 in 1970, 40,726 in 1980, 98,229 in 1991, 129,632 in 1996, and 174,353 in 2000. The projection to the region population in 2003 was 225,322 inhabitants, and its rate of growth is the highest in the city (Table 2, Chart 1). 2  Table 1 Demographic Growth of Slum Population in Barra da Tijuca Place 1991 2000 Rate of Growth Rio de Janeiro 882,483 1,092,476 1.23 Jacarepaguá 58,267 113,287 1.94 Barra da Tijuca 13,915 31,107 2.23 Source: IPP (2000), Armazém de Dados. Ambiente Construído, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. Table 2 Demographic Growth of Barra da Tijuca Population Place 1960 1970 1980 1991 1996 2000 Rate of Growth Rio de Janeiro 3,307,163 4,251,618 5,090,700 5,480,778 5,551,538 5,851,914 1.77 Jacarepaguá 164,092 235,238 315,623 428,073 446,360 506,760 3.09 Barra da Tijuca 2,580 5,779 40,726 98,229 129,632 174,135 6.74 Source: IPP (2001-B), Armazém de Dados. Indicadores Sociodemográficos, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. Actually, there were many reasons that made possible the huge region expansion. First, the fact that Barra da Tijuca is a place where the beach, the lagoons, and the mountains are combined in one of the most beautiful natural complex of Rio de Janeiro was massively used by the real state agencies as a marketing slogan. Second, due to the fact that one third of the region land belonged to only four owners; the urban land was not much divided, improving the occupation process. Third, the federal government investments through its financial agencies benefited the real state agencies in accomplishing its enterprises. Last, the public investments in urban infrastructure, according to Lúcio Costa Plan, especially between 1966 and 1982, made likely the activity of the real state agencies in developing the urban fabric (LEITÃO, 1995). The importance of the last reason relies on the fact that in 1969, the Governor of the State of Guanabara (now State of Rio de Janeiro), Negrão de Lima, invited the architect and urbanist Lúcio Costa to plan the urban occupation of Barra da Tijuca. Similar to the Pilot Plan for Brasília, the Pilot Plan for Barra da Tijuca was based on the ideas of the modernism movement; consequently, there was the implementation of huge blocks of apartment (from 25 to 30 pavements) alongside axial roads and around small centers, both responsible for the structure of the urban fabric (CARDOSO, 1996, PINHEIRO, 2001). Indeed, the purpose of the plan was not only to organize the urban land use of the region but also to integrate it to the historic center of the city and the new center of Santa Cruz; thus, connecting the city from the west to the east (Illustration 2). Lúcio Costa created the urban plan for Barra da Tijuca to be an instrument capable to avoid a predatory and an indiscriminate urban occupation. In this sense, Lúcio Costa Plan was also a legal instrument to protect the environment, especially, the lagoons of the region of Barra da Tijuca. However, this original urban plan has suffered many changes since its implementation in 1969. Among the changes, the most impressing is the densification of the land occupation, which was a result of the pressure of the important real state agencies against the government 3  administration (RIBEIRO, 1990, LEITÃO, 1995, Table 3). In 1979, the successive changes to the original plan made Lúcio Costa to abandon the government agency responsible for the creation of complementary projects and the establishment of rules for land use.1 Table 3 Population Density in Barra da Tijuca (inhabitants/hectares) 2 Place 1980 1991 2000 Rate of Growth Rio de Janeiro 50.9 54.8 58.6 1.15 Copacabana 442.5 351.2 333.6 0.75 Jacarepaguá 33.1 45.0 49.3 1.49 Barra da Tijuca 3.2 7.7 13.6 4.25 Source: IPP (2000-B), Armazém de Dados. Características Demográficas, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. It is important, therefore, to observe that the densification of Barra da Tijuca results, mainly, from the expansion of residential areas in its urban fabric due to the implementation of huge blocks of apartment (Table 4 and Table 5). Table 4 Real Properties According to Types of Land Use in Barra da Tijuca Place Commercial Industrial Residential Rio de Janeiro 188,643 5,763 1,283,427 Jacarepaguá 7,768 203 102,455 Barra da Tijuca 9,496 17 53,877 Source: IPP (2000-A), Armazém de Dados. Ambiente Construído, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. 4  Table 5 Types of Residences in Barra da Tijuca3 Place Houses % Total Apartments % Total Others % Total Rio de Janeiro 408,945 31.8 685,556 53.4 188,926 14.8 Jacarepaguá 43,710 42.6 39,169 38.2 19,576 19.2 Barra da Tijuca 10,778 20.0 36,905 68.5 6,194 11.5 Source: IPP (2000-A), Armazém de Dados. Ambiente Construído, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. LAGOON TIJUCA AND LAGOON CAMORIM: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The Lagunar Complex of Jacarepaguá Lowlands, which has around 300km2 of water surface, includes two hydrographic systems (Illustration 3). The first hydrographic system refers to Lagoons Tijuca, Camorim, and Jacarepaguá, which has about 9.3km2 of surface and 13 km of length. Lagoon Tijuca, at west, links to Lagoon Jacarepaguá, at east, through Lagoon Camorim, and receives water from Lagoon Marapendi, at south, through Canal Marapendi, which has around 14 km of length. Concerning the dimension of these lagoons, Lagoon Tijuca has the biggest surface area (4.8km2), although it has the smallest drainage area (26km2). On the contrary, Lagoon Camorim has a small surface area (0.8km2) but one of the biggest drainage area (91.7km2). However, Lagoon Jacarepaguá has the biggest drainage area, 102.8km? (SEMADS, 2001). 5  The second hydrographic system refers to Lagoons Marapendi and Lagoinha, both situated in ecological parks. Lagoon Marapendi, which is located in an area between a narrow stripe of beach and the interior lagoons, has a long shape, around 10 km of length and 350 meters of width. Owing to the fact that its contour is divided in seven areas, similar to huge pockets, the capacity of water replenishment is, consequently, reduced. In addition, Canal das Taxas, which links Lagoons Marapendi and Lagoinha, spoils the water exchange between these two lagoons due to its eutrophic state. As a result, Lagoon Lagoinha receives a small water contribution from Lagoon Marapendi. The Lagunar Complex of Jacarepaguá Lowlands connects the sea, Barra da Tijuca Beach, through Canal Sernambetiba, at east, and Canal Joatinga, at west, which is the most important canal concerning the water exchange between the lagoons and the ocean (Illustration 4). In fact, while Canal Joatinga allows the entry of seawater in Lagoon Tijuca, Canal Sernambetiba links this lagoon to Lagoon Marapendi. This last canal plays an essential role in the drainage of the water run-off from Massif Pedra Branca and the eastern area of Lowlands Jacarepaguá. Likewise, Canal Joatinga plays a vital role in the exchange of water between Lagoons Tijuca and Marapendi and the ocean. Due to the large volume of water that passes through this canal during each tide cycle, the waters from the lagoons that reach the sea, therefore, damage its water quality. Recently, the Rio de Janeiro Municipal Secretariat of Environment (SMAC) has reported that the water pollution in Barra da Tijuca Beach is a result of the lagoons deterioration (Table 6). 6  Table 6 Monitoring Table for Water Quality in Barra da Tijuca Lagoons Period Turbidity Temperature DO Salinity Coliforms E. Coli (NTU) (°C) (mg/L) (‰) (NMP/100mL) (NMP/100mL) Tijuca 1996 12.8 25.3 5.7 9.7 4,318,090 248,157 1997 26.6 25.8 5.4 14.9 2,513,673 497,886 1998 24.2 24.2 5.0 8.5 17,890,166 381,222 1999 19.7 25.5 5.0 10.2 4,135,333 498,680 2000 12.8 25.2 4.3 13.8 10,797,411 951,510 2001 14.3 26.1 4.2 12.2 8,377,666 659,486 Camorim 1996 15.4 25.8 4.6 2.2 117,496,667 1,876,967 1997 35.1 26.6 5.0 6.2 44,616,667 8,946,975 1998 36.6 26.8 4.9 2.2 2,838,333 105,833 1999 31.7 25.1 3.5 5.0 5,843,333 626,917 2000 23.3 26.0 2.2 5.6 2,909,667 526,833 2001 12.8 25.8 3.4 5.2 4,775,000 202,500 Limits … 20.0 > 5,0 0.5-30 < 5,000 < 1,000 Source: IPP (2001-A), Armazém de Dados. Indicadores Ambientais, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. The degradation of the lagoons in Barra da Tijuca, concerning eutrophication and water pollution, results, mainly, from lack of sanitary sewer system in the region. The presence of pathogenic microorganisms in the water of the lagoons, especially Lagoons Tijuca and Camorim, damages not only the environment, concerning the region water quality but also public health, since the lagoons sustain fishing and leisure activities. Thus, in the last thirty years, the deterioration of these lagoons is a result of increased discharges of industrial and, especially, domestic effluents, which also spoils fauna and flora preservation. In relation to the environmental degradation of Lagoons Tijuca and Camorim, there are two main conditions responsible. The first condition refers to the illegal occupation that, generally with indiscriminate earth embankment, occurs regardless the legal process of urban land use carried out by the public agencies. This type of urban occupation takes place not only in slums, where the poor communities live, but also in luxurious houses, where the rich population lives. Much of this illegal occupation is established on the edges of canals, rivers and lagoons of the region, thus, breaking the municipal environmental legislation because these areas are considered as state properties (Table 7). Table 7 Demographic Growth of Slum Population in the Study Area Slums(Favelas) Year of Ocupation Population Rate of Growth Close to Lagoons 1991 2000 Angu Duro 1931 278 293 1.05 x Floresta da Barra da Tijuca 1936 1,924 3,605 1.87 Muzema 1951 326 368 1.12 x Tijuquinha 1951 555 2,433 4.38 x Rio das Pedras 1951 18,357 41,003 2.23 x Rua São Tillon 1963 76 130 1.71 x Sitio do Pai João 1975 173 742 4.29 Vila da Paz 1986 331 367 1.10 x Cambalacho 1987 605 1,007 1.66 x Vila União 1995 109 ... ... x Vila Santa Teresinha ... 136 ... ... x Source: IPP (2000-C), Armazém de Dados. Morei 2000, Rio de Janeiro, IPP.4 7  The second condition relies on the lack of a sanitary sewer system to collect and treat the domestic effluents discharged in natura, by industrial, commercial, and residential real properties in the lagoons of the region. Among them, Lagoon Tijuca is the most affected by the water bodies’ pollution. For instance, until the 1980’s this lagoon used to have a mean depth of two meters; however, in 2001, some areas registered a mean depth of 10 cm, depending on the tide cycle (PORTELLA, 2001). This problem occurs, mainly, due to the discharge of domestic effluents without any treatment, thus, accelerating the natural process of eutrophication. In fact, the organic matter falls to the deeper water; its decomposition increases oxygen consumption and produces a large amount of phosphorous and nitrogenous, which acts as plant nutrients, and; thus, enlarge algal population, which causes turbidity of the water (HOUGH, 2000). For instance, in Lagoons Tijuca and Camorim, from October 1998 to February 2003, the Municipal Urban Cleaning Company (COMLURB) collected 3,328 tones of aquatic plants and floating garbage,5 corresponding to 61.6 tones a month. In some periods of the year, especially in the summer, the wind changes the tide and turns over the deeper water; therefore, liberating sulphid gas, that enables fishes and water plants to live and causes bad smell. This eutrophication process reduces the water surface as well as the water depth. For example, in September 2000, a research by the engineering and architecture regional council (CREA-RJ) revealed that both lakes have a mean depth of less than a meter, a minimum depth of 30 cm and a maximum depth of 12.7 meters (CREA, 2000). According to Hough (2000), the average natural sedimentation rate should be of one millimeter per year. Therefore, taking into account that in some areas of Lagoon Camorim the mean depth of two meters (or 200 cm), until 1980, turned into 10 cm in 2000 (PORTELLA, 2001), it is clear that the sedimentation in this lagoon, which is 10 times higher than it is recommended, is not natural (Table 8). Table 8 Eutrophication of the Lagoons in Barra da Tijuca6 Lagoons TP (mg/L) TN (mg/L) State Marapendi 210 1670 eutrophic Tijuca and Camorim 490 4230 hipertrophic Jacarepaguá 680 4730 hipertrophic Lagoinha 310 1070 eutrophic Source: SEMADS (2001). In 2002, a monitoring program of the Municipal Secretariat of Environment (SMAC, 2002), which examines water samples of the lagoons, demonstrated the critical condition of the lagoons in Barra da Tijuca. The results showed that the main sources of water pollution to the regions lagoons was Canal Arroio Pavuna and Canal Arroio Fundo, which pollute first the Lagoon Camorim and then the lagoons in the surroundings, Lagoons Jacarepaguá and Tijuca. Nearby Canal Arroio Pavuna, the rate of Escherichia Coli was the highest in the city, 160,000,000 NMP/100mL,7 which is 160,000 times above the limit established by the National Council of Environment (CONAMA, 1986-B). On the contrary, this rate reduced the amount of Dissolved Oxygen (DO) to zero mg/mL, which is much less than the minimum of 5mg/mL established by CONAMA.8 8  The recuperation of the Lagunar Complex of Jacarepaguá Lowlands depends on the revision of the inadequate criteria used in the region urban occupation. In addition, it relies on the sanitary sewer system, which is inexistent. Thus, it is important to examine the commitment of the government, especially the municipal public administration, regarding the extreme degradation state of the lagoons in the region. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: LIMITS AND PERSPECTIVES In the last decade, in particular, there have been some projects and programs with the objective of minimizing the environmental problems in the region of Barra da Tijuca. The municipal public administration, the City Hall, has been creating most of them, because of the pressure of social movements, especially of non-governmental agencies. Furthermore, it is clear that the intention of the municipal government in relation to the environmental problems in the region is to carry out programs that not only recuperate degraded areas but also stop local environmental problems. In addition to the political position of the municipality towards the degradation state of the lagoons in Barra da Tijuca, which is represented by an important program, the state government has been carrying out two significant environmental programs. Hence, there have been three main environmental programs in the region. The first one, carried out by the municipal government since December 1997, is called Program of Environmental Recuperation of Jacarepaguá Bay. The aim is to implement a storm sewer system in the region, especially in the areas close to the slums on the lagoons edges. For that reason, the program is divided in three stages, considering Jacarepaguá Bay as three sub- bays. The main goal is to avoid that the garbage from the poor communities, which the municipality generally does not collect, and the domestic effluents, which are not treated, reach the water bodies of canals and rivers in the region, consequently, polluting the surrounding lagoons (Illustration 5). In this sense, in September 2002, the Rio de Janeiro Municipal Secretariat of Environment (SMAC) brought up the idea of constructing small sewage treatment 9  plans alongside Canal Arroio Fundo and Canal Arroio Pavuna, the two most polluted bodies of water in the region. According to this municipal agency, it would reduce the pollution in the surrounding lagoons, especially Lagoon Tijuca and Marapendi. However, this idea was never implemented. In fact, the municipality has been piping the channels in order to prevent from floods, which tend to occur in the summer. The second one, which is been carried out by an important real state agency with the coordination of the state government since January 2002, is called Dredging of the Lagunar Complex of Jacarepaguá Lowlands. The objective of the program is to dredge up the sludge from the bottom of the lagoons, increasing its depth, which now turns impossible navigation. The State Agency of Rivers and Lagoons (SERLA) has been dredging Lagoon Tijuca, with the intention to open a stream in the central area in order to facilitate the circulation of water between Lagoon Camorim and the sea. This stream is supposed to have 1.7 km in length, 0.80 cm in width, and four meters in depth, which is the minimum to maintain sun light penetration in the water body (COOPETEC, 2001). However, the mean depth of the lagoon must have 1.54 meters. For that reason, SERLA will dredge out 4,000,000 m? of sludge from the bottom of Lagoon Tijuca (SERLA, 2002). According to its engineer in charge, Luiz Gurgel Salles, they still will dredge out 800,000 m? of sludge until April 2004, when the works might end (MOTTA, 2003). The main problem of this program concerns the schedule, which fixed the deadline for the completion of the works on January 2004. This program is part of a larger program that is described next. The third program, which also is been carried out by the state government, is named Program of Clean-up and Sewerage of Jacarepaguá Lowlands. The purpose of the program is to implement a sanitary and a storm sewer system capable to avoid water pollution in the region, as well as to provide water supply and underwater dredging. However, the state government has been giving more attention to the implementation of a sewerage system, especially the construction a submarine emissary that leads into Barra da Tijuca Beach. The program, which started in February 2001 after almost 20 years of misunderstandings between the local inhabitants and the municipal and state authorities, consists of three phases. As far as sanitation is concerned, the first phase refers to the construction of a sewage treatment plan, an earthy emissary with 2.5 km of extension, a submarine emissary 5 km away from the coast of Barra da Tijuca Beach, 48 km of pipelines, 11 pumping stations, and 13.7 km of sewage pumps. Moreover, the second phase consists of the construction of 6km of pipelines, 80 km of collecting sewers and 18.000 buildings connections. The state government, yet, did not define the third phase. According to the Water and Sewage State Company (CEDAE), which is the state agency responsible for the implementation of this program, they will not complete it on schedule, since the deadline for the completion of the works has changed from January 2004 to June 2005. Besides this problem, the local inhabitants and their representatives have been criticizing this program as a solution for the environmental problems in the region, due to some reasons that are listed below: Lack of transparency during the development of the program, because the communitarian commission charged to inspect the works did not have access neither to the execution projects nor to the place where the works were developed; Absence of a study and a report of environmental impact, both demanded by the National Council of Environment (CONAMA, 1986-A); Absence of a solution to the problem of the sludge produced in the wastewater treatment plant. 10 CONCLUSION The analysis of the environmental impacts on Lagoons Tijuca and Camorim, in the region of Barra da Tijuca, in Rio de Janeiro City, has demonstrated the effort of the people involved in the development of the region concerning the mitigation of damages to the natural resources, especially to the water bodies. Nowadays, the dynamics that provides the expansion of the urban fabric still causes harmful impacts on water bodies due to the pollution caused by domestic and industrial effluents. Thus, the challenge is to adjust the urban expansion to the recuperation and the preservation of the lagunar complex of the region, because if the present inefficiency in sanitation persists, it might cause much more damages to the local environment, concerning not only the flora but also the fauna. It is clear the importance of the three programs implemented by the municipal and the state government; however, the problems identified indicate that the final answer to the problem of water pollution in the region depends on: Implementation of adequate sanitary infrastructure in the local slums, which have been spreading enormously in the last decades; Control of illegal occupation, like clandestine land parcels and new slums, especially on Environmental Protected Areas (APA), like hillsides, canals, rivers, and lagoons edges; Physical implementation of limits for the occupation of water bodies edges in the Lagunar Complex of Jacarepaguá Lowlands; Recuperation of the Lagunar Complex of Jacarepaguá Lowlands, including the clean-up and the underwater dredging of canals, rivers, and lagoons, as well as restoration of its edges. In fact, the weakest point for most environmental projects and programs in the region is that, generally, they involve many government agencies with overlapping responsibilities. Moreover, it is vital that the municipal and the state authorities demonstrate a strong and a true political commitment concerning the environmental local problems. Therefore, the challenge is to unite governmental and communitarian interests in favor of the mitigation of the cumulative effects of poor environmental management that might cause some irreparable damage to rare natural resources, in particular, to water resources. 11  LIST OF REFERENCES CARDOSO, A. L. (1996), “O urbanismo de Lúcio Costa: contribuição brasileira ao concerto das nações”. In: RIBEIRO, PECHMAN (eds.), Cidade, povo e nação, Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, pp. 95-122. CONAMA (Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente) (1986-A), “RESOLUÇÃO CONAMA Nº 001”. In: CONAMA, Resoluções do CONAMA; 1984/86, Brasília: SEMA, pp. 33-38. CONAMA (Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente) (1986-B), “RESOLUÇÃO CONAMA Nº 20”. In: CONAMA, Resoluções do CONAMA; 1984/86, Brasília: SEMA, pp. 81-83. COPPETEC (2001), Estudos para Disposição dos Rejeitos de Dragagem do Sistema Lagunar de Jacarepaguá – Relatório Final, Rio de Janeiro: COPPETEC. CREA-RJ (Conselho Regional de Engenharia e Arquitetura) (2000), Carta Náutica do Sistema Lagunar Barra/Jacarepaguá, Rio de Janeiro: CREA-RJ. HOUGH, M. (2000), Cities and Natural Process, Londres: Routledge. IPP (Instituto Municipal de Urbanismo Pereira Passos) (2000-A), Armazém de Dados, Ambiente Construído, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. IPP (Instituto Municipal de Urbanismo Pereira Passos) (2000-B), Armazém de Dados, Características Demográficas, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. IPP (Instituto Municipal de Urbanismo Pereira Passos) (2000-C), Armazém de Dado, Morei 2000, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. IPP (Instituto Municipal de Urbanismo Pereira Passos) (2001-A), Armazém de Dados, Indicadores Ambientais, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. IPP (Instituto Municipal de Urbanismo Pereira Passos) (2001-B), Armazém de Dado, Indicadores Sociodemográficos, Rio de Janeiro, IPP. LEITÃO, G. (1995), A construção do eldorado urbano: o plano piloto da Barra da Tijuca, Baixada de Jacarepaguá 1970/1986, Rio de Janeiro: UFF. MOTTA, C. (2003), “Draga volta a operar em Jacarepaguá”. O Globo, Barra, 25 de dezembro de 2003, pp.3-5. PINHEIRO, A., PINHEIRO, E. (2001), A Construção do Lugar: Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro: Sextante Artes. PORTELLA, L. (2001), “Areia toma conta de lagoa na Barra”. Jornal do Brasil, Cidade, 01 de novembro de 2001, pp 1-2. RIBEIRO, C. T. (1990), Da questão urbana ao poder local: o caso da Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro: IPPUR/UFRJ. SEMADS (Secretaria Estadual de Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável) (2001), Bacias Hidrográficas e Rios Fluminenses: Síntese Informativa por Macrorregião Ambiental, Rio de Janeiro: SEMADS. SMAC (Secretaria Municipal de Meio Ambiente) (1998), Estudo de Impacto Ambiental para o Projeto de Recuperação Ambiental da Microbacia de Jacarepaguá. Diagnóstico do Meio Físico. Volume 1, 2, e 3, Rio de Janeiro: SMAC. SMAC (Secretaria Municipal de Meio Ambiente) (2002), Qualidade Ambiental - Primavera, Verão, Outono 2002, Rio de Janeiro: SMAC. SERLA (Superintendência Estadual de Rios e Lagoas) (2002), Levantamento Batimétrico com Amostragem e Análise Geológica e de Metais Pesados em Sedimentos de Fundo na Lagoa da Tijuca – Relatório Final N° 01/02, Rio de Janeiro: SERLA. ZEE, D., SABINO, C (2003), Afogando em Lodo. Texto Técnico. Rio de Janeiro, Câmara Comunitária da Barra. 12 1 The government agency called SUDEBAR was created in 1974, and extinguished in 1981. 2 The insertion of Copacabana is because it has the second highest population density in Rio de Janeiro City. The densest region in the city is Catete (395.2 inhabitants/hectares), not including the slums. 3 The category “others” refers to popular autonomous unity, apartments in hotels, etc. 4 There is no information about slums Vila União and Vila Santa Terezinha regarding their population in 2000. 5 In 2001, COMLURB found 55 sofas in the waters of Lagoons Tijuca and Camorim. 6 TP refers to Total Phosphorous and TN refers to Total Nitrogenous. The classification of the lagoons is based on the limits defined by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, 1982). 7 NMP/100mL means “Number More Probable”, see: IPP (Instituto Municipal de Urbanismo Pereira Passos) (2001-A), Armazém de Dados. Indicadores Ambientais, Rio de Janeiro: IPP. 8 See CONAMA (Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente) (1986-B). “RESOLUÇÃO CONAMA Nº 20”, In: CONAMA, Resoluções do CONAMA; 1984/86, Brasília: SEMA, pp. 81-83. 13