augusta park: four images for são paulo

Research developed from an invitation by Bamboo magazine, published in November 2016.

Augusta Park: Four Images for São Paulo

The extensive discussion surrounding Augusta Park exemplarily condenses the essential conflicts of urban dynamics. On one side, the first sector, capital, which holds ownership of the land and expects from it the greatest possible economic return; on the other, the third sector, of self-organized collective movements, which advocates for the use of the city, quality, democratization, and self-management of public spaces; between these forces appears the second sector, the public authority, whose actions oscillate between those two poles, at times authorizing exceptions for economic power, at times recognizing the collective interest of the area as a public space. Each party has its own reason and its own logic of action. Would there be any solution capable of reconciling such divergent interests?

We believe that this discussion cannot be restricted to the physical limits of the Park. Any attempt at conciliation there would be a mutilation: of the scarce open and green space arduously preserved amid the voracious densification of the region and, at the same time, of the financial potential expected by those who own it. Given its exemplary nature, Augusta Park can provoke a deeper reflection on ways of thinking, making, and using the city, reintroducing a permanent and urgent question: what is best for the future of our metropolises? The outcome of Augusta Park — whether park or development — will speak to the limits or to the intelligence of the people of São Paulo — citizens, entrepreneurs, and politicians — in reinventing their own city.

A block, an oasis

Precisely because it is located at a high-value address, Augusta Park persists as an oasis. As a park, it will increase the value of its surroundings. As a development, it will extract the land’s value and destroy the place. Even if the trees are preserved, building on its open areas means destroying its environmental diversity. Its scale is irrelevant when compared to other open spaces in the city, but essential when one recognizes the intensive occupation of its surroundings. Its full preservation, as an area of sun and shade, open and free, is a minimum condition for the reconstruction of an urban quality so desired because it is so rare. To imagine any construction there, for the quality of the city, would be the same as imagining construction occupying any fraction of areas such as Parque Trianon, Ibirapuera, the MASP void, or Praça da República. On the other hand, it is worth asking: would São Paulo’s business sector be capable of recognizing the transformative potential of its investments, generating positive legacies for the city?

What cities is private initiative capable of building?

The same city that destroyed its geography, polluted its rivers, and created one of the most profound images of a concrete jungle has also produced notable examples of coexistence and urban generosity. COPAN and Conjunto Nacional are emblems of a certain intelligence of developers, architects, and planners in reconciling density and the quality of the city’s ground plane. Due to their scale — more than double that of the complex proposed for Augusta Park — they acquire the role of infrastructure that articulates the territory and qualifies the street. They were built at a time when São Paulo was urbanizing voraciously and everything was new. More than half a century later, it is worth considering whether private investment could turn its attention to obsolete infrastructures or underused areas of the city as a counterpart to the preservation of green areas and spaces for social interaction.

Public-private partnerships: public problems, private opportunities

We propose an exercise in imagination regarding Augusta Park, considering legal mechanisms already provided for in municipal legislation and in the City Statute: transfer of development rights, urban operations, and public-private partnerships. These are four images intended to provoke discussion about the limits and possibilities of construction, through dialogue among various agents, toward a more humane, convivial, and generous São Paulo.

1. Imagine several small-scale developments around Augusta Park, dispersing investment through negotiations among private agents, developers, and small property owners, encouraged through the transfer of development rights associated with an urban operation that would increase the building potential of small plots. Instead of destroying the park, private development would increase its own value by preserving it. Landowners would see their property appreciated, and the region, with excellent infrastructure, would densify uniformly with buildings that could improve the quality of the relationship with the street through active façades, rather than large blocks with massive parking bases that have gradually been killing the street. Developers could receive more building potential than they would achieve at the Park, compensating for their indirect costs. The city would benefit.
2. Imagine transferring the development potential of the Augusta Park project to a municipal facility, such as Parque Anhembi, integrating public actions and private interests. After the future mayor raised the possibility of granting it to private initiative, business leaders stated that it would be necessary to associate the project with real estate development. Why not allocate part of it as compensation to the municipality for preserving Augusta Park? Just for comparison of scale, a single floor the size of the Anhembi exhibition pavilion corresponds to one and a half times the area intended to be built at the Park.
3. Imagine that, above each metro station in the city, a large building for housing and services were constructed, directly connected to public transportation, like the Chrysler Building in New York. The waste of real estate potential and, above all, of urban valorization and qualification of metro stations was discussed by architect Pablo Hereñu in his doctoral thesis. Associating this densification with an urban operation involving the State, the Municipality, and the developers of Augusta Park could produce better buildings for the city while preserving its open and green areas. Everyone would benefit.
4. Imagine living in the city center, residing and working in studios open to calm streets beneath an extensive and vibrant linear park. If Parque Minhocão is an unavoidable reality and its full consolidation is provided for by law, its undercroft areas, however, continue to generate low-quality public spaces. Its shade would allow the construction of almost twice what is intended for Augusta Park, with significantly lower financial and environmental costs. The association of housing and work in a regenerating area, integrated with the most relevant linear park in Latin America, would be a contemporary action that would prevent ground-level degradation, reinforce the use of Minhocão, and save Augusta Park. Everyone would benefit. The city would benefit. Why not?