# Managing Historic neighbourhoods: preservation and participation

**Bruna Fregonezi; Nadia Somekh**

Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie

*[e-mail]*
*[e-mail]*

## Abstract

During the 1980s, in the context of studies about urban zones in São Paulo started a research about urban environmental heritage. One of these zones was the Bexiga region. This field is featured by a single urban morphology and architecture range. Before being a well-known Italian region, it was already occupied by the black and quilombola population. Due to this fact, Bexiga became a plural region with an intense cultural life in public spaces.
These studies were the beginning of a process that lasted nearly 900 buildings as heritage. On one hand, this action safeguards the land structure and it profited the maintenance of cultural activities at the public space in the neighborhood. However, the number of buildings that need maintenance became a challenge.
Recently, from 2014 to 2016, new laws and public policies in São Paulo revealed new possibilities for fundraising, protection, and promotion of cultural heritage. Some of them are the heritage journey and the law allowing the owner of historical heritage to raise funds through the sale of space adrift.
More than using the income from space adrift to fundraising, the citizen who wants to do that needs to approve a maintenance plan on the heritage council. This tool is helping laypeople to preserve buildings with correct techniques, reducing invasive restorations in the future.
These new possibilities added to several cultural groups that were articulated in the 2015 heritage journey made it the perfect environment to emerge the Fábrica de Restauro movement (Restoration Factory movement). The proposal is to develop the region restoration in a collective way, including inhabitants and specialists in the process, aiming to prevent gentrification.
The movement’s actions are divided into 3 workgroups: the first one deals with professional training, from project to the execution. The second one is about fundraising and the third deals with forms of association.
Thus, the aim of this paper is to examine how the urban policies and new laws are changing the reality of heritage in São Paulo city. Furthermore, to discuss how the impacts of large-scale renovation can gentrify the region and what we can do to reduce it.

## Introduction

The Bexiga region is characterized by an architectural diversity and unique culture. It led to a pioneer heritage preservation in the city of São Paulo. The detailed study carried out by the technicians of DPH - Heritage Department of São Paulo city demonstrated that to preserve the essence of the neighborhood, listing more than exceptional buildings was necessary. Listing the set of ordinary architecture, the land structure and the urban tissue would be fundamental to guarantee the preservation of tangible and intangible aspects of the region. Thus, in 2002, through the resolution 22/CONPRESP/2002 a set of approximately 900 buildings in Bela Vista neighborhood were listed. Bela Vista is the neighborhood in which Bexiga is located.

Heritage preservation matches the preservation of an ordinary architecture and the urbanistic dimension of clusters and settlements defended by Gustavo Giovannoni. Furthermore, it also takes into consideration the aspects of urban heritage environment, which Eduardo Yázigi (2006) defines as “architectural complex, urban spaces, public equipment and intra-urban elements, regulated by social, economical and cultural relations, in which the conflict must be the smallest possible and social inclusion a rising demand.” (Our translation) [[1](#br1)]

The importance of taking into consideration the whole set in the preservation of Bexiga is undeniable. On one hand, we can see that the objective of preserving intangible cultural aspects of the neighborhood was reached. On the other hand, lies the preoccupation about the maintenance and conservation of a huge number of buildings. The number of listed buildings in Bela Vista is almost ⅓ of the buildings listed as heritage in the city of São Paulo.

Taking this scenario into consideration, thinking about public policies of preservation and conservation to Bexiga is essential for the whole city of São Paulo.

Recently, new public policies of preservation and new incentives for raising funds generated new possibilities of acting and more possibilities to the owner of listed building. Some of than are *“Jornada do Patrimônio”* (The Heritage Journey) and the regulation of new tools to transfer the space adrift of listed building.

In this regard, we reflect upon two results of these movements. The first one is *Fábrica de Restauro* (Restoration Factory), a social movement which articulates residents of Bexiga’s region, architecture offices and University in the development of participative restoration initiative. The second is the possibility of involving owners of listed building in the conservation of this heritage through plans of maintenance requested by the Heritage Department.

Thus, with the objective of examining the public policies and actions which happened in the last few years in the city of São Paulo, this paper is developed in four parts. The first one describes Bexiga and its pioneer heritage preservation. The second points out the difficulties of conservation and new public policies for raising funds. The third presents the results of these public policies in the region of Bexiga. Finally, the fourth part describes how recent actions indirectly generated new possibilities for the heritage conservation.

## Bexiga and the heritage conservation

Bexiga is located on a rather uneven topographic territory, where the encounter of the streams Bexiga, Saracura and Anhangabaú happens. It is in the central region of São Paulo city. The occupation of this territory has as background the period of the end of slavery in Brazil. It was characterized by the substitution of labour, from black slaves to free European immigrants, especially Italian.

The beginning of the territory’s occupation happened at the margins of Ribeirão Saracura in the end of the 19th century, when Quilombo of Saracura was constituted. At the time, Quilombos were spaces of refuge for black slaves. Quilombo Saracura was the beginning of urban quilombos, which appeared with the approximation of the end of slavery. Raquel Rolnik (1989) [[2](#br2)] describes that “these places were collective rooms and houses in the city centre”.

The plot division of this region began in 1887, when the Public Slaughterhouse, which existed in the region, was transferred to Vila Mariana. Once the pieces of land were devalued, it is believed that to enable selling, lots of land were subdivided in smaller dimensions. [[3](#br3)]

Lindener Pareto Junior (2020) [[4](#br4)] points out that as the new allotment had accessible value, it attracted Italians who arrived in São Paulo looking for new opportunities. As a result of this occupation, we can notice the predominance of eclectic architectural production, characteristic of the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century in the city of São Paulo. The author also explains that the main labour who worked in civil construction were Italian master constructors, known as *Capomastris*.

We can find a variety of building typologies in Bexiga. The typology of the buildings produced at the end of the 19th century and in the beginning of the 20th are ground level residential constructions, implanted on the alignment of the street with a slight lateral recess. In the beginning of the 20th century, most of the houses had two floors, with frontal gardens and without lateral space in-between buildings. However, when there was commerce on the ground floor, the 20th century's two-story constructions were implanted on the alignment of the street. Most of the buildings were eclectic and it used to be made of bricks and covered with lime mortar. This building also had decorative elements made with lime mortar.

The most recent occupation, after the 1950s, was carried out by architects inspired by the image and constructive techniques of modern architecture. The modern houses with two floors had a garage in front of the house, as automobiles became more popular in the city. Vertical modern buildings were also built between 1950 and 1970.

The occupation of cultural activities in public spaces is the reflection of a set of social processes which happened in the region history. In August, a traditional festival to celebrate *Nossa Senhora da Achiropita* (Our Lady of Achiropita) happens in the streets surrounding the church, which has the saint as its patroness. Walking down São Vicente St. we can see the samba school Vai-Vai, which occupies the street with the samba school rehearsals from the end of the year until the beginning of Carnival.

These are the two biggest events which attract people from all over the city. Although, many other activities are important to this cultural environment. Some of than are the *Rodas de sambas*, the traditional washing of staircase on 13 de Maio Street as demonstration of a fake end of slavery, some theatre activities which take place in public spaces, and the atmosphere created by Italian restaurants.

Besides the cultural activities, the occupation of public spaces in Bexiga is something that happens daily. Walking in the neighbourhood, we notice that the typology near the alignment of the lot and the land structure enable a life stile which has long been lost in São Paulo through a predatory action of real-state market. In other words, culture and the way of living do not only happen in the built heritage, they also happen in the whole environment.

The relation between these two cultures: Italian and African, also has its tensions. We can notice that in the documentary *“Eu sou Bexiga”* [[5](#br5)] (I am Bexiga) carried out in the Academia Internacional de Cinema in 2015. In the documentary, The *Babalorixá* Francisco de Osún tells the story of his arrival in Bexiga in February 1979. Some inhabitants had prejudice against African religion. Thus, in 1982 the priest Toninho from the *Nossa Senhora de Achiropita* church approached him to create an afro group to learn about his religion inside the church. The proposal was for the *babalorixá* to take afro knowledge to the church, where the priest would show aspects of African culture to the people of the neighbourhood, mainly Italian descendants. The proposal intended to reduce the prejudice from the people who did not accept the *babalorixá* in the neighbourhood.

The rich morphology composed by a relevant architectural complex for the city’s architectural history and cultural diversity resulted in Bexiga being one of city regions studied by IGEPAC- *Inventário Geral do Patrimônio Ambiental Urbano de São Paulo* (General Inventory of Urban Environmental Heritage of São Paulo).

IGEPAC was an innovative work which aimed at analysing heritage beyond architectural aspects. The methodology used by the city’s technicians was to carry out a research in central neighbourhoods through morphological, historical, and social aspects. Bexiga’s inventory was carried out in 1984.

In this period FAU USP carried out a course called “Urban Environmental Heritage”. The teacher Upiano Toledo Bezerra de Meneses (1978) [[6](#br6)] presented the theme at the time as “a system of socially appropriated objects, noticed as being capable of enabling representations in an urban environment”. We can clearly identify the results of this work, developed inside the academic environment, in the context of the actions of the city’s technicians.

These works of inventory were finalized, but they were not necessarily turned into heritage preservation. Some years later, in 1989, a group of Bexiga’s residents requested the listing of the neighbourhood. The process of heritage preservation began in 1990 and the study extended itself until 2002, when Bexiga finally became part of the cultural heritage of the city of São Paulo.

The study of heritage preservation was based in the IGEPAC studies and it goes beyond the exceptional architecture, the ordinary architecture and urban aspects were also listed as heritage, as the architect and technician, from Heritage Department, Clara D'alambert points out:

“Not only was the neighbourhood’s exceptional real-estate considered, but also the sets of anonymous houses which, to this day, witness forms of organization of the urban space and various phases of evolution of that region of the city. These constructions of expressive environmental value compose homogeneous architectural groups, which mark the neighbourhood’s landscape due to their characteristics of implantation and volumetry.” (our translation) [[7](#br7)]

D’alambert (2006) [[7](#br7)] suggests that preserving the architectural complex also means trying to preserve the cultural and socio-economic aspects of this region. Castro, Calliari and Fregonezi (2020) [[8](#br8)] point out that the land structure preserved could provide the protection of traditional cultural manifestations and the way of daily life. It involves occupying the region’s public space in a singular way that we cannot see in other neighbourhoods, which only had few exceptional buildings preserved.

On one hand, we can defend that the heritage preservation was successful, on the other hand, how to guarantee that the conservation of a whole set of buildings? If raise funds to restore all the buildings were possible, how would it be possible not to gentrify? When recovering the history of a region occupied by a low-income population, we must make sure these actions will not lead to any gentrification.

## The difficulties of conservation and new perspectives

Even though the importance of preservation of historical monuments was present in the beginning of the 18th century, only in the 19th century the discussions related to techniques and methodologies for projects and works of restoration appeared. Françoise Choay (2006) [[9](#br9)] points out that in the 1820s monuments were already understood as an irreplaceable artefact and that any damage could be irreparable. It resulted in actions, such as, the creation of the figure of heritage inspector in 1830 and the creation of the first preservation law of historical monuments in 1887, in France.

In Brazil, the importance of preservation of historical heritage was first mentioned in 1988 in the article 216 of the federal constitution. However, after the creation of heritage councils, the structure of technical activities and procedures were established to guarantee preservation. The IPHAN - *Instituto do Patrimônio Histórico* (Institute of Historical Heritage), was created in 1937 and in São Paulo’s case, the Heritage Council of São Paulo State (CONDEPHAAT) was created in 1968 and the Heritage Council of São Paulo city (CONPRESP) in 1985.

The actions of these councils have always been in consonance with the main theories and public policies of conservation and restoration. They always take the building’s cultural, historical, and technical aspects into consideration. However, we can notice a distance between the production of knowledge regarding perspectives of preservation of heritage and the owners of the listed buildings, who need to deal with the daily maintenance of these buildings.

The lack of guidance and assistance of specialized labour at building construction is a chronic problem in Brazil. CAU/BR and DataFolha Institute [[10](#br10)] carried out a research in 2015 indicating that 85% of constructions and building renovation in Brazil do not have the technical orientation of architects or urbanists.

In the case of historical heritage buildings, the lack of orientation is even more complex. As the traditional materials and techniques have been substituted by more recent ones, it generates an incompatibility and reaction on the existing surfaces. Here we are not only referring to big constructions, since the use of cement in lime masonry for an electric repair or the use of abrasive cleaning products can be the beginning of irreversible pathologies.

Between 2013 and 2016, working at the Heritage Department in São Paulo city hall, we faced actions which more corrective than preventive. In general, the department was notified after reports of irregular interventions, but sometimes it was too late take preventive measures. Among the existing measures, the alternative was to fine the owner of listed building, who did not necessarily know they were acting incorrectly. The fines without a process of horizontal patrimonial education creates a distance between both elements and complicates even more the relation between public organizations and residents.

Thus, we point out three aspects, which complicate conservation of listed building. The first is the lack of resource, the second is the lack of information and support to the owner of listed building and finally, the lack of public policies which guarantee the previous two.

As a reaction to this scenario, the Heritage Department of São Paulo city had some initiatives over the last few years. One of them was the creation of *Jornada do Patrimônio* (The Heritage Journey) in December 2015. It was created aiming to highlight the heritage issues in the city. Inspired by *Journées Européennes du Patrimoine*, it is an event which lasts a weekend and is focused on the issue of cultural heritage.

The first *Jornada* in São Paulo took in the experience of *Virada Cultural* and brought free artistic activities to the population. *Virada Cultural* is an annual event created in 2004 and it lasts a weekend, offering cultural activities to the population in the city centre. The consequence of this initiative was an event with specialists, but with a diverse audience too.

The theme of the first *Jornada do Patrimônio* was “(Re) acknowledging your heritage” and the event schedule included approximately 120 buildings opened to inhabitants. Some of them are well known, others had never been opened before. The event also had approximately 400 cultural activities related to heritage and approximately 50 lectures. It is worth mentioning that part of the activities were to children, the aim was to make this theme part of their lives since childhood.

The success was big enough to pass a law, which made *Jornada do Patrimônio* an annual even. Moreover, we believe that the main legacy was the awareness and the possibility of approaching the inhabitants to heritage issues and the connection between Heritage Department of São Paulo city with collectives and social movements, which work with cultural heritage aspects.

When the event was being developed, we noticed that Bexiga was one of the regions with the highest numbers of heritage or cultural associations. *Bela Vista Viva, CPC-USP, REPEP, Teatro Oficina and Mumbi* are some exemples. At that moment, we identified that some of them were working in a collaborative way but others were not

During the same period, the Master Plan and the City Zoning were being reviewed. The revision of these two laws brought the new legal regulation of the TDC *Transferência do Direito de Construir* (transfer the space adrift of listed building).

This tool was based on tools foreseen in the plan for the city of Chicago in 1971. The instrument enabled owners of listed buildings to transfer their space adrift so that they can use it on another lot in the city. This transference is connected to a financial negotiation and the value received must be applied in the restoration of the listed building.

The transfer is also conditioned by the approval of the heritage council of São Paulo city. In other words, for the owner to be able to transfer the right to build, keeping the good condition of conservation is necessary. In case the building is not well conserved, a term of commitment is carried out. On this term, the listed building owners links the obtained resources to actions of restoration and conservation of the building. On both cases, a plan of maintenance must be developed.

When the TDC was regulated, the interest of big construction companies in space adrift of heritage started. But these companies started to negotiate just with owners of big plots because the space adrift is bigger. The problem is that the difficulties to raise funds for restoration would continue to owners of small plots.

## Effects of the new perspectives in Bexiga

Considering Bexiga as a region with a land structure characterized by small lots and the presence of a big number of social organizations. The Heritage Department identified an opportunity to start a social movement to think about the physical restoration and social actions on this area.

Therefore, the Heritage Department invited the social groups identified at *Jornada de Patrimônio* for a meeting. The Association of Restoration Companies - Asser, the Agency of Development of São Paulo - Adesampa and universities were also invited. The aim was to cover the possibilities of acting in the field of cultural heritage.

After some preparatory meetings with each group, all of them got together for a workshop. In this big meeting, each one exposed some alternatives to develop a way of collectively acting to preserve this heritage. Thus, the social movement *Fábrica de Restauro* (Restoration Factory) was born.

After several workshops and conferences, the participants divided themselves in three work groups to further study possibilities of acting. The first group aimed to think about courses for maintenance and caretaking, the purpose was to develop training to architects, students, construction workers and craftsmen. This group was led by Professor Julio Katinsky’s study group and it was called Training/Capacitation for construction.

The second group was called collective TDC. It was responsible for studying the possibilities of raising funds through this new tool regulated by the Master Plan and City Zoning. In this group, a sub-group was created with the objective to study other ways of raising funds. However, only TDC was studied.

Reflecting upon how to enable the community’s participation in the restoration of buildings in a collective way, the third group was created. It was composed by ASSER and some other social groups.

Many meetings were held, and many studies were developed. However, after the change in the Heritage Department management, the actions stopped. Nowadays, *Fábrica de Restauro* is linked to the Presbyterian University Mackenzie, and they still aim at encouraging the capacitation and training of professionals.

The articulation between all this social movements and collectives still happens. The founder of *Mumbi*, Paulo Santiago, went back to the idea of thinking about a neighbourhood plan for the region and in November 2019, a debate regarding housing, tenements and occupations was presented in the region. In December 2019, a meeting regarding proposals of intervention was carried out. Both had the participation of the community, leaders, architects, and urbanists.

In parallel to this collective movement, we had the opportunity to monitor how the private sector was using the TDC. Through the increasing number of requests to sell the space adrift at heritage council of São Paulo city and new companies specialized on negotiation between owners of listed building and construction companies, we could notice that the private sector and real-state market are interested in this tool.

We will not focus on the issue of the new-born market, we will focus on the tool of control created by the heritage department to guarantee that the raised funds through TDC are being applied in the correct way.

In January 2016, the Heritage Department presented a “Basic script to elaborate the necessary documents aiming to obtain the Certificate of Conservation of the Listed Building”. The script describes how architects need to develop a technical dossier to guide the listed building owners on what they can do, how to do it, and who can (and must) do it. [[11](#br11)]

The script proposes that owners of listed buildings have the history of the building available, some orientation of conservation, and the kind of professionals who can do that. The document must guide from the type of product that can be used for cleaning surfaces to the situation in which the owner must call a specialist to prevent an incorrect maintenance.

Working on the development of these documents, we noticed that through the process, listed building owners found out that, actions of maintenance they considered regular, were the beginning of a pathology. In other words, without guidance, they did not know which actions were being harmful to the building.

Thus, we noticed that the maintenance plan became a moment that we could include the owner in the whole process, and this turned into a moment of collaborative construction between architects and listed building owners. They presented their difficulties and the architect, knowing the right moment, could use this space as a moment of patrimonial education.

Salvador Muñoz Viñas (2010) [[12](#br12)] indicates that a good restoration includes the user of the building and knows how to include the “present” moment in the restoration. Beyond understanding the object, we are restoring its legacy for the future, the restoration must be carried out considering the person who will use the building in the moment of the restoration.

## Conclusion

This paper presented the effects of some public policies, such as *Jornada do Patrimônio* and the regulation of TDC. *Jornada* had the objective of heritage valorization and to raise funds through TDC. However, both exceeded the expectations, *Jornada* helped in the identification of social movements and TDC enabled a broader project with possibilities of transformation in which, users and owners of a listed building could be involved in the conservation process.

As a collective movement or considering the restoration of a single building, these policies showed the importance to give put the spotlight on the people who live their daily life in a listed building. On the first example, Fábrica de Restauro was only possible with the articulation and approximation with the social movements in Jornada do Patrimônio. On the second case, regarding the maintenance plans, the listed building owners noticed they were not mere owner, but that they were also a part of history and preservation.

Meneses (2017) [[13](#br13)] shows the importance of “repopulating” the heritage, reducing the material-immaterial polarity, changing the role of the user of a listed building, from a mere observer, to an active participant.

These experiences do not aim to minimize the importance of technical knowledge and conservation of materiality, but intend to expose that there is a gap between the building’s preservation, and the maintenance routine of those who live in a historical building. Therefore, this paper points out a number of paths to explore, with the objective of creating policies aiming at offering the possibility of dialogue regarding the maintenance of buildings and the population commitment.

## References

[1] Yázigi, E. (2006). “A conceituação de patrimônio ambiental urbano em países emergentes”. *GeoNova. Revista do Departamento de Geografia e Planejamento Regional da Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade Nova de Lisboa*, 12.

[2] Rolnik, R. (1989). “Territórios Negros nas Cidades Brasileiras (etnicidade e cidade em São Paulo e Rio de Janeiro)”. *Revista de Estudos Afro-Asiáticos*, 17, 1-17.

[3] Moura, M., & D’elboux, R. (2020). “Ocupação inicial e Loteamento”, In: Somekh, N. & Simões Junior, J. G. “Bexiga em três tempos: Patrimônio cultural e desenvolvimento sustentável”, *Romano Guerra*, São Paulo.

[4] Parete Júnior, L. (2020). “O Bexiga dos italianos: os capomastri construtores e a arquitetura eclética do bairro (1890-1930)”. In: Somekh, N. & Simões Junior, J. G. “Bexiga em três tempos: Patrimônio cultural e desenvolvimento sustentável”, *Romano Guerra*, São Paulo.

[5] Jardel, g. et al. (2015). “Eu sou Bexiga”, *Academia internacional de Cinema*, São Paulo.

[6] Meneses, U. B. M. (2017). “Repovoar o patrimônio ambiental urbano. Revista do Patrimônio Histórico e Artístico Nacional”. * Revista do Patrimônio Histórico e Artístico Nacional*, 36, 39-57.

[7] D’alambert, C. C. “Bela Vista:a preservação e o desefaio da renovação de um bairro paulistano”. *Revista do arquivo municipal*, 204, p.151-168.

[8] Castro, L. G. R., & Calliari, M., & Fregonezi, B. B. N. (2020). “Espaços públicos e eventos culturais- Achiropita e Vai-Vai.”, In: Somekh, N. & Simões Junior, J. G. “Bexiga em três tempos: Patrimônio cultural e desenvolvimento sustentável”, *Romano Guerra*, São Paulo.

[9] Choay, F. (2006). “A alegoria do Patrimônio”, *Estação Liberdade: UNESP*, São Paulo.

[10] CAU/BR; DATA FOLHA. Pesquisa CAU/BR Data folha - 2015. Brasilia, DF: CAU/BR. https://www.caubr.gov.br/pesquisa2015/.

[11] DPH-Departamento do Patrimônio Histórico. (2016). “Programa e plano de manutenção: Roteiro básico para elaboração da documentação necessária visandoa obtenção do Atestado de Conservação do Imóvel Tombado”, *DPH*, São Paulo.

[12]Viñas, S. M. (2010). “Teoria contemporânea de la restauración”, *Sintesis*, Madrid.

[13]Meneses, U. B. M. (1978). “Patrimônio ambiental urbano: do lugar comum ao lugar de todos”. *CJ Arquitetura*, 5, 18-20.