Translated from Portuguese to English - www.onlinedoctranslator.

com

MATERIAL CULTURE STUDIES

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-02672017v25n0306

Before Ibirapuera Park: the history of the

void (1890 – 1954)
Before the Ibirapuera Park: the history of a void (1890 – 1954)

ANA CLÁUDIA CASTILHO BARONE1 1. Professor, Department of

Design, Faculty of
University of Sao Paulo / Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Architecture and Urbanism,
University of São Paulo.
Email:<ana barone@usp.br
>.

ABSTRACT: The disputes between the public and private sectors regarding the Ibirapuera Park
return to public debate with the proposal of the new mayor of São Paulo to grant the
management of some of the main green areas in the city to companies. In fact, the topic
never left the order of the day, taking different forms. This article brings together a variety of
documents of different natures, especially in the Municipal Historical Archive, referring to
conflicts over ownership or usufruct of land located inside the area designated as a park. The
analyzed period covers the years between the land allocation, in 1926, and the realization of
the park, in 1954. Our purpose is to highlight the multiple interests in the area, awakened not
only among individuals but also among important public and private institutions that aimed
to settle in the region and were more or less successful in their advance on the large public
land reserved in this noble stretch of the urban fabric. With this objective in view, we seek to
guide the current discussion about the park with relevant historical data on the process of
preserving the empty land before its implementation, evidencing these conflicts.

KEYWORDS: Ibirapuera Park (history). Ibirapuera Park (limits). Preservation of public

area. Land tenure conflicts.

ABSTRACT: The disputes between the public and private sectors in relation to the Ibirapuera Park
return to debate with the proposal of the new mayor of São Paulo, to grant the management of
some of the main green areas of the city to companies. In fact, the theme has never left the agenda,
although it has taken on different forms along time. This article brings together a variety of
documents of diverse natures, mainly found in the Municipal Historic Archives, concerning conflicts
over ownership or usufruct of land within the area designated as a park. The period analyzed covers
the years between the destination of the lands in 1926 and the realization of

Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTASao Paulo, New Series, vol. 25, no. 3, p. 167-194, September-December 2017. 167
2. See Regina Maria
the park in 1954. Our purpose is to highlight the multiple interests in the area, taken not only between
Prosperi Meyer (1991).
individual interests but also between important either public and private institutions who sought to settle
3. See Manuella Marianna in that region and were better or worse succeeded in their advance over the large public terrain reserved
Andrade (2004).
in that noble stretch of the urban fabric. With this aim in view, we seek to inform the current discussion
about the park, with relevant historical data on the process of preservation of the empty site before its
implementation, in order to evidence these conflicts.

KEYWORDS: Ibirapuera Park (history). Ibirapuera Park (limits). Preservation of public area. Conflicts
of land tenure.

BEFORE IBIRAPUERA PARK: THE HISTORY OF THE EMPTY (1890 – 1954)

The proposal by the mayor elected for the term that began in 2017 in
the capital of São Paulo, to grant the management of some of the main green
areas in the city to companies, reignited the public debate around the disputes
between the public and private sectors in relation to the Park. Ibirapuera. In
fact, the topic has never left the order of the day, taking different forms over
time. Since the public destination of the plain of the same name for the
realization of a park, the conflicts between the public power and private
interests of different natures surround this important heritage. Our purpose in
this article is to guide the current discussion about the park with relevant
historical data on the process of preserving the empty land before its
implementation, highlighting these conflicts.
The extent of consolidated studies and research on Ibirapuera Park has
witnessed a significant expansion. One of the first works that has an object in
the Park, although not central, is that of Regina Meyer, who places it in a
“turning point” for the metropolis, in which a vast questioning about the
destinations of its urban development was opened.twoManuella Marianna
Andrade, when head of the studies and research division of the Municipal
Historical Archive (AHM), gathered a significant set of documents on the various
park projects made for the area, in order to make its history known. All the
material collected is catalogued,3allowing the development of new studies.
Using part of this material, Fabiano Oliveira analyzed the projects of Dierberger,
Christiano das Neves and the project carried out by Oscar Niemeyer,

168 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

seeking to raise the discussion about the idea of modernity contained in 4. See Fabiano Lemes
Oliveira (2003).
each of them.4More recently, Eduardo Gurian has made an effort to recover
5. Vacant lands are vacant
the way in which the park's marquee project became the subject of articles land and transferred to the
public domain in case of
in press journals of different natures, in order to analyze the forms of its death of the owner and
appropriation by its users. absence of heirs. The
genesis of the phenomenon
This literature constitutes an important set of reflections about what can be considered the main park of the metropolis. dates back to the colonial
period, when the lands
However, this set does not include a concern to analyze the ways in which the emptiness that gave rise to it was preserved. Filling this were originally owned by
the Crown and returned to
gap is, therefore, the main purpose of this article. For this purpose, a variety of documents of different natures are gathered here. it, by devolution, under the
aforementioned conditions.
The period analyzed covers the years between the allocation of the land, in 1926, and the realization of the park, in 1954. The first

important collection of sources are the processes contained in the Municipal Historical Archive, referring to conflicts over the 6.Slogancommemorating the
4th Centenary.
ownership of land located inside the city. land designated as a park. These sources are complemented by the reports of Mayor Pires

do Rio, responsible for designating the area for the purpose of implementing the park, some documents from the “IV Centenary”

Fund from the same archive and a set of plans of the land and adjacent subdivisions, which help to recompose the litigation and

disputes over the appropriation of those lands. The sources were treated in order to show the multiple interests in the area, aroused

not only among private individuals, but also among important public and private institutions that aimed to settle in the region and

were more or less successful in their advance on the great public land. reserved in this noble stretch of the urban fabric. that help to

recompose the disputes and disputes for the appropriation of those lands. The sources were treated in order to show the multiple

interests in the area, aroused not only among private individuals, but also among important public and private institutions that

aimed to settle in the region and were more or less successful in their advance on the great public land. reserved in this noble stretch

of the urban fabric. that help to recompose the disputes and disputes for the appropriation of those lands. The sources were treated

in order to show the multiple interests in the area, aroused not only among private individuals, but also among important public and

private institutions that aimed to settle in the region and were more or less successful in their advance on the great public land.

reserved in this noble stretch of the urban fabric.

The lands of Várzea do Ibirapuera were vacant lands5made public in

1891, by transfer from the Ministry of Agriculture to the municipality of São
Paulo. The decision to implement a public park there was taken to the City
Council in 1926. But the park was only effectively implemented in 1954, made
possible by the commemorations of the IV Centenary of the city's foundation.
During the 64 years that the area was managed by the municipal
government as an urban void, and particularly during the last 28 years of this
period, when it was already designated as a park, it was the preservation of the void
that made this allocation possible. If the land had not been kept free throughout
this time, in the face of subsequent attempts at occupation, the Ibirapuera would
not exist there today. In the “fastest growing city in the world”,6
Protecting an area for the implementation of a park was a problem that
acquired special contours, as the voracity of urbanization was making the
free areas usable for this purpose scarce.

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 169

7. See Adriano Ferraz (2016).
8. See Process no.
2003-0.324.844-7, opinion
of 6/5/1941 (AHM).
170
The span of the period is surprisingly long. Since the 1920s, the city has
sought to preserve the void for the park. Over the years, there was an intense
conflict over the property of the land, between the Public Power and interests of
different natures. Discussions arose over the size of the land made public. There is
no lack of arguments for those who consider that the park should be much larger,
given the dimensions of the vacant area that gave rise to it. On the other hand,
disputes by private individuals still persist today. Several interests were mobilized
through the availability of such a vast public area, in such a peculiarly noble
situation, in the midst of exclusively residential neighborhoods. Several public and
private sectors tried to occupy it, as we will see later.
The persistence of the Public Power throughout this period contrasts
seriously with the present uncertainty about the future of the park. Immediately
after his election, even before taking office, the current mayor of the capital of São
Paulo announced the proposal to grant responsibility for the administration and
management of the main parks of the metropolis to private companies, spreading a
series of doubts about future forms of access. and use of such equipment.
According to the media, the plan would be to use the management model of Central
Park, in New York, disregarding, perhaps, the traditional culture of civil action,
largely supported by abundant and constant donations to finance projects of public
interest, historically present in American society but completely absent in the
Brazilian context.7Such a grant updates the debate around the disputes between the
Public Power and the private initiative, but puts it in new terms, substantially
shifting the position and role of the State in this matter and generating an aura of
threat among its users, the inhabitants of the metropolis. , regarding the guarantee
of its essential characteristic of public space. Through the analysis of the material
presented here, we will try to show that the role of the Municipal Government as a
defender and protector of the urban void in Várzea de Santo Amaro throughout the
period was essential for the viability of the park, including enabling its
implementation in accordance with certain postulates of Modern Architecture that
was spreading in Brazil at the time of its inauguration.
THE “GRILO” OF IBIRAPUERA: FROM THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE LAND TO THE MUNICIPALITY TO THE DECISION TO
IMPLEMENT THE PARK (1890-1930)
In 1941, at the request of the alleged owner, all the documentation
referring to the “discrimination and demarcation of the vacant lands of Ibirapuera”
was collected.8In that process, there are copies of the letter issued on 17
Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.
November 1890 by the Ministry of Agriculture, Commerce and Public Works of 9. See Government... (1890).

the Union authorizing the State Government to grant the vacant lands of Vila 10. See Government (1890).
The constant references to the
Mariana to the Council of the Municipal Intendence of the Capital. According to footage of the areas involved

the State Government, the area granted corresponded to the “necessary vacant in the conflicts discussed here
are intended to enable
land, except for the right of a third party, to complement a square league or comparisons.

4,356 hectares”.9In the same opinion, the State added that the municipality 11. José Pires do Rio

already had “half a league of land, which has been donated since the year 1598, (1880-1950), civil engineer,
economist and geologist, was
which, according to it, is partially invaded by intruders”.10 mayor of the city of São Paulo
between 1926 and 1930 for
The plans attached to the process (Figure 1) indicate that, in addition to the the São Paulo Republican
Party. He was also Minister of
current area of the park, the land later occupied by the Detran, an Army Transport and Public Works
(1919-22), Federal Deputy
Headquarters, the Legislative Assembly and the clubs of the Círculo Militar, Atlético (1924-25) and Minister of
Monte Líbano, were also donated to the municipality. and Ipê, as well as the Finance (1945-46).

neighborhoods of Jardim Lusitânia, Vila Nova Conceição, Vila Uberabinha and 12. See City Hall... (1927,
P. 10).
Moema, including Jardim Novo Mundo and Indianópolis, to the stream of Traição,
where Bandeirantes avenue is located today. 13. The term “cricket” has
been used since the colonial
period to designate the
Thus, it appears that an extension of land of one and a half square leagues
falsification of land ownership
belonged to the municipal power, in part already occupied by private individuals. The documents. The name comes
from the practice of putting
problem was treated in the 1941 opinion as the “Ibirapuera issue”. counterfeit papers in drawers
with insects that leave yellow
The “Ibirapuera question” dates back to the 1920s, when it was considered marks on them, giving them
an aged appearance.
for the first time to transform these public lands into a municipal park. In the report
of the administrative mandate of 1926, the then mayor Pires do Rio,11
14. See City Hall... (1927,
proponent of the park in Várzea de Santo Amaro, exposed the initial difficulties of P. 10).

implementing the project:

Unfortunately, however, a criminal attempt arose to make this work more difficult: with
forged documents, what forensic slang calls a “cricket” was formed, which is, in this case,
as an eminent lawyer said, the organization of an evident embezzlement. .12

At that time, the jurists of the Municipal Government referred to the

problem as the “cricket of Ibirapuera”, indicating that the “issue” referred to an
invasion problem.13
Pires do Rio's decision to implement the park was essentially based
on the existence of municipal public land and its privileged location. In the
1926 report, the mayor explained his intentions:

The lands of Várzea de Santo Amaro, which form the Invernada dos Firefighters and the old
Chácara de Ibirapuera, belong to the State and the Municipality. (...) They lend themselves,
admirably, to the construction of an immense garden or park, with an area equal to that of “Hide
Park” in London, equal to half of the “Bois de Boulogne” in Paris.14

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 171

 Figure 1 – Breakdown of vacant land transferred to the municipality in 1891. Survey of 1941. Source: Process n.
2003-0.324.844-7, Ibirapuera Park fund, PI 4 box (AHM).

The location of the land between upscale residential neighborhoods and middle
and upper classes that were implemented in São Paulo was decisive for the mayor's
decision:

Less than ten minutes away by tram from Liberdade or Higienópolis, in the neighborhood
of Vila Mariana and Jardim América, we have this large expanse of public land empty of
buildings. The initiative of a vast park was necessary, useful for the hygiene of the urban
population.15
15. See City Hall... (1927,
P. 10).

16. See City Hall... (1927, The existence of the public area in such a location and its eminently
P. 11).
urban condition defined, for Pires do Rio, the need for the park: “For a park of
these dimensions, in the heart of the city, the difficult thing is to have the land
empty of constructions; the rest is relatively secondary”.16The only

172 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

 17. See City Hall... (1927,
obstacle to the formation of the “big park” was the problem of the “cricket”, which,
P. 11).
according to the mayor, was already being overcome.
18. See City Hall... (1928). The
Pires do Rio invested in the project. Still in 1926, the city hall carried out two works municipal slaughterhouse had
been installed in Vila Mariana
with a view to guaranteeing the opening of the park: in 1887, not without many
discussions since 1881
between cattle drovers and
The City Hall is following, with interest, a particular project for the construction of a municipal sanitation workers.
paved road between São Paulo and Santo Amaro (...) future park.17 Torres (undated, p. 61-63).

19. See Process no.

1992-0.045.224-8, Municipal
Law no. 3123, of 12/23/1927
(AHM).

The following year, the planting of eucalyptus trees began on the 20. See Process no.
plot to absorb the soil's moisture, thus starting the park's vegetation 1992-0.045.224-8, Municipal
Law no. 3123, of 12/23/1927
operation. Also in 1927, it was decided to close the municipal (AHM).

slaughterhouse, located next to the plot.18 21. See City Hall... (1928,
P. 25).
The definitive acquisition of the land by the municipality was carried out in
the same year, through an exchange with the State Government. The City Hall was
authorized to exchange an area in Água Branca, currently Parque Fernando Costa,
“for a part of Invernada dos Firefighters, owned by the State and necessary for the
formation of the park”.19The law also authorized credit to the municipality for the
“continuation of works on the municipal park in Várzea de Santo Amaro”.20

The area exchanged with the State corresponded to the Firemen's Invernada.
The plan inserted in the process indicates that a portion of this area, corresponding to
the lots facing the current República do Líbano avenue and back to the park, belonged to
Cia. Puglisi, and was not incorporated into the municipalities themselves (Figure 2). the
company Puglisi was founded by industrialists Nicola and Giuseppe Puglisi Carbone,
partners of Count Mattarazzo at Banco Commerciale Italiano di São Paulo and owners of
Moinhos Santista, União de Refinadores de Açúcar and Manufatura de Açúcar.Italo-
Brazilian hats.

In the report for 1927, Pires do Rio described the situation on the ground:

The Municipality has already sold a large part of its land in Vila Clementino; however, it owns
almost the entire surface that goes from Avenida França Pinto to Córrego do Sapateiro. In
exchange with the State Government, it acquired the area between this stream and the
Caaguassú, the largest part of Invernada dos Firefighters. By purchase, it acquired the land
located between this stream and the end of Rua Abílio Soares.

Over this vast expanse, which measures close to 2,000,000 square meters, we are
building a large park, a future place of incomparable value for the city of São Paulo.21

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 173

22. Washington Luís
(1869-1957) was mayor of São
Paulo from 1914 to 1919,
governor of the state from
1920 to 1924 and president of
the Republic from 1924 to
1930, deposed by the coup led
by Getúlio Vargas.

23. See Municipal Law no.

2,122, of 3/6/1918.

Figure 2 – “Registration survey of part of the Ibirapuera and Caguassú floodplains”, December 1926.
Discrimination, in yellow chalk, of the land of Invernada dos Firefighters. Source: Process no.
1982-0.015.231-6, Ibirapuera Park fund, PI 14 box (AHM).

It is clear, from the excerpt above, the mayor's concern to protect the area from
the decisions of the Public Power itself to subdivide the land. But the implantation of the
park still in the management of Pires do Rio was impossible - not for lack of resources of
the City hall, but due to legal conflicts.

The decision to implement a public park in Várzea do Ibirapuera in 1926 was

in opposition to the previous initiative of the City Hall to subdivide the land. During
the administration of Washington Luís,22among other subdivisions, the City Hall
approved the opening of Jardim Lusitânia on vacant land (Figure 3).23With

174 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

 24. See Process no.
This followed the trend of transforming the vast area of the floodplain of the
2003-0,324,844-7, of
Pinheiros River into elite neighborhoods, initiated by Companhia City with the 6/20/1917 (AHM).

implementation of Jardim América.24The opening of Jardim Lusitânia provoked an

onslaught of individuals who claimed to be landowners in the region. The first
processes date from this period, such as that of Carlos Büker, who presented a deed
from 1905. The process lasted until 1932, when the lands were definitively assigned
to the municipality. The very statute of the lands, originally vacant, had
repercussions on problems that until today generate legal processes of land
ownership in the place.

Figure 3 – Plan of the Lusitânia Garden. Source: Process no. 2004-0.015.244-0, Parque Ibirapuera fund, box PI 11 (AHM).

The park conceived by Pires do Rio was conceived seeking not to interfere
directly in the already commercialized plots of Jardim Lusitânia. It was located on
land located above the extension of Rua Conselheiro Rodrigues Alves, not yet
occupied. Even so, the delimitation of the perimeter of public lands was

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 175

25. See Process no.
2003-0,324,844-7, of
contested in court: several individuals presented deeds of lots located within
6/20/1917 (AHM). the public area. Approved in 1918, the subdivision focused on a strip of
26. See Process no. these municipal lands, then reserved for the formation of the park. The City
2004-0.015.244-0 (AHM).
Hall itself recognized that “a large part had already been sold in public
27. See Process no. tender in May 1918”.25
2004-0.015.244-0, page 14 (AHM).
Three plots located within the perimeter specified for the park were
28. See Process no.
2004-0,015,147-9. Letter contested by alleged landowners (Figure 4). The City Hall even evaluated the
from the Heritage Board, of
land for possible expropriation or exchange for other municipal land.26These
11/10/1930 (AHM).
plots are still occupied by individuals today.
29. See Process no.
2004-0.015.244-0, pgs. 17-20 (AHM). From the problem of commercialization of these lots in Jardim Lusitânia,
30. See Process no. a second problem arose: the street plan of the allotment was incompatible with
2004-0.015.244-0, page 21 (AHM).
the park project and with the land already commercialized since 1918. For this
31. “The judicial defense of the reason, a study was requested for a new street. , in view of the possibility of
forthcoming municipality will
be concluded and the
negotiating the land with these individuals.
criminals punished by law. The
legal action, as we said, In 1928, a new street layout was agreed for the section of the subdivision that
delayed but did not prevent
was between the extensions of Conselheiro Rodrigues Alves and França Pinto streets.27
the work that we have been
carrying out to prepare the The new street layout, approved in 1930, provided for the implementation of the
land destined for the great
park; spent the municipality to
subdivision within the triangle formed by these roads and Indianópolis Avenue, currently
acquire more than 182,000 known as the Republic of Lebanon.28Then, some exchanges between the landowners in
square meters between Abílio
Soares Street, Coritiba Street dispute and the municipality were suggested.29However, the owners did not accept the
and Caaguassú Creek,
650:000$000 or
negotiation of the proposed exchanges.30

less than 4$000 a square Another sector in conflict corresponded to the Vila Frontin subdivision, located next
meter.” See City Hall... to Abílio Soares and José Antônio Coelho streets, currently Tutoia street (Figure 5). In the 1927
(1928, p. 28).
report, the mayor showed attempts to circumvent the conflict situation in Vila Frontin,
32. See Official Gazette of
3/10/1928, p. 6,973, and
announcing an investment corresponding to the purchase of the only land that could still be
resolution no. 501, of occupied by the park, belonging to Banco Metropolitano do Brasil.31The land had been
9/20/1928, included in process
no. 1992-0,045,223-0 (AHM). liquidated by Paulo de Frontin himself, the land developer, and was acquired by the City Hall
Paulo de Frontin (1860-1933),
for the price announced in the mayor's report.32In this case, it is shown an example of
engineer and businessman
from Rio de Janeiro linked to speculative investment by large investors on empty land in the city, with some financial
the Partido Republicano
Paulista, professor of the coverage from the Public Power.
Escola Politécnica do Rio de
Janeiro, was president of the Of the 85 land claims during the Pires do Rio administration in 1926, 11
Engineering Club from 1903 to
1933, through which he led
referred to land in the Santo Amaro floodplain. But City Hall's legal department
the reforms promoted by showed the documents to be falsified, invalidating many of the claims:33
Mayor Pereira Passos, not
only in terms of urbanization
works, but also in terms of This park, with part of 2,000,000 square meters, will triple the surface of the gardens of our
electricity supply. For a brief magnificent capital city. We now have, in São Paulo, only 926,839 square meters of parks
period of six months, he was
and gardens for use by a population of almost 1,000,000 inhabitants.34
mayor of the Federal District.

The directive of Pires do Rio, however, would take time to be implemented.

176 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

 33. See Maria Celestina Teixeira
Mendes Torres (undated).

34. Cf. City Hall (1928, p.

26).

Figure 4 – Floor plan with a breakdown of plots 9, 11 and 12 of Jardim Lusitânia,

located within the perimeter delimited to Parque Ibirapuera. Source: Process no.
2004- 0.015.244-0, Ibirapuera Park fund, PI 11 box (AHM).

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 177

 Figure 5 – Plan of the Vila Frontin subdivision, with a breakdown of the areas negotiated with the
city hall. Source: Process no. 1992-0.045.223-0, Ibirapuera Park fund, PI 2 box (AHM).

178 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

PUBLIC-PRIVATE CONFLICT: HYPODROMEVERSUSNURSERY (1929-1933) 35. Goffredo da Silva Telles,
lawyer, was the son of engineer
and councilor Augusto Carlos da
Silva Telles, who had participated
In 1929, still in the management of Pires do Rio, the transfer of the in the elaboration of the
Anhangabaú Park project in
hippodrome of the Jockey Clube de São Paulo, located until then in Mooca, to the 1906. Like his father, he was also

lands of Ibirapuera, was authorized. Negotiations with the Jockey Club were lengthy. a councilor. Between 1926 and
1930, he defended the project to
The proposal had been sent to the Chamber the previous year by the then councilor implement the avenue

Goffredo da Silva Telles (1888-1980).35 Anhangabaú, becoming the

main articulator in terms of
Telles was mayor of the city of São Paulo for a short period in 1932. urbanism in the City Council
during the management of
During his term, he approved for the first time an effective project for the Pires do Rio. He was mayor
implantation of the park, commissioned to the landscaper Reinaldo Dierberger. of the city in 1932 and a
member of the Amigos da
The project foresaw the reservation of an area for the implementation of the Cidade Society from 1934
onwards. see Cândido Malta
new hippodrome, putting into effect the proposal to transfer the Jóquei Clube to Campos
Ibirapuera (Figure 6).36
Based on the prerogative of the municipal act, the Jóquei Clube addressed a (2000, p. 343-347).

letter to the mayor, in 1933, dealing with the “translation of the Hipódromo da 36. Act no. 378, of July 29,
1932, approved the “project
Mooca to the Ibirapuera Park”.37According to the Club, the transfer from the by Reinaldo Dierberger for
hippodrome to Ibirapuera would free up a public area in Mooca of 225 thousand the constitution of the great
municipal park of
square meters. This area was occupied by the Jockey Club since 1876, when the Ibirapuera”, and the Act n.
379, of the same date,
construction of the hippodrome began. In 1890, it was agreed to loan the public ratified Law n. 3,256. The
land to the Jóquei Clube, in tenancy, “with an indefinite term assignment, but acts of no. 378 and 379 are
included in process no.
without the municipality giving up its property right over the land”.38 2003- 0,293,069-4
(AHM). To see
also Maria Celestina
The suggested area for the hippodrome at Ibirapuera was 435,750 square teixeira Mendes Torres
(n/d, p. 98).
meters. According to the terms of the negotiation proposed by the club, it was
assumed that the lands of Mooca were worth four times more than those of 37. Cf. Process no.
2003-0325.104-9 (AHM).
Ibirapuera. In addition, the club claimed that it had implemented improvements on
38. Cf. Process no.
the land, worth approximately 1,000 contos de réis. Thus, in addition to proposing 2003-0325.104-9, page 8 (AHM).

to keep an area twice as large, in a privileged location, the club still assumed that
39. Cf. Process no.
the transaction would favor the City Hall. According to his calculations, the 2003-0325.104-9, page 8 (AHM).

municipality should revert 7,000 contos de réis to the club, which ended the
proposal giving up half of the amount.

Then, the process reveals the refusal of the proposal by the City Hall: “as the
municipality is the legitimate and sole owner of this land, it cannot accept the
proposal made by the Jockey Club”.39

However, the documents issued by the City Hall show interest in the
“future use of the municipal lands of Mooca, when they are no longer used by
the Jockey Club”. The city government was interested in moving the club to “a
more proper location”, as well as in recovering the Mooca area, “an industrial,
densely inhabited neighborhood”, which could “be converted into a

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 179

 landscaped and wooded public place, which will contribute to considerably
improve the hygienic conditions of this part of the city”.40

Figure 6 – “Ibirapuera Municipal Park”. Project plan, from November 29, 1933, providing for the reservation of area for the
implementation of the hippodrome. Source: Process no. 2003-0.328.958-5, Parque Ibirapuera fund, PI 10 box (AHM).

180 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

 40. See Process no.
The City Hall's counter-proposal foresaw the construction of the new racetrack
2003-0,324,888-9, of 3/6/1934,
on the Ibirapuera land, paid for “for 40 years, at the rate of 30 contos de réis per month” page 4 (AHM).

and the delivery of the Mooca lands with the improvements at no additional cost to the 41. See Process no.
2003-0,324,888-9, of 3/6/1934,
City Hall. The expenses corresponding to the improvements would be debited from the page 4 (AHM).
value of the monthly lease and the difference would be deducted in the last five years, at
42. Cf. Process no.
which time the Jockey Club would stop paying the rent. 2003-0,324,888-9, of 3/6/1934,
page 4 (AHM), document
Faced with the proposal, the Jockey Club replied that “it will only be able to issued on 9/12/1934.

claim compensation for giving up the servitude it enjoys (...) as long as such 43. See Maria Ruth Amaral
de Sampaio (1999).
servitude is reestablished on an equal area in a situation that it itself advocates as
excellent and better than the current one”.41Therefore, he presented a 44. See Process no.
2004-0,015,238-6 (AHM).
counterproposal. The negotiation lasted until the following year, focusing on the
45. See Process no. 2003-
values of the land, the rights of the Jockey Club and the conditions of exchange, 0,324,888-9, letter of
without obtaining terms of agreement. The flow of proposals and counter-proposals 12/21/1934 (AHM).

was terminated by a document based on various legal provisions, concluding that

“the last proposal presented by the Jockey Club cannot be accepted”.42In this case,
there is a surprising vigor of the Public Power in defending the municipal patrimony.

The solution to the issue would come in other ways. At the end of 1933, the
Jockey Club received a proposal for a land donation from Cia. City, in the Cidade
Jardim neighborhood, for the construction of the new hippodrome.43A relatively
cheap area at the time, but one that would see an impressive appreciation process
in the following decades. Interestingly, the solution was forwarded to private
agents, since the part that offered the land next to the Pinheiros River was also very
interested in the realization of the park, as it had subdivided its surrounding
neighborhoods.

Simultaneously to this long negotiation process with the Jóquei Clube,

the City Hall sought to complement the productivity of the municipal nursery,
with a view to expanding the urban tree planting project. The municipal nursery
had initially been set up in the Água Branca park, land that then belonged to the
City Hall.44In 1934, during Fábio Prado’s administration as mayor, Manoel Lopes
de Oliveira, director of the Parks and Gardens Division, requested an area on
the Ibirapuera land for a nursery, with “greenhouse for sowing, shading slats,
multiplication beds, irrigation systems, manure and other permanent
constructions”.45The landscaper claimed that it was not possible for the city to
have the required development for its beautification, afforestation and
reforestation with the existing facilities, of a temporary nature. He explained
that it was necessary for the plants to be cultivated in a nursery for eight or ten
years, before being planted in streets and squares. The coincidence of dates
between the approval of the hippodrome project in Ibirapuera

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 181

46. See Process no. 2003-
and the beginning of activities to implement the municipal nursery and treatment of the
0,324,888-9, letter of
12/21/1934, page 3 (AHM). pond with eucalyptus trees, although incipient, shows that even within the City Hall there
47. See Process no. were divergences regarding the issue of occupation of the park.
2003-0.324.888-9, project of
4/14/1935 (AHM). In the same process, Carlos Lodi, from the General Planning Division of the
48. See Process no. 2003-
Department of Urbanism, wrote to the head of the Urban Planning Division, still
0,324,888-9, letter of with the intention of accommodating the new Jockey Club racing meadow in the
5/14/1935 (AHM).
Ibirapuera area, finding it “difficult and unpleasant for any mutilation of the park in
49. Paulo Alfeu Junqueira de
Monteiro Duarte (1899-1984) had
order to house the plant nursery”. He suggested “moving the nursery to another
a degree in Law. He was also a land, not yet used”.46
writer, journalist and
anthropologist. As a young man,
Still in the same process, there is a “project for the incorporation of the area
he became involved in the city's
cultural movement, supporting that had been reserved for the Hipódromo Paulistano, for the Ibirapuera Park”,
the Modern Art Week of 22.
Politically active, he was a
providing for the construction of a sports center with a stadium, a large swimming
member of the Democratic Party pool and tennis courts, also suggesting that the land occupied by the nursery could
and fought alongside the
Paulistas against the Vargas be attached to the park in the future, when it was implemented.47
government's positions since the
beginning of the 1930s, having
But then a letter to the director of the Department of Works reiterated the
been exiled in France and the nursery's defense.48
United States. He worked in the
creation of the Department of
The then mayor was also in favor of implementing the nursery: on
Culture in São Paulo, was
director of the Museu Paulista October 24, 1935, the City Hall allocated 90:000$000 for the construction of the
and was part of the select group
of intellectuals who conceived
necessary improvements, occupying the sector previously offered to the Jockey
the project to create the
Club (Figure 7).
University of São Paulo in 1934,
later working on the creation of
the Instituto de Pré-
New attempts to occupy the park area did not cease to affect. Some of
them were described by journalist Paulo Duarte.49In constant defense of the
- History, among many other
activities. In France, he administration of Fábio Prado, to whom he was a direct adviser, the journalist
maintained a close connection
repeated that, during his tenure, the park was “almost ready to be opened to
with theMusee de l'Homme.A
friend of Fábio Prado, he was his the public, entirely wooded and urbanized”.50
advisor during his term as mayor
between 1934 and 1938. As for the race tracks proposed by the Jockey Club, Duarte reiterated:
50. See Paulo Duarte (1976b, “Fábio did not accept this idea and I even violently supported the mayor.
P. 249).
That should be a big park in São Paulo. Its location within the city further
51. See Paulo Duarte (1976b, imposed its preservation and the non-acceptance of a horse racing field
P. 167).
there”.51
Duarte dedicated some pages of his memoirs to the case of the attempt to
implement the new São Paulo airport on the Ibirapuera floodplain.

After the foundation of VASP, a successful creation by Armando with the collaboration
mainly of José Mariano de Camargo Aranha, who had the idea immediately supported
by the intervener, Campo de Marte could no longer serve the purpose of an airport
(...). But some cafe or tavern planners invented that the good place for installing the
airport is the land of Ibirapuera, which is also in our sights for the installation of a
large park for the city, the Bois de Boulogne in São Paulo, and

182 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

 these fools want to put a field of commercial planes there without knowing the 52. See Paulo Duarte (1976a,
P. 234).
consequences of installing it, next to a residential center and on a relatively small
land for such a thing, since the area required for this, in view of the relatively near
future, it has to be huge, capable of meeting the demands of a big city for at least the
next fifty years. Because that idiot from Impartial is cursing us because we want to
install the airport in Campo de Marte, which we don't agree with and we don't want
to install it in an appropriate place, which would be Ibirapuera, which is also stupid.
But this sycophant's breath is almost exhausted...52

Figure 7 – “Ibirapuera
Park. Joint plan, including
the part that had been
reserved for the
hippodromo paulis-
tano”, of April 17, 1935.
Source: Process
no. 2004-0.015.1238-6,
Ibirapuera Park fund, PI
10 box (AHM).

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 183

53. See Paulo Duarte (1976b,
P. 69). British engineer Louis
The long quote is still funny, showing the author's nervousness in
Romero Sanson (1887-1967) deriding the opponent of “Impartial”, but also curiously assuming the
was the founder of Cia.
Autoestradas SA, developer of “authorship” of the Park for his group.
the Brigadeiro Luís Antônio,
Washington Luís and The issue was resolved when Cia. Autoestradas Incorporadora e Construtora
Interlagos avenues, as well as
Congonhas Airport, the S./A., owned by Louis Romero Sanson, offered the State Government an area in the
Interlagos Circuit, the
Congonhas neighborhood, which it was subdividing, on the pretext of being “the
neighboring Balneário Satélite
da Capital, the Clube de most suitable piece of land for a large airport, located in the high of a small plateau,
Campo São Paulo and the
Cidade Dutra district. where the familiar fog and fog of São Paulo hardly reached”.53In this case, it was a
case of a private agent selling an area to the Government, also for the benefit of the
54. Cf. Process no. valorization of the previous enterprise.
2003-0,325,300-9 (AHM).
Another attempt to occupy Ibirapuera's ground came from Clube Atlético
55. “Another opinion would
be, if the area of land Sírio Libanês. The Syrian-Lebanese colony, having assumed a moral commitment to
targeted did not affect the
realization of plans already “contribute with its best efforts to the aggrandizement of this progressive capital”,
approved.” opinion of
required a land for the installation of a sports club, with 60 thousand square meters,
7/25/1934 attached n.
2003-0,325,300-9. for the installation of an athletics field, 10 to 15 tennis courts, 2 basketball and
56. See Process no. volleyball courts, a gym, a swimming pool, aplayground, a headquarters with
2004-0.015.147-9 and report
lounges and changing rooms and an administrative area.
of 7/17/1936, contained in
process no. 2003-0.325.232-0,
page 5 (AHM): “A part
Knowing the City Hall’s intention to implement a sports stadium on the land
corresponding to 62% of this of Ibirapuera, and considering the possibility of implementing the Jockey Club, the
triangular area had already
been sold in 1918, which Syrian-Lebanese colony requested the area “located on the extension of Rua Abílio
precisely complicated the
realization of any project
Soares where this street forms an angle with Rua Curitiba”. ”, as a concession for
covering the entirety”.
public utility purposes.54The City Hall's response, however, was quick and concise,
57. See Proposal sent to the denying the proposal.55The club came to establish itself in nearby land, also
city hall in 1936, in Process
n. 2003-0,325,232-0 (AHM). municipal, next to Ibirapuera Avenue.
It was not possible to find
any reference about Cia.
Mauá.

THE RETURN OF THE LEGAL PROBLEM (1941)

During this entire period of negotiations, the Jardim Lusitânia

problem remained unsolved. In 1930, Mayor Pires do Rio had approved the
new street layout for Jardim Lusitânia. However, the private land exchange
agreements provided for in that process were not made, and the term
expired.56
Negotiations continued until 1935, when Cia. Mauá, who bought a large part of
the land in the neighborhood, proposed to implement a new street (Figure 8) and
negotiate the lots that were inside the park, exchanging them for others outside, in the
same subdivision.57However, all the clauses of the proposal made to the

184 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

City Hall were already provided for by law as an obligation of the land developer. Therefore, “it
is absolutely not of interest to the Municipality, as it contains only the requirements provided
for by the code and that the company, like any other individual, is obliged to respect in case it
wishes to open streets within the municipality”.58

Figure 8 – “Street layout project covering the land owned by the municipality and Companhia Mauá in the Ibirapuera
floodplain”. Source: Process no. 2003-0.325.271-1, Ibirapuera Park fund, PI 3 box (AHM).

Therefore, the exchange of the lots that were located inside the park
area was not feasible. A new internal report, dated February 10, 1937, “as the
Municipality needed to become the owner of these plots of land”, proposed that
“the idea of exchange should be abandoned and that they be acquired for
58. See Opinion issued by the
money”.59 city hall on 9/15/1936, page 17
of the same process.
In 1940, the subdivision was revised by the Government. Decree-Law
59. See Process no.
No. 31, of May 7, 1940, revoked the municipal land subdivision plan in 2003-0.325.232-0, page 24 (AHM).

Várzea do Ibirapuera and authorized the mayor to acquire neighboring

private areas, through exchange, in the stretch between Rua França and

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 185

60. See Process no.
Pinto (currently Ibirapuera Avenue), Conselheiro Rodrigues Alves Avenue (IV
2003-0,325,271-1 (AHM).
Centenary) and Indianópolis Avenue (Republic of Lebanon), in order to regularize
61. See Process no.
2004-0.015.256-4 (AHM). the park's perimeter. The revocation of the subdivision aimed to resolve the issue
caused by the sale of the conflicting plots. The subdivision was revoked, but the
62. Cf. William Fillinger
(1941, p. 83). properties remained private.
63. Cf. William Fillinger At that time, a questioning about land property taxes began.60Private
(1941, p. 33).
landowners negotiated exchanges with the Municipality in a deed drawn up
64. See William Fillinger
(1941, p. 80).
on July 23, 1940, but requested the return of taxes collected since 1936,
when the land was declared to belong to the perimeter of the Ibirapuera
Park, obtaining a negative response. The conflicts regarding the land tax
persisted, preventing the resolution of the problem of transferring these
lots to the Public Power. New open process indicates the persistence of the
conflict.61Thus, to this day there are private individuals established within
the perimeter of the Ibirapuera Park.

In order to verify the pertinence and veracity of the claims of

ownership in the land, the Legal Department of the City Hall prepared a
technical opinion with a view to discriminating the perimeter of vacant land
belonging to public patrimony. The survey was thorough, including
authentic copies of the main documents that make up the process of
granting the vacant lands of Ibirapuera to the Municipal Intendence of São
Paulo by the Federal Government.
The opinion issued in 1941 left no doubt: “It is thus definitively
proved the dominion of the Municipality of S. Paulo over the lands of
Ibirapuera, represented and clearly identified in the plan that I now present
in a certified copy”.62
Therefore, the opinion concluded that “the lands deemed to be vacant
are in fact vacant. The technical process of its investigation was perfect,
complete and honest”.63In an addendum to the technical opinion, it was
reported that, once the public land had been surveyed and measured, its
extensions, boundaries and directions were precisely determined. The area of
the vacant land was 10,060.80 square meters, the area of the occupied land
was 1,014.10 square meters and the perimeter of the land totaled 14,634.20
meters.64In this case, the effort of the municipal agency to act against private
interests, this time individuals, to guarantee public ownership of the land to be
integrated into the park is evident.
In 1942, there was still land in Ibirapuera being transferred from the State to the
Municipality:

186 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

 (...) the following properties, owned by the State, are transferred to the municipality of S. Paulo, 65. See Process no.
1982-0.015.231-6, opinion
under the terms and for the purposes set out in this decree-law: (...) the area located in no. 246, of 1943 (AHM).
Ibirapuera, remaining from the old Invernada of the Fire Department, limited by Manoel da
Nóbrega Street, by the land attached to the Squadron and Cavalry Barracks, Abílio Soares Street,
the first stream that crosses this street just below the previous land, and the highway until the
junction with Manoel da Nóbrega Street, point where the perimeter is closed.65

The public Gymnasium and Velodrome were installed on this terrain (Figure
9), which were separated from the park by the implantation of Avenida Brasil and
later by the Legislative Assembly, to which the City Hall also donated a part of the
land, of 32,500 square meters.

Figure 9: “Excerpt from Ibirapuera Municipal Park”, from 1937, with a breakdown of the area for the implementation of a
sports gym. Source: Process no. 1982-0.015.231-6, Ibirapuera Park fund, PI 14 box (AHM).

In his memoirs, Paulo Duarte also tells about the occupation of part of
the land by the Army:

It is true that some of those State Government properties had already been occupied by
the Army since 1932, such as Campo de Marte, the former hospice located in Várzea do
Carmo, which had been transformed into a barracks, an important area of Ibirapuera,

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 187

66. See Paulo Duarte (1976a, but the Hospedaria dos Imigrantes and others were later recovered. The already occupied
P. 105).
part of Ibirapuera was later even added, but this was done with a legal appearance, as the
67. Cf. William Fillinger mayor who later ceded it to increase the prey already occupied since 1932 had neither the
(1941, paragraph III). The courage nor the skill of Armando, refusing that extortion , because another piece of the old
Monument to the Flags had
Invernada dos Firefighters was added thanks to the weakness of a less energetic mayor
been approved in 1936, but
was effectively built only in and unwilling to defend the patrimony of the municipality.66
1942. On this process and
its meanings, see Paulo
César Garcez Marins (1999,
p. 9-36). In this way, the Army captured 120,000 square meters of land in the
park. Once again we see Duarte claiming responsibility for defending the
68. See William Fillinger park for his political group.
(1941, paragraph 1).
This was also the moment of implantation of the Monument to the Flags. The
69. See Ana Claudia Castilho
Barone (2009). assignment of the land to the municipality was intended to “complete the Ibirapuera Park and
provide a landscape and architectural environment for the Monument to the Bandeiras, as
70. On the invitation to
Niemeyer for this project, well as to establish a connection between the park and Avenida Brasil”.67The decree also
see Daniela Viana Leal
(2003, p. 50-51). established the use of the area:

Of the area referred to in item III above, a fraction will be reserved for the school and
sports facility of the Sports Department, located at its upper end, measuring 105,340.00 m
two, the State being able to build and operate the aforementioned facility, without any other

restriction than maintaining the park aspect and submitting its projects to the architectural
and landscape approval of the city hall, for the harmonization of the whole.68

The reservation would serve to maintain the State's prerogative to

install equipment the size of the Legislative Assembly on the same land, facing
Avenida Brasil. In this case, it was the Public Power itself, at the state level, that
suppressed a portion of the municipal park for its own use.
Finally, it remains to make a brief comment on the occupations
encouraged and also expelled from Várzea do Ibirapuera when the park was
implemented in 1954: the pavilions and the preexisting favela on the land. In terms
of encouraged occupation, the pavilions built in the park for the International
Industry Fair constituted the pivot around which the festive celebrations revolved. At
the time of their construction, these pavilions were loudly criticized by a group of
defenders of the implantation of an “exclusively green park” in the place.69In 1951, a
preliminary project presented by Christiano Stockler das Neves for the park did not
include exhibition pavilions. The definitive proposal would be adopted by the
architect Oscar Niemeyer, in response to the request of the patron of the
celebrations, patron Ciccillo Matarazzo. Niemeyer's choice for the authorship of the
project was in tune with the celebration of a certain hegemonic aspect of the
Modern Movement in architecture and the arts, and lent itself in a forceful way to
silence any oppositions to the occupation of the park by pavilions of cultural
exhibitions.70Finally, a public park would be implemented

188 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

in the old Invernada dos Firefighters, hosting a set of buildingsex-new, 71. See IV Centenary Fund,
box 42, case no. 224 (AHM).
conceived in accordance with a dear principle of that branch of Architecture
privileged at that time, which preached a formal rupture with respect to the 72. Cf. IV Centenary Fund,
continuities, historical contingencies or pre-existences of the place. box 62, process n. 1267,
letter of October 15, 1952
(AHM). Several debates in
The existing slum would be removed far away, demonstrating that the the City Council already in
housing of the poorest was an unwanted use and was even excluded from the 1954 proposed the
extinction of the Canindé
circuit programmed for the frequency and use of the Park. In a letter of January 21, favela, which, however, had
been created two years
1952, the commission responsible for promoting the celebrations of the IV earlier by the hands of the
Centenary demanded that the mayor remove the existing slum on the land of municipal power itself.

Ibirapuera, located between Padre Manoel da Nóbrega and Abílio Soares streets.71In
just nine months, a letter informed the president of the commission, Ciccillo
Matarazzo, of the “services carried out in Ibirapuera Park, in the sense of recovering,
entirely free, the land located between Abílio Soares and Manoel da Nóbrega
streets, which was occupied by slums ”: 204 families in 186 shacks, of which 180
were displaced to their own land and six to the Canindé favela, without any support
or protection from the municipal authorities.72

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

In the conflicts exposed here, some important issues stand out. The
successive attacks were very forceful, advancing on the fragile perimeter
determined by the public ordinance of 1926 and reiterated in 1941 by legal
process. The private investments with the purpose of residential
implantation seem to have haunted even more, revealing the short-term
vision of Mayor Washington Luís for the urban development of the region,
when he determined the private commercialization of parts of the large land
through residential subdivisions. nobles. The reversal of this situation with
the indication of the implementation of the public park changed the
circumstances of these disputes and gave the Public Power the strength to
win some of these disputes. However, if the defense of the plot was
resistant to individuals,

The Public Power itself, in its diversity of composition, differed in the orientation
on how to occupy the land. It is possible, throughout the process described in the article,
to perceive that different bodies of the municipal administration acted simultaneously in
opposite ways regarding the guarantee of land tenure for the implementation of the
park. The sharpest defenses against installing the Jockey

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 189

 Clube or the airport were successful because these claims had a direct impact
on the area of Invernada dos Firefighters, where the park was implanted.
Other institutions, which advanced into adjacent areas, were successful and are
still in place today, such as the Legislative Assembly, the Military Circle and
numerous concessions for use around the park, for charitable associations,
hospitals, clubs and associations. In 2012, the implementation of MAC
Ibirapuera in the former Palácio da Agricultura, occupied by the Department of
Transit – Detran for fifty years, between 1959 and 2009, was an important
victory, recovering the building for a cultural purpose. Today, however, new
threats surround this environment, with developments in a real estate market
that seeks heating waves in the noblest areas of the city and is certainly aimed
at the Ibirapuera Park region. The discussion on the privatization of the park's
administration and on possible partnerships between the private sector and the
public sector for this purpose is placed, therefore, in a larger context, referring
to the destiny of the entire surrounding region.
Thus, throughout the history of preserving the void of this land, we have a
series of different positions of the Public Power in relation to the interests of
multiple agents. Initially, the problem of acquiring public land for the implantation
of the park seemed to be just a matter of exchanges between the different spheres
of government, which was facilitated at that time, given the presence of the
Republican Party in various representations. However, as soon as the idea of the
Park was announced, the municipal power had to arbitrate over the occupations
previously approved by itself, in disputes and negotiations that would be replicated
over time.

In the case of subdivisions, in which the Public Power dealt directly with
individual interests, its position of resistance to the granting of favors and
grants is clear, by legally invalidating several allegations, as in the example of
Cia. Mauá and in others verified. Even so, it was not always able to recover the
lots necessary for the realization of the park, as in Jd. Lusitania, for example. In
the case of Cia. Puglisi or Vila Frontin, in which there seems to have been an
organized interest in the land, with the presence of a company or a bank
interceding against it, the Public Power had much less resources to preserve the
public interest. In the first, he gave in completely to private interests. In the
second, he was led to negotiate the purchase of the lots in question.
In the case of private institutions, the Public Power demonstrated its strength
and was more successful in relation to the interest in preserving the land. It was like this
against the onslaught of the Jockey Club, the airport, sports clubs. In cases where the
dispute involved organs of the Public Power itself, as in the example of

190 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

State Legislative Assembly or the Army, municipal resistance was very weak,
insufficient to assert its interest.
This survey does not exhaust all the attacks against the land that would give
rise to the Ibirapuera Park. On the contrary, many other institutions whose
documentation we did not have access to were able to settle in those vacant lots.
Even so, with this survey, it is possible to perceive that the horizon of the municipal
power remained resolute on the preservation of the void in Várzea de Santo Amaro,
even in the absence of different projects that have been carried out under its own
contract for the implementation of parks with different characteristics in that public
area. At the end of the day, this void would have been fundamental, when it was
definitively implanted.

The ostensible attempts of countless agents on the public area were

opposed by a State determined to defend the interests of the municipality. In this
way, the park was finally successfully completed. The current proposition of
granting its management to the private sector seems to disregard the strength,
capacity and the very reason for being of the Public Power. In this sense, it is
valuable to disseminate access to the history of the municipal struggle for this land,
which led to the viability of the park that São Paulo residents have today, so that the
multiple interests and possible consequences at stake can be discussed extensively
and carefully.

The debate remains open.

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 191

 REFERENCES

PRIMARY SOURCES

Municipal Historical Archive(AHM), Sao Paulo.

IV Centenary Fund, box 42, case no. 224.
IV Centenary Fund, box 62, process n. 1267.

Sao Paulo's State Government. Office no. 782, of 11/26/1890. Communication from the Government of the
State of São Paulo to the Municipal Intendency.

Process no. 1982-0,015,231-6.

Process no. 1992-0,045,223-0.

Process no. 1992-0,045,224-8.

Process no. 2003-0,324,844-7.

Process no. 2003-0,324,888-9.

Process no. 2003-0.325.104-9.

Process no. 2003-0,325,271-1.

Process no. 2003-0,325,300-9.

Process no. 2003-0,325,232-0.

Process no. 2003-0,328,958-5

Process no. 2003-0,293,069-4.

Process no. 2004-0.015.147-9.

Process no. 2004-0.015.238-6.

Process no. 2004-0.015.244-0.

Process no. 2004-0.015.256-4.

FILLINGER, William.Ibirapuera, huge “cricket”. Technical opinion on the land discrimination

process. The Municipality of São Paulo is dealing with high-class counterfeiters. São Paulo:
Legal Department of the Municipality of São Paulo, 1941.

CITY HALL OF SÃO PAULO.1926 report presented by Dr. J. Pires do Rio, Mayor of the
Municipality of São Paulo.São Paulo: Section of Works of “O Estado de São Paulo”, 1927.

192 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.

______1927 report presented by Dr. J. Pires do Rio, Mayor of the Municipality of São Paulo. São
Paulo: Empreza Graphica Limitada, 1928.

BOOKS, ARTICLES AND THESES

ANDRADE, Manuella Marianna. The Ibirapuera Park: 1890 to 1954.architexts, São Paulo, year
5, n. 051.01, Vitruvius, Sept. 2004. Available at: <http://www.vitruvius.com.br/revistas/read/
arquitextos/05.051/553>. Accessed on: 20 jun. 2017.

BARONE, Ana Claudia Castilho. Opposition to the Ibirapuera Park pavilions (1950-1954). Annals of
the Paulista Museum: History and Material Culture, Sao Paulo, v. 17, no. 2, p. 295-316, 2009.

CAMPOS, Cândido Malta.The directions of the city:urbanism and modernization in São Paulo. Sao
Paulo: Senac, 2000.

DUARTE, Paul.Memories III:Dark Jungle. Sao Paulo: Hucitec, 1976a.

______Memories IV: The Seabrook Dead. São Paulo: Hucitec, 1976b.

FERRAZ, Adrian. Doria is studying importing the Central Park model to Ibirapuera.The State of São
Paulo, Sao Paulo, 9 Nov. 2016

LEAL, Daniela Viana.Oscar Niemeyer and the real estate market in São Paulo in the 1950s: the
satellite office under the direction of the Carlos Lemos archive and the buildings
commissioned by Banco Nacional Imobiliário. Dissertation (Master) – Institute of Philosophy
and Human Sciences, State University of Campinas, Campinas, 2003.

MARINS, Paulo Cesar Garcez. The Ibirapuera Park and the construction of São Paulo's identity.
Annals of the Paulista Museum: History and Material Culture, Sao Paulo, v. 6/7, no. 1, p. 9-36,
1999 [2003].

MEYER, Regina Maria Prosperi.Metropolis and Urbanism: São Paulo, 1950s.Thesis (Doctorate)
– Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, 1991.

OLIVEIRA, Fabiano Lemes.The projects for Ibirapuera Park: from Manequinho Lopes to
Niemeyer (1926-1954). Dissertation (Master) – School of Engineering of São Carlos, University
of São Paulo, São Carlos: 2003.

ANNALS OF MUSEUM PAULISTA –vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017. 193

 SAMPAIO, Maria Ruth Amaral de (Coord.).Sao Paulo, 1934-1938: years of the Fábio Prado
administration. São Paulo: FAUUSP, 1999.

TORRES, Maria Celestina Teixeira Mendes.ibirapuera. São Paulo: Department of Historic Heritage of
the Municipality of São Paulo, [s/d]. (History of the neighborhoods of São Paulo, 11)

Article submitted on 11/22/2016. Approved on 02/11/2017.

All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License

194 Anais do MUSEUM PAULISTA–vol. 25, nº3, September-December 2017.