Low Rise vs High Rise: beyond a contradiction in São Paulo’s urban and architectural form

Journal title TERRITORIO
Author/s Nicola Russi
Publishing Year 2026 Issue 2025/112-113
Language English Pages 9 P. 54-62 File size 456 KB
DOI 10.3280/TR2025-112005
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

In recent decades, São Paulo has developed a unique urban morphology characterized by the coexistence of lowrise and highrise typologies. The 2014 Plano Diretor Estratégico introduced innovative regulations such as the Fachada Ativa, aimed at improving the relationship between buildings and public space. This paper analyzes the effects of these planning tools on the built environment through the case of the Mooca district, where recent developments highlight tensions between vertical density and traditional horizontal fabric. The study explores how São Paulo’s contemporary urban form diverges from established Western models, proposing a critical re?ection on local alternatives to urban growth that integrate smallscale densi?cation, typological innovation, and public space activation.�

Keywords: urban architecture; Mooca; active façade

  1. Anelli R.L.S., 2018, «Planning São Paulo». Planum. The Journal of Urbanism, 36, 1: 110.
  2. Bonfantini B., 2020, «La forma della strategia». Territorio, 92: 191192. DOI: 10.3280/TR2020092022
  3. Bucci A., 2021, São Paulo, argomenti d’architettura: della dissoluzione degli edi?ci e di come passare attraverso i muri. Melfi: Libria.
  4. Burton E., Jenks M., Williams K., 2003, eds., The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? London: Routledge.
  5. Calderón F., 2008, Human Development in Latin America: Participation, Citizenship, and Exclusion. New York: UNDP.
  6. Choay F., 2004, «The Realm of the Urban and the Death of the City». In:
  7. Ramos Á.M. (ed.). The Urban in 20 Contemporary Authors. Barcelona: ETSABUPC.
  8. Frampton K., 1983, Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of Resistance. In: Foster H. (ed.), The AntiAesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture. Seattle: Bay Press, 1630.
  9. Frehse F., 2012, «Cities in Latin America». Iberoamericana, 12, 45: 8386. Lynch K., 1981, A Theory of Good City Form. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  10. Motta S., Rossini H., 2024, «São Paulo em evolução: o desafio das fachadas ativas inativas». Caos Planejado, 11 gennaio. https://caosplanejado. com/saopauloemevolucaoodesafiodasfachadasativasinativas/ (accessed: 2026.04.01).
  11. Oliveira Teles T., 2020, «Urban Legislation and Urban Form: São Paulo in the 21st Century». Revista Brasileira de Estudos Urbanos e Regionais, 22, 1: 115. https://rbeur.anpur.org.br/rbeur/article/view/6420/5347 (accessed: 2026.04.01).
  12. Pescatori C., 2015, «Compact City and Dispersed City: Considerations on the Alphaville Brasília Project». Revista Brasileira de Estudos Urbanos e Regionais, 17, 2: 40.
  13. Zibechi R., 2012, Territories in Resistance: A Cartography of Latin American Social Movements. Chico, California: AK Press.

Nicola Russi, Low Rise vs High Rise: beyond a contradiction in São Paulo’s urban and architectural form in "TERRITORIO" 112-113/2025, pp 54-62, DOI: 10.3280/TR2025-112005