✓ verbatim from the press
São Paulo's Justice suspended the Boulevard São João project — nicknamed Times Square Paulistana — which planned to install four giant LED panels at the intersection of Ipiranga and São João avenues in the city center. The preliminary injunction was granted by Judge Celina Kiyomi Toyoshima of the 4th Public Treasury Court on Tuesday (27th). ✓
Press quotes (1)
"27/05/2026 Vistos. Ciência ao autor acerca da manifestação do Ministério Público, devendo providenciar a emenda conforme requerido. Considerando a magnitude do projeto, o impacto na região, bem como o potencial dano à toda população, defiro por ora a liminar"
The decision prohibits the beginning of any work, installation or intervention related to the project, including the installation of panels on the Cine Paris República, Herculano de Almeida, Galeria Sampa and New York buildings, as well as mapped projections on the Independência II Building. The magistrate grounded the injunction considering "the magnitude of the project, the impact on the region, as well as the potential damage to the entire population". ✓
Press quotes (1)
"II) a proibição de início de quaisquer obras, instalações ou intervenções relacionadas ao projeto, incluindo a fixação, montagem ou instalação dos painéis de LED nos edifícios Cine Paris República (Av. Ipiranga, 808), Herculano de Almeida (Av. Ipiranga, 890), Galeria Sampa (Av. São João, 604) e New York (Av.Ipiranga, 855), bem como projeções mapeadas no Edifício Independência II, sob pena de multa diária"
The project had been approved by the Urban Landscape Protection Commission (CPPU) in March — the minutes were published in the Official Gazette on March 13, 2026. The judge immediately suspended the effects of this deliberation and prohibited the formalization of the Cooperation Agreement for the municipal administrative process. The initiative planned private investment of R$ 42 million from Fábrica de Bares to create an entertainment hub inspired by New York's Times Square. ✓
Press quotes (1)
"defiro por ora a liminar para: I) suspensão imediata dos efeitos da deliberação consubstanciada na Ata SMUL/ATECC/CPPU nº 152701161, publicada no Diário Oficial da Cidade em 13 de março de 2026, proibindo a formalização do Termo de Cooperação referente ao Processo Administrativo nº 6056.2025/0021667-4"
The popular action was filed by Angelo Andrea Matarazzo and other authors, represented by the law firm Bottini & Tamasauskas Advogados. The decision orders the City Hall and other defendants to present documents such as the complete cooperation agreement, full CPPU minutes, technical opinions from the Urban Planning Secretariat and public consultation records. The decision can be appealed. ✓
Press quotes (1)
"A decisão liminar é da juíza Celina Kiyomi Toyoshima, da 4ª Vara da Fazenda Pública, em ação popular movida por Angelo Andrea Matarazzo e outros autores, representados pelos advogados Igor Tamasauskas e Maitê Bertaiolli, do Bottini & Tamasauskas Advogados."
The main legal argument is the compatibility of the project with the Clean City Law, established about 20 years ago to combat visual pollution in the capital. The law restricts external advertising and prohibits billboards, but the project sought an exception through urban counterparts — 70% of content would be cultural and 30% advertising, lasting 36 months. ✓
Press quotes (1)
"A proposta do Boulevard São João, no entanto, enfrenta críticas por causa da Lei Cidade Limpa, que foi estabelecida há quase 20 anos na capital paulista para combater a poluição visual. Essa lei regula anúncios e publicidade na cidade, limitando o tamanho de placas em fachadas comerciais e proibindo a instalação de outdoors."
Covered by only some sources, or where the accounts diverge.
Covered by only some sources (2)
Institute of Architects of Brazil (IAB-SP) among popular action authors
Project would include closing São João Ave. to cars on weekends
-
What was CPPU's specific legal rationale for approving the project as an exception to the Clean City Law?
Why it's still unknown: The judge ordered presentation of the complete minutes of the 30th Extraordinary CPPU Meeting with approved conditions, indicating that complete technical foundations were not made publicly available
-
Was there prior public consultation and what manifestations were received?
Why it's still unknown: The judicial decision ordered presentation of public consultation records and total manifestations, suggesting this data was not accessible
-
What is the Public Prosecutor's official position on the project?
Why it's still unknown: The decision mentions prior MP manifestation that motivated amendment, but the content of this manifestation was not disclosed by outlets