President of the District Court in Tel Aviv, Judge Eitan Orenstein, refused the request of the Ramat Gan Municipality to postpone the hearing on the policy plan 38 introduced there recently, and probably will decide the matter in the coming days.
The policy , set forth at the end of April this year, states that "a request NMP 38/1 (Strengthening and building, EM) and -38/2 (demolition and rebuilding, EM) localized on one plot, approved an exception and for reasons to be recorded, just where that does not prejudice the possibility of planning complexes existing or future, only depending on the state of public infrastructure in the area and taking into account the budgetary and financial situation of the city's regular budget and development. Also taken into consideration humanitarian concerns and the number of active construction sites nearby. "
In July this year provisions were beyond the implementation of this policy, determined that the programs did not adapt the system to the record date, will be subject to the new policy; Applications accepted by the system and have not yet been discussed, not subject to the new policy, but they will be examined under the rules formulated that policy; Applications submitted and discussed by the local committee, but has not yet made the matter a final decision will be examined by the standards of the old policy, but they are billed opinion of planning by the developer and approved by an engineer Local Committee that the exercise of the permit does not preclude the possibility of advance planning complexes in the spirit of the new Policy; Whereas the applications approved in principle, if not yet issued building permits for which - do not apply the new policy.
Accordingly appealed Builders Association builders of the District Court, sitting as the Court for Administrative Affairs against the Ramat Gan Municipality and the Attorney General, Attorney Eyal mother from the Cane CO. The petition claimed that unite local committee has no authority to stop spending plan 38 permits . According to the petition, the mayor of Ramat Gan, Carmel Shama-Hacohen , did not present a professional decision support and follow populist motives for giving election promises.
Discussion was joined by Attorney General's Office, attached to an opinion written by the director of the administrative district attorney's office in Tel Aviv citizens, Attorney Karen Yost and Attorney Iska Fisher-Joseph. "In practice it seems that the policy as determined negates the provisions of the plan, since it brings the realization of its minimal tailings and rejects many apartment owners interested in strengthening and protecting their apartment the opportunity to do so. Therefore, the Attorney General believes that this policy cannot be considered as reasonable in terms of the manner of exercise of discretion by the local committee in accordance with the authority granted to it and cannot stand, "reads the opinion.
In response approach Ramat Gan Municipality request from Judge Orenstein postpone the discussion held yesterday (Monday) in order you make adjustments to the policy, the spirit of notes the attorney, but the judge decided not to grant the request, it means that the current policy is accepted or canceled - but not corrected .
The mayor attended the hearing Carmel Shama-Hacohen, who said among other things that "we are not told, the plan does not exist. We did not say 'Do not submit requests NMP not approve. We respect the plan, we will consider each request on its merits, only said that because of Ramat Gan invited entrepreneurs to go this route it through the king, it is no longer causeway. This royal road to urban renewal. "
President of the Builders Association Builders of the country, Raul knit responded by saying: "What does the local committee? Do urban renewal plan 38. Instead of urban renewal have higher multiplier, it is only a burden on the infrastructure and the lack of budget, and therefore there is a problem" .
Shama Hacohen commented after the hearing and said that "the celebration of contractors premature and exaggerated, the maximum they can achieve legal procedures is a Pyrrhic victory."
"The celebration of the building without planning and without an answer of public infrastructure in Ramat Gan ended and renewed, and who it is the prerogative and would like to sign building permits are destroying the city slowly but with certainty - is invited to review the requests and sign the permits. As long as I am mayor, this dam re not lifted.
"There will be no compromise in substance, but also implement all the comments of the Attorney General and the Honorable Court for the formulation, and visibility settings one by one."
Srugo responded by saying that "the court session highlighted the fact that the policy of the Ramat Gan Municipality is contrary to the provisions of the plan 38 and negates it, unreasonable and ultra vires. However, as appears from the petition of the Builders Association Builders country. Therefore, the Commission is required Ramat Gan Local Court to answer the question: Is it cancels the policy, as demanded by the Builders Association Builders country. I suggest the local committee Ramat Gan accept the recommendation of Judge Orenstein and immediately cancel its mistaken policy in April 2019, contradicted the provisions of the plan, and prepare a new policy jointly with us. "