Central District Court approved the project plan 38 largest fresher than a decade after the beginning of the promotion, while making the appeal Shaanxi. Question the project demolition and construction, he has been promoting since 2006 tenants of three buildings train Geula Street in the Kiryat Sharett city together with Rasco. the project, covering 9.3 acres, to be built 355 apartments in six buildings, instead of the 138 existing apartments. 
 
In September 2017, after a lengthy process, led by the local committee approved the project Eitan Ginzburg. Which he submitted objections, but the local planning committee rejected them and explained that the state of the buildings dilapidated, and that most of the apartments are available both in a minimum of 35 square meters and the underground parking extensive built under the project, with 540 places, will meet the lack of parking in the area.
 
However, some owners of apartments in nearby buildings refused to come to terms with the massive construction near them approved, and filed an appeal against the District Appeals Committee project, claiming that the excessive scope of the approved construction, and is expected to severely damage the quality of life of living near the project. The Appeals Committee accepted the partial resistance and determined that the calculation should be performed without adding new rights on the rights conferred plan 38.
 
Against the appeal were filed three petitions: one by the planning committee of Raanana, second by tenants were represented by attorney Oded Israeli, and the third by the promoter, Rasco. The petition argued that the decision thwarts an important project and reducing the rights will become the project uneconomical and effectively curb it.
 
Judge Oz Nir Nawi, accepted the petition and ordered the cancellation of the appeal: "I have concluded that the decision is unreasonable and does not stand in one line with the legislative purpose of the plan 38", stated. According to the judge, this project waiting over a decade for approval of their design done in conjunction with the planning authorities - both local committee and the regional committee. 
 
"I do not accept the position of the Appeals Committee, that it is necessary decision, even at the entire project. Only obvious conclusion is that the resolution passed by the end of the day exceeds the bounds of reasonableness in the extreme, is not taken into account clearly all the considerations involved, including the significance of the decision on the project."