Globes, Eric Mirowski, 13.05.2020

In such a mess of the Tama 38 project, Are not encountered every day. Beginning with Givatayim tenants on 13-15 Kg Street as entrepreneurs , continuing to replace contractors, heavy debts incurred by tenants, and years of residence in a building that has become a construction site. The occupants.

In recent days, a decision has been made in the Tel Aviv Administrative Court, which rejects the tenants' request to charge the municipality plus the apartments for a project that matches their request.

Background : The tenants decided to become entrepreneurs

This is a three-story building, two entrances, and 10 apartments in Givatayim. When only the idea of ​​strengthening the structure was born under TAMA 38, the incentives that were valid at that time allowed only one-storey addition. This meant the addition of a few apartments that financed the reinforcement. Indeed, entrepreneurs were reluctant to enter the project. The tenants did not raise their hands and decided to become entrepreneurs themselves. To do this, they set up a company where each received shares reflecting their share of the common property, and then applied for a project permit, the construction of four rooftop apartments, and the expansion of existing apartments.

They took financial assistance, which at the time was about NIS 2 million from a "bonus" company that accompanies real estate projects. In August 2014, the permit was issued, and the tenants contacted a contractor. The building, with exposed reinforcements - inside a construction site.

The entanglement : a debt of about NIS half a million to the tenant

In an attempt to get out of the situation, the tenants contacted another contracting company called Rimon. During the previous decade, Amendment 3 came into effect in Tama 38, which allowed the addition of 2.5 floors to the project, so that the number of apartments to be built on the roof could be increased as part of the reinforcement. As a result, tenants called Rimon, who in 2016 applied for an updated permit for the addition of Twelve four-room apartments received in the original permit.

After a lengthy discussion with the local Givatayim Planning and Building Committee, the application was accepted online only in January 2018. According to the tenants, various local committee failures meant that only in May that year, the request was made, and only eight apartments were approved, a multiplier of 1.8. The municipality explained that the addition required, embodies a multiplier of 2.2 and was to their liking excessive and deviated from its planning policy.

The Rimon company appealed the decision of the local committee, which said, among other things, that the addition of apartments also included the tenant's debt coverage due to the loans they had taken, to initiate the first failed project.

At the same time, the tenants' debts to a bonus company have swelled to NIS 5.5 million, and the company has started legal action against them. Tenant Attorney Elad Elazar told Globes that last year, the parties signed an agreement whereby a bonus company would receive the rights to the project, in exchange for the tenant's debt cancellation, regardless of the number of housing units added to the building under the GDPR.

The decision : Tenant obligations are not a consideration

Shortly thereafter, in May 2019, the Tel Aviv District Appeals Committee ruled that the consideration of tenants' debts was not a decisive consideration when considering an application for a permit under Project 38. The only relevant economic examination, the appeal committee wrote in its decision, is a profitability examination The developer, and whether the tenants at the end of the project enjoy spacious apartments in a building that is built according to the latest standard, the commission also stated that the building in its current state, "significantly strengthens".

Following the decision, Rimon Company ended its tenancy with the tenants, leaving the picture.

Attorney Elazar emphasizes that, in terms of tenants, the question of how many housing units will be added to the project has become least important, since the project has been transferred to a bonus company. However, in recent years, tenants are living on a construction site, so they long for the work to be renewed.

As the official owners of the building, they petitioned the Tel Aviv Administrative Court last year against the decisions of the Appeals Committee and the local committee, which, as it were, allowed only eight new apartments, and not 12. Among other things, they claimed that due to the complexity of the project, if the additional housing units were not approved - The project will not be possible at all.
Judge Limor Bibi, who was discussing the petition, rejected most of the tenants' claims. In the economic aspect, the judge ruled that the economic consideration of the tenants and the developer for the addition of housing units "is not foreseeable," and that the law allows the local committee broad discretion as to the extent of incentives that can be allowed in TAMA 38.

The court also ruled decisively that the rationale regarding personal debts incurred by the tenants is not relevant to the addition of housing units under the Tama 38 Project. Judge Bibi even considered it appropriate to add that in this case the tenants did not present any evidence to support their claim of lack of financial feasibility for the project plus eight units beyond the actual one.

The only argument the judge accepted was that the Appeals Committee did not properly state its decision, and in this light decided to return the hearing to the Appeals Committee, only to have it justify its decision, but did not cancel it.

A bonus company commented: "The company has so far invested hundreds of thousands of shekels in works to promote the project in its original form, and has applied for a building permit for the municipality, for the construction of a project with the addition of eight apartments."

Attorneys will be represented by Attorney Anat Birn and Sigal Lachmani; the Givatayim Local Committee will be represented by Attorney Salam Hamed and Attorney Tomer Rainich of the Shavit Bar-On-Galon Tsin Vitkon & Co. office, while the Appeals Committee will be represented by Attorney Yosef Wingo.