Court ruling may affect hundreds of basements in Tel Aviv
The court rejected a petition by a property owner in central Tel Aviv seeking a residential use permit for a basement located above ground. It was determined that if a property was defined as a "basement" in its original building permit, municipal plans prohibiting residential use apply to it.
The Tel Aviv District Court rejected last week a request to permit residential use in a basement floor, even though the property does not currently meet the definition of a "basement" according to the Tel Aviv Municipality's basement plan. This is because most of it is located above ground and its external walls are above ground level. However, the property was defined as a "basement" in the original building permit granted in the 1950s, when a different definition for the term was in use.
Judge Limor Bibi rejected an appeal against the District Committee's decision and determined that the Tel Aviv basement plan, which prohibits living in them, applies to any property defined as a "basement" in the original building permit. Even if it does not meet the definition set in the plan regarding the physical characteristics of the property, as in the current case.
In doing so, the judge expanded the scope of properties included in the basement plan that does not allow for residential use. The ruling will not affect those who received a permit for residential use in the past. The judge noted that although the Local Committee had previously approved permits for residential use based on practice, the plan is intended to regulate the matter and prevent further deviations.
The petition was filed by the company Yarum Or Nechasim, which owns a property at 100 Ben Yehuda Street in Tel Aviv. In 1957, a permit was granted for the property for office use. In 2013, a permit was granted for exceptional use for residential purposes for a period of ten years, but the permit was not exercised. In 2024, the company submitted an application for a permanent residential permit, which was rejected by the Local Committee. The Appeals Committee confirmed that the property was built legally but determined that the basement plans applicable to the property do not allow for residential use and that it constitutes a "significant deviation from the plan."
The basement plan in Tel Aviv (Plan Ayin) was published in 1985 and replaced by Plan Ayin/1 in 2010. The plan prohibits living in basements and is intended to bring order and define which property constitutes a basement. Before the publication of these plans, the municipality used to approve additional uses, including residential, in basements, known as "permits based on practice."
"Kafkaesque story"
The company asked the court to declare that the property is not a basement and argued that it is a "Kafkaesque story of rigid planning bureaucracy, ignoring the physical and historical reality of the property." The company argued that the planning institutions treated it as a dark underground basement while strictly adhering to an archaic term from a 1957 permit, despite the property being lit and having a ceiling height of 2.8 meters.
The court determined that the provisions of the basement plan apply to any basement built with a legal permit—that is, to any property defined as a "basement" within the framework of the permit, not only to those meeting the physical definition in Plans Ayin and Ayin/1. Among the arguments raised against approving the property for residential use were the building's density and the impact on future building rights.
The company was ordered to pay 22,500 shekels in expenses to the planning bodies. The Appeals Committee was represented by attorneys Iris Gilberg Yudashkin and Reut Weissenberg, and the Local Committee of Tel Aviv was represented by attorneys Hila Campus Mizrahi and Tzlil Goldart.
