We all need the services of different institutions, but no one wants them in his backyard
Police Station?
Not with us.
Demolition of the station on Dizengoff Street
Photography:
PR
Produced by the Department of Special Supplements
You must have once come across in one of the newspapers, perhaps near the obituaries, an advertisement for a plan published for objections.
Who even sees these ads and is aware of the impact they can have on his life?
Maybe a new building is about to be erected right in front of your house, and you did not know.
Authorities are involved in land management, promotion of plans and construction of public buildings in the urban space.
In the conflict between the interests of the general public and the consideration of residents living near the designated site, most of the neighbors come out at a loss.
Want to stay up to date all the time?
Sign up now for the Real Estate Newsletter today
Talking real estate with Ofer Petersburg. Listen to the new podcast >>
In many cases, the residents who live nearby want to preserve their way of life, the environment and their property, and claim that the planning principles are not in line with the character of the neighborhood.
Although residents have great motivation and desire to influence, in practice their ability to influence is limited.
They can express their position only at the stage of filing objections, for a relatively limited time throughout the complex planning processes.
Public resonance is particularly significant when there is a gap between the public and private interests, and there is an attempt by residents to prevent the establishment of the controversial venture in their backyard.
This phenomenon is known as nimbi.
This is not the name of a forgotten African tribe, but a translation of the term from English: NIMBY: Not In My Back Yard.
From the point of view of planners and decision makers, the nimbi phenomenon usually constitutes a significant barrier or delay to development plans.
On the other hand, it is the way of the local residents to express their desire and preserve the characteristics of their living environment.
The closer residents live to the venture, the higher the chance of resistance.
A team of researchers from the Alrov Institute for Real Estate Research at the Faculty of Management at Tel Aviv University sat down last year with the aim of deciphering the phenomenon in Israel and proposing reform. Directed by Prof. Danny Ben Shachar, Head of the Alrov Institute, and Ravit Huberfeld, Director of the Institute.
The Israeli Metro program is an excellent example of Israeli Nimbi.
The nymph phenomenon occurs when the realization of a project entails possible harm to nearby residents socially, health-wise and economically.
On the other hand, the project includes a contribution to a wider and more distant society or group.
Conducting a field survey and case study analysis in Tel Aviv raise two main reasons for the barriers that prevent efficient, equitable and transparent allocation of public uses in the urban space.
One reason is that objections can only be filed at a relatively late stage of the planning and construction process.
Filing an objection requires financial resources and the ability to conduct a complex legal and public battle.
The second reason concerns the issue of ownership of brown areas (public lands) and buildings available to the local authority and the state and how they are managed.
It seems that the combination of significant barriers that make it difficult for vulnerable populations to express effective opposition, and the authorities' fear that the allocation will fall in the final stages after investing a lot of resources in the planning process by stakeholders, leads planning parties to place objectionable uses in areas where oppositions are less likely. And in their intensity.
This creates an unequal distribution of controversial uses in the urban space.
Is the mandate still here?
The study completed this week unfortunately shows what we have known for a long time and did not dare to say.
Israel has never been liberated from the British Mandate.
The process of allocating public space in the urban space today depends entirely on the procedures granted to Israel with the mandatory control of the British, which ended in 1948, but its impact on the legislative and administrative system is still evident today.
The subject of urban planning was included in the legislative tradition of the British Empire, when in 1909 the first law in this field was enacted in Britain, following the Industrial Revolution.
The main law that led to the creation of the planning system in Israel is the City Building Ordinance, which was enacted in 1921 with the aim of ensuring the orderly planning of cities and taking care of public health and well-being.
The Urban Building Ordinance was replaced by the Planning and Building Law enacted in 1965, and to this day it is the law that defines the hierarchy of planning institutions, including the hierarchy of plans and documents relating to spatial planning in Israel.
Under the Planning and Building Act, any person seeking to erect a structure in a particular area is required to obtain a building permit, usually by the local authority that examines the structure in accordance with plans that apply to that area cell.
The plans define the size, volume and design of the building and its permitted uses (residential, commercial, public, employment, etc.).
Each such cell has a number of plans that have a hierarchy between them that defines the nature of the construction in the event of a conflict between the various plans.
The plans are divided into three main types and appear according to their hierarchy of importance: a national outline plan, a district outline plan and a local outline plan.
A national outline plan (NAP) applies to the entire territory of the state, with the state being divided into six districts (Jerusalem, North, Central, South, Tel Aviv and Haifa). A district outline plan (NAP) applies to the territory of the district.
A local outline plan applies to an area in one planning space and is approved by the local authority.
A police station in the neighborhood
Survey participants in the study were asked how often they are exposed to local authority publications about land allocation.
It can be seen that a considerable proportion of the respondents have been exposed to publications infrequently, if at all.
Failure to disclose publications prevents residents from objecting to the various allocations (whether through a land allocation procedure or through the approval of outline plans or detailed plans).
Worst of all, people belonging to a lower socio-economic class are less likely to oppose programs compared to more established populations, because this requires considerable financial resources.
In the study, a number of test cases were selected in Tel Aviv, in order to examine the allocation processes of public uses and the attitude of the residents to these allocations.
The building of the Dizengoff police station has been used by the Israel Police throughout the years to operate a police station in the Lev Tel Aviv activity segment.
The police station building was owned by the State of Israel until 2004, when it was sold by the Israel Land Authority to a private entity.
Following this, the need arose to find an alternative structure for the police station, and the Government Housing Administration (a unit in the Ministry of Finance under the Accountant General's Division that believes, among other things, in allocating housing to all government ministries) began finding an alternative structure.
Between 2005 and 2014, tenders were published, requests for information and even requests for locating housing without a tender, but all attempts to locate a building did not raise suitable alternatives.
In light of the above, the lease agreement for the building on Dizengoff Street was extended.
In light of the search proceedings, and following the landlord's announcement that the lease period is about to expire and the state must prepare for the eviction of the tenant, the Ministry of Finance's exemption committee decided to approve a lease agreement for a replacement property located in the former Bezeq PBX.
It was agreed that the engagement period will be for 20 years, and the landlord must act in order to obtain all the necessary permits and permits for occupancy and use of the tenant, and that he must make the necessary adjustments and renovations to train and adapt the tenant to use a police station.
Since the tenant on Yehuda Halevi Street had previously served as Bezeq's switchboard, the landlord submitted an application to the local committee for a use permit for a police station.
Regarding this request, a number of objections were filed, including the claim that the use of a police station is not part of the permitted uses under the plan that applied to the land.
The Tel Aviv Local Planning and Building Committee discussed the application for use in excess of the permit, and decided to approve the application and reject the objections, stating that the use of a police station was included in the permitted uses of the plan.
Most of the objections were filed by residents of the Kiryat Sefer community and the Green and Concrete Association.
According to the Registrar of Associations, the association's goals are: "Creating and cultivating a neighborhood community center adjacent to the Kiryat Sefer Park - Tel Aviv in the former Mapai and Bezeq buildings, preserving the community structure and character of the Gan Kiryat Sefer neighborhood - Lev Tel Aviv, protecting the quality of life in the Gan Kiryat neighborhood Sefer - Lev Tel Aviv. "In other words, the association engraved on its banner the struggle for the transformation of buildings owned and used by the state into buildings that will be used by the community living in the area.
Opponents argued that the heart of the city was suffering from a shortage of public space, including health services, education and culture and day care, and believed that the local authority should expropriate the building in order to allocate it for public purposes.
They further claimed that a police station was not suitable for the nature of the area and the neighborhood.
The residents' and the association's struggle was carried out by publishing trending articles in the various media, claiming that the building was hijacked by the public, that the state violated the law and that the scope of the contract was too high, even though the rent per square meter agreed was significantly lower than the average in the area. .
Another claim was that the developer was paid rent before the delivery of the adapted structure - a claim that is denied any basis and is contrary to the terms of the agreement, which stipulated the exact opposite.
In addition to the media struggle, there was also a struggle through legal means.
Opponents petitioned the local committee's decision to the appeals committee, a move that was successful in light of the 2016 appeals committee's decision, which states that "the use of a police station is not appropriate for the listed uses."
In fact, the Appeals Committee ruled that the Israel Police, a body whose main activity is to maintain public order and enforce law in emergency hours, does not meet the definition of emergency services, and decided to oppose the establishment of a police station in the building designated for it.
The research team concludes that the lack of dialogue with the residents of the neighborhood led, among other things, to their sweeping opposition.
It is possible that a public participation procedure on behalf of the municipality would have reduced the objections and led to a different result.
The permit issuance procedure was imposed on the developer, although it was a use that could be expected to have opponents.
In such a case a public participation procedure is required in which there is more significant involvement of the state and the local authority, as a private entity may produce antagonism.
Methadone distribution clinic
Another example presented in the study: a methadone distribution clinic of the Ministry of Health, operated in south Tel Aviv.
This is a necessary government service, which should be provided in accessible urban centers, even if naturally patients may cause discomfort to the normative environment.
The service was provided on Adam Mitzkevich Street in Jaffa, in housing rented to the Government Housing Agency on free lease by the municipality.
In 2010, the municipality announced its demand for the evacuation of housing, and accordingly the Government Housing Administration began working to find alternative housing.
The search proceedings went on for several years without result, given the nature of the use.
After 7 years a potential tenant was located on Locksmith Street, but the property had many property barriers.
The residents of the neighborhood learned of the Ministry of Health's intention to use the lease as a methadone distribution clinic and they began operating.
"Dear friends, residents and business owners, you will wake up urgently, because a catastrophe is about to land on us," read one post of many kinds that appeared on Facebook.
Subsequently, an administrative petition was also filed by neighbors in the building.
At the end of the day, the petition was deleted with the consent of the petitioners, after the parties reached certain agreements, and in particular the training of a separate entrance for the users of the clinic.
Nitzan Association Hostel
Another example is the allocation of land in Neot Afeka B to the Nitzan Association, which provides a solution for children and adults with learning disabilities and attention disorders.
The association has branches nationwide, and in Tel Aviv it operates diagnostic and treatment centers, social clubs and a sheltered housing system.
In 2014, the association submitted an application for the allocation of a plot of land in the amount of one dunam in the Neot Afeka B neighborhood for the establishment of a hostel for graduates with learning disabilities and difficulties in functioning and adaptation.
Upon request, the construction will be funded by the Nitzan Association, Social Security and various donors.
The main goal is to train the sponsors for life in the community, so the location of the hostel within the community is an integral part of the system of training and caring for the sponsors.
After submitting the allocation application to the local authority, the municipality apparently realized that this was a controversial use of controversy that was likely to provoke objections, and began an early public participation procedure.
A number of discussions were held with the participation of representatives of the association, the district director on behalf of the municipality and the residents of the Afeka B neighborhood.
Residents expressed concern about the decline in the value of the properties adjacent to the hostel and the violence of sponsors, and also raised the need for public buildings that would meet existing needs.
Residents received attention to their concerns, and at the time of publication of the plan for objections no objections were filed and the allocation was approved.
Any conclusions?
So how can Nimbi be avoided, and how can a fair distribution of land and buildings be ensured for public uses in the urban layout?
Public participation
: In controversial uses that are likely to provoke objections, it is advisable to carry out an early public notification procedure (rather than public participation), to mediate to residents the need and public importance of allocation, encourage awareness among residents and produce transparency and reduce opposition.
It is advisable to make information about uses that are perceived as negative in order to change the public attitude.
In the case of allocation procedures for uses that are not perceived as negative, the involvement of the residents should be increased and they should be allowed to express their position through a regulated public participation procedure.
A review of the planning procedures shows that opposition after the deposit of the plan occurs after the initiator of the plan is in the final stages of planning and after investing a lot of resources, so the opposition is necessarily also examined in relation to costs.
The objection procedure should be brought forward to an earlier stage and the involvement of the public in the decision-making procedures for the planned allocations in their vicinity should be increased.
Most of the opposition that arises regarding non-problematic uses stems from a mismatch between the desires of the neighborhood residents and the vision of the local authority.
Regional Committees from the Community
: Regional committees that represented the residents of the various neighborhoods will increase public involvement in the planning process.
The budget of the committee will be through the revenues of the local authority from improvement levies.
The committee will have faith in managing the budget according to the preferences of the residents in the area and their needs.
It is recommended that the budgeting of the regional committees be done differentially, according to defined criteria, such as the socio-economic profile of the residents of the neighborhood and the relative proportion of the controversial public buildings.
A neighborhood that is characterized by a relatively large number of unwanted public buildings and a relatively large proportion of residents in low socio-economic status will receive a higher rate than the levies.
Distributive justice
: Allocations of public space of all kinds should be carried out equally and uniformly throughout the city.
We recommend the establishment of a dedicated committee for the allocation of public uses, in order to regulate the distribution of uses in the urban space.
The allocation of controversial uses to neighborhoods where a high rate of such uses already exists will be seriously considered and examined in relation to all existing alternatives.
The committee will be composed of representatives of the local authority and will be attended by additional representatives as appropriate.
Digital advertising
: The manner of advertising should be adapted to the current methods of distribution, and the awareness and publicity regarding the allocation of public uses should be increased.
The word of the experts
Prof. Nurit Alfasi
, Head of the Department of Urban Planning, Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev: "Due to the far-reaching effects of allocating public land on the individual and the urban environment, I propose to base the allocation mechanism on principles of transparency and equality. Key to the Allocation Process: Essence and Procedure.
"At the level of essence: basing the allocation on equality in the distribution of public buildings, distinguishing between institutions for use by local residents or for use by broad populations and according to the level of environmental impact of public facilities. It is proposed to develop a real estate allocation index at the neighborhood level, published on local authorities and government housing administration.
"At the level of the procedure: Establishment of a public committee appointed, independent of authorities and the state, to examine proposals from local authorities and the Government Housing Administration for the allocation of real estate and the establishment of institutions, subject to index data and through open public discussion."
Prof. Danny Ben-Shahar
, head of the Alrov Institute for Real Estate Research at Tel Aviv University: "The fairness of the distribution of nymphs in the urban space receives much theoretical attention in the academic literature, but unfortunately does not receive sufficient attention in everyday urban practice.
"The policy paper we put on the agenda deals with how equality and distributive justice can be promoted in bearing the burden of Nimbi institutions in the urban space, so that the voice of underprivileged populations in society will not only be heard but also given practical expression in the Nimbi deployment in space."
Architect Daniela Posek
, Chairman of the Tel Aviv District Planning and Construction Committee: “We at the Planning Directorate are constantly looking for ways to increase transparency and awareness, not only in decisions, but in making information accessible.
Early sharing is important.
At the end of the day, we need to give a solution to everyone, and it is the responsibility of the state and the local authority to provide a solution.
After a lot of listening, in the end decisions have to be made. "
Eran Harel
, director of the Government Housing Administration, Accountant General in the Ministry of Finance: "The uses that need to be produced are within existing areas, and this is the difficulty. The authorities do not want prisons in their areas, for example. They want fast police and fire services,
Architect Udi Carmeli
, Tel Aviv-Yafo City Engineer: "There is almost no public use that is not nimbi. Transparency and proper publicity before I will not oppose opposition, but will help that the opposition be serious and significant. I want a spot opposition that can be addressed. For Nimbi, because it means that there is construction and the city is renewed, which creates the friction. "
Produced by the Department of Special Supplements