Izmir 5th Administrative Court evaluated the objection of the Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB) to the zoning plan note adopted by the Bayraklı Municipal Council and approved by Izmir Metropolitan Municipality with the claims that it is "illegal, predicts an increase in density to exceed its scope and eliminates the integrity of zoning plans".
The decision was taken to create an expert committee
The delegation decided to form an expert committee from Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Architecture, Department of City and Regional Planning during the trial process.
It was argued that it was contrary to the principles of urbanism
The expert committee conveyed to the court the opinion that the 1/1000 scale application zoning plan note is contrary to the public interest, urbanism principles and planning principles. The delegation also expressed the opinion that if the amendments to the plan note are implemented, there will be uncertainties about maintaining the balance regarding the use of cultural facilities, social and technical infrastructure that will be needed in parallel with the population growth that will occur.
In the additional expert report it presented to the court, the delegation expressed the opinion that "the provisions of the plan note are contrary to the principles of urban planning, but have a superior public interest in meeting the emergency shelter needs of earthquake victims".
The Court stated in its decision that the evaluation made in the supplementary report does not include a technical evaluation in the opposite direction of the previous report, and the additional report is not taken into account on the grounds that the issue of whether there is a public interest will be evaluated by the court.
"With a non-integrated (fragmentary) approach, the increase in the precedent and number of floors in the plan note does not foresee a change in the field of technical and social infrastructure in parallel with the population increase brought by the plan note, and therefore imbalances will arise in the distribution of technical and social infrastructure facilities, thus disrupting the integrity of the plan, As it is understood that it was prepared without a geological-geotechnical survey report and a plan report (which explains the reason for the change and the necessary analysis in detail), it has been concluded that it is not in accordance with the planning principles, urbanism principles, zoning legislation and public interest from the perspectives detailed in the expert report.
On the other hand, it is also clear that if the sued plan note, which is clearly illegal, continues to be applied, citizens and companies residing in the region may enter into new construction works in accordance with the existing plan note, if applied, it may cause irreparable and impossible damages for the concerned parties.
It was decided to stop the execution
For the reasons explained above, it was decided to stop the execution of the action without obtaining a guarantee in accordance with Article 27 of the Law No.
Bayraklı Mayor Serdar Sandal, on the other hand, stated in his statement about the decision that the decision ignores the "superior public interest" and that it increases the victimization of earthquake victims and that they will make objections within the legal period.