Tel Aviv District Appeals Committee Approves Height Variance for TAMA 38 Project
The Tel Aviv District Appeals Committee for Planning and Building has rejected appeals against a TAMA 38/2 (demolition and construction) project at 41-43 Avraham Shlonsky and 14 Reuven Rubin streets in the Neot Afeka Bet neighborhood of North Tel Aviv. The committee upheld the Local Committee's decision to approve the building permit.
The decision, made on July 26, 2026, dismissed most of the objectors' claims, including those concerning a height limit variance and a shortage of parking spaces. However, the committee partially accepted the appeals, ordering a reduction in the rooftop construction.
The project, promoted by Canaan Urban Renewal, involves demolishing a 1975 building with 32 apartments and constructing a new building with 72 units. The original plan proposed 13 stories, but it was revised to a stepped structure ranging from 9.65 to 10.15 stories. The appeals were filed by neighbors, represented by attorneys Elimelech Kristal and Asher Kahana, who argued the project violated neighborhood policy and the master plan limiting construction to 8 stories. They also cited procedural flaws in the publication of the revised application, which increased the number of units and included a partial parking solution.
The committee's decision was influenced by the project's proximity to the future "Pinchas Rosen" metro station on Line M3, approximately 98 meters away. Canaan Urban Renewal and the Local Committee cited National Outline Plan 70, which promotes densification around metro stations. The Appeals Committee agreed that this proximity justified deviating from the local height restriction, noting that the higher construction allowed for a smaller building footprint, freeing up green spaces and pedestrian areas.
The committee also rejected claims of procedural publication defects, stating the appellants were aware of the revised application's components and had the opportunity to respond. They further noted that the main change in the application actually reduced the building's height, thus not requiring republication. Claims regarding property damage from temporary anchors and excavation impacting adjacent structures were also dismissed, with the committee citing existing regulations and requiring third-party insurance and bank guarantees from the developer.
However, the committee partially accepted objections regarding the rooftop floor, ordering a recalculation and reduction due to the inclusion of open balconies and loggias in the floor area calculation. Regarding parking, the committee upheld the developer's solution of paying into a parking fund for 8.44 missing spaces, aligning with TAMA 70's policy to reduce reliance on private vehicles near metro stations. The committee did, however, instruct the Local Committee to re-examine the parking issue.
