An agreement with incalculable implications for the spread of construction in space will be proposed in the coming days Ministry of the Environment. According to reports“transitional” regulation will allow off-plan development even on sites without a “face” on an officially recognized street if they were created before 1985. The pre-election decision is likely to lead to a “barrage” of building permits issued by those who want to secure the development of their plots, contrary to what long-standing jurisprudence of the Supreme Court provides.

Deputy Minister of Spatial Planning and Urban Environment spoke about this yesterday in Parliament Nikos Tagaras. The reason was a question from a member of parliament about the “confusion” that arose in urban planning after the decision of the Council of State No. 176/2023 (by which the Supreme Court to annul building permits in the planned areas of Patmos, because they did not have a “face” on a recognizable street). “We are working on a transitional provision that will give a clear answer to the problem that has arisen,” said Mr. Tagaras. “This is an extremely complex issue (…) and we must resolve it with legal certainty, taking into account the specifics determined by the decision of the State Council.”

Mr. Tagaras did not mention the content of the pending ruling (which must be filed before Holy Wednesday). According to the information, the ordinance will propose that all even-numbered off-plan plots created before 1985 (in fact, the majority of plots in our country) be built on a recognized street without the requirement of a “person”, and for those created (for example, through sections ) between 1985 and 2003.

In fact, it is based on… a misinterpretation of the recent decision of the Plenary Meeting of the Council of Europe on Patmos.

1985 to present

This agreement is based on… a misinterpretation of the recent CE plenary decision on Patmos, as the CE has maintained a consistent position on this issue for the past 25 years. As the decision reminds General Building Regulations 1985 defines that “in order for a piece of land to be built up, it must have a face, that is, a border, with a common territory.” A presidential decree that year specified conditions for a minimum lot area of ​​4 acres and 45 meters of “face” on international, national, provincial, municipal, and public roads for a number of lot categories. These provisions are “primarily aimed at preserving the special character of unplanned areas and preventing circumvention of established urban planning rules of a rational structure,” the Supreme Court says. And for this, the basic condition is a “person” in the public space, “legally existing, not arising from private will.” The COP notes that the version that sets as a condition only 4 acres is unconstitutional (citing decision 4525/09).

Then, in 2003, Law 3212 establishes 4 acres and a 25 meter “face” as a condition on a recognized road, and Law 3937/11 provided for a more precise definition of “public road”, which was never done. . As the saying goes Co., because the 1985 presidential decree defined as a condition of 4 acres in one paragraph, and other conditions … in the next paragraph, law 3212/03 appeared “for the avoidance of misunderstanding” and defined a minimum of a person of 25 meters. “Therefore, unscheduled sections created before the entry into force of N 3212/03, subject to the provisions of P. 1985, may be built as long as they have, inter alia, a person on the public road, legally existing and not arising from a private will,” it says. However, the SC nowhere divides the sections in time depending on whether they were created before or after 1985 (or 2003), but indicates that a single rule has been in force since that date. “The opposite would lead to the division of large areas into many smaller ones for the construction of buildings without planning,” he says.

Despite 25 years of Supreme Court practice, until recently, many urban planning authorities continued to issue building permits without a “face” on a recognized street. The recent decision, however, has raised concerns among officials as it concerns the responsibility of Kalymnos city planners for issuing a disputed Patmos license.