(live here) – Today, Monday, March 24, 2025, a demonstration by dozens of environmental activists and residents of the Bat Galim neighborhood took place in front of the Engineering Directorate building in Haifa, where a discussion was being held by the local Planning and Building Committee. The purpose of the demonstration was to protest the plan submitted by Dor Chemicals to change the zoning of the casino complex for the purpose of building a new hotel. The protesters tried to influence the council members who attended the meeting and have the plan rejected or changed.
Results of the discussion – the local committee's recommendation passed:
8 committee members voted in favor: Sarit Golan, chairman of the committee, Yaakov Borovsky, Tzvicha Barbi, Inbal Beit Halachmi, Kirill Kartnik, Sharbel (Balad), Faher Bayadsi, Avraham Stern, advocate for the Torah.
Sally Abed abstained
Motti Blitzblau of the Greens opposed, and Yael Shinar, who was present at the meeting without the right to vote, also opposed.
Council members meet with protesters
Council member Yaakov Borovsky came to talk to the activists. Borovsky emphasized that his vote would be in accordance with an appraiser's report that would examine the project's profitability for the developer. He was followed by Council member Yael Shinar, a resident of the neighborhood, who said in recent days that a seven-story building is too tall in her opinion, and that construction rights should be considered. Another council member, Rani Bender, from Mayor Yona Yahav's faction, listened attentively to the protesters' claims and addressed them.
Among other things, Bender argued that the private developer who owns the property has been interested in promoting the project for many years and that he should be assisted in this as much as possible, as part of the development of hotels in Haifa and alongside business viability. However, he added that it is imperative to listen to the opponents, since they raise arguments that deserve examination, with an emphasis on traffic arrangements.
The slogans of the demonstration: "The sea is not for the entrepreneur"
The protesters carried signs with slogans such as "End of the act with public participation," "The beach is not closed, the public is not abandoned," "A hotel is not on our beach," "The sea is not for the developer," and other slogans. They hoped that their demonstration would cause the committee not to make an immediate decision or to make substantial changes to the plan.
The original plan: a hotel with 100 rooms
According to the original plan, the casino complex's land use would be changed to tourism, and a 100-room hotel would be built on the site. Some of the rooms would be located above the historic casino building, and some in a new three-story building on the former public pool site. Area residents and environmental activists fear that the plan would harm the neighborhood's public character and beach accessibility.
Previous discussions and public participation
In June 2024, a preliminary discussion of the plan was held, but no vote was taken. It was decided to conduct public participation, and then meetings were held between residents and the project developers and architects, with the aim of reaching understandings that would ensure the preservation of the complex for the public. Following the meetings, the plan submitters were required to keep the historic pool area open to the public and to examine additional construction alternatives.
The alternative plan: additional construction and preservation of the pool
An alternative proposal included building four additional floors above the historic casino building, bringing it to seven stories. In addition, it is proposed to build an additional 2-3-story building east of the complex, which would bring the number of hotel rooms to 100. The historic pool area would be kept open, with the possibility of building a renovated public pool, restrooms, locker rooms and a cafe. Direct access from the boardwalk to the pool area and the beach would be ensured. The city engineer team recommended moving forward with this plan.
Galim Environmental Forum opposes the plan
The Galim Environment Forum, which brings together environmental activists and residents, sent a letter to Mayor Yona Yahav, the chairwoman of the Planning and Building Subcommittee, Sarit Golan Steinberg, and members of the City Council. In the letter, the forum members stated that they support preserving the public designation of the historic pool area, but demand that the plan be rejected due to a number of fundamental problems.
The forum's arguments against the plan
Forum members raised several main concerns:
- Additional construction on the pool area – The plan includes adding a hotel building to part of the open space, contrary to the municipality's previous commitments and without sufficient planning justification.
- Failure to ensure public designation for the casino building – There is no clarity regarding public use within the historic building itself.
- Contrast between public designation and private land – The land is intended for public use but is privately owned, and the plan does not solve the problem.
- Environmental implications were not properly considered – An environmental impact assessment has not yet been conducted, which is a necessary step before making significant planning decisions.
Activists' demand: Environmental review and renewed discussion
Opponents of the plan demand that a comprehensive environmental review be conducted first, and only then will further progress on the project be considered. They argue that preserving the public interest requires consideration of the environmental implications and ensuring open spaces for the general public.
The public struggle continues
Today's demonstration is part of an ongoing struggle by Bat Galim residents to preserve the neighborhood's unique character and its access to the beach. Now, it remains to be seen how the local Planning and Building Committee will decide and whether it will respond to public demands to change the plan or reject it altogether.
The ongoing discussion of the plan is characterized by errors on both sides, especially by the committee members who supported the plan. According to the article, Mr. Borovsky, for example, was only interested in the profit of the developer. The Greens did object, but disappointingly, they ignored a special appeal to them, and did not exercise their legal right to demand a repeat discussion in the plenary. Open to the public. Thus, the plan was approved in a closed forum, contrary to the commitment of the Prime Minister and all factions, including the Greens, to transparency and public participation. Let us hope that in the discussion in the district committee before the deposit, there will be an attentive ear not only to the municipality and the developers, but also to public representatives, as befits such a loaded and controversial developer.
Dozens of activists = 15-20