The Constitutional Court (ST) of Latvia has commenced review of a case in which Riga City Council challenges the decision made by Minister of Environment Protection and Regional Development Artūrs Toms Plešs to halt Riga’s development plan, as confirmed by the court.
Riga City Council asked ST to review the ministry’s decision and its compliance with Section 1 of the Constitution, Part 4 of Section 4 of European Charter of Local Self-Government, Part 1 of Section 49 of the Law on Local Governments and Part 3 of Section 27 of the Spatial Development Planning Law.
Section 1 of the Constitution states that Latvia is an independent democratic republic. Section 4 of European Charter of Local Self-Government states that the authority of local governments are usually full and exclusive.
No other, central or regional power is allowed to challenge or limit this authority, except for cases when it is allowed by the law.
Section 8 of the charger governs administrative monitoring of operations of local governments.
Part 1 of Section 49 of the Law on Local Governments details the order under which the minister passes orders regarding the halting of binding rules issued by councils.
Part three of Section 27 of the Spatial Development Planning Law details the order under which the minister evaluates requests and proposals for local municipal territory planning.
ST has invited the Minister of Environment Protection and Regional Development to provide a response with full details and legal justifications for his decision. The deadline is 29 August.
The completion term for the case is 29 November.
Previously representatives of the ruling coalition of Riga City Council stressed how disproportionate the decision from VARAM was in halting the entire plan, not just parts of to which the ministry has objections.
BNN previously reported that the Ministry of Environment Protection and Regional Development has halted Riga’s approved territory development plan for the next several years because experts found breaches of the law and lack of balance between the interests of the sides involved, as the minister explained at a press-conference.
The minister said the plan has problems. «The biggest problem is that if the new plan comes to force, there will be a situation when the Riga’s historic centre is left without a valid territory development plan,» said the minister.
Riga City Council’s decision provided for keeping in place two mutually uncoordinated plans, which is against the law.
According to Riga City Council’s vision, the historic centre would be left with a more than 16 year-old plan that was amended only once in 2013 and which no longer meets new and modern regulations or was coordinated in line with Riga’s territorial plan.
The ministry’s experts, meanwhile, have found major problems with what the plan intends for Freeport of Riga territory in Spilve and norther portion of Kundziņsala, where the zoning is found to create problems for the development of the Freeport of Riga, as well as the city’s and Latvia’s economic development in general.
The Ministry of Economics and Ministry of Finance have also submitted certain objections about this to Riga City Council.
The territory development plan does include a reduction of the permissible level of noise in some areas. Efforts to improve environmental quality indexes are welcome, but, according to VARAM, they are not accompanied by focused activities that would assist with said environmental goals. On to top of that, it is impossible to accomplish those goals without evaluation and balanced measures.
In particular, the minister said the decision to restrict gambling in all of Riga and not instead outline territories where gambling would be permitted was disproportionate and in clear breach of the law.
The minister also said Riga City Council has not evaluated the influence of gambling on specific territories.
The municipal administration, on the other hand, has found a number of contradictions that indicate VARAM has not properly done its own job in the plan’s development process.
The city council states it is unacceptable for the ministry to start presenting objections that weren’t voiced previously, especially now that the plan has been passed.
According to the city council, this has basically resulted in the challenge of the municipality’s rights to develop the plan on its own. Regulations do not provide the minister the right to evaluate solutions employed in the territorial plan, only outline if there were any violations committed in the development process.
This breaches the interests of Riga’s residents and businessmen, as well as state interests, considering its status as Latvia’s capital city.