<\/p>\n
Dan\u0131\u015ftay 6. Daire, mahkemenin iptal karar\u0131na ra\u011fmenKarayollar\u0131 Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan r\u00f6tu\u015flanarak yeni bir proje gibi Bay\u0131nd\u0131rl\u0131kve \u0130sk\u00e2n Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131’na sunulan ve onaylanan Gerze – Yakakent Sahil yolu dolguimar plan\u0131n\u0131n, bilirki\u015fi raporu beklenmeden y\u00fcr\u00fctmesinin durdurulmas\u0131na kararverdi.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Dan\u0131\u015ftay 6. Daire Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, mahkemenin iptal karar\u0131na ra\u011fmenKarayollar\u0131 Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan r\u00f6tu\u015flanarak yeni bir proje gibi Bay\u0131nd\u0131rl\u0131kve \u0130sk\u00e2n Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131’na sunulan ve onaylanan Gerze – Yakakent Sahil yolu dolguimar plan\u0131n\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fctmesinin durdurulmas\u0131na karar verdi. Dan\u0131\u015ftay Tetkik h\u00e2kimiNecdet Bayram’\u0131n, “Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n yerinde ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131r\u0131l\u0131pbilirki\u015fi raporu al\u0131nd\u0131ktan sonra y\u00fcr\u00fctmenin durdurulmas\u0131” y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki\u00f6nerisine ra\u011fmen 6. Daire, ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi raporu beklenmeden y\u00fcr\u00fctmenindurdurulmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde karar ald\u0131.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Daha \u00f6nce a\u00e7\u0131lan Karadeniz Sahil Yolu davalar\u0131nda, bilirki\u015firaporunun ard\u0131ndan y\u00fcr\u00fctmeyi durdurma karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f ancak karar \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131nda dayolun yar\u0131s\u0131ndan fazlas\u0131 tamamlanm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fundan geri d\u00f6n\u00fclmesi neredeyse imk\u00e2ns\u0131zhale gelmi\u015fti.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Karayollar\u0131 Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, Karadeniz Sahil Yolu G\u00fczel\u00e7ay -Sinop 1. K\u0131s\u0131m Projesi’ni 1998’da imar plan\u0131 haz\u0131rlanmadan ihale etti ve dolguimar plan\u0131 olmadan yakla\u015f\u0131k 10 kilometresini tamamlad\u0131. Plans\u0131z ve imars\u0131z bir \u015fekildedeniz dolgusuyla yap\u0131lan yola itiraz eden \u00e7evreciler, Samsun \u0130dare Mahkemesi’neba\u015fvurdu. Mahkeme ge\u00e7en y\u0131l, “Deniz ge\u00e7kisinin, kara ge\u00e7kisine oranla ikikat daha pahal\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve bu y\u00f6n\u00fcyle kamuya mali k\u00fclfet getirece\u011fi”gerek\u00e7esiyle projeyi iptal etti.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Mahkeme karar\u0131nda ayr\u0131ca, “Dolgu planlar\u0131 onaylanmadanprojeye ba\u015fland\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu y\u00f6n\u00fcyle devlet yollar\u0131n\u0131n projelendirme ve yap\u0131ms\u00fcrecinde uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu temel kriterlere uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, davaya konu 28kilometrelik k\u0131sm\u0131n kara y\u00f6n\u00fcnde projelendirme olana\u011f\u0131 oldu\u011fu halde bu hususunde\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fi, projenin k\u0131y\u0131 ve imar mevzuat\u0131na uygun olarak haz\u0131rlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131nanla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve dava konusu i\u015flemde hukuka uygunluk bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na” dikkat\u00e7ekti.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Belediye yok say\u0131ld\u0131<\/span><\/p>\n Karayollar\u0131, mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n ard\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 projede,daha \u00f6nce belediyelerin olumsuz g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f bildirmeleri nedeniyle bu kez belediye s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131nakadar olan k\u0131sm\u0131n imar plan\u0131n\u0131 haz\u0131rlad\u0131. \u00dcstelik, iki ayr\u0131 noktada \u00e7ok k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fckbir de\u011fi\u015fiklik yaparak yeni bir planm\u0131\u015f gibi yine deniz dolgusuyla ge\u00e7enKaradeniz Sahil Yolu Yakakent – Gerze ge\u00e7kisi projesini, belediye yerine Bay\u0131nd\u0131rl\u0131k\u0130l M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc’ne g\u00f6ndererek bakanl\u0131\u011fa sundu.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Bakanl\u0131k, \u015eubat 2008’de, projenin Gerze Belediye s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndakalan 13 kilometrelik k\u0131sm\u0131na ait 1\/5000 ve 1\/1000 \u00f6l\u00e7ekli Naz\u0131m ve UygulamaDolgu Alan\u0131 \u0130mar Plan\u0131’n\u0131 onaylad\u0131.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00c7evrecilerin avukat\u0131 Yakup \u015eekip Okumu\u015fo\u011flu da bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n buplan\u0131na Dan\u0131\u015ftay’a ba\u015fvurarak itiraz etti. Yolu yapan m\u00fcteahhit firma Cengiz \u0130n\u015faatise imar plan\u0131 hen\u00fcz ask\u0131dayken, \u00c7ay\u00f6n\u00fc mevkiinde deniz dolgusu yapmaya ba\u015flad\u0131.Oysa yasaya g\u00f6re, ask\u0131ya yap\u0131lan itirazlar sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmadan in\u015faata ba\u015flanam\u0131yor.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Dan\u0131\u015ftay 6. Daire, 20 Ekim 2008’de \u00e7evrecilerin ba\u015fvurusu\u00fczerine “y\u00fcr\u00fctmeyi durdurma” karar\u0131 verdi. Kararda, “Davan\u0131ndurumu ve uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n hukuki niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n yeniden ke\u015fif vebilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131r\u0131l\u0131p bilirki\u015fi raporunu ald\u0131ktan sonra bu konudayeniden bir karar verilinceye kadar y\u00fcr\u00fctmenin durdurulmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015fleminkabul\u00fcne oybirli\u011fiyle karar verilmi\u015ftir” dedi.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 8 bin YTL laz\u0131m<\/span><\/p>\n Dan\u0131\u015ftay, dolgu imar plan\u0131n\u0131n iptali i\u00e7in de bilirki\u015firaporunun beklenmesine karar verdi. Bu arada bilirki\u015fi masraflar\u0131 i\u00e7in\u00e7evrecilerin mahkemeye 8 bin YTL yat\u0131rmas\u0131 gerekiyor. Ancak \u00e7evreciler \u015fimdilik2 bin YTL toplayabildi.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n M\u0130LL\u0130YET \u2013 01.12.2008<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\nDan\u0131\u015ftay 6. Daire, mahkemenin iptal karar\u0131na ra\u011fmenKarayollar\u0131 Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan r\u00f6tu\u015flanarak yeni bir proje gibi Bay\u0131nd\u0131rl\u0131kve \u0130sk\u00e2n Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131’na sunulan ve onaylanan Gerze – Yakakent Sahil yolu dolguimar plan\u0131n\u0131n, bilirki\u015fi raporu beklenmeden y\u00fcr\u00fctmesinin durdurulmas\u0131na kararverdi.\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":40571,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-620","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-genel"},"acf":[],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/620","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=620"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/620\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/40571"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=620"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=620"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/eonmeet.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=620"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}