The Council of State annulled, in part, a building permit which allowed the extension of basements outside the contour of the basement cover in Kifisias Municipality (urban planning unit of Kefalari), while in the traditional part of the said Municipality, it was considered that it is not prohibited:

In the other part of the territory of the city, in this particular area, the decision to prohibit the use of the building was not allowed.
(a) the non-counting of staircases, thermal insulation walls, and staircase endings in the building factor because these structures do not constitute living quarters, and

(b) the construction, above the maximum allowable height of the district, of a roof with an attic, a stairwell termination area, and an elevator, and an uncovered swimming pool, if small in size, erected in a roof location that is at a significant setback from the façade.

In particular, with the 2035/2025 decision of the Fifth Chamber of the Council of State (president Christos Duhanis and rapporteur Dimitris Pyrgakis) it was held that “the decision of 28.9.1987 Presidential Decree on the classification of a part of the Municipality of Kifissia as traditional, on the revision of the conditions and restrictions on building and on the determination of special land uses in this part (as subsequently amended), in view of the content of the special studies and recommendations that preceded its issuance and in the absence of specific provisions to the contrary, does not prohibit, inter alia:

(a) the non-counting of staircases, thermal insulation walls, and staircase endings in the building factor, based on the general provisions of the Law, because these structures do not constitute living quarters; and

b) the construction, above the maximum permissible height of the area, based on the general provisions of the N.O.K., of a roof with an attic, a staircase and lift terminal area, as well as an uncovered swimming pool, provided that these structures form part of a unified aesthetic whole, are small in size, are erected in a position of the roof that is at a significant setback from the façade, so that they do not morphologically resemble a floor, and have been approved by the Council of Architecture”.

At the same time, the State Counsel, rejecting the applicants’ claims, held: “The concept of the average building factor is by no means identical with the maximum factor and, consequently, in principle, it is lawful that the urban planning unit of Capital, which is the subject of this case, is divided into individual areas with a factor sometimes higher and sometimes lower than the average, which, in fact, were established before the establishment of an average factor. By applying the coefficients of each area and not a uniform building coefficient in the entire urban unit, the observance of the individual characteristics of each area is ensured, and bona fide private individuals, who built with the (legally, according to the above), prescribed building coefficient of each area, are protected.

However, the Council of State continues, “for the sake of protecting the high vegetation, the natural environment and the physiognomy of the area, the above Presidential Decree, in interpretation of its specific provisions, prohibits the extension of basements outside the contour of the building’s superstructure (i.e. outside the contour of the building above ground) in the traditional part of Kifissia, not only for the use of garages, but also for any other use”.

For this reason, concludes the Council of State, “rejecting the other grounds for annulment, annulled, in part, a building permit which allowed the extension of the basement outside the contour of the basement cover”.