The Town Planning Councilor uses a motion on the aesthetics of the old town to cover his back
We are used to the city council, under popular mandates, using the emblematic places of the municipality to hide urban strategies that have little or nothing to do with their protection. After using the Salinas or the Baños de la Reina, it is the turn of the Historic Center of Calp.
What at the beginning of 2021 was released as modification D16, was now raised to the ordinary plenary session in July under the name of interpretation No. 3 of the PGOU-98. The motion, which allegedly came to open the debate on a desirable model of the Historic Center, turned out to be a ruse to gain "legal strength" (a term used by the same councilor) in the face of future lawsuits for the excesses committed by his department in previous concessions.
The matter concerns the existing limitations in the Old Town of Calp, with a maximum of 2 heights, the permissibility of the expansion area of the Old Town to make up to 4 heights, and the visually unpleasant dividing walls that would remain between them.
The proposal of the city council for the bordering areas, with the presumed intention of maintaining aesthetic homogeneity, is not to impose a staggering to the tallest buildings, but to increase the buildability of the lower ones, located within the Old Town, in order to that the 2 heights be adapted in stages to the 4 of the expansion zone, and not the other way around, as would be logical from a protectionist perspective of the essence of the Historic Center. A concession of dubious legal reserve and that will surely end up in court again.
During the plenary debate it came to light that the interpretation that was intended to be approved had its origin in a series of neighborhood demands regarding the granting of a building license and subsequent construction in an area that encompassed the Old Town and its expansion zone . Currently the issue is prosecuted. However, two years ago a second license with similar characteristics and with the same daring interpretation of the urban regulations was requested. The promoters argue that the already constructed (and defendant) building serves as precedent and, sadly, the city council is directing its efforts to accept this version.
Faced with the possible negative outcome of the lawsuits, the town planning councilor has decided to consolidate the (bad) criteria applied to shield the responsibilities of his department. The alleged debate on the aesthetics of the Old Town would have been desirable to project the Calp of the future, but it did not come to be considered because interpretation No. 3 only intended to develop a legal shield against the more than possible future demands.
A little history about the "interpretations of the PGOU of Calp
The previous interpretation, No. 2 of the PGOU-98, approved in 2008, is the one that granted "heights open bar" to 4 or 5-star hotel establishments. The deficient limitation and the tolerance of the city council to the tortuous interpretations granted a building license to the Suitopia hotel, presumably with 14 more heights, or the two towers in the middle of Saladar, with 33 heights each. Today this fatal interpretation is still in force and with little interest on the part of the government team to correct the legal nonsense that the aforementioned "free bar of heights" allows.
From the PSOE we share the desire to debate and clarify the model of the Historic Center at the same time that we point out that this debate has been successfully resolved in neighboring municipalities such as Altea or Benissa. We regret that the Councilor for Citizens has assumed the practice of the Popular Party of using the identity signs of our municipality as hostages for the sole purpose of defending the specific interests of legal indemnity of the department he directs.
PSOE CALP
