Parcent Mayoress answers her critics...and they say she's lying!

Article first published in the July 2006 edition of Viva The Valley.

Reproduced here with the kind permission of Ann Knight.

www.vivathevalley.com

 

Parcent's Mayoress has defended plans to build nearly 1,800 new houses on the outskirts of the pueblo claiming the majority of villagers support the scheme.

In an exclusive interview with Viva the Valley, Mari Carmen Lopez Fernandez accused her political opponents of spreading “lies and misinformation” to whip up a storm of protest over the decision to approve three new urbanisations on Parcent's hillsides.

She said she understood the genuine concerns of many campaigners fighting the plans but claimed many of their fears were unfounded.

“The new urbanisations in Jalón and Gata are horrible,” she declared. “That will only happen in Parcent over my dead body.” She described the partially finished developments in Jalón as an ugly “hongo” (meaning fungus) on the mountainside.

Señora Lopez pledged that the Parcent projects, if approved by the Valencian government, would be tightly controlled and she promised that the village's picturesque hillsides wouldn't be blighted by the same kind of rapid urban sprawl that has been seen elsewhere in the valley.

“Every tree that is removed will be replaced by at least two more of the same age and species,” she said. “No-one will have their land taken from them and new houses will only be built as individual plots are sold.”

She told Viva the Valley that there would be no cheek-by-jowl blocks of houses constructed on the outskirts of the village within a short space of time before buyers had been found. She also stressed that, under the current law, no house would be built higher than 400 metres above sea level. The highest section of the area in question has been ear-marked for an equestrian centre rather than housing.

The council's legal adviser on urban law says she believes it will take at least five years before the first new house is built under the scheme and up to 15 years for the completion of all three building projects.

Señora Lopez said: “It's all very well people wanting a small, tranquil village but it's no good if it doesn't make any money. If Parcent doesn't grow it will die.”

“We need jobs for our young people. Traditionally the village has relied on agriculture but you can't make a living out of selling oranges and almonds these days.”

She said the new developments would give a vital boost to the local economy and enable the village to have a new school, medical centre, library and cultural centre. “We have a mountain of books but no library so we have to keep them in the village school,” she said.

Señora Lopez, who was born in Valencia but has lived in Parcent for 35 years, said she had been stung by personal insults and abuse from protestors, most of whom had never bothered to discuss the details of the development plans with her. She issued an open invitation to anyone who wanted to meet her to discuss the projects and air their concerns.

She rejected accusations of a conflict of interest involving the council's urban planning councillor Ismael Reig, the brother of Roman Reig who owns land in the development area and is an agent for the promoters Terras de l'Horta. She promised that Roman Reig would have no direct involvement in actively promoting the urbanisation schemes. She also rubbished claims, widely reported in the Spanish press, that the singer Julio Iglesias was one of the financial backers of the proposed development.

The biggest and most controversial of the three schemes involves the development of an urbanisation with more than 1,400 houses in the area of El Repla. But the Mayoress stressed that the area had been classified as “urbanizable ” (designated for building) since 1991 and 200 of the 1,400 houses in the project had already been built many years ago without the appropriate licences. The current owners of those 200 houses have been blocked from improving their properties with the addition of swimming pools, extensions etc because the land owners have never been paid by the original developers.

Señora Lopez said that under the new scheme, the land owners would be compensated and the property owners would benefit from the lifting of the moratorium on extending their homes. These owners will have to pay for the provision of services which they are not currently receiving (paved roads, street lighting, sewage disposal etc) but which will form part of the development project.

The council's technical adviser says that any home owner who can't afford to pay the infrastructure charge will be able to raise the money by selling their new “right to build”. This would not involve selling their actual land or property but it would enable the buyer to increase the density of construction permitted on another area of the urbanisation (the overall density will be fixed as a ratio of construction per square metre to total square metres of land).

Campaigners call for a referendum

Campaigners fighting the urbanisation plans have reacted furiously to the Mayoress’ comments accusing her of “lies and blatant propaganda.”

Jenny Bussey, who has lived in Parcent for 18 years and is an elected Democratic Coalition councillor, issued the following statement:

“No one really knows how many villagers are in favour or not as no one has asked them. The Coalicion Democratica de Parcent [opposition party] has asked for a referendum so that this can be ascertained, with the risk that it may go in favour of the development that the PP are trying to get through. Certainly there are land-owners who would like it to go ahead, especially those who are also builders, such as Roman Reig, who has bought up large areas of El Repla to add to the land he already owned there. 

 The provision of new schools and medical centres usually come under the auspices of the Valencian Generalitat or even at national government level. We can ask for new facilities and have the land available, but when they actually get built is another matter – look at Orba's Medical Centre that took 13 years to complete, and Jalón is still waiting for anything to be done five years after allocating land for theirs. A library only needs premises that can be provided by the local council and, with all the money the present council have managed to get from funds available from Alicante to renovate old buildings in Parcent, we should soon have somewhere for the books at present in store to be once more available. Out of interest, these renovations were already requested by the previous CDP administration but they were always told there were no funds available. 

During the last year Parcent has had approved grants from Alicante worth more than those for the all the rest of the villages in the valley put together!

 The three areas for the PAIs (Programas de Actuation Integrada) now being processed were on a 1991 plan of Parcent under what are called "Normas subsidiarias". This was not a General Plan for Parcent. When the CDP wanted to develop these areas in 1999, they were told by the Conselleria de Territorio y Vivienda in Alicante that they would have to be brought up-to-date, but this was found not to be possible and the Conselleria then said that a full General Plan would have to be drawn up. This was started in 2001 but, as it takes up to four years to complete, it was not finished before the last election at which the PP were elected. They chose to ignore the work already done (costing some six million pesetas) and went back to the old "Normas Subsidiarias" plan, apparently with the approval of the Conselleria that had said no previously. The PP accepted three PAIs based on the NNSS from developers last year, and these were provisionally passed at the infamous council meeting on 30th January 2006, at which a draft General Plan was also presented, including these areas as part of the Plan.

 We realise that the proposed houses would not mushroom overnight BUT all three PAIs have provision for terrace houses of three storeys, which we consider inappropriate in the countryside, and which will give a density of 15 houses per hectare, greater than that provided for in the old NNSS (13 houses per hectare). There will also be a lot of land lost to infrastructure, including a 4-lane highway out of proportion to our village - and going from nowhere to nowhere! (Or are there plans to join up with other villages throughout the valley, which we know nothing about?). Beside this, no one has proved that there is any such demand for houses in our area - certainly Parcent needs to expand a bit, but these developments would not be connected to the existing village until the new (dreadful) General Plan is executed, with ever more houses being planned to join up with all the urbanisations.

 The number of illegal houses is about 100, not the 200 as stated by the Mayoress.  I do not know whether it is true or not that the original land owners were not paid when the illegal development was started over 20 years ago, while a PP council was in power. It is more likely that they were only given a very low price for their land. The Barranquet Property Owners Associaton has negotiated a possible deal with the developers of El Repla, but this is not signed, sealed or delivered yet. Those who still own land in the area - mostly Spanish people - could find themselves still saddled with infrastructure costs that the home-owners will not have to pay, which is patently unfair.  I believe that LUV (the new law which replaced the notorious LRAU “land grab” law earlier this year) makes provisions for illegal houses to be legalised anyway, so really they are only getting what is due to them.

 The idea of planting mature trees is ridiculous with regard to the expense and the likelihood of losing half of them unless endless water is available to keep them alive while they settle in.  Water being another bone of contention as the PP claim there is a practically unlimited supply, while the farmers say that it there is not - there is frequently insufficient for normal irrigation in summer now.  Also the local water supply is controlled by a large organisation with jurisdiction over a wide area, far beyond Parcent and its needs.

Mari Carmen thinks this development will create jobs for Parcentinos, which we all doubt as, apart from the developers themselves and their families, any building work will be done by immigrants from poorer countries in Europe or South America, who will be paid a pittance, as is already happening on El Arenal.  Whether Parcentinos will ever take the opportunity to provide services for the people living in these urbanisations remains to be seen - it has hardly happened so far.  Most services are provided by people living elsewhere, often other ex-pats.”

A "battle for hearts and minds" says local residents' leader

Mark Harrison, president of the Neighbours and Residents Association of El Repla, had this to say in response to the Mayoress' comments:

“There has never been any official (legal) notification of the plans to any of the residents in Sector Repla. We only found out about the plans when one of the residents asked for permission to build a swimming pool only to be told "no" because there was a road going through her garden.

The PP promised in their last election manifesto to finalise a new General Plan for Parcent, but did nothing for almost 3 years other than meet with developers and encourage the submission of three new PAIs.

On 22 November 2005 the Mayor and Councillor Ismael Reig Poquet (brother of one of the developers) promised our association (at a meeting attended by our lawyer) that the plan for our area was paralysed and would not be progressed until a new draft General Plan had been finalised and fully consulted. Then on 30th January 2006 they called a meeting and approved a first draft of a General Plan at the same time that they approved three new PAIs including the plan for Sector Repla

On 26th January Mari Carmen asked to speak at a scheduled meeting of our association. We allowed her to speak and she offered the usual platitudes about understanding our concerns. Then she waited until we had left the town hall before posting the notice convening the “Pleno” three days later to approve the plans. All this was just two days before the LRAU was scrapped.

On the day of the Pleno, Roman Reig Poquet, brother of councillor Ismael Reig Poquet, visited my house to plead with me to drop our objections to the plan from Terras de L'Horta (Ballester). He said he was now an authorised agent (apoderado) for Terras de L'Horta (a fact which was subsequently confirmed by a search of the Register of Companies - I have the document).  He offered us everything - no land confiscation, no charges for infrastructure - if only we would withdraw our objections and negotiate. This offer was subsequently rejected overwhelmingly by our Association.

Before the meeting Ismael Reig Poquet was advised by the Borough Secretary that he must not vote on the matter because of his brother's involvement. He ignored this advice and voted in favour of the plan.

The Borough Secretary also has advice from the Consel Juridic Consultivo in Valencia (a kind of Counsel's opinion - I have a copy of the 32 page document) that the whole basis of the plan is illegal and could (should) be annulled. They chose to ignore this.

Mari Carmen often states that the majority of Sector Repla is in favour of the plan. This is a deliberate distortion of the facts. What she means is that the owners of the majority of the land (four or five) support the plan - they would do wouldn't they, since they have all done a deal with the developer!

Another lie is the frequently quoted distortion that the town hall had to approve the plan otherwise they would have to pay a great deal of money by way of compensation (I actually have this one in writing from Mari Carmen). Our lawyer and another independent lawyer have categorically contradicted this. Just because land is urbanisable does not mean it has to be urbanised. The town hall can say no to any plan if they so choose.

The same is true of the argument that the land in Sector Repla has been zoned as urbanisable since 1991 and therefore it has to be developed. The old Normas Subsidiarias plan from 1991 was NOT a General Plan; it was approved in the days before anyone ever thought about the environment, sustainability, Local Agenda 21 etc. This plan can, and should, be revoked. Denia, for example, recently declassified more than one million square metres of land previously zoned as urbanisable. It CAN be done if there is a political will.

The most disgraceful lie (from the Mayoress) is that the houses in this area are illegal - this is just said to frighten us and turn the village against us. The real fact is that almost all of the houses were approved by the town hall in the 1980s (i.e. before the 1991 Plan). Yes, the approvals were illegal because they were illegally granted by the town hall who knew exactly what they were doing in allowing houses to be built on small plots on rustic land. And guess who was the mayor at the time - none other than Mari Carmen's husband! It is disgraceful to imply that the owners have acted illegally when many of them paid the original developer for infrastructure which was never provided - a situation which the town hall has failed over the years to rectify - until now when they expect us to pay again. And as for the benefit of being able, legally, to extend our homes or build pools, it is laughable since it is the town hall who created this situation in the first place. As for the claim that the original landowners were not paid - whose fault is this? The town hall's and definitely not the residents who all bought and paid for their houses in good faith. In any event we all have escrituras to prove our legal ownership.

Mari Carmen tells people in the village that if these plans do not go ahead there will be no money for future investment. She also tells people that if they oppose these plans the social centre will not be made available to them. She tried to stop Veins de Parcent from collecting signatures in a square during a recent fair and issued an edict to say that they would be denounced if they did not stop. A similar edict was issued for the Pleno in January limiting attendance at the meeting to just 40 people although there was room for many more. This was after packing the meeting with her supporters.

Already, one local shopkeeper who dared to come out against the town hall, has seen her trade drop by 20%.

The majority of the houses planned for this sector (El Repla) are adosados (town houses) of the type we can all now see in the Almazara Urbanisation in Jalón - worse still, Almazara is less than 300 properties and they want to build 1500 of these concrete boxes in one of the most beautiful parts of this valley. Worse still, they are nearly all designed as holiday homes - empty for most of the year - so where's the economic benefit in that?

As for the need for a school and library - again it's just a con. Tiny concrete holiday homes will not attract families to live permanently in Parcent - so where's the demand for school places? And so what if Parcent gains a library - like the one in Alcalali, it will probably only be open a couple of days a week and barely used. Is that a price worth paying in return for the destruction of a whole village and its way of life?

As for the argument that this will only happen gradually, so what? It still means the ultimate destruction of this part of the valley. Worse still, the developers will have to put all the infrastructure in at the beginning - so we face the prospect of looking out over a vast desert of roads carved into the mountain for the next 20 years as we can already see in Pedreguer and Gata de Gorgos. And remember Sector Repla is "just" 1,500 houses - the draft General Plan envisages another 2000 on top of these. Welcome to the mayor's vision for La Grand Ciudad de Parcent.

We are not against progress. There is plenty of scope for a General Plan that enables the village to expand and develop in a gradual, sustainable way without destroying the very things that make Parcent special. This plan is a sell out - of the village, of the people and of a whole way of life. If Mari Carmen and the developers are so confident that their vision of the future is the right one, let them put their ideas to the people, open up an informed debate and hold a referendum. Otherwise the suspicion will remain that these proposals are not for the benefit of the community, but for benefit of a few people who have a vested interest.

In the weeks and months to come, there will be a battle for the hearts and minds of the people of Parcent. I only hope that they will be able to reach their own conclusions based on facts and not the kind of blatant propaganda and manipulation we have so far witnessed."

 

With thanks to Ann Knight

Editor / Webmaster  www.vivathevalley.com