- August 4, 2006 at 11:08 am #52085
- August 4, 2006 at 3:05 pm #64411
From today’s interview:
The biggest problem is the more than 30,000 houses already built illegally. What can you do to remedy this situation?
The question of illegal licenses is being tackled in a very courageous way in the advance plans. We have found, as you say, more than 30,000 houses build with illegal licenses, And we can divide them into two quite different categories: those that are built on public ground, whether ground set aside for public services such as health or education facilities, or on ground that had been zoned as green space or on river banks. The town cannot survive without theses spaces, and we now have to attempt to put together this basic structure that the town needs. Marbella has grown over a large urban area, but it lacks the infrastructure to support such growth. Without proper services, or green areas, there is no town. We have to re-build it, and the houses that fall into the mortal sin category, so to speak, will be very difficult to save.
And what will happen to the rest of them?
Here we have some housing that could possibly fit into an overall urban plan, even if they have not been properly planned, and some that have clearly been over-built, which is what happened. In cases such as these, what we have to do is examine each case individually and try to come up with a solution that will compensate for the loss of quality of life in the town. If there has been over-building, either in number of houses or density of housing, we have to extend the parameters with regard to green spaces, parking areas, roads and so on. All this will require compensation to be made, and logically, those people who have benefited from this illegal development will be those required to pay this compensation.
Are you referring to the promoters?
The promoters will have to pay the costs involved in the recuperation of green areas or public service infrastructure, because they are the ones who have benefited from this whole situation in the recent past. If they failed to take responsibility for green zones and the like at the time of building, they will have to do so now. It must be understood that the promoter who wishes to legalise his buildings must assume these costs, because if he fails to do so, the buildings remain illegal. And this is something the promoter will find difficult to live with. This does not amount to a form of punishment against the promoter: those that were punished were the citizens of Marbella, who were deprived of certain basic social rights. The regulations we are applying are simply a way of giving back to the people of Marbella what was taken from them illegally.
How many of these 30,000 houses are in the first category, where there is no solution possible, and how many can become legal?
Initially we are talking about approximately 85 per cent that can become legal, as long as they conform to the criteria we have drawn up in the new plan with regard to compensation for green spaces and basic infrastructure.
Now, I know that SMGH (Santa Maria Green Hills), as far as I can see on the PGOU Plan, is on land marked for public use, and they have overbuilt. Instead of 12 private residential dwellings, they built 6 blocks of flats down below (and they just could not built the other 6 blocks of flats up above)!
They fall under both categories mentioned above: The mortal sin category (solution given is to demolish) and the second category where the promoters will have to compensate the people of Marbella by paying heavy penalties.
I wonder, what do you think will happen up there? 🙄 😉 😉 😉
- August 4, 2006 at 5:03 pm #64417
Does any one know which category los lagos falls into – Mortal sin or otherwise
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.