The land classification when the houses of La Bufona were built prevented "any type of license" from being authorized there for construction. This is what the Murillo family claims, who have been battling in court for years to prove that the construction of the 14 houses in that urbanization, which are subject to a partial demolition order, invaded land owned by them. The family draws this conclusion from a recent report from the Technical Office of the Arrecife City Council; and for which it has already asked the City Council to "identify" the official who authorized the urbanization projects presented by the promoters "to build illegally".
In that report, dated July 7th and prepared at the request of Eduardo Murillo, the municipal technician points out that the land on which those 14 houses were built was located, according to the Arrecife General Plan of 1991, mostly on rustic land with special protection due to the passage of sand, while the remaining part was on "developable sectorized unorganized land", which was "organized with the Partial Plan of La Bufona" of 1981.
Subsequently, the report indicates, that small part that was not rustic land became, with the Basic Adaptation of the General Plan of 2004, "consolidated urban land". And it specifies that the parts that appear in pink on the plans are "land intended for residential use". The Murillo family, however, maintains that this 2004 adaptation "does not apply" to the Partial Plan of La Bufona and that therefore the 1991 Plan applies there. For this, the Murillos rely on a technical report from the Canarian Ministry of Environment and Territorial Planning of 2004, which indicates that this Basic Adaptation is "suspended" in La Bufona. The municipal report points out another aspect that the Murillos consider "important"; and it is that it points out that even when it "borders urban land", the part of rustic land cannot "be provided with urban services".
First report on the land where the houses are built
"The 91 Plan applies", Gonzalo Murillo pointed out to La Voz, who emphasizes that according to the classification of the land made by that Plan, it would not be possible to "authorize any type of license" in the area. "However, there are more than 50 houses there", he adds. Murillo also highlights that the "most important" thing about that report is that "for the first time in almost 20 years" it talks about the "classification of the land that in theory is urban, where the houses are built".
And the case of La Bufona has focused in these years on a part of the land, which corresponds to the rear of the 14 houses that the justice system has already declared illegal and must be partially demolished. The sentence, issued last January by the Criminal Court 3 of Arrecife, considered it proven that the works in that part of the houses continued when the houses had already been bought. There, swimming pools, walls and other interventions were built, which are precisely those that are on protected rustic land. The ruling considered it proven that the promoters executed them knowing their illegality and, therefore, sentenced Federico Echevarría and Antonio Caro for a continuous crime against land planning.
However, according to the thesis defended by the Murillo family in the allegations they presented to the City Council in light of this report from the Technical Office, the construction of the other part of the houses should not have been authorized either. In this sense, they allude to the article of the Canarian law on Territorial Planning that indicates that in "unorganized developable land" only works that "correspond to general systems" and works "of a provisional nature" may be authorized.
"The problem is not 14 houses, but 52"
In those allegations, presented on August 19th to the City Council, the Murillo family maintains that "the problem is not that of 14 houses located to the north of the La Bufona urbanization, but of the 52 houses illegally built in said urbanization, since the municipal technician is reporting that between 1991 and 2004 the classification of the land was unorganized sectorized developable".
Thus, it considers that according to the law the owners are "currently obliged to comply with the legal duties required (make the mandatory transfers to the Arrecife City Council) to be able to obtain the right to legally use the land occupied by their homes". It adds, in this sense, that the owners will have to comply with "innumerable procedures" to obtain the appropriate land classification and "not be subject to demolition action". According to the Murillo family's writing, that demolition would not only affect the 14 houses that already have a partial demolition order, but also "all those located to the south of El Chabusquillo street and that invade roads, green areas, public spaces and public parking lots, since the period to exercise the demolition of said houses never expires, as is the case with rustic land".
Regarding the actions of the City Council, the Murillo family's writing reproaches the institution for having "authorized building licenses to build illegally to the north of Chabusquillo street" and for having "allowed" the development of the La Bufona planning "lacking road access with roads of regional interest", such as the LZ-2 and the LZ-3. In this sense, it emphasizes that the Supreme Court declared "radically null" that planning "precisely for not having a positive report from the roads area of the Ministry of Public Works".
"Someone is lying"
On the other hand, Gonzalo Murillo emphasizes that everything explained in the municipal report comes "into conflict with the famous report that the owners of the houses are using in court". And it is that although the Apmun already ordered years ago the demolition of a part of the houses and more recently the criminal sentence has done so, the measure has not been executed because the owners appealed that decision in court.
The report to which Murillo alludes was signed by the technician of the Island Plan Office of the Cabildo, Gustavo Navarro. In it, "he says that the land is not rustic, but urban", explains Murillo, who highlights the contradiction between one report and another. "Someone is lying. Either this technician from the Cabildo is lying, or this lady (the municipal technician) is lying and the Agency is lying and the Seprona is lying and the Government of the Canary Islands is lying, because they all say the same thing", he concludes.
