How could a 12,000 square meter macro-complex be built in one of the most protected areas of Lanzarote and in full view of everyone, when it only had a license to rehabilitate a house and build a 900 meter warehouse? That is one of the questions that the Stratvs case opens, after knowing all the details that surrounded the construction of that winery and all its annexed facilities, which have nothing to do with what had been authorized (and that was also illegal according to the instruction of the case). Didn't the administrations see anything while the supposed 900-meter warehouse was becoming a "pharaonic" project, as the Prosecutor's Office defines it, with an industrial winery, a restaurant, a store, paved terraces, a kitchen, bathrooms and all the facilities that complete the macro-complex?
According to the case summary, the answer is yes. In fact, Stratvs faced several files, which included financial penalties and even the sealing of the different works carried out from 2003 until the end of 2012, without being covered by any type of permit. However, neither the sanctions nor the seals were executed or had consequences. Now, the indictment that the Environmental Prosecutor's Office has already filed in this case, signed by prosecutor Ignacio Stampa, allows us to know at least some of those files and what happened to them.
- Order to suspend the works in 2003
Shortly after the works began, Stratvs faced its first file. The then mayor, José Francisco Reyes, had granted a building permit in 1999 (despite having negative technical reports), but the works did not begin until 2003, when that permit had already expired and therefore was not valid. In addition, the execution project, which was required to start the works, had not even been presented. When the technicians warned of this, a municipal file was opened and on April 10, 2003, a decree was signed ordering the suspension of the works.
However, it is not recorded that the works actually stopped. Finally, almost two months later, the execution project was presented, "without any report being issued by any technician of the Corporation, without it being authorized, and without the inspected works conforming to said project either", according to the Prosecutor's Office. Two years later, when the works were more than advanced, Reyes authorized an extension of the first license granted in 1999, thus giving supposed coverage to the works that had been carried out. At that time, it was already evident that what was built had nothing to do with what that license authorized, which was a 900 square meter warehouse.
- Sealing of the parking lot works, when they had already finished
Although it is not recorded that the Agency for the Protection of the Urban and Natural Environment (Apmun) of the Government of the Canary Islands acted with the illegal works of the winery, the restaurant and the rest of the annexes, it did so with those related to the parking lot. That work was carried out between 2007 and 2008, filling an area "that occupies an area of about 1,500 square meters".
According to the Prosecutor's Office, "the work lacked any title to protect it and, in addition, it invaded public domain land and easement and affectation area to the island road LZ-30 (Teguise-Uga)". At that time, the Apmun opened a file for urban infraction and on October 7, 2008, the executive director of this Agency signed a resolution agreeing to the suspension and sealing of the works. That sealing, according to the prosecutor's writing, was carried out more than five months later, when the work "was already completed". The parking lot was used until Judge Silvia Muñoz decreed the precautionary closure of all the facilities in December 2013.
- They ordered an inspection that was never carried out
In December 2008, already under the Mayoralty of Gladys Acuña, the Yaiza City Council granted Stratvs the activity license. By then, the winery had been operating for more than a year and even in mid-2008 an inauguration ceremony had been held "with premeditated public notoriety", as the Prosecutor's Office underlines. Prominent public officials from all administrations attended the event.
When granting that license authorizing its opening, the City Council established the "fictitious and superfluous condition, among others, that the activity could not be started without a prior inspection visit by the competent technicians". According to the prosecutor, both the mayor and the councilors who participated in the Governing Board in which that license was approved "knew that the winery had been inaugurated months ago and that it was operating improperly".
In addition, they did not ensure that the order to carry out an inspection was complied with, despite the fact that they themselves conditioned the validity of the license to the completion of that visit. With the inspection, it should be verified "the suitability of the premises to the presented project". Had it been carried out, something that is actually evident would have been verified, and that is that what was built is not a 900-meter warehouse, but a macro-complex that includes not only an industrial winery, but also a restaurant, a store, paved terraces and other annexes.
- Apmun file four years after Stratvs was inaugurated
Almost a decade after the works began and four years after the official inauguration of Stratvs ("with premeditated public notoriety"), the Apmun opened a file for urban infraction in the construction of this macro-complex. At that time, the criminal case opened for these works was already underway, in which technicians from the Government of the Canary Islands had been charged, in addition to the Cabildo of Lanzarote and the Yaiza City Council.
The Apmun file was opened in 2012, but it was not completed. In October 2013, the executive director of the Agency agreed to the "suspension of the exercise of the sanctioning power" due to the "criminal prevalence", derived precisely from the instruction of the Stratvs case.
- Rosa denied entry to the winery to the inspecting technicians and the police
Days after declaring as charged in the Stratvs case for the granting of the activity license, and after the judge asked her if she was going to adopt measures, Gladys Acuña ordered an inspection of the winery. Thus, on July 18, 2013, technicians from Yaiza and agents of the Local Police went to the winery to carry out that inspection. However, according to the Prosecutor's Office, "Juan Francisco Rosa denied via telephone entry to the winery facilities to said officials". The prosecutor questions that "far from exercising their powers and complying with the principle of authority with which they were invested", the officials "made Rosa Marrero's particular interest prevail instead of ensuring the general interest, as they were obliged to do, issuing a merely provisional and incomplete report dated that same day".
The following day, the Governing Board "avoided" adopting a decision on the winery, whose inspection had been prevented by Rosa. According to the prosecutor, the mayor and the councilors adhered "arbitrarily to the restaurant", opening a sanctioning file and proposing its closure. The measure still took months to be implemented, since the property was given a hearing to present allegations.
- Partial sealing ordered by the City Council
On July 25, 2013, the mayor ordered "to continue immediately with the inspection" of Stratvs. After carrying out the visit, on August 8 a technical report was issued that warned that the executed work did not correspond to the license granted, among a long list of irregularities. Among them, that there was not even a request for the start-up of the winery's activity.
That report, according to the Prosecutor's Office, "deliberately and consciously silenced" other serious irregularities, including that the winery "lacked any enabling title", since neither its location nor its dimensions coincided with the project that had been presented in its day, and also that what was built "had no legal fit". The report did propose again the closure of the restaurant, for a "very serious infraction", since in this case there was neither a construction project, nor a building permit, nor a request for an activity license.
Finally, on August 8, 2013, the Governing Board rejected the BTL allegations and confirmed the closure of the restaurant, proposing the opening of a sanctioning file on the rest of the activities "detected in the inspection". The decree agreeing to the sealing of the restaurant was not executed until almost a month later, specifically on September 6, 2013.
- Two decrees agreeing to the total closure that were not executed either
On October 11, 2013, a new municipal technical report was carried out, which concluded that all the buildings built without a license in the Stratvs macro-complex were incompatible with the Island Plan of Lanzarote.
That same day, two decrees were signed initiating sanctioning files for the winery and the store with a tasting area, agreeing on a provisional basis to the cessation of said activities. However, according to the Prosecutor's Office, "deliberately" no "measure was adopted to make said precautionary measures effective". Finally, in December of that year, it was the investigating judge of this case who ordered the precautionary closure of all the facilities. In her order, which was later supported by the Provincial Court, the judge reproached all the administrations involved for their "alarming inactivity" with Stratvs.
- Two fines still unpaid for the destruction of socos
The first action recorded by the Cabildo is not for the construction of the winery itself, but for subsequent works that were carried out at the end of 2012 and that, among other things, involved the destruction of ten socos of La Geria. The company that owns Stratvs had requested permission to transplant seven palm trees but, as happened with the construction of the macro-complex, what it did was much more than that and, in addition, it did not comply with the conditions established by the authorization it received from the Historical Heritage of the Cabildo.
The resolution established that only three palm trees could be planted and that in no case should the vine socos located on that plot be destroyed, "given their historical and landscape value". However, not only were ten socos destroyed, but, in addition to transplanting the palm trees, other works were carried out without authorization, "consisting of the construction of a stone cave and a windmill based on rocks, a canalization or waterfall for water finished with concrete, as well as the installation of posts for the placement of lighting spotlights and the opening of a track to facilitate the tour of visitors, all with the purpose of installing permanently and annually the representation of a Christmas nativity scene" and "a representative model of the landscape with a typical Lanzarote village". In total, an area of 970 square meters was affected, which was filled with red sand from another place.
The Cabildo opened a sanctioning file for these events on January 18, 2013 and in July of that year a resolution was adopted sanctioning the company with a fine of 12,000 euros for the commission of a serious infraction, for failing to comply with the conditions of the Heritage authorization, and with another fine of 2,000 euros for the commission of a "minor" offense, for the destruction of vine socos. In addition, it was ordered that the ten socos be restored.
The resolution was notified the day after it was issued to Juan Francisco Rosa, who on July 23, 2013 filed an appeal for reconsideration. Since then, "no resolution has been issued to resolve" that appeal, "nor has BTL Lanzarote proceeded to restore the damaged island historical heritage to its original state", the prosecutor underlines.
- Another sealing by the Apmun of works already completed
The destruction of the socos also gave rise to a file by the Apmun, which on February 18, 2013 agreed to the suspension of those works and the sealing. The resolution was notified to Stratvs on March 5, 2013 and the sealing was not materially executed until almost a month later, specifically on April 2, 2013. At that time, according to the Prosecutor's Office, "the construction had already been completed" and "even the Christmas motifs of that year had been dismantled by that date", although the "installation remained fixed".
A few months later, in October 2013, the executive director of the Apmun agreed to "suspend the exercise of the sanctioning power" in this file "due to criminal prevalence", thus allowing the responsibilities to be determined within the framework of the Stratvs case.
Add La Voz de Lanzarote as a preferred Google source.
Stay informed with the latest current news.