PLANNING SUMMARY
REPORT
DETAILED MODIFICATION OF THE P.G.O.U. MAZARRON
AREA A-05 07 “EL SALADILLO”
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION. PREVIOUS HISTORY.
2. DEVELOPER, AREA AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MODIFICATION.
3. INFORMATION ON THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT. CURRENT PLANNING
3.1 Decisions of the Plan general
3.2 Decisions of the P.A.U.
4. PROCEDURE. BASIC GENERAL REGULATION.
5. NEED, OPPORTUNITY y OBJECT OF THE MODIFICATION
6. CLARIFICATION AND CONTENT OF THE MODIFICATIONS PROPOSED IN THIS SUMMARY
7. ADAPTATION OF THE PAU
7.1 Description of the area surface A-05-07
7.2 Surface of the General Systems and Free Space General Systems
7.3 Intensity Levels
7.4 Distribution area
8. ADAPTATION SECTOR A
8.1 Overview of surface summary
8.2 Lucrative land
8.3 Public Facilities
8.4 Private Facilities
9. ADAPTATION SECTORS BCDF
9.1 Overview of surface summary
9.2 Lucrative Land
9.3 Public Facilities
9.4 Private Facilities
10. CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND BRIDGE ON THE RAMBLA DE MURCIA AND EXTENSION OF THE STRUCTURAL ROAD THAT SEPARATES THE COMMERCIAL PLOTS
11. MODIFICATION AND CHANNELLING OF THE RAMBLA OF THE AZNARES THROUGH SECTORS BCDF
11.1 Proposal for the channelling of the CHS’ Rambla of the Aznares
11.2 Proposal of alternative route through public roads
1. INTRODUCTION. PREVIOUS HISTORY
The Town Hall of Mazarrón, in plenary session held on the 19th July 1991, agreed to incorporate in the urbanisation process part of the Non Programmed Building Land (SUNP), so classified in the Plan General of Urban Distribution of the Municipality of Mazarrón. Among the areas to be incorporated, is the denomination A-05-07 which corresponds to the area known as “El Saladillo”.
Also, in the above session were initially agreed the basis that would apply for the formulation, on part of the Town Hall, of the corresponding Programme of Urban Development Performance and of the first Plan Parcial. Having submitted the referred Basis to the Public Information for a period of one month, through announcements in the B.O.R.M. and in the local press, and by virtue of the results of such public information procedure, the Town Hall in Plenary session held on the 14th October 1991 agreed to provisionally approve the referred basis. In the session of the 30th April 1992, the Town Hall in Plenary agreed to permanently approve the basis.
The Programme of Urban Development of the Area A05-07 of the PGMOU of Mazarrón was approved on the 12th March 1993 (order no. 1346 Dept. of P.T. Public Works and Environment) the developer being the Town Hall of Mazarrón and the editing Architect D Jorge Siljeström Torres. Subsequently a revised text was produced in December 1999 with the same developer and editing Architect.
On the 22nd March 2004 the Project of Detailed Modification of the Programme of Urban Development of the Area A05-07 of the PGMOU of Mazarron was presented as consequence of the modifications that, it was hoped, had been executed in the already approved Plan Parcial of Sector “B-C-D-F” of the Area A05-07. The expected modifications of the Plan Parcial emerged as consequence of the detection of some errors in the transcription of data between the report and the plans of the Plan Parcial, an error that was producing an increased opportunity. From the report and from the plans of the Plan Parcial emerged another error which consisted in the increased opportunity destined to Tertiary-tourist (TT) in respect to what was established in the actual document of the Plan Parcial and the Programme of Urban Development. Furthermore, as evidence of a new factual reality, as the urbanisation works were practically completed, the following should be reflected upon: location of the bridge, new roundabout, connection between sector A and B and underground channelling of the water in a smaller rambla. All of the above were affecting sectors B4, B6 and B8, reducing its surface area, as well as its development potential and the potential number of dwellings. It must be said that it was the CHS who demanded the displacement of the bridge from its original location. Furthermore, the Town Hall of Mazarrón demanded that the width of the main road crossing the whole area of the Programme and structuring all of its sectors, be of 25 metres. Also, through this document, the denomination of Sector B, Sector C, Sector D and Sector F was modified so that the four areas B, C, D and F would constitute a unique Sector called “B-C-D-F”.
When the Sectorial report was transferred to the CHS for the initial approval, the CHS requested that the bed of the smaller rambla referred-to in the previous paragraph, which runs through Sector “B-C-D-F”, be diverted. Following several channelling proposals and meetings with the CHS, in
August 2013 the CHS wrote a “STUDY AND EVALUATION ON THE MOST SUITABLE ALTERNATIVES FOR THE CHANNELLING OF THE RAMBLA OF THE AZNARES, AND ITS PATH THROUGH THE URBANISATION OF CAMPOSOL, T.M. OF MAZARRON, MURCIA” establishing a solution that this Detailed Modification acknowledges in the majority of its conclusions.
2. DEVELOPER, AREA AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MODIFICATION
This Document relating to the Summary of modification of the Plan General of Urban Distribution of Mazarrón, has been requested by the Town Hall of Mazarrón, in accordance with the Local Government Executive Board’s agreement dated 20th February 2015.
The area of the present modification covers the land belonging to the Planning Area of A-05-07 “CAMPOSOL” – “SALADILLO”.
The land is located in the Municipal Area of Mazarrón, in the Saladillo, and is situated between the Regional Route MU-3315 from Totana to Mazarrón and the route Murcia-Mazarrón via El Palmar, MU-603, according to the sector defined as Non Programmed Building Land on the plans of the Plan General. As a product of the development of the various plan parcial, 90% of the land is at present developed and consolidated, being now SECTORISED BUILDING LAND WITH DETAILED DISTRIBUTION.
The total surface area of the P.A.U. area, revised and adjusted, is of 6.984.850,56 m2
This document has structural characteristics, in accordance with art. 149 of TRLSRM, and affect elements that constitute the general and organic structure of the territory.
3. URBAN INFORMATION. PLANNING CURRENTLY IN FORCE.
3.1 Decisions of the Plan General
The decisions of the P.G.M.O.U. of Mazarrón which refer to the Non-Programmed Building Land in general and to the sector NP “El Saladillo” in particular, are established according to the resolutions of 17th October 1989 and of 8th March 1993 of the Minister of Territorial Politics and Public Works of the Autonomous Community of Murcia where the P.G.M.O.U. is finally approved.
Such decisions were:
* Classification of the Non-programmed Building Land. Sector “El Saladillo”
* Global use: Residential
* Global development potential: 0’10 m?/m?, broken down in 0,06 m?/m? for residential use, and 0’04 m?/m? for tertiary-tourist use and private equipping-complementary Facilities to the Golf Course.
* Maximum surface area: 700 Ha. – A unique P.A.U. will be drawn for the totality of the sector.
* Establishment of a reserve for the Free Space General System of 30% of the total surface ordered.
* The Rambla of Murcia and its influence zone, are to be classified as Zone 8.1 S.N.U. “Protected land” not included in the Free Spaces General System.
* The creation of a Golf Course is to be considered a principal compulsory condition.
* Justification of the maximum number of dwellings and permanent residents.
3.2 Decisions of the P.A.U.
The decisions for the formulation of the Urban Development in the Non-programmed building land A-05-07 of the P.G.M.O.U. of Mazarrón, known as “El Saladillo” were acknowledged in the Basis. Among the more prominent aspects of the Basis, are the following:
* Maximum magnitude of the surface area designated as building land: 700Ha.
* Maximum development potential: 0,10 m?/m?, broken-down in 0,06 m?/m? for residential use, 0,04 m?/m? for tertiary-tourist use and private equipping.
* Planning for the Facilities of a golf course as principal condition.
* A surface area of not less than 30% of the total surface area ordered will be set aside for the Free Space General System.
* The maximum number of dwelling will be justified by the P.A.U.
* The first Plan Parcial will include the land situated to the East of the Road Murcia-Mazarrón.
* The owners will be required to hand over to the Town Hall, at no charge, the land included in the Free Space General System, as well as the land destined to roads, parks and public gardens, and other services and provisions of general interest.
* Free hand-over to the Town Hall of the 15% of any environmental resources and their corresponding land.
* From the third year after the P.A.U. allocation, the recipients will have to initiate every year a minimum of 15% of the construction planned in the Plan Parcial.
* The owners will have to maintain the urbanisation.
4. PROCEDURES, BASIC GENERAL REGULATIONS
The present modification will be dealt with in accordance with art. 162 of Law 13/2015, of 30th March, of territorial and urban distribution of the Region of Murcia.
Article 162 Process of the structural modifications of the Plan General
1. The modifications to the Plan General which must be considered structural, in accordance with art. 173 of the present Law will be subject to the same procedure and documentation previously stated in the processing of the plan.
2. As an exception to the above statement, in cases where the environmental procedure is finalised with the pronouncement that the plan has no significant effects on the
environment, the procedure of public information will be of one month and it will not be necessary to carry out the consultation on the initial approval.
3. The deadline for the final resolution will be, in any case, of two months.
Article 160 Proceedings of the Municipal Plan General of Urban Distribution
1. When the work of preparation of the Plan General has reached a sufficient level of development which allows the formulation of a summary with the criteria, objectives and possible alternatives, the Town Hall will submit it to the public information for a period of one month for presentation of suggestions.
The summary and the public the documentation necessary to initiate the environmental procedure will be prepared and will be made available to the public, in accordance with the specific legislation.
Such documentation will be simultaneously sent to the relevant general direction in Town Planning, for information; the consultation proceedings envisaged in the environmental legislation will be carried out, and the relative reports will be requested, in accordance with the established procedure in the specific sectorial legislation.
Upon receiving the results of the consultations and reports that follow, the Town Hall will give the appropriate dispositions for the preparation of the plan.
2. When the phase of preparation of the plan is completed, the Town Hall will be in a position to give the initial approval which will contend with the strategic environmental study as well as the rest of the necessary complementary instruments. The previous documentation will be submitted to a public information procedure, for a minimum period of two months.
Such documentation will be simultaneously sent to the consultation proceedings of environmental legislation requesting the reports which are mandatory by law and those considered necessary, as well as to the relevant general direction in town planning, granting audience to the adjoining town halls.
The reports and the consultations will have to be issued within two months, unless a greater deadline is set in the sectorial legislation which applies.
3. Upon receiving the results of the public information and consultations and previous reports of the statements presented and the reports issued, the Town Hall will agree the provisional approval of the plan with the modifications that followed, which may also affect the strategic environmental study.
4. The provisionally approved plan and the strategic environmental study will be sent to the environmental Body responsible for the formulation of the strategic environmental declaration.
5. The modifications carried out in the provisionally approved document will be submitted to a new procedure of public information if such modifications show a substantial change in respect to the plan approved initially.
To this effect, it will be intended as substantial change, the alteration of the model of urban and territorial development but not the precise alterations of the integral elements of the same.
6. The TH will be able to display for public information, a summary of the modification introduced in the agreement of the provisional approval in the defined areas.
7. On completion of this procedure the TH will prepare the plan with copy of the complete file to the relevant Department in Town Planning for a decision on their final approval.
Article 161 Definitive resolution of the Plan General
1. Upon receipt of the file, the relevant general direction in Town Planning will pass an initial judgement on the documentation presented and, if any of the procedures or the mandatory documents are missing, they will notify the TH within one month for its rectification, suspending, in the meantime, the proceedings.
2. The relevant advisor, upon receipt of the report of the Commission of Territorial Political Coordination, will decide on its approval within a maximum of three months from the receipt of the file, after which, without necessity for the resolution to be notified, the plan will be understood to be finally approved by administrative silence, as a consequence of which the TH will be able to proceed to the publication of the final approval.
5. NECESSITY, OPPORTUNITY and OBJECT OF THE MODIFICATION
Having developed approximately 90% of the land belonging to the area A-05-07, it has been observed that the same does not fit in its totality to the development planning, and it is therefore necessary to make the appropriate revision and adjustment, in order to incorporate it in the urban land of the municipality in a coherent form, appropriate to the physical reality without contravening the urban regulation of application.
The present modification of the Plan General responds to the necessity to repair the defects and discrepancies encountered between the instruments of development of the Area of intervention, and the reality ultimately executed, as well as the necessity to adapt such instruments to the zones not yet developed. The successive factors that determined the
present configuration of the area, necessitate the formulation of strategies and actions to adapt and adjust the planning to the physical reality verified, and fall within the legislation in force on the matter of organisation.
On the other hand, the modification on the route of the Autovía RM3 and the change in the location of the bridge that crosses the Rambla of Murcia, have modified the route of the various previously planned road-network, consequently affecting the blocks (polígonos) falling within both the original route and the route finally executed, thus forcing the revision and the adjustment of the use and advantages of such polígonos/blocks, as well as the route and the alignments of the roads affected.
Over the years, several Detailed Studies have been approved, where the execution of the alignments and its suitability for building were established, and which determined a series of roads of private character that must be included in the development.
It also becomes necessary to make the modification of the channelling of the Rambla of the Aznares, whose present route flows mainly through land with exclusive rights, which constitute a conflict in relation to the public domain and difficulty in undertaking maintenance or repairs. In view of the magnitude and importance of this modification, and the fact that its development is subject to the previous authorization and resolution of the affected land in relation to the new river bed and relative rights, as well as the no-longer-affected land of the old river bed, the justification will take place in a specific point.
6. SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE MODIFICATIONS PROPOSED IN THIS SUMMARY
During the course of the development of the distribution plans drawn up and approved in the area of the land affected by the present modification, a series of modifications were carried out in the plans and routes, which have become the present condition of the area. Such modifications have complied with different circumstances and by decision and agreement of different administrations, without, up to this date, having been combined in a single modified planning document.
In this Summary are collated and expressed such modifications, at the same time as are revised and adjusted the affected decisions. The present modifications have the following objective:
1. To document the reality or the present condition of the sector. Building Land Sectorised with detailed distribution. To determine the actual area of the sphere, adjust the decisions according to when and how it proceeds.
The limit, alignments and perimeter of the area, have been revised collecting the actual surface resulting from the development of the plans and of the modifications introduced. In the enclosed graphic documentation is gathered the present condition of the area.
2. Re-adjust the planning in force at present to the constructed reality. Overviews are added of the surfaces for the resulting uses. The land defined in the development plans is maintained and its distribution is adjusted.
3. Adapt the road network and reconfigure the blocks falling the new road, as a consequence of the final route of the RM3 Dual carriage-way. Collate and document the new route.
The blocks EC1, EC2 and EL-3 of SECTOR BCDF, which were affected by the route of the RM3 Dual carriage-way “Mazarrón – Totana”, not projected at the time of the drawing up of the Plan General nor of the corresponding instruments of the following developments, have been adapted. This situation provoked a substantial variation in the route of the main road that crosses all area. This forces the regularisation of its position and the adjustment of the route of the adjoining main road, which cannot respect the planned width for the main road in the approved instruments.
Graphic documentation is added in which the final route of the road is shown, and the areas and blocks affected by this modification are graphed. The areas mostly affected are found at both extremes of the stretch that links the old sectors A and B with the dual carriage-way, forcing the revision of the limit of the sector and of the affected polígonos/blocks.
4. Adjustment of the planned and executed infrastructure. Revision of the plans and decisions relating to new infrastructure should this be necessary. At present the land is in sectorised building land with detailed distribution, except for the land identified as SECTOR E of the developed PAU, which still maintain the category of non-detailed building land.
5. Development of the Polígono A of Sector BCDF through the Project of urbanisation and the Project of Re-division of plots.
6. Modification and re-channelling of the path of Rambla of the Aznares through the consolidated and developed land in Sector BCDF.
The present summary shows the route proposed in the project realised by the Confederación Hidrográfica del Segura. This is explained in the last point of this summary.
7. ADAPTATION OF THE PAU
7.1 Table of the Area Surface A-05-07
Global Use Sector A Sector BCDF Sector E Total PAU
Residential 659.815,81 2.988.533,19 690.757,51 4,339.106,51
S.G.E.L. 111.302,06 793.554,73 212.836,81 1.117.693,60
Basic Infrastructure ———— 43.465,00 ————- 43,465,00
Sports Facilities ———— 494.681,51 ————- 494,681,51
Sector Surface 771.117,87 4.320.234,43 903.594,32 5.994.946,62
P.P. S.G.E.L. ZONE F 182.319,64 713.030,17 94.554,12 989.903,94
TOTALS (incl.% SGEL S-F) 953.437,51 5.033.264,60 998.148,44
7.2 Surface of the General Systems and General System of Free Space (SGEL)
S.G.E.L. 2.107.597,54
S.G.I.B. 43.465,00
TOTAL 2.151.062,54
SECTOR ZONES SURFACE m2
A A 111,302,06
BCDF C 322.851,93
D 470.702,80
F 989.903,94
E E 212.836,81
TOTAL 2.107.597,54
(*) 30% of the total surface verified = 2.095.455,17m2
SECTOR P.P. OF S.G. S.G. IN THE SECTOR PART IN ZONE F
A 293.621,70 111.302,06 182.319,64
B-C-D-F 1.506.584,90 793.554,73 713.030,17
E 307.390,93 212.836,81 94.554,12
TOTAL 2.107.597,54 1.117.693,60 989.903,94
7.3 Levels of Intensity
SECTOR SURFACE (m2) LEVEL OF GLOBAL BUILDING LAND (m2)
INT. (m2/m2)
A 771.117,87 0,1236436 95.343,75
pp.F-SECTOR A 182.319,64 0,00 0,00
B-C-D-F 4.320.234,43 0,1165044 503.326,46
pp.F-SECTOR B-C-D-F 713.030,17 0,00 0,00
E 903.594,32 0,1104642 99.814,84
pp.F-SECTOR E 94.554,12 0,00 0,00
F 989,903,94 0,00 0,00
TOTALS 6.984.850,56 0.10 698.485.06
7.4 Distribution Area
SECTOR ZONE SUP.(m2) BUILDING LAND USE COEFFICIENT Ap.Omog.
(m2/m2) U.U. .
A RESIDENTIAL 57.206,25 1,0 57.206,25
————- 659.815,81 0,1445 —— —– ————- TER-TUR 38.137,50 0,8 30.510,00
S.G.E.L. 111.302,06 0,0000 0,00 0,0 0,00
TOTAL A 771.117,87 0,1236 95.343,75 —— 87.716.25
ppF-SECTOR A – S.G.E.L. 182.319,64 0,0000 0,00 0,0 0,00
B-C-D-F RESIDENTIAL 301.995,88 1,0 301.995,88
————– 2.988.533,19 0.1445 —— —— ————–
TER-TUR 201.330,58 0,8 161.064,47
BASIC INFR. 43.465,00 0,00 0,0 0,00
SPORT-PRIV. 494.681,51 0,0439 21.716,52 0,7 15.201,56
S.G.E.L. 793.554,73 0,0000 0,00 0,0 0,00
TOTAL B-C-D-F 4.320.234,43 0,1165 503.326,46 —- 478.261,91
ppF=SECTOR B-C-D-F – S.G.E.L. 713.030,17 0,0000 0,00 0,0 0,00
E RESIDENTIAL 59.888,91 1,0 59.888,91
————— 690.757,51 —————- —– —————
TER-TUR 39.925.94 0,8 31.940,75
S.G.E.L. 212.836,81 0,0000 0,00 0,0 0,00
TOTAL E 903.594,32 0,1105 99.814,84 —- 91.829,66
ppF-SECTOR E – S.G.E.L. 94.554,12 0,0000 0,00 0,0 0,00
8. ADAPTATION, SECTOR A
8.1 Resumen of Surface overview
RESIDENTIAL LAND (RU+TT) 384.838,75
PRIVATE FACILITIES 29.235,75
PUBLIC FACILITIES 100.932,85
SGEL A (incl. % Zone F) 293.621,70
ROADS 144.812,46
SURFACE SECTOR A 953.437,51
SECTOR A
Residential Unitary Residential 346.650,50
Touristic Tertiary 38.184,25 384.834,75
Public Facilities Free Space 82.404,95
Schools 11.939,40
Parking Area 4.504,30
Roads 144.812,46
Infrastructure 2.084,20 245.745,31
Private Facilities Social 2.806,60
Commercial 2.255,70
Sporting 17.067,00
Generic 7.106,45 29.235,75
General Systems SGEL in Sector A 111.302,06
SGEL in Zone F 182.319,64 293.621,70
TOTAL SECTOR A 953.437,51
8.2 Lucrative Land
UNITARY RESIDENTIAL (RU)
A1 6.107,45
A2 8.550,00
A3 10.127,20
A4 9.585,20
A5 9.685,70
A6 9.268,80
A7 8.502,00
A8 9.742,50
A9 8.805,60
A10 8.221,40
A11 7.618,70
A12 10.484,00
A13 10.089,90
A14 12.182,45
A15 14.715,70
A16 16.626,95
A17 8.189,50
A18 10.768,30
A19 7.307,90
A20 5.672,65
A21 5.343,65
A22 7.457,35
A23 10.672,85
A24 11.422,30
A25 11.533,55
A26 8.731,70
A27 8.595,70
A28 10.880,60
A29 9.340,80
A30 8.224,00
A31 10.765,40
A32 9.047,80
A33 7.405,70
A34 3.701,50
A35 7.003,55
A36 12.435,20
A37 9.825,70
A38 2.011,25 346.650,50
Touristic Tertiary (TT)
A39 8.940,40
A40 11.609,25
A41 17.634,60 38.184,25
TOTAL 384.834,75
8.3 Public Facilities
Free Space EL1 1.463,50
EL2 33.277,00
EL3 14.865,70
EL4 24.466,80
EL5 2.433,65
EL6 4.362,00
EL7 1.536,30 82.404,95
Parking Area P1 2.056,00
P2 2.448,30 4.504,30
Roads 14.812,46
Schools EE 11.939,40 11.939,40
Infrastructure INF1 153,00
INF2 1.931,20 2.084,20
TOTAL 245.745,31
8.4 Private Facilities
Generic Facilities EG1 3.405,30
EG2 604,00
EG3 642,40
EG4 2.454,75 7.106,45
Sporting ED1 11.067,00
ED2 6.000,00 17.067,00
Commercial EC 2.255,70 2.255,70
Social ES 2.806,60 2.806,60
TOTAL 29.235,75
9. ADAPTATION SECTOR BCDF
9.1 Resumen of Surface overview
RESIDENTIAL LAND (RU+TT) 1.804.938,08
PRIVATE FACILITIES 646.388,70
PUBLIC FACILITIES 144.787,51
SGEL A (incl. % Zone F) 1.550.049,90
ROADS 887.100,41
SURFACE SECTOR BCDF 5.033.264,60
SECTOR BCDF
Residential Unitary Residential 1.453.428,74
Touristic Tertiary 351.509,34 1.804.938,08
Public Facilities Free Space 348.398,56
Schools 93.685,00
Parking Area 35.196.12
Roads 482.217,75
Technical Services 43.464,09 1.002.961,52
Private Facilities Social 30.252,00
Commercial 52.792,20
Sporting-Golf 533.169,04
Social Golf 59.101,86 675.315,10
General Systems SGEL in Sector BCDF 837.019,73
SGEL in Zone F 713.030,17 1.550.049,90
TOTAL SECTOR BCDF 5.033.264,60
9.2 Lucrative Land
UNITARY RESIDENTIAL (RU)
B1 19.638,51
B2 34.877,80
B3 55.424,71
B4-1 29.717,00
B4-2 14.723,00
B5 17.428,25
B6 20.184,62
B7 21.415,65
B9 28.548,43
B10 26.627,00
B11 12.176,00
B12 4.694,30
B14 13.747,00
B15 13.738,00
B16 2.287,50
B17 10.368,00
B18 27.900,00
B19 10.976,00
B20 27.316,34
B21 11.153,00
B22 19.354,00
C1 34.859,83
C3 17.698,26
C4 29.021,92
C5 29.873,46
C6 21.803,09
C7 23.063,89
C8 16.102,20
C9 20.866,58
C10 14.934,52
C11 11.400,38
C12 39.423,62
C13 29.901,58
D1 21.115,65
D2 19.328,40
D3 26.898,00
D4 33.451,70
D5 7.510,50
D6 14.394,00
D7 24.632,00
D8 36.913,50
D9 33.346,80
D10 16.544,00
D11 21.618,75
D12 28.790,00
D13 17.216,00
D14 16.754,80
D16 36.112,00
D17 25.170,60
D18 22.788,30
D19 30.436,00
D20 40.160,00
D21 23.550,80
D22 28.643,00
D26 45.677,20
D27 23.424,50
D28 18.342,40
D30 27.441,00
D31 19.413,00
D33 25.695,10
D34 19.902,20
D36 17.275,60
D37 19.638,50 1.453.428,74
Turistic Tertiary (TT)
B8 23.302,22
B13 29.767,60
C2 35.676,96
C14 23.629,38
C15 3.044,07
C16 20.806,21
C17 19.780,05
D15 20.481,80
D23 43.216,25
D24 35.862,50
D25 15.376,80
D29 12.477,50
D32 17.913,80
D35 22.093,50
D38 28.080,70 351.509,34
TOTAL 1.804.938,08
9.3 Public Facilities
Free Space EL1 12.559,50
EL2 61.140,00
EL3 790,50
EL4-1 5.223,80
EL4-2 870,00
EL4-3 12.694,60
EL5-1 42.739,46
EL5-2 26.486,39
EL6-1 36.365,81
EL6-2 29.055,00
EL7 115.853,50
EL8 4.620,00 348.398,56
Parking Area P1 3.340,00
P2 8.524,42
P3 5.757,00
P4 12.273,00
P5 5.301,70 35.196,12
Roads 482.217,75
Schools EE1 14.969,00
EE2 24.738,00
EE3 22.667,00
EE4 31.311,00 93.685,00
Technical Services ST 43.464,09
TOTAL 1.002.961,52
9.4 Private Facilities
Social ES 30.252,00
Sporting-Golf ED1 9.561,13
ED2 14.635,00
ED3 14.291,40
DG1 62.897,83
DG2 431.783,68 533.169,04
Commercial EC1 14.653,42
EC2 38.138,78 52.792,20
Social-Golf EH1 28.395,30
EH2 24.187,72
EH3 6.518,84 59.101,86
TOTAL 675.315,10
10. CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND BRIDGE OVER THE RAMBLA OF MURCIA AND EXTENSION OF THE STRUCTURAL ROAD THAT SEPARATES THE COMMERCIAL PLOTS.
Within the chapter of infrastructure that is projected in this modification, is the construction of the bridge over the Rambla of Murcia which was planned in the PAU that was approved in date 22nd March 1993.
As previously described, this bridge linking the two parts of Sector ‘BCDF’ separated by the Rambla of Murcia was modified upon instructions from the CHS, and another bridge was built in its place, crossing the Rambla much more to the south.
The present modification shows the original bridge which links the structural roads that cross the sector, giving therefore a better organisation of entry and exit.
Also, the road which separates the plots EC1 and EC2 of Sector ‘BCDF’ is extended, making it structural and making it 20 metres wide.
11. MODIFICATION AND CHANNELLING OF THE RAMBLA OF THE AZNARES TO ITS PATH THROUGH SECTOR BCDF.
11.1 CHS proposal for the channelling of the Rambla of the Aznares
Following several meetings and visits to the CHS, and as a result of a visit from the Mayor of Mazarrón to the Commissioner of Waters, the Deputy Commissioner of the CHS was given the responsibility to identify and to propose the solution most appropriate to the problem that emerged on the Rambla of the Aznares.
Following a joint visit to the area, at the end of July 2013, with technicians from the Town Hall, all present on that occasion agreed that the geometry of the valley leaves little margin for alternative solutions (the precipitations, necessarily, converge at the bottom) and that the best solution (in fact, the only one possible) is the one described in the STUDY AND EVALUATION OF THE MOST SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE FOR THE CHANNELLING OF THE RAMBLA OF THE AZNARES, TO ITS PATH THROUGH THE URBANISATION OF CAMPOSOL. T.M. OF MAZARRON (MURCIA), which we gather entirely in this Summary.
“1.1. PREVIOUS HISTORY”
Approximately at 1.5km from its source, the original river bed of the Rambla of the Aznares, in the T.M. of Mazarrón passes through the land where one of the phases of the Urbanisation of Camposol was set up some 15 years ago.
In order to set up this phase, a solution, which can only be described as very unfortunate, was taken: the channelling of the rambla, following more or less its natural river bed, with three tubes in cement of 1.200mm of diameter, with the aggravating feature that an urbanised area was later superimposed on this route, occupying over a length of 2km, so that, and although the real route of the channelling is not known with precision, there exist justified doubts that it passes not only under roads, but also under a certain number of plots. In any case, what is most certain (and it is shown repeatedly) is that this solution (3 tubes of 1.200mm diameter) is insufficient for the drainage of the avenue of the rambla, whose volume of flow per periods of return of 100, 500 years are calculated in 11,34 and 16,00 m3 respectively (see enclosed hydrological calculation).
The little valley through which runs the rambla and in which the urbanisation was built (above and to both sides of the river bed) has a perfect V section, at the bottom of which, and as has been said, is the rambla, therefore allowing no detour whatsoever for the volume of flow. The channelling begins at approx. 200 metres northward of the urbanisation, point where a wall perpendicular to the rambla was built, in which are positioned the three original tubes, without points or wings of any type (see photographic coverage at the end of this report).
Obviously, in the case of floods, if the volume of water flowing is superior (and, as we can see later on, it is) to what the tubes can take, the remaining water will overflow above the wall and will head inexorably towards the urbanisation built in its path, passing through roads, patios and possibly
houses. The large damages present found in the road surfaces and road closures throughout the urbanisation which coincide more or less with the rambla, show that this has already happened, a fact that has already been confirmed by several neighbours during the topographic reconnaissance necessary for producing this proposal.
It must also be taken into consideration that the existing tubes cannot be accessed, therefore it is not possible to clean them, and their small diameter renders susceptible to phenomenon of silting by branches and solid dredging produced by all floods. That means that it is logical to suppose that the already insufficient entry point of the tubes is partly reduced by the deposits of debris, a phenomenon that will only worsen in the future.
Furthermore, it must be taken into consideration that there are grilles on the roads connected to these tube for the collection of precipitations which, in case of overloading in the tubes (foreseeable in any avenue of a certain importance) stop working as drains and, on the contrary, contribute to the flooding of the road-network.
THE PROPOSED SOLUTION
The proposed solution is to canalise the flow of the rambla throughout the whole stretch that crosses (or more appropriately, has been invaded by) the urbanisation, by building a culvert of reinforced concrete measuring 2.50m x 2.00m buried under the roads which, broadly speaking, coincide with the river basin of the valley, and of minimum height above sea level of the urbanisation.
The total length of the canalised stretch is of 1985.60m with a level difference of 33.11m equivalent to an average slope of 1.70%, although there are stretches of only 0,5%. With this section and considering that in the more unfavourable stretches the minimum slope is, as already mentioned, of 0.5%, the normal volume of flow calculated with the Manning formula is of Q=13,70 m3. This volume of flow is more than double the possible one in the three tubes of the existing 1.20m diameter, which is Q=6,03m3.
That is to say that the volume of flow admissible in the culvert is practically the average value between the flood corresponding to the period of return 100 and 500 years, whilst the one of the three existing tubes is in the region of half of the avenue T=100. Comments are required.
Other advantages of the proposed section, in respect to the existing one are:
* It is much less susceptible to be totally or partially blocked either from tree-trunks, undergrowth/weeds or solid debris, inevitable in all floods.
* Its dimensions makes it accessible for viewing, inspecting and cleaning, rendering therefore much easier to ensure its good functioning and maintenance, in the long run.
In any case, we insist in saying that we do not believe there is any other solution compatible with the continuance of the urbanisation, as it stands at present, that guarantees the security of the urbanisation in case of flooding, because a large part of it is located right in the area of
public domain, services or police of the rambla. The only “alternative” is to replace on the surface the river bed originally invaded, leaving clear not only this, but, as minimum, the route of intense drainage (approximately equivalent to the floods T=100 years), which would mean to demolish an important number of houses and reorganise the road network, located in part on the river bed or on the protected area surrounding it.
Suffice to say that the persistence of the present situation, which barely allows for the evacuation of half of the foreseeable volume of water in floods of T=100 years, involves a true risk for commodities and people, and we consider it therefore to be unacceptable.
1.3 REPLACEMENT OF SERVICES
The project of the Technician of the CHS includes in his quotation the replacement of the services (principally, water, sewer system and resurfacing of roads and pavements) that might be affected by the works.
(pages 27-31 maps)
11.2 Proposal of alternative route for public roads
Apparently, the proposed solution is the right one, however, we observe that the said route continues passing through private roads, and that’s the reason why a new route is proposed in this Detailed Modification, which, although it moves sensibly away from the valley to which the project refers, it runs in its totality through public roads, eliminating possible services in private land.
This change assumes the revision and adjustment of the calculation parameters, and the writing of a project modification remains a condition for its correct execution.
MAZARRON, MAY 2015
Mariel Casal Lucic
College of Arquitects no. 11972
CTAA – COACV
ALL PLANS CHARTS AND GRAPHS FOR THE ABOVE TRANSLATION CAN BE FOUND ON http://www.mazarron.es/opencms/export/sites/mazarron/es/infraestructuras-y-urbanismo/planes/.content/documentos/Saladillo/Memoria-Avance_mayo-2015-14signed.pdf
————————————————————————————————————————–
The Murcia Regional Authority’s stipulated alterations, additions, and request for further documentation, before initial approval can be sought from the Regional Assembly Plenary.
The Confederación Hidrográfica del Segura has yet to advise of it’s requirements before the Report can be considered for approval
REGION OF MURCIA –
Department of Industry and Infrastructure
General Office of Territory and Housing Distribution
SUBJECT: Modification No. 76 of the PGOU of Mazarrón, Area A-05-07 “El Saladillo” (Camposol)
(file 56/15)
In view of the documentation sent by the Town Hall (of Mazarrón) via official communication dated 5th August 2015 (ref. 17/8/15), in relation to the above mentioned subject, and relative report via the Planning Services in date 25th September 2015, this General Office, in the function of the authority conferred in article 162 of Law 13/2015 of 30th March, of territorial and urban distribution in the Region of Murcia, considers the same as “STRUCTURAL” and in compliance with the proceedings established in article 160.1 of the previous Law, issues the following REPORT, for its consideration in the initial approval.
This is about a structural modification which affects an area greater than 500 hectares (art. 173 LOTURM).
Different alternatives of distribution are not included, considering appropriate in accordance with art. 152 LOTURM, that these are contained in the Summary. In this case it would be necessary to analyse the viability for introducing important changes in the areas that have not been developed and have failed to comply with the PAU/Plan of Stages of the Plan Parcial/ Special Plan of SGEL.. as well as an analysis of the obligations and rights in the sphere of all the intervening agents.
The “Adaptation of the PAU” cannot proceed because it is an instrument that is not included in the list of Articles, nor in the Transitorily Dispositions of the LOTURM. For its part, the proposal proposes the direct integration in the Plan General.
There are problems in including the sectors developed as Sectored Building Land with Detailed Distribution, being the Plan General and instruments of development not adapted to the TRLSRM or LOTURM which would require integration in the systematic of the PGMO in planimetry and rules.
Sector E failed to comply with the PAU Programme, having carried out neither Distribution nor execution, and having to analyse the justification and opportunity to maintain the classification.
In accordance with the DT Fifth LOTURM the Non-Programmed Building Land is governed by the regime of Building Land Without Sectoring and in accordance with art. 84.4 the ‘Without Sectoring’ can be considered Sectored once the corresponding instrument of development is approved. As a consequence, in order to maintain its ‘Building Land’ classification, Sector E must be included in the category of Building Land Without Sectoring.
The classification and category of the surrounding land must be included, resolving therefore problems and differences in the limits, such as the lack of consistency between the PAU and the Plan general in force at present. Differences are observed in the proposed delimitations.
An analysis must be made of the affection to the general System of Free Spaces, in the planning in force at present, in which case the article 173,4 LOTURM is applicable.
The residential building surface is increased without justification, in view of the availability of the area of surface without building to which can be assigned other compatible uses, such as touristic or private facilities area, which can compensate the excess executed in respect to what expected, less new plots still for building such as the A-38.
A reduction of surface destined to facilities is reduced, contrary to art. 173.3 LOTURM, without justification of the compliance of standards established in the RPU.
The connection with the Totana road must be resolved, where the access roundabout, in accordance with the PAU, should have been executed in the 3rd Stage (year 8 to 16).
No justification or analysis is presented in relation to the division of sector BCD in sectors A and B. There is only the initial approval of the subdivision of the sector by agreement of 18/05/2000 (BORM 30/06/2000) but not the definite one.
In the comparative surface calculations, the unit of standard established in the regulations must be taken into consideration, superficial, per unit or if the building surface is actually taken into consideration. It is not necessary to add the surface destined to parking with the rest of the provisions. The Free Spaces are not to be considered facilities.
The distribution of obligations between the intervening agents is not established. The promoter of the works executed continues owning land not suitable for building, where it is expected to continue without keeping into consideration the excesses carried out in other areas. Nor are analysed the works in sectors A and B of sector BCD in relation with the compliance of the Stages Plan of the Plan Parcial and obligations gathered in compliance of art. 46 RPU (pag. 43).
It is not specified which agent undertakes the construction of the second bridge over the rambla of Murcia. It is recommended that an analysis be made on the necessity for this second bridge and an evaluation on the provision of the road of the Calles Cyclamen-Lavanda-Jara, which links the road of 20m next to the commercial, of greater section in the stretch next to the undeveloped land, creating an alternative circulation to the dorsal road.
A request for a report must be made to the CHS in relation to all proposals of the modification, as well as to the Tourism Institute in relation to the activities in the built-up plots, destined to this use, and to the General Direction of Roads regarding access to the RM-3 and the RM-315
In order to obtain initial approval, the document must contain the rest of the documents relating to the modification (regulations, programme of works, etc). A clear differentiation must be made regarding the parameters relative to general planning and those relative to development planning.
The data shown on table 7.4 must be consistent with the details of the plots and the coefficients of the corresponding development potential (they are inferior). There does not follow an analysis in respect of the division area, not envisaged in the LOTURM, or in relation to the Improvement of Reference.
The present report binding in its legality and nature of the modification, is issued without prejudice of what can be appreciated at the moment of knowing its initial approval, to which effect, and in conformity with what established in the section 2 of the above mentioned article 162, will have to send copy of the project on which appears the corresponding plenary agreement of initial approval.
Murcia, 25th September 2015
General Direction of
Distribution of Land and Property
Nuria Fuentes Garcia-Lax

MINUTES OF CRA COMMITTEE MEETING
SATURDAY 8TH APRIL 2017 – 11am, CULTURAL CENTRE, CAMPOSOL

The meeting opened at 11am
Present: Phil Gelling, President (PG)
Silvana Buxton, Vice-President (SB)
Allyson Ingamell, Membership Secretary (AI)
Geof Buxton, Secretary (GB)
Apologies: Maite Gomez, Treasurer (MG)

1. Minutes of previous meeting: Approved
2. Points arising from previous meeting:
– Website update: PG stated that the problems with Forum access have now been rectified. The maintenance cost of the Website is of 90€ p.year, payable in February each year.
– Membership update: AI continues working on the thankless task of updating the database. She is now 2/3 and reported that the number of active members is of approx.. 1000. AI will report her progress at the next meeting AI
– Mission statement. It was agreed that this should be discussed at a later date
– Communication with AUAN. PG has been unable to make contact, but will continue trying PG
– Statement for Zoe, Murcia Today. PG stated that instead of making a statement we will continue to keep Zoe informed of any relevant news
– Sponsors appearing on CRA literature. PG reported that no sponsors are mentioned on the new website, and he will contact prospective interested ones in the near future PG
3. Treasurer’s report: MG emailed the quarterly treasurer’s report, which is enclosed.
4. Update on lawyer’s and architect’s meeting: This will go ahead as planned
5. Approval of problems’ list for the above mentioned meeting: unanimously approved
6. Secondment of Paul Cassidy on the Committee: Paul was proposed by PG and seconded by SB. Paul was unanimously welcomed to the Committee and his offer to deal with members living in the UK was accepted; AI will liaise with him and will agree a working procedure on how best to serve our UK based membership without breaking any Data Protection restrictions.
7. Situation of Cultural Centre management: SB reported that she wrote to the TH on ¼, asking for a meeting to help resolve the unsatisfactory present situation. No reply received to date; SB will pursue the issue. In the meantime, the CRA will endeavour to book the 2nd and 3rd Saturday of each month 11am-1pm
8. CHS document of CHS/Ortiz 2013. SB asked our lawyer’s advice and will be informed in due course on how to pursue the matter.
9. ‘La Verdad’ request: Following Tina’s email to SB that ‘La Verdad’ was enquiring about any exchange of correspondence with the Consulate re: tourism in Murcia, PG stated that no correspondence has taken place to date.
10. Any other Business:
– PG reported that he is in contact with FRAME to explore the possibility of any useful relationship.
– PG expressed the wish to offer a fee-paying associate-membership to members who no longer own a property in Camposol, but wish to continue receiving the newsletter. Unanimously agreed. PG will publish details on the next CRA Newsletter.
– Return of Alison Lister. PG reported that unfortunately Alison will not be returning to Camposol before June, and he should be able to get the Cabin key from Bill. PG
– DONATION – A 10€ donation was made by Mr & Mrs Gamble. SB to give to MG SB
11. Date of next meeting: Saturday 20th MAY, 11am at the Cultural Centre

The meeting closed at 12:40

Accounts on separate entry.

Translated by Silvana Buxton:

Here is the English translation of the minutes of the two meetings held at the Regional Assembly of Murcia in March – they are not exactly riveting and they don’t give much away, but Point III of the 15/3 is quite interesting.…..

MINUTES OF MEETING HELD BY THE COMMISSION OF TERRITORIAL POLITICS,  ENVIRONMENT, AGRICULTURE AND WATER OF THE REGIONAL ASSEMBLY OF MURCIA, ON THE 8th MARCH 2017

I – Informative Session held between the Commission and the general secretary of the Town Hall of Mazarrón

At today’s meeting is taking part Mr Juan Francisco Marín Martínez, general secretary of the Town Hall of Mazarrón.

Mr Marín Martínez informs the Commission about the reasons for his presence. During the general round of questions and answers, Mr Martínez Baños speaks on behalf of the Socialist Parliamentary Group. Mr Marín Martínez answers his questions.

Secondly, Mrs Giménez Casalduero, of the ‘Podemos’ Parliamentary Group poses some questions to Mr Marín Martínez, to whom he answers.

Mr Fernández Martínez speaks on behalf of the ‘Ciudadanos’ Parliamentary Group, and Mr Juan Francisco Marín Martínez answers his questions.

The President opens the second general round of questions and answers. The speakers are Mr Martínez Baños of the Socialist Parliamentary group; MrsGiménez Casalduero of the ‘Podemos’ Parliamentary Group who states that she has no questions but thanks Mr Marín for his presence at the meeting; Mr Fernández Martinez of the ‘Ciudadanos’ Parliamentary Group and Mr Martínez-Carrasco Guzmán of the ‘Popular’ Parliamentary Group. Mr Marín answers to all questions put to him by the above mentioned speakers.

In his final statement Mr Juan Francisco Marín Martínez sets out the present situation and offers his cooperation should the Commission require clarifications or additional information.

II – Informative Session held between the Commission and the Municipal Technician of the Town Hall of Mazarrón

Mr José Antonio Segado Casellas, Municipal Technicial of the Town Hall of Mazarrón greets the Commission and specifies that he has not prepared an initial presentation because he did not know exactly the reason for which he was called. He states that he is happy to answer questions. He informs the Commission that he has been Municipal Technician since 2005.

During the initial round of general questions and answers, the speakers are Mr Martínez Baños of the Socialist Parliamentary group; MrsGiménez Casalduero of the ‘Podemos’ Parliamentary Group; Mr Fernández Martinez of the ‘Ciudadanos’ Parliamentary Group and Mr Martínez-Carrasco Guzmán of the ‘Popular’ Parliamentary Group. Mr Segado Casellas answers to all questions put to him by the above mentioned speakers.

During the second round Mr Segado Casellas answers the questions of the representatives of their respective political Parties, Mr Martínez Baños, Mrs Giménez Casalduero, Mr Fernández Martínez and Mr Martínez-Carrasco Guzmán.

Finally Mr Segado Caselles concludes his appearance with his best wishes to the Commission in their endeavour to resolve this situation.

MINUTES OF MEETING HELD BY THE COMMISSION OF TERRITORIAL POLITICS,  ENVIRONMENT, AGRICULTURE AND WATER OF THE REGIONAL ASSEMBLY OF MURCIA, ON THE 15h MARCH 2017

Before the beginning of the meeting Mrs Margarita Ros McDonell informs the members of the Commission and precisely the President that she does not wishes to be photographed because she does not want to appear in any photos or videos. Accordingly, the President passes Mrs McDonell’s request to those responsible.

The President announces that Mr José Carlos Gonzáles Martínez, Commissary of Waters of the CHS replied by email, refusing the Commission’s invitation to attend. A refusal to attend was also received by the Developer of the Camposol Urbanization, Justo Y Manoli.

The president commented on the Commission’s disappointment for the lack of cooperation by the CHS, this being the second refusal received – the first refusal was made to the Special Waters Commission.

I – Informative Session held between the Commission and Mrs Margarita Ros McDonell, of the Ministry of Development and Infrastructure.

Mrs McDonell stated that she works in Town Planning and that she has not prepared an initial presentation therefore she will only give a few bits of information on the issues for which she is called.

In the first general round, questions are posed by Mr Martínez Baños of the Socialist Parliamentary Group; MrsGiménez Casalduero of the ‘Podemos’ Parliamentary Group, who comments on the absence ot the CHS representative, and thanks Mrs McDonell for her attendance; Mr Fernández Martinez of the ‘Ciudadanos’ Parliamentary Group, who thanks Mrs McDonell for attending; and Mr Martínez-Carrasco Guzmán of the ‘Popular’ Parliamentary Group. Mrs McDonell answers their questions.

In the second round, Mr Martínez Baños, of the Socialist Parliamentary Group begins his questioning. When asked about the reasons why the Ministry did not give information on the Revised Text of the Plan Parcial El Saladillo, Mrs McDonell becomes agitated and states that she will not tolerate any negative comments on the good work of the technicians of Town Planning and she objects to people thinking that they withhold information simply because they are not interested or because it’s easier for them to do so.

Mr Martínez Baños replies that it is not his intention to blame any technician in particular, but the Ministry in general. His job is to ask questions, and he is only doing his job.

From the Parliamentary Group ‘Podemos’, Mrs Giménez Casalduero asks questions to which Mrs McDonell gives her replies.

Next, Mr Fernández Martínez, of the Parliamentary Group ‘Ciudadanos’ poses further questions, to which Mrs McDonell replies.

Mr Martínez-Carrasco Guzmán, of the ‘Popular’ Parliamentary Group, completes the second round of questions to which Mrs McDonell answers accordingly.

In her final statement Mrs McDonell states that she doesn’t understand why she was asked to attend this meeting. She repeats that she feels upset by the comments made by the Commission and that the efforts of the Town Planning General Management during the last few years have been immense and she demands respect for the employees of the Town Planning Department.

The President express her sorrow for the way Mrs McDonell feels, and thanks her for attending.

II – Informative session between the Commission and Mr Antonio Sánchez Lapaz of Murcia Transparente.

Continuing with the Agenda, the President welcomes Mr Antonio Sánchez Lapaz and explains the procedure, after which Mr Sánchez Lapaz makes a brief statement on the reason for his attendance.

In the first general round, questions are posed by Mr Martínez Baños of the Socialist Parliamentary Group; MrsGiménez Casalduero of the ‘Podemos’ Parliamentary Group; Mr Fernández Martinez of the ‘Ciudadanos’ Parliamentary Group, who thanks Mrs McDonell for attending; and Mr Martínez-Carrasco Guzmán of the ‘Popular’ Parliamentary Group. Mr Sánchez Lapaz answers their questions.

There is no second round of questions and answers, and Mr Sánchez Lapaz concludes his appearance with a final statement.

The Commission takes a break.

III – Continuation of the Commission’s work

The President states that, in view of the statements presented by the attendees to these meetings, the Socialist Parliamentary Group’s representative proposes that the Town Hall of Mazarrón be requested to provide further documentation (IX-12167), for which he seeks to open a general round of interviews.

Mr Martínez Baños confirms that he wishes to put forward a proposal, on behalf of the Socialist Parliamentary Group, for the Town Hall to provide specific information; and in relation to the absence of the Commissary of Waters, he proposes that the Head of Department of Environment be called to attend.

Mrs Giménez Casalduero, of the ‘Podemos’ Parliamentary Group, seconds the Socialist’s Parliamentary Group’s proposal.

Mr Fernández Martínez of the ‘Ciudadanos’ Parliamentary Group, seconds the Socialist’s Parliamentary Group’s proposal, and adds that Mr Juan Antonio Senín, Town Hall Architect, be called to attend as well.

Mr Martínez-Carrasco Guzmán states that he doesn’t see what additional information the Head of Department of Environment can bring, and he agrees with the request for additional documentation.

Submitted to a vote, the proposal of the Socialist Parliamentary Group for the request of additional information to the Town Hall od Mazarrón is unanimously agreed. It is further agreed to ask for the following documents and information:

1 – In relation to the Plan Parcial, sectors B C D and F  of El Saladillo:

  • All the reports submitted by the Municipal technician Mr Juan Antonio Senín
  • All the reports submitted by the Municipal technician Mr Juan Carlos Martínez Mateo
  • All the reports submitted by the Municipal technician Ms María Agustina Alcázar
  • All the reports submitted by the Municipal technician José Antonio Segado Casellas
  • All the reports submitted by the Department of Urban Works
  • The extra-judicial agreement signed by the developer Justo y Manoli and by the Towh Hall of Mazarrón in May 2012, regarding the Plan parcial, sectors B C D and F el Saladillo

2 – Economic Valuation prepared by the Municipal technicians regarding the cost of repairing and completing the works on the urbanization of the Plan Parcial sectors B C D and F El Saladillo.

3 – All the documentation in relation to the seizure of the guarantees by the Town Hall of Mazarrón from the Developers Justo y Manoli, for the works of the urbanization of the Plan Parcial sectors B C D and F El Saladillo.

  • Detailed report by periods of the Town Planning Heads of department, of the Town Hall of Mazarrón, between 1991 and the present date.
  • Report of the CHS on the submission and approval of the Urban Works Programme of areas A05-07 of the PGMOU of Mazarrón
  • Report of the CHS on the submission and definitive approval of the Plan Parcial sectors B C D and F El Saladillo.

In relation with the proposal of new attendances it is agreed that this item will be discussed at the next meeting of this Panel.

 

ORIGIN AND APPLICATION
2nd Quarter Year: 2016 – 2017
Period: 01.01.17 / 31.03.17
La Caixa La Caixa
Legals Generals Santander Santander Paypal Cash Transfer Total
C/8942 C/8829 C/5801 C/6507 Movement
Balance at 31.12.16 15,489.48 139.98 185.26 42.25 287.54 350.41 16,494.92
INCOME
Fund Raising 0.00
Donations 0.00
Legal 0.00
Bank Interest 0.00
Transfer from Santander 226.63 226.63
Transfer from La Caixa 300.00 300.00
Total Income 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 526.63 526.63 0.00
EXPENSES
Stationery 178.15 178.15
Fund Raising 0.00
Travel 140.40 140.40
Legal 60.00 60.00
Translation 0.00
Refreshments 17.60 17.60
Miscellaneus 0.00
Bank charges (Maintenance) 12.00 12.00 24.00
Asesoría El Pilar 24.20 24.20
Cancellation fees 0.43 0.45 0.88
Transfer to Cash 300.00 184.83 41.80 526.63
Post  Office 63.44 63.44
Donations 100.00 100.00
Web site 550.00 550.00
Bank charges (Services) 3.95 3.95
Total Expenses 890.15 12.00 185.26 42.25 0.00 559.59 526.63 1,162.62
BALANCE al 31.03.17 14,599.33 127.98 0.00 0.00 287.54 317.45 15,332.30

Minutes of Camposol Residents Association Committee held on Saturday 11th February  2017.

Meeting held in the Cultural Centre and started at 11:30 a.m.

Attendees :–  Phil Gelling(PG), Allyson Ingamells (AI), Maite Gómez (MG), Eloy Jiménez (EJ), Paul Drury (PD)

Apologies for Absence :- Silvana Buxton (SB), Geoffrey Buxton (GB)

Minutes of Meeting held 7th January Approved.

Matters Arising were included in the Agenda under separate headings.

Treasurers Report presented by MG.

Balance at 30.09.16             = 16.569.71

Balance at 31.12.2016         = 16.494.92

If any member requires a breakdown of the Accounts for the quarter please apply to info@cracamposol.com.

Membership Update :- This work still ongoing and stats being collected regarding membership and breakdown of new, departed and whose using the forum and Newsletter. AI and PG continuing with this time consuming exercise.

Website Progress

PG has issued an update in the Forum canvassing members to review and select according to ease of use, look and feel etc. A further update will go out in Newsletter to canvass opinion.

Mission Statement

PG has issued a first draft of a mission statement for the CRA. A number of amendments were suggested and AI has been nominated to complete the statement.

Progress with other Organisations Experiencing difficulties

PG has spoken to SOHA and AUN and as yet has not been able to contact anybody from FAUN as yet. PG will continue chasing and provide further updates.

Correos Situation

Despite all the Camposol rumours circulating the truth of the situation is the following : – The CRA were approached by the Correos about changing the delivery of mail or individuals collection of mail. Camposol along with other urbanisations have had their mail arrangements reviewed and there was a suggestion that Camposol along with some other urbanisations would have to provide provision for the Correos to deliver mail to a Mailing Box point. On Camposol these would be situated on Sectors B, C and D (similar to the one on A).

The current situation is that there are ongoing discussions between the Town Hall and the Correos. The CRA has a watching brief and the Correos will not be closing their post office on B and residents will still be able to collect mail until a decision is made about mailboxes.  MG is monitoring this situation in SB’s absence.

IBI Update

As is the case with any initiative that could impact our members and the residents we have looked at the CDIP initiative to have residents IBI reduced due to lack of services. This is because we have a vested interest in trying to get Camposol sorted for one and all. We have spoken to our lawyers handling the fraud case and the subsequent infrastructure activity. We have also spoken to the British Consulate Legal representative for Murcia and they all agree that this may not be a smart move because the implications are that the Town Hall could use this as a defence for not providing services i.e. we are accepting the situation, also this would need to be resolved by the courts and as  and  it may cost  you more  than any gain. We will be approaching CDip for a discussion on this issue. PG to follow up.

Meetings with Politicians

As a result of the recent meetings with Politicians we feel that there is a need to review what we are doing and to look at what strategies have hit a brick wall and what strategies can still give us hope and if there is anything else we can do. It has been  suggested that we have a Strategy meeting in March. Attendees and agenda to be reviewed.  All.

Meeting closed 12:45

CRA COMMITTEE MEETING – Saturday 7th January 2017 – 3pm – C/Lecrin 1589, D13.

AGENDA

  1. Members Present
  2. Apologies for absence
  3. Minutes of previous meeting
  4. Clarification of Constitution (for benefit of newcomers)
  5. Update of Members’ database
  6. Update of Website progress
  7. Feedback on recent meetings with Officials/Councillors
  8. Next line of action
  9. Handover of Treasurer’s position
  10. Any Other Business

The meeting opened at 3pm

Members present: Phil Gelling (PG), Silvana Buxton (SB), Alison Lister (AL), Allyson Ingamells (AI), Geoffrey Buxton (GB), Maite Gomez (MG)

    Apologies for absence: Bill Pryor (BP)

      Minutes of previous meeting: approved

        1.Clarification of Constitution – This was requested by AI, mostly in relation to the procedure for additions/changes etc. It was confirmed that the current Constitution is the document dated 22/10/2015.  In relation to the aims and objectives of the CRA PG stated that perhaps a MISSION STATEMENT should be written and upon agreement from the Committee, he agreed to produce it and submit it to Committee for approval before publishing.                       PG

          2.Update of Members’ Database – PG and AI reported that they are still only 1/3 of the way through, as they are trying to resolve a ‘software incompatibility’ issue at present.

            3.Update of Website progress – PG stated that he was quoted 500€ by MW IT Services, to revamp the CRA website. At the next meeting PG will discuss with them archiving and bandwidth issues                                                                                                                                   PG PG also agreed to contact the existing advertisers to discuss their continued interest in  advertising on the CRA website (and pay for it), or be deleted.                                                            PG

              4.Feedback on recent meetings with Officials/Councillors – Paul Drury, who attended with PG and SB the two meetings which took place on 3/1/17, and 5/1/17, wrote a very comprehensive report on them, which is enclosed. It was agreed that the report will be publicised on the CRA Forum, on the Newsletter, on the CRA Notice board at Consum, and possibly in the ‘Costa Calida Chronicle’ and ‘The Journal’. PG and AL to liaise as to who’s doing what. Deadline for CCC and TJ is this week.                                                                PG/AL

                5.Next line of action – PG informed the Committee that he intends to contact other Associations such as SOHA, AUAN and FAUN to discuss how they overcome hurdles and how to achieve residents’ interest and participation in the CRA activities. For information:

                  SOHA = Save Our Homes Axarquia (An area on the Costa del Sol)

                  AUAN = Abusos Urbanisticos Almanzora NO (NO to Urban Planning Abuse in Almanzora)

                  FAUN = Federación Española de Asociaciones en defensa de los Derechos Humanos y en             contra de los Atropellos Urbanísticos y Medioambientales (Spanish Federation of       associations in defence of human rights and against urban and environmental abuses)

                  6.Handover of Treasurer’s position –  At the end of the AGM held on 26/11/2016, Maite Gomez expressed an interest in becoming Treasurer for the CRA. Her offer was taken up, and at today’s Committee Meeting she was seconded, by tacit agreement, to take over from SB as CRA Treasurer.  SB passed over her A/C records (9/3/2016-31/12/2016) to MG. The A/C balances being as follows:

                    –          La Caixa, a/c 8829                           127,98€           @ latest bank statement 1/1/2017

                    –          La Caixa, a/c 8942                     15.477,48€           @ latest bank statement 1/1/2017

                    –          Santander, a/c 5801                      185,26€           @ latest bank statement 17/10/2016

                    –          Santander, a/c 6507                         42,25€          @ latest bank statement 7/7/2016

                    –          Petty cash,                                        194,61€           @ 9/1/2017

                    –          Paypal a/c,                                        287,54             @ 9/1/2017

                    SB stated that at present the CRA is paying regular monthly fees to:

                    –          La Caixa                       12,00€ x each a/c = 24,00€ per month

                    –          Asesoría El Pilar         24,20€ (20,00€ + IVA/bank transfer fees)

                    –          Santander                   unable to identify monthly fees from their statement

                    7.It was agreed that the 2 Santander accounts should be closed. SB/PG to process.                       PG/SB It was further agreed that SB arrange a meeting between MG, SB and the Accountant Pedro   Martinez of Asesoría El Pilar to discuss the Auditors’ involvement in the CRA a/c and their           monthly fees in the endeavour to possibly change this to a single payment-for-audit fee.       SB SB to enquire also at La Caixa for inclusion of (Teresa Gomez Rodrigues) MG’s signature on       the CRA accounts                             SB

                    8.           Any Other Business:

                    – Update from SB on the Legal Action – Our Lawyer reported that the case was presented to      the Court of Totana in December. He will keep SB updated on the various     administrative/legal procedures and SB will, in turn, pass the information to the people           involved in the Criminal Action.

                    – CRA contribution to Sandy Allison’s funeral. It was agreed that the CRA would give 50€ to          each of the two Charity Organisations in which Sandy was involved, Noah’s Arc and Kitty               Kitty. The treasurer will process this as soon as she is able to obtain the bank details of the    organisations.                                                                                                                                                    MG

                    The meeting closed at 5:30pm

                    Date of next meeting:   4th February 2017, 11am, Cultural Centre (Apologies received from SB and GB)

                    Notes from meetings as mentioned in above minutes

                    As I will be unable to attend the meeting tomorrow this is my notes/synopsis/remarks following the 2 meetings with Regional Authorities this week.

                    First Meeting on Tuesday 3rd with Pedro Rivera (PP Party), Regional Councillor in charge of Fomento e Infrastructures (Development and Infrastructure) at the departmental office in Murcia.

                    It should be noted that we were only allotted 30 minutes for this meeting, which seems derisory considering the scope of problems involved, it was also evident by the many strategically placed architects models of Corvera airport where the priority is.

                    Before we had hardly even made our acquaintance with Sr Rivera he informed us that his DG (Director General) Nuria Fuentes would be unable to attend through illness and also that his Department only had responsibility for Regional Highways (motorways) and that the urbanisation Camposol was the responsibility of Mazarron Town Hall and the residents.

                    He had some paperwork that he referred to and told us that Camposol was a complex and difficult issue and that the residents should take legal action against the promoter/developer, mentioning that before he was a Councillor he was a lawyer, when we pointed out that Justo y Manoli  were in liquidation and no longer existed he still insisted that legal action was the route to be followed, when we then pointed out that in 2011 Mazarron Junta de Gobierno (Council governing board) in the Council’s reply to the Ombudsman, Mazarron Council stated that they had dismissed Justo y Manoli and as such had assumed the position of promoter/developers of the urbanisation, so we asked should the Council be sued as the promoter/developer, Sr Rivera changed the subject and started talking about the Plan Parcial and his discussions (through his Director General) with Alicia Jimenez (Mazaron Mayoress) and the CHS and his departments involvement in adapting the Plan Parcial (contradicting his initial statement that he had no responsibility for Camposol), he then stressed that Victor Martinez (Regional Assembly and PP Party) and Alicia Jimenez (PP Party) wanted to help Camposol and that he was working with them and his DG to draw up a revised plan for Camposol, he also said that a new plan may not solve the Rambla issue.

                    We asked him what he could do and he replied that he would help out where he could and offer advice on other issues, we asked him if he had been to Camposol he said no, so we asked if we could arrange a visit so we could take him around the urbanisation and he could tell us where he could help and where he could offer advice he agreed saying the Town Hall needed to draw up a new plan and then his department would take it forward, after repeated knocks on the door his PA/Secretary informed him his next appointment was getting impatient so that was the end of the meeting, we asked him when he wanted to come to Camposol and he said he would let us know.

                    Through the whole meeting he was very guarded and negative, his statement that his department is only responsible for regional motorways is just a fob off as virtually every week they announce multi million euro contracts for urban and housing renewal, reconstruction etc, he also pushed the idea that the PP Party was helping Camposol, which is definitely not the case since Alicia Jimenez’s involvement, if we can get Sr Rivera to visit Camposol I would suggest we get as many knowledgeable people as possible to attend, such as Greg Green and Bob Owen to show how long this intolerable situation has been continuing without solution.

                    Second Meeting on Thursday 5th with Luis Fernandez (Regional Assembly Member, Ciudadanos Party) and a collection of Party workers/advisers, at the Clubhouse, Camposol.

                    Luis pointed out that the Regional Working party for Camposol had virtually finished the Paper and would be publishing their findings/recommendations shortly but stressed that these would be recommendations and that the Regional Government would do as it saw fit and as it’s priorities dictated, he urged along with his advisors that the CRA start legal action against Mazarron Town Hall and restart the publicity to force the Region and the TH to act, even though legal action on the face of it would take time it could be that the threat of the case becoming public and previous questionable activities on the part of some individuals being revealed may frighten some into action to stop the legal activities before jail sentences were handed out.

                    He told us he was having a meeting with Alicia Jimenez next week to discuss Camposol and will recommend that all the IBI collected on Camposol for the next 5 years should be invested in Camposol.

                    He asked us how our meeting with Pedro Rivera went, after we told him he said he would contact Alfonso Martinez (Regional Assembly member PSOE Party and co-author of the Camposol Paper) with a view to a joint Ciudadanos/PSOE meeting with Pedro Rivera and his DG.

                    We then went on a tour of the affected areas to see further deterioration and Luis and his team offered advice, but the main theme was that the Working Party was applying as much pressure as possible to aid Camposol’s plight but we the residents and victims need to be strong and fight back using the courts, one of the advisors said that the Region and TH needed to know that there would be consequences if they continue their year after year neglect of Camposol, at the moment the only consequence for inaction after a meeting is another meeting.

                    Paul Drury.

                    The Camposol Disaster team set up by Murcia Regional Authority comes as a result of the efforts of the CRA team which includes MT and our lawyers and is for the benefit of all Camposol residents.Here’s hoping their report will be presented soon after interviewing all parties involved in the building of Camposol and we hope it will benefit all Camposol residents.

                    The visits from the British Consulate and their attempts at brokering a solution to Camposols ills and to make the Town Hall see sense, which comes as the result of the teams efforts to fix the problems for all Camposols residents. Awaiting a response to information provided and also a response from the Town Hall regarding budgets and plans.

                    The visit of a Technical Architect next week to photograph all the visible problems on Camposol is to highlight the suffering of all Camposol Residents. These photographs will be put in a report and along with a solicitors letter will be presented to the Town Hall to illicit a plan or a response from the Town Hall as to how things will be done with regards to fixing the Infrastructure.

                    We are  also in the process of trying to bring together an elite group of representatives from other organisations to form a pressure group to get some results. One of these groups was instrumental in getting the law on Compensation change.Time and workload has stopped us from doing this any earlier.Wheels now in motion.

                    We will be discussing a closer association with CDip to see if we can find some common ground.This may be a quarterly review, but both parties will maintain their own Independence.Still to be discussed between the committee and CDiP.

                    We are still working with Cuidadanos,MT  and others to get more transparency in what the Town Hall is proposing to do for all the residents of Camposol. A denuncia is in place but there are some difficulties with the Fiscalias interpretation of how to proceed.

                    We have MT and our lawyers monitoring the CHS and Town Hall dispute over the rambla as you will see from the recent Newsletter, this will benefit 550 property owners if we can get a conclusion.

                    We are also keeping in touch with ‘the Upper C Class Action’ as this will have some bearing on how we proceed with the Infrastructure case and issues.

                    The bulk of the work within the CRA has been carried out by a team of 5/6 people and it’s been constant all year. Despite the illnesses and holidays a few have had to take, we have managed to get to a point were the next steps include

                    • Court proceedings for Fraud about to start
                    • Murcia Regional Authority Camposol Disaster Committee due to report
                    • Technical report to be completed to start the Infrastructure process
                    • Feedback awaited from British Consulate in view of recent visit and information supplied.
                    • Getting an up to date membership register
                    • Revamping the website to enable a quicker, better communication vehicle.
                    • Looking at a weekly update for cabin volunteers
                    • Making better use of the local magazines and newspapers.

                    Thanks to all those residents who are supporting our efforts despite the rumours and lies being propagated by those with their own agendas.
                    We wish you all a Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year.
                    Best Wishes
                    Phil Gelling
                    After a recent meeting between Mazarron Town Hall and the British Consul, Vice Consul and Honorary Consul for Murcia, at which the CRA Committee was not present, the CRA were informed yesterday of the following report on the meeting by the British Consul who have acted as intermediaries:-
                    ·         The town hall continues to work on the modification of the “plan” that exists of Camposol (by “plan” they mean the document which reflects the buildings that exist on Camposol, as you know the current one does not reflect the reality of what was actually built). Their architects have been working on this now for over a year. They are conscious that the process is slow but they need to have an environmental impact study included.
                    ·         The town hall say they can’t start any major structural improvements on Camposol until at least the provisional plan has been approved as they need to get an overall picture of what needs to be done and where first.
                    ·         This is the reason why they are not giving planning permission for home improvements at the moment – until they know what the exact situation on the ground is, they don’t want any changes to be made.
                    ·         The issue of public vs private land came up again. As Camposol was built as a housing estate there is an obligation on the part of the home owners to maintain the parts of the estate which are privately owned via contributions towards a community charge or ‘Communidad de Vecinos’. The town hall were quite firm on this point as they believe they would be breaking the law if they were to work on the private land. They are clear where their responsibility starts and ends in terms of maintaining public streets, lighting etc and what is private and needs to be maintained by the home owners as a local community. What needs to happen (and what should have happened from the very start) is that the neighbours need to create an a Comunidad de Vecinos. This is standard practice in Spain on housing estates with communal facilities and areas. It would (or should) have been made clear to purchasers when they bought their properties on Camposol that they’d have to pay a local community charge for the maintenance of the communal areas on the housing estate.
                    ·         The town hall said they were committed to carrying out as many improvements as possible on the land that is public, but that they cannot start this until the above mentioned plan has been at least provisionally approved.
                    ·         The town hall did not make any reference to Murcia region taking over the running of Camposol, although they did say that they are looking to the Region for support in getting the necessary improvements made to Camposol.
                    ·         The town hall explained that the fine from CHS has expired but that as soon as a national government is formed, there is a chance that CHS will seek to put it in place again. The town hall is committed to lobbying CHS on this matter as soon as they can, to try to prevent the fine from being reinstated. Note – now we have a national government, we should see some movement on this soon.
                    ·         The town hall went into figures on amounts they have spent on Camposol and they said they’d be more than happy to share these with you if you request them.
                    The town hall has agreed that when we next go to Camposol, we will hold a joint meeting with the town hall, CRA and the Consulate to share progress and perspectives and start working together to collectively address the problems on Camposol. Before that meeting, the Consulate will produce a paper in an attempt to outline our understanding of the situation and path forward. We will share this with you and the local Council beforehand to check our understanding.
                    As can be seen from this report Mazarron TH are quite adamant that a “Comunidad de Vecinos” (Entity) must be established to maintain and support the private roads and areas, this would involve an administrator to calculate the amount payable by each household according to escritura “Cuota” (size of property) all properties would be included,there is also some ambiguity as to whether any work would be carried out on public areas unless this “Entity” is established.
                    The Private and Public issue first became apparent in October 2013 when the then Mayor Gines Campillo said that street lights being turned off by Iberdrola after non payment by Justo y Manoli would only be serviced and restored on Public roads and that those on Private roads were the responsibility of the community along with road maintenance, insurance etc.
                    A “Comunidad de Vecinos” (Entity) was originally set up for Camposol A Sector, which would have rolled out to the other Sectors in due course but this Entity was dissolved at some point before the roll out could occur, there was also an Ombudsman report, this does mention that an Urban Conservation Entity would need to be set up, but this didn’t happen so resident and homeowners have been left in a no-man’s land.
                    The British Consul, Vice Consul and Honorary Consul as highly trained negotiators and arbitrators have offered to hold joint meetings with Mazzaron Town Hall and the CRA and if required with the Murcia Regional Authority to try and find solutions to these seemingly gigantic problems.
                    In the mean time we are awaiting publication of the findings of the Regional Working Party in their Paper/Report which we are told will be before Christmas.

                    SATURDAY 26th NOVEMBER 2016
                    10am – CULTURAL CENTRE, SECTOR B, CAMPOSOL
                    AGENDA

                    1. Minutes of previous meeting
                    2. Chairman report
                    3. Acting Secretary Report
                    4. Acting Treasurer report
                    5. Result of proposals for Committee vacancies
                    6.Question and Answers

                    This meeting was held on Wednesday 4th November 2016.
                    After a recent meeting between Mazarron Town Hall and the British Consul, Vice Consul and Honorary Consul for Murcia, at which the CRA Committee was not present, the CRA were informed yesterday of the following report on the meeting by the British Consul who have acted as intermediaries:-

                    · The town hall continues to work on the modification of the “plan” that exists of Camposol (by “plan” they mean the document which reflects the buildings that exist on Camposol, as you know the current one does not reflect the reality of what was actually built). Their architects have been working on this now for over a year. They are conscious that the process is slow but they need to have an environmental impact study included.
                    · The town hall say they can’t start any major structural improvements on Camposol until at least the provisional plan has been approved as they need to get an overall picture of what needs to be done and where first.
                    · This is the reason why they are not giving planning permission for home improvements at the moment – until they know what the exact situation on the ground is, they don’t want any changes to be made.
                    · The issue of public vs private land came up again. As Camposol was built as a housing estate there is an obligation on the part of the home owners to maintain the parts of the estate which are privately owned via contributions towards a community charge or ‘Communidad de Vecinos’. The town hall were quite firm on this point as they believe they would be breaking the law if they were to work on the private land. They are clear where their responsibility starts and ends in terms of maintaining public streets, lighting etc and what is private and needs to be maintained by the home owners as a local community. What needs to happen (and what should have happened from the very start) is that the neighbours need to create an a Comunidad de Vecinos. This is standard practice in Spain on housing estates with communal facilities and areas. It would (or should) have been made clear to purchasers when they bought their properties on Camposol that they’d have to pay a local community charge for the maintenance of the communal areas on the housing estate.
                    · The town hall said they were committed to carrying out as many improvements as possible on the land that is public, but that they cannot start this until the above mentioned plan has been at least provisionally approved.
                    · The town hall did not make any reference to Murcia region taking over the running of Camposol, although they did say that they are looking to the Region for support in getting the necessary improvements made to Camposol.
                    · The town hall explained that the fine from CHS has expired but that as soon as a national government is formed, there is a chance that CHS will seek to put it in place again. The town hall is committed to lobbying CHS on this matter as soon as they can, to try to prevent the fine from being reinstated. Note – now we have a national government, we should see some movement on this soon.
                    · The town hall went into figures on amounts they have spent on Camposol and they said they’d be more than happy to share these with you if you request them.

                    The town hall has agreed that when we next go to Camposol, we will hold a joint meeting with the town hall, CRA and the Consulate to share progress and perspectives and start working together to collectively address the problems on Camposol. Before that meeting, the Consulate will produce a paper in an attempt to outline our understanding of the situation and path forward. We will share this with you and the local Council beforehand to check our understanding.

                    As can be seen from this report Mazarron TH are quite adamant that a “Comunidad de Vecinos” (Entity) must be established to maintain and support the private roads and areas, this would involve an administrator to calculate the amount payable by each household according to escritura “Cuota” (size of property) all properties would be included,there is also some ambiguity as to whether any work would be carried out on public areas unless this “Entity” is established.

                    The Private and Public issue first became apparent in October 2013 when the then Mayor Gines Campillo said that street lights being turned off by Iberdrola after non payment by Justo y Manoli would only be serviced and restored on Public roads and that those on Private roads were the responsibility of the community along with road maintenance, insurance etc.

                    A “Comunidad de Vecinos” (Entity) was originally set up for Camposol A Sector, which would have rolled out to the other Sectors in due course but this Entity was dissolved at some point before the roll out could occur, there was also an Ombudsman report, this does mention that an Urban Conservation Entity would need to be set up, but this didn’t happen so resident and homeowners have been left in a no-man’s land.

                    The British Consul, Vice Consul and Honorary Consul as highly trained negotiators and arbitrators have offered to hold joint meetings with Mazzaron Town Hall and the CRA and if required with the Murcia Regional Authority to try and find solutions to these seemingly gigantic problems.

                    In the mean time we are awaiting publication of the findings of the Regional Working Party in their Paper/Report which we are told will be before Christmas.
                    Phil Gelling