Yolanda Díaz, during a Government Control session in the Congress of Deputies, expressed her disagreement with the reform of the Land Law that will be approved by the Council of Ministers on Tuesday. The minority partner of the coalition believes that the draft limits the unnecessary intervention capacity of the public administration in urban planning and criticizes the reduction of total nullity reasons for projects. Díaz’s party had already expressed their objections to the Ministry of Transport, now they are doing so within the Council through a formal observation, although the rule will still go ahead. The Sumar parliamentary group will try to correct these deficiencies through amendments in the parliamentary process. The rule, which also does not satisfy other left-wing groups like Podemos, will force the Government to negotiate with the investiture bloc or seek support from the right once it reaches Congress.
Sumar argues in their document that the text does not adequately respond to the objective of strengthening legal certainty in urban planning. They point out that the regulation of nullities and anulabilities can lead to the validation of urban irregularities, which they believe is questionable and should remain unchanged. They also criticize the unnecessary limitation introduced to public action in urban planning, which they believe is not necessary as public action has been used to stop oversized projects that neglect environmental protection. They do not agree with the need to restrict access to public action and argue that it should remain unchanged to allow citizens to demand the expulsion of illegal urban plans from the legal system in defense of the general interests.
However, analysts believe that this public action opens the door for organizations to stop urban projects without demonstrating a direct impact. Jorge Hervás Más, a professor at the Valencia Polytechnic University’s urban planning department, suggests that modifying the article will ensure that plaintiffs are acting in good faith and without ulterior motives. He doubts that changing Article 55 will lead to urban irregularities as feared by Sumar, stating that a defect in form does not necessarily mean a problem in content. He emphasizes that urban developments contain multiple sectoral reports and it is possible that some may be incorrect. Sumar also proposes that current deadlines for indirect challenge of territorial and urban planning instruments be maintained, conflicting with the demands of the real estate sector for more efficient management to prevent project delays.
Subscribe to continue reading. Subscribe now for unlimited access.
