Objections

Urban Planning Agreement between the Gelida Town Council and Ametller Origen. 8 objections

The Agreement aims to achieve a covert modification of the POUM, with an abuse of power by the council to prioritise private interests over public ones, and the violation of environmental legislation due to its impact on the pair of Bonelli's eagles.

Urbanisation Project. 35 objections

The urbanisation project is fragmented and incomplete, as it does not include the necessary infrastructure for the sustainability of the Agroparc project, and overlooks essential services. It is not justified that the derived areas are included within the executive urbanisation project. Regarding the BV-2249 road, there is no comprehensive improvement, which includes the variant planned in the urban planning, in order to ensure safety and traffic capacity. The environmental impacts of earth movements are reported, especially concerning the protection of the Bonelli's eagle. The capture of water from the EDAR is considered unjustified. Regarding rural paths, it is requested to ensure their integrity and accessibility.

Project of Extra-sectoral Works. 19 objections

The project presented is actually a technical project in the field of a general road system and other actions on urban land owned by the municipality of Gelida, without any public tender for the awarding of the project drafting for adaptation. The areas derived from the delimited urbanisable land sector of Can Joncoses must be included in the Project for Extra-sectoral Works. The safety of residents and users of the BV-2249 road is at risk. The large volume of earth movements threatens the survival of the Bonelli's eagle.

The main objections to the approval of the Agroparc project in Gelida can be summarised in the following points:

1. Lack of legitimacy of the company UNPASMES S.L. to sign the Urban Planning Agreement: The Compensation Board, which should be legally constituted, is the only entity with the legitimacy to negotiate and sign the urban planning agreement, not a single company owning land within the scope of the project.

2. The Urban Planning Agreement does not respond to reasons of general interest and constitutes a covert modification of the POUM of Gelida: The agreement aims to evade environmental measures and the required reports, adapting the planning to the interests of the promoting company to the detriment of the public interest.

3. The Agreement modifies the environmental compensatory measures and allows for the immediate start of works without prior validation: The agreement aims to alter the compensatory measures intended to protect the habitat of the Bonelli's eagle, a protected species, and authorises the start of works without waiting for its implementation and validation, contradicting the Strategic Environmental Declaration (DAE) and the reports from the Fauna and Flora Service (SFF).

4. The Urban Planning Agreement is flawed due to dispensatory reservations in favour of the promoting company, violating the principle of equality before the law: The Gelida Town Council grants preferential treatment to the company UNPASMES S.L., exempting it from compliance with general regulations regarding urban planning and environmental matters.

5. The Gelida Town Council acts with a deviation of power, favouring private interests to the detriment of the public interest: The Town Council is acting motivated by interests alien to the general interest, putting at risk the natural heritage and public resources for the benefit of a private company.

6. The Urbanisation Project is fragmented, incomplete and lacks a coherent criterion: The project is divided into two documents (Executive Urbanisation Project and Extra-sectoral Works Project) that attempt to dissociate themselves through the Urban Planning Agreement, accelerating the execution of the project for the benefit of the company, creating confusion and hindering its overall assessment. Furthermore, it is incomplete, as it does not include key infrastructures for its supposed sustainability, such as the hydrogen plant, the biogas plant or the wastewater treatment plant.

7. The project fails to meet the requirements for improving the BV-2249 road and puts road safety and people's lives at risk: The project does not include the construction of the BV-2249 road bypass, a key infrastructure for traffic decongestion and the safety of residents, even though it is planned in the 2015 POUM.

8. The project does not adequately address earth movements and their environmental impacts: The project involves a large volume of earth movements that affect streams and forests, without requiring the necessary permits and authorisations.

9. The project puts the Bonelli's eagle in serious danger: The earth movements and the construction of infrastructures will affect the habitat of the Bonelli's eagle, and the project does not include effective measures for its protection.

10. The project does not foresee a sustainable use of water and the intake from the Gelida wastewater treatment plant is not justified: The water intake from the Gelida wastewater treatment plant was not foreseen in the MPOUM and is not justified, as the project had been presented as self-sufficient in terms of water.

11. The project negatively affects rural paths and does not respect their regulations: There are negative impacts on rural paths, such as the modification of routes, the widening of widths, and the disappearance of sections, without justification or viable alternatives.