Canillo Landowners Protest Covert Urban Planning Overhaul

Landowners in Canillo have launched a discreet signature drive backing a letter to the parish council, accusing it of conducting a covert urban planning review disguised as a minor modification. They claim this approach denies them the right to submit formal objections, leaving them in "total defencelessness."

The letter, addressed to Comú leader Jordi Alcobé, criticises a recent amendment to the Canillo Urban Planning Ordinance (POUPC), approved just weeks ago. Signatories—numbering in the dozens, though exact figures remain undisclosed—express "deep disappointment and concern" over what they describe as a sweeping overhaul affecting key parameters. These include minimum parcel sizes for building, maximum occupancy per floor, allowable building heights, facade lengths, permitted uses, cession percentages, and designations for development units.

Critics argue the changes amount to a full review, which Andorran law limits to once every four years. This interval, they say, allows councils to assess prior measures' effectiveness and gives landowners time to adapt projects, which often span years, providing "legal certainty." The latest amendment follows a major 2023 review by just two years—both slashing buildable volumes in urbanisable land—without considering landowners' difficulties in assimilating such rapid shifts.

Unlike reviews, modifications offer no allegations period, sidelining affected parties. "It is clear that landowners were the last concern in this POUPC modification process," the letter states.

While affirming the need to preserve heritage for future generations, signatories reject claims that reduced buildability always boosts parcel values, as Alcobé suggested during the amendment's presentation. They cite examples: halving buildable area from 100% to 50% in old village cores with small plots; doubling minimum sizes to 6,000 m² in high-mountain valleys, many prone to natural risks; and restrictions on demolishing old farmhouses, barns, or threshing floors lacking heritage value.

The group questions whether impacts on specific parcels were evaluated, given owners' inability to object, and accuses the council of breaching the law's four-year review rhythm tied to approved projects' evolution. They note 16 years passed between the initial POUPC approval and its first review, yet two major cutbacks occurred in two years. "Was such a drastic, across-the-board reduction in buildability necessary when another review is possible in two years?" the letter asks.

The effort proceeds quietly, with some backers—said to include council sympathisers—opting not to sign publicly amid Alcobé's influence. A popular refrain captures the mood: "Them served, all served." The council has not commented.