The owners of the Hoya Fría lands in Tenerife, which were forcefully expropriated by the Army, have filed an appeal with the Supreme Court claiming recognition of only 10% of the economic compensation they are seeking.
The Rodríguez López family has taken their case to the high court following a ruling by the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands (TSJC). The TSJC ruled in favor of the Provincial Board of Forced Expropriation (JPEF) in their decision to award an average of 21.5 euros for each of the 145,000 square meters that were expropriated.
The heirs, however, argue that the evaluation is inadequate and are petitioning for an increased compensation of 205 euros per square meter, amounting to a total of 30 million. This figure was deemed “disproportionate” by the TSJC, which considers the land to be predominantly rural, not urban.
Furthermore, the owners are seeking an additional 16 million for a section of land that was not expropriated but is considered unusable, predominantly consisting of cliffs. They are urging the Ministry of Defense to also acquire this parcel of land.
The TSJC has indicated that the expropriated lands are categorized in the General Urban Planning Plan (PGOU) as deferred non-sectorized developable land and a further part as deferred, therefore, most of the land would be valued and compensated as rural land in accordance with legislation.
These plots are not integrated into any urban grid, neither by proximity nor by access. The military base is situated on a steeply sloping promontory, with exclusive access to the Southern Highway, justifying the classification of the land as “rural.”
The TSJC has also dismissed the argument that future urban planning expectations must be considered, as they lack “regulatory support,” given that the General Plan has not yet been approved.
The land, until now, has only served military purposes, and the remaining portion is in a “completely wild” state, characterized by a high concentration of tabaibas, ruined terraces, and remnants of an old irrigation system that was inoperative prior to the Army’s occupation.
According to the Ministry of Agriculture, the land would be classified as “herbaceous and fallow,” with an average value of 1.2 euros per square meter throughout Spain.
Taking into account the higher value of this type of land in the Canary Islands, the valuation made in 2013 for the expansion of the TF-1, set at 20.5 euros, is being used as a reference.
The owners have requested the application of rent capitalization, valuing the economic use generated by the land due to the rent agreed with Defense since 2009, at a rate of 200,000 euros per year, equivalent to one euro per year per square meter.
However, the TSJC has ruled out applying this assessment, as the Army’s presence on the land has been determined by a chain of litigation, with a base constructed on land that was taken from the owners through legal proceedings that dictated the price.
The argument put forward by the heirs that the part which has not been expropriated is useless or uneconomical due to the lack of access for proper exploitation has also been dismissed as “absolutely uncertain.”
These territories, which in certain areas have gentler inclines compared to those occupied at the Base, were deserted before the military’s arrival due to the lack of agricultural profitability and are interconnected at two points.
Currently, the Supreme Court is examining another appeal from the landowners, as they are not satisfied with the use of expropriation, a decision also supported by the TSJC.
The Rodríguez López family expresses its disillusionment over the loss of a “unique opportunity” for the capital of Tenerife to reclaim a vital area for its urban development in the medium term.
They point out that if the State’s plans proceed, the “outdated” circumstance will arise of a military base being situated at the heart of the Tenerife capital at a time when such facilities are vanishing from urban surroundings.
In one of the initial versions of the PGOU, there was a proposal for a large healthcare complex with hospitals and housing. However, when the expropriation was considered, neither the Cabildo nor the City Council were willing to negotiate an alternative possibility, as stated by the previous owners at the time.