This Saturday, the campaign group dedicated to preserving Tejita has lodged a complaint with the Canary Agency for the Protection of the Natural Environment (ACPMN) and Seprona regarding the “Earthworks and Movement Activities for the Cuna project in Puertito de Adeje,” asserting that these activities are occurring outside the designated schedule outlined in the local construction regulations.
In a communiqué, SLT reported that, for instance, on Saturday from 7:00 in the morning, operations involving heavy machinery have persisted in the vicinity, as conveyed by local residents to the organisation.
The Tejita preservation group reminded that, according to municipal guidelines, “activities of this nature are prohibited during weekends and holidays.” They further stated that the operational hours for public or private construction “are to be between 08:00 and 19:00.”
Consequently, it is prohibited to “carry out works on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, barring any emergency situations previously mentioned,” as noted from an excerpt of the municipal building regulations.
The association has asserted that such operations “have been occurring on multiple Saturdays,” as reported by the residents, which “reveals” the “impunity” felt by “the developer of the Cuna project,” which “has managed to recommence activities,” specifying, “thanks to the actions of ‘Legal Engineering to the Charter’ initiated by both the Government of the Canary Islands and the City of Adeje.”
This continues, with the intention to “legalise” an urban development initiative “without an environmental impact assessment, resulting in the destruction and relocation of protected species and damage to a site which has recently been declared of geological significance by the Geological and Mining Institute of Spain.”
They further disclosed that, to date, “an area of approximately 70,000 square metres” has been destroyed and altered, while “the entire sector 6 of the General Plan for Planning of Adeje spans around 421,918.08 square metres.”
“The destruction activities progress rapidly, representing a strategy of ‘fait accompli’. There are currently two contentious-administrative cases open that challenge the legality of this urban plan. While these matters are being resolved, harm to the environment, biodiversity, and cultural heritage continues unchecked,” concluded the group.
