Property owners hit out at Andorran Government over restrictions on their land without compensation
Those affected say 260,000 square metres have been protected around a church measuring just 715 square metres
Property owners affected by the Sant Joan de Caselles Protected Environment have criticised the final approval of the boundaries established by the Andorran Government, arguing that the measure imposes significant restrictions on private property without any financial compensation.
In a statement obtained by La Veu Lliure, the affected owners stress that they do not oppose protecting the Romanesque church, but consider the approved area «disproportionate» and question the criteria used to establish its boundaries.
260,000 square metres to protect a 715-square-metre church
According to the property owners, Sant Joan de Caselles church occupies approximately 715 square metres, while the approved protected environment covers around 260,000 square metres — an area roughly 360 times larger than the building itself.
The protected area, according to the statement, stretches from the Canillo Fire Station to the Cascada de Moles climbing wall, on both sides of the main road, and also includes the village of El Vilar.
The owners argue that preserving the monument's visual surroundings is not sufficient justification for a protected area of such a size.
«Is it really necessary to protect 260,000 square metres to preserve a 715-square-metre church?», they ask.
Owners denounce restrictions on their property without compensation
One of the owners' main arguments is that their land is now subject to new restrictions on its use without any financial compensation.
The family argues that a decision significantly restricting property rights should be supported by a «rigorous» technical justification.
In this regard, they claim that the administrative file devotes considerable attention to the history and cultural value of Sant Joan de Caselles, but does not justify the specific boundaries of the protected environment in the same level of detail.
The owners say there are no detailed studies of viewsheds, simulations, topography, elevations or individualised justification for the boundaries of the protected area.
They recall an earlier land transfer centre project
The statement also focuses on an earlier Government project. According to the owners, several years ago the authorities proposed using these same plots of land for a land transfer centre, which they describe as a soil disposal site.
The property owners consider it contradictory that the area was previously regarded as compatible with such a project while its use is now being significantly restricted on heritage protection grounds.
They also claim that the property remains involved in legal proceedings with the Administration over the alleged failure to comply with that agreement.
The owners further question some of the landscape criteria applied. They argue that it is contradictory for the preservation of views to be one of the main arguments when a four-lane main road runs through the protected area and is used by hundreds of vehicles every day.
They also question the prohibition on future river channelling works when, they claim, one of the riverbanks is already channelled.
The statement compares the situation with other projects promoted by public authorities, citing as an example the new General Council building in relation to the visual perception of Casa de la Vall.
Criticism of Canillo Town Council over the car park and Motorcycle Museum
The property owners also criticise several decisions by Canillo Town Council concerning services around Sant Joan de Caselles.
According to the family, approximately one month ago the council informed them that the contract for the Sant Joan de Caselles car park was being terminated, without prior negotiations or an alternative proposal.
The family also points to the relocation of the Motorcycle Museum, which occupied the lower floors of the building and, according to the owners, also provided public toilets for visitors.
In their statement, they claim that following the museum's relocation, some visitors have no alternative facilities and that it has become common to find people relieving themselves around the church.
«Protecting heritage is not just about restricting property owners»
The owners maintain that they have kept the land in good condition for decades and have undertaken cleaning, vegetation clearance, pest control and water supply work.
For this reason, they argue that heritage protection should also involve greater involvement from the public authorities in maintaining the area.
As an example, they claim that snow was not cleared from the church's steps this winter, which, according to the family, created a risk for visitors.
A dispute between heritage protection and property rights
The owners insist that they do not question the heritage value of Sant Joan de Caselles or the need to protect it. What they reject is the extent of the approved protected environment and the consequences they say it will have for private land.
«Protecting heritage is a shared responsibility», they state, arguing that such protection «cannot become an exclusive burden» for property owners.
The statement concludes with a direct criticism of the political official responsible for heritage management. The owners call on her to leave politics after more than two decades of institutional activity and return to her professional life outside public institutions.