Well, they went ahead and did it, as they said they would once the season had ended. The Playero Club, aka Boccaccio Snack Bar, in Puerto Alcúdia has been duly bulldozed into oblivion. This was a story highlighted back in June (16 June: Demolition Man); the Playero was to be one of three "chiringuitos" to not escape the demolition men of the Costas authority. All that remains are two kiosks, and maybe they'll be torn down as well.
It's all rather sad, and the impression given by the bulldozing is almost one of vandalism; they managed to knock down a litter bin in the process. Why have they done it? For an answer, you have to go back to the law on demarcation and also actual permissions, but the difficulty is knowing what is what. Strictly speaking, there is not meant to be any building within 100 metres of the shoreline, unless it is on so-called urban land. The Playero was along a line of buildings, apartments mainly, roughly 50 metres from the sea. Perhaps there was just never any permission for it to be there, but there are any number of buildings and additions to buildings that have never received permission. As mentioned previously, it was not actually on the beach, indeed it was behind the pavement (urban land?) that runs at the back of the beach, whereas some of the chiringuitos or balnearios - call them what you will, they are all, to Brits, beach bars - are on the sand and are also permanent buildings. Beach, sand, it is not urban land.
The confusion as to what should or should not be allowed to stay has been heightened by different "plans" and bits of legislation which appear to contradict others, and there is now this business of what are natural or artificial salt deposits ("salinas") which exist right along Alcúdia bay. It is this, as much as the 100 metres rule, that draws into question the strict legality of many buildings and the determination as to whether they occupy urban or public land or land influenced by the sea (the controversy over Ses Casetes des Capellans in Playa de Muro is an example of all of this). The Costas authority is not completely mad though. It accepts that many buildings that might actually be on naturally created salt lands are, in its words, "productive" (which can be interpreted many ways one supposes), and the hundred or so chiringuitos that were under threat have been spared (save for the Playero and a couple in the south). But what good does knocking down the Playero actually do? None, as far as anyone can make out.
* Thanks to Ben for drawing to my attention that the Playero had gone. I knew it was planned but didn't know when.
Real Mallorca - the nonsense continues
"The Diario" ran a splendid piece yesterday. It concerned two Catalan businessmen in their thirties who apparently specialise in the acquisition of insolvent businesses. They have asked to see the books, but why they would be interested in Real Mallorca is far from clear, though some associated with the club seem to know the answer. Publicity. All they want is to have their photos taken and to get their names bandied about. Moreover, they are "two unknown youths (or young men)". The word "joven" covers a wide age range. These are two thirtysomethings, but a "joven" could just as easily be a teenager.
The implication is that there are likely to be prospective buyers who may be anything but. Their interest will be in gaining publicity, as is being said in this instance. And Real Mallorca has had its fill of questionable suitors and indeed failed purchasers over the past year or so. The club has been made to look ridiculous, and interim owner Alemany has vowed not to make the same mistakes that let in the disgraced Martí Mingarros.
QUIZ
Yesterday's title - Fine song, and one of the ladies looks as though she's wearing a transparent mac - very odd. God, things were so cheesy back then. The Fifth Dimension, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWVe3AB8OY8. Today's title - it was not a playero but a playhouse - who?
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
No comments:
Post a Comment