WRITTEN QUESTION E-3846/00 by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission. Demolition of the district of Cabanyal-Canyamelar (Valencia) and infringement of Directive 97/11/EC.
Date: 2000-12-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community of Valencia, application of EU law, architectural heritage, competence of the Member States, heritage protection, impact study, road services department, town planning, urban infrastructure

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/61

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(7 February 2001)

The question raised by the Honourable Member should be addressed in the context of the political
settlement of the Cyprus problem.

The Union position on this problem has been reconfirmed recently at the Nice European Council
in December 2000. In its conclusions, the European Council (cid:145)welcomed and strongly supports the efforts
of the United Nations Secretary-General to achieve an overall agreement on the Cyprus problem consistent
with the UN Security Council Resolutions and to arrive at a positive conclusion of the process initiated
in December 1999. It appeals to all the parties concerned to contribute to the efforts made to this effect(cid:146).

(2001/C 187 E/065)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3846/00

by Mar(cid:237)a Sornosa Mart(cid:237)nez (PSE) to the Commission

(7 December 2000)

Subject: Demolition of the district of Cabanyal-Canyamelar (Valencia) and infringement of Directive 97/11/

EC

In its answer to Written Questions E-2416/00, E-2417/00 and E-2418/00, the Commission expressed the
view that the redevelopment of the district of Cabanyal-Canyamelar in Valencia could be classified as an
urban development project and that it was therefore the sole responsibility of the Spanish authorities to
decide whether or not a study of its impact on the cultural heritage was needed.

However, the Commission failed to take into account the fact that Annexes I and II to Directive 97/11/
EC (1) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment include
constructions such as (cid:145)car parks(cid:146) and (cid:145)shopping centres(cid:146) among the projects subject
to an impact
assessment. Clearly, the project to extend Blasco IbÆnez Avenues to the sea includes constructions of this
kind, which are mentioned in the annexes to the above directive.

As the Commission will recall from the questions tabled previously, if the project were to go ahead, it
would involve the demolition of 1 500 19th century buildings in the historic centre hitherto afforded
protection by the Valencian Government owing to their (cid:145)unique characteristics and cultural relevance(cid:146). For
instance, one of the buildings earmarked for demolition, the Lonja de los Pescadores (fish market), the
oldest of its kind in Spain and one of the oldest in Europe, ranks among the most symbolic examples of
European cultural heritage.

In the light of the above, does the Commission not consider that the project to extend Blasco IbÆnez
Avenue, and the effects this will have on the places of cultural and historical interest in the district of
Cabanyal-Canyamelar, represents an infringement of Directive 97/11/EC?

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2001)

On the basis of the information supplied by the Honourable Member, the Commission considers that the
project mentioned could come under Annex II to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the
assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1), provided that the
application for approval was introduced before 14 March 1999. If it was, it is up to the Member State to
determine whether an environmental impact assessment (EIA) is necessary or not.

C 187 E/62

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

If the application was introduced after this date, this project would be among those included in Annex II
to Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 (2), which amends Directive 85/337/EEC. If that is the
case, the decision to carry out an EIA or not is still up to the Member State, which may apply thresholds
or criteria, or take a decision on a case by case basis but which, in all cases, will apply the criteria laid
down in Annex III.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(2001/C 187 E/066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3847/00

by Riitta Myller (PSE) to the Commission

(7 December 2000)

Subject: Promotion of public transport

is a central

The promotion of public transport
factor in attempting to achieve a transport policy
compatible with sustainable development. Mass transport reduces the burden on the environment and
creates social equality, and must therefore be seen as a social service which may justifiably be subsidised
with public funds. The Commission(cid:146)s proposal for a regulation on the principles of public service contracts
in passenger transport by rail, road and inland waterways has raised concerns that the operational
possibilities of public transport will be reduced. Opening rail traffic to competition would reduce the
level of services in countries such as Finland where there are long distances to be covered. In the same
way, restricting public support to particular groups of travellers would threaten the competitiveness of
public transport in commuter traffic and increase the use of private cars correspondingly. How does the
Commission intend to ensure that the EU(cid:146)s transport policy encourages the principle of sustainable
development, is environmentally sound and promotes regional and social equality?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 2001)

The Commission is in full agreement with the view that greater use of public transport is one of the
essential factors in sustainable development, the preservation of the environment and social and regional
cohesion, as mentioned in article 161 (ex Article 130d) of the EC Treaty.

It agrees, too, that in this sector an approach based on a pure open market is not appropriate. Among
other problems, this approach would certainly carry the risk of operators cutting back socially and
environmentally important services.

However, the Commission(cid:146)s proposal for a regulation on public services in public transport (1) has a quite
different approach, based as it is on the principle of controlled competition rather than a pure open
market approach.

Experience in Member States that have introduced controlled competition shows that, properly managed, it
is an effective way to make services more attractive and more efficient. It is true that some operators that
do not face competition provide excellent services. However, others do not (cid:129) and costs are generally high.
Closed market regimes seem to make change hard to achieve where it is most needed.

The basic objective of the Commission(cid:146)s proposal is to promote quality and efficiency in public transport.
It takes the widespread necessity of public financial support as its main starting point.

Under this approach, public authorities have wide powers to fix the service levels and quality standards
that are needed, and select the operator that will fulfil these standards in the way that offers the best value
for money. Authorities are encouraged by a specific provision in the draft regulation to guarantee
continuing support for socially necessary services in lightly populated areas.