Cort keeps Palma's urban future without a calendar
Two years after assuming the Detailed Planning Plan (POD), the City Council does not specify what deficiencies the company's document had nor what work the municipal technicians have done.
PalmaThe Detailed Urban Plan (POD) of Palma still has no timetable two years after municipal technicians took over its drafting. It is a fundamental instrument for interpreting and applying Palma's General Plan, approved by the Pact shortly before losing the elections. Cort assures that the document handed over by Territorios y Ciudad “did not meet the necessary conditions for its approval,” but does not specify what deficiencies it had, what work has been done since April 2024, or what remains to be completed.
The company argues that it delivered the POD, which it provided in editable format at the request of the City Council and that it offered to resolve any doubts, but that it received no feedback or specific request for amendments.
The municipal response comes 15 days after ARA Balears requested information on the status of the planning and the litigation with the drafting company. Cort confirms that the municipal planning technical services are reviewing and adapting the document “to the needs of Palma and current regulations”, but does not explain what phase it is in, what degree of execution it has, or when its processing could begin.
The City Council is limited to pointing out that the calendar can only be finalized “once the review is completed”, without indicating when it expects to finish it. Nor does it detail which parts of the document submitted by the company have been used, which have had to be redone, or which municipal resources have been allocated to this work.
The POD must develop the determinations of the General Plan and specify, among other issues, the organization of neighborhoods, land uses, facilities, open spaces, and building conditions. The lack of this document generates dysfunctions in the application of planning and conditions the urban development of Palma.
Two versions on the document
The explanation now offered by Cort is the same with which it justified the termination of the contract in April 2024. The Councilor for Urban Planning, Óscar Fidalgo, described the documentation at the time as “deficient, incomplete” and assured that “in no case” could it serve as a draft to be submitted for public exhibition. Cort continues to fail to identify what the POD errors were, nor whether it formally communicated them to the contractor so that it could correct them. Nor does it explain with what technical documentation it maintains that the work was not finished.
Territorios y Ciudad assured in 2024 that it had delivered the first version in July 2023 and another in December of that year. According to its legal director, Sebastián Olmedo, the first was not yet a finished document and the City Council had been warned of this. The version that the company considered definitive was presented at the end of the year and subsequently sent in editable format and on a hard drive, along with the consolidated General Plan. “Since then, we have repeatedly offered ourselves to resolve doubts and have not received a response or any specific request,” stated Olmedo. The company also complained that Cort had eliminated coordination meetings and had not provided any feedback on the work presented.
The current response does not resolve this contradiction. The City Council reiterates that the document did not meet the necessary conditions for approval, but does not clarify whether it formally requested that it be amended nor why municipal technicians have been reviewing it for two years without yet having a schedule.
Cort denies that there is work pending payment
The City Council does specify its position on the settlement of the contract. It assures that phases prior, I, and II were completed and paid. On the other hand, it considers that phase III was not finished because the document submitted did not meet the required conditions and maintains that phase IV was never initiated. “There is no amount recognized as work done and pending payment,” states Cort.
The municipal position clashes with that of Territorios y Ciudad, which has taken the termination of the contract to court and claims an amount that, adding up the different items, is close to 350,000 euros. In the documentation of the proceedings, a claim of about 270,000 euros appears, but Cort has not clarified what work or items this sum corresponds to according to the lawsuit.
The City Council also does not explain with what documentation it maintains that phase III was not completed. The company, on the contrary, argues that it had carried out work that was not settled after the termination.
Unanswered questions about the trial
The municipal response does not address the main legal arguments that Cort defends in its answer to the lawsuit. Nor does it detail the concepts included in the amount claimed by Territorios y Ciudad or the possible consequences of a ruling in favor of the company.
Among the questions raised by ARA Balears, it was asked whether, in the event of an adverse ruling, the City Council could be forced to pay for the work carried out, assume compensation, or face other effects on the rescinded contract. These questions remain unanswered.
The legal claim does not solely affect an economic dispute between the Administration and a company. The procedure also casts uncertainty over an essential document for the implementation of Palma's new planning and over the final cost the conflict could have for the municipal treasury.
Cort has also not explained how the resignation of the Urban Planning manager (at the end of 2025) has affected the development of the POD. Likewise, it does not specify whether his departure has altered the organization of tasks, caused delays, or forced the redistribution of responsibilities among municipal technicians.
In short, 15 days after receiving the questions from ARA Balears, Cort has confirmed that municipal technicians continue to review the document and does not acknowledge any pending payments. However, it leaves unclear what has been advanced during these two years, what specific deficiencies the company's proposal had, whether it formally requested the company to correct them, what economic risk the trial entails, and when the POD's processing can begin.