On the 13 th of January, Ms Sylvana Debono said in The Times: “MEPA is not in the business of fooling anyone”. How strange then that MEPA’s reply to the Auditor’s report on the scandalous case of the Windsor Terrace permit issued by MEPA’s DCC C board is characterised by playing with words, legalisms, and outright misleading statements.
Faced with the report that the DCC board approved a 6-floor block of apartments in an area where both the Draft and the Ratified Local Plans stipulated only two floors, all that MEPA and Environment Minister George Pullicino come up with was to split hairs that the building to be constructed is not six floors high but four plus a penthouse. Whether the proposed building of a so-called ‘semi’-basement (of about 10 filati or stone courses above ground), four floors and a penthouse – is effectively 5 or 6 floors – is an irrelevant distraction in the face of such a blatant breach of regulations.
MEPA talks about “when the full application is submitted,” while the Minster says that the Auditor “was also incorrect in concluding that the board's decision on the outline application included internal demolition”. In fact, the Full Application was submitted on the 11 th of September and lists as its aims, “To demolish existing dwelling and erect an apartment block with semi-basement garage”, the very same terms as the Outline Permit approved by the DCC.
As regards various sites in the area being committed to six floors, this is downright misleading. The site is in the middle of a row of identical, untouched, two-floor, old Sliema townhouses which until recently were shown to be scheduled on the MEPA Map Server, a scheduling that that has suddenly and mysteriously disappeared.
FAA is outraged at MEPA’s statement that “It is clear that the DCC shouldered its
responsibility in taking the appropriate decision in a fair, reasonable and just manner”. The members of the Development Control Commission* contravened the Draft Local Plan, the Ratified Local Plan, and even the Structure Plan which clearly says: “POLICY BEN 4: During the interim period between the commencement date of the Structure Plan and the adoption of any particular Local Plan, permission … will not normally be given unless the Planning Authority is satisfied that such permission would be unlikely to compromise the objectives of the review forming part of Local Plan preparation.”
The public’s feedback on this is one of shock and disgust. How can both MEPA and the Minister of the Environment seek not only to shield, but even to condone such a blatant abuse of environment law, rather than taking remedial action against it? For this reason, we echo the Auditor’s recommendation that if the DCC members are not prepared to shoulder their responsibilities by adhering to MEPA’s regulations, they should tender their resignation immediately. If the Minister does not deem this necessary, then he should consider the political responsibility that this entails.
Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar