MEPA action against infringements

It would be interesting for your readers to be updated on the cases mentioned by Alan Deidun ("The Green Whistle-blower", The Sunday Times, August 22) either in print or with visuals.

The works being carried out in Wied il-Kbir are meant to be storm mitigation measures and are covered by GD2412/00. The works are being carried out now, before the start of the rainy season.

The protection of Dar ix-Xemx is at the moment ensured by an Emergency Conservation Order GN676/2004 published in the Government Gazette of June 22. Dar ix-Xemx is being considered as a Grade 2 scheduled property for its architectural, cultural and contextual value. The emergency conservation order also affords protection to the existing garden.

An enforcement notice ECF 566/02 on the devlopment in Gnejna was issued on July 17, 2002. Subsequently an application to sanction this development was submitted with the stipulated legal timeframe. This application was refused and is pending reconsideration. Action may only be taken when the application process is exhausted.

With regard to the illegal structures in Mgiebah, MEPA has managed to persuade the perpetrator to remove the building himself after he was served with an enforcement notice. This was done a day before the expiry of the time limit allowed by the notice.

The illegal development at La Grotta is a bit more complex in that it consists of two parts; infringements in the parking area and in the La Grotta complex.

The parking are is covered by ECF206/94 and an application to sanction was pending since 1993 but now the process has been exhausted. The application, PA3482/93 was refused and refusal confirmed by the Appeals Board in 1996.

A further application, PA 358/98, was refused and refusal confirmed by the Appeals Board in July 2000. This enforcement notice is awaiting direct action, that is, demolition.

The illegal development at La Grotta Complex itself refers to the terracing and structures constructed at the face of the cliffs from the street level doen to the valley bed as shown in sketch above. Since 1993 various enforcement cases were issued on site. Currently ECF893/99 is pending at appeals stage. The enforcement notice covers all the infrigements.

MEPA officers last week inspected the site where the alleged parking is taking place in Ramla Bay. They verified that six cars were actually parked in this area. The owners of the vehicles were informed about this and ordered to remove the cars. Eventually all these cars were removed from this illegal parking site.

From the site inspection it was noticed that the site in question is actually smaller from the one shown in the photo accompanying Mr Deidun's article. This indicates that this photo is not a recent one. The owner of the cars was also requested to reinstate the boundary wall and all the parking signs in this locality have been removed.

From the cases quoted it is evident that while it is true that there is no lull in infringements, MEPA is doing its best to curb illegal development.

One cannot but point out however that the problems are two-fold. In the first place there is the national pastime of flouting the law in the full knowledge that the developments are illegal.

Then there is the question of resources. The quote used by Mr Deidun is very apt in this case as the Enforcement and Direction Action Teams qualify as a small group of thoughtful and committed people.

One must bear in mind however, that when an enforcement notice is served, the onus is on the developer to remove the illegal structure. When the Direct Action Team moves in, MEPA bears the cost and in all probability the lengthy procedure of cost recovery.

Finally, MEPA is committed to accountability and transparency and this before Malta became bound by the Aarhus convention.