Bahar ic-Caghaq residents object to development zones extension

Twenty-nine Bahar ic-Caghaq residents yesterday filed a judicial protest explaining why neighbouring land should not have been included in the development zones extension exercise.

The residents filed their protest against the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, the Prime Minister and Finance Minister and the Minister for the Environment and Rural Affairs.

The residents said the Cabinet of ministers had laid down the criteria that established how land could qualify to be included in the development zone extension. They submitted that the land in their vicinity was clearly not suitable for inclusion as it did not satisfy such criteria.

The primary and essential criterion established by the Cabinet was that land which was an infill pocket and that had three out of four sides adjacent to urbanised zones was suitable for inclusion. However, the land neighbouring that belonging to the residents was only immediately adjoining urbanised areas on two of its four sides.

Nor, said the residents, did the land qualify for inclusion in terms of the restricted exceptions laid down by the Cabinet.

The land in question was not surrounded by roads on all four sides, nor was it developed by permit.

The residents added that a predominant part of the land in question had a water supply and was subject to an agricultural lease. Furthermore, it contained indigenous protected trees.

The residents had submitted their objections to the inclusion of the land to Mepa but although the objections had been delivered by hand and within the time limit, no receipt had been issued.

Mepa, the residents said, had ignored their submissions, and had also failed to observe the criteria established by the Cabinet when deciding which land was to be included in the extension to the development zones.

They said the value of their properties had diminished as a result of such inclusion, adding that Mepa had acted illegally and abusively.

In conclusion, the residents held the authorities liable in damages and gave notice of their intention to file judicial action on this matter.

Lawyer Patrick Galea represented the residents.