Relocation of petrol station

With reference to Sylvana Debono's letter entitled Relocation Of Fuel Station (September 18), Moviment Graffitti argues:

Why is it that with regard to the issue of the mentioned permit, Mepa and its own DCC have not given due importance to the conservation and the high landscape value of the area, the specific relevance of the preservation of the acquifer, and the ecological value of the valley well known as Chadwick lakes?

Mepa's justification for the granting of such permit has only been limited to a planning notion, and not on environmental grounds. In fact another two sites identified by Mepa were deemed as not being suitable, as a result of the low feasibility of the area, instead of on environmental grounds.

Citizens cannot but find it strange that Mepa refused an application for the development of rooms for vineyard purposes in the vicinity of the said area, but now has approved an application for a full development of a petrol station, with canopy, car-wash and shop. Is this a contradiction in terms or a new mode of doing things?

Effectively through this approach Mepa has opened the doors for more such development in areas of a high landscape and conservation value. MRA's policy, which states that "fuel stations are to be relocated from areas in which they constitute unacceptable environmental impacts, to areas more suited for such uses", is surely counter to the decision to relocate such a petrol station at Ta' Buqana.

As a result, Moviment Graffitti believes that Mepa should stop using MRA as an excuse. Once again, Moviment Graffitti declares that the petrol station could have been located elsewhere, in such a way as not to have such negative environmental implications.