Saturday, 17th May 2008 - 16:16CET
MEPA, NGO argue over Attard open space
The Malta Environment & Planning Authority (MEPA) ithis afternoon categorically denied that the parcel of land known as Ta’Fgieni, in Attard (Near Villa Bologna) was ever earmarked as a green area or public open space.
Reacting to comments by Flimkien ghal Ambjena Ahjar (FAA), which is backing residents' calls for such open space, the Authority said that prior to the formulation of the local plan in 2002 this parcel of land was identified as a car park and not as a public open space.
When in July 2002 the draft local plan was issued for public consultation part of this land was indicated for development. The draft local plan always showed the intention for this area of land to be developed.
During the public consultation period and subsequent to that, the Authority never received a request or submission either from residents or the Attard local council objecting to this area policy. Neither did the Authority ever receive a request from the local council for this parcel of land to be turned into a public garden.
In the approved local plan that was published in July 2006 the rezoning of this area included a street between the indicated development and the walls of Villa Bologna and a green area around the castellated tower adjacent to the wall. The permitted development in this parcel of land is for a semi-basement, 3 floors and a penthouse.
The local plan did consider and safeguard the need for open spaces in the locality of Attard, infact beside a number of other open spaces in the area, some metres south of this land there is another open space that has been identified as a green area.
On this particular case the Audit officer commented that MEPA acted diligently when it slightly amended the zoning after the public consultation exercise. Infact related to this issue the courts found that there was nothing illegal with the rezoning of this area.
"The Authority will evaluate all development planning applications in accordance with the established plans and policies. The local plans are an approved policy documents that can get revised after two years from their publication", MEPA said.
The FAA said it was Attard Local Council which had repeatedly assured members of the public that the area would be landscaped as a Public Open Area or recreational area. MEPA's own maps showed it in turn as an widening of the road and a car parking area, while the one attached above which clearly proposed part of the area as a green area.
"It is due to all these conflicting designations that the residents were not fully informed of the situation at the time of the revision of the Local Plans.
"However the fact remains that the residents had made their wishes clear to both the Local Council and MEPA in a petition submitted to both, and which was recorded in MEPA's Ta' Fgieni file."
RSS
Comments
It is very clear that this is a case of a piece of land that can in no way be described as a 'green area' (it's clearly surrounded by other buildings). It is also clear that this land is privately owned and thus can be built by its owners if the necessary permits are issued by Mepa as they were issued before when the residents built years ago.
The neighbours have no right to stop a land-owner doing what they did 10 or 20 years ago. It's rich, if not worse, for the neighbours to expect the owner of this piece of land to supply them with a car park rather than exercise his right to build as they did in the past.
The land owners who built first have no right to stop other land owners from building after them. That should be a very simple principle in a country where people should be treated equally and where we take our rights seriously.
The people who have built in the past next to this land obviously have a huge interest and one understands how disappointed they must be at losing an undeveloped area in front of them giving them views and light. But they are labouring under the very false impression that they have some 'right' over other landowners' property.
They have very obviously built on land that was in the past a green area - people who know Attard and this area know this. Now they cannot bar others from doing precisely what they themselves did in the past.
So Mr. Borg if you are enjoying the quality of life with no open space and just claustrophobia deal with it! But we will fight till justice is done!
No one is attempting to break property rights. Ownership of property does not automatically convey development rights. Only MEPA can decide on the planning designation of land and as in all cases, both the owners and the public have to abide by that. I am sure that the residents would be only too happy to re-purchase the land for Lm1,000.
Attard was 'green area' once...
I am sure the people of Attard will loan the funds to the council who will then pay back in time the loan from the Government subvension provided to the Attard Council.
It will be an investment in the future of our village.
MEPA is saying that prior the 2002 local plan the piece of land at Ta' Fgieni was designated as a car park...what a difference from apartments, shop and semi-basement garages being proposed!
The motto of Attard is "florigena rosis halo" meaning "I perfume the air with my blossoms"...yeah right..I guess this should be updated to "I fill the air with dust and diesel"