• email article
  • print article
  • small text sizemedium text sizelarge text size
  • comment on this article

Board approves most of architect's applications despite refusal advice

Most of the planning applications submitted by an architect member of a Development Control Commission, which had been recommended for refusal by Mepa's technical experts, were later approved, a Gozo court heard.

The court was presented with statistics to show the frequency with which Development Control Commissions overturned recommendations by Mepa's case officers and decided in favour of applications presented by architect Joe Bondin, who for some years simultaneously sat on one of the DCC boards and the Heritage Advisory Committee, while practising his profession.

The figures were produced by Astrid Vella, coordinator of the environment lobby Flimkien Għal Ambjent Aħjar (FAA), during a hearing on Friday in a case instituted against the Malta Environment and Planning Authority by residents of Żebbuġ, Gozo. They are accusing Mepa of irregularities when it issued a permit for the development of a farmhouse outside a development zone in Żebbuġ. The architect who submitted the application was Mr Bondin.

Due to lack of resources, the FAA focused its analysis on specific areas and targeted a number of practising architects who also sit on boards. She has been using the data to make the case with the government against allowing practising architects to sit on Mepa boards.

In Mr Bondin's case, the FAA developed some statistics for Mosta -his main area of professional activity.

In 2003, out of 25 planning applications he submitted for the Mosta area, 10 were recommended for refusal but the DCC boards overruled seven of these recommendations, Mrs Vella pointed out. Similarly, in 2004, out of 17 applications, 12 were recommended for refusal and nine were overruled. In the final year analysed, 2005, out of 24 applications, seven were recommended for refusal but all of the applications except one were approved.

Mrs Vella and Mr Bondin crossed paths for the first time when the former launched her campaign against the demolition of a baroque house in Għar il-Lembi Street, Sliema. Since then, she said, she has come across a number of irregularities or "unethical behaviour" surrounding projects in which Mr Bondin was the architect.

In this connection she mentioned the case involving 94-year-old Yolanda Angileri who feared her house could collapse after a huge apartment block above her was pulled down for redevelopment while she was still living there last October.

The authority's lawyer, Ian Stafrace, who is defending Mepa in the Żebbuġ case, argued that sometimes architects alter their designs to address the issues raised by case officers after the latter have made an unfavourable recommendation.

However, Mrs Vella insisted that a detailed look at the applications she had cited showed that the boards often made flimsy justifications for approval. In essence, she claimed, besides an obvious conflict of interest, architects who are allowed to practise and even present their applications before the very boards they sit on have privileged access to information which is not available to other architects or the public. They also have the ability to network with the people involved in the decision-making process.

"And networks at Mepa are alive and kicking," she said. In this case, the 40-odd residents of an apartment complex, whose view will be partly obstructed by the proposed project, are pressing precisely this point - which is why Mrs Vella was called to testify.

Dr Stafrace asked whether the FAA had conducted a similar analysis of Mr Bondin's activity after 2005 when he left the DCC. Mrs Vella replied that his planning applications had fallen dramatically after he was no longer a board member.

One of the residents, Ronald Saliba, testified on behalf of the others that he had carried out a similar analysis of applications which, however, does not involve one particular architect.

He studied planning applications in Għarb, Victoria, San Lawrenz and Żebbuġ. Besides discovering that about 38 per cent of the applications made were for outside development zones, Mr Saliba said that between 2004 and last year, only three applications were recommended for approval but were overruled by the DCC.

In contrast, 209 applications were recommended for refusal during the same period but were overruled.

  • Google Bookmarks Del.icio.us Facebook Blogger YahooMyWeb Digg Reddit Stumbleupon
  • email article
  • print article
  • small text sizemedium text sizelarge text size
  • comment on this article

Comments

m farrugia (on 1/7/08)
MEPA 's officers normally do a great job. In giving their advice about a permit, they follow the policies set out by MEPA and act accordingly. The problem is when the decision reaches the DCC boards. The boards, the members of which are mainly practising architects, often overturn the advise given by MEPA officers.
Architect Robert Musemeci last week in his article in The Times called for more efficiency in the granting of MEPA permits, claiming that this was one of the PN's electoral promises. As far as I know, the electoral promise was to reform MEPA. The electorate understood that the MEPA reform would eliminate these abuses by DCC boards, such as the demolishing of houses in village cores to be replaced by characterless awful looking apartments, against the MEPA's officers advice. The electorate's main concern was surely not the delay in granting permits. If Architect Musemeci is speaking in the name of architects, there is no great hope for some character in our villages, bur we seem to be in for more awful eyesores.
Simon Camilleri (on 1/7/08)
That MEPA had become a law unto itself is a fact acknowledged even by the PN. This is yet more evidence of irregular practice, with the Boards re-interpreting regulations and seeking loopholes to aid developers. Whether this was done for financial gain or not I can not say. However Dr Gonzi had given us to understand that all this would change if the PN were to be re-elected. The first real test of Dr Gonzi's sincerity and Mr. Walker's integrity is next Thursday, where the MEPA Board will sit to decide whether to award the developer 20 floors or stick to the Development Brief and the Law and allow sixteen floors. The signs are not favourable.
Joseph Buhagiar (on 1/7/08)

Dr. Gonzi and Dr. Muscat - One person - just one person managed to identify so many elements of non conformance that to some degree or other border and probably exceed what one would consider correct.

So am I write in saying that the auditor at MEPA is taking a siesta most of the time?
Or perhaps he does his duty but no one listens?
And is it possible that no minister is aware of what is going on?
Or is it perhaps that we have some key people that stand to gain?

No wonder the wistle blower act was left on the shelf.

We would probably have a tangentopoli if this were to be enacted.

A Daley (on 30/6/08)
One wonders why PN did not give an adjective to MEPA !

VIRGIN MEPA

One remembers the then Minister in charge as saying, "Thank God that today we have MEPA and the Government has nothing to do with the issue of permits. The people are professionals and competent in their work" Ha ha haj!

Il-huta min rasa tinten!
g portelli (on 30/6/08)
But then we do have a light at the end of the tunnel...
"Mr Pullicino tried to reply to the children in language they could understand, although it was difficult sometimes, such as when he asked whether people were prepared to have part of their taxes spent on the purchase of buildings which would then be removed for environmental purposes. "
timesofmalta.com Schoolchildren call for greater environmental protection Thursday, 12th June 2008 - 15:32CET
So not all is lost...in the future ...if we agree ...with our tax money, we can buy back our Malta and restore it to its former glory!


Charles Camilleri (on 30/6/08)
Why these abuses have been allowed to go on for so long is beyond one's apprehension. Those responsible should be made to pay for their actions and any illegal building should be brought down. Now that Mepa is being restructured we hope that no loopholes or excuses will allowed any longer.
David Refalo (on 30/6/08)
This is a clear message to all of us that the problems in MEPA are from high up. The problems lie with the top brass at MEPA. It is the DCC, MEPA Board and top management that are the problem at MEPA and not the directorate staff (case officers) who just do as they are told. It is obvious that the new Code of Ethics should be targeted at the high up people and those who run MEPA from the sidelines such as the OPM and former Environment Minister. It seems to me, as an outsider who has had experience with the helpful and honest staff at MEPA, that the worker (with least political and planning power) is being made a scapegoat and victim of those higher up. The Prime Minister should show his courage and tackle the high up MEPA whilst showing his appreciation and trust to those who keep MEPA functioning (the staff) despite the irregularities carried out at board level
Emanuel Bajada (on 30/6/08)
I refer to this particular case I was involved in as an objector, as clearly it went against policies for the area. I only quote part of - DPA Report recomending Grant for case number PA05634/06.
......page 2 under heading 5.Consultations................ I quote"Civil Protection Department - No Objection. No Consultation was carried out in this application since all neccessary consultations were carried out in the outline application. The development as proposed in the outline permit is once again being reproduced in this application with the addition of more parking facilities and better landscaping."
At the hearing I asked the case officer who wrote the report to show the outline permit.His reply was that there is no outline permit and it never existed.The board carries on and approves the permit. Who do you think is the architect involved....Who do you think the board was...Check it out on the Mepa website....by the way there was change of architects for the project after the approval..
Helen Caruana Galizia (on 30/6/08)
"Adrian Cardona says it all (about our shame at the willful destruction of our own beautiful land) but….. not quite all. Apart from the monstrosities we have allowed, and are still allowing, to be created, the issue is one of unethical action on the part of a member of Malta's architectural profession; it is about the use of public office for private gain. Such gross actions took place in other parts of Europe in the 60s but, since then, governments have taken action to curb the speculators and many apartment blocks and high rise buildings have been demolished. Why do we never learn? It makes one cringe to visit places like Prague, Dubrovnik and St. Petersburg, destinations that only recently opened to commercial development, yet they already have the maturity that we lack , proud of the fact that they have undergone a boom in tourism and business investment while keeping their historic skyline intact.
Our newly elected government must act swiftly - it could begin by putting an end to the Cambridge project and to change the disastrous "high rise" model which has ruled for so long and will ruin so much of our supposedly protected landscapes.
joe Buttigieg (on 30/6/08)
At Ta' Pennellu Mellieha we are starting to reap the benefits from high rise buildings. Beautiful terraced buildings with marvellous views of Mellieha Bay are being dwarved by blocks of flats five-six storeys high, plus penthouse, plus washroom!! They have MEPA's blessing I presume.
mario mifsud (on 30/6/08)
And what was the minister responsible for all this doing at that time? Should he be deemed politacally responsible ? What measures were taken (if any) ? Did someone resign at some stage ? Is any legal action to be taken ? We all know the answers to these all to well
Adrian Cardona (on 30/6/08)
Just shows what a joke (a really misplaced word in this case) MEPA is. A total lack of respect for the quality of life of neighbouring residents, disguised under the vague umbrella of sustainable development. How can permits for blocks of apartments be allowed in village centres? How can old townhouses forming part of a typical streetscape be torn down? Why are flats being allowed to tower over picturesque scenery? Where on earth does this happen in civilized Europe? Anyone who travels a bit can see how whole areas are preserved in historical places...here nothing seems sacred..it's just money money money and to hell with the people who have to live with the rest. I am really ashamed when I show visitors around and they come across the shambles of Xemxija, the disaster of the Sliema promenade, the white disease spreading across all of Gozo's typical hillsides and the horrendous situation in most of the old village cores.
"architect Joe Bondin, who for some years simultaneously sat on one of the DCC boards and the Heritage Advisory Committee, while practising his profession"....says it all doesn't it....
Joseph Aquilina (on 30/6/08)
The judge should ordered the demolition of any of these building which have already started and stop those that are going to start!! Additionally, just giving fines to these people is useless; they have plenty of money to pay with. A prison sentence would be more justified!!! The authorities should understand that the people have seen lack of justice in this area for a very long time now! It is time that some amendments are done!!

Poll

Do you agree with the rebuilding of the Opera House site to house Parliament and a cultural centre?

  • yes
  • no
  • don't know
  • don't care


View results

Fun Stuff


Play Sudoku