Christian Peregin
Mepa rejects application for flats amidst Balzan villas
The planning authority has rejected a controversial application for the building of 15 apartments that would have encroached on a villa neighbourhood in Balzan.
Several families from the surrounding area had protested against this application, arguing there was an error in the local plan which converted a wedge of land reserved for villas into one for terraced houses and apartments.
They have been contesting this development since 2005 and last year 28 families filed a judicial protest asking the Malta Environment and Planning Authority to correct the mistake.
The application, rejected last week, was for the building of two blocks in St Francis Street, corner with St Gabriel Street.
Mepa's board decided the application should be turned down because of the major impact it would have had on the area. The decision came after the planning directorate recommended the permit for approval since the conditions it made to the applicant had been met.
"This is a victory for the residents, because this means Mepa can now re-zone the area back to one for just villas. If they had approved the permit, this would not have been possible," Kenneth Bartolo, one of the neighbours, told The Times after the decision was taken.
Explaining why the board refused the permit, Mepa chairman Austin Walker said the building's impact would have been unacceptable. He added that, like other local plans, this one would be reviewed and any gaps reassessed.
The Balzan local council had requested the re-zoning of the area by saying Mepa officials had misinterpreted the Temporary Provision Schemes charts, partly done in water colours, enabling terraced houses to be built in a villa area.
The council had said the residents would be paying dearly for this mistake since the proposed five-storey development would dwarf the existing two-storey villas and one-storey bungalows on either side, cutting off light, invading privacy and failing to integrate within the quiet area.
Just one Mepa board member voted in favour of the permit while an overwhelming seven voted against. The decision was met with loud applause from the neighbours who were present at the hearing.
The applicant's architect refused to comment.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
7 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Antoine Vella
Jun 30th 2009, 17:07
Galea L.
"Can we have the name of the architect please? Perhaps one of those concerned may oblige?"
Look it up for yourself on the MEPA website. Such information (and much else) is available freely.
J Martinelli
Jun 30th 2009, 14:16
The most basic MEPA reform should be that MEPA is seen to be able to make just decisions based on existing policies, without interference or pressure from the 'public' or 'interest groups'.
MEPA should be the authority with an initiative of its own and not needing prodding via public opinion.
The Balzan villas rejection by MEPA is the result of protests by area families, therefore, the application having gone as far as it did, makes MEPA look like it took the decision to stop the project only after the protests were heard. If the project did not comply, for whatever reason, the application should have been rejected before seeing the light of day and not ' wait and see' if the public even notices before construction starts and too late to stop!
An architect is hired to produce a set of plans of a building suitable for the site. He does not issue permits. Whoever the Balzan villas architect was is immaterial. The final decision to proceed or otherwise was not his.
DVella
Jun 30th 2009, 13:29
@ L Galea, Steve Rogers;
Information on the applicant and his Perit is available in the public domain on the MEPA Website, I believe the permit application number was PA 06858/04.
Galea. L
Jun 30th 2009, 12:43
Can we have the name of the architect please?
Perhaps one of those concerned may oblige?
Simon Camilleri
Jun 30th 2009, 10:46
Why is it that when MEPA takes a decision in favour of the environment it makes the news? The application should never even have got this far It took a court case and a lot of bad publicity to make them see sense. The reform may eventually occur, however correct application of the rules should have started immediately after the electoral promise. It seems MEPA has been allowed to carry on with business as usual until then.
Steve Rogers
Jun 30th 2009, 10:39
"The applicant's architect refused to comment."
Who was the architect?
Mary Muscat
Jun 30th 2009, 10:30
Very good. The MEPA protects the interest of an area with villas but not an area of nature which is ODZ in Bahrija. Could someone somehwere sometime somehow try to explain this (il)logic to me please.