Illegal canopy outside scheduled villa removed
The Mepa enforcement team this morning removed a large canopy structure which was illegally assembled last month on one of the seafront terraces at Villa Cassar Torreggiani in St Julian’s.
The villa, which is a Grade 2 scheduled property, is being used as a restaurant.
Mepa said that it was impeded last month from carrying out its direct action operation after the site owner’s lawyer requested a prohibitory injunction from the courts. This week the courts decided in Mepa’s favour and gave the green light for the direct action to be carried out.
In March this year the site was served with an enforcement notice to stop the assembly of signage, glass wind breakers and floor decking without planning permission. This enforcement notice is being appealed, Mepa said.
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...
'No need for early election if PM's...
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...
34 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
DGalea
Nov 8th 2010, 12:20
Well done MEPA.
Philip Galea
Nov 8th 2010, 10:13
Its pathetic to use your time on enforcing such petty things when an illegal building in Xwieki, Gharghur has been standing for the past 18 years, with the application to sanction said building being refused 5 times (case number PA/07071/03). Can someone explain this?!
Phil Press
Nov 7th 2010, 11:14
Qawra. Boat houses ?. What about illegal structures there.
C Galea
Nov 7th 2010, 12:08
The way I see it is not the canopy to be the problem. Probably it would have been allowed if it was applied for in normal circumstances. The issue is in principle. One should never do illegal development on a site when there is active enforcement action. This is the message. As seen from this case, there is already an enforcement notice issued last March against which developers have lodged an appeal and which is still pending. I think it would have been illegal for MEPA not to intervene the way it did. More so when the Courts have decided in favor of MEPA.
patrick zammit
Nov 7th 2010, 16:30
So why are enforcement notices not issued against illegal boat house, especially those built on public land?
C. FArrugia
Nov 7th 2010, 10:27
Why dosn't MEPA come to Sliema on the Gzira/Ferries/Tigne sea front to see the illegally constructed canopies on public ground. At least the one mentioned in this article was on private ground. As usual with this government and its institutions, two weights and two measures.
Vicki Soler
Nov 7th 2010, 08:20
I personally live near Balluta Bay and quite liked the canopy which looked more chic than the umbrellas they have replaced it with. Hopefully the canopy will be re erected with of course permission from MEPA.
Gabriel A Pellegrini
Nov 6th 2010, 18:10
What a joke!!!...hard work for the Chairman...2 Directors and 2 Managers earning between them over 300,000euros ++++
Gabriel A. Pellegrini
Alfred Farrugia
Nov 6th 2010, 17:48
So a huge canopy over our pre-historic temples is acceptable for MEPA, but a small canopy over a restaurant is not! Are there any clear regulations on what is acceptable and what is not?
Michael Catania
Nov 6th 2010, 17:45
May I remind some of the bloggers who criticized this MEPA action, that the law must be obeyed like anywhere in a civilized world. Unfortunately in Malta we have this mentality that anything goes. Don't blame the Government as being weak. Certain laws do not apply to a section of the population ie conservative benefactors. Have we forgotten the Bahrija incident. Mind you we have seen in the past where laws are changed to accommodate such benefactors.
Charles Micallef
Nov 6th 2010, 17:03
@ Peter Borg Oliver...
I thought we are all European now and freedom of
speech is one of oue fundenmental rights that is
unless you did not agree with Malta joining the EU
c. camilleri
Nov 6th 2010, 17:00
One has to come to Paola and Fgura to see the many illegal canopies used for storage infront of many outlets. The irony is that residents of the same streets are asked to comply with the environment when refurbishing their frontage.
Joseph Mallia
Nov 6th 2010, 16:34
Halliena Sur Magro. Titkellem hekk ghax il-post huwa ta' certu industrialist. Min jaf li kieku kien ta' xi-hadd iehor tirragunax bl-istess mod.
k vella
Nov 6th 2010, 15:55
If we start listing all these trivial matters we really do not have anything to report on our newspapers. This is no news when witnessing much more illegal structures in broad day light, namely: boat houses, restaurant tables, bore holes, boundary walls height in our countryside, etc... More enforcement is defintely needed on a regular basis.
A. Borg
Nov 6th 2010, 15:40
All men are equal but some are more equal than others! Ejjew go Santa Lucija u hawn bizibilju minnhom minghajr permess.
joseph borg
Nov 6th 2010, 14:30
What a joke!!!!
This is for sure the worst goverment department on the island.
To get a building permit it will take you 2 years and some people get more floors than others.
In central London you get a permit to build a hotel in 6 weeks max...u dawn biex jidru sbieh qalaw it tinda.
s.baldacchino
Nov 8th 2010, 06:45
You are talking rubbish Mr Borg, you dont get permssion in 6 weeks in london..who gave you that information??
pierre galea
Nov 6th 2010, 13:56
Mr MAGRO. wHAT A WAY TO DO THINGS.! Confiscation. If the canopy was illegal, why not compromise and let them use it for winter at least. At present every one in business, is trying his best to survive and attract more work in order to pay his employees wages. If everyone took your attitude unemployment in malta would be sky high. I admire people that keep on investing. With people around us with your attitude I would give up instead of invest. Hatred in Malta towards enterprising people is becoming too much.
Joseph N Attard
Nov 6th 2010, 14:20
Mr Galea, with respect, it is exactly your attitude that has been the ruination of Malta. Close your eyes to everything, because it is for Malta's good! There is no hatred involved here. There is the simple fact that everybody should obey and respect the law, fullstop. If a law or regulation is deemed illegal, or harsh, or whatever, fight it by democratic means. But taking the law into one's own hands is simply not on. Naturally, I agree with all those who insist that the law must be applied to all. I also agree that much more serious infringments have been allowed to pass, nay, have been even sanctioned by our politicians in search of votes. The whole of the Armier stolen land, for example.
C Cassar
Nov 6th 2010, 14:42
Often there are factors much more important than making money, things like the environment and existing regulations. Of course both those subjects are usually ignored by the Maltese because they only apply to others.
Malta needs far more aggressive enforcement, confiscation, fines and ultimately jail terms for those that are most persistent. If the Maltese actually started acting in the interest of everyone instead of themselves for a change, things might just start to improve.
S.Farrugia
Nov 6th 2010, 13:55
Well done Mepa. Commercial entities seem to think that they can get away with anything under the excuse that otherwise their business will suffer. They don't bother that they make the profits while everybody else suffers.
Jimmy Magro
Nov 6th 2010, 13:15
Has the villa been confiscated by MEPA?
Unless the Government changes the law in this way it is us the taxpayers that continue to suffer. Who will pay for the removal of the illegal structure and legal costs and so on? Is it us the taxpayers? This is shameful.
All property with an illegal development should be confiscated and turned into social housing so that strong families can have decent accomodation.
This is what is called social justice with empowerment in order to build strong sustainable communities.
MBorg
Nov 6th 2010, 13:45
The villa was not confiscated by MEPA . What gave you that idea? Only the outside canopy was removed. The owners spent money on this property and it is all legal.
J. J. Borg
Nov 6th 2010, 14:36
Jimmy Magro: confiscation of private property was done under Labour governments in the 1970s. Feeling nostalgic for the good old days?
Mark-Anthony Portelli
Nov 6th 2010, 15:33
Its a Gonzi Pn Government not a Mintoff Government
J. Mifsud
Nov 6th 2010, 16:49
Memories of Labour!
Lucia Davies
Nov 7th 2010, 09:28
OMG what thoughts, do they want to go back to the 70s, when we were scared stiff to go and work abroad incase our property was confiscated to be rented to same bazuzli for cheap rent. Owing property does not mean we are rich, some of us have worked hard for it , and by the way do not let my name think I am a foreigner I am full blooded Maltese
patrick zammit
Nov 6th 2010, 13:06
If only MEPA acts that way with everybody...
C Cassar
Nov 6th 2010, 12:29
Great work from Mepa. This was a real eysore. I hope that now legal proceedings can now take place against the owners and a very large fine imposed for their obstruction to what is the law.
More MEPA enforcement like this is required, many, many of us appreciate it.
Gerry Cowie
Nov 6th 2010, 12:00
How pathetic! MEPA should be preventing ridiculously tall buildings from going up and uglifying Malta, not wasting time and money picking on a business trying to make its way in this recession and providing such excellent facilities for locals and the tourists upon whom Malta so heavily depends!
MEPA really has its priorities wrong here! Why such a heavy-handed approach!
And given that the enforcement notice has been appealed, why not at least wait for the appeal process to give its verdict?
Joseph Calleja
Nov 6th 2010, 14:08
Mr Cowie, this time I have to side with you 100%. Like I said many times before, Mepa is very selective about enforcing rules. Still waiting for the change.of fairness being enforced by Mepa.
Peter Borg Olivier
Nov 6th 2010, 16:05
I hope you're not an Englishman interfering with with Malta's Government decisions !
Mario Aquilina
Nov 6th 2010, 22:42
@Peter Borg Oliver:
What is wrong with an Englishman airing his views, when our government spends out, our taxpayers money on foreign consultants, everytime that our government decides to hold a piss up in a brewery.
In my area of Qawra, we need someone to show us how to do or have decent pavements, and he/she does not even have to be another Einstein or into rocket science. Is it possible to find a Maltese, with a brain, a bit bigger than that of an ant, to show us the way forward. It is safer to walk on the road, around here, believe me.
Charles Micallef
Nov 6th 2010, 11:52
Could Mepa not sanction a more in-keeping canopy as a temporary structure, the type that
one can see all over the Islands.
One would have thought that it will compliment the property and will give the restaurant the additional space that ir requires to operate over the winter months!