It is a pity that the rumpus that followed the decision by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority on Villa Degiorgio totally eclipsed the importance of this landmark case.

...it is now up to citizens to start shouldering some responsibility for their own destiny- Astrid Vella

Many people mistakenly imagined that the issue was the heritage value of the house itself when, in fact, Mepa refused the application because issuing a permit to demolish this house in the Sliema urban conservation area would inevitably lead to the demolition of the other houses of genuine heritage value on this almost-untouched Sliema block. The board stated that “the proposed development will compromise the visual integrity of the existing streetscape, which is, until today, predominantly that of two floors”.

Allowing more demolitions would, furthermore, eat into the green lung formed by the joined back gardens of this UCA.

The permit was also refused because it would lead to an increase in traffic in this busy junction near a hotel and hospital, which is already gridlocked several times a day, increasing the air pollution in the area.

It is refreshing to see the Mepa board uphold the policies of the local plans as opposed to the height limitation maps. The excessive heights legalised by the maps have been the cause of much of the ruination of our towns and villages. They violate the Structure Plan, which stipulated that the height limitations were to reflect the predominant height of each block. Conversely, Sliema streets that did not rise higher than two to three floors were given height limitations that exceed six floors!

Although much damage has already been done, it is a welcome sign that the Mepa board is occasionally redressing the injustices of the local plans.

But what of cases where residents do not take up the battle to preserve their area? As Michael Falzon, chairman of the Developers’ Association said of UCAs: “Allowing redevelopment should not translate into an increase in density: the retention of existing heights and number of units – rather than retention of every nook and cranny – should be the objective.”

Narrow old lanes like Sir Arturo Mercieca and Sir Luigi Camilleri Street, which used to accommodate some 128 houses, can now be built and have up to 1,128 apartments according to the local plans, rendering them effectively unliveable. This is already happening in the Qui-Si-Sana and Tigné where 10-floor blocks are separated by four-metre alleys while Swieqi, Ta’ l-Ibraġġ, Attard and Marsascala are marked as three-floor areas but have effectively been built up to five floors with the addition of semi-basements and penthouses.

Is this degeneration of our living spaces inevitable? The obvious answer lies in the revision of the infamous 2006 local plans, which were often redrawn with certain projects in mind, as became apparent once these projects were applied for.

Launched by a pro-development Minister of Environment, the 2006 local plans were already a travesty back in 2006. Given the turn of events since then, including two world financial calamities and the financial instability in Europe, this persistence in adhering to policies designed to stimulate further construction projects rather than rehabilitation and public health, is not just illogical but downright damaging, especially in the light of the International Monetary Fund’s warning to Malta against over-reliance on the real estate sector.

However, the authorities have resisted all calls to revise these local plans, leaving our communities to face a health-sapping mess of construction sites, noise and dirt, with high blocks of flats being built next to low houses. Previously attractive streetscapes are now an eyesore, residents are deprived of privacy and light, air pollution rises while the value of their properties plummet.

Even developers have been seriously affected because the surplus of over 76,000 empty housing units has left them with inventories of empty properties that are now harder to sell as potential buyers hold back due to the questionable resale potential of properties in a glut.

Can anything be done? Can this deterioration of our quality of life be curbed? The answer is yes, if we are prepared to do something about the situation rather than just moaning about it.

What do the Ramla l-Ħamra, Tal-Papa Farm (Birżebbuġa), Wied Għajn Żejtuna (Mellieħa), the Arriva bus depot and Villa Degiorgio cases have in common? In all of these cases residents and environment groups, like Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar and the Ramblers Association, refused to accept to be bulldozed and challenged the applications persistently with clear and justified arguments.

It has to be said that it is to Mepa’s credit that it accepted these arguments. This would not have happened while Mepa was under previous management, totally beholden to the development lobby. This change of heart should encourage residents to stick up for their rights. Gone are the days when we used to be told ad nauseam: “It’s useless to object, we can’t change matters, they will still do what they like.”

Just as a private individual took the laudable initiative to set up billboards encouraging care of our heritage and environment, it is now up to citizens to start shouldering some responsibility for their own destiny.

FAA has fought and won citizens’ right of access to environmental information and, although there is still room for improvement, Mepa is now ensuring a much fairer playing field for all parties. The fact that this came about in the year of volunteering should encourage those who feel strongly about their health and quality of life to join existing organisations or to set up residents’ groups that now have a stronger chance of being heard.

The author is coordinator, Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar.