An outline development planning application report prepared by the Mepa directorate in 2005 (PA 5214/08) cited six reasons why a proposed residential development on agricultural land on the periphery of the Għargħur urban conservation area should be refused.

The updated full development planning report prepared by the same directorate (PA 0481/13) and published in 2015 recommends an approval for the exact same project.

In one of the most astounding comments made during one of the hearings related to this case, the Planning Directorate stated: “The Authority acknowledges the particular character of Għargħur but all decisions relating to new development have to be decided upon approved plans and policies and not on a general character of a village or town.”

Surely the general character of the village or town should take precedence over any technicalities and personal interpretations of policies. The recent Valletta courts of justice and Rudolph Street roof room carbuncle extensions are cases in point where this absurd attitude predominated.

The Mepa directorate is clearly missing the wood for the trees.

The application site is useful agricultural land that forms part of a series of fields which border the urban conservation area of Għargħur and extend down into the valley on to the Victoria Lines.

The alley that leads to the proposed site is particular not only because of its traditional winding, narrow lanes, which are bordered with old and restored village houses, but also because it integrates the village core with the surrounding rural areas.

The land should not constitute an infill site and should never be considered as being within the development zone. The urban conservation area of Għargħur is clearly defined by the actual built-up fabric and not by any digitised line on a map that was interpreted from a hand-drawn line on a 1:2500 scaled map.