What is corruption? What is malpractice? What is unethical behaviour by public officials? Members of the public attending a meeting at the Planning Authority were wondering what the behaviour of the Planning Commission members amounted to at last week’s Planning Authority hearing on the Lija case involving a block of 27 apartments.
As exposed by the Lija council, this application to build a five-storey block of flats in a predominantly two-floor area infringes a number of Planning Authority policies, foremost among them being the fact that the minimum facade width for a housing unit is stipulated as six metres, while the units in this block only measure two to four metres wide.
The development also includes basement residential apartments that have been disallowed by the 2015 Strategic Plan for Environment and Development (Sped).
In spite of all the valid points raised by the local council, Elizabeth Ellul, chairman of the Planning Commission, insisted that the Commission had to be guided by the legal height limitations of the 2006 local plans. Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar pointed out that the 2006 local plans are themselves illegal, since they ignored regulations on public consultation.
I highlighted the fact that the height limitations are no more than a guideline not to be exceeded, therefore the Planning Authority is not obliged to issue a permit to the full height permitted by the plan. In fact, Mepa had often refused to grant the full height of the local plan when this was deemed detrimental to the environment, streetscape or quality of life of the area.
When challenged, Ellul openly admitted that she would approve the permit on the grounds of the only document that favoured the developer, while ignoring a raft of policies in the local plans, the Sped and the Design Guidance 2015, which all stipulate that development is to reflect the character of its surroundings.
In adamantly defending the developer’s case from beginning to end, the Planning Commission abandoned any pretence of impartiality, suggesting that the permit was patently pre-decided and that the hearing was nothing but a sham.
Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar also raised the issue that one of the architects on the board is a practising architect – a conflict of interest that had been eradicated some years ago. Joe Bondin, the architect presenting the highly-criticised project, has been embroiled in a court case for malpractice, and was involved in the abusive Wied il-Għasel project which stank from beginning to end.
FAA asked whether the other Planning Commission members registered on the Planning Authority website are still on the PA’s payroll and why they are not being passed any cases.
This permit sets a precedent that will undermine not only Lija’s urban core but also that of other characteristic towns which are now being faced with the same degradation as other localities, ruining the atmosphere and undermining the quality of life, factors that the Planning Authority’s new polices had pledged to improve. This disgusting performance was about as low as the Planning Authority can go.