The planning authority’s case officer considering the application to sanction infringements on Patrick Dalli’s controversial farmhouse is recommending the board refuse the permit despite new plans having been submitted.
The case will be heard on Tuesday after it was postponed at least twice following the submission of new plans by Mr Dalli’s architect.
Despite the case officer’s list of reasons justifying the refusal of a permit, the board still requested a document listing the conditions for granting a permit.
The request for the ‘conditions of grant’ document is an indication the planning authority board is inclined to approve the permit and overturn the case officer’s recommendation, an architect told The Sunday Times of Malta.
The Żejtun farmhouse located in an Outside Development Zone came into the spotlight after this newspaper reported workers on site despite an enforcement notice served on Mr Dalli for breaching permit conditions.
Both Mr Dalli and his wife, Civil Liberties Minister Helena Dalli, have said they were not aware workmen were on site. Their home lies a few metres away.
Updated documents related to the case were not uploaded on Mepa’s website until pressure was applied by this newspaper for the full publication of reports before Tuesday’s hearing.
In the updated report by the planning authority, the case officer argues the scale and massing of the building proposed for sanctioning are considered to go beyond the allowable interventions.
The area needs to be considered in relation to the size and proportions of the original site.
The pool size also exceeds the maximum permissible.
“The proposal cannot therefore be positively considered,” the case officer stated. All but one of the reasons listed by the case officer for the board to refuse the permit are inexplicably struck out.
Moreover, an additional document requested by the board lists the conditions on which full development permission, valid for five years, will be granted.
The case has prompted action by the Ombudsman’s office. Planning Commissioner David Pace has concluded the case raises issues that are in the public interest and worthy of investigation.
The Opposition has argued that the planning authority should have dismissed the hearing because of recent infringements, according to the Environment and Planning Act.
Yet Mepa countered that there had been no further “development” on site.
The bone of contention is therefore what is considered to be an infringement once an enforcement notice has been served, as is the case with Mr Dalli.
This is one of the points that the Ombudsman’s office is investigating. Mr Dalli has said the work on site was conducted by the property’s buyer.
The promise of sale agreement Mr Dalli repeatedly promised to publish is still not public despite his saying last November he had given it to his lawyer “to hand over to… Times [of Malta]”.
The document presented in Parliament by his wife was not the actual promise of sale agreement, but an extension of the agreement lacking crucial details, according to a notary.
Mr Dalli is the majority shareholder in Pada Bulders Limited, which owns the house.
His wife listed the company in her ministerial declaration of assets but did not specify what properties the company held.