Recent excavations to pave the way for a development in Balzan unearthed two historical water cisterns that will now be protected, yet the planned block of apartments will go ahead, despite the residents’ protests.
One of the cisterns was discovered in a damaged state since part of the original roof cover of the vaulted cistern had collapsed as a result of tree root infiltration.
The cisterns are still being surveyed but the developer will have to incorporate them in the new development and make “good practical use of them”, according to the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage, which is monitoring the site.
The architects have confirmed they will follow the direction given by cultural heritage authorities. Yet this offers little respite to residents who have objected to the development for some 11 years and hoped the discovery of the cisterns would stall the building.
Residents have objected to the development for some 11 years
The residents have argued that the site in question is a villa area where no apartment blocks should have been approved. Yet the permit was issued at appeals stage, despite a report by the Ombudsman that confirmed residents’ concerns that the development would go ahead because of a planning authority mishap.
The area in question was designated for villas with a height limitation of two storeys, but the water colours on the temporary provision scheme charts faded and planning authority officials misinterpreted the area as being brown (terraced houses) rather than grey (villas).
When Mepa officials then visited the site, they decided on the designation of a terraced house area based on the appearance of a corner fully detached villa, which they decided “had all the characteristics of a terraced house”. Mepa’s audit officer confirmed in 2006 the planning authority’s mistake in zoning the area for terraced houses. Balzan residents collected 433 signatures for a petition calling for the designation to revert back to a villa area.
The application first requested permission to build 22 apartments. In 2009, the Mepa board refused to approve the development of flats in this area because they were not compatible with existing villas.
Mepa did try to rezone the area back to villas, supported by an overwhelmingly positive response from the residents. Yet the court provisionally stopped the changes to the local plans at the developer’s request. Three years later, Mepa’s appeals tribunal approved a scaled-down application for some 13 apartments in the area.
The residents again appealed in court and even filed two judicial protests holding Mepa responsible for the devaluation of their property. The court ruled last March that neighbours had no right to object to the decision taken by Mepa’s appeals tribunal, since any permit is subject to third-party rights.
caroline.muscat@timesofmalta.com