The Paceville masterplan's target is motivated by unbridled development aimed at maximising economic gain over and above the well-being of the public, the Church's Environment Commission said this morning.

"It seems some developers still prefer the plan to be flexible enough to allow them to build wherever they see an opportunity to do so," said the strongly-worded statement.

Issued in October, the plan has run into strong opposition from residents, some of whom will see their homes expropriated to make way for public spaces. Plans for land reclamation have also raised controversy.

The Church commission said the proposed plan seems to imply that the appalling conditions of the locality it is supposedly addressing are "standalones" and not the various related symptoms of a common cause: unsustainable development.

Therefore, one would have imagined that the Planning Authority and the government would be wise enough to identify the real cause of the problems, learn from past experiences and ultimately avoid repeating the same mistakes.

It said it cannot understand how such a concept can be reconciled with a methodology that has failed to acknowledge the importance of actively consulting the residents at the earlier stages of the drafting of the plan.

The commission said it felt that the bad reputation Paceville is gaining due to what goes on in a number of establishments, is counterproductive to the high-quality branding the masterplan seems to strive for.

Land reclamation should be ruled out altogether if it is proven that it would damage the rich marine biodiversity.

Tackling the issue of unbridled construction, the commission urged the authorities to carry out a national study on the demand and supply of Maltese properties and the fiscal and economic environment that has a bearing on them.

The government should carry out the necessary reforms in how it leases out or disposes of property belonging to the whole nation and to ensure transparency in the granting of environment-related tenders.

Moreover, one expects that the developments that will benefit from such a masterplan should contribute to a fund that will upgrade the infrastructure and pay for expropriations that will ultimately benefit such developments.

Read the Church's position paper in the PDF below.