Updated September 22 8.40am
Front Ħarsien ODZ said today that it 'expects' the Planning Tribunal to uphold earlier decisions to refuse permits for development in and around Wied Għomor (near San Ġwann)
The NGO was referring to three appeals during to be heard in the coming days.
The first appeal, due to be heard tomorrow, involves the extension of a private villa and addition of a swimming pool. The NGO said the application should be refused again, given that the existing structure is illegal.
Regarding the second case, the construction of a two-floor ‘extension,’ swimming pool, cesspit and reservoir adjacent to a farmhouse, to be heard on October 6, the Front said it had noted a worrying increase in the reliance on affidavits (sworn statements) to determine past use of property.
"Determining whether a property was once used as a residence should depend upon clear and transparent processes, and not upon any individual’s memory and/or integrity," the front said.
The third appeal, due to be heard on November 22, regards the construction of a 133-room retirement home and ancillary facilities in a disused quarry.
"The Front objects to developer Laurence Galea’s recent statement in the press that residents must choose between his retirement home or further quarrying activities. Permits for such activities must be granted through an objective and transparent process via the relevant authorities and developers must not be allowed to think that Maltese citizens will be held to ransom by their threats," the NGO said.
"All three application should be refused on the grounds that they are located Outside Development Zone, on agricultural land with significant natural vegetation, and in a system of valleys which are protected as Areas of Ecological Importance and Sites of Scientific Importance."
Swieqi council opposes plans
In a statement issued on Thursday morning, Swieqi local council added its voice to that of Front Ħarsien ODZ, saying it expected the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal to uphold the original decision to refuse permits for the application.
The local council noted that the site is entirely Outside Development Zone, that the proposal ran counter to local plan policies for the area, and that "the entire existing building is illegal."