The Ombudsman yesterday issued a damning report on the controversial permit issued by the planning authority for the building of more than 700 apartments on the Mistra Ridge at Xemxija.
The investigation by architect David Pace – environment and planning officer at the Ombudsman’s office – concludes Mepa was wrong to issue an outline permit in 2008 and continued to make the situation worse when it chose to green-light the full development of the site a few weeks ago.
The report also harshly criticises current Mepa chairman Vince Cassar for breaking procedural rules when the board discussed the permit.
In the wake of the report, Alternattiva Demokratika called for the Mepa board to resign, paving the way for a new board “which would be expected to withdraw the permits issued”.
NGO Din l-Art Helwa called on the Prime Minster to consider the conclusions seriously.
Sources yesterday told Times of Malta the NGO is now considering all legal avenues, including the possibility of filing an appeal.
Although the government has justified the controversial decision by pointing to the outline permit issued under the previous administration, the Ombudsman dismissed this argument, saying Mepa had every right to revoke it.
“While the authority is duty-bound to respect commitments, this does not signify that the board’s hands are tied,” the Ombudsman argued.
Stating that the recent permit was based on a re-modelled proposal with altered overall heights, Mr Pace said there was a marked departure from the approved proposal (outline permit) and this justified a revocation.
“There is no commitment which binds the authority to accept and approve applications for development which leave major adverse impacts unresolved. The authority has every right to revoke a permit if it is found that it was issued in breach or in disregard to policy.”
The damning report was provoked by a complaint by Din l-Art Helwa claiming “lack of proper application of policies”.
While the authority is duty-bound to respect commitments, this does not signify that the board’s hands are tied
Last month, before the start of the Mepa session to determine the permit, Din l-Art Helwa and other NGOs had asked the chairman to postpone the decision in view of their complaint to the Ombudsman. However, Mr Cassar turned down the request.
Referring to this incident, the Ombudsman chastises Mr Cassar and clearly states that he was wrong and “procedurally incorrect.”
“The fait accompli presented to the public on the matter of the request for revocation is therefore null and void.
“The procedure adopted strongly suggests that the authority was under immense pressure due to the commitments made through the outline permit.”
On the merits of the latest permit, the Ombudsman agrees with the NGOs on the many adverse impacts the project will have on the environment.
Recognising that the last approved proposal was downscaled, the report states that the resulting design, in terms of relation to the surrounding environment, “is however still disproportionate”.
“The detrimental effects on the natural environment, the insensitive urban design treatment of the transition point between the development zone and the open countryside is still evident.”
Referring to Transport Malta’s withdrawal of objections to the project, the Ombudsman calls the decision “superficial” as the authority did not give supporting reasons why the down-scaling of the project now made it acceptable.
With regard to the outline permit, issued in 2008, Mr Pace states that notwithstanding major flaws, “the Major Projects Unit (within Mepa) actively supported this proposal regardless of the detrimental effects it was bound to have on its environs”.
The Mepa board was complacent and overlooked major drawbacks in the proposal. It did not give due consideration “to the justified concerns raised by the objectors of the deleterious effect it would cause”.
Speaking to Times of Malta following the publication of the report, Din l-Art Helwa president Simone Mizzi said that although the recommendations are not enforceable, the Prime Minister – as the minister responsible for Mepa – should give them very serious consideration.
“Otherwise what’s the point in having an Ombudsman?”