The myth that building ever upward will somehow preserve the countryside doesn’t quite cut it. Anyone who has eyes can see the continued erosion of Malta’s green spaces outside the development zone.
Unbridled development includes a rash of permits for ‘stables’ which morph into country homes. Then there are the illegal Outside Development Zone (ODZ) restaurants with aviaries. The Planning Authority (PA) has heard from the Wild Birds Regulation Unit, which finds no objection.
Will objections to this permit application from the environment authority be ignored once again?
The idea of booting the environment out of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (Mepa) enjoyed some popular support. Yet keeping the environment at arm’s length from the planning process has seen pie-in-the-sky developer ambitions coming home to roost.
Some prominent names have appeared on a petition against multiple high-rises in Malta, describing the proposals as “a severe attack of contagious madness”.
Among a rain of comments on the planned developments at Mrieħel and Qui-si-Sana, Alex Torpiano, dean of the Faculty for Built Environment at the University of Malta, said: “Planning is (supposed to be) about vision and managing change. At the moment, planning is about tweaking rules to permit a free-for-all.”
As for the dysfunctional high-rise vote, the Planning Authority showed its dastardly hand by refusing to either postpone the vote or appoint a proxy to represent the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA).It was a clear case of steam-rollering.
Dismembered at the shoulder by means of a demerger splitting Mepa into the PA and ERA, the latter’s arm is now seen to be flailing uselessly in the face of a building binge.
A former member of the now defunct Mepa’s natural heritage consultative committee recalls how all the officials of the former Environmental Protection Directorate were “truly passionate, highly trained and very knowledgeable about environmental matters”.
It was clear at the time that what was needed was a greater integration of environmental protection with planning policies – not a demerger that would exclude these officials from the planning process.
Such was the shock and anger with which the high-rise decision was met that emotions have run at flood level. Laying the entire blame for the coffin towers vote in the lap of ERA’s justifiably absent CEO Victor Axiak was an understandably bilious reaction from the very sore gut of a community.
Yet, as pointed out by Petra Caruana Dingli last Sunday, the seven individuals who voted in favour should be given their fair share of credit for destroying what is left of our skyline.
High-rises have a real impact on the character of small islands. Is it possible that the population really is split down the middle over whether we should embrace our small island-ness or emulate Dubai?
In its previous incarnation as a fully integrated part of the same authority that issued building permits, the ERA (formerly the environment directorate of Mepa) was unable to appeal planning decisions it did not agree with.
Recently the decoupled environment authority was criticised for being slow on the uptake of the only power granted to it by the demerger.
The idea of booting the environment out of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (Mepa) enjoyed some popular support. Yet keeping the environment at arm’s length from the planning process has seen pie-in-the-sky developer ambitions coming home to roost
The authority is currently delving into the question of what legal and financial quagmires await if it appeals the high-rise vote. An Environment Resources Authority without the resources to exercise its new-found power to appeal is effectively disabled.
Journalist and former activist James Debono has commented that the ERA risks becoming “a glorified NGO powerless to stop any development”.
The PA has systematically ignored the environment authority’s advice on a string of minor ODZ applications.
Over the summer, the ERA continued vetting of proposed developments in the countryside.
A humble room for goats near Żabbar that was transformed into a stable is now set to be restyled into a residence (PA 03507/16). The ERA has sent its comments to the PA on illegal commitments and excessive land uptake at the expense of the countryside at this site:
“This application confirms the ERA’s concerns that once initial permission is granted, further extensions and applications for sanctionings will inevitably follow, altering the site’s agricultural character to a more formal setting.”
On a permit application near Wied Incita (PA 03471/16) the ERA expressed its disapproval:
“These interventions cannot be accepted under the pretext of agriculture as is being suggested in the permit application. The ERA warns that approval by the Wild Birds Regulation Unit is not to be construed as carte blanche to develop the site and change its use to a recreational one. This does not justify the illegalities on site, which consist of land clearing, removal of soil, construction of walls and multiple structures.”
On the proposed sanctioning of an “agricultural tool room” near Żebbuġ (PA 03650/13), the ERA had this to say:
“Multiple interconnected rooms in the middle of a field are not akin to typical agricultural stores, which normally seek to maximise internal storage space. The ERA is significantly concerned about proposals for new storage buildings in the countryside, particularly those intended to serve relatively small or fragmented holdings, due to their significant impact on the quality of the rural context.
“Cumulatively, these buildings, along with similar structures in the area, contribute to a significant uptake of rural land.
“The result is formalisation and proliferation of built development in primarily unspoilt rural areas as well as an adverse impact on the rural character and overall natural state of the area.”
More comments sent by the ERA to the PA are related to an application for sanctioning of a farmhouse with protruding structures built over a watercourse near Chadwick Lakes (PA 03250/16): “Such area should be undeveloped and the structures removed, not rewarded through retroactive sanctioning of the already built structure.”
These are just a thin sample of representations by the environment authority regarding the constant barrage of ODZ planning outrages. Despite assurances from the top that the demerger would “strengthen the environment”, the ERA’s comments appear to have little or no influence on planning decisions.
The demerger of the Planning Authority has turned out to be a slap in the face for the environment. As one dissenting television programme after another is shut down, greed gobbles away at the fabric of our islands.