A controversial petrol station in Magħtab is back under consideration after having been rejected by the Planning Authority last year, following a ruling by an appeals tribunal.

In a blow to residents and environmental groups who had opposed the project, the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal (EPRT) concluded that the PA had not given sufficient reason for overturning the recommendation to approve the application in line with the Fuel Stations Policy.

In refusing the application, the PA had cited the SPED policy (Strategic Plan for Environment and Development) “which aims to protect and enhance the positive qualities of the landscape and the traditional components of the rural landscape”.

But the appeals tribunal ruled that the PA had not explained why the SPED should take precedence over the 2015 fuel stations policy, which allows petrol stations to be relocated to rural areas outside development zones.

The PA board has now been ordered to reconsider the application, submitted by Paul Abela of Abel Energy, which aims to demolish two derelict farmhouses and build a fuel station with an electric car charging station, car wash, shop, car mechanic workshop, stores and a parking lot that would take 17 cars.

The proposed site is a triangular-shaped piece of land situated in Triq is-Salina and Trejqet l-Arznu, Naxxar, near the T’Alla u Ommu hill.

The site covers an area of more than 3,500 square metres.

Residents had long complained that the development would bring with it a host of environmental issues including increased traffic, rural deterioration and noise pollution.

Objections were also raised by the Naxxar local council and Mepa’s own Environment Protection Directorate, on the basis that the proposed development was “located in a predominantly open and undeveloped rural area and involves excessive land take-up”.

The application was rejected by the PA board in March 2016.

The government and Opposition representatives were among four board members to vote against the proposal, while three members, including deputy chairperson Elizabeth Ellul, voted in favour.

The rest of the board abstained.

In a rare move, the public had not been allowed to follow the board’s discussions, after an obscure procedure was invoked allowing deliberations to be held behind closed doors, although the final vote was held in public.

This procedure was queried by the applicant in his appeal over the ruling, but was confirmed to be regular by the appeals tribunal.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.