Ombudsman: Planning Authority 'encouraged' catering outlets to 'do as they please'

The Office of the Ombudsman has stated that the Planning Authority’s lack of action has encouraged offenders to “do as they please” with regards to tables and chairs in front of the Mellieħa sanctuary. 

In a press release on Tuesday, the Ombudsman detailed their investigation on irregularities by two establishments owned by db Group, as well as a restaurant named Espiral and a Starbucks franchise.

“The Planning Authority did not reply to a request by the Commissioner whether it considers the outside catering area as irregular and the services on the roof to run against the condition of the permit that states that all services shall not extend beyond the height of the approved parapet wall.”

MaltaToday understands that Espiral had planned to file a separate PA application in order to build a structure for its outdoor tables and chairs. Despite this, the present structure was subject to a sanctioning application, which is recommended for approval and will be decided on Friday.

After taking note of a recent development application seeking approval for an outdoor catering area and a minor amendment application intended to regularise roof services, the Commissioner pointed out that the proposed application does not involve formal sanctioning. 

Additionally, the Commissioner underscored that any attempt to rectify the roof services through a minor amendment application, “does not in any way overrule the relative permit conditions.”

After the PA failed to submit an official reply, the Commissioner recommended issuing a stop and enforcement notice. This action was prompted by the absence of a sanctioning application for the regularisation of existing illegal developments, namely an outdoor catering area and roof services that exceed the height of the approved parapet wall.

“Although the applicant changed the pending application to sanctioning on the same day that the Commissioner issued the recommendations, the Commissioner considers the way the Planning Authority acted in this case as an encouragement for contravenors to do as they please since the Planning Authority will not only take no action but it will also help them in avoiding such action.” 

The case was then referred to the Prime Minister and Parliament.