[ANALYSIS] When ODZ is not ODZ

Many may have been shocked by the reply given by the Prime Minister on Monday to two staged parliamentary questions by Labour MPs Silvio Parnis and Tony Agius Decelis, which revealed the massive scale of ODZ development permitted by MEPA over the past 20 years.

Seen in the context of the development by Sadeen Group over land the size of 12 football grounds in Zonqor, Marsaskala, the revelation that 12,572 ODZ applications were approved in 20 years was clearly meant to convey the impression that the newly proposed development pales in significance to what has been already approved under previous administrations.

Nobody can deny that Malta has lost a large quantity of land to large-scale ODZ developments under PN governments.

These ODZ developments included Charles Polidano’s sprawling cement plant in Hal Farrug, the infamous Lidl supermarkets approved in Luqa and Safi, and a number of ODZ hotels like the Seabank hotel in Ghadira, the Riviera hotel in Cirkewwa and San Lawrenz in Gozo.

But the figures presented in parliament also include massive but beneficial infrastructural projects such as sewage treatment plants, which are necessarily located in the ODZ. Moreover it also includes roads, which gobble large amounts of land.

For example, on its own the new coast road has consumed 56,000 square metres of undeveloped land. They also include the Mater Dei hospital, which is also located in an ODZ area. Also included are the over 200,000 square metre landfill in Maghtab, which is also ODZ.

Other MEPA statistics give us a more clear idea of the scale of ODZ development in the country. For example, between 2000 and 2014 a total of 2,422 residential units were developed in ODZ sites. Of these 810 were approved between 2008 and 2014.  But even these new units include a large number of farmhouse conversions and developments, which took place within existing hamlets.

Permitted ODZ developments

The 12,576 figure is extremely misleading simply because even an application to repair a rubble wall, construct a cesspit to conform to the EU’s environmental regulations or to lay pipes for essential services would count as an ODZ application.

According to the Structure Plan, MEPA can only approve ODZ development which cannot be located within the development zone. While this rule has been abused to justify new tourism developments, it makes logical sense when it comes to agriculture, most of which is limited to the development zone.

Only last week MEPA received 18 applications for ODZ developments. These include applications to construct boundary walls, greenhouses, stores, stables, tool rooms and alterations to existing dwellings.

A similar number of applications mostly dealing with small-scale developments in agricultural areas are received every week.

ODZ development also includes conversions of existing dwellings like farmhouses not only in the countryside but also in small hamlets, which are still located ODZ.

These applications may be controversial. One such case was a farmhouse developed by former PN president Victor Scerri in Bahrija instead of a countryside ruin. 

A number of architects have specialised in the art of tweaking the rules to get residential development disguised as an agricultural one approved. In this way a number of permits for storage facilities or stables have disguised what were effectively new residential units.

Areas of containment

Moreover the ODZ also includes Areas of Containments and Areas for Open Storage and designated areas for small and medium industries. In Malta there are 33 ODZ sites designated as Areas of Containment. 

These areas include a variety of locations, ranging from parts of Bahar ic-Caghaq, the Hal Mann site in Lija, various parts of Mdina Road, Saint Leonard Street in Zabbar, Tal-Balal in San Gwann and part of Hal Farrug road.

Most of these areas are isolated pockets of developed land in a rural context. In these areas MEPA policies allow it to approve warehouses, petrol stations and even supermarkets.

The ODZ designation of these sites is meant to ensure their containment but does not exclude permits being issued on the footprint of existing development.

15 ODZ sites in Malta and Gozo are officially designated for the construction and operation of Micro-Enterprise Parks.

MEPA also regularly issued permits for the renewal of quarrying operations, which are also located in the ODZ.

MEPA may also approve a change of use of already existing developments in ODZ areas.

Only a few months ago MEPA approved the development of a new supermarket on an ODZ in Mosta. Yet in this case the development consists of the conversion of an already existing batching plant.

MEPA has also approved tourist development on sites like the Ghajn Tuffieha barracks, which were already built up. 

Even if the new university is located in a historical fort like Ricasoli the development will still be taking place in an ODZ area, albeit an already built one. 

It is clear that, in their criticism of the American University of Malta idea, when referring to ODZ development environmentalists are referring to undeveloped sites like Zonqor and not to sites which have already been developed.  

Changing the goalposts

Moreover the planning goal posts have also been moved in the past two years to accommodate a variety of developments outside development zones. Therefore one should expect the number of ODZ applications to start increasing again following a lull in the past few years.

The recently approved policy regulating ODZ development allows a greater volume and variety of developments, ranging from stables and stores to limited tourist accommodation on very large land holdings. 

The policy even allows buildings in buffer zones to Special Areas of Conservation and archaeological zones. 

Moreover new policies also pave the way for fireworks factories and 3,000 square metre petrol stations, which can be located in the ODZ.  

Changing mentality

While the 12,576 figure may be trumpeted by apologists of development in Zonqor, the figure itself may also spur people to think that the country has already lost too much to ODZ development and cannot afford to lose more.

Moreover although a number of controversial developments were approved under previous administrations, other developments like the proposed golf courses in Verdala and Xaghra l-Hamra, the Ta’ Cenc and Hondoq ir-Rummien projects in Gozo and the proposed road in Ghadira were turned down or scrapped.

Moreover, with the notable exception of the Seabank hotel in Ghadira, the post-2008 PN government elected on a pledge that “ODZ should be ODZ”, was far less liberal than previous PN governments in dishing out permits in the ODZ. 

This change in policy was a result of popular outrage at the PN led government’s decision to extend development zones in 2006. As a reaction the PN government backtracked from proposed development overlooking Ramla l-Hamra and abandoned plans for a golf course in Xaghra l-Hamra.

The opposition to the proposed development in Zonqor reflects this change in public opinion.

Share your personal views on this matter and contribute to the MT Observer.