Qala development within scheme allowed, subject to mitigation measures

The commission had held that the site is located on the side of a valley and such intervention would lead to soil erosion.

On a separate note, the commission held also that the proposed development does not comply with policies 2.1 and 3.8 (B) of Development Control Policy & Design Guidance 2007 in that the 8.5 metre maximum height limitation rule (height limitation for two storey development) is not being respected.

Construction allowed subject to absence of crushed stone between concrete ground floor slab and underlying soil

In conclusion, the commission held that the proposed works consist of an “internal development” which is incompatible with the urban design and environmental characteristics of the Urban Conservation Area, and so is in conflict with the overall objectives of the Structure Plan for the preservation and enhancement of buildings, spaces and townscapes within Urban Conservation Areas (Structure Plan policy UCO6).

The applicant appealed the commission’s decision, insisting that the proposed development lies entirely within the development zone as shown in the Qala Local Plan. The applicant submitted that “the part of the site which is being developed is definitely not a valley”, adding that “the water course is located circa 30 metres to the East away from the proposed development.”

The applicant went on to argue that the swimming pools which were originally proposed to be located beyond the development boundary have been eliminated from the proposal. As regards the “excessive height”, applicant insisted that the latest designs addressed such consideration.

On its part, the authority confirmed that according to the latest drawings, the development does not encroach beyond the development zone while the two-floor height limitation was now being respected. Nevertheless, the authority insisted that the proposed development is objectionable since it is “expected to have a significant effect on surface water flow in the Wied il-Marga watercourse”.

In its assessment, the tribunal observed that the Malta Resources Authority were not objecting to the proposal on condition that the applicant adheres to the construction method statement which the applicant’s consultant had submitted during the course of proceedings pending before the tribunal. The tribunal therefore concluded that the proposal could be entertained on condition that development is constructed entirely above soil level without the use of crushed stone between the existing soil levels and the surface of the concrete ground floor slab as per method statement.

Robert Musumeci is an architect who also pursued a degree in law

[email protected]