‘The Planning Authority repeatedly ignores its own planning rules’ – ADPD

ADPD – The Green party said that the Court of Appeals' decision confirmed that the Planning Authority repeatedly ignores its own planning rules.

During a press conference in front of the Planning Authority offices in Floriana on Saturday, the Greens said that the Authority applies its rules rigidly with the common citizen but is super flexible when it comes to the big and powerful developers.

ADPD Deputy Chairperson Sandra Gauci said that land use planning is a controversial process in and of itself since it requires decision-making and hence stressed on the need for the PA’s work to be carried out diligently and consistently.

“Unfortunately, the Planning Authority is lacking both. Its board members or its different bodies are not always to blame. Sometimes it is those who appoint them who are responsible,” Gauci said.

She recalled the case of a PA board member involved in a real estate agency and said that such appointments would not be made by someone who wanted a serious land use planning process.

“How couldn’t they see the crystal-clear conflict of interest in this case? Neither will a private jet be sent to Sicily to bring over a board member to ensure the dB permit in Pembroke is approved. Such manoeuvres over the years will not be forgotten easily and have brought the whole planning process into disrepute,” Gauci added.

She accused the PA of accommodating the needs of well-known speculators without limits.

ADPD Chairperson Carmel Cacopardo said that the key problem with the Planning Authority is that it repeatedly ignores its own planning rules, highlighting how the Appeals Court nullified another two decisions it had taken.

Cacopardo said that in the Mistra case, the renewed permit for a 12-storey development was not in line with the planning rules in force today, 10 years after the permit had been first issued.

Although the Environment Planning Review Tribunal (EPRT) had refused the residents’ appeal, the Court of Appeal concluded that the residents’ claims were not examined adequately by the EPRT and sent the case back to the drawing board, Cacopardo said.

He also spoke about the Court of Appeals’ decision to cancel the permit for a hotel in Mellieha, in an area where the local plan forbids it.

Cacopardo said that the original recommendation to refuse this application had been ignored both by the Development Control Commission as well as by the EPRT.

“In the meantime, construction work on this Mellieħa hotel proceed so that by the time the appeal was decided the building was finished albeit without a permit. Moreover, since it is a hotel, it was granted a concession to build an additional two floors over and above the prevailing height,” Cacopardo said.

He said he now expects the building’s use to be changed from that of a hotel, to a one which is acceptable in a residential area and with the heights permissible in that area, meaning that the extra two floors would need to be demolished expeditiously.

Cacopardo said that only when this is done will the message be heard loud and clear, that even omnipotent speculators are subject to the laws of the land.

He emphasised that these are only two cases that reveal how planning laws – albeit with their imperfections – may lead to sensible decisions, as long as those who take them are able to apply the rules correctly.

“This is the greatest reform needed at the Planning Authoritythat within its structures the right persons are appointed who are willing to follow the rules. Unfortunately, such people are few and far between,” Cacopardo concluded.