MEPA set to ‘dismiss’ permit for Black Gold’s extended pavement

The Malta Environment and Planning Authority has informed Michael Stivala, owner of the Black Gold restaurant, that it intends to “dismiss” a permit issued in 2013 to allow the setting of tables and chairs on an extension to the pavement built by Stivala in front of his restaurant.

Last year MEPA sanctioned a 2.1-metre wide extension to the pavement in front of the Black Gold bar and restaurant in Gzira, where chairs and tables are placed on condition that a two-metre pedestrian passage is created. 

But a new MEPA hearing has been scheduled for November 25.

According to a MEPA spokesperson, two of the requirements imposed by the Environment and Planning Commission when the permit was issued was that the applicant had to pay a fine of €1,430.18 and provide the Authority with photographs to show that illegalities have been redressed.

“Given that the applicant did not adhere to these two requirements, the Authority informed the applicant that the permit is being recommended for dismissal.”

On his part Michael Stivala insists that he is not denying access to pedestrians and that the situation in front of his outlet is exactly the same as that for other outlets along the Strand. 

He also denied that he was informed by MEPA that the permit would be ‘dismissed’, the information he was given was that the permit would be discussed anew.

He also expressed willingness to abide by any conditions imposed by MEPA and that pending issues can be resolved at the hearing.

When asked whether he has abided by the original conditions imposed in last year’s permit, Stivala replied that during the meeting he will be presenting photographic evidence to show that he is doing so.

Back in October 2013 the Environment and Planning Commission had overturned the recommendation of the case officer to refuse the permit, arguing that the 56 square metre extension to the pavement has a “minimal impact” on traffic.

But the permit was approved on condition that a  “two metre wide pedestrian passageway physically separated from the seating area” is also created.

Developers were given five days to present new plans, which include both the pedestrian passageway and showing “two standard lanes and two metre parking bays”.

Stivala’s architects complied but MEPA claims that it has not yet received photographic evidence.

In its decision the MEPA board made it clear that the permit shall in no way compromise any proposed upgrading of the Gzira/Sliema Strand and in such an eventuality the applicant will have to abide by the requirements of such upgrading and have no right to any compensation in this regard.

The case officer insisted that the development was not acceptable, as the proposed extension of the pavement for the placing of tables and chairs would intensify an “unacceptable use” within what is still designated in the local plan as a “residential area”. 

The case officer also objected to the loss of two parking spaces in an area which already has a significant shortfall of parking room.

Transport Malta had originally objected to the development because the tables and chairs would be separated from the establishment and result in a loss of two parking bays.  But the MEPA board referred to more recent documents showing that Transport Malta had deemed the impact on traffic to be acceptable.