Roderick Galdes's U turn on Balzan development

Although this time around the proposal was considerably smaller in size to previous applications, Galdes joined fellow board members on the board in a unanimous decision to turn down the development.

The MEPA board felt that the development will compromise the character and heritage of the urban conservation area of this traditional village.

Contacted by MaltaToday, Galdes justified his apparent U-turn, saying that unlike the present application, which involved the demolition of the townhouse, he favoured the previous application because it included the restoration of the townhouse, the pigeon loft and the internal garden.

“The present proposal was different from the previous one as it involved the demolition of a historical building, something with which I disagree in principle,” Galdes said.

Galdes insists the Balzan local council, which had attacked him for his “ineffective and singular vote” for the development in March, had originally favoured the development, as shown by a letter sent to MEPA in November 2006.

The letter, seen by MaltaToday, stated that the council had no objection to the development as long as the pigeon loft and the garden are not touched by the development.

Back in March 2010, Galdes had defended his vote in favour of the development of 40 apartments on technical grounds, arguing that the Development Control Commission had previously accepted the Balzan application in principle, after imposing a number of conditions which were then accepted in subsequent plans presented by the developer.

Galdes claimed MEPA’s own directorate had noted the several improvements in the amended plans, such as that “the traditional garden was being preserved in its entirety” and that the scale of the development had been reduced.

“The reasons cited for refusing the project had been resolved in the amended plans submitted by the developer,” Galdes claimed.

He also claimed that in the past few years, MEPA had approved many similar projects in Balzan and the rest of Malta. “These were not just limited to restoration, as in this case, but even in the demolition of buildings in urban conservation areas.”

He also had insisted that although he was nominated on the MEPA board by the Opposition, he serves on the board in his own personal capacity.

“I only voted in favour on the basis of technical considerations. Nobody interfered in my decision.”