Lija mayor’s outrage – ‘I have no confidence in the DCC board’
Castaldi Paris’s anger after DCC asks for new plans to sanction Lija illegalities
James Debono Lija mayor Ian Castaldi Paris has expressed his complete lack of confidence in MEPA’s Development Control Commission (DCC), after it failed to turn down an application to sanction the illegalities on the construction of terraced houses in Merino Street. MEPA had already issued six enforcement notices against illegal developments, which included the construction of a swimming pool outside development zones. But subsequently, four applications were submitted to sanction the illegal works.
Despite the case officer’s recommendation to refuse all four applications, the DCC requested the developers to submit new plans that could pave the way for permission.
Castaldi Paris expressed his complete lack of confidence in the DCC, saying it had ignored his council’s demand to dismiss the application. “I have no confidence in the DCC, which has given the perpetrators of this illegal development the chance to regularise their position.”
The outspoken mayor, who last year campaigned successfully to stop the three-storey development next to the historic Lija Belvedere, has now called on the MEPA board – the highest board in the authority – to take this sensitive case away from the DCC.
“I am calling on MEPA chairman Austin Walker to take this case away from the DCC so that a decision on this case is taken directly by the MEPA board,” Castaldi Paris told MaltaToday.
MEPA’s Heritage Advisory Committee has also objected to three of the four applications, arguing that part of the development took place outside development zones (ODZ).
The case officer noted illegalities in the construction of a reservoir, pool structure, a balance tank and back-wash structure at basement level, and the construction of a pool at ground floor. “All of these are situated outside the limit of development,” his report said.
The excavation work also resulted in the loss of the vegetation and greenery. Listing 12 different policies breached by the illegalities, the case officer called for an outright refusal, adding that the approval of this application would create a “great precedent for similar proposals”.
The proposed swimming pool exceeds policy limit by 35 square metres of paving area. Since the illegalities took place in a rural conservation area, sanctioning the development would also be in breach of the Structure Plan, which clearly prohibits urban development inside rural areas.
The case officer also said the development already occupies 53% of the total soil and planted area already on site, contrary to policies limiting this to 15% of the total area.
MEPA originally approved the construction of the four terraced houses in 2007. On that occasion the case officer observed that the development was situated in a garden designated as “an open space enclave” in the Central Malta Local Plan, which forbids the development of new residential units in these sites.
However the same report could not recommend a refusal for the development, because the site was already committed for development by an outline permit issued in 2006. The outline permit was only issued following a reversal of an earlier decision, taken in 2005, to refuse the proposed development.
“I already have doubts on how this permit was issued in the first place. The least I expect now is that MEPA does not reward developers who first break the law and then expect MEPA to sanction the illegalities,” Castaldi Paris said.
Castaldi Paris also denounced that despite the enforcement notices, works have continued on the site.
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Download front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
MEPA had already issued six enforcement notices against illegal developments, which included the construction of a swimming pool outside development zones. But subsequently, four applications were submitted to sanction the illegal works.
