Robert Musumeci’s Robert Musumeci’s analysis of MEPA decisions
The 50 sq.m. limit on pharmacies – too restrictive A 2007 application to change a residence to a pharmacy was recommended for refusal by the case officer in view that the area of the premises was in excess of 50 square metres. The Local Plans state that the area of a pharmacy in a residential area cannot exceed 50 square metres. Nonetheless, the DCC referred the file to the Executive Committee, and the latter held that the 50 square metre limitation imposed by the Local Plan is considered to be too restrictive. Despite the negative recommendation from the case office, this application was approved this week despite the 50 square metre limitation on the grounds that pharmacies are considered to be of a local nature. This decision goes to prove that the Local Plans need to be revised without further delay. It is manifestly evident that that the proposed commercial areas imposed by the Local Plans are too restrictive.
Policy 4.10 in Policy and Design Guidance 2007 has been overruled A 2007 application to construct apartments and basement garages was recommended for refusal on the grounds that the ramp leading to the basement was not adequate to enable access service and emergency vehicles. The application was however approved this week after it transpired that a three-metre headroom is considered adequate for an emergency vehicle to access the site. At last, architects can now rely on a three-metre vertical access in order to enable access to emergency vehicles within a developed site. This also means that policy 4.10 in DC 2007, which states that a minimum headroom of 3.5 metres must be provided to allow access by fire tenders is no longer applicable.
How to assess an impact A proposal to construct basement garages, semi-basement garages and offices, maisonettes, overlying apartments and penthouses was being recommended for refusal by a case officer on the pretext that the resultant office area was in excess of the limitations set out in the Local Plan. Notwithstanding, the DCC overruled the negative recommendation, stating that that since the size of site qualifies for more than three plots the amount of office space in relation to site is justified in a residential area. Impact should always be assessed in relation to all scenarios which could be potentially permitted by policy. The DCC should be lauded for such rational decision taking.
Replacement of pre-1967 structures is possible The Directorate insisted that a 2007 application to demolish a number of existing rooms and replace with agricultural stores should be dismissed by the DCC. The DCC approved the application on the pretext that the said structures were in existence prior to 1967. This decision is in consistence with a number of similar DCC decisions, where planning consent was given to replace dangerous structures which existed in 1967, provided that the same footprint area was retained. The Directorate is therefore bound to acknowledge that the structural replacement of legally established structures is acceptable, provided an already committed use or a use which is defined in the document ‘Agriculture, Farm Diversification and Stables’ which was approved by the then minister responsible for MEPA in 2007 is in existence.
RCO 29 aims to support rehabilitation of derelict agricultural land A 2007 application to reclaim a piece of abandoned land with soil was being recommended for refusal by the Directorate since it was argued that the said land was garigue and should have been preserved in its former state. The DCC approved the application following a site inspection. Although the purpose of a site inspection in such instances is not clear, it must be recalled that Structure Plan policy RCO 29 was specifically designed to support development aimed at preventing soil erosion, while policies RCO 6, 8, 9 and 20 are designed to encourage the rehabilitation of degraded and derelict agricultural land. One may therefore conclude that the DCC were correct in their decision.
Mobile kiosks no longer constitute an urban development A 2006 application to keep a mobile kiosk on site was approved by the DCC, even though the Planning Directorate made strong objections, stating that the proposal would constitute an unacceptable urban development. When the case was referred to the DCC for a decision, the Board overruled the Directorate and granted the permit on the grounds that Malta Transport Authority was not objecting to the request. The DCC went further to underline that a kiosk is not considered to be an urban development. This decision underlines that a kiosk, which is reversible by nature, is no longer considered to constitute an urban development, even if its location lies in an ODZ area.
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.
Search:
MALTATODAY
BUSINESSTODAY
Download MaltaToday Sunday issue front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
A 2007 application to change a residence to a pharmacy was recommended for refusal by the case officer in view that the area of the premises was in excess of 50 square metres. The Local Plans state that the area of a pharmacy in a residential area cannot exceed 50 square metres. Nonetheless, the DCC referred the file to the Executive Committee, and the latter held that the 50 square metre limitation imposed by the Local Plan is considered to be too restrictive. Despite the negative recommendation from the case office, this application was approved this week despite the 50 square metre limitation on the grounds that pharmacies are considered to be of a local nature. This decision goes to prove that the Local Plans need to be revised without further delay. It is manifestly evident that that the proposed commercial areas imposed by the Local Plans are too restrictive.
