MEPA reform Finally, the much-awaited MEPA reform is taking shape – it is also evident that the prime minister’s decision to assign Dr Mario de Marco with the specific task to pilot the MEPA reform is yielding concrete results. This week government announced a series of recommendations concerning the policy mechanism framework – the said recommendations were prepared by an appointed commission which was tasked with examining the current planning policies (including the Structure Plan) and establish which policies overlap and which regulations are conflicting or obsolete. It was further announced that this report will be made public in March and tabled in Parliament prior to the debate surrounding the MEPA Reform Bill. The commission remarked its concern with respect to the sheer number and complexity of policy documents and recommended a completely new approach to render a smoother planning process. It was already common knowledge that MEPA can do away with many of its policies, which are either obsolete or conflicting.
For example, Structure Plan Policy BEN 13 still provides that telecommunications antennae are to be conspicuously located, either at the rear of the property, on the roof below the highest part of the roof, or in a special enclosure. In reality, this is not technically possible. With the advent of emerging wireless technology during the course of recent years, MEPA was constrained to ignore this policy altogether. (even though this policy is still in force) The result was that countless development applications for the installation of telecommunication equipment on roof tops were approved by MEPA notwithstanding the provisions of this policy.
It is further estimated that one third of the policies contained in the Structure Plan are not even related to planning. Let’s take an example. Structure Plan POLICY LEM 2 provides for the introduction and enforcement of tougher drink/driving laws. Yet, it is certainly acknowledged that drink/driving laws fall under separate legislation.
Originally, the Structure Plan had envisaged the preparation of twenty four local plans which were aimed to cover Malta and Gozo. Nonetheless, only seven Local Plans were approved since the inception of the Authority – the Grand Harbour Local Plan, the Marsaxlokk Local Plan, the North Harbour Local Plan, the North West Local Plan, the South Malta Local Plan, the Central Malta Local Plan and the Gozo/ Comino Local Plan. Still, the Commission felt that it was appropriate to suggest that the number of local plans is reduced to three covering the eastern part of Malta, the western part of Malta and Gozo.
Of equal significance, it is pertinent to add that at present, there are no less than 40 design documents which regulate planning and design – these include a substantial number of supplementary planning guidelines and circulars which are issued to architects on a regular basis. Rightly so, the commission proposed a reduction in the number of supplementary guideline documents to four: on urban conservation areas, outside development zones, development zones and marine development.
The Parliamentary Secretary for the Environment, Mario de Marco was correct to state that these recommendations would certainly contribute to render the authority become more transparent, user-friendly and consistent. It is evident that the reform process is moving in the right direction.
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
The commission remarked its concern with respect to the sheer number and complexity of policy documents and recommended a completely new approach to render a smoother planning process. It was already common knowledge that MEPA can do away with many of its policies, which are either obsolete or conflicting.
