A spokesperson for environmental NGO Flimkien Ghal Ambjent Ahjar has expressed concern over a proposed addition to Development Notification Orders, worried that it will lead to “under the radar sanctioning” of certain developments.
The proposal, which is currently open for public consultation until 16 April, will add a new category class to the Development Notification Order (DNO).
The PA has described DNO’s in the past as being “for any proposed development which does not have an adverse impact on neighbouring residences. There are currently 21 category classes of permitted development which include internal alterations, roof structures and more. For this type of application the public is not notified of the proposed works. The Authority has to reply to a notification within 30 days from its submission.”
“The new proposed class will consider as permitted development existing fireworks factories, including their operations, which have been in existence since, or before, the year 1994 and are still currently in existence, as evident from the relative aerial photography of the Authority,” the PA website read.
The actual text of the proposal goes on to read that this development shall be considered permitted development notwithstanding certain provisions of Order and notwithstanding anything to the contrary laid down in the “sanitary Regulations; the relevant provisions of the Development Control Design Policy, Guidance and Standards; the Rural Policy and Design Guidance; and all other relevant approved plans and policies under the Act, exceptions, conditions, restrictions, rules, limitations and exclusions.”
An FAA spokesperson told The Malta Independent that this is no minor amendment.
The spokesperson explained that a DNO procedure is a fast-track, low-cost procedure “with practically no publicity and near to no external consultation.”
The FAA representative expressed concern that the proposed DNO change would result in effectively, a retroactive amnesty on all fireworks factories within the aforementioned time period, and expressed concern that any existing planning infringements could be done away with through this DNO.
The FAA representative also questioned why one particular class of use regarding fireworks factories should not receive the same amount of publicity as other applications.
The FAA has also proposed that external consultees such as ERA and the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage should have a veto on applications which may be sensitive ecologically/archeologically speaking.
This newsroom asked a number of questions to the Planning Authority, asking for the number of representations filed thus far, and for a reason as to why the decision taken to place such applications under a DNO was taken.
The PA, in response, said “The proposed amendment to the DNO legal notice is currently open for public consultation. Up until now the Authority has received 3 submissions.”
This newsroom also sought the ERA’s views on the proposal. “The Environment and Resources Authority is currently reviewing the proposed amendment to the Development Notification Order, as part of the environment policy integration (EPI) process. The review will focus on minimizing the potential environmental impact such a policy may have. ERA’s official feedback will be forwarded to the Planning Authority during the public participation exercise. These submissions will be published by the Planning Authority.”