The Planning Authority board’s approval of the db project in Pembroke came as no real surprise.
Surely, not many actually believed that the PA would turn down the application, despite the unprecedented opposition to the development.
It was evident from day one that the decision would be based only on planning policies – what can and cannot be done according to the rulebooks of planning – and not on the wishes and objections of ordinary citizens say they will be ‘buried alive’ by the massive project.
Residents of Pembroke, Swieqi, St Julian’s and from many other areas around the country had beseeched the PA to turn down the application, on the basis that the project was just too big and would affect their lives and health in no small way. Over 4,000 objections were filed with the PA – a number which was an absolute record. Public meetings were held, and protest were mounted, with local councils standing foursquare behind the residents they represent.
The Opposition also declared itself against the project, as did the Church’s environment commission and all of the country’s environmental NGOs.
In the end, though, all these voices were not enough and the board voted in favour of the project.
The mayors of Pembroke and St Julian’s said the result was not unexpected – that the PA was placing more importance in planning policy than in what people were saying. The mayor of Swieqi, on the other hand, said he was shocked by the decision.
These three mayors must be used to this kind of thing – they represent three prominent localities that are under constant siege by development. Yet they have probably never encountered a project of such gargantuan proportions, and surely never a project that had amassed such opposition.
Their actions should be commended. They spoke for the residents even if, in the end, they were not successful. The mayors are now considering appealing the decision. They should not get their hopes up.
If an appeal is filed and lost, and the project moves ahead, one hopes that the developers carry out their work with full respect towards residents. One would also hope that the cost of road infrastructure, which is estimated to be in the millions, will be borne by the db Group and other developers in the area, and not by the taxpayer.
Another worrying aspect of Thursday’s meeting is that decision on a major project was taken in the absence of a master plan. Now, one cannot expect developers to put their projects on hold for a number of years while the PA takes its time to come up with a master plan for the area.
That is why the PA needs to up its game and deliver on a master plan now. When it botched the first attempt, wasting months of work, it should have started working on a new plan at double speed, because, in the meantime, permits are being dished out in the absence of such a policy.
Now Malta is a small country and all authorities have limited resources, including human capital, but something like a master plan for high rise buildings in heavily populated areas, which will definitely have an effect on the environment and on the wellbeing of our citizens, should be placed at the very top of the PA’s agenda.
Let us not repeat the same mistake over and over again. Let us have a proper master plan – on that not only deals in policies and legalistic jargon but also one that places the wellbeing of people at its core.