An important precedent was set yesterday when the Malta Environment and Planning Authority board decided to apply Article 39A in respect of a development in St Anne Square, Sliema and ask the developer to re-submit plans that were deemed to be incorrect.

In its presentation, the Mepa board explained that the plans for a proposed eight storey building in St Anne Square contained misleading statements, especially about a nearby resi-dence that was portrayed on the applicants’ maps as being just a wall.

The directorate’s recommendation was for the board to consider whether to revoke or modify the permit in terms of Article 39 (A) of the Development Planning Act.

The developer’s architect, Patrick Calleja, insisted that it was never his intention to mislead the directorate, as previous plans were unclear. He said that he had tried to portray as accurate a plan as possible and had definitely not intended to incorrectly portray what was on site.

Mepa planning director Godwin Cassar said that the plans submitted by the developers clearly showed a blank wall that did not exist and that if the proposed development were to go ahead, it would be in breach of sanitary laws. He said that incorrect information had been submitted and this had led to the erroneous granting of a development permit.

For his part, the developer’s lawyer, Professor Ian Refalo, contended that the objectors had no legal right to make their presentations as they had not objected to the original application within the stipulated timeframe.

After a brief discussion, the board decided that Article 39A should apply in this case. A further vote was taken, which gave the developer the opportunity to resubmit correct plans by 27 June so that the application could be reconsidered.