The role of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (Mepa) in the management of both natural and cultural heritage is established by the Development Planning Act 1992 (DPA). The integration of spatial planning and heritage management as addressed in the DPA is a logical approach adopted in other countries decades ago for the reason that development and land use are foremost factors that are likely to damage or destroy heritage assets.

Article 46 of the DPA describes in detail the process of statutory protection of sites having heritage value. By statutory protection, such sites are treated with special care through the planning process whenever they are likely to be affected by proposals for development or land use.

In addition to the DPA, the structure plan provides guidance on measures that may be taken by Mepa, as well as by developers and their respective architects, to ensure the mitigation of conflicts between the proposed development and the management of the heritage assets. Both the DPA and the Structure Plan policies conform to the concept of sustainability as declared by Agenda 21:

Development and the use of the resources in the present must be in such a way that would not compromise the ability of future generations to make use of the same resources.

In addition to these statu-tory obligations, Mepa has also published a number of local plans in which development and land use in specific regions with characteristics and potential that are somewhat different from others are addressed in more detail and policies are tailor-made for that specific region.

The planning issues and opportunities of the Marsa area are included in the Grand Harbour Local Plan, where issues and policies concerning the archaeology within this region are handled. The policies aim to achieve a sense of balance between the need to safeguard heritage through adaptive reuse and the need to protect it from incompatible uses. Policy GH07 addresses archaeology specifically. This policy demands that where large earth-moving operations are required, archaeological assessment and monitoring will be a requisite and no development will be allowed that will adversely affect archaeological sites.

The DPA and spatial planning policies are implemented by Mepa in compatibility with other related local legislation such as the Cultural Heritage Act 2002 (CHA), which is administered by the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage (SCH). Collaboration between Mepa and the SCH is of paramount importance for the better management of Malta’s cultural heritage. Hence, Mepa consults the SCH about a development that is within identified and potential archaeological sites or buildings of historical or architectural value. Mepa consultations with the SCH are shown in Table 1 (below).

Year Number

2003 293

2004 417

2005 427

Table 1

In addition to the above, Malta is a signatory to a number of international conventions and charters on heritage management (the Lausanne Charter), archaeological practice (the Valletta Convention), conservation (the Venice Charter), the environment (EU Directives) and public rights (Åahrus). It is therefore the duty of the state and all its citizens to protect and provide for the better conservation of Malta’s heritage. However, the state delegates agencies such as Mepa and the SCH to ensure compliance with these international obligations on heritage conservation.

The development application process is quite well known. Where heritage is concerned, consultations are held both with internal bodies within Mepa such as the Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee (CHAC) and the Integrated Heritage Management Team (IHMT), as well externally with the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage. These are allowed 30 days to reply as prescribed by law and if no answer is received within this period, it is considered that they has no objection.

However, this raises a serious problem. When a proposed development is likely to damage or destroy known or potential archaeological remains and a “no objection” is registered by default through not replying in time, this creates inconsistencies and could have an undesired impact on the site in question. However, this is rather the exception and often one or more of the three organisations reply in time, though at times there may be some divergent recommendations that require some resolution.

Recommendations by the case officer and the organisations are based on local legislation, the Structure Plan and Local Plan policies, international conventions and charters and best practice, and are compiled into a single report by the case officer. The case officer’s report is then presented to the Development Control Commission that rules on the application on the merits presented by the applicant and the case officer’s report. In the eventuality of granting a permit, a number of standard and tailor-made conditions are included to ensure the project’s compliance with planning and environmental recommendations.

However, problems arise whenever development is initiated without a permit or, worse still, without even an application. In such circumstances, Mepa’s Enforcement Unit acts as provided for by the DPA, issuing a Stop Notice to halt the work until a development permit is obtained.

Joseph Conti Magro is manager, Integrated Heritage Management Team

Malta Environment and Planning Authority