The Malta Environment and Planning Authority hit out at the Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar non-governmental organisation and urged it to get its facts right before issuing statements. It was referring to a media release in which FAA said Ta’ Hagrat temples in Mgarr, Malta were under threat from development.

Mepa said application 1272/00 was for the demolition of an existing garage and the construction of a terraced house with an underlying ground floor garage. In the first instance, Mepa considered the visual and physical impacts on Ta’ Hagrat Temples. The existing garage was built in the 1970’s or earlier, along

with the rest of the street. The application was within the building schemes approved by parliament in 1988. The application was one of just two remaining plots which were as yet partly unbuilt.

Consultations were held with the Museums Department in June 2000. Following consultations between the applicant and the department, the latter replied to Mepa in September 2000 objecting to the development. In spite of the fact that this reply was three months out of the legal time frame, the objection was fully endorsed and the application was refused on 7 February 2002.

The refusal was based on the fact that the application entailed excavation in a site of close proximity to Ta’ Hagrat Temples. A request for reconsideration was filed by the applicant and Mepa requested the applicant to modify his plans to address the concerns which had led to the refusal of the application.

The changes included removal of the basement which was the greatest bone of contention as this entailed excavation, and removal of the garage entrance from opposite Ta’ Hagrat.

Mepa said it recommended approval of the new plans but still imposed stringent conditions to ensure that the scheduled site of Ta’ Hagrat was adequately

protected. For instance, the applicant must notify the superintendence and Mepa at least two weeks before the start of works so that the agencies could monitor the works; the use of heavy machinery is prohibited and if necessary only manual work is to be carried out. A bank guarantee was required to ensure compliance with these conditions.

Ta’ Hagrat Temples were afforded the highest protection and scheduled by Mepa in 1998. The site in question was already built, was within the development boundary and outside the archaeological buffer zone. Mepa’s greatest concern was the protection of the temples. To this end Mepa placed considerable constraints on the proposed development to make sure that the temples and any potential remains were safeguarded. The bank guarantee which was levied was to ensure that the conditions were adhered to. These

facts were verifiable on the internet. “There one can see that the application PA306/06 is on a site which is outside the development boundary and is still awaiting decision but is being recommended for refusal. PA 1272/00 is inside the development boundary and was subject to various stringent constraints by Mepa prior to approval,” Mepa said.