A rather straightforward application for an extension to a beauty salon in Attard had become somewhat of a cause celebre in recent months after the application was approved because when the permit was being drawn up, it was realised that the application had not been published in the newspapers nor had a notice been affixed to the site.

Although this was, strictly speaking, a Mepa mistake, since the publication of the application and the affixing of the site notice are done by a Mepa contractor, and despite strenuous opposition by the application’s architect, Robert Musumeci, Article 39a of the Mepa Act was invoked and the application was withdrawn.

Subsequently, the same application was re-presented and came up for consideration by the Mepa board last Thursday. However, this time, the directorate, which had previously found nothing wrong with the application, recommended refusal.

The main point of its contention was that the application was asking for the excavation of a basement, which was greater than the 50 sq m that the law allows in such an area.

Mr Musumeci argued that the steps and the bathroom in the basement and also the holding walls could not really be considered as commercial, but the directorate officers argued that this is how areas are considered.

Mr Musumeci also argued that this was a ‘res iudicata’ since the mistake had been a Mepa one, the directorate had already given its assent and at no time had any of the neighbours objected to the development.

It looked like what had already been approved was about to be turned down when the board, asked for its decision, practically unanimously voted to turn down the directorate’s refusal recommendation and approved the application.

Since the application was not being recommended for approval, the health permission is still pending.