How interesting that on Thursday while the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (Mepa) refused five applications to sanction boathouses, or the extension of boathouses, including the raising of the height of one of them, in Dwejra, Gozo, a meeting was being held for Sliema residents to decry the building of yet another monolith in the already overbuilt and grotesque Tigné Point.

Compared to the monstrosities in Tigné, a two-storey structure seems like small fry and, of course, the massive tower blocks are legal. Mepa’s chairman Andrew Walker, said that this sort of development (in Dwejra) was not in line with the requirements of special conservation areas and not in the public interest, especially for Dwejra, which is highly, ecologically sensitive.”

It is delightful that Dwejra is finally getting some protection, but I would have thought that preserving our heritage, whether ecological or cultural, should be dealt with in the same manner. Mr Walker should ‘consult’ with Sliema residents about “not in the public interest”. Besides, are not views of Valletta considered for “special conservation” by Mepa.

More on Tigné later, meanwhile on Dwejra, Mr Walker reiterated the position taken by the board last year and pointed out that it was “not looking favourably” at sanctioning illegalities in protected or outside scheme areas.

Not looking favourably? Mepa should not even be considering sanctioning illegalities at all. Because “sanctioning” in this context means that official approval be given for an illegality. Thankfully, the planning authority’s extensive reform “prohibits the submission of a planning application to regularise illegal development in an outside development zone or a protected area carried out after May 2008”, said a report by Juan Ameen in The Times.

That, though welcome, is still not good enough. An illegal structure should be demolished whenever it was built. Laws can be amended to rectify such discrepancies. Although another 13 applications were refused in April 2010, lawyers and architects are still trying it on.

Later in a statement, Mepa said the board “sent out a clear message” that it would not tolerate the illegal abuse of land, especially if it was protected. Illegal abuse of land should not be tolerated full stop. It is a shame that whoever was on the Mepa board three years ago did not use the same intolerance to illegal abuse of land.

On Friday, Ms Ameen reported that in February 2008, a number of environmental groups had protested vehemently against the approval of around 20 applications to sanction illegal structures in Dwejra.

Unbelievably, the authority had defended its decision, saying it formed part of a process that went back to 2005 called the Dwejra Heritage Park Action Plan. How on earth could illegal structures be seen as forming part of the process in a Heritage Park Action Plan?

The mind boggles at what their definition of heritage could have been. And yet, architects and lawyers representing the boathouse owners are still trying to get Mepa to accept that the illegal buildings fell in line with that Dwejra action plan.

Ms Ameen reported yesterday that Mepa would take “comprehensive” direct action with regard to the various illegalities in the scenic and protected Dwejra Bay once all the cases were finalised. The regulator would have to wait for the statutory 30-day time frame, during which the applicant could appeal. Once this period was up, enforcement action would be taken, the spokesperson said.

That is good news indeed, but it was a bit confusing because, “Direct action will be taken comprehensively on the site to ensure that Dwejra comes in line with its Action Plan,” the Mepa spokesperson said. Now, which Action Plan exactly was s/he talking about?

Hopefully, not the 2005 Dwejra Heritage Park Action Plan that some lawyers and architects are still trying to exploit. According to planning policies, any boathouse built or altered after 1965 requires “sanctioning”. That word again. Mepa needs to reconsider the use of the word “sanctioning” and start using it as a punishment imposed as a result of breaking the law and not giving official approval for an illegality.

Now for Tigné, I was alerted, and a meeting for Sliema residents was held on Thursday, about further development at the Point. Since I overlook this particular site, I wondered where in this compact maze of monoliths further development was actually possible?

But as I looked up while typing this, I discovered that a small gap does exist in that particular skyline. Last week, in “Are we cultured?” I commented “Our coastline, especially in Tignè, and along the Strand, has been so horrendously dented with monstrous buildings that views of the sea and of our prime heritage site Valletta, except from some of the monoliths, are becoming rarer and will soon disappear.”

I also covered some points brought up in parliament last week, including Labour spokesman on education and civil rights Evarist Bartolo’s claim that “the country still lacked a national cultural heritage strategic plan”. I was therefore not surprised to hear various NGOs claim that Mepa lacks a clear policy on high-rise buildings and that more tower blocks are planned for Tigné.

Focal points at the meeting on Thursday were that large projects in the town were being pushed through with no serious public consultation; that overdevelopment was carrying on unabated worsening the quality of life for residents with air pollution and a huge reduction in parking spaces among other negative effects.

Din l-Art Helwa on Friday issued a press release stating, “The additional development being proposed to this already densely built up area, backed by the bulky construction mass created by the Fort Cambridge buildings and the eventual proposed Town Square, would continue to add to the discordant and negative impact they already had on the unique vista of the world heritage city of Valletta and its harmonious skyline.

“This is already close to being totally obscured from many parts of Sliema and is severely compromised from the Three Cities,” it said. The NGO is calling on government to “freeze all developments pending the Structure Plan review and to establish a stringent policy on density and high-rise construction”.

The Sliema Residents Association informed me that in 2004, Mepa issued a Landscape Assessment Study of the Maltese Islands for public consultation. In relation to the coastline of the area, which includes Sliema and Valletta, the study noted: “The historic settlements and the military fortifications crown the harbours with an urban skyline of international significance. The majestic fortifications provide a unique cultural experience in addition to the urban experience within the settlements.”

Later, in 2006, according to Din l-Art Ħelwa, Mepa had presented a draft policy to cabinet, which addressed many of the then existing problems relating to, no appropriate infrastructural provision to reduce pollution and traffic and no planning effort to protect the last of their open spaces. Nevertheless, no changes have surfaced so far.

Any open space spells loads of money (memories of Harry Enfield) to developers and no one is stopping them raking it in while ruining our environment. I repeat what I said last week that it is laughable for Minister George Pullicino to say, “We want the public to take ownership and embrace a green environment.” Did he mean the green environment the government is not protecting?

[email protected]