Din L-Art Helwa intends to stand its ground regarding the outline permit for the redevelopment of Mistra Village in Xemxija, a project that the organisation describes as ‘monstrous’.
The heritage and environment NGO has written to the Mepa Board stating that the approval of the outline development permit, granted in 2008, had been done in the absence of important and relevant information and should be annulled.
The organisation is now invoking Article 77 of the Environment and Planning Act 2010, claiming irregular process and ‘Error on the Face of a Record’, a procedure permitted by the Environment and Planning Act.
Din l-Art Helwa (DLH) is also requesting David Pace, the Environment and Planning Commissioner at the National Ombudsman’s Office, to carry out an investigation into the process, which Din l-Art Helwa maintains was “incomplete, dubious and misleading”.
The decision sealing the fate of the picturesque ridge at Xemxija formerly occupied by the low lying and terraced houses of Mistra Village Holiday Complex is due to be decided by Mepa on Thursday, 31 October.
If the application is approved, six massive towering blocks of 12 floors requiring some 1,200 car spaces will rise sharply and unnaturally from the edge of this picturesque ridge creating a monstrous and permanent blot on the landscape.
The NGO had campaigned throughout the entire process. It claims there had been several incomplete submissions, biased information and irregularities which it has documented and which led to the drawing up of a “misleading” Development Permit Application Report (DPAR) presented to the Mepa Board at the time.
This, DLH says, resulted in the board giving their approval to the project. A request for investigation was sent to the Audit Officer at Mepa; however DLH states that no reply was ever received.
Local Plans should allow only four storeys
The Local Plan for the area, DLH points out, only allows for four storeys, but in this application an as yet unapproved Floor Area Ratio policy allowing eight storeys was applied.
Furthermore, DLK argues that the policy contemplated at the time had expressly excluded Xemxija ridge from tall buildings, a fact DLH says was “conveniently glossed over”.
Din l-Art Helwa noted that to this day the Floor Area Ratio Tall Buildings policy has not yet been approved or even launched. Even taking this into consideration, 11 floors were actually granted by the Outline Permit, which the NGO says was “more than a small departure from an as yet unapproved policy”.
Xemxija ridge removed from floor area ratio policy
Since 2008, Din l-Art Helwa noted, the updated Floor Area Ratio Policy “has been conveniently amended to allow high-rise on Xemxija Ridge”.
It adds, “This is a total divergence from the 2008 version of the Floor Area Ratio Policy which specifically mentioned Xemxija ridge, as a site where tall buildings are not allowed."
Heritage Advisory Committee conclusions ignored
Din l-Art Helwa also noted that the Development Planning Application Report leading to the application being granted was also incomplete in several other instances.
It explains, “Mepa’s own Heritage Advisory Committee had concluded that this application should be refused. This refusal was not registered in the Environmental Impact Assessment and in the final report making it incomplete and thus biased towards the developer.
“The area was scheduled as an Area of Archaeological Importance, a fact which was also not brought sufficiently to the attention of the Board by the report.”
Massive impact on traffic and transport
The significant impact the excavation and construction process would have for a number of years on traffic was not properly examined nor explained, according to Din l-Art Helwa.
“A traffic impact assessment was not presented to the board at the time although Transport Malta had always expressed grave concern on this issue. In spite of the scientific reports concluding that traffic is a major problem, the latest correspondence from Transport Malta in August 2013, stated that there was no objection to this project as the impact was minimal.
“This can hardly be the case,” the NGO says, “when four storeys of rock have to be excavated to create space for parking and the laying of foundations.”
The NGO has estimated that this represents a truck of rubble being carried away through single lane traffic every five minutes for two years on a road that is already congested and is the main thoroughfare for traffic to Mellieha and Gozo.
Essential photomontages not presented
Din l-Art Helwa observes that the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment, in its Point 3, clearly states that this development was to have effect on the Mediterranean health in the area and be of great impact upon the visual amenity and the landscape. Out of 12 assessed impacts in the EIA, eight were registered as being of major impact and four of which needed further study.
Din l-Art Helwa maintains that in an area of such high landscape value, a development of such massive proportions should be interpreted through photomontages with supporting sections showing heights from sea level.
These, if presented, DLH said, would have clearly depicted the immense negative impact on the area from the most important public viewpoints.
It adds, “The photomontages available within the EIA were misleading as they were taken with wide angled perspectives and without shadows, and in any case were not even presented to the Board despite several requests from DLH who was present at the hearing.”
DLH said it expressly requested that the board members view the photomontages made available by the NGO before taking a decision.
But, DLH says, “This request was denied and the board took a decision without even viewing them. The disastrous and everlasting effect on the landscape and on the adjacent ridges that these six massive apartment blocks are to have, certainly merited this consideration and still do.”
According to DLH, its reservations were not fully registered in the Environmental Impact Assessment despite requirements for public opinion to be considered by the Mepa Board.
All these “serious reservations” were raised by DLH in a letter to the Auditor of Mepa’s Board on 6 June 2008 but, to date, it says it has not received a response from the Auditor or from any of the officials who were also informed of these irregularities.
It adds, “Considering the irregularities that preceded the Mepa Board decision to grant this Outline Permit and the incomplete and biased Development Permit Application Report, Din l-Art Helwa concludes that this approval was granted with misleading documentation.”
The organisation has now invoked Article 77 of the Environment Planning Act asking for the Outline Permit to be revoked and for an investigation by the Environment and Planning Commissioner in the office of the Ombudsman into the procedure that led to its approval.
The NGO stresses that, “The serious allegations on the manner in which the Outline application was approved directly impacts the current process for Application No 6236/08 due to be heard by the MEPA Board on 31 October.
“The proposal for six blocks at 13 floors from piazza level has only become allowable as a result of the Outline Permit. It is still hoped that a revocation of the Outline Permit would cause the developers to reconsider one of the earlier options they had proposed which consisted of 75 per cent build up of the site to a maximum height of four floors.
“This was an option that Din l-Art Helwa, together with most of the constituted bodies consulted, including the Heritage Advisory Committee, have always maintained to be the more acceptable route considering this is a ridge site of immense cultural landscape value at a national level.”