Triq il-Foss in Paola (that would be Ditch Street, I guess) is a sloping street but underneath a row of houses there is a huge cistern that lies so deep down that only one house, the lowest one, has access to it.

But when the new owner of one of the houses further up applied to pull down the house, the neighbours became concerned about possible damage to their houses during construction.

Normally, such issues are common when neighbouring houses are being pulled down and are usually solved by the applicant taking out insurance and additional care being paid during excavation.

But in this case, the neighbours waited until the application had been approved and a permit issued and then claimed that the application should be nullified because the applicant never raised the issue of the underlying cistern.

Article 77 was thus invoked and this can lead either to a revocation of the issued permit or to its modification.

The applicant’s architect, John Attard, accepted to modify the approved plans and he also managed to insert a box-like structure to be fitted into the cistern part that belongs to his client so as to create a garage there.

The neighbours were still not mollified. They claimed they had told the new owners about the underlying cistern but the new owners replied they had come to know about the cistern after the permit was issued.

The neighbours further argued that since their house was on the lower level, they would not be able to rebuild as the applicant will be doing. And meanwhile their house will be at risk during construction.

The Mepa chairman replied there are things such as insurance and the Building Regulations Unit that should take care of these worries.

The application to modify the permit was unanimously approved.