Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1538322
A developers' 'wish-list' to sweeten one bitter pill? Asked if the overhaul of planning laws was meant to sweeten the pill, giving developers all they want in exchange for one reform that would stop works during appeals, Stivala emphatically dis- agrees. He says some changes are not bene- ficial to developers, such as the lack of compensation when permits are an- nulled by the authority. Stivala is referring to a change in the law which specifically removes compen- sation for losses related to land value, when discontinuance or removal orders are issued on lawful development or ac- tivities. Today, compensation is given for "any losses sustained" and is based on land value. Pressed about proposals that will allow planning control applications presented by private developers to change building heights or to reclassify ODZ land, Stiva- la says the laws "do not affect developers only but all land owners". He stresses that the PA's 12,000 applicants every year are "not all developers." Pizzuto reiterates the KTP's stand that this part of the reform—which propos- es that heights and the classification of ODZ land be included as minor mod- ifications, which can be approved by the PA through zoning applications— should be deleted. On his part, Stivala insists the MDA is always opposed to any development on "virgin ODZ land" and that any changes to land classification in the ODZ should be discussed in parliament's develop- ment and planning committee, some- thing presently not required for 'minor modifications'. Pizzuto hints that the issue can be re- solved by rewording the law so these changes are still considered major mod- ifications. Stivala agrees, adding that "checks and balances", including parlia- mentary scrutiny for major changes in zoning, are crucial. But Pizzuto is also adamantly opposed to the change which reverses the hier- archy of PA policies. The government proposal shifts the order from the pri- macy of the Strategic Plan for the En- vironment and Development and the local plans to the newest policy to be approved. "In a country, you have the Constitu- tion, laws and legal notices. The Con- stitution is supreme and anything in breach of it is illegal. In the planning system the constitution is the SPED and anything in breach of it should not be al- lowed. I understand that there is a need to change plans and policies but this is not the way to correct outdated poli- cies," Pizzuto says. In contrast, Stivala agrees with the proposed change because of conflicting policies enacted over different years. Stivala insists that the latest policies are in line with the "present priorities of the present legislator". Nonetheless, Stivala contends that he would prefer having the local plans changed. He also is ready to accept a condition excluding changes to devel- opment zones, while once again shifting the blame from developers to property owners who, according to him, are the ones to benefit from the inclusion of their land in the development zone. Appeal to change the local plans Pizzuto warns against piecemeal re- forms and says the real question is whether the local plans approved in 2006 are still serving their purpose. He recalls his organisation's opposition to the local plans in 2006 and his person- al unease which contributed to his own decision as a new architect to leave the country for a while. "My fear is that we are getting lost in a system where planning is done through applications while the environment is safeguarded through objections. I do not like this system. I prefer having planning policies in place which safe- guard the environment." One point where Pizzuto and Sti- vala are in total agreement is the proposed new power to be given to PA boards to deviate from policy in a more context-based approach. Would this specific reform practically eliminate the possibility of successfully appealing a permit on the basis of spe- cific policy breaches, which can now be overruled by the board's discretionary powers? Pizzuto insists that this change is not being explained well, insisting that even at present the board has to consider "material considerations" and not just policies, adding that effectively nothing will change with the new law. He also argues that NGOs can use this to their advantage, arguing that the con- textual approach could be used to over- rule pencil developments in areas char- acterised by terraced houses in localities like Santa Lucija, where present local plans foresee five-storey development. But Pizzuto is concerned by anoth- er more insidious change to the appeal system—that which states that the fac- tual determination of the EPRT (a board chosen by the prime minister) will be fi- nal and the law courts' deliberations will be limited to points of law. "We still cannot understand the inten- tion behind this part of the law as it does not provide any defini- tion of factual determination. Does approving additional storeys in a particular area because of the surrounding context amount to a factual determination or not?" he asks. Stivala welcomes other changes which preclude the law courts from revoking permits completely, leaving the final decision to the EPRT which is obliged to follow the court's decisions, now limited to the legal aspect. "I simply cannot understand the pleasure some feel when a permit is cancelled… What's wrong with a change in a sys- tem which pres- e n t l y obliges applicants to pay more fees to restart the process by having to resub- mit an application instead of changing their plans to abide by the court deci- sions?" Developers want a seat on the board Now that a one-month consultation process has been launched after the backlash the proposed bills received, the MDA is taking the opportunity to make further demands including the appoint- ment of its representative on the PA board. "On the planning board there is pres- ently a representative of the environ- mentalists. There is nobody represent- ing developers and applicants," he says. When I point out that there are enough board members who are mostly silent but vote for more development, Stivala replies that these members represent the government, not developers. This, it seems, could be another fron- tier for conflict with those who believe the system is already skewed to favour developers. 7 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 10 AUGUST 2025 INTERVIEW washrooms, and shifting goalposts Andre Pizzuto