Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1546553
17 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 13 SEPTEMBER 2026 NEWS Ghar il-Friefet appeal tests Planning Authority's use of height rules THE Planning Authority ap- proved the permit for a five-sto- rey apartment block overlooking the protected Għar il-Friefet in Birżebbuġa. But a court appeal filed by resi- dents will test whether the author- ity can rely on internal guidance to approve taller buildings than those designated by local plans. Residents living in a terraced house directly above the cave, rep- resented by lawyer Claire Bonello, are challenging the approval of a residential development on a site between St Jude, Triq Herakles and Triq De Redin in Birżebbuġa. The development is within the buffer zone of a protected cave. Għar il-Friefet is a protected lime- stone cave, parts of which lie di- rectly beneath modern residential buildings. Its 2,200-cubic-metre karstic system was first scientifi- cally document- ed in 2003. Closed to the public, the cave is an important roost for a regionally significant bat colony and is thus protected for its geological and ecological val- ue. Residents argue the project breaches the height limits in the Marsaxlokk Bay Local Plan and undermines protections afforded to one of the locality's most sensi- tive geological features. The development, approved un- der permit PA2177/22, consists of a five-storey apartment block replacing an existing two storey terraced house. The development does not involve below ground ex- cavations and was only approved on the basis of a geological report excluding dangers to the cave. But the appellants argue it ex- ceeds the area's three-floor limit and conflicts with Policy MQ08, which specifically safeguards Għar il-Friefet, as well as Strate- gic Plan for the Environment and Development (SPED) objectives requiring the protection of Mal- ta's geological and environmental heritage. Although the project places ga- rages at ground-floor level rather than in an excavated basement, the appellants argue the overall scale of the building—made pos- sible through what they describe as a "gratuitous mistake" in the interpretation of height limita- tions—poses a risk to the site's environmental and heritage value. Height policies At the heart of the dispute is the Planning Authority's interpreta- tion of the site's permitted height. The residents argue the authority incorrectly treated the site as being "schemed for a semi-basement", even though no such designation exists in the Marsaxlokk Bay Lo- cal Plan. They say this allowed the authority to approve a building reaching 17.5 metres—ef- fectively five levels—on a site where the local p l a n permits only three floors. The appellants also contend the proposal breaches Policy P2, which requires buildings on slop- ing streets to step down with the terrain. Instead, they argue the project will create prominent blank party walls that are out of character with a neighbourhood largely made up of two-storey homes. The appeal also maintains that the local plan is unequivocal in restricting development in this part of Birżebbuġa to three floors and contains no provision allow- ing additional height through semi-basements or similar inter- pretations. The Environment and Planning Review Tribunal (EPRT) had upheld the permit, ruling that Planning Authority Circular 2/24 could be used to interpret the 1995 local plan, which regulates development in terms of storeys rather than metres. On that basis, the EPRT ac- cepted that the three-storey limit could translate into a maximum height of 17.5 metres. The tribu- nal also found that the surround- ing area already contains several taller buildings, justifying a more intensive form of development. It dismissed concerns over exposed party walls, arguing these would eventually be concealed if neigh- bouring sites were redeveloped. However, residents argue this reasoning is legally flawed. They maintain that Article 52 of the Development Planning Act es- tablishes that statutory local plans take precedence over planning circulars where the two conflict. Planning saga The application was initially rec- ommended for refusal because it was considered to conflict with SPED policies protecting Malta's geological and natural heritage. However, the EPRT referred the application back to the PA before the case officer's report stage so the authority could consider a ground investigation report sub- mitted during the appeal and al- low the applicant to file additional studies on the cave's protection. Following submission of the report and a method statement, both the Superintendence of Cul- tural Heritage and the Environ- ment and Resources Authority dropped their objection to the proposal and issued their clear- ance. The project's architect insists that no excavation works will be undertaken, and that the proposed new building will be de- signed with cantilevered corners at all levels, thereby eliminating any direct structural loading on the underlying cave system. In its submissions to the Court of Appeal, the Planning Authority argues that the permit was lawful- ly issued and that Circular 2/24 merely formalises a long-standing interpretation of older local plans that regulate development by sto- reys rather than metric heights. The authority also argues the area is already characterised by four- and five-level buildings and that the proposal is consistent with SPED's objective of making effi- cient use of urban land. JAMES DEBONO jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt Ghar il-Friefet is a protected limestone cave, parts of which lie directly beneath modern residential buildings A five-f loor, 29-room guest house is being proposed in Sliema's historic 'parapets' area of Triq Depiro, with plans to retain the street's traditional façades and broadly match the height of an approved residential development next door.