Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/404410
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 26 OCTOBER 2014 10 News JAMES DEBONO A new planning application has been presented to enlarge the car park and commercial development in Spinola which was approved in November 2013. The development is being pro- posed by Equinox Ventures, a company owned by architect Ray DeMicoli and his son Mark, and property developers Carmel and Anthony Gauci. Contacted by MaltaToday, Ray DeMicoli explained that the changes were made after Equinox Ventures concluded negotiations on a property in the area and this was included in the project, in a way which will have "minimal im- pact on the urban landscape". The already approved develop- ment consisted of four under- ground parking levels, a supermar- ket, a coffee shop at ground floor and seven overlying levels of of- fices and apartments. While the new application fore- sees a reduction in the number of apartments from 22 to 10, the space for office provision will in- crease substantially from a floor space of 6,100 to 10,119 square metres. Moreover, car park spaces are set to increase from 396 to 470, retail provision from 355 square metres to 700 square metres and the su- permarket's floor space from 2,000 to 2,621 square metres. The space allocated for coffee shop development will double from 355 to 700 square metres. DEVELOPERS will no longer re- quire the written consent of 75% of neighbouring owners when they ap- ply to change the street alignment or zoning of a particular area, if a government proposal that has been issued for public consultation is ap- proved. The former CEO of the Malta En- vironment and Planning Authority, planning lawyer Ian Stafrace, is scep- tical, noting that the consent mecha- nism avoided a "cascading of litiga- tion and disputes" after the approval of planning changes. But former planning minister Michael Falzon welcomed, when asked, the removal of the right giv- en to neighbours to 'veto' planning changes, insisting that "giving people incontestable rights over their neigh- bours' property never works". Changes to zoning and street align- ment are normally done through a Planning Control (PC) application. The changes can be requested by the authority itself if these are deemed to be in the interest of prop- er planning. In such cases the MEPA is not required to seek the consent of residents in the area surrounding the development. But when the changes are request- ed by a private person, the consent of 75% of neighbouring residents is needed. A PC application can change only two conditions: the road alignment and the zoning of a site. Stafrace argues that the legal no- tice requiring the consent of 75% of neighbouring residents did not di- minish the ultimate authority vested in MEPA to commence the plan- ning control process itself, without the need of any consent, or to carry out a local plan amendment either through its own motion, or at the re- quest of the minister. He notes that unlike a normal plan- ning application, a PC application can impact on the civil and property rights of other owners, especially in the case of street alignments. Through the proposed amend- ments, the mandatory requirement for consent will be removed for appli- cations which change the alignment, "not just of that part of the road onto which the applicant's property abuts, but even on a larger stretch of road", where other properties are located. But Falzon sees this as a case of giv- ing "people incontestable rights over their neighbours' property", some- thing which, according to the former minister, "never works." He also claims that existing regu- lations of the consent mechanism practically give the power of veto to owners, resulting in abuse. "People with the right to object were abusing of this right as many were doing so with ulterior motives, such as bad blood between owners of neighbouring properties rather than genuine ones and, even worse, using this right to extort money by the out- right 'sale' of their 'no objection'." Stafrace acknowledged that the consent mechanism represents "a cumbersome obligation on the ap- plicant" and may result in possible abuse. "There have been cases where ap- plicants would struggle to obtain consent, not because the proposal does not make sense, or because the proposal has a negative impact on a neighbouring property, but possibly for other reasons." But according to Stafrace, in such circumstances nothing stops the ap- plicant, even as the law stands today, from making submissions to MEPA so that it takes over the process and carries forward the proposed chang- es in the public interest and in the interest of proper planning. "MEPA should never shy away from this responsibility since the maintenance of the local plans and policies is one of its core functions," he argues. Effectively what will happen if the changes are approved is that MEPA will still determine applicant-driven PC applications without the neigh- bouring consent. Still, Stafrace believes that when determining these applications MEPA should be bound by the same principles of public interest and proper planning. "To my mind, the removal of this regulation should not be perceived as removing the public interest and proper planning benchmark through which PC applications, irrespective as to whether same are applicant- or MEPA-driven, are assessed and de- termined." On this point Falzon agrees. "It is MEPA that should take the re- sponsibility to ensure that requested changes do not realistically impinge negatively on others and on the com- munity." According to the government the aim of the reform is to facilitate the processing of planning control ap- plications. Owners presenting PC applications will still have to notify neighbouring owners of their plans. The changes do not apply to PC applications re- lated to sites added to development zones in the 2006 'rationalization' of boundaries. jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt Government seeks to remove 'neighbour's veto' Fancy having your neighbour apply to change, without your consent, the zoning or alignment of the street in which you live? JAMES DEBONO explains what government is suggesting in a public consultation Spinola project earmarks Ian Stafrace – a PC application can impact on the rights of others Michael Falzon (second from left) welcomed the removal of the right to veto changes