Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/631983
8 James Debono MEPA has regularised an illegal development located within the upper Ghajn Tuffieha military complex, which is being pro- posed for scheduling as a Grade 2 historical building. Both the Planning and the En- vironment directorates opposed the sanctioning while MEPA's Agricultural Advisory Commit- tee deemed most of the develop- ment proposed for sanctioning as not being necessary for agri- cultural needs. The accretion to the barracks had an enforcement notice against it, dating back to 2007. The sanctioned development in- cludes two stores occupying 40 square metres, a 22 square me- tre garage and a 40 square metre carport. Three different applications on the same holding were presented to regularise the illegalities on the site, adjacent to a 200 square metre old building, which serves as a residence. The residence was also a part of the military barracks but its use dates back to the 1960s, before the setting up of a planning regime. Marika Micallef and Nazzareno and Joseph Dimech who reside at the same address, presented the separate applications. Applica- tions presented in 2002, 2008 and 2010 had already been re- jected by MEPA but the permits were reconsidered according to the new rural policy approved by the government in 2015. But despite the changes in policy the Planning Directorate still insist- ed on refusing the development, especially because not all the illegalities on the site were ad- dressed by the sanctioning. The Environment Protection Directorate, which opposed the sanctioning, said the site is ad- jacent to coastal cliffs and sur- rounded by sensitive habitats. The Agriculture Advisory Committee also considered one of the stores as not being "genu- inely essential to the needs of agriculture" and that it was not even located on arable land. The AAC also noted that the appli- cant had other buildings on the land, which can be used for this purpose. The AAC also objected to the regularisation of the illegal garage and carport, consider- ing these as not essential for agriculture. On the other hand the AAC recommended the ap- proval of the other store since the owner did not have other buildings which could be used for this purpose. In a memo sent to MEPA in 2013 the Environment Protec- tion Directorate had noted that the development is more "akin to a garage" than to an agricul- tural store. Moreover it noted that the "store" and a "garage" both proposed for sanctioning, shared a common entrance. The EPD warned that the regu- larisation of the illegal develop- ment would set a precedent for the development of the whole area for similar development, In July 2013 the Heritage Advi- sory Committee had deemed the development incompatible with the historical site. But recently the re-appointed committee, now chaired by Magistrate Den- nis Montebello, recommended the approval of the development. The HAC is now saying that it accepts the necessity of agricul- tural facilities. When approving the develop- ment of the Hal Far tourist com- plex upon the recommendation of the Superintendence of Cul- tural Heritage, the Mepa board had imposed a Planning Gain of €20,000 for the restoration of the Upper Camp. But when asked for its comments on this application the Superintendence insisted that any decision on regularising illegal development is the sole prerogative of MEPA. maltatoday, WEDNESDAY, 27 JANuArY 2016 News IN ALL LEADING BOOK SHOPS HISTORY OF ORNITHOLOGY IN MALTA mePa sanctions illegal accretions to Ghajn Tuffieha barracks Store approved in scheduled Gnejna bay area James Debono THE Environment and Plan- ning Commission has over- ruled both the Planning Di- rectorate and the Environment Protection Directorate in ap- proving a 15 square metre store in Gnejna. The case officer had made it clear to the board that the ap- proval was in breach of MEPA's rural policy which precludes the development of stores in Level 1 and Level 2 protected areas. The approved store is located in an outside development zone within an area known as Irdum il-Hmar in the vicinity of Gne- jna bay. The site is scheduled as a Level 2 Area of Ecological Importance, an Area of High Landscape Value and a Spe- cial Area of Conservation. The rural policy approved in 2014 states that scheduled locations such as Level 1 or 2 Areas of Ecological Impor- tance "are in principle con- sidered inappropriate loca- tions" for the development of stores "unless it can be duly demonstrated through the necessary assessment that the development does not compromise the site scheduling characteristics". The EPC justified the ap- proval by saying that the proposed store and under- lying reservoir are located along the edge of a "change in soil levels" and the new development is "therefore mostly sunken". Indigenous trees have been included to buffer the store. But the EPD had warned that the site is "unspoilt by physi- cal development" and any new proposal for storage buildings could result in the environ- mental degradation of the area. The case officer described the development as being proposed "in a sensitive location, on high ground and within a relatively unspoilt area". The Agricultural Advisory Committee which assesses whether an application is re- quired for agricultural needs recommended the development as long as no other rooms ex- ist on the applicant's holdings. The applicant, Philip Muscat, has been registered as a farmer since October 2014 according to documentation provided by the Agriculture Department. The sanctioned development includes two stores occupying 40 sq m, a 22 sq m garage and a 40 sq m carport