The Planning Authority was born out of the reform of MEPA, which has definitely given the Environment Resources Authority more power, but it still remains a toothless organisation, considering that some 70 per cent of its recommendations are ignored. Do you believe the ERA should be given more power and control when it comes to PA decisions?
No, 70 per cent of its recommendations are not ignored: this is a misconception. Obviously, the ERA has the remit to give importance to the environment, just as the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage (SCH) gives importance to cultural heritage. The PA has to try and achieve a balance between both the plans and the policies we have and also the opinions of the other entities, which are sometimes conflicting. So, I would not say that it is toothless – there are points on which we agree and points on which we disagree.
The fact that we do not have more ERA representatives does not mean that we do not take environmental aspects into consideration, because each and every board member has, to a certain extent, some sort of environmental background. There are instances where you have board members who would normally vote in favour, but on certain projects vote against, and vice-versa. So I wouldn't say there is the need for further votes for ERA, because the PA, for example, does not have a vote in the ERA. ERA has its own agenda and it should do well by promoting that agenda, but why should we give greater powers to the ERA and not do the same with the SCH?
We have a significant number of ODZ applications being approved. A total of 745 developments in ODZ areas were approved by the PA in 2016 alone and residential applications in ODZ are also on the rise. Does ODZ actually mean ODZ?
I do not think there is any sector at the moment where the number of applications has not increased. With the economic boom, people are tending to develop what they would not have previously considered developing. To be fair, some of the policies that have been reviewed are – to a certain extent – even more stringent than they were before, and they have been relaxed a bit in other areas.
The figures do not reflect the whole story, because those would have been the regeneration of existing dwellings. People have that extra pound and they are looking to regenerate existing property.
This mix and match gives certain aspects and entices people to purchase in these areas.
The policy changed a number of years ago and we were always transparent in the process. So nobody can actually say that we tried to hide any aspects of the policy.
There is a perception that the policies are geared towards developers and applicants, which allow rampant development in ODZ, especially given recent cases involving homes for the elderly and fuel stations. Do you agree?
No, because there are a number of policies which do not allow certain things to take place. Before we had the fuel station policy, did we have fuel stations being approved? They were approved in sensitive areas. Now, at least, the fuel station policy has been reduced to certain locations with certain characteristics but, obviously, we need to regenerate areas were existing fuel stations exist, and they have to be given an incentive to actually move away from urban areas. This is the balancing effect. If you were to ask the ERA, they would say there should be absolutely no development in ODZ, but we also have a responsibility to regenerate other areas. This is a classic example of situations where we have to find a balance.
The PA plays a fundamental role in environmental protection. Unfortunately, Malta appears to be obsessed with concrete and has become one big construction site. Does the PA give enough importance to the environment? It is clear it is a big issue for many people, so shouldn't more be done?
Yes, I would say that we do give enough importance to the environment: maybe not as much as some other sectors would want us to give, but we also have another sector that actually does not want give that environmental protection.
With regard to policies, the ERA actually has two votes out of seven at executive council level, and this does not mean that the other five do not have an environmental conscience.
Dust clouds have become a common feature in areas with a large amount of development, which is detrimental to both the environment and to people's health. Technology beyond simply watering the site is out there – as seen in numerous countries across the EU. Why is this not introduced here and enforced?
Firstly, this does not fall under the remit of the PA; it is the responsibility of the Building Regulations Office (BRO). As you know, we have decided to step in to help the BRO. Yes, there are technologies that can suppress dust, and there is certainly the question of the way construction companies affect third parties in both terms of pollution and noise, and this is why I have always believed that people are not necessarily against development but the way a development is carried out. This is what the public cannot accept, that the contractor does not take any notice of the needs of society.
That's fair, but we do see a large number of illegalities on a daily basis; the fact that illegal work at Paranga was only stopped after The Malta Independent reported it shows that enforcement remains an issue. Is this because of a lack of political will, or is it an issue with funding and staffing?
As I said, it was not part of our remit but we have stepped in because the BRO may be understaffed due to the huge volume of planning applications we have experienced in the past few years. We have stepped up enforcement and have recruited an additional seven officers. It is nothing to do with not wanting to employ more officers or because there is some sort of political pressure which does not allow us to.
As you said, the PA has become involved with enforcement. However, even in cases when illegalities are discovered, the fines do not appear to be working given the massive financial gains made in the construction industry. Should more suspensions, removal of licences or bans be introduced and be more easily applied?
What I can assure is that, from the start of this enforcement drive, we have always had good cooperation from the contractors. Obviously, yes, it wasn't easy on the first day that we went out. I think you've seen the statistics that around half were non-compliant. On the second time around, it was around 20 per cent but as soon as they saw that re-inspections were happening, even on the same day, it stopped. In fact, we've had some police on standby since.
And will this initiative be sustained in the long-term or is it just a case of pleasing the public for a couple of months?
It will be sustained. We want to bring everyone on board. We are stepping in to help BRO and hopefully, BRO will manage on its own eventually, but if PA needs to sustain it, we will do.
When it comes to bans and suspensions, do you think they should be increased?
Yes. We had six police officers on standby to ensure that if the work did not stop, the police would stop it.
To move on, given that the PA and the people working for it, including you yourself, is a politically appointed institution, how can a conflict of interest be separated when projects in which there is a government interest are brought in front of the PA?
When the PA itself applies there is the utmost transparency. For example, originally I wanted the Chairman's building to extend further, but when we consulted the SCH, we had to revise our plans. We have even more responsibility for ensuring that when these things are done there are even more checks and balances.
And, just for an example, this newsroom reported that the PA had filed an application to excavate inside the Grade 1 scheduled bastion at its own offices for a staircase. How can fairness be ensured and is this the correct example the PA should be setting?
First of all, you need to look at the functionality of the building. So, the fact that you have a Grade 1 building does not mean that it is a monument because it is not. You have to ensure that is functional and understand that amendments and alterations can take place. We have many Grade 1 Buildings that have undergone alterations. For this particular project, we have chosen an area where we can do a surgical cut in an area where a penetration already exists in the bastions. We have consulted with the SCH, and they have endorsed it from their end.
from The Malta Independent https://ift.tt/2IG2XAb
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment