The Ramblers Association of Malta was very pleased that the
Portomaso Extension application was rejected by the MEPA board.
Ramblers are however not so pleased that the board was
divided on this issue, when, to all intents and purposes, the decision should
been crystal clear. This is in view of the fact that the original permit, for
the Portomaso buildings, stated that no further development could be carried
out in this area. Apart from the other
reasons militating against approval of this application, this condition alone
should have been enough for this application to be thrown out, without MEPA
wasting its time, and everyone else's, in considering and evaluating this
spurious application.
It is therefore surprising that half the MEPA board members
actually voted in favour of this development. It seems that the recent cultural change in
favour of more sustainable development has not permeated to all the board
members. Those who voted “yes” are apparently still in favour of the maxim:
"If there is an open space, let's build it".
Ramblers also note that the PL representative on the board was
one of those who voted in favour of the project. This causes us to question the
PL’s current policy on the environment, as this looks more favourable to
unrestrained development. Unfortunately,
the PN representative was absent for this crucial vote, so we cannot know how
he would have voted.
We are also not in agreement with the MEPA chairman's stance
that the restriction against further development should not have been included
in the first permit. According to the Times: "Mr Walker criticised the decision to include the condition in
the first permit precluding further development, saying that the hands of
future board members should not be tied down in this way". This is
in fact the reason for these restrictions, to tie the hand of future board
members, so that developments cannot be extended in the "usual"
manner, by submitting one application after another, each one extending the
built-up area. Mr. Walker, more than
anyone else, should be aware of this.
Having said that, Mr
Walker should still be commended for doing the right thing, and voting against.
26 April, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment