Floriana embellishment works

I refer to the article entitled "Bureaucracy stalls Floriana embellishment works" (July 3). I believe it is unethical that after having personally advised a journalist about the status of the works at the Air Force memorial garden in Floriana, The Times thought fit to capture its readers' attention by alleging that "bureaucracy stalls... works".

It is most unfair since in the process that the Malta Environment and Planning Authority is fulfilling its role as watchdog to protect the environment, it is conveniently labelled as being bureaucratic. I will give an account of the details involved in assessing the impact of the proposed works and leave judgment to readers whether we acted in a proper manner.

The works were taken in hand in February 2004 by the Environmental Landscapes Consortium (ELC) without an application or permit despite the fact that the site is scheduled as part of the Valletta fortifications.

On February 17, 2004, our officers inspected the site and identified the uncovering of historic features. Mepa stopped the works and informed the Superintendent of Cultural Heritage and the Superintendent of Fortifications. The works included the excavation of a reservoir and planting of trees.

The excavations uncovered the front works of the Valletta fortifications, an air vent of the train tunnel running from the Valletta ditch towards Portes des Bombes, underneath the Mall, and an armoured electrical cable. Obviously, such works had to be stopped as they were actually damaging the historic features and public service utilities.

Following a site inspection, the Superintendent of Cultural Heritage (SCH) in two letters, dated March 9 and April 20, 2004, to the Director of Planning expressed his concern about the works affecting historic features. The SCH recommended that:

i) no works should proceed;
ii) the developer should submit scaled plans showing the historic features;
iii) the historic features should be preserved; and
iv) the proposed reservoir should not have any impact on the historic features.

SCH also informed Mepa that his officers had met representatives from ELC to identify a suitable location for the reservoir. The applicant was requested and agreed to prepare surveys of the historical features and submit a new proposal. SCH sent a further communication to Mepa on June 24, 2004, insisting on the relocation of the reservoir and its monitoring.

The Superintendent of Fortifications was also consulted on March 25, 2004 and replied on April 7, 2004, recommending that the historic features "must not be demolished but preserved" and requested that these be monitored.

For the application to continue being processed, on April 22, 2004, the case officer formally asked the architect to submit "a plan/documentation of the exposed features in their context" so that the proposed reservoir can be located away from these features.

The architect sent the requested additional information on June 9, 2004 but this was limited to the location of the features alone, not showing any proposal for relocating the reservoir. A new site location for the reservoir was submitted on July 2, 2004.

We are now again in consultation with the Superintendent of Cultural Heritage to determine whether the proposed new location of the reservoir is acceptable. Hopefully, the matter will now be settled in a couple of days.

Dr Cassar is Director General, the Malta Environment and Planning Authority.