Recent works carried out by the government in Comino broke the law, the Ombudsman has found.
The works consisted of the construction of a service culvert on a dirt road to Blue Lagoon, raising vociferous objections from environmental NGOs.
Construction was carried out without a planning permit and was, therefore, in breach of the law regulating planning and construction, the Office of the Ombudsman said in a report.
It recommends the site be returned to the state it was in before the works were carried out and that the PA should impose fines that would be placed in a fund for Comino’s environment.
Comino is classed as a Natura 2000 site and its environment needs to be conserved.
The report was spurred by a complaint filed by PN whip and opposition spokesperson for the environment Robert Cutajar.
Earlier this month, the works were stopped after the NGO outcry but a week later the Environment and Resources Authority allowed them to resume with “mitigation measures to curb environmental damage”.
The Ombudsman found that service culverts were built of brick in a recently dug ditch and paved over with concrete slabs.
Construction material was found dumped onto the garigue surroundings and exposed to the elements, while a retaining wall was damaged by heavy machinery.
The Ombudsman’s report, seen by Times of Malta, says that in February of last year, the Gozo ministry wrote to the Planning Authority asking for an exemption from planning permission to carry out works near Blue Lagoon under Article 70 of the Planning Development Act, which allows emergency works to be done without a permit in the interest of public safety.
A works method statement was sent to the PA on March 5, 2020. The ministry again asked for approval on March 24 and the next day the Malta Tourism Authority asked the PA to declare a position on the works.
On March 26, the PA replied that if the MTA was of the opinion that the indicated works were necessary due to a public safety concern, then planning permission was not necessary, adding that the ERA should be looped into the decision given the location of the site.
Retaining wall damaged by heavy machinery
The Ombudsman observed that the Comino steering committee, which is made up of representatives from the MTA, ERA, Transport Malta, the Ministry for Tourism and the Ministry for Gozo, had decided that works of a somewhat urgent nature were necessary.
These were primarily works on an existing water culvert, the mending of rubble walls and the resurfacing of the road leading to Blue Lagoon.
These conclusions were reached on the basis of an architect’s report compiled following a site inspection on August 29, 2017. The Gozo ministry and the PA discussed the possibility of granting an exemption and the authority consented subject to consultation with the ERA.
In turn, the ERA consented to the resurfacing and rubble wall maintenance work, noting that extensive works were not required and that they should be strictly limited to resurfacing with natural stone paving.
The authority also recommended that the culverts be repaired and the superintendence for cultural heritage consulted.
Following light maintenance work, the ministry decided to postpone works to the following year, given that summer was fast approaching. Up until that point, the construction of service culverts had not been discussed, the Ombudsman said.
The idea of adding service culverts was proposed last January following consultation with Enemalta, with the reasoning that since works were set to be carried out in the area, these should be done in one go.
ERA replied that it would give its consent subject to other necessary permits from itself and other relevant authorities. The authority was informed that works would begin at the end of February.
“While it is right that the government works included the thought of services before resurfacing works, it is essential that all permits are in order to construct a service culvert, particularly in a sensitive zone that is subject to environmental protection such as Comino,” the Ombudsman said.
“While the necessity of permits from other entities was communicated by ERA on two occasions, the PA was neither informed nor approached about the service culvert, particularly whether this would require permission under the same sub-article 70 of the development planning act adopted for the works, when these only concerned resurfacing and rubble wall maintenance.
“While the service culvert is a work that ought to be carried out before resurfacing, this does not mean that this service culvert qualifies under emergency works with concerns to public safety,” the report continues.
As no permit was issued by the Planning Authority for the construction of the service culvert, the PA has no other avenue but to issue a stop works notice, the Ombudsman said.
The construction of a similar service culvert at this site, he added, should be subject to a full development application, with considerations for the use of clean energy as well as being fully below the surface of the road.