A country lane in Wardija, which was recently covered in concrete by Infrastructure Malta, has led to a sudden influx of applications for land divisions, with the Environmental Resources Authority (ERA) expressing concern about the future of the highly sensitive area.
ERA said it was worried that such applications were contributing to “unnecessary rural land take-up” and the formalisation of sites in ODZ areas.
“Rubble walls are typically constructed to prevent soil erosion rather than to create formal boundary walls around rural passageways. This proposal is considered objectionable from an environmental point of view,” ERA said in its comments on one of the applications which will be considered by the Planning Authority on Friday.
The application seeks permission for the repair and construction of existing, dry rubble walls, the removal of minor segments of dry walls, the removal of topsoil to create a passage for agricultural vehicles and the creation of a wooden gate.
There are other applications for the development of a tool shed and for the rebuilding of rubble walls which would ruin the present system of traditional terraced fields.
According to the case officer, although applicant Alexander Fenech is registered with the agriculture authorities, the site in question is registered on a third party.
The Agriculture Advisory Committee (AAC) observed that the proposal, covering almost 300 square metres of land, will lead to land defragmentation.
It also objected to the proposed pathway which it deemed to be excessive.
The case officer said that while there was no issue with the repairing of rubble walls, the proposal was to create a passage, 36 metres long and 2.7 metres wide as well as the creation of sidewalls.
He said the directorate shared the views that the proposed passage would result in land take-up, site formalisation and loss of rural character at the expense of good agricultural soil.
On the sidewalls, the case officer said these were being considered as a form of demarcation walls separating and dividing plots of lands against the site’s original contours.
Moreover, the demarcation rubble walls were considered unjustified since such walls are typically constructed to prevent soil erosion which is not the case in this application, making it objectionable.