The chairperson of the Planning Commission responsible for decisions regarding Outside Development Zone applications admitted it is high time for a change in policy, just hours after a property magnate surprisingly renounced a controversial planning permit.
Gozitan developer Joseph Portelli on Saturday announced he would not be forging ahead with plans to turn dilapidated ruins in the outskirts of Qala into a sprawling pool villa, just two days after obtaining a permit.
Speaking to The Sunday Times of Malta on Saturday, Elizabeth Ellul defended the decision to grant the permit while conceding the need for change.
“I was the author of the current policy and know it inside out. A policy proves its worth when it is applied. I think that for the sake of clarity, correctness and certainty, the time is ripe to change and amend the current rules.”
The decision to approve the plans for the countryside site had led to vocal criticism from NGOs and the Opposition and also caused friction among certain Labour Party exponents who publicly disapproved of the decision.
It is not yet known whether in view of the voluntary renouncement, the PA will now take the initiative to revoke the Qala permit.
While an appeal can still be lodged to annul the permit, there are also provisions in the law through which the PA can withdraw a permit.
Ms Ellul disagreed with claims that developers had found creative ways to abuse the policy since it allows vague and subjective interpretations.
“In the case of Qala, the application was drawn up according to the existing policy,” she insisted, when contacted.
“All my commission members accepted that the proof of residence through a death certificate of 1921 and a notarial declaration were enough. That is why, in our opinion, the application was valid.”
Ms Ellul disagreed with claims that developers had found creative ways to abuse the policy
Challenged on the fact that the rural remains were not serving as a residence until 1978, as there was no roof in place according to aerial pictures, Ms Ellul said “this was not a requirement according to the policy”.
The planning directorate, another arm of the PA, disagrees with this interpretation.
Asked about her potential conflict of interest after it was revealed that her architect husband had worked on a mega-project in which Joseph Portelli was one of the developers, Ms Ellul insisted she did not know the identity of her husband’s clients.
“In the case of Qala, the developer was Mark Agius and Mr Portelli did not appear anywhere. How am I supposed to know who is also behind the project?” she asked.
When it was pointed out that basic research could have yielded this information, Ms Ellul agreed “this could be part of the work of the planning directorate”.
Following public outrage following last Thursday’s permit approval, Joseph Portelli declared for the first time that he was the applicant. In a statement, the company, J Portelli Projects, defended the project, stating this was submitted “after extensive research which confirmed that the property was used as a residence in the past”.
Criticising the planning authority’s directorate and the media for “singling out this application”, the company said it had accepted the fact the public was worried over the development.
In direct criticism at the planning directorate, which until last week fell under the responsibility of CEO Johann Buttigieg, the developers complained of “odd reasons” for the way their application was treated.
“At the sitting of the commission the authority also sent officers to make submissions,” the company said, insisting this was not the process followed in any other case in the last six years.
In a reaction after Saturday's decision, former Labour leader and sitting MEP Alfred Sant appeared to be calling for the resignation of Ms Ellul.
In a post on social media, he said “the permit approved by the Planning Commission puts its chairperson in an impossible situation”.
The permit was approved by the Planning Board in which Ms Ellul is a member. The other government appointees, Jacqueline Gili, Karl Attard, Alfred Pule, Joe Brincat, Duncan Mifsud and Labour MP Clayton Bartolo also voted in favour.
Chairman Vince Cassar, Environment and Resources Authority chairman Victor Asciak, NGOs representative Annick Bonello and Nationalist Party representative Marthese Portelli voted against.
In a statement, the Malta Developers’ Association said it hoped the new policies would be straightforward and clear, without leaving too much leeway for different interpretations.
Qala: The rules, the facts and the recommendations:
Rule 1: Qala development applicants had to prove that the building was covered by development permission, or that it was a pre-1978 building.
Fact: Aerial pictures indicate that the building (ruins) existed before 1978.
PA Directorate: No issue
Rule 2: The Qala building proposed to be converted had to be used as a residence, at least until 1978.
Fact: The 1978 aerial photos clearly show that the building had no roof. This meant it was not used as a residence by 1978.
PA Directorate: There is clear proof that in 1978 the building was not used for residential purposes. The proposed development does not qualify in terms of policy.
Rule 3: Use of building as a residence until 1978 must be
legally established.
Fact: Applicants provided a 1921 death certificate of an 83-year-old farmer, stating she was found dead in the place which the developers applied to convert into a residence. Times of Malta later established that the same farmer was registered to reside in another house in Qala centre.
PA Directorate: A death certificate does not prove that the area was used as a residence. Also, there is undeniable proof that in 1978 the building was not used for residential purposes. The proposed development does not qualify in terms of policy.
Rule 4: The Qala building, if converted, shall be used for the same reasons it had until 1978.
Fact: The use of the building until 1978 was not residential.
PA Directorate: The development of a new dwelling is not permitted under the policy.
Rule 5: To be considered for re-use, existing building must have a minimum habitable area of 100 square metres.
Fact: Qala building ruins have a floor area of 31.5 square metres and when excluding the thickness of the walls, existing structure has an internal floor area of 21 square metres.
PA Directorate: The property does not qualify for a new residential use under current policy.
Rule 6: The building should be limited to a use that would lead to an improvement to the area and/or to the agricultural and/or animal welfare.
Fact: The application was for a residential dwelling and not for agricultural or animal welfare use.
PA Directorate: The proposed development does not qualify in terms of policy.
Rule 7: The proposal does not involve substantial lateral or vertical extensions and or substantial rebuilding.
Fact: Developer’s proposal extends the current building by some four times.
PA Directorate: The proposal involves substantial lateral or vertical extensions. The proposed development does not qualify in terms of policy.
Rule 8: The use of the building shall be subject to prior consultation with the authorities regulating such use.
Fact: ERA and the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage are against the proposal.
PA Directorate: The proposed development does not qualify in terms of policy.