The Planning Authority has unanimously rejected a development application for a new petrol station in Attard, sparing agricultural land.
The application had proposed turning some 3,000 square metres of rural land outside development zone in Mdina Road for the relocation of a petrol station from Valley Road, Msida.
The refusal comes just one week after the Planning Authority gave the green light to the contentious Central Link road project in the same area. The controversial project will see the uprooting of 549 trees and 49,000 square metres of agricultural land taken up. The government has, however, promised to replace the trees and add more.
A case officer had recommended the petrol station proposal for refusal, arguing, among other things, that the site was less than 500 metres away from the nearest fuel station.
But the project’s architect contested this, saying that the distance would increase to 510 metres thanks to the of the Central Link project.
Environment Resources Authority chair Victor Axiak said this was hardly “useful” and argued that the same argument could be made to apply to the reviewed version of the current fuel station policy.
A draft of the revised policy, not yet implemented, would reduce the maximum fuel station footprint to 1,000 square metres and increase the minimum distance between facilities to 1.5 kilometres.
Speaking on behalf of the Attard local council, architect Peter Falzon objected to the application, saying it would be detrimental to the surrounding rural area.
We cannot keep giving petrol stations in certain areas when the environment is being sacrificed
“We cannot keep giving petrol stations in certain areas when the environment is being sacrificed,” he said.
The Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) has objected to the plans, insisting there was no justification for the “further loss of rural land and associated environmental impacts”.
According to the study, five Aleppo pines and one olive tree would have had to be removed, with the potential for relocation described as “very limited”. While new trees would be planted, it will take “considerable time” for them to reach the same level of maturity.
In a statement after the PA decision, the Environment Authority said it welcomed the rejection of the application.
"ERA is pleased and welcomes the decision for refusal that the PA Board has opted for, in view of its clear stand that the loss of potentially good quality agricultural land and of protected trees should not happen in order to accommodate a fully-fledged commercial enterprise. ERA was adamant that the proposed development is objectionable in principle, as it would contribute to urban sprawl at the expense of farmland and mature indigenous trees," it said.