A permit to build ‘domestic stores’ on the airspace of a ridge-edge apartment block in Żebbuġ, Gozo, has sparked anger among residents, who have doubts about the eventual use of the unusual rooftop storerooms with a view.
The lawyer representing the residents, who intend to appeal the decision, has described the situation as “an old trick in the book” that sees ‘washrooms’ – as the original application indicates – morph into penthouses with panoramas.
“The suspicion is that the proposal is merely a guise to create a separate residential unit, or to connect the ‘domestic stores’ to the penthouse situated at the topmost level of the adjoining block of apartments,” Dr Tanya Sciberras Camilleri, who is representing the residents, said in the objection that “fell on deaf ears”.
During the public hearing, it was highlighted that the residents of the underlying apartments and adjoining block had nothing to do with the proposed washrooms and questioned whom they would serve without even any access by lift.
In their objection, the residents said the washrooms were never offered to them. The proposal did not make sense and there was no planning justification for the siting of domestic stores on top of a residential block also because the applicant did not own any of the underlying units.
The PA should not be so simplistic in its decision-making process
Sciberras Camilleri said that from one sitting to the next, the description of the development transformed from washrooms into “domestic stores”, with a door and apertures on to the terrace – “so that the goods in storage can enjoy the view!”
An examination of the plans demonstrates, in fact, that the proposed building is not intended as a store but as a residence, she said.
Domestic stores should be like garages, she explained, with no openings for maximum storage and stacking space. There is no reason for storage of any items on top of a block of apartments while marring a protected view.
According to the objectors, the proposed stores breached various planning policies. Their construction on top of the apartment block at the edge of the development zone was deemed “unacceptable” because it was visually intrusive and affected long views of the development when seen from the opposite side of the valley.
Policy dictated that massing and facades of new developments that overlooked ODZ areas, as was the case, should be designed in a way that respected the traditional edge of settlement skylines.
Sciberras Camilleri said neither the applicant nor the Planning Commission attempted to explain the reason for the store, showing the latter to be just a “rubber stamp”.
In a statement, the residents of Lighthouse Court and flat owners in adjacent Skapuccina Court A, where the stores will be built, expressed their disappointment that the Planning Authority “totally ignored” their point of view.
“We feel the PA should not be so simplistic in its decision-making process. It should foresee that granting building rights on the roof of apartments to a non-resident will also pave the way for more development on the neighbouring properties.”
The apartment blocks at the edge of the promontory are located in a quiet dead-end, which is already suffering environmental pressure because of parking and noise from nearby properties, the residents said.
“We deserve to spend the last years of our lives in peace after having paid our taxes all these years,” they protested.
“First, they ruined the environment in Malta and objections fell on deaf ears. Now, they have set their sights on Gozo and the ordinary people just have to take it,” they said of the “disrespect” they have experienced.
Airspace has become very valuable and owners hold on to it in the hope that height limitations would be increased, their lawyer said. The other tactic was to apply for a washroom and watch it transform into a luxury penthouse.