Build now, apply later
The idea of developers building first without the required permits is an insult to the Maltese public, to the Planning Authority, and to other developers in general.
If a developer feels they could construct first, and then apply for sanctioning, and said sanctioning is granted, it would only encourage other developers and members of the public to do the same.
The Planning Authority should take a harsher stand and immediately refuse any such applications, possibly even forcing the demolition of illegally built structures instead of issuing fines for long periods.
The idea of sanctioning should have a more limited scope, such as sanctioning a dwelling which has had some illegalities for many years (though there would need to be safeguards), or in cases where a home owner has to sanction illegalities made by the previous land owner.
If the Planning Authority does not act more harshly with such developers, then others
Editor’s pick
might decide to build first, ask later.
The latest example of such a situation was construction above a restaurant in St George’s Bay, Paceville, which was stopped by the Planning Authority enforcement officials.
The development was taking place prior to the application being decided upon.
Public outcry over development has already become more frequent, and the Authority cannot risk giving more reasons for public anger, lest whatever trust the public has left in the authority fades.
The thoughts of developers running the Authority, and the perception that the environment and surrounding residents are secondary considerations are already present, and if the Authority does not begin to get tough with developers, or change policy and focus on what is good for the community rather than for one developer, then public anger at the situation will only worsen.
The lack of a master plan for high rise developments has already angered residents in the Paceville, Swieqi, St Julian’s and Sliema areas, and the pathetic attempt to present one to the public saw many residents enraged, again resulting in the perception that the authority leans more towards developers.
Luckily, politicians were made to withdraw the plan in order to revise it. Yet allowing so many developments through without a plan in place is just as bad.
Since we are on the subject, we cannot fail to mention the recent blunder by a church entity – the Augustinian order – which has leased a plot of land to a hotel and retail company on which to build a 12-floor residential tower – right in the heart of Paceville.
The plans emerged just days after the Church’s environment commission blasted the db Group over its plans for a massive project at the former ITS site. One of its objections was, in fact, the lack of a master plan for the area.
We feel that, for the sake of consistency, the KA should also object to this proposal as well.