28th May 2012
24,110 SIGNATURE PETITION PRESENTED TO PM & LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
The full version of the petition may be found
http://www.di-ve.com/Default.aspx?ID=72&Action=1&NewsId=92609&newscategory=36&cache=false
4th June 2012
SIGNATURE PETITION TABLED ON MONDAY 4th JUNE
|
Petition laid on the House of Parlliament 4-06-12.pdf Size : 122.473 Kb Type : pdf |
MASSIVE 24,000+
SIGNATURE PETITION SUBMITTED TO PRESIDENT OF MALTA
6th June 2012
21st June 2012
A DAY OF SHAME FOR MALTA AS
7th July 2012
URGENT CALL FOR SPONSORS & DONATIONS
IN VIEW OF COURT PROCEEDINGS
With reference to our
efforts and those of Nature Trust (Malta), aimed at reverting a massive
development permit at Wied il-Ghasel's world protected green core, we
would like to re-announce that the appeal has been won by the developers.
Following
considerable deliberation, as required by an in depth evaluation of the
appeal report, we have resolved to go on with the last step, this being
the law courts.
We shall be submitting our second appeal this coming Monday, 9th July, 2012.
However, the past 3 years
of constant campaigning, and all the relative legal fees, have cost us
thousands of euros, and it is only through the extreme sacrifice of our
members, and our own voluntary work, that we have come this far.
We
have had to throw everything in to keep afloat, and all our educational
and cultural projects have had to be shelved, since the budget
afforded to them had to be committed to this crucial struggle.
The
problem is that HPM has bled dry, and there is no way we can submit the
appeal unless we manage to put together 900 euros, and an additional
300 to cover legal costs and related expenses.
(Since both
Nature Trust and Harsien Patrimonju Mosti are recognised objectors, it
was agreed that the former would be the official appellant while the
latter was to provide the extra funds and logistics required to tackle
this particular case.
If you would like to contribute to this cause, kindly mail any cheque donations to
The Secretary,
Harsien Patrimonju Mosti
16, Aquarius Bldg, Floor 2
Triq il-Wied
Mosta
All donations shall be recorded and acknowledged (by email where possible to cut down on postage). Kindly forward this to anyone you know might be in a position to help. Having done all in our power, and even well beyond, our success now lies within the power of the people, entirely!
Jonathan Paul Cuschieri KLJ
Secretary, HPM
We shall soon have a bank account number for direct debit, but right now there is no time or energy to address that issue.
25th July 2012
LATEST APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE WIED IL-GHASEL SITE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY MEPA
THE IMPLICATIONS:
We make reference to yet a 3rd new application for the development of the Wied il-Ghasel ridge site, lodged by the developers in Spring 2012.
This proposal, a new application entirely, is heavily based on a formerly granted permit, and retains the same plans and conditions, minus 2 underground levels and with one of the edges closest to the valley bed trimmed down.
Numerous objections were submitted by several NGOs and other third parties, but the application was recommended for approval in the last few weeks, with a decisive sitting to be held on the 8th August, 2012.
HPM,
in agreement with other recognised objectors, is in the process of
lodging submissions based on the approval recommendation report. This is
an extract of our submissions:
Nothing
in this recommendation for approval has been said about the devastating
impact this project is going to have in terms of over-development.
This has partially been recognized by the authority as follows:
“The removal of on-site car parking facilities is a planning concern”
It
is an even greater concern to existing uses including the residents and
commercial entities in the area, since even without this development
and proposed influx of nearly 40 cars, parking and traffic issues are
already intense!
The
addition of this large number of vehicles cannot but have a huge
detrimental effect and long term problems as a direct result of
over-development, with a huge imposed inconvenience to both the people
who live and work in this area.
The
situation today already is difficult, as shop owners require parking
spaces for their patrons as well as their staff and have to compete with
the residents for an already limited and inadequate parking.
The conclusion of the authority’s report states that “The proposed modifications are within the parameters as established in PA 5560/05”, and that “Despite
that the proposed complete elimination of car parking from the site,
limiting the amount of excavations would have less negative impacts on
Wied il-Ghasel and the existing Girna”, hence “An approval is therefore being recommended.”
(It
was also proposed that the sum of EUR 70,813 shall be paid to the
council in terms of the Commuted Parking Payments Scheme of Mosta, “to compensate for the shortfall of 38 parking spaces”).
We
find this conclusion to be seriously against the principles of
sustainable development, and wholly insensitive to proper development
guidelines. We also find no justification in such an approval, and the
conclusion does not properly address some very serious issues.
The proposal of the mentioned compensatory sum to the council in no way addresses the above concerns either.
Furthermore,
this grant permit recommendation bases its consent gauged on the fact
that there shall be less damages and negative impacts than as per permit
05560/05, when the law clearly states that no negative impact(s) should
be allowed, especially in such sensitive areas.
One
must also consider the ethical and moral responsibilities of this
authority in terms of its own mission statement which clearly states
that sites of certain value, including open spaces is heavily dense town
cores should be protected, and not tarnished, or even destroyed.
The
fact that the former permit was to have a greater negative impact only
shows that our claims in that regard have been correct, and both for
this, and other reasons, PA 05560/05 should never have been granted.
We
also refer to issues raised in former site evaluations by MEPA’s own
case officers, and remind the authority that over-development and the
detrimental effect on the area with all its assets and existing uses,
was one of the main causes for refusal.
Despite several aesthetic modifications from the original submissions, the issue of over-development has never been properly addressed. Along with the latest consideration pertaining to parking issues, these factors by themselves should have been and remain enough to prompt the authority to turn this application down.
As for the former application, an appeal in court is now ongoing, and we strongly believe that in view of fairness, reference to it should only be made once proceedings have expired and the final decision has been taken.
9th August 2012
LATEST APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE WIED IL-GHASEL TURNED DOWN BY MEPA BOARD
At this stage, the developers submitted a third application for the same site, which would omit further digging due to the exclusion of the garage levels, and with the reduction of the building line in the development area closest to the valley bed itself.
Although HPM and other NGOs, including Flimkien Ghall-Ambjent Ahjar (FAA) and the Rambler’s Association of Malta (RAM), Nature Trust (Malta), and others, agree in principle that this application would constitute far less damage, the site would be ruined all the same, and the impact on the valley, its ecosystems and other attributes would still be unacceptable.
Furthermore, the lack of garages would also have resulted in at least 38 cars having nowhere to park, in an already intense commercial and residential zone, where parking is already an issue. Accidents have also become and all too regular occurrence here due to the intense overload of the designated city centre, of which the respective road forms an integral part.
This was one of the main points raised during the board sitting held yesterday, whereby Chev. Jonathan Paul Cuschieri, in a joint representation for HPM, NT, the Residential Assn, and a number of private individuals and residents, made reference to the fact that over-development had already featured as an issue when the former permit had been initially turned down by MEPA’s case officers, and approval of this new application would lead to an unacceptable state of chaos in the area, to the detrimental consequence of all the residents and many commercial or work related entities.
The board was hence faced with a dilemma leading to a lengthy evaluation and much consideration. The only choice the board had, in essence, was whether to approve the newer permit in order to lessen the negative impact on the valley, but have around 40 vehicles added to an area that already has known parking problems, or to refuse it and avoid this situation, potentially allowing the older permit for further digging of the garage levels to be revived.
The developers made it clear that if their new bid was turned down, they could resort to said former permit and carry on with the digging. At this point an allegation was also made by the developers’ architect that it was MEPA who had asked them to come up with a solution that would avoid further digging of live rock, hence this new application. This statement was deemed unacceptable to the board however, and this in no uncertain terms.
HPM pointed out that in reality, this was a lose-lose situation, and made it clear that this was the result of (formerly) granting an unsustainable permit which would either destroy the valley, or alternatively, if this amended application is approved, still ruin the valley and constitute an extreme case of over-development, along with other concerns.
HPM also added that despite the appeal over the original permit was confirmed in favour of the developers, since this was still being contested in court, its revocation was still possible. Hence it is unfair to relate to a permit that is still being legally disputed.The Board made it clear however, that its decision had to be based in the light of the developer having a valid permit.
After a lengthy deliberation between all parties involved, the board eventually ruled that the new application would indeed cause over-development, and that the influx of such a large number of vehicles would be too much of a strain on an already heavily burdened system and area.
The developers were asked whether they would consider reducing the number of apartments as to provide for adequate garaging space, and whether they wanted the decision to be postponed as to allow for fresh plans to be submitted, but this was declined on the basis that the project would no longer be economically viable and profitable.
The Board members, still divided, then took a vote, with the result that this new application was refused.
In the meantime, HPM & NT shall carry on with their representations in court. HPM shall also be following up its petition, as to ensure that this important and unique site is saved and preserved.
A copy of the joint submission made to the board may be seen here:
26th SEPTEMBER 2012
Rock cutting and digging commenced last week and is now going on at full speed, to make good for three and a half years of disruption. Despite everything, works have already been stopped this week since these had proceeded without the proper screening required by law. This however was soon rectified, and works were again allowed to continue. Again since the developers have repetitively infringed several of the conditions subject to which the permit was bound.
In any serious country, where the law is applied firmly and consistently, these numerable and serious relapses, would have long seen the permit withdrawn. But despite what is said on paper, reality is often very much in contrast with established principles and declared values.
Compare MEPA's mission statements and its many press releases and declarations about its determination in saving what should be saved and protected to the reality you see on these pages.
Our last hope remains in the value of democracy, which is why a petition with over 24,000 signatures was lodged in parliament and also with the President of Malta.
Any serious and thorough investigation of our claims will immediately show that this is a clear cut case of environmental abuse, and the fact that court proceedings are currently underway while every passing day sees more damage to what we are trying to save and protect is unacceptable.
This is why we, and so many others, including the vast majority of similar NGOS have requested Malta's electoral representatives, or members of parliament, and their respective heads, including the President, to intervene and restore order, democracy, transparency, and all that one expects in a serious society and country. This includes the immediate revocation of this flawed permit as well as permanent protection of a unique and cherished site!
29th SEPTEMBER 2012
To add insult to injury, the works are being carried out with total disregard to permit conditions, along with relative additional instructions by MEPA itself.
The clips show above, taken over the past days, show inadequate hoarding, and trucks leaving the site without having their wheels and undercarriages washed or cleaned. This was a specific condition made by Mr. Alex Borg, in his capacity of Enforcement Director, within the said authority, after the site had been sealed due to several breaches, which already included this shortcoming.
The screening is clearly not able to withstand force 8 winds, despite this being another specific instruction and point of law, is completely destroyed / missing on one side, adjoining gardens full of trees and 3rd party property in which people, not rats, live.
More soil was also being removed by the truckload, despite the fact that all soil was to be preserved. We can understand that a minor loss would be sustained, but our photos and evidence show several trucks being filled with large quantities of soil. The same goes for rubble wall stones, which should have been removed by hand, and kept on site. The facts speak by themselves:
Above: soil and rubble stone wall pieces and foundations being carted off despite instructions to the contrary.
Several reports have been made to both MEPA and MRRA, the 2 local authorities concerned with the monitoring and enforcement of relative legislation. No steps have been taken so far, since up till today at 1.30pm, works were proceeding at full speed.
This brings to light the absolute futility of MEPA setting conditions which may then be infringed at will, and on several occasions. It is another great shame and abuse, that the relapsing nature of the developers in question remains oblivious to the authorities, and that such acts of direct defiance are allowed to carry on!--------------------------------------------------------