Outgoing tribunal revokes permit where penthouse was already built

Following approval of the application, a neighbouring objector lodged an appeal, stating that he is the owner of the adjacent tenement. Appellant pointed out that an application to carry out extensive works was already lodged by applicant way back in 2001, during which process the case officer had alerted the then Commission  that “Sir Luigi Preziosi Street, Floriana is a visually sensitive area close to Misrah Sir Luigi Preziosi and the bastion walls” and yet, the application was approved.

To this end, objector stated that applicant had originally been granted a 36 square metre structure at roof level against the Directorate’s recommendation, following which an extension was built illegally so that the newly approved roof structure amounts to 67 square metres, or nearly double what had been approved in the previous application.

Case officer states that the roof structure, as approved, is adequately receded as per current policies

Moreover, the objector alleged that the application against which he lodged an appeal does not contain a detailed and clear description of the development. In conclusion, appellant maintained that he is a co-owner of the site under consideration and never gave his consent to applicant for the carrying out of the illegal works, which were eventually approved by MEPA.

On his part, the case officer reacted by stating that the roof structure, as approved in the latest application, is adequately receded as per current policies.

In its assessment, the Environment and Planning Tribunal observed that the authority went on to sanction an application which features a roof extension having an area which is double what had been originally approved. The tribunal further remarked that the authority had previously insisted that the roof structure be built in natural stone, whereas in the current application, it did not object to the structure being constructed in rendered brick work. The tribunal further maintained that the elevations as shown in the drawings (and eventually approved by the commission) did not tally with the situation on site. 

In the circumstances, the tribunal felt that appellant’s objections are justified and ordered the revocation of the permit.

Robert Musumeci is a warranted architect and civil engineer. He also holds a degree in law.