Tribunal allows industrial garages on “committed” land

In turn, the Planning Commission turned down the applicant’s request, concluding inter alia that “the proposed industrial development does not meet the principles and criteria set out in Structure Plan Policies RCO4 and RCO8 for development in that the proposed structures or facilities are not essential to agricultural or scenic interests.”

In addition, the Commission held that the proposed works would result in the take up of agricultural land, thus being in conflict with Structure Plan Policy AHF5 which essentially seeks to protect land of agricultural value.

In reaction, the applicant appealed the Commission’s decision before the Environment and Planning Tribunal. In his appeal, the applicant argued that the application was submitted “after a public consultation meeting held by officials of the Local Planning Unit on the initiative of the GRTU to discuss the Open Storage Policy”. The appellant highlighted that MEPA’s technical officers had indeed suggested that he proceeds with the application.

Furthermore, the applicant contended that “in Gozo there is a lack of small industrial garages and that consequently most of these garages are still located and operate within residential areas”, adding that “the approval of this application will help to alleviate such a problem”.

On a separate note, the applicant stated that the site is already committed and hence the present skyline would not be disturbed or disrupted by reason of “mass or location”.  In a concluding note, the appellant made specific reference to a letter released by the Department of Agriculture, which in turn had concluded that “no agricultural land is to be affected”.

The Authority nonetheless reiterated its position against the proposal, insisting once again that the interventions constitute piecemeal sprawl of industrial development into undeveloped land outside the development zone. The case officer also pointed out that two of the garages were being proposed within an area which was earmarked for landscaping in a previous permit.

In its assessment, the Tribunal confirmed that the applicant was proposing four garages in total, two of which were to be located on virgin land.  The Tribunal therefore concluded that the proposal may be accepted on condition that the two garages (which were to occupy a soil area) are eliminated from the proposal and an adequate landscaping scheme is implemented.  

[email protected]

Robert Musumeci is a warranted architect and civil engineer. He also holds a Masters Degree in Conservation and a degree in Law.