Superintendence shoots down new plans for Mgarr solar farm

Malta’s cultural heritage watchdog has reiterated its objection to the mega solar farm being proposed on farmland in Mgarr, on land the size of six football grounds in an area designated for its archeological and ecological importance at Tar-Ragħad.

Following the refusal of the project in March, Electrofix Limited has not only appealed the decision but has presented new plans which envisage 6,528 panels on 18,760sq.m of land – which represents 42% of the 44,500sq.m site. Previous plans rejected were for 5,784 solar panels on 90 greenhouses over 14,100sq.m of land – a land coverage of 32%. 

Moreover, the height of the panels was reduced from 4.5m to 4m and the greenhouses will be placed into the ground using small concrete plinths to ensure that no damage is done to any archaeological remains. 

But the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage is not impressed by the latest plans.

“These revised drawings do not alter the principle of the application and thus remain objectionable.”

Moreover the SCH has reserved the right to make further representations if required in the pending appeal procedures.

According to the SCH the area is one of considerable archaeological importance to the extent that it is included within the Mgarr Area of Archaeological which includes the World Heritage Sites of Ta’ Ħaġrat and Skorba.

Not only will the proposed solar farm “negatively affect the perception of the cultural landscape” but the very nature of the proposed development is deemed to be “incompatible with the cultural and scenic value of the area:.

Moreover any ground disturbance in this area, resulting from the excavation of a reservoir and the extensive trenching required for connectivity between the solar panels and the substation and from substation to the national grid may also impact directly on archaeological remains. 

The SCH also reiterated concern by Heritage Malta as the state agency responsible at law for the management of the World Heritage Sites of Ta Ħaġrat and Skorba that the proposed development may increase the risk of flooding at Ta’ Ħaġrat due increased rainwater run off resulting from the extensive soil-cover associated with the proposed greenhouses.

PA defends decision 

The Planning Authority has strongly rebutted Electrofix’s claim that the proposed solar farm is primarily an agricultural project.

It said the project was refused as it was deemed to be in breach of the solar farm policy, which limits such developments to quarries and brownfield sites. But the developers have now appealed arguing that their project is primarily an agricultural one.

In its appeal against the PA’s refusal, Electrofix claimed that the greenhouses will be used to grow “extensive amounts of crops which will be put on the local market for sale, while the solar activity will also be used to lower the commercial cost of the agricultural produce apart from contributing to the national electricity grid.” 

But in its official reply filed by its lawyers, the PA questioned the impression being given by Electrofix that the greenhouses will “simply act as a roof over agricultural land”, noting that the PA’s advisory panel on agricultural issues had already made it clear that “it is evident from the proposal itself that the primary objective is a solar farm and not a greenhouse.”

Electrofix’s claim that its project is primarily an agricultural one was never backed by technical studies which had been requested before the original application was turned down.

In fact, Electrofix failed to present a “detailed technical report” requested by the PA’s advisory panel on agricultural issues. The report had to be certified by a qualified engineer and agronomist to document the daily light integral required by the crops grown in the proposed greenhouses, and the photoperiod required by these crops. The report also had to show how the solar greenhouse will ensure that this photoperiod is reached.

In the absence of such documentation the PA insisted that the project “cannot be regarded as one benefitting the agricultural sector” and confirms that the project is “just a solar farm.”

Plans cannot be changed at the last moment, PA insists

The PA rebutted the argument that the company was denied a fair hearing after the authority refused to postpone its decision to give Electrofix more time to present new plans, insisting that by law it has to take its decision based on information presented before the publication of the case officer.

In this case the request for a suspension was made in January 2022, a full month after the Authority had finalised a case officer report which recommended refusal. 

Moreover the PA had informed the applicant of its concerns about the project in a screening letter issued in August 2020, providing ample time for a change in plans. 

Since both the ERA and the PA’s agriculture advisory committee had objected “in principle” to the project, “no amount of minor changes” could change these objections.

In their appeal Electrofix claimed they had unsuccessfully asked the PA board to suspend the application so that they would be in “a position to submit revised plans following discussions with the Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Economy (Trade Department) and the Ministry of Energy.” The ministries for environment and energy, the economy, and agriculture, have all denied having held any talks with the proponents of the Mġarr mega-solar farm.

Suggesting that Electrofix wanted to discuss its plans with the three government entities in question, the appeal does not state any such meetings actually took place following the PA’s refusal. But it included a new set of plans “intended to be submitted during the suspension period.