‘Stop and Enforcement Notice’ fails to stop Sliema development

Residents of Mattew Pulis Street, whose homes back onto Pace Street, have long been complaining about an apartment block
currently under construction by developers Stivala & Sons Ltd.

The complaints revolve around two open shafts adjacent to the dividing wall of properties on Mattew Pulis Street. According to the conditions of MEPA permit PA/07683/06, these shafts were meant to be closed. Furthermore, Article 443(1) of Chapter 16 of the
Civil Code stipulates that, in order to have windows, a property had to respect the minimum distance of 76cm from the dividing wall.

However, the block was sited less than the minimum legal distance, and contrary to permit conditions the two shafts were built with windows overlooking adjacent properties.

To compound this apparent irregularity, extensive damage was caused to third party property during the excavation and construction works. In a letter published in our Wednesday edition, Mattew Pulis street resident Joan de Maria wrote that: “when construction
works commenced, the developers broke into our backyards with their diggers, dug up our yards, and when we confronted them for having trespassed, destroyed and removed (among other things) pots, plants and various other items on our properties, they had the arrogance to tell us not to make a fuss, as after all, we only had rubbish and that they had done us a favour to remove it.”

According to de Maria, “one of the notorious cowboy developers went on to brag that we could not stop them as they are millionaires, own half of Gzira, and that he was so capable he could fill the place with blasphemy and obscenities (kapaci nimla’ hawn bid-dagha u kliem oxxen).”

De Maria also wrote that numerous complaints made to MEPA, the Police and the Health and Safety Authority had all been ignored.

But in a letter to be published on Wednesday 11 August, a MEPA spokesman writes that the irregularities in question do not require direct enforcement action: “A site inspection carried out by the Enforcement section reported that the shaft, while permitted, was not built as planned. However, this change is one which is rectifiable through the process of a minor amendment, as envisaged in the Development Planning Act and, as such, does not require the works to be stopped.”

However, subsequent site inspections revealed further irregularities, prompting the authority to issue an enforcement notice… more than two months after the neighbours’ initial complaint, submitted in May.

“On 28 July, following Ms De Maria’s letters to the press, a further inspection was carried out. Certain works on site were not constructed according to the approved permit but according to the proposals laid out in a Planning Application (PA2604/10) still being processed by the directorate. As such, a Stop and Enforcement notice was issued (ECF 450/10).”

According to MEPA’s own website: “If such action is taken, the contravenor should stop immediately and take any necessary actions to regularise his/her position within a 16-30 day period of receipt of the Enforcement Notice.” MaltaToday can nonetheless confirm that works have since proceeded as normal, with construction work carried out on Tuesday, Thursday and Friday this week.

There have even been complaints of large stones falling into the back gardens of houses on Mattew Pulis Street as a result of
the ongoing works.

Contacted on Friday, the MEPA spokesman insisted that an enforcement officer had been sent again that same morning.

“Today, MEPA carried out another site inspection and stopped the workers once again from carrying out any finishing works within the building. The workers were allowed to take away their tools and place some hoarding for safety measures.”

Nonetheless, residents of Mattew Pulis Street contacted this newspaper on the same day at 1.30pm, claiming that workmen were still on site and works still ongoing. Until 4pm on Friday, there was no indication that the contravenor would “stop immediately”, as per the enforcement order.

The affected residents, who initiated court proceedings on 28 July (the same day the enforcement order was issued) are now calling for an investigation.

“I expect the Prime Minister, Dr Gonzi, who is responsible for MEPA, to investigate what is going on at the Authority,” de Maria wrote. “To us it seems that some people, for some odd reason, are above the law.”

Permit history In December 2006, Mr Emanuel Psaila, through architect Ian Cutajar, applied to “demolish (an) existing building and construct residential units” at 4, Pace Street Sliema.

The original recommendation of case officer Sylzana Zammit, endorsed by Carmel Caruana in March 2007, was to refuse permission.

“The proposal cannot be favourably recommended since it fails to reflect and respect the existing streetscape characteristics, and therefore conflicts with policies 1.1 and 1.2 of the Policy and design Guidance 2005, and with structure Plan Policy BEN 2.”

Similarly, the Heritage Advisory Committee reported that parts of the development “are not acceptable within an Area of High
Landscape Value.” However, the Development Control Commission board ignored these negative recommendations and approved the permit.

The same DCC board (A) resigned en masse a year later in February 2008, after a report by MEPA’s auditor Joe Falzon found ‘gross irregularities’ in the approval of a permit for a supermarket outside the development zones in Safi.