Going on a lead which identified a 1995 MEPA refusal for permission to develop a single villa on the Ulysses Lodge site FAA has uncovered an even earlier, 1993 refusal on the Ramla hillside. This highlights a departure from policy in an evident U- turn by the MEPA Board.
FAA co-ordinator Astrid Vella said “These verdicts contrast sharply with the latest Ramla decision giving the green light for a development of 23 villas with pools. This runs counter to MEPA's 1995 decision against a permit for a single villa to be built on the Ulysees Lodge site, due to regulations re scenic value and erosion factors as well as going against policy on development outside committed areas.
Ms Vella added that the unlike 1995, Malta now has to conform to stringent EU environment regulations which logically lead to fewer permits being accepted outside the development zone rather than an increase.
FAA maintains that EU regulations oblige full assessment of environmental impact (EIA) in cases such as Ramla. Exemption is only permissible in exceptional cases.
There is nothing to suggest that Ramla should be any exception to the rule. FAA points out that a case officer had reported to the MEPA board that the whole area had been declared unstable while the developer at the time had requested to submit an EIA. This was not considered necessary in the case of the recent 23 villa application.
The NGO adds that while the property had changed hands since 1995 ownership should not have any bearing on MEPA decisions.
FAA notes that other permits for dwellings and pools have now been applied for on Ramla hillside, no doubt in the hope that the approval of the Ulysees Lodge permit will create a precedent which will allow more permits to be issued. This would mean that the Ulysees Lodge project would not be an isolated and ‘camouflaged’ case, but simply the beginning of the urbanization of the Ramla.
Ms Vella concluded "Since the MEPA policies on the landscape at Ramla l-Hamra are constant, MEPA is guilty of gross negligence, since no one on the MEPA Board seems to have studied, still less upheld, MEPA's 1995 decision on the very same site in question. For this reason, Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar concludes it has no other option but to repeat its previous call for the resignation of the MEPA board.”
