Ta Cenc PA 05277/96 – Additional Comments to MEPA 29.02.2016

March 3, 2016

 

Application No:  PA05277/96

Location :  Ta’ Cenc, Ta’ Cenc, Sannat Gozo

Proposal:  To develop Ta’ Cenc area into Malta’s fist ‘Heritage park’ and ‘Multi-ownership tourist hotel development’

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM DIN L-ART HELWA

 29th February 2016

Din l-Art Helwa would like to submit further comments on this application to the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, as follows:

  1. The entire peninsula at Ta Cenc has been designated as a protected area, under European legislation as part of the Natura 2000 network. In this context, it is unacceptable that the current application proposes that only 63% of the site (Zone B) is to be recognised as a ‘protected area’, presumably with the intention of putting the rest to some other use. The entire site is a protected area and this should be clarified in the zoning and all other aspects of this proposal.
  1. The Ta Cenc site should be viewed and assessed holistically. The proposal requests that 23.7% (35.3 hectares) of the site should be approved by the Planning Authority as having a “use to be determined”.  It is not acceptable for a permit to be granted on this vague basis, and the status and use of all the peninsula should be clearly determined, in particular, it should be clearly stated that all further development is to be excluded as it is both outside the development zone and a protected area.
  1. The developer should provide precise dimensions for the proposed interpretation centre. If permission is granted for any interpretation facilities for visitors to the protected area at Ta Cenc, then this should be on condition that it is not used as a pretext for further development and catering facilities. The interpretation centre should be incorporated within the hotel area, and not be allowed to take up further ODZ land at the periphery of the hotel.
  1. Din l-Art Helwa reiterates that no further villas should be permitted on the Ta Cenc peninsula. This is an ODZ area and such permits would go against the principles outlined in the Strategic Plan for the Environment and Development, as well as the Local Plan. However, it should be clarified that Table 0.1 of the EIS Addendum indicates that the villa area in the 2015 proposal is 11.8% less than that in the 2007 proposal (reduced from 10.2 to 9 hectares), while on p.28 of the same EIS Addendum it is stated that the reduction is of 25%. This inconsistency should be addressed.

Comments are closed.