Posts

CIR 01/24 | DNO Processing Streamlined

The Council is pleased to announce a significant update in the processing of notifications filed under Development Notification Order (DNO) (S.L.552.08), which took effect on Monday, 15 January 2024 following a series of productive discussions with the Planning Authority (PA).

Echoing the sentiments expressed in the email I had sent out on 23rd October 2023, our stance has consistently been clear and firm: DNOs are permitted developments by law. The responsibility of the PA in this context is not to issue permissions but to confirm that the proposed works are included under the specific classes of permitted development.

After careful consideration, the PA has aligned with our perspective, revising its internal policy. This revision entails a strict limitation of external consultations solely in those circumstances permitted by the regulations, except for class 16. This shift in policy is among the significant steps toward simplifying the planning process, removing unnecessary administrative complexities, and thereby enhancing the clarity and efficacy of our professional practices.

Acknowledging this update as a step forward, the Council remains vigilant in monitoring its implementation and is prepared to address any emerging issues. Furthermore, we continue our efforts in advocating for more sensible processes that ensure both quality and efficiency in our work. We encourage all members to acquaint themselves with this recent policy change and to actively report any discrepancies or challenges encountered in its application.

Your continued support and active participation have been pivotal in achieving this milestone. Rest assured, the Council is steadfast in its commitment to advancing the interests of our profession, ensuring that our practices are not only effective but also fully compliant.

Perit André Pizzuto
President

 

PR 11/17 | Kamra tal-Periti comments on the proposed amendments to the DNO Classes

Reference is made to the proposed amendments to the Development Notification Order (DNO) and specifically regarding the introduction of two new Classes of development.

Once again, the Kamra tal-Periti notes with deep regret that the Planning Authority persists in failing to consult directly with the primary stake-holders on these proposed amendments to the DNO Class Order. The obligation for consultation with the Kamra and with the Chamber of Planners has been entrenched in planning legislation for decades, and has been reiterated in the recent Development Planning Act. The Kamra fails to understand why the Planning Authority persists in ignoring its obligations at law, in a manner which is, to say the least, unacceptable. This lack of correct procedure in pushing forward these amendments leaves no option but to speculate that these are being presented in order to facilitate some yet to be announced development which would not normally have been permitted without the checks and balances afforded by the Full Development Process.

The very concept, that whole classes of development are so important that they should be allowed without due process and oversight, betrays a worrying and persisting ignorance of the purpose of development planning and planning control. The ultimate objective of the planning process is the creation of an urban and rural environment of higher quality. The ultimate beneficiary of an environment of higher quality is the citizen; and the citizen has the right to an environment of a high quality whether he works in, or lives adjacent to, any class of development, be it industrial, health-related, military, and now police and correctional facilities.

It is important to ask why it is necessary for development carried out by the Director of the Corradino Correctional Facility and by the Malta Police Force to be undertaken through the DNO process rather than through a Full Development Application process or the Summary Application process, which is generally the norm for most types of new development. It is noted, furthermore, that should the Minister responsible for the Prisons or the Police deem the development to be “urgently required for national security reasons”, the development may proceed without even going through the DNO process. Had the proposed changes referred exclusively to internal alterations within either police or correctional facilities, one could understand the reference to “urgency” and DNO; but how could development, which is funded by public funds that have to be approved in Parliament, and procured via normal procurement regulations be so urgent as to make it impossible to allow time for planning scrutiny and oversight?

Although the proposed amendments include an obligation for obtaining prior clearance from the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage and the Environment and Resources Authority in certain locations, these proposed amendments unnecessarily create scope for abuse. We are all painfully aware of the scar on the Valletta seafront created by the Armed Forces base at Hay Wharf, which circumvented all checks and balances because it was required “for national security reasons” – this development was allowed to take place under the same regulation regime that is being proposed for the Prisons and the Police Force. The complete disregard of the surrounding context manifested by the Authorities and the Minister responsible for the AFM with regard to the Hay Wharf building are a clear warning sign of what can happen when the floodgates are opened for unchecked development which takes place in our historic and natural landscapes.

The disastrous AFM coastal base in Floriana

Moreover, it is to be noted that the DNO process is the only planning application process which does not involve public consultation, and therefore members of the public will have no opportunity to participate in the planning process and to submit their views, objections, and suggestions. These amendments, which do not set any sort of limitation on the size or type of development that may be undertaken through this process, open the door for serious abuse if additional safeguards are not included.

PR 03/16 | Planning Authority’s reply unsatisfactory

The Kamra tal-Periti notes that the Planning Authority’s reply to its press release of the 11th May 2016 enters into a long-winded recount of various meetings held with the Kamra over the past months. However it blatantly fails to comment on the subject of the Kamra’s statement, namely that the revocation of the Development Notification Order (DNO) was carried out without consultation with the Kamra tal-Periti, and this in breach of the Development Planning Act.

The Planning Authority is reminded that, at no point during the meetings held this year did it consult with the Kamra tal-Periti about the intention to revoke the Order in its entirety leaving a legal vacuum in the interim. The Kamra tal-Periti denies having been consulted on the new draft Development Order and on the revocation of the 2007 Order, and reiterates that this is a specific obligation of the Executive Council of the Planning Authority arising from the Development Planning Act.

The Planning Authority also failed to comment on the fact that as of Monday 9th May 2016 it was not accepting new DNO submissions, leaving the profession and the public in the dark as to when and how the new DNO regulations will be promulgated. This means that until such time as the new regulations are in place, certain works which were considered as permitted development under the Order, such as minor internal alterations, cannot be undertaken today since this would constitute illegal development in view of the revocation of the Order which regulated these types of works.