Mangion Mangion & Partners, Malta Architects, Civil Engineers and Planning Consultants

There exist parts of the Development Planning Act (DPA) that were never been implemented - one of them being the need for Mediation in Planning. Perit Vincent Magri looks at this part of the DPA and argues that it should to be replaced to better suit today's needs.

The DPA provides the legal framework for development Planning in Malta. Some sections were never brought into force, including the appointment of Planning Mediators, intermediaries between developers and the Planning Directorate.

Possible reasons may include:

• The need for mediators may be irrelevant;
• Developers are already adequately represented at MEPA sittings;
• The Directorate does not need any external professional to tell it what should be done;
• There are not enough professionals in the private sector who are adequately qualified to do the job.

Over the years there does not seem to have been the need for this …..or was there?

During the last decade, given the intensive way and size of developments, and given a more organized environmental lobby, the need for Planning Mediators has definitely increased.

The DPA provides for the presence of "…..officers, to be known as Planning Mediators, whose function shall be to act as a mediator at the request of an applicant seeking development permission between the Director and the applicant after the communication by the Director to the applicant of the application report." It also states that the relative MEPA Board shall consider the opinion of the Mediator but it shall not be bound by it.

Today it is the applicant who needs to ask for the appointment of a Planning Mediator. He/she will be needed when the applicant thinks that unreasonable demands are being made by the Directorate during the processing of the application. This comes much earlier than the Development Permit Application Report (DPAR). Once the DPAR is issued by the Directorate, it is reasonable to say that there is no way that such a stance will ever be changed!

The applicant either asks for a Planning Mediator, or tries to convince the Development Control Commission (DCC), or just accedes to the requests made by the Planning Directorate. It seems that applicants always opted for the latter two options, clearly showing that the legal provisions of the Act are not adequate. Applicants are usually very well represented at DCC sittings, and secondly, the Planning Directorate is dictating the proceedings - it does not have to change anything as there is nothing to lose. It is easier to recommend a refusal and then shift the responsibility up to the DCC!

So, let's go back to the drawing board and make a case for a NEW Planning Mediator.

I have experienced situations where the MEPA Directorate will not change its position whatever relevant planning arguments are brought forward by the applicant. I have also been in situations where the applicant, maybe due to strong lobbying powers, is clearly putting pressure on the Planning Directorate to accept things which maybe they should not. Hence, the need for such Mediators does exist. Third parties are also important players in the development process and they would also benefit from the appointment of Mediators.

The Planning Mediator should be an independent person who has studied Spatial Planning. This ensures skills in the economic, environmental and social aspects of development. Preferably he/she would have experience in both the public and private sectors.

Applicants, the Planning Directorate and interested third parties should all be able to ask for the appointment of a Planning Mediator. And so as not to further hinder what is already a very slow process, Planning Mediators should issue their report within one month from being appointed - a relatively short period when one considers that certain applications take years to be processed. Planning Mediators need to be brought in at an early stage of the Application Process and before the DPAR is prepared. The Planning Directorate would have to include the Mediator's report in the DPAR while if not satisfied, developers and third parties could still make their case at the DCC or the MEPA Board (as the case may be).

The earlier a Planning Mediator is brought into the picture, the earlier the issues can be resolved. This makes the process faster, while at the same time it facilitates the job for DCC Board members. It also gives an earlier opportunity for third parties to elaborate on the reasons for their objections. Developers will also benefit through a faster process which drastically reduces the red tape of MEPA. This is a win-win-win situation for all.

Who pays? Obviously, whoever makes the request for the appointment of the Planning Mediator.


Perit Vincent Magri is specialized in Land Use Planning, having graduated from the University of Malta and the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. He has worked in Planning since 1988, both as part of the Planning Directorate in the early days of Planning in Malta and in the Private sector. He currently forms part of the team at Mangion, Mangion and Partners (Architects, Civil Engineers and Planning Consultants) – and can be contacted on vmagri@mmp.com.mt or 21336704.