Mepa Reform Process: Issues & Concerns
Particular Cases
The following text is based on comments submitted by one or more periti. If KTP has managed to make any progress with MEPA in resolving this issue, this will be documented in italics below.
Mepa Reform Process: Issues & Concerns
Particular Cases
The following text is based on comments submitted by one or more periti. If KTP has managed to make any progress with MEPA in resolving this issue, this will be documented in italics below.
Issue no 001
Submitted on 06.02.2011
A particular Perit wrote that he has a client who applied for sanctioning of the apertures of a property in a UCA in 2008, and the case is still deferred for a decision. The Planning Directorate had in 2005 previously recommended to the MEPA Board a change in ‘policy’ (which would have approved such apertures), and the Board has not yet deliberated on this. Thus this particular applicant is stuck with an ‘illegal’ unfinished (no compliance) building in a UCA which will get a refusal if he insists on its determination. The Perit hopes that this ‘policy’ amendment is not awaiting another few years of ‘consultation’, commission findings and un-enacted legal notices.
The Perit asks "why can’t MEPA take decisions on simple issues quickly and competently without creating such an incredible and unjustifiable waste of time"?
The issue has been referred to MEPA for their views.