Made on behalf of the Claimants

Witness: R Matto

1st Statement of Witnesses

Exhibits: RM1-4

Dated 19th January 2006

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GIBRALTAR

 

 

2006 – Misc No.

 

In The Matter of an Application for Judicial Review

 

BETWEEN

 

THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF

(1) THE CHAIRPERSON IN REPRESENTATION OF THE SOUTH DISTRICT ASSOCIATION

(2) STEVEN HARRISON

 (3) GINO BOSSINO

Claimants

-and-

 

DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION

 

Defendant

-and-

 

OEM ROSIA DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED

 

First Interested Party

-and-

 

GIBRALTAR HERITAGE TRUST

 

Second Interested Party

 

__________________________

 

Witness Statement

                                                           

 

 

I, Robert Matto of 47 Rosia Dale, Gibraltar, SAY AS FOLLOWS:-

 

1.            I am a Chartered Architect in private practice. I am also resident of the South District and a member of the South District Association (“the SDA”).

 

2.            I make this Witness Statement in support of the SDA’s Application for Permission to bring proceedings for Judicial Review and in support of the substantive Application for Judicial Review.

 

3.            I make this Witness Statement from matters within my own knowledge which matters are true. Where matters are not within my own knowledge the sources are stated herein and those matters are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.

 

4.            I have seen the Witness Statement of Gigi Sene on behalf of the South District Association (“the SDA Witness Statement”) which is the main Witness Statement filed on behalf of the South District Association.

 

5.            My Witness Statement will concentrate on more technical issues such as density of the project, architectural design and conservation possibilities for the Rosia Tanks themselves.

 

PLOT / DENSITY REGULATION

 

6.            The Town Planning (Building Development Control Regulations) 2001 specifies that;

 

(a)         the floor to space index which is essentially the total floor space within the entire building divided by the site area is at the discretion of the Development and Planning Commission outside the city walls;

(b)        that the plot ratio (effectively the footprint of the building in relation to the site area) should (outside the city walls) not exceed 80%.

 

7.            The idea of the latter is that there is space left around and/or “through” new buildings. It becomes more difficult to calculate this ratio when new buildings are set on top of podiums which carry internal car parking etc. and when the podiums themselves cover the entire site area. In examples where the podium covers the entire plot the building that sits on top has usually been set back to allow some space around or through it (Harbour Views, Westview Park and other examples). This has been deemed reasonable by the Development and Planning Commission.

 

8.            The Rosia Tanks project also has a podium but the building rises directly up from the boundary line. The 20% “free space” is thus unfairly removed and utilised internally for private purposes only of the building users. This is an interpretation of the said regulation which completely negates the public the free space which it is there to provide in the first place.

 

9.            Now produced and shown to me marked RM1 is a sketch to illustrate the point.

 

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

 

10.       The Applicant developers, OEM Rosia Developments Limited (“OEM”) have produced drawings as part of the Outline Planning Application filed with the DPC. The said application is exhibited to the SDA Witness Statement. These drawings now produced and shown to me marked RM2 is a true copy of the said drawings attached to the said application though explanatory notes have been added by me.

 

11.       In my view the architectural drawings do not properly demonstrate the impact on the Rosia Tanks site itself and its impact on the adjoining area. Now produced and shown to me marked RM3 are copy drawings that I have produced which in my professional opinion demonstrate the effect of the plans that were proposed (10 storey block).

 

12.       As a concerned resident of the area, I attended the initial meetings of the South District Committee back in October 2005. Due to my previous experience in preparation artists visualisations and sketches, I was asked to prepare some sketches showing what I thought was the real impact of the proposals.

 

13.       I first noticed that the images originally presented by OEM showed BOTH Rosia Plaza blocks as being approximately 8 storeys in comparison with their proposed 10 storey building, when in reality they are only 6 and 4 storeys high respectively. This I thought, completely and inaccurately minimised the impact of the new building by showing enlarged versions of those around it.

 

14.       The sketches I prepared were based on the simple fact that the Rosia Plaza building is 6 storeys high, and the Nelson’s View proposals were described as being 10 storeys, i.e. by simple mathematics, 4 storeys higher. The sketches showing the impact of the proposed building were therefore simply constructed by visually extrapolating one from the other.

 

15.       When confronted by the developer as to the accuracy of these sketches, I asked them to prepare their own accurate artist’s impressions, since they were obviously privy to the exact dimensions and heights of their own building. The developer dismissed this exercise outright.

 

16.       Since then, the proposals have been reduced by 2 storeys, and new images were produced by the developer. Having said that I have seen a copy of the Outline Planning permit issued on the 20th December 2005 by the DPC and signed by its Chairman and note that it states that permission is granted “…to construct a new residential development consisting of 196 affordable housing units at CP1210(pt) Rosia Water Tanks, Rosia Road in accordance with the specifications dated 12th October 2005…”.Exhibit GS6 to the SDA Witness Statement. I understand from the Government Press release dated the 6th of December 2005 Exhibit GS11 to the SDA Witness Statement that the reduction of 2 storeys would reduce the flats numbers by 62 from the original 196. This seems to be contradictory and I am not sure how technically the same amount of units can be accommodated in 8 floors.

 

17.       The reality in my opinion is that the EXACT visual impact of the proposed new building over its heritage sensitive surroundings will only be fully ascertained if the tower block is actually built.

 

CONSERVATION POSSIBLITIES OF THE ROSIA TANKS

 

18.       Now produced and shown to me marked RM4 is a two-copy brochure prepared by me at the request of the SDA in relation to the sustainable regeneration of the Rosia Tanks. This has been prepared in accordance with the heritage value of the Tanks and following other precedents of sensitive conservation.

 

 

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

 

 

 

 

…………………………

Robert matto

 

Dated this 19th day of January 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This Witness Statement is filed by Cruz & Co. of Suites 19 & 21, Watergardens 3, Gibraltar.  Solicitors for the Claimants.