TIME IS THE SINGLE MOST PRECIOUS COMMODITY IN THE UNIVERSE.
May 2021: We submitted an application to the Urban Planning Department for the construction of a winery. Despite the department's promise to grant a permit, we received a negative opinion without justification after approximately two years exactly after we submitted a written complain.
Planning Application: More than 1156 days of waiting
Hierarchical Appeal: More than 349 days of waiting
Application for Grant 2023: Deadline has passed
HISTORY OF ABSURDITY - WASTING TIME - WASTING MONEY - INVESTMENT COMMITMENTS
1. We received positive preliminary opinions for our request, which was based on guidelines and directives provided by the urban planning department, assuring us that they are legally binding.
2. Before submitting and paying the hefty fee of 4250 thousand euros, we requested the urban planning department to review the plans we would submit and provide feedback. However, they categorically replied that such a request is prohibited. Date of Urban Planning.
3. It took more than a year to solicit opinions from the relevant departments, despite numerous reminders we made, when opinions should have been sought from the first day.
4. We repeatedly tried to be allowed to transfer the requests that were sealed in various departments, aiming to expedite the process. However, this request was rejected despite existing guidelines.
5. From the day of submitting the application to the day of rejection, copies of plans were repeatedly requested for transmission to various departments. We had already provided more copies than required/demanded.
6. Changes to the plans were repeatedly requested by the official, which were implemented, except for the winery's location, which was not requested. The location at this specific point had been examined and approved from the beginning, but after our written complaint about the delays, we suddenly learned that we had to move the building to a lower and disadvantageous point next to the road, which was also indicated as the only available parking space.
7. We were accused of starting construction illegally without permits, while in reality, the official and the director visited and examined the neighboring plot. The boundaries of the plot had been clearly defined by the surveyor.
8. There was a significant delay in sending the environmental study to the environmental department, resulting in a change in legislation and a requirement to pay 833 euros for the examination. Note that we asked the urban planning official to allow us to hand-deliver the study to the environmental department, but our request was denied.
9. We often called requesting the examination of our application, but each time we received different answers: absence or illness of staff, postponement of the examination of our application for a later time, more urgent priority applications for examination, absence of the provincial department, the need to visit the plot, Christmas holidays, Easter holidays, and various other excuses. The absurd point was that they constantly claimed they couldn't examine our application without the opinions of all departments, even though these opinions had not been requested by the department in the first place, something that should have been done from the beginning.
10. In a period of about a year and a half, opinions were requested for the second time from the Thira department, despite the fact that this department had already submitted its opinions through the Environmental Department.
11. After opinions were requested and provided by all departments, the official and the director consistently expressed the condition that our application would only be examined when all opinions are available, promising to issue a permit only if all departments give positive evaluations. However, they continued to claim that they had not received all opinions and could not examine our application, despite the fact that these opinions had already been delivered to the official, and she had placed them in our file.
12. Nearly two years passed, and after submitting a written complaint, the official contacted us angrily and expressed complaints about the submission of the complaint. She then announced that she would not grant us a permit unless the building is moved, as issuing a permit on hilltops/ridgelines is prohibited.
13. Note that in the surrounding area, all hilltops/ridgelines have already been developed with luxurious villas, even in areas within Natura 2000 zones.
14. In Limassol, a large winery was recently built on a high hilltop/ridgeline with a 360-degree view, but suddenly, we are prohibited.
15. I requested a meeting with the director of the Paphos planning department both in writing and verbally, either at her office or on-site, but the request was repeatedly denied.
16. Due to significant delays and a lack of coordination with the Paphos planning authority, I requested my application to be examined by the Director of Planning in Cyprus, but it was denied. I then requested a meeting both in writing and verbally, but again, they refused, stating that they would provide instructions.
17. I contacted urban planners working in the public sector from all provinces of Cyprus, and none see a reason for the permit denial, especially when it has already been examined, and positive preliminary opinions have been given.
18. The Ministry of Interior AFFIRMS and assures that the amendment to Article 25(8) of the Town Planning and Spatial Planning Law continues to be valid and is interpreted/applied collectively with the conditions set by the said article.
19. Before receiving a negative response, we repeatedly requested and pleaded with the Paphos Planning Authority to examine our request as soon as possible, as we depend on a grant that is available every two years, with a period of about 2 months. To submit an application, the issuance of a town planning permit and the submission of a building permit application are required. We have already lost the year 2021, and soon we will lose 2023. Therefore, we must wait until 2025.
20. Before rejecting our request, they guided us to submit a request for deviation, promising that they would issue the town planning permit without changing the building's location, which is supposed to be on a hilltop/ridgeline.
21. If the planning authority had properly examined our request from the beginning, the situation would be different. A proper examination could have led to solutions or avoided the delays we are facing now and the waste of private and public resources.
22. It took 292 days for the planning department to send the incident report to the Ministry of Interior for our request to be considered.
23. The Ministry of Interior repeatedly sent instructions to the Paphos planning department to send their report. Imagine what would have happened if they hadn't sent repeated instructions. STATE WITHIN A STATE
REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT THE MINISTRY'S GOALS
Citizen at the Center:
Focus on citizen needs and priorities.
Professionalism:
Uphold high standards of conduct and expertise.
Equality:
Ensure equal opportunities and treatment for all citizens.
Integrity and Honesty:
Promote ethical behavior and transparency in all actions.
Transparency:
Make information and processes accessible and open to public scrutiny.
Reliability:
Deliver consistent, high-quality services and outcomes.
Excellence and Total Quality:
Continuously strive for excellence and improvement in all aspects of operations.
Respect for Human Rights:
Protect and promote human rights in all policies and practices.
"What would you do if your time and money were wasted?"