The need for expensive desalination is just one cost of over-development. Through rapid, unplanned building, Cyprus has virtually destroyed most of its underground water resources by over-extraction and the subsequent destruction of what should be a renewable resource. And that’s not all.
Peyia example again
Other examples of required infrastructure to support new building, funded by the taxpayer, are extensive road improvements, storm drainage and central sewage treatment. Peyia once again serves as an example of the hidden costs of development. The building boom of the past ten years has added thousands of new buildings, all on septic systems for toilet and household liquid waste. Such dense construction in a short period has added considerable strain on the land and there is evidence of leakage into the underground water. Boreholes in some areas have e-coli contamination. EU legislation requires a central sewage treatment plant for coastal towns with a population over 1,000, but this is only now being studied and it will be several years before this is in place in Peyia.
In addition, serious saltwater intrusions into the underground water have already been documented. From 1990 to a peak in 2000, extraction rates in Peyia quadrupled. For some time, underground water from areas containing high nitrates and salinity is mixed with water from areas that are not so badly polluted. This results in a deteriorating quality of the water supply, although the analyses indicate that the water currently still meets EU standards.
There is also a problem with municipalities extending the boundaries of their water systems. Each town has speciifc areas that they are obliged to provide with water. If any building permission is granted beyond this area, it is the builder’s responsibility to provide water for that development, as a condition of the grant of planning permission. What often happens, however, is that new buildings are constructed and then there is a request that the Municipal water be extended to cover the new houses. This of course puts great strain on the supply system and adds greatly to the costs of the Municipality when it extends the water network.
Serious problems exist in many areas of Peyia because of a lack of rainwater drainage. Over the last decade, many of the ravines and river beds have been built upon, which results in serious flooding when it rains. The very centre of the village is a virtual rushing torrent during even modest rainfall. With the natural drainage areas now covered in concrete, and no storm drainage in place, there is nowhere for the rain to go. In October 2006, Peyia suffered damage during a storm which resulted in a flash flood sweeping down from the higher, now built-up areas. By the time this torrent reached the coastal areas, it was well over a metre high and roaring along at a dangerous rate, sweeping away all that was in its path. At about 8:30 am, it swamped a seaside hotel, which was inundunated with a wall of mud and debris, sending tourists and staff scurrying for their lives during breakfast. It was a miracle no one was injured or killed in Peyia, although two people died in the next village which has also suffered from heavy, unplanned development.
The Municipality of Peyia took this very seriously. Requests were sent to the Ministry of Interior for financial support to clear the ravines and gullies of the storm debris and to fund the needed anti-flood culverts. It was the Ministry of Interior’s own Townplanning and Housing Department that had approved all the over-building that was the apparent cause of the storm damage. Unfortunately, Peyia’s request for assistance was denied. The community, now facing the constant threat of flooding whenever there is a storm, had little choice but to fund the anti-flooding measures from its own resources. So far over 2 million euros have been spent on this drainage project and it is still not completed. Some doubt that it will be effective, especially since the water is merely being diverted to the sea, which will cause pollution. It would have been prohibitively expensive to build a proper holding reservoir and filtering system to recycle the rainwater. There has also been a recent scandal about a resident who moved the surveyor’s markings so as to avoid damage to his land.
Lessons learned?
Some day soon we hope that townplanning in Cyprus will incorporate the requirement for proper infrastructure BEFORE granting permits for building sprees. Not only is it more cost effective to do this before rather than after, but it is also more logical. This is the usual procedure in most EU countries where developers must contribute to the costs of the new infrastructure needed to service their developments.
The challenge facing us today in Cyprus is : do we have the political will to change a system where consumers pay for costly infrastructure while developers make even more profits? This is a classical case of privatising profit while socialising costs.
It is up to all of us to stop it!
Wednesday 19 November 2008
Peyia – A Case Study in Unsustainability
Last year, an EU funded programme with Peyia as a case study in Sustainable Water Management reported that “although the [Peyia] aquifer is not yet subject to dramatic seawater intrusion, degradation of the water quality due to excessive pumping has been observed in some areas”.Water specialists from around the Mediterranean area armed with all the data spelled it out that Peyia has a serious problem relating to the availability of future water supplies of decent quality. Senior Cyprus Water Department officials from Nicosia stated categorically that Peyia has a serious water problem. In fact all of the experts agree that Peyia is in trouble regarding water.
Peyia is running out of water. It is as simple and as stark as that.
Frightening prospect? Absolutely. Sense of urgency in Peyia? Absolutely not.
Peyia Councillor Linda Leblanc, however, is deeply concerned about this situation. A Green Party member, she states, “We now find ourselves in the position where, in order to feed the frenzy of unsuitable, unsustainable development over the last decade, the Municipality has depleted and damaged its precious underground water resources and has already been forced to stop pumping from some boreholes due to saltwater intrusion.”
With the drought natural replenishment is reduced, causing great stress on the aquifer. In these circumstances, it is imperative to reduce extraction from underground water. If damage continues, the Peyia aquifer will be destroyed forever. Underground water should be managed sustainably so that future generations can support themselves from this renewable resource.
Leblanc is worried that safeguards are still not in place in Peyia, especially so in light of the fact that the onslaught of mega-building continues. Peyia did not have any water cuts this summer, despite reductions in supplies from the Asprokremmos Dam and despite recommendations that pumping from boreholes be reduced due to drought conditions. In addition, her written request to the Mayor (in June) asking for specific details of the pumping and consumption and analyses of water has remained unanswered.
In Peyia, people have still not developed a water savings consciousness and even the Municipality itself continues to use hosepipes with drinking water to water the roses right outside its offices – in the middle of the day!
Desalination for Peyia?
But even worse, in Leblanc’s opinion, is the Mayor and Council’s new interest in a desalination plant. She disagrees with this approach, saying that desalination is a last resort due to high cost, pollution, intrusion into protected coastal zones and lack of controls.
She asks, “Where will all these mobile desalination units be located – on the beach?”
Two hotels in Peyia have already applied for permits for mobile desalination units (the Coral Beach and Thalassa hotels owned by Leptos). Cyprus Environment Commissioner Charalambous Theopemptou has concerns, among other things, about who will monitor water quality and pollution and about exemptions from Environmental Impact Assessments for such mobile units producing up to 1,500 cubic metres per day.
Water statistics for Peyia indicate that almost 1% of consumers use about 30% of the water. These profligate consumers happen to be in the tourist areas where the hotels are located. Leblanc also wonders why Peyia Municipality would need its own desalination plant if these two hotels have their own units, as this would free up a lot of water for other consumers. Leblanc feels that desalination in Peyia would be used to fuel even more building. She says, “Peyia seems to prove the link between the rush for more desalination plants and even more unsustainable development. Isn’t it time that the public is properly informed and that residents of Peyia, not just the vested interests, can participate in making crucial decisions about our future sustainability?”
The public needs to be properly informed so that they understand the vast costs and consequences of desalination and how this seems set to fuel even more unsustainable development. One wonders why, at this late stage, the government has still not implemented simple legislation on water conservation measures, especially concerning new building standards.
The inevitable question pops into mind: Cui Bono?
THE FRESHWATER CRISIS
Only a hermit or an ostrich would be unaware that we are facing a critical moment in the supply of freshwater in Cyprus, but neither has its head in the sand all the time.
This summer has seen almost daily media coverage of the crisis, but how often do we stop to really think about the seriousness of the situation? In July the Environment Commissioner, Charalampos Theopemptou, emphasised the warnings given in the paper on climate change and water published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The facts as presented by the IPCC are these:
· Rainfall in the Mediterranean will drop by 20%.
· Groundwater recharges in the Southern Mediterranean will drop by 70% by 2050.
· Expected rise in sea levels will increase the salinity of groundwater supplies, affecting the quality of drinking water.
· Consecutive days without water will increase, threatening agriculture and forests. (Trees stressed by drought are more vulnerable to disease and there is an increased risk of forest fires.)
This is a prospect we cannot ignore. Climate change is with us, however much we debate the causes.
Measures to conserve and ensure an adequate supply of freshwater require a unified policy for water management.
In Cyprus, part of the problem lies in the fragmentation of responsibilities and authority, and a lack of enforcement. Sustainable solutions based on proper management of consumption and supply should be put in place as soon as possible.
As individuals and households we can all make savings by thinking carefully about our use of water; water authorities can repair leaks in the supply network; grey water can be recycled for non-potable use in the home and garden (low-tech method, use a bowl in the kitchen sink and bathroom basin); rainwater can be collected and stored; drought resistant plants and crops can be introduced, encouraging use of native tree planting, cacti, succulents etc.; drip irrigation can be used instead of sprinklers; legislation to make the installation of recycling and sewage systems mandatory in all new buildings; proper management of water usage in swimming pools by mandatory use of covers to reduce evaporation; limiting the numbers of swimming pools; and of course pricing water realistically will make us all think twice before we waste it.
The availability of clean, drinkable, freshwater is something we all expect, but do we realise just how much we use? Here’s a figure:
1,000 cubic metres per annum is the minimum water each person requires for drinking, hygiene, and growing food. The volume is equivalent to 2/5 of an Olympic-size swimming pool. (Scientific American, August 2008)
Ideally, we would like that water to be the fresh kind which falls from the sky; after all, desalinated water is manufactured water and comes with a significant environmental and energy-usage cost. A recent study by the WWF calculates that the average UK household use of water for drinking and washing per person per day is approximately 150 litres.
Here are some more figures:
One 18-hole golf course can use as much water in a year as a town of 10,000 houses. 9 litres per sq.m. per day are needed to keep a fairway or tee looking green. (Guardian Weekly, July 29, 2005)
Do we really need 14 golf courses in Cyprus, the majority in the Paphos district, when the citizen copes with cuts in the water supply and the farmers who grow our food have their allocation drastically reduced?
Do we think about our water footprint? Coffee production consumes 2% of the world’s water; one cotton T-shirt requires 7,000 litres of water; the production of 1 kilo of beef requires 16,000 litres of water (the United Nations has recently called for a reduction in meat consumption in order to conserve water resources). Look at www.waterfootprint.org to calculate your water footprint.
Desalination is not a sustainable solution to the freshwater crisis in Cyprus. It encourages over-use of water, is a polluting process and all consumers will eventually have to pay higher electricity bills as Cyprus exceeds the energy targets set by the EU, resulting in considerable fines. If, as has been suggested, the Cyprus government denies the golf resorts the use of recycled water (allocating it for agricultural use) and the golf courses are dependent on desalination, who will ultimately pay the EU fines for exceeding energy targets, the ordinary consumer or the developers?
There are many alternative approaches to ensuring an adequate supply for all, beginning with the setting up of an independent water body which will implement unified water policies throughout the island and greater awareness of each individual’s personal responsibility in relation to their consumption of freshwater.
This summer has seen almost daily media coverage of the crisis, but how often do we stop to really think about the seriousness of the situation? In July the Environment Commissioner, Charalampos Theopemptou, emphasised the warnings given in the paper on climate change and water published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The facts as presented by the IPCC are these:
· Rainfall in the Mediterranean will drop by 20%.
· Groundwater recharges in the Southern Mediterranean will drop by 70% by 2050.
· Expected rise in sea levels will increase the salinity of groundwater supplies, affecting the quality of drinking water.
· Consecutive days without water will increase, threatening agriculture and forests. (Trees stressed by drought are more vulnerable to disease and there is an increased risk of forest fires.)
This is a prospect we cannot ignore. Climate change is with us, however much we debate the causes.
Measures to conserve and ensure an adequate supply of freshwater require a unified policy for water management.
In Cyprus, part of the problem lies in the fragmentation of responsibilities and authority, and a lack of enforcement. Sustainable solutions based on proper management of consumption and supply should be put in place as soon as possible.
As individuals and households we can all make savings by thinking carefully about our use of water; water authorities can repair leaks in the supply network; grey water can be recycled for non-potable use in the home and garden (low-tech method, use a bowl in the kitchen sink and bathroom basin); rainwater can be collected and stored; drought resistant plants and crops can be introduced, encouraging use of native tree planting, cacti, succulents etc.; drip irrigation can be used instead of sprinklers; legislation to make the installation of recycling and sewage systems mandatory in all new buildings; proper management of water usage in swimming pools by mandatory use of covers to reduce evaporation; limiting the numbers of swimming pools; and of course pricing water realistically will make us all think twice before we waste it.
The availability of clean, drinkable, freshwater is something we all expect, but do we realise just how much we use? Here’s a figure:
1,000 cubic metres per annum is the minimum water each person requires for drinking, hygiene, and growing food. The volume is equivalent to 2/5 of an Olympic-size swimming pool. (Scientific American, August 2008)
Ideally, we would like that water to be the fresh kind which falls from the sky; after all, desalinated water is manufactured water and comes with a significant environmental and energy-usage cost. A recent study by the WWF calculates that the average UK household use of water for drinking and washing per person per day is approximately 150 litres.
Here are some more figures:
One 18-hole golf course can use as much water in a year as a town of 10,000 houses. 9 litres per sq.m. per day are needed to keep a fairway or tee looking green. (Guardian Weekly, July 29, 2005)
Do we really need 14 golf courses in Cyprus, the majority in the Paphos district, when the citizen copes with cuts in the water supply and the farmers who grow our food have their allocation drastically reduced?
Do we think about our water footprint? Coffee production consumes 2% of the world’s water; one cotton T-shirt requires 7,000 litres of water; the production of 1 kilo of beef requires 16,000 litres of water (the United Nations has recently called for a reduction in meat consumption in order to conserve water resources). Look at www.waterfootprint.org to calculate your water footprint.
Desalination is not a sustainable solution to the freshwater crisis in Cyprus. It encourages over-use of water, is a polluting process and all consumers will eventually have to pay higher electricity bills as Cyprus exceeds the energy targets set by the EU, resulting in considerable fines. If, as has been suggested, the Cyprus government denies the golf resorts the use of recycled water (allocating it for agricultural use) and the golf courses are dependent on desalination, who will ultimately pay the EU fines for exceeding energy targets, the ordinary consumer or the developers?
There are many alternative approaches to ensuring an adequate supply for all, beginning with the setting up of an independent water body which will implement unified water policies throughout the island and greater awareness of each individual’s personal responsibility in relation to their consumption of freshwater.
DESALINATION……WHAT IS IT?
The most frequently and enthusiastically promoted remedy for alleviating the long-term water shortage in Cyprus is desalination. This involves the construction of mobile or fixed desalination plants or units that will remove the salt from seawater in order to manufacture drinkable water.
This process has several important environmental and economic impacts. We should therefore be asking some questions regarding its suitability as a solution for the water supply problem that Cyprus faces due to cyclical droughts and the projected deteriorating conditions that Cyprus will face in the future due to the effects of climate change in the Mediterranean.
- What is desalination?
- What are the costs and benefits of desalination? What are the alternatives to desalination?
These questions are comprehensively answered in the WWF report Making Water.
Desalination: option or distraction for a thirsty world? (June 2007).
The major economic impact is clearly stated in the report: desalination is the most energy intensive method of water manufacture. The energy required by the process will add to the total carbon emissions of Cyprus at a time when we should be working towards a reduction in order to meet EU targets. Failure to meet these targets will result in large fines that will inevitably be passed on to the general consumer through higher electricity bills. This is believed by some to outweigh the benefits of choosing desalination as a solution in preference to alternative methods of water supply management. Renewable energy such as solar is generally considered unviable for large-scale desalination due to cost and large areas of expensive coastal land required at current levels of the technology.
The environmental impacts of the process affect the marine ecosystems through the location of the intake and discharge structures, especially near sensitive marine or coastal environments. Seawater is a habitat for the many small life forms that will disappear up the intake pipe, resulting in long-term depletion of plankton, eggs and fish larvae.
Discharging the heated brine back into the sea alters the delicate and important salinity balance of the marine ecosystem through a rise in temperature and concentration of products such as salt and boron. It is acknowledged that temperature and salt content of seawater is critical for the reproduction and survival of marine species. Additional pollution occurs through contamination with corrosion by-products.
Issues of sustainability also arise. Other Mediterranean countries have seen an explosion of development based on the assumption of water availability. The WWF report states that
“Spain’s natural environments, many of its nature reserves and indeed, the natural assets found attractive by so many of the foreign residents and tourists are being damaged by the development which is underwritten by an assumption that water will always be available and be made available – whatever the economic, environmental and political costs.” (p. 35)
It can be argued that, for similar reasons, multiple desalination units could pose a comparable, significant threat to the unique Cyprus environment. Is this what we want? Some may think that we are getting close to it in certain areas of the Paphos district.
Desalination is a manufacturing process, i.e. industrial water; desalination is a distraction from water conservation, water efficiency, and water recycling; desalination is a pollutant; desalination is expensive.
Island-wide average loss from leakages is estimated to be 30%. Paphos actually exceeds this figure, with up to 35% lost between 1999 and 2005, to a cost of euros 3.5 million. In light of these losses, wouldn’t it be wiser to put resources into upgrading delivery systems rather than trying to fix the water problem through costly desalination? There is much talk of mobile units for hotels but the cost is higher for such small units, reaching up to euros 1.5 per cubic metre. In addition, there are concerns about intrusions into protected coastal zones and the government’s recent decision to waive environmental impact assessments for desalination units producing up to 1,500 cubic metres per day.
All of us in Cyprus must first develop and foster a better water conservation consciousness before we stumble into drastic solutions such as desalination.
What are the alternatives?
The alternatives would first and foremost be
A unified policy for water use and management that would address supply and distribution through water storage and conservation, e.g. repair and renewal of the network of pipes; rainwater collection; prevention of evaporation from swimming pools; domestic, industrial and commercial water recycling; supply of water for agriculture from treatment plants; legislation for mandatory installation of water saving measures and technology in new buildings etc. In other words, a sustainable policy for water.
This process has several important environmental and economic impacts. We should therefore be asking some questions regarding its suitability as a solution for the water supply problem that Cyprus faces due to cyclical droughts and the projected deteriorating conditions that Cyprus will face in the future due to the effects of climate change in the Mediterranean.
- What is desalination?
- What are the costs and benefits of desalination? What are the alternatives to desalination?
These questions are comprehensively answered in the WWF report Making Water.
Desalination: option or distraction for a thirsty world? (June 2007).
The major economic impact is clearly stated in the report: desalination is the most energy intensive method of water manufacture. The energy required by the process will add to the total carbon emissions of Cyprus at a time when we should be working towards a reduction in order to meet EU targets. Failure to meet these targets will result in large fines that will inevitably be passed on to the general consumer through higher electricity bills. This is believed by some to outweigh the benefits of choosing desalination as a solution in preference to alternative methods of water supply management. Renewable energy such as solar is generally considered unviable for large-scale desalination due to cost and large areas of expensive coastal land required at current levels of the technology.
The environmental impacts of the process affect the marine ecosystems through the location of the intake and discharge structures, especially near sensitive marine or coastal environments. Seawater is a habitat for the many small life forms that will disappear up the intake pipe, resulting in long-term depletion of plankton, eggs and fish larvae.
Discharging the heated brine back into the sea alters the delicate and important salinity balance of the marine ecosystem through a rise in temperature and concentration of products such as salt and boron. It is acknowledged that temperature and salt content of seawater is critical for the reproduction and survival of marine species. Additional pollution occurs through contamination with corrosion by-products.
Issues of sustainability also arise. Other Mediterranean countries have seen an explosion of development based on the assumption of water availability. The WWF report states that
“Spain’s natural environments, many of its nature reserves and indeed, the natural assets found attractive by so many of the foreign residents and tourists are being damaged by the development which is underwritten by an assumption that water will always be available and be made available – whatever the economic, environmental and political costs.” (p. 35)
It can be argued that, for similar reasons, multiple desalination units could pose a comparable, significant threat to the unique Cyprus environment. Is this what we want? Some may think that we are getting close to it in certain areas of the Paphos district.
Desalination is a manufacturing process, i.e. industrial water; desalination is a distraction from water conservation, water efficiency, and water recycling; desalination is a pollutant; desalination is expensive.
Island-wide average loss from leakages is estimated to be 30%. Paphos actually exceeds this figure, with up to 35% lost between 1999 and 2005, to a cost of euros 3.5 million. In light of these losses, wouldn’t it be wiser to put resources into upgrading delivery systems rather than trying to fix the water problem through costly desalination? There is much talk of mobile units for hotels but the cost is higher for such small units, reaching up to euros 1.5 per cubic metre. In addition, there are concerns about intrusions into protected coastal zones and the government’s recent decision to waive environmental impact assessments for desalination units producing up to 1,500 cubic metres per day.
All of us in Cyprus must first develop and foster a better water conservation consciousness before we stumble into drastic solutions such as desalination.
What are the alternatives?
The alternatives would first and foremost be
A unified policy for water use and management that would address supply and distribution through water storage and conservation, e.g. repair and renewal of the network of pipes; rainwater collection; prevention of evaporation from swimming pools; domestic, industrial and commercial water recycling; supply of water for agriculture from treatment plants; legislation for mandatory installation of water saving measures and technology in new buildings etc. In other words, a sustainable policy for water.
An illegality – more disgrace
It started with a change of name from Mavrokolompos which was then baptised “Adonis Baths”. For obvious commercial reasons, someone made use of public land, a practice which has found suitable ground in our country. Before us was erected a huge statue of only 10 metres of an ancient God, a really ugly monster, without planning permission, which insults the aesthetics of this beautiful area.
The attractive name the owner invented complemented the natural beauty and the small waterfall became a special attraction with many visitors who were called upon to pay a very insignificant amount (last year the entrance price was 4 pounds a person). The Paphos Greens District Committee launched dozens of complaints especially concerning the distasteful entrance price. After the intervention of the Green Party Member of Parliament to the Ministry of the Interior, we have achieved the restoration of a delusion which operated in an unlawful manner, including the removal of the name “Adonis Baths” from the official government map. In such an especially beautiful area, the Community Council of Kili must ensure the free entrance of visitors. But, in an unusual manner, the Cyprus Tourism Organization actually rewarded an illegality that has continued to exist here for years. How could CTO include it in its programme, inviting our guests to visit the “Baths of Adonis”? If the Community of Kili is not able to secure free entrance to the baths then the government should undertake to restore order in a situation that has been allowed to continue for years. We are not against any private business whose workings are based on the law and follows the rules of the government without inventing myths, entrance tolls, statues, etc. It is unfortunate that, in conclusion, the facts are that the drowning of a visitor must be swept under the carpet and the issue of the safety of those who use the “Baths”. Finally, who takes responsibility for those who enjoy their bath while having paid entrance to A PUBLIC PLACE?
The attractive name the owner invented complemented the natural beauty and the small waterfall became a special attraction with many visitors who were called upon to pay a very insignificant amount (last year the entrance price was 4 pounds a person). The Paphos Greens District Committee launched dozens of complaints especially concerning the distasteful entrance price. After the intervention of the Green Party Member of Parliament to the Ministry of the Interior, we have achieved the restoration of a delusion which operated in an unlawful manner, including the removal of the name “Adonis Baths” from the official government map. In such an especially beautiful area, the Community Council of Kili must ensure the free entrance of visitors. But, in an unusual manner, the Cyprus Tourism Organization actually rewarded an illegality that has continued to exist here for years. How could CTO include it in its programme, inviting our guests to visit the “Baths of Adonis”? If the Community of Kili is not able to secure free entrance to the baths then the government should undertake to restore order in a situation that has been allowed to continue for years. We are not against any private business whose workings are based on the law and follows the rules of the government without inventing myths, entrance tolls, statues, etc. It is unfortunate that, in conclusion, the facts are that the drowning of a visitor must be swept under the carpet and the issue of the safety of those who use the “Baths”. Finally, who takes responsibility for those who enjoy their bath while having paid entrance to A PUBLIC PLACE?
Church in the Park: Theatre of the Absurd
The Paphos Green Party District Committee expresses again its opposition to the erection of a cathedral in the Municipal Park. In an era where green areas in our town are ravaged, apparently owing to the principle of “development”, it is a sacrilege to lay a hand on the only remaining park in the centre of our town.
Day by day the park languishes and is destroyed because of clear obstinancy and the dispute that broke out years ago between the Bishop of Paphos and the Paphos Municipal Council. The issue started with the former Bishop who is now the Archbishop, and unfortunately is continued by his successor.
The Bishop announced that he is ready to submit building plans and ask for the approval of the Municipal Council. How can a building permit be issued for a public area that is a park with a building factor of 0%?
We like to believe that the law exists for every citizen of this country and is applied without deviations and delays. This situation tests the credibility of the Local Council who will be called upon to give its consent.
The constant irresolution of the Municipal Council concerning its handling of different issues leaves us completely disappointed (the Mousalla case, the coastal area, disappearing green areas, handling of parks, etc.). We hope that this time our Municipal Council officers will stand tall in the circumstances and not disappoint the people of Paphos (again).
The Paphos Green party calls on Paphians to fight together to save our park because this land belongs not only to the Church but also to the members of the Church who are all residents of Paphos.
With his immense business activities, the Bishop of Paphos can erect a Church anywhere else in Paphos (and even bigger that 500 square metres).
What the Park needs to be done is immediate upgrading and embellishment. This must be done by the Bishop of Paphos, by the Mayor and by the Municipal Council.
This is exactly what the people want.
Day by day the park languishes and is destroyed because of clear obstinancy and the dispute that broke out years ago between the Bishop of Paphos and the Paphos Municipal Council. The issue started with the former Bishop who is now the Archbishop, and unfortunately is continued by his successor.
The Bishop announced that he is ready to submit building plans and ask for the approval of the Municipal Council. How can a building permit be issued for a public area that is a park with a building factor of 0%?
We like to believe that the law exists for every citizen of this country and is applied without deviations and delays. This situation tests the credibility of the Local Council who will be called upon to give its consent.
The constant irresolution of the Municipal Council concerning its handling of different issues leaves us completely disappointed (the Mousalla case, the coastal area, disappearing green areas, handling of parks, etc.). We hope that this time our Municipal Council officers will stand tall in the circumstances and not disappoint the people of Paphos (again).
The Paphos Green party calls on Paphians to fight together to save our park because this land belongs not only to the Church but also to the members of the Church who are all residents of Paphos.
With his immense business activities, the Bishop of Paphos can erect a Church anywhere else in Paphos (and even bigger that 500 square metres).
What the Park needs to be done is immediate upgrading and embellishment. This must be done by the Bishop of Paphos, by the Mayor and by the Municipal Council.
This is exactly what the people want.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)