The Planning Authority's Planning Board has postponed a decision on the building of four towers at Mriehel after a court this morning accepted a request by environment NGOs to issue a temporary warrant to stop the process.

The PA's Planning Board was due to decide on the project at a public meeting today. The court set July 5 as the date for a new hearing.

The request for a prohibitory injunction was filed by four environment NGOs who are insisting that proper studies be made on the building of high-rise buildings before decisions are taken.  

The public meeting today will also determine the future of proposals for the building of a hotel, a yacht marina and a tourist village at Hondoq ir-Rummien, Gozo, which environmentalists are also strongly objecting to. The case officer is recommending refusal.

The proposed €70 million Mriehel development by Tumas and Gasan Holdings comprises four cylindrical towers of 14, 16, 17 and 19 storeys respectively, overlying five basement levels.

The towers will be arranged around a central plaza and interlinked with elevated landscaped walkways and bridges rising to the sixth storey.

These massive buildings will be visible from almost the whole island

The project has been recommended for approval by the Planning Authority case officer, in line, among others, with the floor-area ratio policy.

NGO have argued that Mrieħel was included in the high-rise policy by stealth because it was not included by the planning authority in the draft policy for tall buildings which opened for public consultation in 2014 and was only included later.

“Approving Mrieħel as a high-rise zone without having first consulted the public is objectionable and possibly illegal,” the Civil Society Network, composed of various NGOs, said yesterday.

“The Planning Authority’s recommendation to approve this major project at Mrieħel is reacting to an unjustified demand for high-rise buildings, arising from certain lobby groups. The question of whether Malta should embark on this journey for high-rise or not should ultimately be decided by the citizens of this country following studies and not by a select few.”

Last week, the government confirmed that no major projects would be accepted in the Paceville area before a master plan for the zone was drawn up and consultations with the parliamentary committee on the environment held.

The Civil Society Network called for the same principle to apply to such projects at Mrieħel and elsewhere, underlining the impact on the landscape and also pointing out that Mrieħel’s infrastructure could not support the size of development being proposed.

Concerns over infrastructure are due to the expected increase in traffic on already congested roads as well as the fact that the project is estimated to generate 3,000 extra cars per day but includes a provision for only 1,032 parking spaces.

The only mitigation measure foreseen by the developers over and above this is encouraging a modal shift away from single person car use, including by providing 105 bicycle racks and reserving 54 parking spaces for car sharing.

Transport Malta, moreover, insisted on a condition requiring the developer to commit to organising the provision of home-work-home collective transport for employees for at least five years.

HONDOQ IR-RUMMIEN PROJECT 

The Ħondoq bay project is for the development of a marina and hotel in a disused quarry along the protected stretch of the Ħondoq coastline.

The proposed 104,000 square metre development seeks to turn the entire quarry site and an additional area of garigue into a 110-bedroom hotel spread across nine floors with four levels of underground parking.

The developers, Gozo Prestige Holidays, are also seeking to build 25 villas, 60 apartments and 200 multi-owner properties.  

The 40-page case officer report says the project is not acceptable “in principle”. It said it would be a “highly dense urban development within an area designated as rural coastline”, which was contrary to several national policies.

“There is no reason acceptable in terms of the structure plan which justifies an expectation to allowing this development outside of the development zone,” the report reads.

The development application dates back to 2002 and has over the years faced stern criticism from locals and environmentalists who argue the project would be detrimental to the area.
 

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.