The proposed Mistra Village project will have a “huge and permanent visual impact”, according to Din l-Art Ħelwa, which continued to exert pressure as the planning authority meets today to decide on the massive project.
The building will consist of more than 770 apartments, and the environmental lobby group insists no high-rise buildings should be allowed on ridges.
Moreover, it believes the design is “ordinary” and goes against the requirements of the area’s local plan.
But the project has been defended by its creator, architect Edwin Mintoff, who said instead of submitting a proposal identical to the one approved by the outline permit, the developer opted to reduce building density by 20 per cent “to create a more pleasing building massing”.
The project is merely a sheer exploitation of a site
“The changes significantly reduce the visual impact of the project from the surroundings. The full extent of the actual project and not the misleading perceptions which have been fed to the public will be fully discussed and explained at the correct forum – the public Mepa hearing [this] afternoon,” he said.
Dr Mintoff said the project owners, Gemxija Crown Ltd, had followed all policies and procedures and a full environmental project statement for the development was prepared, including the required environmental and social studies.
According to DLĦ, the local plan specifically required the Malta Environment and Planning Authority to ensure the redevelopment of Mistra Village has “a noteworthy urban and architectural design of the highest calibre” and “provides the highest quality in architectural form and details”.
The organisation said that the proposed project did not fall within this description, and described it as a “monstrous high-rise scheme”.
The design was not of the highest calibre but was “an exercise in concentrating the maximum number of flats within volumes imposed on a site, with no attempt to contextualise, elegance of materials or underlying concept”.
“The project is merely a sheer exploitation of a site,” it said in another press statement on the Mistra project.
It criticised Transport Malta for “withdrawing” its complaints on the project. The transport watchdog had earlier said the “present situation will be significantly exacerbated with any additional load, let alone the load of the magnitude as anticipated by this project”.
The NGO said the outline development permit granted to the developers in 2009 was not an automatic green light.
While the outline permit considered the general parameters of the project, the design was to be evaluated in the full permit being discussed today, it said, adding that the outline permit ought to be revoked “due to incomplete and irregular procedures”.
But Chamber of Architects president Stephen Farrugia begged to differ on the weight of the outline permit, saying this carried a certain amount of “vested rights”.
He said the chamber did not comment on individual projects, unless they involved public buildings, but on a personal level he said that “at first glance” the project looked like a “massive mass”. But the “photomontages making the rounds do not do justice to the project”, he added.
He said he had seen the project document and deduced it was actually “a downsizing of what was originally proposed”.
Mr Farrugia said the chamber, on a more general scale, was proposing the introduction of design review panels where, without having to pay and on a voluntary basis, the architect would sit down and discuss a project’s design.
“If such panels were available, the designs we see proposed will be better. This is very urgent in our view and the Government is keen on the idea. We will achieve a better visual impact,” he said.