The Malta Developers Association’s recent proposal for the introduction of a planning tool or mechanism used in several countries and known as ‘Transferable Development Rights’, or TDR, has been received with some scepticism and concern from various quarters. 

One can understand such a reaction. The way planning policies in recent years have been changed to ease or accommodate development at the expense of proper planning cannot but spark such a concern towards this proposal particularly because of who its proposer is.

Transfer of development rights programmes simply refer to the transfer of development potential from one parcel of land to another. Such a tool initially was conceived to enable the protection of farmland, where farmers had various development rights which might not always have been in line with countryside and nature protection and conservation objectives.

In this way this mechanism was instituted specifically to ensure that the countryside is protected and at the same time owners are not penalised. The scope of the tool was to protect and conserve. The parcel of land where the development rights originate is called the ‘sending parcel’. The site to which the development rights are transferred is called the ‘receiving parcel’.

Once the development rights have been transferred the sending site is protected with a permanent conservation easement. This actually freezes any development potential on this site since it has already been transferred.

The transferred rights generally allow a buyer to build at a higher density than permitted by planning regulations on the receiving parcel. The TDR in various countries is a mechanism used as a form of development control and to control urban sprawl. It also provides a form of compensation to owners whose property has reduced in value due to rezoning. This mechanism offers property or land owners financial incentives for conserving environmental, heritage or agricultural resources.

So in principle TDRs can be seen as a positive mechanism that should lead to proper planning and environmental protection. However, scepticism towards this system is justified since the current climate with regard to planning and development is well away from proper planning and concern for the quality of life of the local community.

It is, therefore, natural for the public to smell something fishy about this proposal.

The introduction of TDRs and the mechanism by which it is to operate is not an easy exercise. Rather than the principle of TDRs, which can be considered positive, it is the details, yet to be established, on the operation of such a mechanism that are likely to raise concern.

Natural for the public to smell something fishy about this proposal

By no stretch of the imagination will anyone believe that the MDA in its proposal will be genuinely promoting the common good. Some of the crucial issues that will need to be addressed by planners in setting up such a mechanism concern the following:

Identification of the areas meriting protection or sending parcels; types of transfers to be permitted; allocation of development rights mechanism; and identification of the receiving parcels and densities to be applied.

These are only some of the crucial factors that will require in depth evaluation and further study before introducing such a mechanism.

For example, the use of TDRs results in increasing density in specific areas. Considering that in most of the main development areas (e.g Paceville, St Paul’s Bay, Sliema, Paola, Fgura, St Julian’s) acceptable density levels may have been exceeded, taking account of parking problems and traffic issues particularly, the first question would obviously be which areas will be identified as the receiving parcels.

While overseas TDRs have been positive in protecting farmland, environmentally sensitive areas and the preservation of historic landmarks from development, yet such a mechanism requires significant investment of time and staff resources to study, plan and eventually implement. It would also need a lengthy and extensive public education campaign to explain TDRs to the public.

The mechanism has been introduced to reconcile protection of environmental and heritage resources with ensuring that property owners get some form of compensation for loss in value of their property as a result of rezoning regulations or to protect a landmark building.

In identifying the sending parcels, caution must be taken not to create development rights which previously did not exist.

Although a mechanism like TDRs may have worked overseas, it does not necessarily mean that it may be appropriate for our country. For a start, do we have the right planning culture and mentality to introduce such a mechanism?

TDRs have been implemented in the US, the UK, India and Brazil, just to mention a few. These are contexts that are much different than ours. Hence, further proper study on TDRs and its application in our context is warranted if the government is to introduce a mechanism that will genuinely benefit the general community and protect our urban contexts.

Discussions should not be limited solely with developers but engage primarily relevant NGOs. Only by means of a transparent approach may such a mechanism, if appropriate, be introduced, otherwise it may smell of a Trojan Horse.

Anthony Ellul is general secretary of the Malta Chamber of Planners.

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece