|
Julian Manduca wrote this article prior to his untimely death on 17 May 2005. A clear example of his keen journalistic eye, Manduca writes about the systematic appeasement of construction developers by the changes in planning law and guidelines
New guidelines that came into effect back in April 2005 encouraged more high-rise development, allowing penthouses to be built on third storeys and ‘setback’ third floors on small houses in towns’ inner cores. While so many visitors complained that Malta is overbuilt, joking that “it will be nice when it is ready”, it would seem the construction industry is in for a field day: more construction in urban areas, more dust, noise and disturbance that assures Malta remains in a ‘not ready’ state.
The new regulations were welcomed by developer Angelo Xuereb, while environment groups had mixed reactions (see boxes). The regulations cover a wide range of planning and design issues and among them MEPA decided that: people who own or live in small houses in Urban Conservation Areas (historic town centres) can apply to build a third floor setback from the street; high-rise buildings that were previously permitted only on land measuring 3,000 square metres can now be permitted in land measuring 2,000 square metres; and that any building of three storeys can apply for a permit for a penthouse.
The last large open space in St Julians – Pender Place and Mercury House – is to be developed by government order and the massive MIDI development at Tigné and Manoel Island is far from completed, building goes on in each town and village, but MEPA obviously feels that this is not enough.
Like the poor man that was given a wooden ferryboat and burned the wood to heat his house during the winter rather than ferrying people across the lake to earn money, Malta seems determined to use up all its stone and build up every nook and cranny.
When announcing the new measures MEPA’s planning director Ing Christopher Borg said that one of the reasons for the setback second floors in urban conservation areas was “to relieve the pressure from building in the countryside,” and environment minister George Pullicino explained that some houses were often too small for the modern needs of families and that the new guidelines would discourage them from leaving small old houses vacant and looking to build elsewhere.
But when MaltaToday asked the environment ministry whether MEPA was considering taking action to limit building in other areas the reply confirmed that no such measures will be taken.
The ministry spokesperson would only say that MEPA’s Structure Plan policies related to development outside development zones are expected to be rigorously applied. There will be no give and take and the market, or the developers, will decide.
Malta boasts about 40,000 vacant dwellings, yet now not only can developers and speculators build in the building areas that MEPA has admitted were far in excess of need, but will now have further opportunities to develop urban areas.
When MaltaToday asked minister George Pullicino why – given the number of vacant dwellings – permits were to be given for penthouses on three-storey buildings his immediate reply was that with only three storeys a lift was often not a financially viable proposition, but with four this could be so.
Clarifying further the environment ministry later said: “The cause of vacant dwellings could be one of several: there could be problems of inheritance or the property may have been acquired for investment purposes. Even if the numbers indicate an oversupply, in reality many of the vacant properties are not available for sale or for use by those who really need them.
“For someone wishing to buy their own home, houses which are not on the market for sale are of no use. These are issues that cannot be ignored when discussing oversupply.
“It is worth noting that, in spite of the rent law changes enacted by Government in 1995, very few empty dwellings were put on the market for rent. One should ask why this is the case.”
While people still fear renting out property – in part because the Malta Labour Party has never given an assurance that it will not change the law to its pre-1995 state – Malta would seem to be blessed with many properties for sale and a glance through the Sunday papers will show what is on offer.
Asked whether Malta needs more high-rise development, the ministry said that a change in the floor area ratio allows for a higher development, but at the same time requires the development to provide for open space that can be enjoyed by the public.
“Added open space is an advantage for the people living in the area. Having said that, careful consideration has to be given to the impact the tall building will have on the skyline and on its surroundings. The design of the tall building is paramount.
“There can be tall buildings which are attractive and which create visual interest. MEPA is in the process of preparing a policy paper on tall buildings to address these issues.”
Urban centres, also known as Urban Conservation Areas will also be affected by the new guidelines as small houses will be able to build a ‘setback’ third floor, but the ministry said that the time required for a crane – and other disturbance – in the UCAs will be limited. The ministry does not believe that building in the UCAs should either be staggered or done over a limited time period and the spokesperson said: “A development permit is valid for a period of five years. In which year after the permit, the development commences is a decision for the developer to take, provided that the five years of the permit does not expire.
“It is neither legally possible nor practical for MEPA to impose when the developer will start the development. I think the solution lies elsewhere. Cranes which block roads require a permit from the local council. More careful thought is required when issuing such permits to ensure that the traffic can still flow efficiently in the area and that any one area is not saturated with cranes. The local council can and should refuse a permit for a crane in a road, even if this means the start of the development will have to be postponed.
“The best way to ensure that cranes do not occupy precious road space unnecessarily is to impose a charge. It is interesting to note that when the Sliema council introduced such a charge they were criticised for imposing additional costs. What people failed to see was that this was a measure to cut down congestion created by cranes.”
In a normal ‘market’ greater supply should decrease prices so with more dwellings being built one could expect the price of property to decrease, making it more affordable, but in Malta the real estate market has never worked that way. Prices have always risen no matter how many properties were put on the market.
The ministry spokesperson told MaltaToday that reducing the price of property was not the reason for allowing development where it previously was not possible, but surmised that prices may indeed fall: “There are innumerable factors which affect property prices. Units available for sale are one of them. My guess is that the penthouse on the third floor will slow down the rate of increase in property prices, although I should say that these changes were made for reasons other than property prices.”
Nature Trust supports high-rise and third floors, slams penthouses
Not all environment groups see the MEPA guidelines in the same way. The president of Nature Trust, Vince Attard told MaltaToday: “First of all I consider the smaller floor ratio on high rise buildings to be a positive step. Today high-rise buildings are occupying a large footprint on our precious land space. With land use being a prime problem in the Maltese Islands we agree with high-rise trends however we cannot allow these buildings to occupy an even larger chunk of land.”
Vince Attard also welcomed the setback third floors in Urban Conservation Areas: “This will help keep the desired air space in our fast developing towns which are often ending in a sort of architecture competition rather then a town planning exercise. If ever we want to plan forward for sustainable development and consider the use of alternate energy such as solar energy for example, such developments should reflect this as today buildings seem to compete with which building will manage to capture sunlight.”
Attard echoed minister George Pullicino on the decision to allow third floors in small houses in town centres: “This can also perhaps solve the problem of people seeking to change houses for the more needed space. Maybe it will also encourage more people to retain their house rather then sell their property to seek new housing which again is having an impact on land use.”
It was the penthouses that caught Attard’s ire: “One cannot but not note with disappointment that penthouses seem to get a high feature. Roof space should not be sacrificed to give up the potential use of alternate energy uses such as the use of solar energy in residential areas. We feel that solar energy should be given a higher boost in our fast growing energy consuming country and rather then try to solve the issue by increasing the power being provided by our power stations we recommend the use of solar energy on every household. Penthouses take up precious space that could be used for solar energy production.”
Friends of the Earth: more construction cannot be justified
Friends of the Earth (Malta) coordinator Martin Galea de Giovanni believes the new MEPA guidelines will increase environmental pressures and told MaltaToday: “At face value, one might imagine that these measures will decrease the environmental pressure created by new constructions. Yet, this is far from the truth as the solution to curb urban sprawl lies in taking other more effective measures, such as reforming the rent laws. The general idea given by MEPA’s document seems to provide further thrust to the construction industry which has grown out of scope and proportion. Considering that Malta has about 40,000 vacant dwelling, further construction initiatives can hardly be justified as a way to solve land related issues.”
Galea de Giovanni warned that independently of how many new penthouses are built, an ever-increasing property value will only encourage landowners to speculate on more open land, where in applying for a permit the sustainability and necessity of such constructions is not even questioned by MEPA.
He insists the rental market must be reformed: “Reforming the property market will prove to be both environmentally and socially just, even if such a bold step would upset developers and estate agents who currently prosper in a ‘law of the (concrete) jungle’ environment.”
The FoE coordinator told MaltaToday that one of the reasons for allowing penthouses on fourth floors could be related to the number of illegal penthouses all over the islands.
“One asks if this is just a sneaky alternative to regularise these illegal constructions at one simple stroke of a pen. This move will definitely make the tenants or owners happy, but the same cannot be said about the neighbour who one fine day woke up to find a plain white wall instead of a sea view.”
Angelo Xuereb hails beginning of new era in building design
Angelo Xuereb, the president of the Federation of Building and Civil Engineering Contractors believes MEPA’s new guidelines will herald a new era in building design and planning for Malta’s building developments and constitute another milestone towards a better standard of living.
Asked by MaltaToday whether the new guidelines will boost the construction industry Xuereb explained that “the demand for additional development is generated from progress and everyone expects that progress will continue over the coming years. Construction activities move hand in hand with demand. If there is demand for further development, it is only natural that this demand will boost up the construction activity. This means that it is not these policies that will boost the construction activity but the demand.
“Demand naturally leads to more developments and unless height restrictions are eased with caution and only in appropriate areas, then it is difficult to control the sprawl of further horizontal development. This means that more virgin land would have to be sacrificed, and we all agree that this would be as a last resort.”
According to Xuereb: “The new policies that allow: penthouses to be erected on the third floor of a building, a setback third floor in urban conservation areas and the reduction of footprint for high rise buildings are all moves in the right direction for better land use. This can also be considered as an attempt to control the ever increasing land values which in turn are escalating the final price of a development.”
The developer behind several hotels and a failed golf course proposal told MaltaToday: “The concept of high rise development built on a plot ratio basis has many advantages. This may encourage developers to purchase adjoining properties in order to have a more attractive building. It will allow for better planning since most rooms shall have outward facing windows and other openings. Rooms will have more direct natural lighting, more privacy to residents and more open spaces at ground floor levels surrounded with landscaped open spaces or gardens, this depending on the size of the plot. The architects will have a more challenging time in designing the elevations since presently they are very restricted in their creativity when working on a small frontage. This is very easily noticed on Tower Road in Sliema where the whole streetscape has very similar looks resembling pigeon holes when viewed from a distance apart from the fact that the buildings here also have different heights which represent the year in which they were developed.
“I can still remember very clearly when during the late 70s I was constructing a five-storey apartment block on the Sliema front, and many where those who considered the building as being excessive at that time. Today, we all know that a 5-storey building is considered to be very low for the Sliema front. After a period of 30 years, many now seriously consider buying these relatively low buildings for redevelopment into higher buildings. Naturally enough, persuading all owners to sell is not easy and probably they would only sell at a very high price.”
Xuereb believes Tower Road could have been turned into a high rise area: “Should this new policy have been enforced in earlier times, then, probably we would not have ended up with such bad planning for Tower Road, where the buildings on the front are all over-shadowing those behind. We would have had a better neighborhood and also still be enjoying it today, with landscaped openings in between the blocks of apartments.”
Angelo Xuereb sees the main benefit to the construction industry in the changes to the policies for high rise buildings, “due to the fact that these structures require more rigid controls in all aspects; these being, quality of concrete and tolerance, as well as for all the finishing trades. The new building regulations, which are still in draft form, will also make a great impact on the way we construct and the way we calculate the noise and thermal insulations. These regulations will also lead to another step forward in having properties valued on the basis of the regulations.” |
