Updated | PA rebuts towers’ green critics : ‘High-rise creates more open spaces’

The Planning Authority has defended its decision to approve two high-rise projects, after the plans at Sliema and Mriehel were criticised heavily by a group of environmental NGOs.

In a brief statement, the PA argued that sites that accommodate high-rise buildings have significantly more open spaces available to the public than a site which is developed in a conventional manner.

It also rebutted accusations by the NGOs – Din l-Art Helwa, Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar, Friends of the Earth Malta and the Ramblers’ Association – against its planning director, Chris Borg.

The NGOs took Borg to task for saying that high-rise buildings have the same impact as low and medium rise structures.

“It is well known that high-rise cast a longer shadow on surrounding buildings depriving them of light, air and solar rights, while increasing temperatures in surrounding streets due to heat canyon effect,” the NGOs said in a joint statement.

However, the PA insisted that the NGOs had misinterpreted Borg, arguing that the planning director was only referring to the impact of high-rise on utilities services.

“Borg was directly referring to the utilities services and had pointed out that the impact that high-rise buildings have on water, drainage and electricity is very much the same as low- and medium-rise buildings,” the PA said. “This reality stems from the fact that if a site is developed as a high-rise, it will have the same or even fewer apartments than if it is developed as a low- or medium-rise.”

The PA board on Thursday approved a 38-storey tower in Qui Si Sana, Sliema, and a four-tower block that rises to 20 storeys in Mriehel. The former project is owned by the Gasan Group, while the latter is the brainchild of both the Gasan and Tumas business groups.

In their statement, the green NGOs called for a national master plan for high-rise buildings to be approved before any other applications are processed.

They hit out at the Planning Authority for ignoring expert advice and for not basing their approval of the projects on comprehensive studies.

“They were presented with irrefutable evidence that the Mriehel photomontages on which the Case Officer’s report was based, were flawed in favour of the developers, and did not show the true impact of the project,” they said. “The visual impact on the iconic view of Mdina is clearly ‘major’ and not ‘moderate’ as described by the applicants’ consultants. Instead of requesting new and updated visuals, the board chose to base its decision on flawed information.”

Moreover, they argued that the board also refused to take account of the fact that the policy allowing tall buildings in Mriehel was invalid, as it violated established legal procedures.

“The inclusion of Mriehel as a high-rise zone was never issued for public consultation as required by Maltese and international law,” they said. “This did not augur well for the expected deluge of 22 high-rise applications, some of which were currently being discussed on a case-by-case basis, and proved the urgency of a national master plan for high-rise buildings, before any other applications are processed,” the NGOs said.