MEPA set to ban high buildings at Ta’ Masrija

The Malta Environment and Planning Authority has issued a public consultation with the aim of revising an existing policy allowing the application of the controversial Floor Area Ration mechanism which could see high building towering over a ridge in Mellieha.

Effectively, the proposed prohibition of high buildings in this area will limit any development on the site to three storeys, a basement and a penthouse as foreseen in the local plan, thus avoiding a repeat of the Mistra controversy, which saw the authority approving high-rise development on a ridge.

But the public consultation also proposes to remove the obligation imposed on developers to present comprehensive plans to cover the entire area, which has multiple owners. This could result in a trade off for the developers enabling them to occupy more of the site.

Instead of the developers being expected of presenting comprehensive plans, MEPA will be issuing a master plan indicating road alignments, land uses and building heights "within the framework of the policy approved in 2006".

Ta' Masrija area is located on an open space next to the Mellieha bypass overlooking the Mizieb Valley and the Xaghra l-Hamra natural park, which has been earmarked in the local plans for the development of 463 apartments. The site is presently in a derelict state following the closure of a quarry in the area in 1996.

Two years ago an Environmental Planning Statement (EPS) which considers proposals submitted for the development of three adjacent sites in the Ta' Masrija area, limits of Mellieha acknowledged that the high-rise development is bound to have significant impact on the rural landscape, when viewed from the southwest, south, and southeast.

"The fact that the Ta' Masrija area is located on the periphery of Mellieha and adjacent to a relatively, unspoiled valley dramatises the contrasts that often characterise the urban-rural nexus," the report states.

According to the planning policy for the area, the height of the buildings in the site will not exceed three floors plus six courses semi-basement above the level of any proposed route but through the application of the Floor Area Ratio, developers were  proposing apartment blocks, which are six-and-a-half-storeys high.

MEPA's Floor Area Ratio policy, which is still a draft, enables developers to opt for higher buildings if this results in more open space facilities for residents.

A survey conducted by the consultants among 190 residents living in adjacent streets showed that only 4% of respondents were in favour of the development as proposed; 87% were opposed to it. 6% were undecided at the time of survey.

The vast majority called for building heights to be reduced to three or four storeys and for the density of units within the development to be reduced. Several others argued for a larger area to be devoted to gardens. Some respondents proposed that the area be developed with a small number of terraced houses surrounded by gardens.

MEPA's Environment Protection Directorate had opposed  application of the Floor Area Ratio on this site because it is located on a ridge.

"The provision of more public space can be achieved without resorting to the construction of tall buildings."
MEPA's Natural Heritage Panel made similar objections.