MEPA says that Fort Cambridge should be allowed to build up to 20 storeys within the maximum height allowed for 16 storeys, by ignoring its own guidelines setting floor heights. JAMES DEBONO on the planning authority’s latest somersault

The Malta Environment and Planning Authority is claiming that its approval of a 20-storey height for the Fort Cambridge development in Tigné, still respects the 16-storey limit it previously set in its development brief for the project.
Facing an appeal against its decision to approve the project by the Sliema local council, MEPA has presented a technical report on its relaxation of the building height limit.
MEPA originally approved an outline permit for 23 floors, after it exempted developers Gap Holdings from carrying out an environment impact assessment (EIA) on the project.
But upon the intervention of the European Commission, MEPA was forced to order Gap to conduct an EIA.
When resulting photomontages in the EIA showed that the project would impinge on the view of Valletta from Kalkara and Bighi, the authority called on the developers to respect the 16-floor limit stipulated by the development brief.
But finally, in a stormy meeting in July, MEPA ended up approving a 20-storey block on the pretext that it would have the same height as a 16-storey block. Although the visual impact of the project remained significant from Valletta, it is not as severe from Bighi and Kalkara.
MEPA is citing a circular it sent to architects in 2007, which established that the height of each storey should be 3.46 metres high, with a 0.29 metre floor slab.
Applying these parameters to a 16-storey building, with semi-basement and a parapet wall at roof level, the resultant height should be 63.2 metres.
Using this as a benchmark, MEPA is saying the height limit of the 20-storey Fort Cambridge development should stay at 63.2 metres – even though using the same parameters for a 20-storey building would set it at a height of 77.6 metres.
MEPA is saying the height limit would respect the development brief, but since the brief makes no reference to a maximum 63.2-metre height, MEPA’s claim remains dubious.
By compressing 20 floors into the maximum height set for a 16-storey building, the developers will be ignoring the same policy that MEPA set on building heights, even if this policy is merely indicative and carries no legal weight – as they would still be within the Police Code, which sets minimum floor heights of any habitable room at 2.75 metres.
On their own part, Gap Holdings have replied to the council’s appeal saying that since MEPA approved a 23-storey development at the outline stage, the MEPA appeals board cannot overrule a 20-storey development that was approved with a full development permit.
“The Sliema local council cannot expect to file an appeal from a decision approving a maximum height of 20 floors when there was already a decision approving a maximum height of 23 floors and from which decision no appeal was ever lodged,” the developers said.
But in its report MEPA refrains from making such an argument, as it now admits that the outline permit did not abide by the rules of the development brief.
MEPA claims that although it approved the 23-floor development, the original drawings were discarded when MEPA ordered “fresh building plans” that respected the 16-floor limit.
Gap Holdings still argues it had a vested right to develop 23 floors even if they later agreed to reduce the number of floors to 20 after the MEPA board asked them to modify plans in such a way that the visual impact would “possibly be that of a 16-storey building.”
Gap Holdings paid the government €55.2 million to buy the land formerly occupied by national airline Air Malta, a sum which filled the gap in public finances and helped Malta meet the criteria to adopt the euro.

Fort Cambridge saga
In 2006, MEPA approved an outline permit for 23 storeys, in spite of a development brief that set the maximum height at 16 floors.
Months later, the European Commission initiated infringement procedures against the government for exempting the project from an EIA.
MEPA later ordered the developers to conduct a partial EIA, which did not include a social impact assessment.
In June 2008, the MEPA board postponed its decision after it transpired that the 23-storey block had a visual impact on views from Bighi and Kalkara. In August, Sliema’s green party councillor Michael Briguglio presented a motion urging the council to appeal against the permit. Nationalist councillor and former mayor Albert Bonello Dupuis abstained. All Labour and PN councillors, including mayor Marina Arrigo, supported the appeal.

jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt

 

PRINT THIS ARTICLE