Part of Malta very unique charm is our skyline. Our villages’ skylines are beautiful because they are usually focused on the parish Church, normally with a cupola whiohc is silhouetted against a sunset, or being illuminated against the night sky.

Similarly, turn of the century buildings and buildings from the colonial times create a beautiful scene. But somewhere along the line, as Malta’s tourist boom began in the 1970s, we ruined a great part of the skyline. One only has to think of Bugibba or Sliema to get an idea. In the apartment boom of the millennium, we saw something similar happen with houses being demolished to make way for apartment blocks and condominiums.

Finally, someone has taken action. Mepa this week proposed that high-rise buildings should be limited to only five localities. These include areas that have already seen high rise developments and include Marsa, Gzira, Tigne, Paceville and Qawra. No high rises will be allowed in Gozo.

This is all very positive, as it will prevent blemishes on existing skylines, and will also make sure that high rises are only built in areas that already have them – if the proposal is approved.

The same document also delineates and puts an emphasis on open space and sustainability. For example, the document calls for high rise development to incorporate an open space of 50 % of the footprint, as well as ensuring that sites must be surrounded by streets on all four sides, making them ‘standalone’ blocks.

Mepa also went into the merits of what is considered to be a high rise – in the context of its locality. Mepa says a high rise can be considered as such to be a building “significantly higher than the built development in its local context”. It also classifies buildings as “tall”  and classified as “tall”, when it is more than twice as high as the maximum building height limitation for the locality established by the Local Plan or more than10 floors (40m).

When we talk about progress, we talk about new attractive buildings. We have seen huge improvements over the years, but still something has been lacking. The very recent mega construction projects have been a mixed bag – some have been white elephants and others have been very aesthetically pleasing.

But perhaps one grey area of the policy document is that it does not indicate a maximum number of such buildings which will be permitted in any specific location, nor a maximum height of high rise. Mepa argues that the regulatory framework is intended to give developers space to build their case. It could lead to long and protracted hearings when the applicants submit their development plans, rather than coming up with a plan that fits into the existing reality.

But back to the positive. This policy document is a good one and comes at a time when it is much needed. Not only does it limit the areas which will see high rise developments, but it will also preserve Malta’s character. It is also positive in terms of what a high rise is. This is a good thing and will serve to improve Malta holistically.