The Planning Authority today faces a litmus test when its board convenes to decide on two development applications of the type that have very much gripped the national attention over recent months: high rises and skyscrapers.

The PA board is tomorrow slated to take decisions on the four high-rise towers earmarked for Mriehel, as well as on the TownSquare complex in Tigné.  Public opinion appears to be very much split on the question of whether the country should be building vertically or horizontally.

But despite the fact that building up saves precious land area in this small country, most environmental NGOs are steadfast against, arguing that high rises and skyscrapers have a huge and long-term impact on the lifestyle of residents of Malta – affecting quality of life in terms of  traffic congestion, air quality, visual amenity and infrastructure.

A group of NGOs yesterday filed another judicial protest over today’s scheduled Planning Authority meeting, calling on the board members not to issue permits for high rises, claiming that the law had not been observed in the application process.

They claim that in both cases, the policy governing high-rise buildings was not subject to public consultation as required by law, which they say has been confirmed by the Environment and Planning Commissioner David Pace. The required studies, including a social impact assessment, were not carried out satisfactorily and the Mriehel site was added by stealth, the NGOs contend, after the public consultation had closed.

There are presently several high-rise and skyscraper developments being planned for the country, the vast majority of which are spread between the Sliema-Gzira and the Paceville-St George’s Bay areas. 

So far, the high-rise developments that have actually been approved - major planning decisions with inevitable long-term impacts on the urban environment - have been approved in a piecemeal fashion and without being underpinned by a clear vision or strategy as to where we want to go as a country in this respect.

This lack of a holistic plan could very well result in uncontrolled developments and unpredictable impacts on urban life. Moreover, the construction of such large-scale projects will undoubtedly aggravate traffic problems on the already heavily congested road network in these areas.

What is abundantly clear is that future tall building developments should not be considered without a master plan.  The concept of a possible moratorium as was recently proposed along such lines, however, has been dismissed by the Prime Minister.

As far as the public is aware, the only attempt to study the prospect of the further development of skyscrapers and/or high-rises in Malta was made back in 2008.  It had been commissioned by the then Malta Environment and Planning Authority to a Fulbright scholar and Chicago-based expert on tall buildings.

That report had, for a number of reasons, advised that the country should not allow any buildings to exceed 24 storeys – one storey higher than the country’s currently highest building, the Portomaso tower. 

It is true that tall buildings can replace dilapidated buildings and create a modern urban skyline that attracts foreign investment.  It is, however, questionable whether Malta is undergoing the kind of accelerated economic growth that would justify the construction boom that is being proposed, particularly of late, or whether there is the demand from the foreign market for the kind of residential and/or office block towers that are being proposed.

High-rise districts with appropriate amenities, parking facilities, pedestrian and bus links are also essential to such projects.  But, unfortunately, an efficient public transport system, key to successful tall buildings, is still sorely lacking in Malta. The inadequate utility infrastructure – electricity, water and drains – also needs to be upgraded to meet the needs of such structures. 

Very detailed studies certainly need to be carried out on these and other economic and social factors, and a master plan and a national vision must be developed before proceeding with the approval for such projects.  The country cannot simply rush headlong into such projects, no matter how tempting they may be.