31-storey Tigné tower hotel set for approval

A case officer recommending approval of a 31-storey hotel on the 19th century Fort Cambridge barracks barely mentions the proposed scheduling of the building pending since 2015.

The tower hotel will be erected above the historic barracks, which formerly formed part of the now-shuttered Holiday Inn hotel.

Had the Planning Authority scheduled the building as requested by the Sliema local council in 2015, it would not be able to approve the development in terms of the policy regulating hotel heights.

The Planning Authority board will be taking a final decision on the high-rise development proposed by developers GAP, on 13 July.

As proposed the development will retain most of the façade of the 19th century building and integrate it in the high-rise hotel. It also foresees extensive restoration works and the recreation of the original courtyard of the building.

But an environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the project commissioned by the developers had warned that the integration of the façade into the lower floors of the high-rise hotel means its “mere existence as a free-standing structure will be forever lost” and that the military heritage of the area would be “further de-contextualised”.

The EIA’s heritage report clearly indicated that the building deserved Grade 2 scheduling, the same level of protection recently granted to Palazzina Vincenti in St Julian’s.

The Fort Cambridge officers’ mess was built between 1903 and 1905. The conversion of the barracks into a hotel in the 1980s resulted in the removal of the main porch on the north façade, and the conversion of existing rooms into double bedrooms. But most of the building’s external fabric remains intact.

The PA’s own Fort Cambridge Development Brief, approved in January 2006, described the barracks as a “landmark building” to be retained due to its historical and architectural importance, serving as a buffer between new, higher development and the surrounding residential blocks. “No additional floors over the third floor will be allowed over this landmark building,” the brief concluded.

The hotel’s EIA confirms that the officers’ mess would merit a Grade 1 level of protection, as was the case with similar buildings in Pembroke, but only recommended Grade 2 protection because of the irreversible changes made to the building when it was transformed into a hotel in the 1980s. Grade 2 protection normally allows internal alterations to buildings but precludes substantial additions to the fabric of the building.

Policy quandary

The scheduling of the building would have prevented the Planning Authority from assessing the proposal in terms of the Height Limitation Adjustment Policy for Hotels. This is because this policy, which allows hotels to rise above the height limits imposed in the local plan, specifically states that the policy cannot be applied on scheduled areas.

The case officer only makes a brief mention of the pending request to schedule the Fort Cambridge building, when reporting the comments of the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage that the barracks “merit scheduling at an appropriate level to ensure its protection and appropriate treatment” and that the scheduling proposal to the PA is still pending a decision.

The case officer refers to two policies regulating development in the area, namely the hotel heights policy and the Floor Area Ratio policy, which earmarked Tigné as a strategic location for tall buildings. In this case the developers are not applying the FAR mechanism through which extra heights are compensated by the creation of new open spaces.

The request for the scheduling of the building made by the Sliema Local council has been pending since 2015. In 2021 the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage expressed concern on the visual impact of the project, noting that the development will be visible above the Valletta skyline when viewed from across the Grand Harbour.

But the heritage watchdog later welcomed plans to preserve the external façades and arcades, and masonry fabric of the original building, as well as plans to preserve and recreate the internal courtyard.

The case officer report briefly refers to the 2006 development brief, which is still legally valid in stating that the use of the site as a hotel is in line with the brief.

But it does not refer to another clause in the brief, stipulating that “no additional floors are to be allowed over this landmark building.”

Architectural merits

The case officer’s report described the reuse of a historical structure as part of the project as “a positive planning consideration for its integration, particularly when considering the strategic location of the building”.

It concludes that the proposal will respect its context and is acceptable from an aesthetical point of view since it constitutes a standalone building, having no rhythm to follow a particular street cape. The building profile as proposed will also contribute “to an interesting visual architectural gain.”

Moreover, when considering the already committed skyline which, apart from the MIDI project also includes Townsquare, Mercury Tower and the DB project, the report concludes that the proposed impact to the skyline is acceptable. It says the five-star accommodation will also provide “a good transition between the commercial and residential activity”.

The case officer’s report also refers to a Sun Path Study assessing the shadowing of the new building on surrounding houses. The analysis showed that the shadows would mostly affect the residential area in the mornings especially in winter when the impact on the residential area to the west of the site will be “substantial”.