Height limitations for hotels in tourist areas to be relaxed

Hotels in Mellieha, St Paul's Bay, St Julian's, Sliema, Marsascala, Marsaxlokk, B'Bugia in Malta and in Marsalforn, Xlendi and Mgarr in Gozo could be allowed to rise beyond the limit imposed in local plans.

This emerges from a new policy document issued for public consultation through which the Malta Environment and Planning Authority is proposing a relaxation of height limitations to facilitate the upgrading of existing hotels.

The new policy is limited to within development zones which are outside Urban Conservation Areas or Residential Priority Areas.

The "overall built mass" should not exceed the height limitation set by the local plan  by more than two floors, but the document also refers to the application of the floor area ratio, which could result in even higher development.

The policy also proposes that the new height limit should not be employed in tourist areas where the maximum height limitation is less than four floors unless this is already compromised by taller buildings.

For this aim, MEPA has issued a public consultation development which proposes a Height Limitation Adjustment Policy which would allow the transfer of an equivalent amount of floor-space from one part of a project to another area within the curtilage of the same project, possibly through "limited infringement" on the maximum height limitation indicated in local plans.

MEPA justifies this change by referring to a number of cases whereby hotels and other properties located in Tourism Areas are unable to achieve development up to the height limitation indicated in a local plan.

The policy emphasises the need for hotels to constantly upgrade facilities to remain competitive.

It also refers to the fact that hotels seeking to provide new facilities have to compensate this by more revenue-generating activities.

"Upgrading of existing hotels may entail the provision of additional facilities but these, in turn, would entail higher running costs which would need to be supplemented by additional revenue-generating facilities. According to MEPA, the most difficult issues to address relate to achieving a design which does not overwhelm the townscape either from a short or longer distance point of view.

More often than not, this would depend on the surrounding context.

The policy warns that the height adjustment policy should only be used with great discretion, given that a resulting building may create an unacceptably massive intervention.

"To this effect, great discretion should be used in areas which happen to be close to local ridge lines," as this could have a disproportionate effect on longer distance views.

The new policy allowing hotels to surpass existing height policies comes in the wake of another more generic policy to introduce a flexibility clause that allows MEPA to better assess development application proposals which promote sustainable growth in Tourism Areas, as well as regeneration and employment consolidation initiatives that may be neighborhood-compatible, and in some cases could also positively contribute to the amenity of the areas in question.

According to MEPA, the goal of this policy is not intended to supersede either the general thrust or the direction given by the specific policies in the Local Plan.

It is only intended to give MEPA a degree of flexibility in identified situations where a justified departure may be deemed sensible or desirable from a planning point of view.