MaltaToday previous editions

MT 13 November 2016

Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/750768

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 1 of 87

2 JAMES DEBONO The Paceville masterplan is changing the goalposts for the new owners of Mercury House, who were bound by a development brief when they purchased what was the GO telephone exchange from its former owners Penderville Ltd for €25 million. The sale of Mercury House was made on condition that a public square be developed, but the new owners will benefit from changed planning policies without any of their previous obligations. The 2005 development brief, a le- gally binding document, excluded any sort of development that is now being proposed for Mercury House in the government-commissioned masterplan for Paceville. Note to readers: the masterplan was drafted by Mott MacDonald, a consultancy firm that the new Mer- cury House owner, Joseph Portelli, actually engaged for his own project months before the start of the mas- terplan. When in 2005 a call for offers was issued for the acquisition of the gov- ernment land at Pender Place and Mercury House, it was clearly stat- ed that development would have to conform with a brief that precluded high-rise buildings and which had to come with a public square. But the Paceville masterplan ef- fectively changes the goalposts: Mercury House is now set to host the highest skyscraper, of around 35 floors, seeing its total floor space ar- ea increase from just 11,081 square metres to 87,000. Out goes the public plaza, which was now shifted to private land op- posite the St George's Park Hotel in the new masterplan. Development limited by 2005 brief The 2005 development brief obliged the developer to create a major public piazza around Mer- cury House, restore the Grade 2 scheduled telephone exchange building, remove any extensions to the rear of Mercury House, and prohibited any hotels being ap- proved on either the Mercury or Pender sites. Most importantly, the brief made it clear that the Mercury site could not benefit from the floor area ratio policy, which allows taller buildings when more open space is created. The highest building on the site was set at 15 floors. And the design of the whole area had to highlight Mercury House as the focal point, and "ensure good views of its attractive front eleva- tion". In contrast, the Paceville master- plan for Paceville wants to create a long view to the listed Spinola Entrenchment Archway at the en- trance of the Dragonara peninsula, which would "provide an impres- sive backdrop to the plaza with the sea visible beyond the historic gate". No similar treatment has been granted to the listed Mercury House, which will be cluttered by the new high-rise developments. The developers were also to en- sure an underground car park for 1,500 cars and a bus terminus at the Pender site. But all car parking for Mercury House has to be provided at Pender Place. Masterplan overrules brief Despite the 2005 development brief being still legally binding, the new planning laws introduced in 2015 give precedence to other types of plans over development briefs that originally served to provide specific guidelines for sites such as Fort Cambridge in Tigné and Mer- cury House. In the new hierarchy, the spatial strategy is at the top of the pyramid. Then comes the subject plan, the local plan, the action plan or man- agement plan, and finally the devel- opment brief: the latter relegated to the bottom rung. Tender awarded to Pender Ville Pender Ville Limited had won the 2005 concession for the Pender and Mercury sites for Lm10.6 million (€24 million), seeing off the owners of the St George's Park site as their main rivals for the concession. In 2007, an application for the "development at Pender Place and Mercury House sites according to the development brief issued by Government Investment Limited" was approved, although this came with a number of deviations from the brief. Curiously, the contract signed with the government itself did not even refer to the development brief but to the conditions presented in the call for offers. In 2009, part of the Mercury House site (950 square metres) was sold to trade finance bank FIMBank plc for their global headquarters. Pender Ville, now Pendergar- dens Development, then sold 8,500 square metres of the Merucry House site to Gozitan developer Joseph Portelli, whose business in- terests have included the former Forum Hotel site in Ibragg, now an upmarket residential development, and the Hal Saghtrija developent in Zebbug, Gozo. The Mott MacDonald consultancy Portelli selected Mott MacDon- ald to advise him with regard to the proposed high-rise project at Mer- cury House and inform and advise Zaha Hadid Architects in "the de- velopment of feasibility options for the Mercury Tower project." On its part, the Planning Authori- ty signed its own consultancy agree- ment with Mott MacDonald on 11 May 2016, which agreement con- tains articles regulating the "ethical conduct of the parties." None of these articles precluded Mott MacDonald from offering its consultancy services to any of the developers impacted by the master- plan. A €307,810 direct order was awarded to Mott MacDonald for the masterplan. The Planning Authority initially contacted nine foreign companies for the procurement of this service. Only two expressed interest, one of which was Mott MacDonald. While originally Mott MacDonald was asked to prepare a transport strat- egy, its remit was later extended to include urban planning. Mott MacDonald outsourced this task to Broadway Malyan. Prior to being awarded the con- tract, Mott MacDonald had flagged its potential conflict of interest to the PA as they had been giving consultancy in relation to the Mer- cury House tower. Nevertheless, PA chief Johann Buttigieg had given his go-ahead for the signing of the agreement, a Mott MacDonald of- ficial told MPs earlier this month during a parliamentary committee hearing. The government has now ordered a review of the plan to ensure that there was no conflict of interest. maltatoday, SUNDAY, 13 NOVEMBER 2016 News Freedom of Information request on land reclamation denied JAMES DEBONO A freedom of information request for the publication of submissions made by the Tumas Group propos- ing land reclamation at Portomaso since 2013, has been rejected by the Planning Authority, which has claimed that this would impact negatively on negotiations between the government and the Portoma- so owners. The land reclamation proposal is included in the controversial masterplan for Paceville, which ac- cording to the PA "incorporated" proposals made by business groups and owners of nine different sites in Paceville. No formal application has been presented for development on the Portomaso site, but the Tumas Group has presented pre-submis- sion proposals. Moreover a land reclamation proposal at Portomaso was also made to the Government Property Division in 2013, when a call for expressions of interest in land rec- lamation projects was submitted in 21 different sites. According to the Planning Au- thority, the request cannot be ac- cepted for any disclosure of these documents under the FOI Act which "would, or could reasonably be expected to have a substantial adverse effect on the conduct of negotiations (including commer- cial and industrial negotiations) by or on behalf of the Government or another public authority". MaltaToday will contest the FOI decision. The Paceville masterplan, devel- oped by consultants Mott Mac- Donald, says this area has a poten- tial for land reclamation because of the relatively shallow sea, and that a sensitive development approach would be required for this site be- cause of its proximity to a marine protected area. The area is known to be rich in sea grasses that are protected by the European Union's Habitats Di- rective. The PA has insisted that the land reclamation proposal will have to pass through various assessments, including a Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) on the whole plan and a subsequent Environ- ment Impact Assessment if the project is retained after the SEA. Most of the new development proposed on reclaimed land at Por- tomaso will consist of hotel devel- opment, which means an addition- al floor space 67,456 square metres. Development on reclaimed land can rise up to 15 floors. This would see Portomaso's ex- isting 117,679 square metres of res- idential development increase by 4,113 square metres. Office space will only increase by 427 square metres from the current 12,203 square metres. But at 234,000 square metres, Portomaso will remain the larg- est development site in Paceville, through the addition of another 72,080 square metres. It will also see an extra 650 hotel guests (24% of the projected ad- ditional number of tourists in all Paceville) but only 62 new resi- dents and 18 new employees. Another request for the publica- tion of submissions presented by the owners of the nine develop- ment sites included in the mas- terplan was also rejected because information on the "use and floor space" of additional development has already been presented in par- liament. This information does not consist in the submissions made by devel- opers but consists in the additional floor area and uses granted to each developer in the master plan. The PA has published formal submissions presented by resi- dents, NGOs and owners of other sites on its website during a public consultation period conducted be- fore the master plan was drafted. Masterplan moves goalposts for 2005 Mercury House brief The guidelines under which Mercury House owners had to develop a public plaza and 15-storey office block in 2005 are not worth the paper they were signed on thanks to the PA's controversial masterplan Original plans: constrained by the 2005 development brief, pride of place had to be given to Mercury House and a public piazza The impressive Zaha Hadid creations for Joseph Portelli, rendered possible by Labour's high-rise policy and Paceville masterplan

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of MaltaToday previous editions - MT 13 November 2016