The controversial Panorama Hotel application in Mellieħa is being recommended for refusal, despite the developer scaling down the project from three additional storeys as originally intended to just one.
Located on the top of a ridge, the five-storey hotel built in 1966 commands breath-taking views of Għadira Bay.
Objections to this proposal, submitted by V&C Developments in August 2018, had stemmed amid concerns that its close proximity to the Mellieħa parish church would ruin the village’s skyline and dwarf this prominent landmark.
The original proposal was to build three additional floors comprising a receded penthouse level under a 2014 policy review which allowed two or more extra storeys for hotels.
Faced by a public outrage from residents, the Mellieħa council and the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage, the developer had scaled down the project to just one additional storey.
The revised proposal cited a development permit issued in 2010, through which the Planning Authority had given the green light for an additional floor, albeit on condition that it would be receded. Such a condition had been crucial, as the planning watchdog had originally refused the request.
The PA had only budged as it imposed another condition whereby this receded floor had to be dismantled in case the hotel would cease operations. For some reason, the project remained on paper as this extra floor was never built.
In his report regarding the scaled-down application, the case officer pointed out that the 2014 policy review for hotels could not be invoked for this proposal as it specifically excluded sites located on a ridge edge.
Moreover, the large blank party walls which would result if this project had to be approved would be in breach of planning policies as they would likely have a negative visual impact on the existing and potential streetscape and urban context. In this respect, it was noted that the design did not effectively mitigate this impact through the use of voids and solid parts.
Objections from the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage were also cited among the reasons for refusal.