Construction waste crisis: ERA land reclamation policy still in draft stage

Four months after being presented to the Cabinet for discussion, the land reclamation policy is still in a draft stage, the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) told The Malta Independent on Sunday, despite the country currently being faced with yet another construction waste ‘crisis’.

In May, Environment Minister Jose Herrera said that the ERA had drawn up a policy document which he noted had been finalised and presented to the Cabinet for discussion. Six areas around Malta and Gozo were identified as potential areas for a land reclamation project.

Following several unanswered requests to the environment ministry by this newsroom for the policy document, a request was made under the Freedom of Information Act, which was refused. The given by the ERA was that it is still a draft policy and thus exempt from act.

The issue of land reclamation has once again become pertinent considering that in less than six months the country is facing another construction waste ‘crisis’, as many contractors are not finding places where to deposit waste, the president of the Malta Developers’ Association (MDA), Sandro Chetcuti, told this newsroom last week.

Asked if had heard about any developments on the land reclamation policy document, Chetcuti said he had not. “The MDA has never been consulted about this document, which is worrying. Certain ministries consult you and keep you updated, while others keep you in the dark.”

If a decision is to be taken on land reclamation, it has to be taken now, Chetcuti said. “Time is against us.”

In a leaked presentation document detailing the draft proposals for land reclamation, the ERA had noted that given the several major projects being proposed and the related generation of construction waste, it had carried out an analysis of potential search areas for a land reclamation project.

The assumed primary reason for the intended land reclamation is for the placement of inert material, the ERA said in the document.

The official document on the studies carried out by the ERA has not yet been released, despite reports of information from the leaked document dating back to late last year. Minister Herrera had told MaltaToday that “the study will give the government the information necessary to make the right decision if the country decides to go for land reclamation, rather than doing it haphazardly.”

He also said that the document will be officially released and then discussed with all stakeholders.

Land reclamation has also risen on the agenda in recent months because of the massive amount of waste set to be generated by the proposed Malta-Gozo tunnel. Prime Minister Joseph Muscat had noted that the solution for the waste generated from the tunnel could be land reclamation. He had also said that Malta already has experience with land reclamation in the Marsa and Msida areas, as well as the Freeport. He had added that it does not mean that land reclamation will be used to build, but will be used in the ‘best way possible’.

The six potential areas identified for land reclamation are Mġarr Harbour (Gozo), Buġibba and St Paul’s Bay Waterfront, Qalet Marku, Portomaso to Xgħajra, the spoil ground area off Xgħajra and the Marsaxlokk harbour area.

The largest potential search area is the Portomaso to Xgħajra area, which is identified in the ERA presentation document as having a potential scale of medium to large. The area could be used as an investment for commercial and industrial/urban purposes as well as the creation of natural habitats, the ERA noted.

Concerns were raised following the release of the leaked document with Moviment Graffitti saying that the Xgħajra land reclamation project will have a devastating impact on nature and residents, while Xghajra Mayor Anthony Valvo had said he would wait for the conclusion and clarification of the ERA regarding potential land reclamation sites before taking any action.

“Don’t tell me you are against land reclamation because you have a sea view that will be lost,” Herrera had told a bewildered resident from Xgħajra, during a meeting of the parliamentary environment committee on construction waste in May.

Herrera had insisted land reclamation would enhance the country’s open spaces. “It will be done for environmental purposes… we need to take a long-term view that benefits society.”

In an interview with MaltaToday, the director of the ERA, Michelle Piccinino, had said the designation of coastal land between Portomaso and Xgħajra for ‘large-scale’ land reclamation is only ‘indicative’.

The other areas along the coast were identified as potentially being micro, small or medium projects. The harbour areas, as well as Qalet Marku could potentially be used to enhance the potential of the area, giving examples of breakwaters, marinas and touristic developments.

The presentation notes that the reclaimed land could be used for any purpose, depending on the location selected; however, economic feasibility must be noted.

The presentation makes it clear that any areas described as a ‘potentially suitable’ should not be considered as ‘definitely acceptable for the purposes of land reclamation’.

While noting that disposal at sea is regulated at an international level through various instruments, the ERA said that, in Malta, disposal at sea is only allowed at the spoil ground. Furthermore, they noted that all efforts must be undertaken to reduce the volume of such waste before land reclamation is considered.

The ERA said, in the presentation, that construction waste generation should be reduced at source and recovery must be maximised. Furthermore, if land reclamation is to be considered, it is to be limited and localised.

The document also notes that relevant international and national policy aspects regarding ecology and biodiversity must be abided to. Alteration of hydrographical conditions and influences on the hydromorphology of water bodies should be kept to a minimum.

As much as possible, habitats of the Habitats Directive Annex I should be avoided when considering land reclamation, the ERA noted.

Annex I lists 233 European natural habitat types, including 71 priority habitats (i.e. habitats in danger of disappearance and whose natural range mainly falls within the territory of the European Union).

The ERA highlighted the priority habitat of Posidonia as areas that should be avoided. Areas hosting seabird colonies and relatively pristine natural areas are noted as areas to be avoided.

Terrestrial areas without existing road infrastructure are also detailed as being areas to be avoided.

In 2013 the government launched an international expression of interest for potential land reclamation projects, receiving 21 proposals that were reviewed by an internal selection committee. Bidders for land reclamation ventures had to pay a €5,000 fee for the expression of interest and were bound by a confidentiality agreement.

Floating villages, a race track and business centres were among the proposals submitted to the government.