Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar said it is disgusted at the approval of the Transport Malta application for a restaurant, shop and offices on the Gzira Coast.
This application has been mired in illegalities before it even started, as Transport Malta had declared that it had a permit for this site in its tender documents of 2017, going so far as to assure tenderers that it had permits in hand for this project. Gzira Mayor Borg Manche admitted that it was pre-decided in an interview to an online news outlet as to why Gzira Local Council had not put up stronger opposition to this project, FAA said in a statement.
Objectors raised a plethora of points, regarding the takeover of public land designated as a public open space in the North Harbour Local Plan without ‘public gain’ compensation, the blocking of views towards Valletta’s bastions, and the reduction in car parking spaces, which was rebutted by the developers, FAA said.
The residents’ lawyers insisted that the regulations being invoked specifically applied to new marinas, not established ones like Ta’ Xbiex Marina, the NGO added.
FAA’s Astrid Vella maintained that using the local or central authorities’ neglect of Gzira Garden is no reason to justify the extensive project on the grounds that it will upgrade the garden and improved safety, a mantra repeated throughout the hearing. Vella pointed out that it was useless to incorporate conditions re the use of the roof, limiting it to a green roof, as a nearby ‘green roof’ is just a jumble of services, while the Gzira Lido which was to be a ‘transparent’ building preserving the view of the bastions, is any thing but transparent while its roof is being used illegally with no steps being taken against the developers. Gzira Local Council had already held discussions with Transport Malta re using the roof as an entertainment area for kareoke nights.
Vella pointed out that constructing a building on the promenade would set a precedent that will give other neighbouring marinas a solid claim to do the same, resulting in a wall of buildings blocking the seafront. FAA representatives insisted that there is no justification for this building as the marina services were available in the coastal zone and within a few metres from the quay.
Perit Noel Debattista pointed out that a floating capitanerie could be used as others in the area had done. He highlighted that public parking would decrease from the present 174 spaces to 122, plus 12 car spaces occupying garden area. Perit Debattista exhibited photos showing that far from upgrading public enjoyment of the promenade, much of the road has already been taken up by marina activities. With such a track record, how could one believe TM’s promises re community benefit. Since Ta Xbiex’s Urban Conservation Area faces this site, the building would totally undermine the character of the UCA, violating several Local Plan and SPED policies.
The fact the Case Office failed to report that the site is within the buffer zone of a scheduled building or monument, proves that the Case Officer’s report and approval was totally biased in favour of Transport Malta. Therefore this application violates the policies protecting the setting of scheduled sites. It was also highlighted that since it fronts on the Marsamxett Area of High Landscape Value, this building and those that will follow, will impact the buffer zone of Valletta’s UNESCO World Heritage Site.
In spite of all the valid points made by the objectors, and an impassioned plea for the Commission to study the facts presented instead of just basing themselves on the highly slanted Case Office Report, the Commission proceeded to issue a hasty approval, confirming objectors’ conviction that this application was pre-determined in order to uphold Transport Malta’s illegal tender committment.