Foundation would never risk damage to St John's Co-Cathedral

Facts in the public domain that some people prefer to disregard:

The Co-Cathedral Museum is far too small for its collection.

This collection should be properly exhibited
(most of it is exhibited in too small a space or not at all),
kept together in St.John's Museum,
and not scattered in other buildings that have no connection with St.John's
as this collection was mostly commissioned specifically for St.John’s or
donated specifically to the Co-Cathedral by the Grand Masters.

St.John’s Foundation has therefore proposed
two alternative options, one underground, one overground,
for the Museum’s extension.

If the extension is made underground, the Foundation’s preferred option,
there will be no building whatsoever.

Neither option involves any building in the Co-Cathedral itself -
only in the annex on Merchants’ Street
and only if MEPA rejects
the Foundation’s preferred option.

In the Co-Cathedral proper, we walk over graves.
Even with an extension of its Museum in the annex,
we would not be walking over graves there.

Museums abroad develop;
eg Louvre’s pyramid, British Museum’s glazed-over Great Court.

A 'palazzo' FAA suggests is no alternative.
As ‘Din l-Art Helwa’ said, “the entire Co-Cathedral collection
should be kept together”.

There is already a shop in St.John's Museum.

All those of us who have at heart the well-being of our capital as well as, the treasure that is St John's, should leave no stone unturned to stop THIS SHEER MADNESS, obviously emanating from the summer heat!
I cannot call it by any other name - madness! There are a few alternatives; if none of them can be put into practice, then so be it. But the courtyard in question is yet anouther treasure, equal to the treasures that the Foundation wants more room to house!
If the Foundation is made up of professional individuals and they come up with a monstrous idea such as this, then, I for one, really worry about in whose hands our treasures are!

Please publish the names of the people behind this crazy project. I am very interested to know who has the guts and arrogance to take on such daring and risky projects.
Do you remember the damage done to the old Stella Maris church in Sliema or is St John's Cathedral immune from such risks. One would argue that precautions will be taken. I do not care. It is to risky to mess around with a national monument like our Valletta Cathedral.
Develop the old opera site if you lack space and make something useful out of a plot of land which is a waste and an eyesore right at the centre of town.

The risk is way too high, we are talking about a National treasure here, why risk any damage to such a priceless structure.

Chasing Mammona

the foundation is skirting the issue.the foundation is trying to alienate the publicby saying that the two applications were for the construction of an underground museum to house the goblin tapestries. Notice that no mention was made of the blasphemious construction of a three storey building on the graves of the knights. This is tantamount to madness. nothing and I mean NOTHING should even be considered that would change the ground plan of this prizeless jewel in our heritage. Whenever I go past the cathedral and think what would have happened had a bomb landed on its roof during the war my blood runs cold. Now my fellow maltese are poised to vandalise it themselves. Are we barbarians? are we Philistines?

Perhaps what they are really after is the cafeteria. How's that for aesthetics? It's all that this great temple needs; people eating and drinking over its roof.

The beauty of St John's Co-Cathedral is in its ENTIRETY! The above ground should not even be touched! Enough of this so-called 'state-of-the-art' nonsense and let things stand as they are, for goodness' sake. How can you contemplate building over that burial-ground? Three storeys?
If so much space is truly needed, what about the project of digging beneath the Square?
Or, what about taking over some other space within the enclave of St John's? Such as the old Chapter Hall of the Canons of the Cathedral? After all, the proper Chapter Hall is at the Metropolitan Cathedral.
There are some offices upstairs at the enclave: why not try and use those? Or part of the very, very large Sacristy on the left hand side as you enter the Cathedral?
Surely, some other alternative MUST be found. Or else, try and take over a building adjacent to the Cathedral property! But certainly NOT build over that burial-ground! That is part of the beauty of the Cathedral and should be kept as it is!

3 storey building in St. John's Co-Cathedral's Courtyard?!?? Gennata ohra. Truly, common sense is very rare!

It is taken for granted that "the St John's Co-Cathedral Foundation ... would never risk any real or potential damage to the Co-Cathedral or any of its possessions." But ruining the aesthetics of the building by constructing a 3-storey monstrosity in the yard?

What sort of mentality have the people proposing such a structure got?

Surely the people responsible for such decision-taking/proposals should have more than just simple academic qualifications?