Record number of objections to co-cathedral museum proposals

The St John's Co-Cathedral Foundation's museum extension proposals have attracted a record number of objections to the Malta Environment and Planning Authority - 1,050 over the past two weeks as opposed to the last highest figure of 120 against Gozo's Ħondoq ir-Rummien project.

Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar, together with Friends of the Earth, yesterday continued their crusade against the two proposals: A three-storey excavation or, alternatively, a three-storey building in the co-cathedral's courtyard.

The organisation said the public was confused and information about the project's implications for the co-cathedral and Valletta was lacking.

However, the confusion was not clarified much yesterday, when the extent of the excavation was explained. According to FAA, the works would spread from Republic Street to Merchants Street and into the entire depth of St John's Square and Street, including the water reservoirs, while the foundation had said they would extend from Merchants Street to the middle of the parvis, underneath the paved area and not touching the underground cisterns.

The excavation proposal to house the Gobelins tapestries would see St John's Square being dug down to a depth of beyond 11 metres, over three storeys, Miriam Cremona said. She described the result as a "quarry" in the heart of Valletta and highlighted the impact of the trucks and the dust on the World Heritage Site and the co-cathedral itself, tourism and the commercial community.

The development only took into consideration the needs of the co-cathedral and was not in the interest of Valletta, risking rocking its WHS status, she said.

The foundation's role was to safeguard St John's and not to be a developer, Ms Cremona continued.

FAA's Astrid Vella roposed a search for more creative solutions, including the possible re-routing of visitors so that they did not have to enter the co-cathedral twice, and the better utility for exhibitions of existing space and the palaces across the road - which, she said, were up for sale.

"We are backing the foundation's seeking of more exhibition space, but through alternative sites," Ms Vella said.

FAA and FoE proposed an intelligent study of the existing space, adding that the visitor did not have time to view all the museum's treasures and that only the best should be chosen and displayed.

Modern museums aimed at quality, not quantity, and it was unlikely that viewers would be interested in seeing all of St John's 200 sacred vestments, or scores of chalices, for example, they said.

The proposed roofing over of the courtyard with a transparent material - what the objectors described as a "glass" ceiling - was more suited to a futuristic discotheque, the environmental NGOs said.

None of the foundation's directors were qualified in conservation, they insisted, questioning how they could guarantee no damage as a result of the proposed works.

They also expressed alarm at the fact that the foundation's architect had claimed that its National Monument Grade 1 scheduling did not mean that the entire complex had to be protected.

The clause states that internal structural alterations would only be allowed in exceptional circumstances to keep the building in active use - not the case for St John's that functions successfully, the two environment groups pointed out.

St John's did not need to enter the frenetic world of competition, they added.

Maintaining the required environmental conditions in the underground chambers was not sustainable and an extra expense. "The more you try to dehumidify the area, the more moisture would be drawn from the porous stone."

Most damage to the tapestries was caused by their own weight and they should not be hung 365 days a year, they said. Neither did they need to be hung together - as opposed to what the co-cathedral foundation strongly believes is needed to achieve maximum impact from the collection of 29, the largest in the world based on the Rubens cartoons.

The development of the museum would not significantly reduce the impact on the cathedral, the NGOs said, adding that the same number of people - 450,000 a year - would still visit it.

Speaking on her own behalf, Ms Cremona said that if the tourist influx was causing damage, the solution was not to build and excavate, but to reduce the visitors to a specific number.

The foundation, on the other hand, has stated that controlling the amount of visitors to the most visited site was not an option, but a deterrent; it was unacceptable to limit visitors to a church.

The NGOs also expressed lack of faith in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), which were paid by developers. No EIA has ever recommended that any project should be stopped, they said.