Fiona Galea Debono
Record number of objections to co-cathedral museum proposals
We are backing the foundation in seeking more exhibition space, through alternative sites - FAA
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.
16 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Marisa Bugeja
Oct 8th 2008, 11:14
Marisa Bugeja
I think the proposed project is too risky considering the great heritage in the area (not just St John's but the whole area,including underground tunnels).
I would be happier seeing the tapestries hanging in the Main Hall of the Sacra Infermeria; it is linked to the Order of St. John so the tapestries would belong there, they are not the exclusive property of the cathedral. God forbid anything should hppen to them underground after all the restoration.
I think the Sacra Infermeria is an ideal showcase for these priceless treasures.
M Camenzuli
Aug 23rd 2008, 13:09
@ Joz Camilleri:
You mention Hagar Qim which is a prime example that
development is sometimes needed in order to conserve
and show a monument to its full potential.
The same applies to St John's.
We can have a world-class museum at the Co-Cathedral.
But world-class museums develop and don't stay stuck in the 1960s.
Le Louvre has developed, and not just with the Pyramid.
The British Museum has crowned centuries of development
with the glazing over of the Great Court by Lord Norman Foster.
It has now the largest roofed over piazza in Europe.
With a museum that is connected and directly related to St John's
(rather than the backward idea of having St John's
collection somewhere else unconnected and unrelated)
we can have the various gifts to the Co-Cathedral
by the Knights and the Grand Masters
shown in the best way possible in the best place possible
ie where they were meant to be by the Grand Masters and donators themselves.
Unfortunately, here we have this knee-jerk 'no' as ever by FAA
that is obsessed with keeping everything exactly as it is.
With this obsession, the Knights themselves would have never built Valletta
in the first case.
Joz Camilleri
Aug 23rd 2008, 00:05
Bah!!! So we have to copy, copy, copy what others do! The Louvre, the British Museum, Les Invalides... my foot!! Oh great... go have a look at the monstrosity being constructed ever so close to Hagar Qim, now isn't that really creative??? (and that's putting it rather mildly).
Can we try finding alternatives without battering what we possess? For sure we all know that after almost 500 years from its construction, St. John's is in no position to withstand too much interference with its foundations (and here I mean it's structural parts!! ;) ) Oh, but of course, there's no problem, if, accidentally, the building crumbles down just to satisfy the whims and fancies of some eccentric megalomaniac being out there whose ego is insatiable. Perhpas he can have his name carved on every stone in St. John's like Saddam Hussein's Babylon...
This is way too crazy! As most of Valletta's heritage is considered of worldwide importance, why not use some lateral thinking for once and find another plausible solution? There are, surely, other methods that may be adopted without tunnelling all the way under and around St. John's just to prove somebody's point.
M Camenzuli
Aug 22nd 2008, 14:04
This NO NO NO from FAA for anything that develops and enhances
what we have has now become tiring and off-putting.
For anyone who has been to museums abroad
this is a positive project that will put our Co-Cathedral Museum
on the map of world-class museums where it belongs.
We have this backward looking idea in Malta of
Don't Touch Anything - just like the lazy guy in the parable of the talents
who hid his talent and the Lord punished him and told him that
even if he had depositied in a bank he would have got more.
This was the excellent point by C Camilleri further down.
For those saying this is a graveyard,
even the Co-Cathedral proper is a graveyard.
In the Co-Cathedral we even walk over the gravestones!
Someone mentioned Les Invalides.
Even there they have a modern museum!
Next time you're in Paris, go and see for yourselves.
Les Invalides also contains L'Institution Nationale des Invalides
which is a retirement home for war veterans,
with a hospital and surgical centre to boot.
So please, if we were to copy Les Invalides,
we would have a hospital there, not just a museum extension!
James A. Tyrrell
Aug 21st 2008, 21:19
@ M Camenzuli I have been to both of the establishments you mention and whenever I am in London or Paris I would make a point of going back. Why? Because they rotate their exhibits. Each time you go you can see something new. They just don’t have the room to exhibit everything.
Also I do wish you would stop referring to St’ John’s as a museum and putting it in the same context as the British Museum and the Louvre. St. John’s is a Co-Cathedral and a graveyard. I find people like you hard to understand. You obviously care so little for your country and its history that you attack the very people who are doing their best to protect it.
@ C. camilleri, I agree with what you are saying but surely you can see the point that risking the destruction of part of your history in order to display other historical treasures is not a risk worth taking. Especially when a purpose built exhibition centre can be provided by renovating another building a matter of meters away.
Martin Galea De Giovanni
Aug 21st 2008, 15:29
@M. Camezuli - It's easy to dismiss this issue by saying that NGOs are a bunch of "NO NOs" ... when you don't agree with what they're saying. But perhaps you are being a bit too simplistic.
I'm sure that the Maltese version of the "naked king" story would have ended with the rest of the crowd trying to convince the little chap that the king was not naked after all. They yearned for the King's favour ... as after all, he knew them all by name....
I can assure you that I've been to both of the sites you mentioned.... and as far as I know, none of them are anywhere close to a burial site of national heroes.... (I sometimes wonder how many people know that the courtyard at St. John is a burial site of those who died during the great siege )
Les Invalides is only "down the road" from the Louvre ... and I don't remember seeing any flashy new constructions anywhere near Napoleon's resting place. Yes, in a big city like Paris, some things are still sacred. Not so in Malta, where the only sacred thing is Money...
Sergio Galea Vincenti
Aug 21st 2008, 15:18
@ c. camilleri: Who is saying otherwise?
c. camilleri
Aug 21st 2008, 14:48
I once heard the story of a man who inherited his parents house and beneath a loose floor tile he found about Lm20,000 in cash hoarded away. The money was all rotten and in pieces. The bank obviously could not exchange the money for him and the money went lost. The moral of the story... lets enjoy our treasures and share it with the rest of the world, lets use our treasures to create and integrate new ones lets keep the wheel spinning lets keep on writing our history its the only way to keep our treasures alive. Let us not do the same mistake as in our story and prevent our treasures from living by protecting them to the extent of preventing them to be alive, in the end they are only going to die without having been enjoyed by us which is the prime motive for their existance.
Sergio Galea Vincenti
Aug 21st 2008, 13:35
M. Camenzuli seems blissfully unaware of the contribution FAA has given in discussions with the authorities on a better, more transparent planning and development process for this poor country of ours!
Christian Debono
Aug 21st 2008, 13:23
Dear M. Camezuli I have been to numerous museums abroad I don t think its the point here. If there was exhibiting space available I would be the first to buy a ticket to see the Tapestries! We all love our cultural heritage. What I am against is to create exhibiting space by going against the structure plan as THE PLACE IS SCHEDULED GRADE 1!!!!! I The foundation said that the underground museums will relief the cathedral from the huge amount of visitors......this in my opinion does not make sense as people visiting the museum will still want to enter the cathedral.
If museums are developed it depends on their type of scheduling, the type of development happening inside etc etc HOWEVER remember that St John's is not a museum but a Cathedral!!! M. Camenzuli if there is something they do more in other European countries is follow the planning policies. Something which is still fairyland in Malta and that is why we need to keep going!
Astrid vella
Aug 21st 2008, 12:47
Contrary to what was claimed, there is no confusion about the works as FAA explained that the EXCAVATION of the galleries down to a depth of at least three floors will run from Merchants’ Street to the end of the parvis (zuntier) of St. John’s, while it is WORKS to interlink the cisterns, and create air ducting etc that will continue down towards Republic Street. This was clearly explained at the Press Conference.
What is not mentioned in the report above is that part of the Foundation’s requirement for extra space includes a modern art gallery. FAA cannot accept that a potentially-damaging project be undertaken for non-essential items like a modern art gallery or café. These can be accommodated off-site if necessary.
@J Borg: how much more constructive can one get than asking Government and Church weeks ago to provide the Foundation with suitable premises which are more sustainable, but more importantly,do not threaten the stability of the Cathedral's foundations as stated by MEPA. The suggestion of using a nearby palazzo came not only from us but from other heritage authorities. We are backing the Foundation's need for an extension, but by more creative solutions.
M Camenzuli
Aug 21st 2008, 12:32
Has anyone from FAA and FoE ever been to the British Museum and the Louvre
where important parts are glazed over?
Are they really serious when they say that the Co-Cathedral's exhibits
should NOT be shown, and that only a part of them should?
Do they really mean that the 29 Gobelin Tapestries
shoud NOT be shown in their entirety?
Did they manage to keep a straight face
when they said that St John's Museum does not need to compete
with other similar museums?
Do these people ever go abroad and see the constant development
similar museums undergo all the time without any controversy at all?
Are they serious when they say that we should turn visitors away
from the Co-Cathedral and its museum?
Why is it always NO,NO, NO from FAA?
Always!
Christian Debono
Aug 21st 2008, 11:51
Dear J. Borg we are not opposing the project for the sake of opposition but we are opposing because of various issues related to the proposals, that for us are worrying.
I am sorry but you cannot compare the Louvre to a Cathedral. They are two completely different stories. Many cathedrals all over Europe move their collections in premises out of the cathedral's building. Plus its normal for a museum to have a reserve collection from which to rotate exhibits. This makes the museums more appealing and innovative.
John you have to understand that if this country has to progress it is the laws and regulations of the country that have to be respected! The place is scheduled as Grade 1! Which means no alterations are to take place. If these laws and regulations are ignored than that is what will hamper the progress of our island. We are being constructive and we are proposing alternative solutions.
Believe me I have serious doubts whether the knights would want to roof a graveyard and sell postcards and tickets next to the graves of heroes.
Thanks
Franco Farrugia
Aug 21st 2008, 11:30
At this point in time, it is futile to once again go over the reasons why these proposals are scandalously disgusting! Mr J Borg should be informed that where there is evil and wrongdoing, one simply cannot 'back each other' as he suggests.
By building and developing, you are not improving this little island - there has been enough of this and look where it has brought us: it has only provided cash for all those involved, whether they are the developers themselves, the poor workers or their lawyers and architects!
And you don't have any right to speak on behalf of the Knights, thank you.
B Borg
Aug 21st 2008, 10:45
I, for one, admire the voluntary work of these people. They aren´t in it for the money, pretending to be in it for the sake of development and modernisation... like the filthy developers plagueing the islands, all along with the blessing of MEPA and the politcal parties. These people are in it because they really care for the environment and our heritage and decided to do something about it. Well-done and thankyou for speaking up for so many fellow citizens.
J. Borg
Aug 21st 2008, 10:21
No wonder why we never really progress in this country. We waste too much energy objecting and arguing and striking rather than putting our energy together and back each other to improve our little island. How can we ever compete with our neighbouring countries. Look at Louvre in Paris a modern striking and yet comfortable museum in the middle of a historic site. A perfect tourist attraction. But in Malta we are not capable of doing this we have to object cause that's all we know how to do. Its about time we start to broaden our skills and be a bit more constructive. If the knights had this kind of attitude in their time their probably would be no Valletta today.