Saturday, 23rd August 2008
Proposed extension of co-cathedral museum
FAA accuses foundation of dismissing voice of public
Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar (FAA) expressed surprise yesterday at what it said was the way the St John's Co-Cathedral Foundation came out so strongly against public participation in the current debate over the proposed extension of the museum at St John's.
Reacting to a statement issued by the foundation yesterday, FAA said: "By failing to hold a public presentation before submitting the applications, as is the norm when dealing with a project affecting the country's premier national monument, the foundation looked upon the public's interest as unwelcome and uncalled-for, trespassing on the hallowed grounds of 'experts'."
Far from being based on speculation, the stand adopted by the FAA was arrived at after researching the information available, attending the foundation's presentation, widespread consultation and study of the file at the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (Mepa), it said.
"Just as FAA committee members are not experts in the matter, neither are the members of the foundation.
"FAA is echoing the views of other entities including Mepa, the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage, the Valletta Local Council and the Church Cultural Heritage Commission."
Public participation in the planning process is a right established by an EU Directive as well as the Aarhus Convention which the foundation is obliged to respect, being partly appointed by the state, the FAA said.
"Submitting identical objections does not make them any less valid, but the foundation's dismissal of the voice of the public is downright patronising and arrogant; a totally inappropriate response from an entity that is partly Church-run.
"It is pertinent to ask whether this attitude was approved by the Curia and the Archbishop. The over 1,050 people who objected to Mepa in record numbers represent society, from the layman to a great many university lecturers and even ambassadors. The foundation's disdain of these committed objections is an insult to the public," it said.
RSS
Comments
http://www.eukn.org/eukn/themes/Urban_Policy/Transport_and_infrastructure/buidling-the-athens-underground---Athens--GR_1657.html
It should also be noted, moreover, that in the case of St. John's Co-Cathedral, the underground structures are indeed there and come as part and parcel of the protected heritage. It is not the same as saying as these are unknown entities which may or may not be discovered.
Specifically at Ms. Debono general sentiments, no one is saying that the intentions of the Foundation to develop an alternative and possibly more suitable venue for the tapestries and other treasures is not laudable. The objection is that the works proposed are not suited and, in fact, there have been a number of alternatives which were proposed. It's enough to see the letters from the public reproduced by The Times.
Here in Malta, you cannot change anything. Whenever somebody proposes some development to show something better, like the things donated to St John Cathedral, there's always a big fuss. Are these the real problems Malta has? Sometimes you think we're really living well in Malta if the issues we keep having are on buildings.
Mur gibom they build something like the Cucumber in London what a fuss there will be! We're really backward here. Like someone said about the festas. Whatever you see is barokk, even if it's new from this year. LIke that we are, we never move forward.
You obviously have some personal petty little vendetta going on here regarding the FAA and don’t think twice about spreading misinformation in order to attack them at the expense of your own country’s heritage. I have studied this proposal with a professional eye and even given the gross mistakes made in the past by Mepa I would be willing to bet my next months wages that this project is a non starter. Not even Mepa could be this stupid. So why don’t you go and prepare for your next battle with FAA and Ms. Vella, as your childish utterances will have no effect here.
@ Jonathan Farrugia
You are a liar. I have never rubbished Din l-Art Helwa. I have never even referred to Din l-Art Helwa. Our debate is with the Foundation; what other NGOs do is their affair, not ours.
If you are a man, give your full name and address so that I can take libel action against you, though I know you will not as you are a coward hiding behind the anonymity of a blog.
This latest lie should prove to everybody that nothing you say here can be believed.
The many examples you are quoting are very common and ongoing worldwide. As you are saying, they pertain ancient finds. Clearly they do not fit into the context of the Saint John's which is totally different, for example, from finds at the Roman Villa just outside Mdina.
The Saint John's is a unique monument, is officially designated as such, and is required to be dealt with in accordance with all the procedures that are specific to monuments of this category. This, in fact, is the very reason why the FAA has been critical to the two proposals.
Also, please respect the fact that both Astrid Vella and Sergio Galea Vincenti are writing in this blog on their own personal behalf and not on behalf of the FAA.
@ Sergio Galea (Vincenti):
UNBELIEVABLE!
So first you had the cheek to ask ME:
"By what title are you posting here?"
Then, after I had asked you,
you had to admit that you are actually a Committee member of FAA!
(misleadingly signing 'Galea-Vincenti' here but
saying you're just 'Galea' in the FAA website)
U hallina!
.
a. The Superintendence of Cultural Heritage, in Malta, has made it clear that the annex and the graveyard are protected with the Grade I designation.
b. As you may be aware, any scheduled property entails a protection buffer zone - which can extend up to 100m in certain cases (particularly for monuments such as St. John's Co-Cathedral.
c. Valletta - unlike the example of urban sprawls such as London or Athen - is in its entirety a monument even acknowledged by UNESCO and its spatial dimension also encompasses the wealth of structures below street level.
d. To this, one must add - as reported in other English-speaking media - that MEPA is objecting to any excavation works in Valletta (including the proposed parking facilities in St. George's Square).
e. It was the Foundation itself which objected to other excavation works in the area - again as reported in other sections of the media - and you may also wish to inform yourself of the current controversy regarding the structural damage caused to the Monte di Pieta' as a result of excavation works.
Shooting the messenger does not change an iota of the various concerns raised and it is not just FAA or other NGOs which have reservations on the project but also the Heritage Advisory Committee of MEPA, the Planning Directorate of MEPA, the Church's own Episcopal Commission for Catholic Patrimony (which is recognised by law) and so on.,
What happens where they don't have the 'crib mentality':
ATHENS METRO
During the creation of the Athens metro,
artefacts of archaeological interest were discovered.
These included
ancient streets, houses, cemeteries, sanctuaries, public workshops, foundry pits,
kilns, aqueducts, wells, cisterns, drains and sewage tunnels.
Some are now exhibited in various metro stations.
BRITISH MUSEUM
The central quadrangle of the British Museum in London
was redeveloped to a design by Norman Foster to become The Great Court.
It was opened by Queen Elizabeth in 2000.
The court has a tessellated glass roof covering the entire court and surrounds
the original circular British Museum Reading Room, now a museum.
It is the largest covered square in Europe.
The glass and steel roof is made up of
4,878 unique steel members connected at
1,566 unique nodes and
1,656 pairs of glass windowpanes making up
6,100 sq metres of glazing each of a unique shape
because of the undulating nature of the roof.
Within the Great Court, there are shops and a café.
It is deliberately open later than the British Museum itself.
The court acts as a centrally linking point for the museum,
like the Pyramid at the Louvre.
(from Wikipedia)
@ Francesca Meilaq
As a supporter of FAA and Astrid Vella,
you can do better than giving her advice not to pursue this argument.
People who lose an argument usally then try to question
the credentials of those they are arguing with
or even, as you do, put on the mantle of "the expert"
and rubbish anyone who disagrees with you,
without really arguing.
Being interested in heritage conservation,
you know that you can 'conserve' as in a 'crib' -
leaving everything as you find it,
or you can 'conserve' by using and showing
what you want to conserve to its fullest potential.
You know that the 'crib' mentality in Malta is very strong.
But elsewhere, they shun the 'crib' mentality.
I won't go into detail of what they did at
the Louvre or the British Museum.
I will just mention Athens,
where they built a Metro for the Olympics
in the centre of a city where,
wherever you dig, you find ancient artefacts.
They didn't stop and bury everything.
Rather, whatever they found they now show
in the metro stations.
And people can appreciate these artefacts even more
than if they remained hidden underground.
That's the ultimate conservation.
I like to suggest to you not to make the assumption that three persons will necessarily agree with you all at once. That would be a pretty long shot.
The "multitude of people, mostly from Africa" whom you are referring to appear to be the illegal immigrants who are being reported on by The Times and discussed in other blogs, but not here.
Here people are discussing two proposals submitted to MEPA by the Foundation of Saint John's Co-Cathedral, in case you haven't noticed.
I have already said I am myself and no one else -
those who lose the argument usally
attribute ulterior motives or try to derail the argument in such ways
rather than keep arguing.
Very gratifying indeed.
If there is someone else who is also in favour of this project,
then the more the merrier.
It goes to show that there are many people
ready to disagree with Astrid Vella and FAA
on this project, just like others did, such as Din l-Art Helwa.
Once some people are asking questions of title,
I have already pointed out to Sergio Galea Vincenti
(who asked such a question as well)
that I assume he's NOT the Sergio Galea who is a member of the FAA Committee.
I hope he replies just to clarify the matter.
Franco Farrugia keeps insisting that development will take place in the Co-Cathedral.
Anyone who has followed this controversy knows that it's not.
He mentions buildings in St.John's block.
These buildings include shops, for example,
on St John's, Merchants', St Lucia and Republic streets.
Are those shops part of the Co-Cathedral, then?
Actually, Franco Farrugia's tirade
confirms that the Co-Cathedral proper is not going to be touched.
These are only examples what Cathedrals are. it is useless to try and mould the people's thinking and say that the Cathedral proper is not going to be touched.
It is useless for some bright spark of an architect-with-connections to say that the graveyard is not covered by a certain protection level or other..... facts speak for themselves...
and even MEPA has already given the red light to the project;
an important Church Commission - the Heritage Commission - also gave the red light;
The Valletta Local Council, through its architect Musumeci has also looked unfavourably at the project;
So ... Jonathan, what are you talking about?
You show that you have simply NO IDEA WHAT A CATHEDRAL ENTAILS.
A Cathedral is not only the church, the temple, but it is all the auxiliary buildings in and around it. Some of these buildings vary, according to the time in which the Cathedral was built, as well as the country and the religion. So, for instance, if we had, for one wild and crazy moment, follow what our Jonathan is saying, then, we might as well develop the very large Sacristies on the left hand side of the Cathedral as you go in! We also might as well scrap that part of the Cathedral which is opposite the Law Courts, as well as the stores behind the high altar.
Abroad, some Cathedrals included the Bishop's Palace, and other buildings reserved for members of the Cathedral clergy, known as Chapters. Some Cathedrals also had their own Schools.
Raymond Sammut,
Franco Farrugia and
Sergio Galea Vincenti:
You will surely all agree with me that the money the government and the church are going to waste on this horrible project would be much better spent giving welcome, food and housing to the multitude of people, mostly from Africa, who are ending up on our shores through no fault of their own, fleeing economic hardship and political persecution in their countries. This would be satisfying our basic Christian duty to welcome the foreigner while doing away with this rape of our most important Christian monument.
@Astrid Vella
You had decided that you were wasting your time replying to me (check below).
You have now decided otherwise.
Good.
Any average reader can easily glean from what was published
that the Co-Cathedral itself will not be touched.
You keep insisting otherwise.
The annexe on Merchants' Street is not the Co-Cathedral proper.
Any visitor to St.John's Museum and any person walking down Merchants' Street
can reach this conclusion.
But you keep insisting that the Co-Cathedral proper
will be dug under and built over.
Anyone who followed this controversy knows that
the proposals to extend St.John's Museum
under St.John's Street or over part of the annexe
are two ALTERNATIVE proposals
only one (or none) of which will be undertaken.
You keep talking as if BOTH will.
Any average reader knows that the Co-Cathedral Museum has a collection
of treasures purposely donated to St.John's by the Grandmasters
and it thus makes no sense to take this collection away
in some unconnected and unrelated building.
You keep insisting otherwise.
People know that DLH has disagreed with you...
DIN L-ART HELWA.
But you keep rubbishing them and insisting you are the
only authority on this.
Who is misleading and misinforming the public?
Given the fact that this has been pointed out to M Camenzuli on quite a number of occasions now, he appears to have changed his name to Jonathan Farrugia. This is quite obvious due to the absence of M Camenzuli and the fact that Jonathan Farrugia is putting forward the same arguments.
@ Sergio Galea Vincenti:
Since you ask under which title I post here,
(which is a personal title of someone interested in the Co-Cathedral and
agreeing with this project),
I assume you are NOT the Sergio Galea who is a member of the FAA Committee.
.
The corridor which touches on the Cathedral nave is part and parcel of the Cathedral. Even the Annexe is considered by MEPA to be an integral part of the Cathedral, so trying to give the impression that "The Cathedral itself will not be touched" is an outright lie.
The excavations in St John's street are NOT the Knights' water reservoirs. Those are altogether different, and trying to give the public the impression that they're the same thing in order to downplay the project is just part of the programme of misinformation that has accompanied this project from the very beginning.
Yes, I don't mind saying that I'm intolerant of people who play with words to the levels of dishonesty that you do.
@ Franco Farrugia
I have every right to agree with this project
just as much as you have every right to disagree.
Disagreeing does not mean that you have a "secret agenda"
or that you are your "master's (or lady's) voice".
The sign that you have lost the argument is when you attribute
ulterior motives to people who disagree with you.
St John's Co-Cathedral's Foundation happens to have a website
(which you evidently have not checked out) and it gives
quite some information about the workings of the Foundation.
And anyone who's minimally interested in our national monument that is St John's
or who followed the facts emanating from this controversy should know anyway.
Ignorance is definitely no recommendation.
When I said something will happen,
it is understood that this applies pending approval by MEPA.
Even you were talking in those same terms.
Does it mean that you believe MEPA will approve this project?
You keep wrongly repeating that this project will touch the Co-Cathedral proper.
It won't.
What we're talking about is an extension of its Museum
that will in any case reduce the pressure and congestion on the Co-Cathedral
and show its treasures to their best potential.
"The quarries in St John's Street have were dug
long ago by the Knights."
The digging will have been done by the knights "before" the cathedral was built.
Present day architects (or more precisely, structural engineers), as experts on these matters, are likely to have different thoughts. Any attempts to alter the underground structures would most likely entail an unacceptable "level of risk" because of the heavy loads presented by the nearby above ground structures.
MEPA, as a decision making body, will have to analyse carefully any report that will be produced by these experts in due course, and measure the risk against the risk posed by alternative approaches, such as that being suggested by the FAA.
You seem to be drawing a foregone conclusion when you say
"Some of them will now be linked and used to house
a world-class Museum for the Co-Cathedral."
Your use of the word "will" bypasses the decision process which MEPA will be required to go through.
I would also imagine that this process by MEPA will take a fairly long time.
Time will tell.
Also, do you notice that he speaks in a way that the proposals WILL TAKE PLACE, whether people like it or not!!! He speaks with authority.
And indeed, these proposals are so disgusting that those who harp in their favour must be having a secret agenda of their own!
You continue to ignore the fact that St John's is NOT a museum! It is a Cathedral and any way that changes that priority is wrong!
@ Astrid Vella
Thanks for confirming that there's NOT going to be any digging or building
in the Co-Cathedral proper that is NOT going to be touched in any way.
The quarries in St John's Street have were dug
long ago by the Knights.
Some of them will now be linked and used to house
a world-class Museum for the Co-Cathedral.
@ Franco Farrugia
Astrid Vella cannot stomach criticism.
She's genuine, but unfortunately she mixes up
being genuine with being right.
You do so as well.
For example, your claim that I or someone close to me is
going to somehow benefit from this
is also a sign of your self-righteousness.
Your strange logic says that you can be against
this project but that those who are in favour
must be drawing some personal benefit from it.
The benefit I will draw from this project is seeing the treasures
in the Co-Cathedral collection shown appropriately in a top-level museum.
The representatives of the Church and the Archbishop
in the Co-Cathedral Foundation approve of this project.
Which is only right and proper as this is a project that will
put St John's Co-Cathedral's museum where it belongs.
It is more than clear that you have an axe to grind and that probably you or someone close to you stands to gain by all this, in one way or another.
So be it. Continue digging your heels in, in a stupid manner.
With regard to the Church, it has not yet pronounced itself formally - its representatives in the Foundation do NOT represent the Archbishop or the Church and I anxiously await the pronouncement of the Church, the Archbishop and the whole Metropolitan Chapter in this matter. Unfortunately, they are all still, happily, sitting on the fence!
@ Jonathan Farrugia: you have obviously not seen the plans which show the lift shafts within the walls of the Cathedral corridors. If, by 'no building in the Cathedral' you mean within the nave, you are just playing on words and trying to hide the truth from the public.
There are quarries smaller than the excavation that shows up on the Foundation's plans.
See the plans!
@ Astrid Vella
There's not going to be any digging or building in the Co-Cathedral proper.
It's only a figment of your imagination that the Co-Cathedral proper
is going to be touched in any way.
If you have no faith in EIAs, then why do you keep calling for them?
Why don't you collect money and pay for one yourself?
If, as you say, what they're going to dig in St John's Street
is a "hole", why all this fuss you have kicked up?
Your comment that "heat and humidity... negatively impact the stonework"
when a building is roofed over
means that we should remove all roofs in all buidlings.
I was pointing out the illogicality of your comment.
The representatives of the Church and the Archbishop in the Foundation
have obviously agreed to this project.
Din l-Art Helwa did as well.
How come?
Thanks for calling me "ignorant", "currying favour", a "discreditor" and a "waste of time".
Comments like that show that you cannot stand any criticism and that
you think you're always right.
Some people call that self-righteousness.
"... baroque fortified cities do not usually have open spaces"
The Foundation's website has an aerial view of Saint John's which you can enlarge. It shows clearly that the open space on the left-hand side of the Co-Cathedral (namely, the churchyard) is balanced by the open space on the right-hand side (opposite the Courts).
A common theme of Baroque architecture was the balance between Church and State. Thus, the courtyard on the left (the religious) neutralises the leisure space on the right (the secular).
Most probably, the message conveyed by the architect was simply that we cannot have one without the other.
Re: Baroque Citadels have no open spaces have you forgotten that it was Grand Master Vilhena who remodelled Mdina to give it a Baroque stamp by building palaces AND CREATING OPEN SPACES which did not exist previously. What about the open spaces of Fort Manoel and Fort Chambray, designed as a self-contained citadel?
Have you never been to Erice, Lucca, Cortona and all the other Baroque citadels graced with open spaces which were essential not only for beauty but also for the assembly of troops?
Faced with comments like "Then we should remove the Co-Cathedral's roof" I realise I'm wasting my time.
INCORRECT:"there's not going to be digging or building in the Co-Cathedral proper"how are lift shafts and access to the Galleries going to be created?
You say"The Co-Cathedral Foundation has lodged applications with MEPA to make the necessary impact assessments" EIAs are paid by the client.Who pays the piper calls the tune.No EIA submitted to MEPA has ever cancelled projects or even caused radical changes.
INCORRECT: "No "quarry" will be dug in front of St John's" How would you describe a hole running a whole block and three or more storeys deep?The fact that the Foundation architect would not reveal the exact depth only raises more concerns.
Also, the Monsnijuri on the Foundation are autonomous so their stand does not necessarily reflect that of the Archibishop's Curia. The Church Cultural Heritage Commission has responded negatively to the proposals.
I have every respect for well-informed, well-intentioned critics, but since you know so little about this project, you must just be objecting either out of sheer ignorance or out of a wish to curry favour with someone or to discredit FAA's stand, and I honestly don't know which is worse.
@Astrid Vella
First of all I am myself and no one else.
I don't know who M Camenzuli is.
Of course, s/he has every right to comment.
I never claimed I am an expert - I leave that claim to you.
But I do know that baroque fortified cities do not usually have open spaces
as that can help the enemy and makes it more difficult for
a population increase when the rest of Malta
would have been under siege.
"Glazing over part of the annex is actually
nothing worse than the Co-Cathedral itself"
as the Co-Cathedral is a graveyard as well and roofed over.
With your argument that
"heat and humidity... negatively impact the stonework"
we should then remove the Co-Cathedral's roof!
For all those who know where the annex on Merchants Street is
it only stands to reason that the annex is NOT the Co-Cathedral proper.
No alteration to the Co-Cathedral proper is being proposed.
Since you claim that the proposals have been opposed by the bodies you mention,
then I wonder how Din l-Art Helwa came out in favour.
Din l-Art Helwa must really be out of its senses!
@ Franco Farrugia
The graveyard in the annex will be no worse
than the Co-Cathedral itself that is a graveyard as well, built over and
where we walk on the graves of the Knights.
When you mention 'ambience', you're becoming very very subjective.
And its architecture is, well, 1968!
You claim to be an expert on this, so you should know
that fortified baroque cities do not usually have open spaces.
You give the impression that there's going to be digging or building
in the Co-Cathedral proper which is absolutely not the case.
The Co-Cathedral Foundation has lodged applications with MEPA
to be able to make the necessary impact assessments regarding the digging.
Mentioning a palazzo where digging caused damage is no reason
to ban all digging everywhere.
No "quarry" will be dug in front of St John's.
It has actually already been dug by the Knights to put cisterns that are now unused.
You also ask what the Church's and the Archbishop's stand is on this.
The Co-Cathedral Foundation is made up of two Church representatives
and a representative of the Archbishop.
You cannot but assume that these three representatives approve of the project.
You certainly are no expert on Baroque architecture, stating that it does not include open spaces.Baroque architecture is in fact about the interplay of open spaces alternating with wide and narrow streets, especially in the centre of a town.
In Valletta, this is expressed by the enfilade of piazzas beginning with those flanking the Cathedral,then 'Misrah ir-Republlika' and 'Misrah San Gorg'. The Merchants' Street side has fewer open spaces, for which reason we must protect what we have.
Your "glazing over part of the annex is actually nothing worse than the Co-Cathedral itself" is not intelligible. Experts have already confirmed that glazing over the graveyard will alter its micro-climate,causing heat and humidity to negatively impact the stonework.
Re:"you don't need to be an expert to know that the annex is not the Co-Cathedral"In fact the MEPA Heritage Management Unit confirmed that they are considered one and the same in terms of scheduling protection.
As for the two different alternatives,they have both been considered and opposed by different expert bodies consulted by MEPA,as well as the Church Cultural Heritage Commission.
Any more expert opinion needed?
The graveyard touching Merchant's Street
is not only precious due to the graves lying there, but
also due to its ambiance and its architecture throughout.
Since baroque cities like Valletta do not have open spaces,
let us continue building up where the Knights decided not
to build!
And let us mix up various vegetables together by bringing in
the issue of City Gate.
'Tis claimed the annex is not the Cathedral ... according
to some clever expert who is out to change
the grading of said graveyard.
But the fact remains that the annex is an intrinsic
part of the Cathedral.
Digging near St John's has already been done
-illegally, may I add -
and the result is there for all to see:
that the palazzo above has been seriously
damaged ... but of course,
that is of little consequence.
So now the readers can make their own judgement as
to who is really shooting from the hip.
@Franco Farrugia
No, you don't need to be an expert to know that
not only is St John's Co-Cathedral proper a graveyard,
not only is it built over,
but we also walk over the gravestones in the Co-Cathedral.
So you don't need to be an expert to know that
glazing over part of the annex is actually nothing
worse than the Co-Cathedral itself.
No, you don't need to be an expert to know that baroque fortified cities,
like Valletta, do not usually have open spaces.
In fact, Valletta nowadays has more open space
in its ugly entrance than it used to have.
No, you don't need to be an expert to know that
the annex is not the Co-Cathedral.
And yes, you're surely no expert if you mix up the annex
on Merchants Street with the Co-Cathedral proper.
And you do need to be an expert to decide
whether digging up can damage the Co-Cathedral proper.
That's why the Co-Cathedral lodged two alternative applications
so that real experts can decide.
And no, you don't need to be an expert to shoot from the hip (armchair)
and to hold the backward idea that everything should be kept as a crib.
Do you need to be an expert in order to realise that it is wrong to further stifle the little bit of open space within Valletta?
Do you need to be an expert in order to realise that it is wrong to somehow change the original fabric of the Co-Cathedral? Is that how much we respect the work of Glormu Cassar, its architect? Or do we now want the Co-Cathedral to be a living memory of Cassar & Bencini?
Do you need to be an expert in order to realise that it is not possible for so much mechanical digging just in front of St John's, as to dig up a very deep quarry, without putting into serious jeopardy the fabric and structure of the Cathedral?