MEPA to prepare terms of reference on Cathedral museum EIA
The Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA) has agreed to prepare the terms of reference for an Environment Impact Assessment to be carried out on the proposed extension of the St John's Co-Cathedral museum, the St John's Co-Cathedral Foundation said this evening.
In its letter acceding to the foundation’s request, MEPA stated that: “Without prejudice to any decision which the MEPA Board may take in future with regard to the foundation’s applications, the members felt that, in order to be able to take a properly informed decision on such a sensitive issue, more information was necessary.”
MPEA has therefore instructed its Planning and Environment Directorates to compile the necessary terms of reference.
The foundation said it welcomed the announcement, since it had consistently stated that an independent Environment Impact Assessment was required.
The foundation had proposed extending its museum by either excavating the area occupied by St John Square or roofing the cathedral church yard.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Petrol price up 6c
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
3 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
John Abela
Sep 15th 2008, 22:47
I was told by a reliable source that a supplement similar to the one refered to by astrid vella cost 80 per cent less than what she quoted. Does this mean that one has to deduct 80 per cent of what astrid has been saying on this project to get a realistic picture?
Peter Micallef
Sep 15th 2008, 22:20
May I quote from a letter to The Times on the 29th August 2008 by Alfred Zahra de Domenico who very clearly writes:
"It is also unacceptable because St John's Co-Cathedral is a Grade 1 scheduled monument. Grade 1 scheduling means St John's cannot be tampered with in any way. The relevant part of the law clearly states: "Grade 1 buildings of outstanding architectural or historical interest shall be preserved in their entirety. Demolition or alterations which impair the setting or change the external or internal appearance, including anything contained within the curtilage of the building, will not be allowed. Internal structural alterations will only be allowed in exceptional circumstances for keeping the building in active use."
So why are MEPA bothering wasting time and money on an EIA when their own rules are quite clearly set out. This application should be dismissed out of hand. MEPA stand up and be counted and practice what you preach.
Astrid Vella
Sep 15th 2008, 21:22
So now we have an 8-page supplement costing up to 10,000 Euros,four half page adverts at about 4,000 Euros and many thousands more euros to be spent on an Environment Impact Assessment for a project that violates the provisions of the Heritage Act,is opposed by all the consultative heritage bodies and is unsustainable in every way.
This project could be a wonderful catalyst for change.We could be making this huge investment in heritage go much further in restoring one of our crumbling fortresses, St. Angelo or St. Elmo,before they are lost, and from there, boosting the economy and social fabric of a depressed area with all its social problems.
St. John's is not presently at risk; excavating a quarry and putting its artefacts underground is the main risk. Heritage is wealth like any other,Church and State have an obligation to spread wealth equitably and sustainably.Better use of the existing space inside St. John's while moving out the restoration workshops, offices and ancillary collections could make enough space for the tapestries, freeing up these huge funds for a really essential restoration project. Who is it who decides how Malta's Structure Funds are spent,is the Foundation above the national priorities?