The proposed Portomoso extension in St Julians was “illegal” and should not be considered by the planning authority since it went against a condition in the original permit of not allowing any further development, objectors insisted yesterday.

A lawyer and an architect representing the registered objectors, as well as Alternattiva Demokratika chairman Michael Briguglio, questioned the legality of considering this project since, they argued, no further development could legally take place.

Dr Briguglio, lawyer Victoria Cuschieri and architect Paul Gauci were speaking during a public consultation meeting on the proposed extension, which attracted a mere 10 to 15 people.

Dr Cuschieri described the application as “inadmissible”.

However, architect Ray DeMicoli, on behalf of the developers, defended the project saying several other developments on the Portomaso/Hilton site had been shown the green light by the planning authority since the issuing of the original permit which included this condition.

The proposal is to develop a stretch of land adjacent to the southern block of the Portomaso Complex between Spinola Road, the edge of the existing marina and the foreshore. The project will feature a central lagoon, 46 dwellings on two storeys and 98 parking spaces.

The plan is for the roof of the residential units to be landscaped so as to safeguard the views from overlying Portomaso apartments.

Krista Farrugia, from ADI Associates, the company that carried out an update to the Portomaso project’s 1995 Environmental Impact Assessment, said that the new development would have a “minor to major impact” on green pockets on site while having a minor impact on the existing marina. Regarding the Southern Wedgefoot Grass which had been found on site during the 1995 EIA, Ms Farrugia said this species was not found in this update and was last recorded on site in 1999.

Reacting to complaints that a social impact assessment on the project had not been carried out, Ms Farrugia said Mepa had not asked for one.

Mr Gauci argued that according to law, conditions of a permit could not be reversed so the Malta Environment and Planning Authority should not have evaluated the proposal.

He also said the environmental study did not factor in the impact the development would have on air quality and noise pollution. Dr Briguglio said the objectors were holding Mepa responsible if the project went ahead.

Mr DeMicoli explained that the roof of the proposed properties would be 8.5 metres away from the lagoon level.

The lagoon, which will be used for swimming, will use state-of-the-art filtration systems to reduce the amount of chlorine and water that will overflow into the marina.

Comments on the proposal as part of the consultation process will continue to be received until October 19.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.