The development of a private university campus along the Żonqor coastline is a “travesty of the State’s constitutional responsibilities” to protect the environment, according to experts.

The National Independent Forum for Sustainability – Nifs, a non-governmental think-tank set up earlier this year – yesterday handed Prime Minister Joseph Muscat a 150-page reaction to the contentious campus of the American University of Malta earmarked for Żonqor.

The exhaustive report delves into the project’s various health and economic implications, as well as the ecological, archaeological and even sociological effects this would have on the surrounding communities.

An artist’s impression of the proposed project for the British building at Dock 1.

Dr Muscat announced last week that some 18,000 square metres of the coastal stretch, located outside the development zone, would be used to build part of AUM. The remaining lecture rooms and halls will be housed in the large, but mostly abandoned buildings, along Dock 1 in Bormla.

The report delves into several policies and regulations which the authors argue conflict with the government’s plans.

The main arguments against the project since it was first announced in May have mostly been based on the fact that the area is located outside the development boundaries. However, the think-tank’s reaction lists several regulations in the planning authority’s South Local Plan, including those for areas of “high landscape value”, which it felt conflicted with the project.

The Żonqor coast, between Marsascala and Xgħajra, is listed as having such a value and the planning authority’s own regulations say it should exercise “strong assumption against the creation of new building structures” there.

The local plan also describes the area and others like it as “essential local recreational venues” which offer residents “a feeling of remoteness from the urban atmosphere, which is so prevalent in the south of Malta”.

Other regulations include a policy on valley protection and another on “archaeologically sensitive areas”, as well as the requirement for a full environmental assessment which has not yet been observed.

Whatever this building is, it will push this community further into environmental poverty

Weighing in on all these regulations and policies the experts – who include academics, environmentalists and architects, among others – conclude: “The proposal to build a university campus, in whole or in part, within this coastal area is a direct contradiction of these principles and policy objectives, and a travesty of the State’s responsibilities under Article 9 of the Constitution.”

This Article states that “the State shall safeguard the landscape and historical and artistic patrimony of the nation”.

The think-tank also shoots down suggestions that the Żonqor campus could be incorporated within the area designated as a national park, describing this as a “direct contraction to the very purpose of the park”.

In its concluding remarks, the report raises concerns that the economic activity the project is expected to generate may not compensate for the loss of the outdoor space.

“How can the opening of, for instance, new shopping and eating outlets, or perhaps nightclubs, compensate for the loss of open spaces?” it asked.

It goes on to question how the millions promised to the south, as a direct result of the project, would benefit the lower and skilled working classes, who the authors claim are the majority of residents in Marsascala and its neighbouring communities.

“One cannot keep fostering jobs in the maintenance and cleaning services of these complexes as a sort of salvific offering for the people in the area,” the document adds.

There is also concern that the university project could potentially create greater social inequality in the surrounding area.

“More buildings, more traffic and more visitors will restrict the open spaces, and it is those who can least afford it who will be hit the hardest,” the document says.

The collective raises concerns that the university project may not only fail to provide new employment opportunities for residents, but also rob them of their environmental wealth.

“If this open space is compromised by a building project, whatever this building is, it will push this community further into environmental poverty [providing] little or no access to open and unbuilt public space,” the document reads.

Health objections

The document also poses several health-related objections to the project, insisting the retention of an open space will help boost residents’ health.

Quoting 2010 statistics, the document says people from the area have the highest Body Mass Index on the island, and are also the most prone to obesity.

Air quality was getting worse, and the government had even located two out of four air quality monitoring stations close by to guage the situation. This was leading to an increase in the incidence of asthma cases and other respiratory illnesses.

High urbanisation and population density were also linked to a higher incidence of cancer, mental disorders and cardiovascular disease. Marsascala is located in one of the most highly urbanised and densest areas in Malta, in terms of population.