The Marsascala Local Council has agreed on a number of objections to the recently updated plans for the former Jerma Palace Hotel site, where developers have officially proposed a hotel and residential development rising up to 14 storeys.

But Mayor Mario Calleja says that the council is still in favour of the development “in principle” and the objections are more like ‘recommendations’ to improve certain aspects of the project.

Meanwhile, in the 27 June meeting, a new request by independent (formerly PN) councillor Charlot Cassar to urge the government to buy the land and turn it into an open space for families was turned down. Cassar is the only member of the council who is against the development.

Last month, Porto Notos, a company owned by Charles Camilleri and lawyer Pierre Lofaro, formally submitted plans for the site. These include a 13-storey hotel with a rooftop restaurant (which effectively brings the total number of floors to 14) and an adjacent building with a mixed-use ground floor and 12 floors of overlying residential units. The project will reach 65.5 metres above road level at its highest point.

The application also covers an extension of the landscaped area around the scheduled St Thomas tower to create a public park and the construction of a public area above a proposed underground car park.

Plans for a development to replace the abandoned hotel have changed significantly over the years. In 2016 the Planning Authority had shot down a proposal that included three high rise towers and land reclamation, calling it a non-starter.

The developers had subsequently presented a new plan to the Local Council, proposing a project similar to the latest one but with the height varying between 13 floors and seven floors. The council had agreed in principle, with Mayor Mario Calleja telling this newsroom that “if they change something we will go against, we only agreed on the principle.”

In the plans that were officially presented to the PA a few weeks ago, the developers added the rooftop restaurant and a number of new floors to the apartment building.

Despite the changes, the council is still in favour of the project in principle, but has agreed to file a number of objections.

The council is against plans to remove the road passing directly in front of the hotel. It wants the developers to either keep the road or build an underground tunnel instead.

It also wants the authorities to ensure that the development to is sensitive to the nearby tower and that the scheduled building is safeguarded.

The council also said that the development’s proximity to the shoreline runs counter to the Public Domain Act. Another point raised was about the lack of information about the demolition process and how the waste material will be disposed of. The council also wants a clear project timeframe.

It also objected to the extra floors, saying that the height was already excessive as originally proposed. The council is also insisting that the project should focus more on the hotel rather than residential units.

The most interesting objection describes the entire development as “excessive”, adding that it will have a negative impact on the locality, including on parking spaces. It says not enough parking spaces are being proposed.

Independent councillor Charlot Cassar told The Malta Independent that the council was admitting that the development was excessive but was, nonetheless, still in favour of the development.

He said he had argued once again that the council should urge the government to buy the property from the private owners and turn it into an open space but his proposal was shot down by the mayor, who accused him of “wasting the council’s time.”

Cassar explained that he had voted in favour of certain objections, including on the excessive side and the need to schedule the tower, but abstained on others.

When contacted, Mayor Calleja played down the objections, saying that this was normal practice for a local council. “We are not against the project, in fact we are still in favour, in principle, but we will file these objections to be on the safe side,” he said.

Calleja said that all councillors were given the chance to come up with objections, and this did not mean that all objections were backed by the entire council. He pointed out that he did not personally agree that the project was excessive. “But I have to side with the majority,” he said. “I am not one to cause trouble. I want everyone to be happy.”

Calleja added that the proposed development was certainly better than the abandoned hotel.

“The objections are sort of recommendations aimed at improving certain aspects of the projects for the benefit of the residents of Marsascala,” Calleja said.