From Ms A. Vella

It is felt that some follow-up is required on your article “Unexpected support for underground museum at St John’s” (TMIS, 14 September).

As emphasised by Sante Guido in The Times of 17th September, his words about the project (as you correctly quoted) were limited to the inclusion of the old cisterns or water reservoirs in the museum’s expansion plans. His support did not extend to the huge new galleries the Foundation is proposing to excavate in St John’s Street and Square even though several authorities have pointed to space within the St John’s complex that is either under or inappropriately utilised.

In fact, Sante Guido, an Italian restorer who has been working on the restoration of St John’s Co-Cathedral for over a decade, stated that it would be “utter madness to further excavate the area beneath the cathedral in Valletta in order to open a museum”. This is understandable as St John’s has already suffered serious damage from minor works carried out around it, works to which, incidentally, the Foundation had objected vehemently, even though it now proposes to excavate a quarry about four storeys deep in St John’s Street. It is a pity that someone with Sante Guido’s years of experience in restoring St. John’s has not been consulted every inch of the way, which makes one wonder how thoroughly the project has been studied.

Similar qualification is required regarding the Foundation’s strange reply that it does not intend to carry out any excavations under St John’s, when the project plans clearly show new corridors to be excavated, running under St John’s, to link the crypt to the new underground galleries. The plans also show sizeable lift shafts to be sunk down to basement level. Are these not excavations under St John’s?

I doubt that the Curator is unaware of these details of the plans, though she could be discounting the crypt as being part of the Cathedral and meaning that no excavation is to take place under the nave of the Cathedral. Given that St John’s Cathedral is a complex, which includes the oratory, sacristy, crypts and so on, this is a disingenuous interpretation. It is to be recalled that the excavations in Sta Lucia Street were not under the nave but still did irreparable damage to the frescoes in the Grand Masters’ crypt.

This is not the first instance of misleading information being given by the Foundation, whose architect also wrongly claimed that the post-war structures around the graveyard are not scheduled.

We also point to the fact that projects for similar excavations have been rejected out of hand, such as the proposal for underground parking by the Mosta Rotunda. In spite of the fact that Mosta has been known for the solidity of its bedrock since the time of the Roman quarries there, Mepa immediately quashed this project due to the risk of damage to the church, with no talk of going into costly Impact Assessments. Before we recommend a project because something similar has been carried out abroad, we would do well to recall the damage inflicted on local churches sharing similar bedrock, building techniques and materials to St John’s. I refer not only to the Sliema chapel, which was extensively cracked due to the excavation of a simple trench by modern, non-vibrating methods, but also to the damage caused to Burmarrad Church and the church which previously stood at it-Tokk in Victoria, which had to be completely demolished due to damage caused by works nearby.

As to Ms Degiorgio’s words that “the foundation has always put the interest of St John’s Co-Cathedral first” we would like to ask, how come the Foundation issued a tender for works on St John’s roof which included the requirement for “power water washing”? Even the most basic restoration practitioner knows that power washing in the vicinity of old stone and “deffun” is out of the question, as it can lead to the ingress of water through cracks and micro-fissures, which could result in damage, even years later, to the Mattia Preti wall paintings on St John’s ceiling.

When this point was raised at the public hearing, the official in charge of this Foundation project seemed unaware of this requirement commissioned by the Foundation itself.

We rest our case.

Astrid Vella

Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar

BIRKIRKARA