St John’s Co-Cathedral belongs to Malta and should remain a cultural tourism attraction. It draws some 450,000 visitors annually and on peak days as many as 4,000 tourists go the co-cathedral’s doors. To ease the congestion of visitors inside the co-cathedral the foundation has submitted two alternative outline applications for the extension of its museum. One option proposes the construction of a three-storey building in the courtyard running along Merchants Street to provide additional space, including a canteen at roof level. The second proposes an extension to the co-cathedral’s museum by excavating interconnecting chambers underneath St John’s Street.
As expected, the proposal to develop a full-scale exhibition hall right underneath St John’s Co-Cathedral touched a very sensitive point. While one appreciates the desirable need to exhibit such priceless collections of tapestries, vestments, and silver within the historical and architectural contexts of the cathedral, the risks of excavating amid a maze of buried archaeological remains are too realistic to ignore.
Opposition to the extension proposal has been vociferously expressed by many. Such public opinion is even shared by some PN exponents as Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando and Jesmond Mugliett, to name a few. Others, including members of the foundation itself, assure us that an Environmental Impact Assessment shall investigate in minute detail all the arising issues which will eventually be dealt with and find solutions.
Sadly, Maltese EIAs tend to be significantly biased in favour of the development for the simple reason that consultants are paid by the developer and that no deterrent mechanisms exist to prevent impartiality. In fact, as far as I can recall, I have yet to see one EIA backed development which failed to obtain a Mepa approval.
Commissioning an EIA often means that conceptually, the proposed project is acceptable, and invariably many are weary of a disastrous outcome if lock, stock and barrel are thrown in the lap of the gods. Rightly so I contend, this is a national issue and way forward should not be left exclusively to the “experts” who, by the way, are not willing to assume any responsibility for any mishaps as for instance flooding, or damage due to vibrations during excavation.
Despite the contemplated technical vigilance, the likely risk that at some point the excavations may damage the underground tunnels, a 450-year old civil engineering feat that meanders below Valletta’s streets is realistic. The proposed excavation would thus mean that a substantial part of these tunnels could be irreparably damaged if not destroyed forever. The Project Description Statement lacks essential geological data on the characteristics of rock formation which should give an insight on the stability of rock within and around the Cathedral. Personally, I cannot see how the two large lift shafts and corridors linking the Cathedral to the underground gallery as indicated in the proposed plans could be excavated without rendering serious damage to the foundations of the Cathedral.
The foundation should in the first instance set up an adequately staffed information office where members of the public and interested parties could access documentation as the Project Description Statement (project outline), plans and non-technical reports, without the need to rely on other sources which often are ill prepared for such an undertaking and could only render little or none at all.
The impacts on the Valletta residents, tourists and the commercial community cannot be treated lightly either. Such an undertaking could easily span over at least 24 months during which time several streets will be closed off for vehicle and human traffic and commercial outlets severely disrupted. To the local community this project presents nothing but nuisance, and hence has all the right in the world to be represented to protect its interests and ask for compensation.
The most sensible alternative option (probably cheaper) is to look for other sites near the Cathedral that could provide an alternative exhibition area. I am convinced that good sense shall prevail and the protagonists of this project will distance themselves from their present obsession. At a time of financial strain, this project could indeed contribute directly to other important projects in Valletta as for instance restoring fort St Elmo and St Angelo to draw more foreign visitors, regenerate the surrounding areas and create new jobs.
Roderick Galdes is Labour Party spokesman for planning and housing