The Planning Authority has approved the sanctioning of 20 padel courts that were built illegally on Manoel Island, while also granting permission for a further 10 courts to be constructed on the site. The developer has been fined €25,000 for carrying out the works without a permit.
The decision, taken at a hearing on Thursday, brings to a close months-long controversy that saw construction press ahead on the Nicholl Ground before planning approval had been secured, prompting objections from environmental and heritage campaigns.
The permit, filed under reference PA/07995/25, was submitted last November by Sharlon Pace on behalf of Gżira football club. It sought the reinstatement of a sports ground with variable sporting uses and demountable glass structures on the Nicholl Ground, a roughly 6,700 square-metre site that had previously hosted a football pitch.
Construction, however, began well before the permit was issued. Moviment Graffitti first raised the alarm over the unauthorised works in March, and the group later released drone footage showing several courts already at an advanced stage of building.
The Manoel Island: Post Għalina campaign joined calls for the works to be halted, and objectors lodged a complaint with the Planning Authority's enforcement unit. Enforcement officers subsequently visited the site and ordered the works stopped, by which point they were said to be close to completion.
Despite the breach, the Authority’s case officer recommended approval, proposing a far smaller fine of €900 on the grounds that the site had a long history of sporting use as the Nicholl Football Ground. Neither the Environment and Resources Authority nor the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage objected to the scheme during the screening process.
The hearing itself had originally been scheduled for election week but was postponed at short notice after the project's architect was unable to attend.
Architect Ruben Sciortino told Thursday's hearing that an earlier proposal, dating to 2021 and forming part of the wider Manoel Island master plan, would have relocated the football club's grounds to the island's north shore. That plan collapsed after the Government announced it would reclaim the island from developer MIDI. Gżira football club subsequently revised its approach, applying instead to repair the existing ground and reconfigure it as a multi-purpose site usable for either padel or football.
Planning directorate officials backed the application, arguing that the site would retain its historic recreational use, that the development would not have any significant visual impact, and that the new structures were reversible. They also said the €900 fine initially proposed had been calculated according to the standard formula set out in existing regulations- thought the board ultimately imposed a considerably higher penalty of €25,000.
Several objectors spoke against the application at the hearing. Michael Sciortino, representing Flimkien Għal Ambjent Aħjar, questioned the application’s validity, noting that the land had been owned by MIDI rather than the applicant at the time it was filed. He also called for government appointed board members to recuse themselves, citing a potential conflict of interest now that the state has taken over the land, and dismissed claims that the structures were reversible as unrealistic given their evident permanent use as padel courts. He further argued that, because the site falls within Valletta's UNESCO buffer zone, the application ought to have been subject to a heritage impact assessment.
Astrid Vella, coordinator of Flimkien Għal Ambjent Aħjar, said UNESCO officials had raised concerns about the development during a visit to the site only weeks earlier, warning that floodlighting installed as part of the project would affect views of the Valletta skyline.
Representatives of Moviment Graffitti pointed to earlier applications concerning the same site, in which Gżira football club had itself acknowledged it was not the landowner - a fact they said should invalidate the current permit. Campaigners from Manoel Island: Post Għalina argued that the site should not be put to commercial use so soon after the public paid €43 million to reclaim the island, warning that the permit could prejudice future plans for the area.
Did the PA just 'sell' 6,700sqm of Manoel Island for €25,000, NGOs ask
NGOs referred to the decision in a statement which described the PA hearing as a charade.
“Despite the PA’s attempt to brand the padel complex as something of a temporary nature, a planning permit is a permanent commitment of the land,” the NGOs said, noting that 10 new courts had been approved on land which the government had just negotiated to get back in its control.
“This was admitted by the applicant’s lawyer, Ian Stafrace, during this charade of a hearing. So much so, that he himself suggested adding a clause that would ensure the new masterplan for Manoel Island would not be compromised by this permit,” the NGOs said.
Instead, the PA Board approved the illegal padel complex without said clause along with a fine of €25,000. Looking at the rates Sharlon Pace demands for the use of his padel courts, this is a sum they could easily recoup in the first week of operation, the NGOs said.
They added that when Manoel Island: Post Għalina activists called the board out on their failure to include the clause of no permanence, Stafrace – Sharlon Pace’s lawyer – arrogantly remarked “it’s either the planning gain or the clause!”
Planning board chair Emanual Camilleri agreed to not reopen the discussion.
“This represents a perverse decision with implications on the long-term future of Manoel Island as a public park,” the NGOs said.
The Board and the applicant’s lawyer himself acknowledged the risk that this permit undermines the Government’s own plans for the island by establishing legal commitment to the padel courts through the PA.
Instead of addressing this concern, the PA focused on increasing the planning gain (essentially a fine) from €900 to €25,000.
“The applicant’s delight at this decision was plain to see, and spoke volumes. It was clear that €25,000 was a small price to pay for what they got – a legal commitment to part of a site that the Government had just paid €43,000,000 for,” the NGOs said.
“The decision was problematic for other reasons as well. Stafrace made it clear that the applicant did not seek the permission of the Lands Authority after the emphyteusis was transferred to the Government and relied on the agreement of MIDI plc. Therefore, they are building without the specific permission of the Government of Malta,” they said.
Additionally, Astrid Vella, a Manoel Island: Post Għalina and Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar activist, highlighted the fact that the floodlighting of the padel courts completely obliterates the view of Valletta’s bastions which are currently being considered for inclusion as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. During its session in Malta three weeks ago, UNESCO’s consultant repeated its concern about projects around the fortifications, including these padel courts. Vella stressed that approving this permit could risk the designation of World Heritage Site status being awarded to the Knights’ fortifications.
Michael Sciortino, on behalf of FAA, stressed that since this application covers a site that falls within the Valletta World Heritage Buffer Zone, the Chairman also misguided the Board regarding the state obligations for developments in UNESCO World Heritage Site Buffer Zones. The requirement of a Heritage Impact Assessment is a duty imposed on Malta as State Party signatory of the World Heritage Convention. It is the PA and not the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage that is the sole body that issues development permits, with both approving this application in the knowledge that UNESCO is concerned about developments that impact Valletta’s landscape and contextual setting.
“Is the Government really not ashamed to have sold off 6,700sqm of hard-fought public land on Manoel Island for €25,000 to appease a friend of a friend?”