Tower Road set for traffic gridlock

The junction between Tower Road, Sliema, and Qui-Si-Sana will become critical in five years’ time as a result both of nationwide traffic growth and the traffic generated by a number of developments approved in recent years.

This emerges from Transport Malta’s assessment of traffic studies related to the incorporation of the naval clinic façade into a commercial development.

Transport Malta is not objecting to this development despite the critical traffic situation in the area, but is committing itself to upgrade the junction in the future.

The development proposed by Gasan will include seven storeys above the historical building and three underground levels.

In correspondence published on the website of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA), Transport Malta (TM) reiterated its commitment “to upgrade this critical junction” when required in the future, using the most “appropriate, technically feasible design” in order to minimise expected traffic queues and delays.

Despite the expected traffic problems on this junction, TM is not objecting to the development proposed by Gasan but is insisting on a separate traffic management application with regard to loading and unloading spaces on Triq Ghar il-Lembi.

The planning application foresees the restoration of the existing façade, which is the only structure remaining from the clinic, and the sanctioning of the total, internal demolition of the building.

It also foresees the construction of an apartment block with offices at ground and first floor levels, and commercial outlets at the lower level and extending below a new public garden located on an external piazza.

A restaurant is also being proposed in the garden. The development will include two levels of underlying basement garages.

The naval clinic, a military hospital dating back to the nineteenth century, is a Grade 2 scheduled building, for which permits to demolish “will not normally be given” according to the Structure Plan. But MEPA rules allow alterations to the interior if they are carried out sensitively.

In June 1996, a bizarre decision by the MEPA appeals board decreed that the façade should be dismantled in its entirety and actually re-erected somewhere else.

But in 2003, MEPA refused an application to erect a basement car park on four levels as well as ground floor shops on the so-called ‘pjazzetta’, including the demolition of the naval clinic. MEPA said the total demolition was “unacceptable” and contrary to the structure plan

Gasan Group is also proposing a mega development, which includes a 34 level tower next to the scheduled Villa Drago.

No objection from Superintendence

The Superintendence for Cultural Heritage is not objecting to the development.

In a letter sent to MEPA in June the Superintendence noted that the latest proposal “reflects long standing design negotiations with MEPA” intended to create a viable project with a “positive public gain” for the urban environment.

In its letter the Superintendence notes that the project will ensure the restoration and integration of the surviving historic façade.  It also noted that the triangular piazzetta would be retained as an open space “ensuring high visibility of the historical façade and gateway pillars.”

But the Superintendence also noted that the construction of basement garages would inevitably result in “the loss of a subterranean rock cut corridor.”  As a mitigation measure the Superintendence is calling for the “mapping and recording” of this feature.

As for the request made in the application to sanction the illegal works which led to the demolition of the historical building’s interior the Superintendence passed the buck back to MEPA, arguing that “the sanctioning of such illegal works falls under the responsibility of MEPA”.

According to the present law MEPA cannot sanction any development carried out illegally on a scheduled site. But in disagreement with its own appeals tribunal MEPA insists that this prohibition is not applicable to applications presented before 2011.

The Superintendence’s stance contrasts with that of MEPA’s internal heritage watchdog, which had objected to a new eight-storey development incorporating Sliema’s old naval clinic.

The Heritage Advisory Committee described the proposal “objectionable from the aesthetic point of view” as it does not “give due prominence to the existing façade of the naval clinic”.