ERA exempts Marsaskala ferry landing from full environmental assessment

The Environment & Resources Authority (ERA) has determined that a proposed permanent ferry landing site at Marsaskala Bay does not require a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), concluding that, despite the loss of protected seagrass, the development is unlikely to generate significant environmental effects.  

The decision follows a screening process that assessed the project’s impact on marine ecology, sediment quality, and compatibility with existing coastal uses. 

The proposal centres on upgrading an existing quay to accommodate fast ferry operations proposed by Infrastructure Malta. ERA considered the development relatively small in scale and located within an already urbanised coastal environment characterised by maritime activity, residential use, and recreation. The authority concluded that the anticipated impacts can be addressed through mitigation measures, without the need for a detailed EIA. 

The works involve dredging approximately 4,700 cubic metres of seabed material to reach a depth of 2.5 metres, required for safe ferry manoeuvring. Structural interventions include reinforcing the existing quay using either a gravity wall or a pile-supported structure, together with the construction of an overlying deck. Additional infrastructure will include an accessible pedestrian ramp, bollards, fenders, lighting, and passenger waiting facilities. Construction is expected to last around 12 months, subject to weather and operational constraints. 

ERA acknowledged that dredging will lead to the permanent removal of seabed habitats but concluded that impacts on marine ecology would not be significant. A benthic survey identified species including Cymodocea nodosa and Posidonia oceanica (both protected species of seagrass), and Tonna galea (a protected marine gastropod), within the area of influence. The dredging is expected to result in the loss of around 1,496 square metres of sparse Posidonia oceanica. However, the authority noted that the affected seagrass occurs within an operational coastal stretch already influenced by human activity. Denser and continuous Posidonia meadows are located further north and fall outside the project footprint. Posidonia meadows play a vital role in recharging and oxygenating the marine environment. 

The site is situated along an existing quay and promenade currently used for residential, commercial, and recreational purposes, including fishing and boating, even though maritime activity will increase. Since the area is already used for docking small vessels, the authority determined that no significant long-term impacts on coastal access or land use are expected. Temporary disturbance during construction was also not considered a major environmental concern. 

Construction works, particularly those related to quay reinforcement, are expected to generate noise, vibration, and dust, while heavy machinery will produce emissions. ERA nonetheless waived the need for an EIA, stating that such impacts are temporary and can be mitigated through adherence to the Environmental Management Construction Site Regulations. No significant operational impacts on air quality or noise levels are anticipated once ferry services commence. 

The development will generate approximately 2,945 cubic metres of construction waste, in addition to the dredged material. Sediment sampling formed a key part of ERA’s screening. Contamination was detected at one sampling point at a depth of -3.4 metres, but this lies below the dredging level and will remain undisturbed. A small layer of contaminated material identified at another location will need to be removed and disposed of at a non-hazardous landfill. The remaining dredged material is considered suitable for disposal at sea, subject to compliance with waste management regulations. 

The site falls within the protected coastal water body designated MTMTC 106. An expert hydromorphology assessment indicated that the area already exhibits a low level of natural hydromorphology and that the development will not significantly alter the bay’s physical characteristics. Since no operational discharges into the sea are proposed, ERA concluded that the project is unlikely to compromise the environmental status of the water body. 

The screening document does not contain specific data on the number of daily ferry trips, projected passenger numbers, or any potential increase in road traffic in the surrounding residential area. 

ERA imposed a series of mitigation measures, including the installation of silt curtains and wooden shutters during concrete works, halting operations during adverse weather, and limiting dredging to avoid disturbing deeper contaminated sediments. Identified contaminated material must be disposed of at an authorised non-hazardous landfill, while containment measures are required to prevent run-off and spillages from reaching the marine environment. The developer must also submit monitoring and contingency plans for ERA approval before works begin. 

The authority concluded that, with these safeguards in place, the project’s environmental impacts would remain limited and manageable, making a full Environmental Impact Assessment unnecessary. 

Not requiring a full Environmental Impact Assessment means the project proceeds without an in-depth study. A full EIA normally includes detailed technical analysis, alternatives, cumulative impacts, and structured public consultation. Screening is more limited, with shorter timelines and fewer opportunities for submissions. However, it aims to identify issues early, nipping problems in the bud while allowing projects to advance more quickly with reduced procedural requirements.