Għarb fireworks factory ‘undeniable threat’ to St Demetrius Chapel

The Superintendence for Cultural Heritage has expressed “concern” and “considerable reservations” on an application to rebuild a fireworks factory 350 metres away from San Demetrius chapel.

The San Demetrius chapel is an early 15th century chapel rebuilt in 1736 just outside Għarb, close to the cliffs of Ras San Mitri (the Cape of St Demetrius).

The Superintendence for Cultural Heritage alerted the Planning Authority to the proximity of the site of a fireworks factory, which was completely destroyed in an explosion in 2010 and which is now earmarked for reconstruction in a planning application submitted last year.

In a memo to the Planning Authority, the SCH warned of the “intrinsically dangerous nature of this activity, which poses an undeniable threat to any cultural heritage asset in this area”.

The site of the proposed factory is also approximately 350m from the Chapel of St Demetrius.

The chapel is included in the National Inventory of the Cultural Property of the Maltese Islands, but is yet to be given formal protection through scheduling,

But should the application be further considered, the Superintendence will be seeking “strong guarantees for the security of the Chapel”, in the absence of which, the Superintendence would object to this application.

The Superintendence reiterated its strong reservations on the impact on the cultural landscape of the rural area around the chapel, and asked for photomontages of the proposed development from various viewpoints, including from and towards the Chapel.

The 2010 explosion which left four people dead had also shattered some of the chapel’s windowpanes, but the building did not suffer any structural damage.

In 2007, then PA ombudsman Joe Falzon had upheld a complaint by MaltaToday on the “superficial” way a permit was issued in 2006 for the reconstruction of the same factory after an earlier explosion in 2005.

On that occasion the applicants were asked to insure the nearby chapel against the eventuality of damage caused by a possible explosion.

This led Falzon to question the permit by asking: “If there is no danger to the Chapel of San Demetrius, why insist on an insurance policy? If, on the other hand, there is a danger, no amount of insurance money can replace a historical monument.”

Falzon had criticised the PA case officer who said that no studies on the impact of a potential explosion were required, simply because the chapel had incurred no damage in an explosion in August 2005. “How did he know that this was the most massive explosion possible? Is it not possible that a repeat of the accident can take place, but of more massive proportions which will cause damage to the chapel and other archaeological remains in the vicinity?”

Falzon had described the development as an unacceptable intrusion in the natural environment. “Why not take the opportunity to relocate this development towards a more acceptable site, where it can be screened more effectively and pose no risk to the historical heritage?” asked Falzon.

The condition imposing an insurance policy on the chapel was removed by the PA’s appeals tribunal in 2011 after the second explosion. Curiously, the factory owners appealed the decision again, arguing that the PA should not have just removed this condition but reissued the permit in its entirety, doing away with the need of re-applying to reconstruct the building after the second explosion.

But this attempt to circumvent the need of another permit was thwarted in a decision in 2014.