Ta’ Hagrat swimming pool raises cultural superintendence’s hackles

A swimming pool has been approved alongside an Mgarr store in the archaeologically sensitive area at Ta’ Hagrat, against the advice of the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage.

The 75 square-metre pool and deck, and 30 square-metre store on Triq il-Konkors Teatrali, were approved earlier this week on Wednesday by MEPA’s Environment and Planning Commission (EPC).

The Superintendence warned MEPA in October 2015 that the proposed pool was in the “immediate vicinity” of documented archaeological remains consisting of tombs, cart ruts, a rubble wall including megalithic boulders, and possible traces of ancient quarrying activities.

Ta’ Hagrat temples – an emergency conservation order has been issued about it

It warned that the development would impinge negatively on the “cultural landscape” and serve as a precedent resulting in an “urban sprawl” through the development of more pools and decks in the area, “detaching the archaeological features from their setting” and possibly “jeopardise their preservation.”

The Superintendence recommended that the area be “kept free from development.”

But although the development was fully approved, the permit includes a clause stating that before works start the applicant is required to submit a copy of approval from the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage. This effectively means that MEPA has thrown back the ball in the court of the Superintendence after blatantly disregarding its advice by issuing the permit. 

MEPA’s internal Heritage Protection Unit has also warned the EPC that any approval of this permit would be in breach of the law. The Environment Protection Directorate also warned about the adverse impact on natural features on the site.

The case officer also recommended the refusal of this permit arguing that the rural development policy approved in 2014 does not consider archeologically sensitive areas as “appropriate locations” for swimming pools.

According to the policy, sites of archaeological importance “are in principle considered inappropriate locations”, unless it can be duly demonstrated through the necessary assessment, that the development does not compromise the site scheduling characteristics.

The EPC justified its decision by insisting that the proposal does not compromise the Class A Site of Archaeological Importance since it is only 1.2m deep at the maximum level of excavation and excavation is limited in area. The board also noted that the site lies adjacent to an “approved rationalisation site” (formerly ODZ land included in the extension of development boundaries carried out in 2006), which is covered by the same archaeological constraints. The EPC also referred to three other permits issued opposite to the proposed swimming pool to which the Superintendence had not objected to in the past.

In 2007 MEPA had issued an enforcement order against the dumping of construction waste in the area where the swimming pool has been approved.

An application to construct a pool in the same area was twice rejected in 2005 and 2006. The Appeals Board confirmed the decision in 2007.

The reason always given for refusing the development was the archaeological importance of the site.

In 2011 MEPA had refused a permit for an extension of the same building and the erection of a wall to define the property.

In 2014 the government had to expropriate land and issue an emergency conservation order to stop development on land in the vicinity of the nearby Ta’ Hagrat temples, following another controversial MEPA permit. 

In 2014, a development threatened the unique UNESCO World Heritage status of the Ta’ Hagrat Neolithic temple in Mgarr.

MEPA approved the 15-apartment block on  Triq San Pietru, Mgarr but residents objected to the two-storey residence. The controversial dwelling was 10 metres away from the Ta’ Hagrat temples, and had the blessing of the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage.

But the same body had initially objected to the development in March 2013. After a meeting with Heritage Malta and MEPA in May 2013, the Superintendence green-lit the permit when plans were changed to address some of its concerns

The PN demanded that the government expropriate the land on which the apartments are being built, on the grounds that there is a public purpose to safeguard national heritage, against appropriate compensation.

Labour blamed the PN, saying  that the area in question was not spared from the 2006 extension of building zones.

Under the UNESCO Convention of World Heritage in 1972, the government can expropriate the land in question against compensation to its owners.