Paradise Bay lido in new regularisation effort

The lido is replete with irregularities, which under the MEPA reform of 2011 could not be regularised because Paradise Bay is a scheduled area.

Din l-Art Helwa is objecting to any regularisation of a terrace adjoined to the lido which has taken an “extensive area of the bay”, insisting that this should be reverted to the original natural state.
Din l-Art Helwa is objecting to any regularisation of a terrace adjoined to the lido which has taken an “extensive area of the bay”, insisting that this should be reverted to the original natural state.

An application to regularise various illegalities in the Paradise Bay lido includes a proposal to paint the complex in more “muted colours” and for a new lounge area on the roof of the existing development.

The lido is replete with irregularities, which under the MEPA reform of 2011 could not be regularised because Paradise Bay is a scheduled area. But the reversal of this landmark reform by the current administration makes it possible for owner Charles Micallef to regularise past illegalities, and a planning application was presented by architect William Lewis in 2015.

A project development statement from consultants ADI Associates on behalf of Micallef now proposes ways of improving the environment in the area, which will still retain most of the lido’s illegal structures, in a bid to “blend in with the surrounding context”, such as painting the lido stairway in ‘earth colour’.

A metal pipe frame and bamboo cover on the roof of lido’s building is to be removed so that the area can be converted into a lounge area for evening use, with loungers, low tables, low-level down-lighters, and planters. 

The owners also want to extend a pontoon for visiting dinghies, for visitors coming on tenders from larger boats moored offshore.

The major environmental gain of the project will be the removal of a terrace at the back of the beach and the demolition of an illegal storage room.

The owners also claim they will attempt to reconstruct the sand dunes in the area, by removing a retaining rubble wall. According to the PDS, old aerial photographs suggest the landward area of the beach could have sustained sand dune formations up to around 60 years ago. “No information exists on when these dunes were lost, but the construction of terraces at the back of the beach, especially those beneath the slopes on the eastern side of the bay, surely did not help.”

A Restoration Method Statement prepared on MEPA’s request has recommended the removal of the current terrace structure at the back of the beach and the introduction of sand dune vegetation.

But the application retains a number of illegalities on this Natura 2000 site. A room beneath the restaurant’s terrace will be sanctioned and extended underground to provide additional storage to compensate for the demolition of another illegal storage room: “indispensable for the storage of sun beds and umbrellas, particularly during the winter months when wave action can be pretty severe”.

Another illegal terrace used for sunbathing purposes and “private functions” will also be retained. According to the PDS the site of the lido itself covers an area of approximately 2,000 square metres. This includes a bar and restaurant, including a kitchen and a covered dining terrace, a beach shop, toilet facilities and showers. 

Din l-Art Helwa objects

The application fails to address the occupation of the beach by sunbeds.

Patrons of the lido use various terraces located around the restaurant area as sunbathing decks but they are also used to host private functions, especially in the evenings.

The PDS acknowledges that the eastern-most terrace does not form part of the lido but the lido operator still rents out umbrellas and sunbeds to visitors who prefer to stay in this area in the same way that they rent out umbrellas and deck chairs to people on the sandy beach.

Through the application these terraced areas covering approximately 1,700m2 would also be “restored”.

In an objection sent to MEPA in December Din l-Art Helwa objected to any sanctioning of any illegal extension of the lido into the surrounding area, noting that the permit issued in 1999 had already considerably enlarged the lido. 

“What was (in the 1960s) a small lido has now grown in proportion in a way that it overpowers the bay, extending from one side to the other,” it said.

Din l-Art Helwa is objecting to any regularisation of a terrace adjoined to the lido which has taken an “extensive area of the bay”, insisting that this should be reverted to the original natural state. The eNGO is also objecting to the placing of tables and chairs on the roof over the lido, noting that this would only increase the volume of the development. Din l-Art Helwa insists that the site should be restored in a way which creates a “gentle gradient to the bay”.

A planning saga lasting 20 years

The site was originally leased to Charles Micallef through a letter issued by the government in 1994, for a licensed catering establishment – but it included a special condition, which obliged the lessee to use the area solely for the placing of tables, umbrellas and deckchairs.

In October 1994, the Planning Authority issued an enforcement notice for concrete paving that took place without a permit.

Micallef appealed, saying he had not changed the use of the site and was therefore in compliance with the special condition of the lease requiring him to use the area solely for the placing of tables, umbrellas and deckchairs. The appeal was dismissed. 

In 1999 however, MEPA issued a permit for additions and alterations to the existing restaurant, leaving the staircase and terraces in an irregular position. Subsequently, two applications to regularise the development were rejected in 2004.

In 2008, MEPA issued enforcement notices over two rooms built without a permit. In 2009, another enforcement was issued over the deposit of concrete to form passages, the deposit of construction material and new boundary walls without a permit on a scheduled property. 

In March 2014, a new enforcement order was issued against the construction of an illegal canopy covering the restaurant’s terrace, the construction of a room being used as a kitchen, the creation of concrete paved areas used for placing of sunbeds and umbrellas, the levelling of pathways and the development of cladded boundary walls between sand level and concrete area.