PA set to refuse Hagar Qim restaurant make-over

The Planning Authority’s Development Management Directorate is recommending the refusal of a proposed redevelopment of the Ħaġar Qim restaurant, citing its negative impact on the surrounding rural environment and the objections presented by the  Superintendence of Cultural Heritage (SCH), the National World Heritage Technical Committee (NWHTC), the Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee (CHAC), and Heritage Malta (HM).

The final decision is set to be taken by the Planning Commission in a meeting scheduled for 6 November.

The application cites Maria Theresa Mallia, whose family had won a court eviction of the former restaurant operators in 2019, as the applicant. But some of the plans submitted by TBA periti, the architectural firm responsible for the project, refer to James Barbara, owner of James Caterers, as their client.

The application seeks to demolish the existing restaurant, which has been in a state of disrepair, and replace it with a modern structure.

While the new restaurant would retain a similar footprint, the proposal  shifts the location of the restaurant,resulting in an increase in volume at a higher level.   

Submitted drawings indicate an increase in the overall volume of the structure from that existing on site. Plans indicate the creation of a 450 sq.m outside dining area and an adjacent open area with seating benches.

According to the case officer both the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) and the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage (SCH) had carried out various discussions with the project’s architect throughout the processing of this application.

While the Heritage watchdogs have kept objecting till the end, the Environment and Resources Authority has issued its conditional approval as long as any development is retained within the already approved footprint and a number of conditions like those limiting light pollution are abided to.

Photomontages of the proposed development show the new restaurant rising higher than Heritage Malta’s bulky visitor centre as seen from the road.    

The visitor centre itself had attracted its own fair share of criticism at the time when it was built in 2011.

The proposed restaurant also includes large outdoor terraces, prompting concerns from several cultural and environmental authorities worried about increased light and noise pollution.

Additionally, the SCH has noted that most of the mature trees currently screening the existing restaurant will be removed and replaced with new ones, which may be less effective in screening the building.

Initially the project also included a 104 sq.m roof terrace which was later removed from the plans. The proposed materials, such as copper alucobond cladding and travertine and large glazed apertures along the sides of the restaurant are seen as further exacerbating the visibility of the new structure, reducing the effectiveness of the existing natural landscape as a visual buffer.  A landscaping plan presented by the developers indicates that 38 of the existing 121 trees and shrubs will be retained on site while  174 new trees will be planted.  The project will also see the removal of a number of invasive shrubs grown in the restaurant grounds.  The developers have also presented a plan to minimise light pollution in the area.

Parking shortfall and traffic impact

Studies also show that the development will result in a shortfall of  39 parking spaces required for the additional dining areas, which cannot be accommodated on site.

Heritage Malta, which manages the Ħaġar Qim Visitor Centre, has confirmed that its parking facilities, which include spaces for coach parking, cannot be used by patrons of the proposed restaurant. These parking spaces are strictly reserved for visitors to the heritage site.

Additionally, the increased traffic generated by the restaurant is expected to add to congestion in this sensitive archaeological area, further undermining the site’s cultural and environmental value.

Din l-Art Helwa whose former President Alex Torpiano is one of four senior partners in the architectural firm which drafted the plans, had also objected to the project in November 2022.  Another objection was submitted by Nature Trust.

The final decision on the redevelopment proposal is expected on November 6. However, given the significant concerns raised by key cultural heritage bodies, including the National World Heritage Technical Committee, and the case officer’s  recommendation for refusal, the project is unlikely to be approved.