Decision deferred on Gzira land reclamation project for lido

Presented four years ago, the application was discussed by the Development Control Commission last week.

While the case officer recommended an outright refusal of the application, the board described the proposal an “embellishment of the area” and is seeking the advice of MEPA’s executive committee before taking a decision.

“We are interested in developing the above project for the good of the local community, local businesses and the hotels,” Michael Stivala, managing director of the Bayview Hotel, told MaltaToday. 

The development is being proposed by four hotels on the Gzira sea front namely the Bayview Hotel, 115 Strand, Milano Due and the Kennedy Nova Hotel, all of which have very limited pool facilities on their roofs.

The proposed development will reclaim 20,132 square meters of land, stretching from the area opposite the Waterfront Hotel to the Manoel Island bridge.

Stivala welcomed the fact that MEPA has not shot down the proposal, and has given the developers more time to consult with the Malta Tourism Authority and Transport Malta. 

A major stumbling block for the project is that Transport Malta is insisting that a tender has to be  issued before the application for yachting facilities is even considered by MEPA.

When asked about what will happen to existing sea craft anchored in the area, Stivala explained that the project  includes a pontoon for their use.

When asked about public access, he replied that the project will embellish the area and will actually increase public areas.

In his report, the case office argued that the proposal should be rejected as the project violates theNorth Harbour Local Plan – which seeks to protect the coastal area by designating the site as one where no development is allowed – as well as the Structure Plan Policy CZM 3, which aims to secure public access along the coast. 

In its submissions on the project the Malta Maritime Authority (now Transport Malta) objected to the fact that MEPA is even considering the development.

“It cannot be understood why MEPA accepts an application for such a massive development on what is considered to be land and sea in the public domain.”