Ħondoq complex ‘should not get permit’ Mepa’s environment protection unit says there is no justification for the project
The proposal to build a €120 million tourist complex at Ħondoq ir-Rummien, one of Gozo’s beautiful pristine bays, is “objectionable” and a permit should be refused, according to the planning authority’s Environment Protection Directorate.
The planned complex and marina was a proposal for a major urban type development outside scheme “in an area which should be kept free from even small-scale urban development,” the directorate said in its recommendations to the Malta Environment and Planning Authority.
There was no overriding justification for the project in terms of environmental improvement or public benefit. Instead, various negative impacts “are expected”.
The directorate’s 45-page report was uploaded yesterday on the planning authority’s website and includes its conclusions based on reports – including an Environment Impact Assessment – submitted by the applicant.
Inspired by the hanging garden effect of villages dotting the Italian Amalfi Coast, the proposal is for a five-star hotel, 285 flats and villas, 731 underground parking spaces, 10 shops, five restaurants and a marina for 150 boats.
The application, filed by Gozo Prestige Holidays in 2002, drew instant harsh criticism from environmental groups and was recently slammed by the Church’s Environment Commission.
The directorate said it could not accept one particular report which was unduly biased towards the choice of site and presented it as a “foregone conclusion”, using expressions such as “the site cries out to be developed”. This ran counter to other nationwide studies, it said.
The unit also criticised the results of the EIA, saying some impacts were not studied in enough detail or depth and that some proposed mitigation measures were “not realistically implementable” or would create unacceptable impacts.
In fact, the directorate disagreed with a “superficial” proposal to build a new, temporary road in a scheduled area of untouched land to mitigate the impact of increased traffic flow during construction.
Creating this route represented an unacceptable environmental impact outside scheme, with major impacts which could create a “dangerous precedent” for similar undesirable development in agricultural and natural land.
Restoring the road “to its pristine state” would be less plausible than claimed, making the impact significant and permanent.
Another report did not provide “sufficient comfort” in excluding any impacts on priority habitats listed in the EU Habitats Directive. “The development would potentially give rise to significant impacts and bearing in mind that the project cannot be considered of overriding public interest within the spirit of the Directive, the proposal cannot be considered further,” the directorate said.
Also, the impact study “unreasonably claims” that major impacts could be minimised by measures “even though local experience leaves much to be desired in mitigating environment impacts”.
Despite these mitigation measures, there would still be major negative short-term impacts such as dust, change of landscape, noise and air pollution. Others had not been identified because they were either insufficiently addressed or downplayed through unrealistic conditions.
The marina’s excavation and operation was also of particular concern because of the impacts on nature, the directorate said.
It pointed out that any claimed benefits of the project could be brought about without the need for new development, such as by removing the accumulated quarry debris, distillation plant, concrete quay and coastal debris, and regenerating the former natural habitats through afforestation.
At the height of the controversy over the proposal, Tourism Parliamentary Secretary Mario de Marco had warned that authorities could not afford to make any mistakes concerning development in the pristine bay, saying it was a matter of weighing the advantages of a marina against the impact on the environment, marine life and the bay.
In 2002, the Qala local council held a referendum in which 85 per cent of the village residents voted to keep Ħondoq ir-Rummien bay free of development.
When contacted, Paul Buttigieg of Moviment Ħarsien Ħondoq, which has lobbied fiercely against the proposal, said his group were very pleased and agreed with the conclusion of the report that the area should be for the public’s recreation.
posted by Hondoq at
2:55 PM
