Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1529778
9 NEWS maltatoday | SUNDAY • 24 NOVEMBER 2024 JAMES DEBONO jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt JAMES DEBONO jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt Cultural Heritage watchdog requests 'historical justification' for Mosta obelisk The Mosta Council has submitted a planning application to construct a 15-metre-high obelisk on the paved area between St Mary's Pharmacy and APS Bank, based on the premise that an obelisk was proposed in the original plan for the square THE Superintendence for Cul- tural Heritage (SCH) has with- held judgment on a proposed 15.4-metre-high obelisk by the Mosta Local Council, stating that it will only provide its assessment after receiving a detailed "histor- ical justification" for the project. While acknowledging the ar- chitect's claim that the obelisk was part of the original plan for the square designed by Giorgio Grognet de Vassé – who also de- signed the Mosta Rotunda – the SCH has requested the sub- mission of "a historical appraisal and justification for the propos- al." A legible copy of Grognet de Vassé's original master plan must also be provided. The SCH noted that it would offer further com- ments on the application once this documentation has been submitted. The proposal has sparked a broader debate within the her- itage community. Globally, the reconstruction of historical mon- uments and unrealised plans is often controversial, with heritage experts prioritising historical au- thenticity and the preservation of a site's existing historical record over resurrecting unbuilt or hy- pothetical pasts. In this case, even the absence of the obelisk could be considered an integral part of the Mosta square's historical nar- rative. However, reconstructions or the completion of original plans may be justified if they respect the historical vision of the de- signer. For such projects to gain clearance, they typically require interpretive materials that ex- plain the structure's original pur- pose and the reasons for its mod- ern-day construction. Grognet de Vassé, who mod- elled the Mosta Rotunda on a neoclassical design inspired by Rome's Pantheon, included an obelisk in his original plan for the square, similar to the one located in front of the Pantheon. "The obelisk was part of Archi- tect Grognet's plan for the Mosta square and was meant to feature prominently in his design. How- ever, the plan was later shelved, and the idea of having an obelisk raised in front of the Rotunda never materialised," Mosta may- or Joseph Gatt told MaltaToday in October when the original plans were submitted. Plans submitted by former may- or Chris Grech, on behalf of the council, proposed that the ob- elisk would rise to 15.4 metres – approximately the height of a four-storey building – making it the second tallest structure in the square, after the Rotunda dome itself. In the coun- cil's plans, the obelisk is proposed for the paved area between St. Mary's Pharmacy and APS Bank. THE planning tribunal has reject- ed an appeal by Arkadia Limited against the Planning Authority's refusal to install two large retract- able canopies in front of the Suq tal-Belt. The retractable canopies were intended to replace existing illegal structures cluttering the site. They would have left a small central ar- ea in front of the listed Suq tal- Belt building unobstructed, while visually dominating the two sides of the building. The current structures that cov- er the whole area in front of the building were originally approved through a Development Notifica- tion Order, which was only valid for a year. The present structure remains in place nearly five years after Ark- adia was hit by an enforcement order from the PA in October 2019, making the group liable for a daily fine of €50. The appeal against the enforce- ment order is still pending, with the next hearing scheduled for 16 January 2025, further delaying any action to remove the existing canopies. In a hearing held in September, the Environment Planning Re- view Tribunal (EPRT) postponed the case due to Ark- adia's other appeal against the proposed structures, which has now been concluded. In its decision, the Tribunal stated that Arkadia's alternative proposal would still have a neg- ative impact on the "legibility" of the Grade 1 listed building, which should be appreciated as a "standalone" structure. It also noted that visuals of the pro- posed canopies confirm they would obstruct appreciation of this prominent building. The Tribunal referred to planning guidelines in the Development Control Design Policy (DC15), which specify that "structures shall not be permitted if they will disrupt the architectural equilib- rium or rhythm of the façades in the streetscape." Furthermore, the Tribunal pointed out that the two proposed tents on both sides of the histor- ic building would have been of a "permanent nature", erected on a fixed metal structure. Arkadia, however, argues that the proposal is specifically intend- ed to avoid "placing umbrellas indiscriminately along the façade of the scheduled building", which creates "clutter and a drab envi- ronment." Arkadia also asserted that al- though all of Valletta is designated as an Urban Conservation Area (UCA), the capital was a com- mercial hub and a primary town centre where canopies can be per- mitted. They cited the canopies along the Valletta Waterfront as an example of different policies being applied in different parts of the city. In its appeal, Arkadia highlight- ed that the land in question was privately owned through an em- phyteusis, and that the histori- cal building had been restored through private direct invest- ment, becoming "a prime culinary destination in Valletta for locals and tourists alike." The group insisted that the outside catering area was a "key component" to the success of this operation, as they require a space that can be effectively used year- round without interruption from the elements. Tribunal confirms PA rejection of Valletta Suq canopies Photomontage of proposed canopies replacing existing illegal structures, which have now been rejected by EPRT