Following the presentation of the St. John’s Foundation projects at the Din l-Art Helwa premises on Tuesday the 12th of August, Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar, FoE and others are in a position to comment on the details of the proposals which are as follows:

A. To excavate St. John’s Square and Street to create two massive UNDERGROUND CHAMBERS in order to replicate in size the nave of the co-cathedral. The project is to extend beneath St. John’s square and street from Republic Street right up to Merchants Street, and is to incorporate the water reservoirs excavated in the XVI century during the building of Valletta. The Foundation architect did not reply to questions on the depth of the excavation it was stated that the gallery might be over 10 metres high, which means that the overall depth of the excavations would be well over three storeys.

The presentation has also brought to light the fact that in addition to other proposals, the extension that the foundation claims to need, includes a modern art gallery.

In spite of the fact that MEPA has declared that the excavation project is a ‘non-starter’ due to the risk to the stability of the Cathedral, the Foundation has ignored this warning and this project remains the Foundation’s preferred project.

B. As an alternative MEPA had suggested that the Foundation considers the option of additional structures within the St. John’s graveyard alongside Merchants’ Street. These have been indicated as ticketing booths, a Visitors’ Centre the extension of rooms overlooking the graveyard, rebuilding of the Annexe building and the covering of the graveyard with a transparent ceiling.

Our comments on the above are as follows:

St John’s Co-Cathedral is already functioning successfully as a museum therefore there is no justification to violate the clauses of its National Monument Grade I scheduling in order to stay open: “Buildings of outstanding architectural or historical interest that shall be preserved in their entirety. Demolition or alterations which impair the setting or change the external or internal appearance, including anything contained within the curtilage of the building, will not be allowed. Internal structural alterations will only be allowed in exceptional circumstances where this is paramount for reasons of keeping the building in active use.”

The Foundation has stated that it will do nothing to damage St. John’s Co-Cathedra and will be preserving the underground passages in the area to be excavated, however MEPA’s statement has dubbed the project to excavate St. John’s Street and Square a “non starter” due to the risk of potential damage to the stability of St John’s Cathedral. It has reminded the architect that a number of heritage protection entities had already recommended that another building in Valletta be used for the Foundation’s as expansion requirements.

The passages below St. John’s Street are 16th century engineering treasures, beneath which pass the city’s sewers and water supply. They served as access and to shelters during WWII and still function to this day. Since their position cannot be calculated with absolute precision and their state of preservation is poor in places, damage from the excavations is cannot be eliminated and would not only impact the city’s present-day drainage services but also the passages’ potential as a tourist attraction.

Re. the EU programmes on sustainable tourism and competitiveness, due to aspects of dehumidifying and cooling underground chambers, especially the cisterns, the project is environmentally unsustainable and carries an element of risk for the Gobelins Tapestries. St. John’s Cathedral does not need to enter the frenetic world of competitiveness since most visitors to Malta are already paying visitors to the Cathedral. We are not convinced that the building of the underground chambers will solve the problem of congestion inside the Catherdral as it is dubious whether a significant number of tourists would opt to visit the tapestries and not St. John’s Cathedral and its Caravaggios. Part of the congestion problem is caused by the present touring route within the Cathedral which has been established by the Foundation and can be easily changed.

In spite of the Foundation architect’s claim that parts of St. John’s Cathedral are not protected by the scheduling, enquires with MEPA revealed that this is not the case; it was stated that all of St John’s Cathedral complex is equally protected, including any war-damage reconstructions in the graveyard area.

As such St. John’s cannot be tampered with, and we find it alarming that the Foundation is overlooking the fact that St. John’s is protected at law.

OUR ALTERNATIVES:
It must be stressed that we fully support the Foundation’s desire to expand its exhibition space; it is only the way it is being handled that is in question.

In the course of the meeting, several parts of the St. John’s complex were identified that could be put to better use as exhibition space. We also maintain that the substantial funds earmarked for this project could be used to purchase and restore a deteriorating palazzo very close to St. John’s. This option would not only serve to restore the building and enrich Valletta.

Contrary to the impression being given by the Foundation, we are not advocating ‘dispersal of its collection’ to several sites. Once the tapestries, liturgical vestments and artefacts are out of their original setting within the Co-Cathedral, their location in underground chambers is already out of context. The collection was never a single entity but acquired over the centuries and may be exhibited according to its subject matter, with the Gobelins tapestries better accommodated within St. John’s museum, while other collections, restoration laboratories, offices and research rooms can be accommodated nearby. The Cappella Ardente, intended to occupy the St. John’s Annexe, is a stand-alone exhibit which has already been offered an excellent alternative location which would free up more space for the tapestries, however for some reason, this offer was refused.

Modern museum practice dictates that museums do not display all their exhibits, that is what ‘Reserve Collections’ are about. Modern museums aim at quality not quantity; it is unlikely that viewers would be interested in seeing all of St. John’s 200 sacred vestments or scores of chalices.

These projects are potentially very damaging not only to our heritage but also to our communal values; do we really want ticketing booths and a shop selling postcards and souvenirs in the graveyard of the Knights? Furthermore the glass canopy over the graveyard will negatively affect the graveyard’s micro-climate, trapping heat and humidity within the structure, which will affect the Co-Cathedral’s stonework. Additionally, the visual effect of the proposed undulating glass canopy complete with spotlights is more suited to a disco.

We maintain that we cannot accept that a sizeable portion of our EU budget be spent on a project which will lead to the exploitation and possibly damage to Malta’s most precious national, when other feasible and simple alternatives exist as not only suggested by FAA, but also by other entities and the MEPA Planning Directorate. A project of more reasonable dimensions would also leave funds available for more pressing projects like the restoration of crumbling Fort St. Elmo.

We have no interest financial otherwise in these projects or proposals. Our only interest is in safeguarding national treasures in the context of our World heritage site and we cannot understand why the Foundation Board members have taken such a hard-line stance against the public’s views on this project. Our submissions are backed by 1,050 objections i
ncluding a great many from University lecturers and even ambassadors, that have been submitted to MEPA over the last two weeks, all we are requesting is for plans to slow down in order to allow for better investigation of alternatives being proposed so that we do not end up with a travesty of our national heritage.

Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar
Friends of the Earth (Malta)

Permalink: Update on St John’s projects – FAA and FoE