A demolition permit for the Villa Rosa mega-development has been revoked by the Planning Authority after it was found that a site notice advertising the development was not properly affixed on the Cresta Quay area of the development. 

Garnet Investments Ltd is proposing developing the sprawling site into a tourism complex, which will include three massive towers, two of which will climb to 27 storeys and the third which comprise 34 storeys in total. 

A permit seeking the demolition of the existing buildings, including the St George’s Bay Hotel, Dolphin House, Moynihan House and Cresta Quay was approved in 2016 and renewed in a new permit filed in 2022.

However, a group of residents represented by lawyer Claire Bonello requested the revocation of the two applications ( PA/2478/16 and PA/6072/22) due to issues related to the affixing of site notices for the respective applications on Dragonara Road and the fact the same road was not listed as a site on which the development would lie. 

This, they said, left them with insufficient information to object to the development.

In the case of PA/2478/16, the residents argued that the site notice was affixed to an internal path that leads to the Cresta Quay establishment and not on the nearest access road, which is Dragonara Road. 

Subsequently, they also said that in the case of PA 6072/22, no site notice was affixed at the Cresta Quay site at all. 

During a Planning Board hearing on Thursday, Bonello said that in the case of the first permit, the site notice was affixed in the drive-way of the Cresta Quay property, which is slightly below street level and this not visible from Dragonara Road, which is the portion of the street that leads upwards from St Geoge’s Bay towards the Westin Hotel. 

A digital render of what the Villa Rosa mega development would look like once completed, including the existing Mercury Tower and Pender Gardens Tower in the background. Photo via Planning Authority

Bonello said there is no evidence whatsoever that a site notice was affixed to the Cresta Quay site at all. 

This, she said, meant that proper notification was not carried as specified in PA regulations which say that if a site is located in a built-up area, then the nearest street access name should be given and that in cases of developments with frontage on more than one street, all street names should be listed in the appropriate section of the application form. 

The Planning Directorate, which compiles case reports for consideration by the board, thus recommended that PA 6072/22 should be revoked, the site notice republished and the application re-opened for public assessment.

However, it did not similarly recommend the revocation of PA/2478/16.

The project’s architect Colin Zammit said that he agreed with the directorate's recommendation that PA 6072/22 be revoked, due to a lack of evidence that the site notice had been affixed on the Cresta Quay side, adding that the affixation of site notices is not something that is done by the applicant but by the PA itself. 

In view of this, however, Zammit argued that in the case of PA/2478/16, the site notice had been properly affixed, as while the drive-in of the site is somewhat recessed from the road, it was still a public space, so much so that PA employees had been able to access it and affix the site notice on the property’s gate. 

Zammit added that while the objectors are listing the fact that Dragonara Road is not listed as an access road on both applications, the applications still list ix-Xatt ta San Ġorġ as the site’s location, which is continuous with Dragonara Road. 

Zammit argued against residents’ claims that the lack of a site notice on Dragonara Road led to them being improperly informed about the application, saying this is not the only way that planning applications are advertised. 

A digital render of what the project is expected to look like in the area directly adjacent to St George's Bay. Photo via Planning Authority

Both applications, he said, were published in the government gazette and were reported about in newspapers, generating public discussion about the project, he said. 

The issue at hand did not prejudice the residents’ right to mount an appeal against the project, Zammit said, as since it is subject to an environmental impact assessment, this grants any third party the right to appeal a decision even if they were not a registered objector on the planning application, which is typically required to appeal any planning decision that is not subject to an EIA. 

The board decided unanimously to revoke PA/6072/22, deciding that the exclusion of Dragonara Road rendered the site address incorrect and that it could not be proven that a site notice had been affixed to the site of Cresta Quay. 

However, in the case of PA/2478/16 it decided by eight votes to one not to revoke the permit, with board member Romano Cassar objecting and agreeing with the assertion that the site notice on Cresta Quay was not visible to the public from Dragonara Road. 

Garnet Investments' application for the Villa Rosa complex (PA/07254/22)  is still at screening stage. 

An EIA into the mega-development that is set to take up much of the shorefront property around St George’s Bay found it would have a major impact on the environment as well as the air quality, both during its construction as well as its operation. 

The Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association has also expressed concern about the proposed towers, saying that they will cast a shadow on St George’s Bay.