Msida pedestrian bridge faces legal challenge from residents
Residents say state authorities intentionally misused planning laws to sneak approval through
A group of Pietà residents is preparing a legal battle to stop the construction of a pedestrian bridge they say will end up just five metres away from their private balconies.
The residents this week filed a judicial protest against Infrastructure Malta and the Planning Authority, accusing the state of sidestepping legal scrutiny to sneak the controversial bridge back into the multi-million euro Msida Creek Project.
The bridge was quietly approved by the Planning Authority in April 2026, more than five years after it was first withdrawn from plans following massive outcry.
Residents claim that the government managed to secure planning approval for the bridge by reintroducing it into plans under the guise of a “minor amendment”, avoiding the full public scrutiny required had it been proposed through a full development application.
Plans for the pedestrian bridge have proven controversial from the outset of the Msida Creek project. Infrastructure Malta first filed plans to develop one in the area back in 2020 but withdrew the proposal after local councils for Msida and Pieta as well as the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage (SCH) and the Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee (CHAC) all expressed concern.
Five years later and as roadworks at the junction began, Infrastructure Minister Chris Bonett said he would be pushing to add a bridge to the project, saying Junior College students wanted one.
Residents and NGOs objected but in April planners approved amendments to roadworks plans that effectively give the green light for the bridge to be built.
Residents are now taking their objections to court. They contend that the bridge is a major infrastructural addition that cannot be classified as a "minor amendment".
They contend that by using this regulatory route, the Planning Authority effectively denied them their statutory right to appeal the decision before the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal.
"It appears the process was used specifically to prevent public opposition and avoid the scrutiny a new application would have required," the judicial protest states.
Residents list a catalogue of grievances regarding the bridge’s design and its impact on their daily lives. They say the bridge will overlook their private balconies, damage the value of their properties and pose a safety risk by creating blind spots that could attract vandals and anti-social behaviour.
They also note that pedestrian bridges are often underutilised, frequently rely on broken lifts, and force residents to walk three times the distance compared to a ground-level crossing.
The 14 residents insist they were never consulted on the project.
The judicial protest was signed by lawyer Kayleigh Borg.