Ta' Cenc and the proposed Heritage Development Plan

[MWP admin]

When I was asked the first time about the proposed Heritage Development Plan, as I instintly always do, I did not agree about it. In fact, I already signed a petition aginst it a week ago.

Recentely I heard the details of the plan by the owner of the land (is this true that ta' Cenc is his?!) that is Mr. Victor Borg.

If it is true that his plan is performed fully according what is said in the program, then, I may surprise you but I am not that much against it.

The situation is a give and take or adv vd disadv thing.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Imagine the two scenarios A (as it is now) or B (as planned)



[Scenario A:]

Advantages:
=========
No building,
no cars,
quite and peaceful (unless there are bird hunters)
no light pollution, (but I am no astrologist)
intact as mother nature left it (sort of!)


Disadvantages:
============
Place carelessed - I did not even know there are archaelogical remains there.
Full of bird traps, who are always angry to passing ramblours. They disturb me even on sight of 200m distance!
People cutting flowers and picking snails without control.
Prone to dumping and vandalism



[Scenario B:]

Disadvantages:
===========

1 storey houses (bungalows) over a limited area of ta Cenc; near the hotel (ok its ing to see but remember the give and take motto)

A second hotel, not very high.

More people roaming around (but these are VIPs (=educated) not bird hunters.

Less quite.

Maybe cars gets annoying (but maybe it will be prohibited to drive in the outer parts)


Advantages:
=========

Free entrance to all.
Guarded against vandalism and anti-environmental acts
Guarded agains dumping.
Enforced protection towards the environment (flora+fauna)
Restored with plaques of information about the important things in the area
Free of bird trapping sites (what a relief)
The fact there are more people around, less bird traps are set in the area.
Maybe some indeginous trees are planted too


So if all these promises are maintained, I am at present slightly favourable to the plan. You might argue that the government should take contol and make the advantages of happen, but as you know the government do not even enforce his basic laws (which are profitable to him), so I am sure he will not be interested to spend money to make such a thing. If the Goverment cannot manage his land, then let the others to do it, with the consequence that they want in turn some investment out of it, but in an environment friendly manner.


So maybe these rich people like Victor Borg might be the right compromise for our wild teritories, but on the other would they really mainatin their environmental promisies?


Your comments are welcomed

[Ke!tH]

Advantages:
=========

Free entrance to all.
Guarded against vandalism and anti-environmental acts
Guarded agains dumping.
Enforced protection towards the environment (flora+fauna)
Restored with plaques of information about the important things in the area
Free of bird trapping sites (what a relief)
The fact there are more people around, less bird traps are set in the area.
Maybe some indeginous trees are planted too

well
-free entrance already exists
-indeginous trees should only be planted where they are supposed to grow (not near cliffs)
-educated or not, people will still tremple on plants and cut flowers
-nesting seabirds will be disrupted because of light at night and noise
-guarding against vandalism should be left in the hands of green wardens
-when money is involved, nature is just involved to show the 'bright side' of the project, not cause they really care about it! and just to attract people to agree with the project

= I dont agree

[MWP admin]

Keith actually I partly agree on some points and writing the comment above was like playing a bit the advocate of the devil. However it would be good to try out and see the outcome.

Regards inigenous trees, I was refering to trees and shrubs that their habitat is as that of ta' Cenc. I am not sure but I remember our lecturer mentioning that the gharar trees are found at cliffs.

Regards "educated or not, people will still tremple on plants and cut flowers" if there are wardens of the area, they have to be careful or they risk a fine, so it would surely decrease the outcome but also agree with you that not prohibit it completely.

Finallyits true that this environment and nature care is just a strategy by Mr. Borg enterprise, but if it is on a black and white contract, people would surely report any irregolarities.

I would like to have a crystal ball to see what it would happen if the plan is approved.

[robcar]

Like Keith i strongly disagree . The choice is not necessarily between the proposed heritage development plan and leaving everything as it is. The site as a whole should be proposed as a Natura 2000 site of scientific interest. Improving information, restricting hunting and trapping, planting trees in suitable areas etc. do not require the presence of any bungalows or such developments.

Unfortunately the notion of simply improving or just cleaning up an area and reducing disturbance is totally alien to the Maltese way of looking at things.

So we are always presented with a choice between two extremes: either leaving everything as it is or developing the area (= speculation) with the supposed improvement of the undeveloped area being used to gain popular support

(The same approach was used when proposing the Xaghra l-hamra golf course, where the reduction in hunting & trapping was indicated as an advantage of developing the golf course - as if you need a golf course to restrict such activities. Bull....

[MWP admin]

The ideal is the National nature site by the goverment (if by the private surely one have to pay to enter). The thing is, as we all know, that the Goverment has no money or interess to do such a thing. So as it is it will remain in a state of abandonship, and more bird trapping, and our walk will finally be limited to the pathway.

The photos below is what I mean that can happen with "as it is"

Distgusting!

And thats why my position.

[IL-PINE]

Like Robcar I strongly disagree with the project.
Well, first of all if there are buildings etc - no matter how clean the area is we will end up with plants of disturbed habitats - not Ta' Cenc plants.
2) We will still end up with rubbish and waste in the surroundings of the hotel area.
3) Drenagg fejn se jmur? Mhux f' Ta' Cenc?
4) Bungalows are still an eyesore.
5) Many hotels in Gozo are closing down, so why should we build a larger one?

[wolf]

MWP - I strongly disagree with this project - open your eyes !!!
the developer is trying to build a villa ghetto and then throws in this heritage park bul**** and some people fall for it !!
The point is Mr. Borg may perhaps own the land but he is fully aware it is ODZ land and MEPA would lose all credit ( jekk fadlilha ) if it approves this obscenity. Extending the hotel is one thing but a whole new village is obscene - Malta ( and Gozo especially ) will have nothing to offer if this sort of madness is to happen.
As pine so correctly said Gozo hotels are being knocked down and we should believe that the answer is to build bigger ones instead !
Fu**** nonsense I say.
If you watched Bondiplus ( which I otherwise never bother to do ) you wud have seen what weak arguments Mr.Borg had. More .....if like me you had gone up to Sannat to hear the residents then you would appreciate more their genuine concern - and the fact that quite a lot of them are seeing through this smokescreen which hardly hides the real motive behind this so-called project - SELLING PROPERTY. Punto !
MWP I sincerely hope you are joking or playing devil's advocate

wolf

[MWP admin]

Yes, I am not 100% convinced on playing the devil's advocate for this plan and as I said I already signed the petition against it.


What I can add is that I went there in December and it was totally carelessed, and plenty of bird hunting (one is even in the prehistoric temple - could it be worse?!). When someone vandalised Hagar Qim (becasue it was another site that was carelessed) then the authorities took action, but with the consequence the area was closed (its OK) but Maltese have to pay much more (LM2 per person) then it was (was it free?) to visit the temples!


My point is that if the Goverment has no money and interess to manage and take care of the environment and open land, then why not leave the private sector to try, where on contract, his development should be in conformity with the environment of the place.


We cannot say if the plan is genuine or not (that is if it is a game or not) and at this point neither you can say it is a game nor me can say it is fair play. We have to put it under test and for once in Malta we would see the outcome.


I dont care about his hotel and money, I just want to see this area converted to something decent. I prefer to see few dozens of bungulows rather than bird-traps, RTO, Privat, barbed wire, hunters, waste dumpings, and total abandonship.


If he said that he is building all ta cenc with villas, then I would never agree of course, but he said that has in mind a small percentage of the land (12% I think). As I always say, I am assuming that what is said is done.


Nice discussion by the way!

[wolf]

no no no MWP carelessness or whatever does not justify giving the developer " a try " ...we already know what they do ...take the cirkewwa caqnu hotel for example - as one very respected engineer said at sannat once you give the developer te green light then its all over for ta cenc
you are also missing the 100 or so bungalows and villas nearly 2km away from present hotel

sorry MWP for once you are on the wrong track - completely

wplf

[robcar]

Wolf you are 100% correct

MWP, I am afraid you are very wrong in your assessment of the situation. As an environmentalist and nature lover you are obviously angry and ed at the carelessness, abandon and filth dispersed throughout the site at ta' cenc.

Yet this type of neglect, however hideous it is, can be reversed relatively easily and the area rehabilitated without significant long term problems. So it is far better to leave things as they are.

If MEPA wants to retain some sort of credibility it should make it very clear to the owner that this and similar projects are simply unacceptable. MEPA should propose the whole area as a Natura 2000 site of scientific interest. This would make such speculative development impossible, now and in the future. If the developer is such a nature lover and so keen on a heritage park he should be very happy to be the proud owner of a protected area

On the other hand bungalows and construction will ruin the aesthetic and ecological (but not speculative) value of the site and cause irreversible harm. Ta cenc will be gone forever