Gianpula’s illegalities sanctioning on hold as noise pollution questions remain

The Planning Authority has postponed a decision on whether to sanction the massive illegal expansion of Gianpula Village, in the limits of Żebbuġ, after some board members raised fresh concerns over noise pollution, which can still be heard almost daily during the summer months from various surrounding localities.

The application, filed by Roger De Giorgio –  the co-owner of MaltaToday – seeks to regularise decades of massive illegal entertainment facilities spread across some 33,350 square metres of agricultural land outside the development zone (ODZ) in Żebbuġ.

Planning officials had recommended approval against the payment of a €50,000 sanctioning fine despite strong objections from the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA).

However, during Thursday’s Planning Board meeting, members stopped short of endorsing the recommendation, requesting further clarification from the case officer and the applicant on the site’s noise impacts and the related studies.

The deferral means that De Giorgio’s latest attempt to regularise what has grown from a rural farmhouse into one of Malta’s largest entertainment venues remains on hold.

The case, first filed in 2016, concerns a substantial sanctioning request covering bars, kitchens, swimming pools, ticket booths, entertainment areas, seating areas, kiosks, sanitary facilities, staircases, extensive paving, planters and other structures that have accumulated over decades as Gianpula evolved into one of Malta’s busiest nightlife destinations.

Roger De Giorgio has longstanding political and media connections. A former Nationalist Party official, he is also the co-owner of MediaToday, the publisher of MaltaToday and Illum, through his family company, Elvaston Ltd, alongside publisher Saviour Balzan.

His relationship with the Nationalist Party soured towards the end of the PN administration.

Despite the extensive illegalities, the Planning Directorate concluded that, because Gianpula has operated for many years under police and trading licences, and because the proposed interventions are ancillary to an existing entertainment use, the illegal development could be sanctioned in return for the administrative fine.

That recommendation, however, runs directly counter to the position adopted by the ERA.

In its submission, the environmental regulator warned that the incremental expansion of Gianpula had resulted in “significant environmental impacts”, excessive land take-up, hard landscaping, light and noise pollution, and the continued intensification of commercial activity in a protected rural area.

ERA also issued a broader warning against rewarding developers who build first and seek permits later.

“The malpractice of first developing a site irrespective of its ODZ status and subsequently expecting the regulatory authorities to retroactively rubber-stamp a ‘fait accompli’ is objectionable in principle,” the authority stated while recommending the outright refusal of the application.

The Superintendence of Cultural Heritage also found that unauthorised interventions had caused irreversible damage to the site’s historic farmhouse and the underlying catacombs, while the Planning Authority’s own transport consultants initially described traffic generated by Gianpula as “chaotic and hazardous” before later accepting mitigation measures proposed by the applicant.