Residents of Swieqi gathered on Saturday morning to voice their opposition to a proposed pedestrian footbridge along Triq Sant’ Andrija, arguing that the project fails to address the community’s actual needs.
The protest brought together locals who insisted that their concerns must be taken seriously, particularly when decisions directly affect their daily lives. The demonstration was organised by the Swieqi Local Council, which urged residents to stand united in calling for solutions that genuinely serve the area.
Momentum Chairperson Arnold Cassola also weighed in on the issue, describing the planned structure as a “monstrous, useless, four-storey pedestrian bridge” in a post shared on social media.
While residents and the council reiterated their support for measures that improve pedestrian safety and connectivity, they stressed that the current proposal misses the mark. According to those present, the crossing is not being planned in the location where it is most needed, raising doubts about its effectiveness.
Central to the controversy is planning application PA 1595/26, which proposes a link between Swieqi and Pembroke. The local council has already flagged concerns over the process leading up to the application, noting that Infrastructure Malta failed to consult it prior to submission, despite being obliged to do so.
Opposition to the project has been significant, with more than 200 objections already filed. Among the key issues raised is the fact that part of the proposed site lies within an Outside Development Zone (ODZ). Residents argue that approving the project could set a troubling precedent, potentially opening the door to further encroachment on protected land.
Financial concerns have also been highlighted, with the council describing the projected cost of the footbridge as disproportionately high for what it would deliver.
As an alternative, the council has proposed the construction of a pedestrian underpass. It argues that such a solution would minimise visual impact, reduce long-term maintenance costs, and allow for safer crossing infrastructure to be placed in a more practical and frequently used location.
Residents insist that their opposition is not to improved infrastructure, but to what they see as poor planning and misplaced priorities.
