Government responds to GSD criticism of Eastside marina project

The Government of Gibraltar has rejected the GSD’s criticism of the Eastside Project, describing it as inconsistent given the party’s own record in office.

In a statement, the government said the GSD had previously promoted the “Sovereign Bay” scheme, which included a larger marina and a long sea arm at Catalan Bay without consideration for environmental impact. By contrast, it said, the current Eastside Project has been subject to environmental assessments upheld by the European Union and is progressing transparently under the oversight of the Development and Planning Commission (DPC).

According to the statement, the marina arm was reviewed by the DPC after site visits and the placement of a physical marker, with approval granted subject to conditions. These require parts of the sea wall to be replaced with low-level rock revetments to reduce visibility and create new habitats for marine life. The government said this would also improve coastal resilience.

Concerns about sand movement at Catalan Bay have also been addressed, with the developer required to replenish sand from approved sources until natural balance is restored. The government contrasted this with a 2011 exercise carried out under the GSD which, it said, involved dredging and caused prolonged disruption.

The government said the marina is essential to the viability of removing the rubble mountain and regenerating the Eastside area, adding that opposing it would prolong the site’s long-standing problems.

It confirmed that the Department of the Environment is monitoring the works to ensure compliance with environmental standards.

The project, the government said, will deliver a number of benefits, including a new garden and landscaped public spaces, improved access to Catalan Bay while preserving its character, energy efficiency and renewable energy measures and new social and recreational facilities.

The government said the development will remove an eyesore, enhance Gibraltar’s coastline and provide long-term social and economic benefits, contrasting this with what it described as the GSD’s “failed and environmentally careless proposals of the past.”