Thursday, 5th November 2009 - 07:35CET

Association objects to Forestals development

The Sliema Residents' Association has objected to applications submitted to Mepa for the demolition of premises at Forestals and adjacent buildings and their substitution with commercial and residential buildings and garages.

"This site is the last remaining area with access to the sea front which has not risen to eight floors (plus semi-basement and penthouse) like the rest of the coastal area from Gzira, all the way around the whole of Sliema up to St Julians. This gap in this high rise cordon gives some breathing space to the residents living within this barrier, allowing fresh wind to clear the inner town areas from the stifling summer heat and in turn lowering the day and night time temperatures," the association said.

"Raising this last part of low rise buildings will choke the Villa Bonici area which, if preserved, can serve as the last open space within Sliema to serve residents for recreational purposes. This open space also provides vistas for the people living in the Savoy area."

The association said Sliema already had a high dwelling density.

"While the Local Plan policies aim at improving localities, MEPA's recent approval of more mega-projects has done just the opposite," the association complained.

It said an Environmental Impact Assessment should be carried out for such a development in an already congested area, taking into account the new housing units that have been built in all of Sliema and Gzira, together with the other mega projects, namely Tigne Point, Fort Cambridge, Town Square, Piazzetta, Manoel Island, Galaxy Complex, Savoy Gardens and the Metropolis complex, that are either built or are in the planning stage.

A Social Impact Assessment based on comprehensive surveys and sociological analysis through proper public consultation should form an essential part of this EIA, the association said.

Previous article • 20 NGOs call for wider action against animal cruelty
Next article • Press digest

Article © Allied Newspapers Ltd., printed on Saturday, November 21, 2009. This article is for personal use only, and should not be distributed.

Comments

Pat camilleri (2 weeks ago)

We want a moritorium on development in Sliema. These selfish people are making other people,s lives a misery.Dr Gonzi will you please help the people who put you in power.No more buildings. Just tidy up what there is left. The town has already been destroyed by greed .

Sarah Camilleri (2 weeks ago)

The point is that Sliema is over-built and the road network is hopelessly inadequate - let's face it, the narrow streets and roads were never designed for such a large volume of residents.

There are only three or four roads leading out of Sliema and all are almost constantly congested. It's dangerous to continue increasing Sliema's population. without improving the infrastructure. Time to draw a line and stop issuing permits for apartments, no matter where they are or who they belong to. Full stop.

Stephen Borg Cardona (2 weeks ago)

Its not fair penalizing these people just for being the last ones to develop their property.

Mike Spiteri (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

The Sliema Residents Association ought to appreciate that Sliema is an exciting, developing vibrant place to live and that not all Sliema residents share their luddite views. Many hundreds of people love living in these efficient modern bright, new appartment blocks.

Very soon, Sliema will be the most exciting city in Malta and this will not be stopped by this NIMBY behaviour.

adrian gatt (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

OK then, lets take a more practical example. Everyone is familiar with Paceville, a once small quaint town where residents lived in near paradise. So because it seemed natural to build over every corner, we now have got paceville as it is now, a haven for party goers and what would one say for the residents? If they do not like it they can move away and find a new home? And for those who never had a chance of leaving Paceville? they have to live in perpetual hell for as long as they live. So is that fair? Residential areas are for residents and not for money making. the same thing with sliema, apart from the commercial aspect which is situated in 2 or 3 hot spots, within the built bastions of 10 floor apartments all around, 1000s of residents LIVE in sliema. And mind you, 25% of all the dwellings in sliema are vacant, so why do we need to increase the residential units? Does this make logical (not monetary) sense?

Peter Gatt (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

Over development in Sliema is not just affecting Sliema resident but also neighbouring towns. 9400 residents’ cars plus visitors’ don’t fly but drive tru S. Julians, Gzira, Msida etc every day.
Remember the Sliema residential parking issue? Readers from all over Malta expressed strong disapproval further showing the impact of unsustainable development in any part of Malta on the whole nation.

Apparently, those stating SRA as NIBY have some financial gains from such developments to the detriment of others.

Re SLC as being ‘only this authority which has the power to say anything on behalf of the Sliema residents’, using the same argument, then sack all opposition MP’s from parliament, exile AD members and ban pressure groups, as the party in power “has the power to say anything on behalf of the“ Malta residents. !!!

Anthony Pace Gouder (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

IF THE NORTH HARBOURS LOCAL PLAN STATES CLEARLY THAT SLIEMA IS OVERBUILT.OVERPOPULATED ETC. ETC.
THEN HOW COME WE FIND DEVELOPERS UNSCRUPULOUSLY AND SHAMELESSLY DEMANDING FOR A "MAKE-OVER"....?????. OF THEIR PRACTICALLY FINISHED PROJECT. ADDIO EIAS AND ALL ! THIS IF APPROVED ,WILL RESULT IN A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS (FLATS / APARTMENTS /CONDOMS) OF THEIR MEGA PROJECT.
WHAT THE HELL IS MEPA DOING ? BY IGNORING ITS OWN SURVEYS -STUDIES , IS THIS NOT A WASTE OF MONEY AND TIME ON ITS STAFF & CONSULTANTS ?
WE WERE PROMISED A REFORMED AND A CREDIBLE MEPA , BUT IN REALITY ITS GOING FROM BAD TO WORST !
MEANWHILE THE GLUT OF EMPTY PROPERTIES INCREASES. ..... TO SUCH AN EXTENT THAT IN SLIEMA - ST.JULIANS WE HAVE LOST COUNT .

patrick mifsud (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

here we go again!!! sliema residents objecting development. it seems that someone's view is going to be obstructed by this development. no one objected when the houses in tower road were pulled down to make space for high blocks of flats but now they want to object. give us a break, you object for everything but we know the reason why you are objecting.

well said mr.portelli. i am totally with you.

joe Morana (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

Malta is oneof the most densely populated countries in the world and the most in Europe. Malta has also one of the highest number of cars per capita (circa 725 cars per 1000 persons) making Malta also one of the most car congested countries in the world. The Sliema population is circa 13000 with an estimated 9400 cars in1/3 km sq apart from visitors' cars.
Official reports state that air poillution in Sliema exceeds EU safety levels. ADT reports state that the Sliema raods infrastructure is overleoad. The NHLP aknowledges that Sliema is overdeveloped.
Yet regretabbly some readers prefer to ignore these realities in favour of unsustainabel development to teh detrimentof Sliema residnets' helath and quality of life .
So much for good sense and sensibility. These readers might as well revert the question and look at their mirrors and problably they will discover a NIMBY albeit of a different selfish nature.

Anthony Pace Gouder (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

Mentioning Villa Bonnici as the last remaining OPEN SPACE ideal as a public garden , I would totally support this idea and perhaps this could also include some SPORT FACILITIES , to-day completely missing in Sliema, such as Tennis Courts ,a 5 a-side football pitch etc. etc .This would be an OASIS away from the hustle and bustle of the immediate neighbourhood .

Here I ask .....When will this MANIA of continuing building all these dull ,depressing apartment BLOCKS stop ? These FRONT-LINE high rise blocks, especially as in Balluta valley , now were even allowed 5 EXTRA storeys thus screening/blocking off the picturesque perspective of the hillside or the townscape at the back .

A stop to all this may-be wishful thinking , but MEPA and THE SLIEMA LOCAL COUNCIL can be instrumental with their authority and sanction ANY internal core development .

Regretfully , I heard that the WHOLE AREA (Villa Bonnici and garden) is PLANNED to be developed (????) into a HIGH DENSITY APARTMENT PROJECT ! Maybe plans have already been submitted .

L Micallef Capello (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

M Portelli you hit the nail on its head.....

Forestals should be given the permit in my opinion, after all the beside owners were give the permit.

Roderick Cutajar (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

What a lame excuse! Coming up with something like, the site shouldn't be developed so as to "allow fresh wind to clear the inner town areas from the stifling summer heat." It's too late now, you can't discriminize against one developer when, like you said, the rest of the coast has been developed. You expect the Forestals owners to be your samaritan. I say pull down the ghastly Forestals buildings, its taking too much prime space, and replace it with something architecturally pleasing.

a attard (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

Mepa and all those concerned need to do something urgent re lack of open green spaces in the North harbour area (I would guess the South harbour area too). Too many high buildings and such an influx of vehicles would make any place unhealthy and unpleasant to live in, no university degree needed to notice what these towns are turning into!. Some kind of parks are needed badly especially in the inner areas off the coast to improve the quality of life.

J Farrugia (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

I am a sliema resident so please ignore what the Sliema residents association is saying. Who gave this association, authority to speak on behalf of ALL sliema residents? We dont care what this NIMBY association is saying, there is the Local Council which is the governing organ and it is only this authority which has the power to say anything on behalf of the Sliema residents and no one else must usurp this authority. Forestals has every right to demolish its property according to law and to rebuild it as is approved by MEPA.
And no MR X or MRS Y should interfere in this process unless they are directly its neighbours.

adrian gatt (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

That is why MEPA and all developed countries have local plans so as to plan a town sensibly. If any of you bother to take a glimpse at the North Harbours Local Plan written by MEPA itself, one finds that Sliema is overbuilt, overpopulated, cannot sustain any more development, infrastructure cant cope with excess in demand, it badly lacks open space etc etc etc while pollution levels have exceeded acceptable levels .All this suggests that the few remaining spaces should be kept for the general public because residential areas require open space. Does one have to catch a car to take his kids to a recreational area.

This is not a nimby case but a case where residents can live in their own homes safely with a well designed town around them. Go to mepa website and look for North Harbours Local Plan, read it and then comment!!!!

N.Calleja (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

I do not support the SRA on this issue. Did they ever realise that the area in question is in a crumbling state and no maintenance would improve the situation. The whole area needs re-building ,no more no less!

Jane Clare (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

For those who are interested to learn more of the Forestals re-development, there is info available on the SRA website www.sra.org.mt.

The accusation that this is a case of NIMBY (Not In My BackYard) is easily made and just as easily countered; the poor air quality and severe traffic/parking problems of Sliema are already officially documented and acknowledged. Why should existing householders suffer further distress for the profit of a few? Is not the point of (a) Government and (b) MEPA to adjudicate such requests for development permission in the BEST INTERESTS OF THE MAJORITY in accordance with established and agreed policies?

If only MEPA followed its own guidance, all would be well.

The need to renovate this area is not in dispute. The question is how it is renovated. It should in the name of MEPA and Riforma be done in a "Sustainable" manner. How are 1000s extra people and 100s of extra cars going to fit into the area around Forestals without causing more traffic jams, more pollution and more crowding?

The owners may do better to offer other development options than more of the same - cramped, hot flats with just a glimmer of the sea!

AJ Anastasi (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

I would like to ask any of the objectors, the following question.

“Would you, personally object to such development if the Forestal’s site was your property or had a share in it, if the opportunity arises that this site could be developed to its maximum potential and hence the reward?”

Appreciate an honest reply, please.

Thanks.

AJA.

M Portelli (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

What a cheek! Is one suggesting that owners of prime site seafront properties should be penalised so as owners of inland properties may benefit. I am sure that none of The Sliema Residents’ Association members are prepared to give up any of their seafront properties to accommodate the chap behind them.

John Aquilina (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

... typical complaints from people who want sea-front views when paying back-street prices!

T.Caruana (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

This is the result of a goverment that the majority of Sliema residents voted for.

Albert Bezzina (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

Victor Vella, did you submit your ground breaking suggestion to MITC as a valuable contribution to the public consultation of the Air Quality Plan document?

victor vella (2 weeks, 2 days ago)

There is a whiff of NIMBY about this.Want open air?move to the villages.

Association objects to Forestals development

Comments

Poll

Fun Stuff

	17 °C
Mostly Cloudy Feels like: 15.6°C UV Index: 3