Easing parking pressures in Tigné

Referring to someone who wrote in favour of the Qui-si-Sana car park, Alison Mallia (December 20, 2005) argued that "he can't be bothered to use public transport to accommodate his needs regardless of the effect this would have on the residents and on the surrounding environment".

No one would dispute that more people should be encouraged to use public transport to come to Sliema. This, however, can only be part of the solution. There needs to be a culture change in favour of greater use of public transport, something that cannot happen overnight. More importantly there need to be more direct services to Sliema from major urban areas such as Paola, Birkirkara and Mosta.

The real issue is not whether or not people from other localities should use the bus to go to Sliema. The real issue is whether the objectors are justified in their objections to the car park. I think this small group of objectors have grossly overstated their case.

Objectors' letters are packed with generalisations and extrapolations in an attempt to depict a doomsday scenario if the car park were to be built.

They argue that their health will be compromised because of pollution from the car park. This argument makes no sense because the underground car park will be at some distance from the nearest apartments (and even further from the bulk of residences in the Qui-si-Sana side streets). If they are not convinced, they could always insist that the eventual car park should have an extraction system which directs polluted air towards the sea and away from their homes.

They also argue that significant traffic congestion will result because of queuing of cars to enter the car park. I find it difficult to believe that the car park will cause traffic congestion but if there are indications that this could happen, it can always be resolved through the design of the junction. A lay-by for waiting cars can be provided to avoid disrupting the traffic flows.

Let us, for argument's sake, assume that the objectors are right when they claim that there will be queuing at the entrance to the car park. This will mean that the car park is well used and that therefore it is providing a much-needed service to visitors to Sliema. If this were to happen, it would contradict the objectors' own statements when they say there is no need for the car park.

Arguments based on the loss of open space and the "creation of a concrete jungle" is nothing but deception because all the development will be underground and the garden is to be reinstated over the car park.

Like it or not, there are many people who wish to go to Sliema for the promenade, cafés, restaurants and so on. With improvements that will be carried out, including along the Tigné peninsula, it is likely that more people will want to go to the area. Because of difficulties residents face to find parking, the introduction of resident parking zones is being planned.

Inevitably this will reduce parking availability for visitors and for workers. Problems of parking for visitors to Sliema is likely to be further compounded with major developments such as MIDI.

Although these developments will provide parking, the chances are that they will put increased pressures on the supply of parking spaces in the area.

In this scenario, it would be unwise to discard the possibility of having an underground car park under the Qui-si-Sana gardens.

The more the objectors use emotive arguments rather than reasoned ones; the more they regurgitate the same letters to the editor, the more they convince people that they are in the wrong.