Anna Maria Rosso, Sliema
The price of conserving old town houses
With reference to the controversy about Sliema town houses, please allow me to make public my views as an owner of such a house in Sliema.
I hate the idea of seeing, one day, my family home being pulled down. Besides, I am for conservation, as long as this is justified and reasonable. Having said that, I think that my husband and I should have the liberty of doing as we wish and need with our property, as others did. There are many reasons for having this opinion, some of which are indicated hereunder.
• We invested a lot of our resources in this property thinking, when we were much younger, that we were making a sound investment;
• Sliema was already undergoing a change and with the flow of high-rise buildings on Tower Road and the side streets surrounding us, we were literally "buried". No longer can I keep a flowering plant in my back yard as all direct sunlight has been excluded. The photo on the back page of The Times of July 25 gives some idea of how back yards have been engulfed by high-rise buildings. Our situation is even worse;
• We are now growing older and the house is becoming too large and unpractical for us. I would have thought that the day would come when we could turn our property into flats, not only for our well being, but also to be able to offer a flat each to our two daughters. From the remaining flats we could have had some income in our old age from our "sound" investment in our younger age.
Do Mepa and Astrid Vella of FAA know how much it costs us to maintain these old town houses? A handyman at home would have work all year round. Will we be able to continue keeping them in an adequate state later on in life?
Do Mepa and Ms Vella realise how much the value of these houses has gone down as they cannot be developed like the majority of townhouses in Sliema have been?
Why should we be discriminated against? Isn't it some joke that after the demolition of the best houses and the majority of town houses in Sliema, now Mepa and FAA want to preserve the remaining few? It is a farce. Just look at Windsor Terrace, starting from Gelateria towards Dingli Street, and other streets for that matter, and you will see what a zigzag in heights of buildings there is. Is this a harmonious and pleasant sight? Obviously not! Sliema is no Unesco World Heritage Site and can never be.
If Mepa and FAA want to keep the few town houses that are left in Sliema as "heritage", well I think that the owners should, in some way, be compensated.
After all the damage done to Sliema, the decision taken some years back of maintaining the original façade of an old town house and allowing conversion of the rest was, in my opinion, the best decision.
Now, to add insult to injury, after having had light and sunshine practically eliminated from our houses and after suffering all the consequences that come with construction around you, we are being told that we have to bear the price of "conservation".
Popular Stories
In Discussion
29 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Amanda Mallia
Aug 11th 2008, 21:46
Ivan Vassallo - Playing with words seems to be your forte.
Mrs Rosso has - I believe - applied for a permit to build FLATS, ie with NO commercial space. Should the permit be issued (which would be against the law anyway, since her home falls under the UCA) it would still contribute to further destroying the streetscape.
I trust that that English is plain enough for you to understand without further - ahem - "misinsterpretion".
Ivan Vassallo
Aug 10th 2008, 10:18
Amanda Mallia:
Ah, I see. That's why then: Mrs Anna Maria Rosso's house is going to be turned into a "tattoo parlour", or a "brothel", a "massave parlour" perhaps, or even a "seedy bar" if she's given a permit like her neighbours. But that's not what I would call personal interest; that's an entirely reasonable and altruistic pursuit not to see your neighbourhood overrun by such horrendous establishments making such a respectable part of Sliema a Little Amsterdam. Saving Mrs Rosso from her own folly is vital.
Amanda Mallia
Aug 9th 2008, 21:21
Ivan Vassallo - Is it not clear enough that I do not wish to see more of old Sliema destroyed?
(Apart from the fact that it is becoming too much like another Bugibba, what with the numerous blocks of flats, the odd tattoo parlour, brothels, massage parlours (ditto) in otherwise respectable neighbourhoods, seedy bars and whatnot.)
Ivan Vassallo
Aug 9th 2008, 14:02
Amanda Mallia:
When someone expresses an opinion over an issue, they do not necessarily have a personal interest in the issue. I would never enter an issue without immediately and clearly declaring a personal interest if I had one. As I didn't express a personal interest in this issue, then please rest assured that I have none.
You say that " ..."campaigning" must certainly be due to a personal interest n the matter...". As you say that yourself, do I take it then that you have a personal interest in this issue?
Amanda Mallia
Aug 9th 2008, 12:49
Ivan Vassallo - Your "campaigning" must certainly be due to a personal interest n the matter, so what, may I ask, is it?
It would be far better to channel your energy into abiding by the law, instead of "campaigning" for someone who is saying that it's not fair for the law being the way it is, simply because so many blocks of flats went up before such laws were enacted.
Ivan Vassallo
Aug 8th 2008, 22:32
But you see, Amanda Mallia, telling people what to do with their property is all very easy, except that they tend to see things very differently when they're the ones paying for what you're campaigning for. Reading Mrs Rosso's letter shows her irritation (even though she's very polite) at other people telling her what to do with her property for ephemeral reasons of how lovely they think her house is. And, of course, when something is evidently not fair, people can see it for what it is. Many people in Sliema now talk the way Mrs Rosso does especially when they live on blocks where most buildings are now six storeys or more but they're told they have to keep their buildings as they are for conservation reasons. What's not fair is not fair and people can very easily see that it's not fair to force them not to develop if they happen to be the last people to do so in their area.
People who are campaigning for conservation should really campaign for a fund that compensates people like Mrs Rosso if they're forced not to develop. That's one possible way of compensating for the unfairness she's suffering.
Amanda Mallia
Aug 8th 2008, 21:14
Ivan Vassallo - Mrs Rosso claims that she bought the house 21 years ago,which is when most of the front (backing onto her house) had long been turned into flats; likewise most (if not all) the flats on Windsor Terrace.
She should be mature enough at her age to know that metaphorical "it's not fair - they did it, so why shouldn't I"s and stamping of feet should have no effect in a case like this.
Ivan Vassallo
Aug 8th 2008, 20:54
Astrid Vella:
One should appreciate Mrs Rosso’s letter. She’s not a developer but a Sliema resident who would like to live in a groundfloor and build flats above for her children, as most of her neighbours did before her.
Sliema is less than a century old, which by Maltese standards, is not old at all. High, Ghar il-Lembi and Ghar id-Dud streets might have been built before, but most of the original buildings even in those ‘old’ streets have made way for flats.
As for the pjazzetta, I totally agree that the old façade there should be kept. The problem with the pjazzetta is that apparently (I stand to be corrected on this) it’s private and its owner obtained a permit to build up to six storeys. So, if he builds, that façade won’t be visible any more.
Are the facades on Windsor Terrace baroque? I don’t believe so.
Regarding, empty properties, there are 43,000 and not 70,000. Still a lot, however, even 43,000. But one cannot limit supply – developers’ worst enemy is actually oversupply, ie when they find it difficult to sell. That’s one clear market signal that they should stop. This is not Mrs Rosso’s case, however.
Ivan Vassallo
Aug 8th 2008, 20:33
Amanda Mallia:
Sliema is not old, even if it started as Valletta’s villeggatura (as Bugibba did, incidentally). Most buildings we’re talking about are teens and twenties last century. But even though not old, a lot of them are rotting, as the perfect example you show in the link. If you don’t appreciate Mrs Rosso’s plight, they will just keep rotting.
You tell Mrs Rosso to sell her house and buy a flat. But that’s not what Mrs Rosso wants. In her letter above, she stated quite clearly that, like her neighbours, she want to rebuild her house, keep a groundfloor and give flats above to her children. Her argument is about fairness: most of her neighbours have already done what she would like to do, ‘burying’ her in the process. And, please, you might not see it like that, but you are campaigning against people like Mrs Rosso who are suffering from these campaigns by people who see her house as lovely but who are not paying for the expensive maintenance such buildings need. She's not a developer after money; she's just pleading for fairness. You can do worse than listening to her.
Astrid Vella
Aug 8th 2008, 20:13
Part 2 @ Ivan Vassallo : As for most buildings rotting, this is another myth. Some old buildings are sounder than the recent ones built with materials and techniques which proved unsuitable for Malta, and are already deteriorating.
Many others are only rotting because of the negligence of miserly tenants taking advantage of rent laws and owners hoping that the house would fall and allow demolition. Some supposedly rotting buildings have been restored to their former glory as townhouses, which shows that this claim of 'rotting houses' is not always but often nothing more than a ploy to gain a demolitoin permit.
To see how Sliema’s buildings are rotting, just take a look the former Naval Clinic at the Piazzetta; gutted abusively by its mega-developer owners three weeks after it became obligatory to obtain a PA permit for such works - of course legal steps were not taken against them - the façade still stands, testimony of a beautiful old building that refuses to die.
Astrid Vella
Aug 8th 2008, 20:04
@ Ivan Vassallo: the ‘fact’ that most of Sliema was built after 1910 is a common misconception. Although not as old as some villages, you’d be surprised to see from maps I have copied, how much of Sliema was already built up in the 1850s. This myth of Sliema’s architecture only being recent and worthless has been put out very much to serve the interests of the demolition crews.
Although I was ridiculed by certain Local Councillors with thinly veiled interests when I claimed that Sliema had Baroque buildings, the maps have proven this correct, and a few of them still exist.Still, it is very outdated to consider that valid architecture needs to be ancient architecture.Each period has its own style and merit; we are now at the point of protecting good examples of 60s architecture, so it is not correct to say that ‘most buildings have no architectural value’.They also offer streetscape value which was recognised as early as 1530 but has yet to filter into the brains of our local philistines who can only appreciate demolitions and money, although the two no longer necessarily go together, now that we have over 70,000 empty units.
Part I
Amanda Mallia
Aug 8th 2008, 12:47
Ivan Vassallo - (Contd)
You state that Mrs Rosso's plight is very real. So is that of people like my parents, who have a right to live at peace in their own home, and who are often bombarded with calls/flyers from estate agents, etc pressurizing them to sell up.
There is a solution to Mrs Rosso's "plight", however - She may sell her house and buy a flat with the proceeds. That would kill several birds with one stone, including protecting one of Sliema's better streets from money-grabbing individuals.
Another thing - The MEPA website is public domain, and is thus accessible to all and sundry.
Nobody is campaigning against people "like Mrs Rosso". Believe it or not, people like myself are simply trying to protect what's left of the Sliema that we love. Good thing that MEPA SOMETIMES works correctly, and that this house was not removed from the UCA seemingly to accommodate somebody.
The fact that neighbours' homes have been demolished is also no excuse, but is all the more reason to protect what's left of Windsor Terrace. If you are at all familiar with the area, you'd also know that most of the flats were built pre-MEPA.
Amanda Mallia
Aug 8th 2008, 12:47
Ivan Vassallo - Don't put words into my mouth. I never called anyone "non-descript". Sliema's being turned into a seedy place, what with the various massage parlours, bars, etc occupying the lower floors built as "commercial" space that nobody otherwise wants under these blocks of flats. Yes, some of the occupants of the actual flats are the type usually attracted to that sort of place, turning it into yet another Bugibba.
Sliema is not as old as Valletta, but it grew as an offshoot of Valletta (originally being the summer "home" for many a Valletta family), with an architectural style more-or-less unique to the place.
"Rotting buildings" are still protected by law once they form part of the UCA, as is Mrs Rosso's house. The following is a case in point, and is just across the road from the proposed building site in Milner Street (application number 06269/06):
http://www.mepa.org.mt/sitenoticeimages/05/03067.05.jpg (MEPA application number 03067/05 - See here: http://www.mepa.org.mt/Planning/index.htm?../asps/DC_search_by_arch.htm&1 )
.
(Contd on next comment)
Ivan Vassallo
Aug 7th 2008, 22:17
Amanda Mallia:
What do you propose to do with the "non-descript" people who occupy the "non-descript" blocks of flats that have already gone up in Sliema? Despatch them to the concentration camps? They have as much right to live in Sliema as you do.
Sliema is not an old town. Most of Sliema was built in the 1910s and 1920s, less than a 100 years ago. Most buildings have only slight architectural value, if at all. Many 'old' buildings are unsound and, even though less than a 100 years old, are already rotting.
The plight of people like Mrs Rosso who wrote this letter is very real. They want to rebuild their houses, keep a groundfloor for themselves and give a flat on top of them to their children once they have the opportunity to do so. Listen respectfully to their remarks because all they want is fairness. They're the people who are literally paying for these repetitive campaigns against them while their neighbours have built long ago. Publishing the details of her application here was disrespectful. Wasn't it obvious from her letter that her family applied for a permit? She hid no personal interest.
Amanda Mallia
Aug 7th 2008, 21:42
Ivan Vassallo - In case you were not aware, Sliema IS an old town, with most houses having been standing for over a century. Please stop trying to turn it into another Bugibba - although it is already well on the way there, given the large number of non-descript blocks of flats (not to mention some of the people who occupy them).
Ivan Vassallo
Aug 7th 2008, 21:25
Mrs Rosso, well done for speaking out. A lot of Sliema residents are suffering from this constant campaign that targets Sliema as some kind of old village, which it is obviously not. As you say, these Sliema residents want to rebuild their expensive to maintain houses, give a flat to their sons and daughters, and sell what's left to pay for the rebuilding. But, after everybody else around them has done precisely what they want to do, they find this insistent campaign targeting them as 'developers', even publishing details and photos of their property in the press as if they were robbing someone and not just asking to do what their neighbours have done before them. Well done for speaking out and do not let yourself be shouted down.
Amanda Mallia
Aug 6th 2008, 23:02
Anna Maria Rosso - I apologise, and in fact stated that I may have been wrong.
You said that you bought the house 21 years ago. As far as I know, MEPA did not exist in those days.
Twenty-one years ago is just a few years after the destruction of Sliema began, when people like myself, born and brought up in Sliema, were sad to see the Sliema that once was had started to change - Lovely old houses (where most people more-or-less knew each other, incidentally) were being torn down to be replaced by anonymous, non-descript blocks.
Unfortunately too, the owners of such houses were also responsible for such destruction.
It is too late to save all the lovely houses that have since gone, but well done to MEPA for trying to save at least the houses left in Windsor Terrace. Unfortunately, MEPA has not done enough to prevent the demolition of the Milner Street / Howard Street group of houses.
Another thing, Mrs Rosso - Haven't you ever considered selling your house AS A HOUSE (as opposed to a site)? There's more of a market for them than there is for flats. Try asking any estate agent!
Amanda Mallia
Aug 6th 2008, 22:46
Mark Tanti - You have stated that neither do you own or ever will own any property in Sliema. Any connection with the Mark Tanti of Tanti's Coffee Shop in Howard Street, however (right across the road from the site in the link below)? - Just wondering, seriously, because it would be fatuous for you to make such a statemen if that is the case..
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080724/local/asds
As for your stating that "This process cannot be stopped and that no one should try to stop
other property owners from doing the same as have other hundreds of Sliema
residents done before", that certainly is no way to reason.
If hundreds of people jump off a cliff, would you follow suit, just to keep up with the Joneses? I doubt it. Neither would it be the right thing to do. At least MEPA had the mechanism to stop the destruction of yet another lovely row of houses. We should be thankful for that. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the Milner Street / Howard Street lot of houses.
Astrid Vella
Aug 6th 2008, 12:37
Mrs Rosso,there are still areas of Sliema which are virtually untouched and, like it or not, they form part of Sliema’s heritage. While I have often called for state assistance to property owners (a fact you have not commented on) it is MEPA who has ordained that they should be preserved, as reflected in the Local Plans. Much as I feel for your being 'buried' by development through short-sighted town planning, two wrongs don't make a right and your now wanting to inflict the same on your neighbours is simply not acceptable.
What many like Ms Rosso cannot understand, is that even owners of private property are not above the law, embodied in the Local Plans. Claiming discrimination because, like others before her, you are being refused an application to build five floors in a two-floor area is hardly credible. I'm sure you know that many in your street have been refused the same development all the way through Reconsideration and Appeal. If you were to be granted it, would that not be the biggest discrimination of them all?
Anna Maria Rosso
Aug 6th 2008, 10:24
To those who feel that what is left in certain streets of Sliema should be preserved: Fine! But why should we pay for it after having been "buried" by development?
To Mr. Steve Rogers
No, I live in Sliema and yes, I have my Gozo address on my ID Card. Simply to beat the discriminating Gozo Ferry fares against the Malta permanent residents. Wake up Mr. Rogers please!
To Ms Amanda Mallia.
No way! We bought the house well over 21 years ago. It's obvious that you did not believe what I wrote. It's not in my style to lie. Please check your facts before slinging mud and at the same time asking forgiveness. And yes, of course, we did apply to develop our property. What's wrong with that? What have you discovered?
Albet Ellul
Aug 5th 2008, 22:36
The same thing is happening in Zurrieq, old (50 year old) houses being destroyed together with their beautiful back gardens and turning them nto glorified slums. I appeal to mepa to review this situation as soon aspossible, othrrwise ina few years time we will have a very beautiful village core surrounded by 4 storey flats/appartments (concrete jungle)with no back gardens anywhere. No oxygene, no life. Qrendi is going through the same thing and looking from one place in Zurrieq, the Qrendi church is already hidden by such a concrete jungle dressed in graffiato. Wake up MEPA. Save our villages.
mark tanti
Aug 5th 2008, 19:54
Well said Ms Rosso, This the best reply that could be given to A.Vella.
A reply coming from a Sliema resident who suffered for so long from the
decision taken by other residents in the past and who most of them are now
pretending that who today own a town house should restore it spending
thousands of euros for him to enjoy.
This process cannot be stopped and that no one should try to stop
other property owners from doing the same as have other hundreds of Sliema
residents done before because as Ms Rosso said this will be discrimination.
What I could suggest to A.Vella is that she can buy this property and restore
it at her expenses.
I would like to point out that I am not a Sliema resident who own or will
ever own any property in Sliema. Neither am I a involved in the building
industry.
Amanda Mallia
Aug 5th 2008, 16:57
Steve Rogers - If my previous comment is put online by The Times, then you'll see that you DID hit the nail on the head, or so it seems.
Click here and see application number 06113/07 on the MEPA website:
http://www.mepa.org.mt/Planning/index.htm?../asps/DC_search_by_arch.htm&1
But then again, you probably knew that anyway.
Well done, MEPA! I mean it.
Saying that Sliema has been destroyed is no excuse for further destruction. We need to preserve the little bit that is left of "old" Sliema that is worth preserving. Windsor Terrace - as Milner Street - falls into that category.
Mrs Rosso - Was it not recently that you bought the house in question? If I am wrong, then do please forgive me.
Amanda Mallia
Aug 5th 2008, 16:15
Extract from MEPA website:
Case Number 06113/07
Location of development 52 Triq Windsor Sliema
Description of works To demolish existing building, retain main facade and construct basement parking, 4 apartments and 1 penthouse
Applicant MR DANNY ROSSO
Reception date Thursday, October 04, 2007
Validation Date Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Target Date Saturday, September 27, 2008
Application Type Outline development permission
Case Category URBAN CONSERVATION AREA
Date Publshd in Newspapers Saturday, October 27, 2007
Representation Expiry Date Sunday, November 11, 2007
Case Officer George Delmar
DPA Report Cleared date Friday, June 06, 2008
DPA Report Endorsed By David Mallia
Recommended Decision REFUSE PERMISSION
DPA Report sent date Thursday, June 12, 2008
DPA Submissions recvd date Wednesday, July 16, 2008
http://www.mepa.org.mt/Planning/index.htm?../asps/DC_search_by_arch.htm&1
Wll done, MEPA - And no, I am not being sarcastic, as you could see from here:
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080724/local/asds
Steve Rogers
Aug 5th 2008, 16:01
@Anna Maria Rosso - Don't you live in Xaghra Gozo? So why the big fuss about Sliema, unless you are another developer whose been bitten by MEPA or living in Sliema but taking advantage of the abusive hole in the system that allows people to use the Gozo Ferry with reduced rates. Having it good at both ends?
Astrid Vella
Aug 5th 2008, 15:20
No2 - While we understand MsRosso's predicament at being engulfed with no light and air,Ms.Rosso is now proposing to inflict the same on her neighbours, which we shall not be speaking up against if it is in line with the Local Plans.
What many cannot understand is that even owners of private property are not above the law,embodied in the Local Plans.The law has to take into account the interests of the public, and Ms.Rosso’s plight shows that they offer little enough protection,is she advocating ditching even the little regulation that exists in favour of total anarchy?
While there is a lot of talk of the rights of property owners,there is never,ever,talk of the rights of residents to enjoy a minimum quality of life. This is being completely destroyed in cases like SirArturoMercieca Street, where 125 houses can be replaced by 1,250 flats – with no thought of the impossibility of supplying water,electricity and drains, not to mention the exhaust fumes of 2,000 cars in a narrow, one-way canyon.
Re compensation,FAA is the only NGO calling for financial help to owners of scheduled properties and immediate activation of the Heritage Fund,planned in 1990 but never activated.
Astrid Vella
Aug 5th 2008, 14:59
We understand MsRosso’s situation but it is too easy to say "Sliema has been destroyed” as there are areas of Sliema which were still virtually untouched until the recent Local Plans, and, like it or not, are part of Sliema’s heritage.
Ms. Rosso is mistaken in thinking that FAA objects to any redevelopment of Sliema houses –hundreds are submitted annually but we only speak up about few really damaging ones.These are cases where development goes against MEPA regulations which are already generous enough as the 6-floor height ‘limitations’ within the Sliema Urban Conservation Area are already much higher than all other towns and villages.
MEPA’s regulations also allow re-construction as long as facades are kept and we have only argued against that in two cases which involved scheduled properties such as the untouched row in Windsor Terrace, which had been indicated as scheduled until the present application surfaced. All we asked for in the case of the Baroque house and the Milner Street houses,was that facades should be preserved as was imposed in nearby sites.Ms.Rosso complains of discrimination which also applies to the injustice of some applicants being granted permits while others are refused for the same thing.
E Serracino Inglott
Aug 5th 2008, 12:16
I am sorry Ms Rosso, I totally disagree with you. That the authorities came to their senses too late does not mean that everything can thus be destroyed at will by the owners of townhouses. A person living in an old house has a responsibility towards it. In my opinion, destroying it just because everyone else around you has done so is not taking that responsibility. Secondly, there were 52,000 empty housing units at the time of the last census, building more units is totally useless. Investments should be made in upgrading existing dwellings. I understand that this does not solve Ms Rosso's problem but just pulling down old houses or getting money to compensate you for not being able to add to the problem... Sorry it just doesn't add up!
Franco Farrugia
Aug 5th 2008, 09:27
While I don't like Sliema houses to be destroyed, to have those horrible, modern apartment blocks mushrooming, I sympathise with Ms Rosso. She's right.
As far as I am concerned, Sliema has already been destroyed.