Michael Briguglio, AD local councillor, Sliema
No development brief for Villa Bonici
I refer to the news article NGOs Insist Large Sliema Garden Should Be Protected (May 9). It is very positive that various NGOs, including Flimkien Għal Ambjent Aħjar, BirdLife Malta, Friends of the Earth, Greenhouse, NatureTrust, the Ramblers Association, Żminijietna Voice of the Left and Sliema Residents' Association are objecting to the proposed development of about 23 blocks of apartments, some rising as high as 12 floors, in one of Sliema's last remaining green lungs.
Both Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party and the Sliema local council have respectively written to Mepa to object to the proposed development at Villa Bonici (PA 6239/08). According to Sliema's local plan, development in the Villa Bonici area requires a development brief. This does not yet exist. So why has Mepa not immediately refused the proposed development?
Popular Stories
In Discussion
3 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
clare spiteri
May 15th 2009, 19:42
Dear prime minister and who ever is responsible this is a loud and clear message from many people living in Sliema. WE do not want any more developments. We are choking with dust, fumes and you are ruining the lives of many of us.Please stop giving permits.for further buildings. Most of the dwellings are empty. Consider the residents.For the love of God stop this madness.
Joe Morana
May 15th 2009, 13:51
Can MEPA be trusted???
MEPA knows very well that Sliema is overdeveloped.Y et it continues to defy sensible town planning logic and continues to authorise further development projects well aware that such development will precipitate Sliema's already precarious traffic problems, including air and traffic noise pollution.
Adrian Gatt
May 15th 2009, 11:54
When comparing the Local Plan ratified in 2006 and the previous Draft Local Plan, one notices that for some reason all the gardens of Villa Bonici have been excluded from the UCA while the Villa’s major building still remains within the UCA. This change was effected without any public consultation whatsoever, in contravention of the DPA and the Aarhus Convention, so the UCA conditions should still apply. To make matters worse, the once designated UCA area has now been classified under ‘Institutional buildings or other sites with no Specified Building Height NHSE04’. This clause does not bind the developer to a set height thus this development can easily rise beyond the requested heights, as happened with other sites, going strongly against the recommendations of the same Local Plan.