Villa Bonici rehabilitation proposals presented to MPs
The Sliema Residents Association has presented MPs from the 10th electoral district with conceptual proposals for the rehabilitation of Villa Bonici, its gardens and the environs. This report includes suggested changes in the local plan and a proposal for a state-owned home for the Sliema elderly.
The SRA committee briefly explained its main concepts and proposals and solicited the MPs for their intervention and support regarding the Villa Bonici controversy.
SRA said in a statement MPs seemed disposed to look further into the matter and looked forward to eventual subsequent meetings.
It reiterated that contrary to reports and comments which appeared in the press in the past two weeks, its concerns and proposals regarding the Villa Bonici area were submitted in the "public interest", within the holistic context of the continued unsustainable overdevelopment of Sliema, which was detrimental to residents’ health and quality of life.
32 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Astrid Vella
Mar 19th 2010, 21:46
I see I have been dragged into things again. No dear Colin Stanley, I have to admit, I didn't "complain when they dropped the house down to build flats, and nor did I buy one" The fact that I was four years old might have had something to do with it.
P Zammit, your outburst is so over the top that it's funny! And the funniest thing is that I heard that, far from SRA lobbying in favour of residents' parking, Sliema Local Council were miffed because SRA did not support their residents' parking initiative!
P.Zammit
Mar 19th 2010, 22:41
Astrid Vella
Looked up some history - guess what you're correct. They did not agree with it on its proposed form - instead they proposed to reduce the traffic influx into Sliema. Seems my hunch was cirrect then - they're propsing who and what passes through Sliema.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090804/local/residents-association-slams-sliema-parking-scheme
Thank you Ms. Vella for correcting me - I got one wrong - you got 3 wrong about Lou Bondi's programme, and you called Lou petty.
adrian gatt
Mar 19th 2010, 21:46
Sliema has been declared by MEPA (north harbours local plan)as overdeveloped for more than a decade and it clearly states that Sliema cannot take further development. It also states that 25% of property is vacant, and TM(ADT) states that the roads cannot take more traffic. These facts have been stated years ago. Also from MEPA's air monitoring stations Sliema is well above EU stated pollution limits when it comes to Benzene and NOx. PM10 is not measured in Sliema but the closest station in Msida does not show good results. NOW THESE ARE SOME OF THE FACTS.
For the un-knowledgable, NOx and PM10 cause lung associated diseases especially for young children, while benzene causes cancer. Roads are gridlocked for long periods during the day, water hardly reaches the roof tanks and drainage spills in the sea every now and again.
Facts showing clearly well that Sliema is past its development limit. MIDI, fort cambridge and galaxy complex still havent started increasing influx of residents, workers, tourists and clients.
Two new projects (Townsquare&villa-bonici) will increase population by about 10% in Sliema. What would you suggest then?
Joe Morana
Mar 19th 2010, 19:32
Apparently some readers still beleive that Malta is still a fiefdom and not a sovereign republican state member of the European Union, whereby the EU gives the most paramount importance to the fundamental rights of citizens and society for a healthy and sustainable living environment. Presently these fundamental rights of individual citizens and the Sliema community in general for a healthy and sustianable living envrironment are being denied to the Sliema community. Facts (as supported by the refered to official reports ) speak louder than empty rethoric .
MBorg
Mar 19th 2010, 18:49
I take it that Mr Morena lives in a nice old house and not in one of the many blocks of flats that ruined Sliema and gave it its bad air quality ! As for the Malta Air Quality and Transport Authority reports ,we all know that most of the traffic making use of Sliema roads does not belong to Sliema residents but to outsiders who come to Sliema to work , play, shop, visit etc. Putting a stop to new development does not mean less traffic. The situation will just remain the same. No organization should have the right to ask the government to take over private property. The rights of property owners should be protected. @ P Zammit I am afraid you are not up to date in things that concern Sliema. What gave you the impression that we have residents parking ? We asked for it but we are still waiting for it. So you can walk to your heart's content on all of our roads not just the on the Sliema front and make use of all the benches we would never dream of stopping you even if we do get our residnts parking
Joe Morana
Mar 19th 2010, 16:35
From the comments posted hereunder apparently some readers still bilieve that property owners/developers have a 'divine right' to manage their property at whatever the 'cost' to third parties, be it residents and/or residents as property owners.
Are some readers really advocating that the fundamental right of a citizens to private property override and therfore 'violates' the other fundmantal rights of other citizens and the community in general, to a healthy and sustainable living environment ?
May I again invite readers to refer to the Northern Harbours Local Plan (2006)which makes pertinent references regarding Sliema's overdevelopment ; to MEPA's air quality motoring data (see last updates ); the Malta Air Quality Plan and the Trasport Autority' reports (supported by privately commisiison traffic flow/management reports) and assertions that the Sliema roads infrastructure is not adequate to meet present needs much less future demands.
Readers are kindly invited to visit www.sra.org.mt for a more comprehensive understading about this matter.
C.Attard
Mar 19th 2010, 18:25
Morana All Malta is over developed. Shall we start exporting couples to Australia to accomodate the SRA brigade? What's your point? Shall we stop development in all Malta because of pollution? Nobody is saying to build over some unbuilt field but not to put your nose in other peoples' property. What are you waiting for to donate your property for the good of Sliema and go live somewhere else? You are now being ridiculous with your points. Mepa will agree that ALL Malta is overdeveloped. Therefore the best way to go is building condominiums and not one family large Villas. What are you suggesting that we spread over onto ghar id-dud and fond ghadir and build there instead. Stop quoting MEPA where it serves you only. Any court would take everything into consideration and not just a one liner kneeded at pleasure.
c.camilleri
Mar 19th 2010, 16:10
I find it total unacceptable on the part of certain people dictating what to do with other people's property. Their arrogance knows no limit. We had a taste of this in the past and once a precedent is set there is no limit . Besides do these members of this Association know that our Constitution and European laws uphold the rights of individual to their properties. What next now.
P.Zammit
Mar 19th 2010, 15:58
I have already said this when the SRA were lobbying for reserved parking (which they eventually got) for Sliema. Trying to shut Malta out of Sliema. SRA have grown into a disgusting, mini government expecting to dictate on everything. I had got the example that we would need permission from them to have a walk on the front and use the benches. How right I was - Now SRA is expecting to have a say on private property in Sliema. What are these people ? Untouchables?
Pretty soon, anyone expecting to come to live in Sliema will have to be vetted by the SRA and provide a complete CV, a police conduct, a health and banking check before being considered and allowed to live in Sliema.
I would not be surprised that they will start lobbying for having Sliema car free except for residents. Don't laugh at this - who would have thought SRA would dictate how private property is disposed of some time ago?
C.Busuttil
Mar 19th 2010, 17:34
Who is coming to live in Sliema ? because since all the development we had since the 80's with all those new appartments, the population of Sliema has declined. Sliema's population has aged within ten years it will decline further. Sliema does not need further appartments, no excuses, no blaming the SRA can change the facts that I have pointed out.
J.Azzopardi
Mar 19th 2010, 17:55
CBusuttil And you're surprised? go find a good priced property in Sliema for a new couple u tara ssibx. It is only those who have lived there for a very long time (Senior Citizens) or people who are in very good business who can afford buying a property in Sliema. Actually more properties will bring the property prices a little bit down and maybe bring the average down if that is your major concern (average age)
C.Busuttil
Mar 19th 2010, 18:13
@J Azzopardi, How do you explain that Sliema's population has declined instead of increased with all the development we had since the 80's ? With more living spacing and housing available the population keeps going down? Over 75% of the population is over 60. Because young couples can't afford certain prices and the young have moved out from Sliema for this simple reason. If you aren't aware of this you live on the moon. Sliema has been uglified and destroyed in its soul and the lack of civic mindedness the few that have moved in is appalling.
Henry J Bonett
Mar 19th 2010, 14:35
I do not think that there is a hard and fast rule in deciding what is of private or public interest. However the end result must be equitable. My family owned land which ended up as the Hamrun football field, under the false name of ''Public Garden'', when it is actuallly run on a business basis. This was the only property we owned and we were offered a few hundred pounds for it, take it or leave it. The result was certainly not a clear matter of public interest nor was it a matter of private interest - not ours that is. So those for private interest in this case, please stop and ponder that two weights and two measures can never be of any of the two legitimate interests but of another.
colin stanley
Mar 19th 2010, 14:35
It is true that we should be a bit more careful about certain buildings, first of all it was all goverments that helped destroy certain properties, secondly it was the proper sliema residents themselves who sold their properties,now they are trying to save houses , that have no special heritage value.I don't mean villa bonici. and after all I guess that many of these people protesting, most probably live in a flat, like Astrid Vella herself, did she complain when they dropped the house down to build flats,or did she just buy one?
C.Busuttil
Mar 19th 2010, 14:10
Jista xhadd mill-ghorriefa li qeghdin jiktbu hawn taht jghidli ghalfejn f'Tas-sliema hemm bzonn ta' aktar flats meta din il-belt ghandha wahda mill-aktar rati gholja ta' anzjani. Bil-flats kollha li gew mibnija fl-ahhar snin minflokk ziedet il-popolazzjoni f'Tas-Sliema naqset. Fi ftit kliem mhemmx bzonn ta' aktar flats.
Gheziez difensuri ta' aktar bini ta' flats f'Tas-Sliema nistenna ha nara b'liema risposta ha tohorgu
Gabriel A. Pellegrini
Mar 19th 2010, 13:42
@Joe Morana
What came first the chicken or the egg
Likewise what comes first
Individual Human rights or Public Interest
Gap
A.Busuttil
Mar 19th 2010, 13:42
Do you know that this is a private property?
No one has the right to take over property
Thats why we voted to join EU
The silent from the owners confirms that you dont have the right to talk about their PRIVATE property
J. Schembri
Mar 19th 2010, 13:02
"look Mr Prime Minister , we have some plans on other people's property which happen to be in our backyards , you know , we developed our property to its maximum and we never gave a damn about the environment.Can you intervene so that these land owners don't do what we did years ago with our properties? " They were talking to Lorry (Lawrence) but his surname is Gonzi not Sant.
Gabriel A. Pellegrini
Mar 19th 2010, 12:48
I call on Government to pull away from being dragged in property matters in which he is not a partner. I call on The Government to return to all rightful owners their property which has been requisitioned. I refer to my family's property which has been requisitioned 33 years ago His. Hon Dr. Lawrence Gonzi and Her Hon. Dolores Cristina know well enough to which property I am referring.
Gabriel A. Pellegrini
Joe Morana
Mar 19th 2010, 12:23
Regrettably some comments posted to this news item, so far are solely concerned about the 'rights' of property owners/ developers and/or knowingly or unknowingly sxemm to discard "the public interest" i.e the fundamental rights of residents to live in a healthy and sustainable environment (responsibility of MEPA according to Law ) .
May I suggest to these contiributors to move away from their (sic) 'taliban' stance and refer to the MEPA's own Northern Harbours Local Plan of 2006 which essentially cautions that Sliema's infrastructure cannot cope with furher development ; MEPA's own Air Quality Monitoring 'alarming' data for Sliema which exceeds EU safegurard levels and the National Transport Authority's concerns that further developoment in Sliema will precipitate Sliema's precarious Traffic problems.
May I suggest that contributers hypotetically 'change roles' and possibly venture beyond their 'own interests' and come up with realistic equitabile and sustaianble solutions for all concerned .
Is it too diffulcult........!!!!!
C.Gatt
Mar 19th 2010, 12:51
How opportune. It always the others who have to have restrictions on their properties, or who should put themselves in the SRA shoes and never the other way round. Credibility is a virtue it seems.
PS. I have no interest whatsoever in any speculative business either in Sliema, Malta or Gozo or the rest of the world. I just call you to uphold EQUAL justice. How can one sliema resident who screwed sleima call on the other to do this and that with his property? Credibility first, give up your property first, put yourself in their shoes first, otherwise you're just laughing stock.
Joseph Attard
Mar 19th 2010, 13:18
This comment and the one below by mr. Grima are seeking the general interests of Sliema residents and Maltese residents on the whole. However one cannot make a petition against a particular owner when at the same time, the current laws and MEPA regulations allow such development to take place. It's either a law for everyone or none.
Antonio Anastasi
Mar 19th 2010, 12:13
In Bavaria, around residential areas NOBODY is allowed to alter, or build WITHOUT the specific acknowledgment of the neighbors who have the right to not only protect their property but also the aesthetics of the environment.
There is NO WAY that new buildings would be allowed in the older parts of towns.
What prevails is not the good of the individual but the common good of the society.
MBorg
Mar 19th 2010, 11:47
The owners of Villa Bonici , and any other owner of private property , should have the right to realize their investment if they so wish,. No body should ask the government to take over private property, Malta should not be turned into a communist state.
Three quaters of flat owners in Sliema once lived in houses, very often rented and were rewarded very nicely when they returned them to owners for development. The flat they now live in was given to them for free. They saw nothing wrong in their action when they did it. Why are they so against other property owners who hung on to their property and who would like to make the move now ?
P Saliba
Mar 19th 2010, 11:34
The built up area in Moroni Street adjacent to the grounds of Villa Bonnici once formed part of Sliema's only lungs. Now it ain’t any more! Now it forms part of the overdeveloped Sliema.
J.Tonna
Mar 19th 2010, 11:20
Why don't SRA buy Villa Bonici themselves and then they do what they like with it?
Some have taken the habit of intruding in other people's affairs. This trend should be stopped once and for all.
M Grima
Mar 19th 2010, 11:06
Mr Mifsud,money may not grow on trees,but then again there are no trees for it to grow on. Ever thought that your and your children's health might be better with a few more trees around?
And then again,why shouldn't the elderly benefit in the last few years of their life. Time will come when you ,and others of your ilk will change your tune.
I take it all of you preaching against this scheme do not have a vested interest in property speculation.
C.Gatt
Mar 19th 2010, 10:44
Taliban tactics on privately owned properties. SRA has come out in public showing what it is made of. I guess each SRA sliema resident is ready to give up his/her own property in the name of public interest. NO - it is only public interest when the property is of someone else.
MPs please note - do not tarnish your reputation as SRA have - the consequences would be far reaching and can even end up in the International court - red facing Malta ghal erba ma jisthux min ma nafx xiex.
E Gatt
Mar 19th 2010, 10:38
The SRA should discuss their proposal with the owners of Villa Bonici.
If (and only if) the owners of Villa Bonici agree to sell the property to the SRA, the SRA should then turn to the Sliema residents and ask them to cough up the money.
Sean Sant Fournier
Mar 19th 2010, 10:15
The owners of this property already had their rights as owners infringed as this property had been rented by third parties for many years for peanuts and only lately did the owners get it back in their hands. Now the Government is thinking of taking it away again. I guess the problem with a democratic country is that the minority has no rights, at least that's what's happening in this country. Another problem is that the compensation given by the government is peanuts too.
Mario De Bono
Mar 19th 2010, 09:49
The same residents who made thousands by giving up their rented houses to be developed are not crying about Villa Bonci. This is not about Villa Bonici. Its about property rights. These people, the SRA, just want to usurp the rights of other property owners. Its time to do a little digging on the backgrounds of who exactly are the people behnd the SRA. Maye the journalists of the Times can carry out that service to their readers, or are we all so worried about the Fouth Estate ?
Henry Mifsud
Mar 19th 2010, 09:47
But isn't Villa Bonici privately owned? How can any group make such ubsurd prposals. I wonder whether any member of this group would have been prepared to make the same proposals if he or she inherited such property. Where was this group when the Government granted vast tracts of public land in the Sliema/ St. Julians area to developers? Who incidentally did an excellent job in rehabilitating such areas obviously at a profit otherwise why should they have bothered to take such risk. Wake up to reality people ... money does not grow on trees!