Two residents’ associations have expressed their concerns about the negative effects of Mepa’s “questionable and arbitrary policy” allowing commercial interests and establishments to operate in Sliema residential neighbourhoods adversely affecting their serene environment and well being.
The Qui Si Sana and Tigne Residents Association and the Sliema Residents Association jointly said in a statement that one of the aspirations of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority’s North Harbour Local Plan was to regulate development to protect residential areas from inappropriate establishments.
This plan set out residential areas and through specific policies, defined which type of outlets may be permitted within these areas.
Bars, restaurants and cafeterias were excluded from residential areas with an exception being made for Paceville, which was listed as a “tourism and entertainment” area.
But despite numerous objections, a Mepa DCC board allowed itself to be persuaded to extend the Paceville policies to Sliema and in November 2007 gave permission for a premises to operate in Qui-si-Sana. What was previously a souvenir shop was now a bar.
“The thin edge of the wedge had been applied to crack open the security for a serene environment given to Sliema residents.
“Under this decision, it could now be claimed that any shop or commercial premises in Sliema may convert to a bar or restaurant.
“The Qui-si-Sana and Tigne Residents Association had voiced their fears that this will allow places of entertainment to flourish.
“Mepa’s PRO at the time had ridiculed their comments, declaring this scenario impossible,” the two associations said in their joint statement.
They said that the crack was being steadily widened.
“In spite of the fact that the concept of precedent is not entrenched in any Mepa regulation, two other applications in the area being considered by Mepa for a change of use.
“Furthermore, one existing bar has apparently been given permission to play loud music up to the early hours of the morning, much to the distress of neighbours”.
The two associations said that citizens, including Sliema residents, had a right to live in peace and quiet and their rights were not to be to be circumvented or ignored.
The laws that protected residents and residential areas had to be respected and upheld especially by institutions created for that particular purpose, and not twisted and re-interpreted in order to accommodate business interests at the expense of residents’ health and quality of life, they said.