Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party said that MEPA once again decided to take the side of big developers by granting permission for a massive 100-apartment block at the Sliema ferries (ex-Forestals site).
Michael Briguglio, AD chairperson and Sliema Local Councillor, who was present for the MEPA meetings said that Mepa totally disregarded the appeal by AD, Sliema local council and NGOs for an environment impact assessment.
“MEPA once again took a selective and apologetic approach and ignored the cumulative impact of the development in terms of traffic, pollution, congestion and other factors”.
“AD once again reiterates that the environment is a political issue. We have the MEPA we deserve, but we can change things through our vote”.
“AD notes that the PN and PL representatives on the MEPA board voted in favour of the development”
Showing posts with label Proposed Development - ex-Forestals Site. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Proposed Development - ex-Forestals Site. Show all posts
Friday, July 6, 2012
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Ex-Forestals MEPA meeting cancelled
The MEPA board meeting regarding the proposed development at the ex-Forestals site has been cancelled. It transpired that there is a well or something of the sort on site, which was not documented.
In the meantime, Sliema Local Council and Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party have both called for an Environment Impact Assessment and Traffic Impact Assessment. AD is four-square behind the objections of Sliema Residents' Association and Flimkien ghall-Ambjent Ahjar.
In the meantime, Sliema Local Council and Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party have both called for an Environment Impact Assessment and Traffic Impact Assessment. AD is four-square behind the objections of Sliema Residents' Association and Flimkien ghall-Ambjent Ahjar.
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Sliema Ex-Forestals Development should be refused – AD
Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party expressed its support of the objection raised by Sliema Residents' Association against the
proposed development at the ex-Forestals Site at the Strand, Sliema. AD is also a registered objector to the development proposal.
Michael Briguglio, AD Chairperson and Sliema Local Councillor said: "Both AD and the Sliema Local Council have asked MEPA to commission an Environment Impact Assessment and a Transport Impact Assessment on the proposed development. Moreover, AD, as the only political party which is objecting to the proposed development believes that this development is too dense and will increase traffic congestion in the area, as opposed to MEPA policies.”
Carmel Cacopardo, AD Deputy Chairperson and spokesperson for Sustainable Development and Home Affairs, said: "These are the consequences of approving the Local Plans without subjecting them to a Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA). Government used a legal loophole to avoid an SEA of the local Plans way back in 2006. Had an SEA been carried out, undoubtedly the cumulative impacts of development would have featured as one of the negative elements of the Local Plans. AD and Environmental NGOs insisted on the need to carry out an SEA but the government ignored everyone. Subservience to the building industry dictated otherwise.”
proposed development at the ex-Forestals Site at the Strand, Sliema. AD is also a registered objector to the development proposal.
Michael Briguglio, AD Chairperson and Sliema Local Councillor said: "Both AD and the Sliema Local Council have asked MEPA to commission an Environment Impact Assessment and a Transport Impact Assessment on the proposed development. Moreover, AD, as the only political party which is objecting to the proposed development believes that this development is too dense and will increase traffic congestion in the area, as opposed to MEPA policies.”
Carmel Cacopardo, AD Deputy Chairperson and spokesperson for Sustainable Development and Home Affairs, said: "These are the consequences of approving the Local Plans without subjecting them to a Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA). Government used a legal loophole to avoid an SEA of the local Plans way back in 2006. Had an SEA been carried out, undoubtedly the cumulative impacts of development would have featured as one of the negative elements of the Local Plans. AD and Environmental NGOs insisted on the need to carry out an SEA but the government ignored everyone. Subservience to the building industry dictated otherwise.”
Friday, May 25, 2012
Proposed development at ex-Forestals Site (2)
Further to my previous blog on the issue, which can be read here , I am pleased to announce that Sliema Local Council will ask MEPA for an Environment Impact Assessment and a Traffic Impact Assessment on the proposed development.
Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party is objecting to the proposed development and is also asking for an EIA and a TIA.
Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party is objecting to the proposed development and is also asking for an EIA and a TIA.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Proposed development at ex-Forestals site
Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party, is endorsing the objection of Sliema Residents Association against the proposed development at the ex-Forestals site at the Strand, Sliema. AD is also asking MEPA to have an Environment Impact Assessment and a Transport Impact Assesment on the proposed development.
Objections can be sent to MEPA, by sending an email to objakn@mepa.org.mt
MEPA will be deciding on the project in a public hearing on Thursday 31 May, 10am at St Francis Ravellin, MEPA, Floriana.
SRA's objection reads as follows:
Objection against PA2590/09 and PA3613/10
The contents of the numerous objections received against these developments
were not considered and implemented at all by MEPA when reviewing the plans
submitted by the developers. The development is still one of high density
with a very high frontage which will increase hardship for residents in the
vicinity. It goes counter to several policies and requests mentioned
within NHLP 2006.
This development will definitely increase traffic congestion in the area
(against policy NHSJ01 -v. in the NHLP 2006) which states 'Reduce car
domination along the waterfront;'. For sure, major developments like this
will not reduce car domination at the water front but will actually cause
more permanent traffic at the water's edge which cannot be remedied by
future traffic management policies.
In the 'Issues' chapter 17.2 of the NHLP 2006, para 17.3.2 number iv.,
states that new open spaces have to be created while enhancing existing
ones. For sure this will not create any new open spaces.
The proposed development would adversely affect the external environs of a
grade 2 scheduled building and garden (Villa Bonici) and another Grade 3
scheduled building (Belvedere Terrace) in its vicinity. The proposal would
therefore detract from the historical value of these important buildings
and so it does not conform to Structure Plan Policy UCO7, which seeks to
preserve buildings of outstanding architectural or historical interest.
The proposed development runs counter to Structure Plan policy UCO10 in
that it would adversely affect views of the Urban Conservation Area and
detract from the traditional urban skyline.
The proposed development goes against Structure Plan policy BEN1 since the
proposal is likely to have a deleterious impact on existing or planned
adjacent uses because
of visual intrusion, noise, vibration, atmospheric pollution, unusually
high traffic generation, unusual operating times, or any other
characteristic which would constitute bad neighbourliness
Objections can be sent to MEPA, by sending an email to objakn@mepa.org.mt
MEPA will be deciding on the project in a public hearing on Thursday 31 May, 10am at St Francis Ravellin, MEPA, Floriana.
SRA's objection reads as follows:
Objection against PA2590/09 and PA3613/10
The contents of the numerous objections received against these developments
were not considered and implemented at all by MEPA when reviewing the plans
submitted by the developers. The development is still one of high density
with a very high frontage which will increase hardship for residents in the
vicinity. It goes counter to several policies and requests mentioned
within NHLP 2006.
This development will definitely increase traffic congestion in the area
(against policy NHSJ01 -v. in the NHLP 2006) which states 'Reduce car
domination along the waterfront;'. For sure, major developments like this
will not reduce car domination at the water front but will actually cause
more permanent traffic at the water's edge which cannot be remedied by
future traffic management policies.
In the 'Issues' chapter 17.2 of the NHLP 2006, para 17.3.2 number iv.,
states that new open spaces have to be created while enhancing existing
ones. For sure this will not create any new open spaces.
The proposed development would adversely affect the external environs of a
grade 2 scheduled building and garden (Villa Bonici) and another Grade 3
scheduled building (Belvedere Terrace) in its vicinity. The proposal would
therefore detract from the historical value of these important buildings
and so it does not conform to Structure Plan Policy UCO7, which seeks to
preserve buildings of outstanding architectural or historical interest.
The proposed development runs counter to Structure Plan policy UCO10 in
that it would adversely affect views of the Urban Conservation Area and
detract from the traditional urban skyline.
The proposed development goes against Structure Plan policy BEN1 since the
proposal is likely to have a deleterious impact on existing or planned
adjacent uses because
of visual intrusion, noise, vibration, atmospheric pollution, unusually
high traffic generation, unusual operating times, or any other
characteristic which would constitute bad neighbourliness
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)