|
During the first working meeting of the fifth Sliema Local Council a letter was received from the deputy chief executive officer of the Malta Transport Authority (ADT).
In this letter the council was told that the public consultation period regarding the Sliema Transport Action Plan which includes the diversion of traffic to the Tigné Peninsula had elapsed on March 31, 2006.
The council was surprised that the consultation period for such a drastic change in Sliema had and no councillor seemed to have been aware of this deadline.
It was agreed that I am one of two councillors that would submit a report on the important issue.
Since the changeover from the fourth council to the fifth council there was little or no opportunity for the council to discuss the issue within the council and also with the residents, as the council would have liked to do.
One would prefer the deadline to be extended to the end of June. Since the consultation period was during the council elections and changeover, it might seem that the ADT was trying to hoodwink the public and council on such an important issue, which one assumes is not the case.
Attendees at the Preluna and Crown Plaza do not recall the March 31 deadline. However, they do recall that the ADT wanted to conclude the plan by the end of this year. Since the press were expelled and not allowed to report the Preluna meeting, one cannot consider the Preluna meeting as a public consultation meeting.
The spending of millions of liri to widen one part of the stand road to four lanes, while the proposed tunnel is only two lanes is debatable, this creates a bottleneck effect that will cause much traffic congestion and tailbacks. This could be a major flaw in the plan.
There is also the fact, that no traffic impact assessment or environmental impact assessment reports were done to assess how the people’s health or the quality of life in the area is going to be affected. During one meeting it was made clear that only the private projects’ requirements, together with the existing traffic flows, were taken into account and that the plan is being implemented because of the additional traffic generated by the new projects in the area.
Is seems that the ADT, MEPA and the Government are not even willing or interested to find out the damage in our environment that the new plan would cause, as an environmental impact assessment has not been commissioned.
There is also much confusion between the Malta Environment and Planning Authority’s Local Plan, known as the North Harbours Local Plan and the ministers’ plans that were unveiled at the said meetings. MEPA spent millions on a Local Plan that states that the Gzira to Sliema road has to be reduced to two lanes from four while the Malta Transport Authority is wanting to spend three million of our taxes on road improvements and land reclamation to change the Strand Ferries to four lanes. It is impossible to implement two plans from two different authorities that directly contradict each other.
The proposed budget to spend three million liri on land reclamation and a new Strand Ferries ‘autostrada’ (as the minister defined it), intended to satisfy the requirements of private entrepreneurial projects is ludicrous and seems suspect.
According to the commission for the European Union in the Qui-Si-Sana petition, any development permission for the land reclamation after May 2005 is subject to EU environmental laws and it is mandatory for an Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out both for the roadworks and the land reclamation.
The planning of intersections for projects such as the Qui-Si-Sana Tourism Commercial project that has no planning permission and is opposed by the great majority of people in the area gives the sense that ADT is putting the cart before the horse.
The Sliema transport action plan is not in accordance with the proposed MEPA approved local plan. Before one places a proposal for ‘a transport plan’, one has to amend the holistic North Harbours Local plan then submit a plan that is in accordance with the new approved local plan. If this is not done, it would seem indicated that the ADT is not abiding with the law that all citizens and authorities are compelled to abide with.
In conclusion it seems indicated that:
1. I feel that the council has not had the opportunity to discuss the issue in the council and with the public.
2. The Plan violates the North Harbours Local Plan that has to be amended before a different solution is implemented. The two plans presently contradict each other.
3. The Preluna meeting was open only to selected invitees, not to the general public. The press were expelled and not allowed to report the meeting.
4. The majority of residents in Sliema are opposed to the ADT’s plans.
5. There was no public awareness in the press that the deadline was last month.
6. No traffic impact assessment report or environmental impact assessment reports have been done on the traffic plan to assess the environmental damage that this plan can cause to the residents.
It seems indicated that the said ADT’s Traffic Plan was hastily done to satisfy the requirements of private entrepreneurial interest. The forceful imposition of this plan on the Sliema residents is deplorable.
Martin Debono
Councillor (MLP)
Sliema
|
