Sliema residents win partial victory in Townsquare case

Sliema residents secured a partial victory on Wednesday in their prolonged legal battle against developer Michael Stivala, after the Court of Appeal ordered the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal (EPRT) to reassess plans for expanding the controversial Townsquare project.

The case has been ongoing for nearly a decade, reflecting broader tensions between rapid urban development, community concerns, and regulatory oversight in Malta’s real estate landscape. Residents and advocacy groups have consistently argued that the scale and nature of the Townsquare project could undermine public access, heritage values, and urban planning norms in Sliema.

Court orders reassessment of expansion plans

Residents had taken legal action after both the Planning Authority and the EPRT approved Stivala’s proposal to augment the previously approved 28-storey tower. The planned expansion included a 10-storey hotel, new restaurants, and additional residential apartments.

The Court of Appeal concluded that certain elements of the project violated existing zoning regulations. Specifically, the court ruled that:

• A hotel cannot be constructed in the middle of a designated public open space.
• Restaurants cannot be added in areas zoned strictly for residential use.
• All apartments must meet a minimum floor area of 150 square metres.

Despite these rulings, the court dismissed objections regarding a proposed tunnel leading to the site and upheld the findings of the Environmental Impact Assessment, indicating that the broader environmental considerations had been adequately addressed.

Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti emphasized the need for a fresh review by the EPRT, stating that the tribunal must reassess the project in light of the court’s findings and ensure that planning regulations are applied consistently.

A history of controversy and legal disputes

The Townsquare project has long been the subject of public debate and litigation. Originally, the site was owned by a consortium of the Ganado, Gasan, Soler, and Trapani-Galea families. In 2016, the project initially received approval for a 38-storey tower.

However, the development faced immediate opposition from residents, non-governmental organizations, and heritage advocates who cited concerns about the project’s scale, impact on public spaces, and potential strain on local infrastructure. The Planning Appeals Tribunal overturned the approval in 2018, reflecting the intensity of the objections.

Subsequently, the developers reduced the proposed tower’s height to 28 storeys. This revised design received Planning Authority approval in 2019. Two years later, the project was acquired by Michael Stivala’s ST Group, which reignited debate by seeking further expansion.

Proposed expansion and developer claims

Stivala argued that the expansion would not significantly alter the overall building volume and highlighted that 64% of the site would remain as open space. The revised plans included:

• Increasing the number of residential units from 159 to 234.
• Adding more than 200 parking spaces to accommodate increased demand.
• Introducing a 90-room hotel to attract tourism and business clientele.
• Expanding commercial spaces, including restaurants and retail areas.

Stivala and his team maintained that these additions would contribute to the local economy, generate employment, and enhance the site’s overall utility without encroaching excessively on public amenities.

Planning Authority and EPRT decisions

The Planning Authority approved the expansion unanimously in 2023, indicating that regulators were satisfied with the proposed mitigation measures and the developer’s claims regarding open space retention.

The EPRT subsequently reviewed the decision and upheld the approval in February 2024. Their ruling emphasized that the project’s design complied with most technical planning and environmental requirements, though they deferred certain zoning and community impact concerns to broader regulatory oversight.

Residents and community groups, however, challenged these approvals in court, arguing that the decisions failed to protect public interest adequately and overlooked fundamental zoning violations. Moviment Graffitti and Din l-Art Ħelwa supported these objections, reinforcing concerns about public space preservation, urban density, and community rights.

Community opposition and public sentiment

The Townsquare project has remained polarizing in Sliema. Residents have repeatedly highlighted several key issues:

Impact on public open spaces: The site includes a designated public area that locals consider essential for recreation and community activities. The proposed hotel, they argue, would disrupt this function.

• Zoning violations: The addition of restaurants in residential zones could compromise the area’s character, increase traffic, and generate noise pollution.
• Apartment size: Community advocates stress that smaller apartments could lead to overcrowding and reduce living standards.

Public demonstrations, petitions, and media coverage have ensured that the project remains under intense scrutiny. Advocates for sustainable urban planning in Malta view this case as emblematic of the tension between large-scale development and community preservation.

Economic and urban planning implications

The Townsquare project reflects broader trends in Malta’s real estate and tourism sectors. Developers often seek to maximize site potential, citing economic benefits such as increased employment, tourism revenue, and commercial activity.

However, urban planners and residents emphasize the importance of maintaining livable communities, preserving heritage sites, and ensuring compliance with zoning laws. The court’s partial intervention serves as a precedent for balancing development ambitions with public interest and regulatory compliance.

If implemented in accordance with the court’s guidance, the revised Townsquare project could offer a model for integrating high-density development with community and environmental safeguards.

Legal and procedural outcomes

The Court of Appeal’s decision highlights the layered nature of Malta’s planning and regulatory framework:

• Legal review: Courts can overturn or partially modify decisions made by planning authorities when zoning, public space, or community rights are at risk.
• Environmental assessments: While environmental compliance is necessary, it does not exempt developers from following zoning or land-use regulations.
• Community engagement: Judicial review often considers public opposition and the role of advocacy groups in challenging developments.

Chief Justice Chetcuti’s referral to the EPRT ensures that the tribunal will re-evaluate the project, this time integrating the court’s specifications regarding hotel placement, restaurant zoning, and apartment sizes.

Future of the Townsquare project

• The decision leaves Stivala and his ST Group with several options:
• Adjust plans to comply fully with zoning and public space regulations.
• Challenge specific aspects of the ruling in higher courts, though such actions carry legal and reputational risks.
• Engage with community representatives to develop a project that addresses local concerns while maintaining economic objectives.

The court’s ruling signals that large-scale development projects in Malta must carefully consider legal, environmental, and community dimensions, reinforcing the need for transparent planning and stakeholder consultation.

Conclusion

The partial legal victory for Sliema residents illustrates the ongoing tension between urban development and community interests in Malta. While Michael Stivala’s Townsquare project remains active, the court’s ruling ensures stricter compliance with zoning regulations, apartment standards, and public space preservation.

As the EPRT prepares for a reassessment, all parties—including residents, developers, and planning authorities—will need to navigate legal, economic, and social considerations carefully. This case may ultimately serve as a benchmark for future disputes over large-scale developments in urban Malta, highlighting the importance of balancing private investment with public interest and regulatory compliance.

FAQs

What was the court ruling on the Townsquare expansion?
The Court of Appeal ruled that the hotel cannot be built in public open space, restaurants cannot be added to residential zones, and apartments must meet minimum floor areas.

Why was the Townsquare project controversial?
The project was controversial due to its scale, potential impact on public space, zoning violations, and concerns about urban density.

Who owns the Townsquare project now?
Michael Stivala’s ST Group currently owns the Townsquare project.

What is the role of the EPRT in this case?
The Environment and Planning Review Tribunal (EPRT) reviews and decides on appeals related to planning approvals and must reassess the project based on the court’s ruling.

What did residents oppose in the expansion plan?
Residents opposed the hotel in public space, restaurants in residential areas, and smaller apartments that did not meet minimum floor area standards.

How long has the Townsquare project been in dispute?
The project has faced legal and community disputes for nearly a decade.

What percentage of the site would remain open space according to Stivala?
Stivala claimed that 64% of the site would remain as open space.

Did the court uphold the Environmental Impact Assessment?
Yes, the court upheld the findings of the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment.

What organizations supported residents in court?
Moviment Graffitti and Din l-Art Ħelwa supported residents’ legal challenge.

What is the next step for the Townsquare project?
The EPRT will reassess the project in line with the court’s ruling, focusing on zoning compliance, apartment sizes, and public space protection.