An appeal has been lodged against a plan to install a large, double-sided LED billboard along the Sliema waterfront on grounds it would impinge on road safety and have a visual impact.

The Planning Authority granted a permit for the illuminated billboard to Paul Zammit. Measuring four by three metres, it will be placed on the centre strip in Triq ix-Xatt, facing traffic in both directions.

The PA received no representations from the public nor any objections from consultees, among them Transport Malta, and approved the permit in February 2019.

However, Sliema property owner Glen Cassar, whose premises are just across the road, has filed an appeal to the planning review tribunal asking to have the permit revoked.

Cassar said that the PA had failed to consider road safety and the environmental and visual impact when approving the permit.

He also claimed that interested parties were not properly notified about the intended development.

“The road in question is highly busy, with traffic flowing on both sides throughout the day. There are also multiple pedestrian crossings allowing pedestrians to access the part of the road where the billboard is erected,” Cassar’s appeal reads.

Granting the permit, he added, contradicted the imposed condition that the billboard should not hinder the interpretation of road signs or impact navigation in a way that made travel hazardous.

“The sightlines of the drivers shall without a doubt be distracted due to the placing of the billboard on each side of the traffic island.”

Drivers and pedestrians would also be exposed to severe danger in case of windy or extreme weather.

The siting of the billboard means that trees would be uprooted, he further argues. And the application could also potentially pave the way for numerous others.

“The trees and shrubs currently embellishing the entire road should not be sacrificed for the financial gain of the few,” says the appeal.

The LED billboard would also have a negative visual impact on views of the Marsamxetto harbour.

“It is certainly unfair for the owners of the respective neighbouring properties to be placed in such a prejudicial situation to the economic benefit of third parties,” it adds.