No room for mistakes

Probably, after Auberge de Castille, the site in front of Palazzo Ferreria (the former Opera House) is the best strategically located building (site) in Malta. While the former commands a Parthenon-like stature, as you enter Valletta from Duke of York Avenue, the latter unfolds its presence as you pass beyond City Gate and enter Valletta.

Like most sites in the capital, a part of our illustrious history is attached to it. Nevertheless, while history is there to preserve and look back on, our future beckons.

The site cannot remain in its present state of ruins - a building that marked an era that has now been superceded by history itself. After all, history is a record of events. So let's create more history. The site craves for it.

But, if the opera house site is to be deve-loped, it must be done in accordance with our needs and whatever is constructed must be sustainable. The process must take off now and should be aimed at the future. That's the way Valletta was built and that's the way we need to proceed.

Where are we now?

For the past 15 years the site incorporating the adjoining open space has been the subject of a number of architectural competitions and invitations for development.

I have personally been part and co-ordinated developers in preparing submission offers Lm20-40 millions' worth) requested by successive governments for the site in question.

Regrettably, both briefs demanded castles in the air from would-be developers. The briefs were ill prepared, aiming at turning the site into a mega project that would have killed Valletta and its community, and probably bankrupted both government and potential developers.

The point should be emphasised that, executing such a project would require that the entrance to Valletta be partially blocked for a number of years. With a large gaping hole being dug across that part of Republic Street and Freedom Square, the lifeline that feeds Valletta with its patrons would be entirely cut off. The daily flow of these patrons should not in any way be interrupted or tampered with!

In fact, on one hand, the brief didn't make financial sense. On the other, it was far fetched and required drastic changes.

Competitions, development briefs and proposals have all since died a natural death. So be it! Valletta has been spared another siege. This time, it would have been self-inflicted.

So, where can we go from here? First of all, we must analyse what we could possibly require. Then study its effect on Valletta, its implementation and also its sustainability.

Do we require an art centre? We have just built a magnificent one (St James Cavalier), which is still to flourish further. An opera house? This will kill the Manoel Theatre, bankrupt the public coffers and be a huge burden to sustain commercially.

More shops? The Valletta commercial community is already fighting a stiff battle as it competes with other business centres. Not to mention others being constructed or planned, like Tigné and Sliema. More shops would just extinguishing each other.

Offices? Mepa's local plan for the area recommends putting a blanket on creating more offices. If anything, converting a number of deteriorating houses in the inner city would be more revitalising than building new ones.

A few months ago, a number of politicians, including former President Guido de Marco, voiced an opinion to re-house Parliament to this site. How about it! It would be a building dedicated to the machinery that runs the country.

Surely, this is neither cheap nor sustainable but, and here it comes, it is definitely profitable - in a national sense. What better use for the second most strategic site then - to rehouse Parliament and all its activities in a modern purpose-designed building?

Our Parliament needs a modern building with all necessary amenities if it is to gear up for an ever-demanding future. Such heavy demands required to manage the country can no longer be accommodated within the Palace building. This cannot take it.

So why is the site so ideal for Parliament? Here are its credentials: the site is located in the captial city, right after you enter City Gate; it also has the right setting with Freedom Square on one side; it is surrounded by four roads that permit people to walk around it and into it freely; its size is adequate for the proposed use; and vehicle access and parking could easily be provided from down under, through the former railway tunnel.

What else could one possibly wish for? With credentials like these, can one afford to waste such a site on, say, more shops, another arts centre or possibly another opera house! Parliament is the highest institution and it deserves to be housed in a top-notch building. Look at the spectacular sports facilities which were built recently. Why can it not be Parliament's turn now?

Government should take a couple of decisive decisions. Take a bold decision about the fate of the site and declare its use for a new modern parliament with its various institutions. Fix a sign on site - Sold!

Start preparing a development brief in consultation with all political forces, analysing the parliamentary system, ancillary facilities and uses, public interaction with the building and financing.

Once these two decisions are taken, realisation of the project need not be immediate. A project plan formulated should be based on the definition of the project parameters, duration and obviously its cost.

A working group of politicians and architects should then team up and formulate their plans. These plans should include synergy with Freedom Square, which needs to be the amphitheatre to Parliament itself.

Freedom Square

Freedom Square should not be built on. A few historians insist that a building be constructed opposite the shopping arcade to re-enact the main axis into Valletta.

While this was applicable during times of war and suffering, today with our lifestyle and the urge for more leisure, this open space should be left as it is and be left as an amphitheatre for a multitude of activates.

The City Gate entrance and adjoining arcade, austere as they may look, should only be upgraded and livened up. We just cannot afford to indulge in money spending sprees when this money could be better used within the capital city proper, like upgrading the road network and providing better lighting. It's like changing one's hat and at the same time leaving one's clothes tattered.

The external design of the façade is prob-ably the most difficult part of the job. Trying to design a modern building to fit in the surrounding environment is no small feat. The creators of Valletta always designed buildings with this in mind. So, the building should be designed in line with this line of thinking. The building should be our contribution to the enrichment of Valletta. We certainly do not need any Tom, Dick or Harry to tell us what it should look like.

The external design should encourage public interaction. It should not look like a closed Pandora's box but should serve to give a new meaning and image to our Parliament.

While the design of the layout itself could be carried out by a team of architects agreed on by all parties concerned, the treatment of the façade might be the subject of an international competition.

A lot of people might not agree with this. They might prefer that the old Opera House be re-built instead. That's easy to say, but who is going to pay for it? Who will pay the people who would run it and pay maintenance costs. Furthermore, rebuilding it on the same original design would set the clock back.

A mega commercial project will destroy Valletta. If Valletta needs more life, upgrading what is existing is more profitable and less extran-eous to the city.

It's a decision that we cannot afford to take wrongly in both function and form. The site is too sensitive and, if whatever we decide to build goes wrong, the consequences would be disastrous. On the other hand, the site itself cannot be left in its present state.

A tribute to our highest institution is a wise solution. It fully uses the site without exploiting it.

We need to decide and move on. The decision has to be spot on! There is no room for mistakes. It's the entrance to our capital we are dealing with.

Zero tolerance!

Alfred Grech, BE&A (Hons), A&CE, is a senior partner at Med Design Consultants.