As long as the historic structures are protected, allowing modern interventions can render historical centres alive and vibrant, says Joanna Spiteri Staines.
How have Malta’s town centres and village cores changed in the past decades?
The historical and aesthetic value of our town centres and village cores has not been given due importance and protection in the past. The 1950s, 60s and 70s witnessed large tracts of our historical urban cores being destroyed to make place for large axial roads such as Transfiguration Avenue in Lija or the modern housing development which replaced a large section of the historical urban core in Cospicua. The destruction of the 19th and early-20th century terraced houses in Sliema and St Julian’s is a sad example of how the authorities at the time failed to value the historical and aesthetic value of these buildings.
Since the implementation of the Structure Plan in 1992 and the direction provided by specialised architects and planners at the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, historical cores have been increasingly given significant protection. The past decade has witnessed improved awareness of the importance of historical cores, and very few historical buildings are being torn down or gutted to make way for new build in urban cores.
What is the current state of urban conservation in Malta?
The conservation and protection of our historical urban cores is governed primarily by MEPA, which includes various bodies such as the Heritage Advisory Committee, the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage and the Heritage Planning Unit. These are all consulted when applications for changes are lodged on a historic building or space. These bodies include specialists in the field of conservation and are obliged to give their opinion on the changes requested.
It is also within the current MEPA remit to create policies that regulate and protect our historic urban cores and other historical buildings, sites and structures. MEPA’s role in protecting the historical environment necessitates the assistance of specialised and dedicated people who can adjudicate what changes can be allowed to ensure that a historic building can continue to provide a use while conserving its historical and aesthetic value.
How effective is the legislation protecting urban conservation areas?
The current legislation is not sufficiently robust to ensure the protection of urban conservation areas. For instance, scheduling criteria for Grade 2 and 3 buildings allows for significant changes which may seriously alter the historical qualities of such sites. Also, current legislation and policy do not include the conservation of the interior elements that constitute part of the value of our buildings. Most European countries offer protection for the interiors such as wrought iron elements, timber apertures, plaster and gypsum works. For instance, regulations for the restoration of apertures for the Georgian houses in Bath, UK, include utilising the historic lead paints and exact colour of what existed historically. Similar regulations exist in southern France to ensure that the historic palette of colours for plasterwork is kept.
Another major lacuna in our legislation is the lack of protection of the surroundings of historical buildings. It is utterly pointless to protect the historic houses of, for instance, Balzan and at the same time allow for the destruction of the historic gardens that surround these houses.
Protection must also be extended to ensure that historic cores have a buffer area of sympathetic development that does not destroy or impinge negatively upon the gardens and skylines of our villages. I have witnessed far too many gardens within historic cores, where owners spent a fortune restoring and conserving their house, only to have a block of flats put up overlooking their garden.
Is there enough appreciation of our vernacular architecture that, in turn, helps in the conservation of urban conservation areas?
The recent case of a Naxxar townhouse being given a MEPA permit to be demolished and replaced by a facsimile illustrates clearly that there is insufficient appreciation of the vernacular urban fabric which constitutes 90 per cent of our historic urban cores. Conservation philosophy in European countries clearly advocates the protection of vernacular architecture in its entirety. Rebuilding a facsimile is not acceptable by any of the international conservation charters. The only situation where rebuilding a facsimile was considered acceptable is where entire swathes of cities have been lost, such as Warsaw. The rebuilding of the historic urban core of Warsaw was deemed important because it allowed the population of the city to regain some of its lost identity.
What is the social importance of urban conservation areas?
The identity of every village in Malta and Gozo is centred on the buildings and spaces which have witnessed the key historical and social events of that town. Traditionally these have been centred on the parish churches of such villages and towns. The buildings that constitute these historical centres give a specific identity to the town and to its inhabitants.
The current legislation is not sufficiently robust to ensure the protection of urban conservation areas
The developers lobby frequently points out that policies should be more practical in order to revitalise urban conservation areas. Do you agree?
I have worked for over 20 years in the reuse of historic buildings. All of these projects have involved the conservation and interventions necessary to render the building capable of offering spaces and environmental conditions which allow for contemporary living. The regulatory framework which currently exists, in most cases, allows this to happen.
Developers, on the other hand, may seek to extract maximum density out of the footprint of a site. I have heard, many a time, developers requesting for gutting of historic buildings which would result in simply retaining a facade. This is short-term thinking that can only result in the destruction of our heritage. Creative solutions need to be found to ensure that the historic value of a building as a whole is protected. On the other hand, at an urban level, conservation of our urban cores can, if done very sensitively, also extend to allowing cutting edge architecture to co-exist within our historical urban cores. As long as the historic structures are protected, allowing modern interventions can render historical centres alive and vibrant.
What sensitive interventions can be carried out to enhance our urban conservation areas?
At a policy level, urban conservation areas require buffer zones between the development zones and the urban cores. Protection is also needed for the skyline. The change in zoning from two to three-storey and penthouse has resulted in extensive destruction of our villages. These need to change. The urban core skyline should be respected and remain visually pleasant.
It is a great shame that the previous vernacular and gentle skyline that existed in Manikata, has been marred by insensitive building heights around the church. Manikata is a great case study of how our local plans failed to protect the rural and vernacular urban aspects of this hamlet. Similarly, Marsalforn’s skyline around the church consisted of a spire and rooftops set against the backdrop of the hill beyond. It is now dominated by extensive roof developments and hotel extensions, marring a skyline which formed part of our collective memory of Marsalforn.
What is the role of Din l-Art Ħelwa in helping conserve town centres and village cores?
Din l-Art Helwa advocates conservation of the very intrinsic qualities of our urban and rural environment that make us who we are and which we hold dear. We are a lobby group that encourages the preservation of the character of our towns and villages and of our natural and cultural landscape. Din l-Art Helwa speaks out against policies and decisions which may harm our environment. It is a highly respected NGO that since its foundation as a volunteer group in 1965 has saved as many as 39 national monuments through restoration and its opinions have always received consideration from government.
In 2012, when the Malta Tourism Authority was advocating allowing increasing the hotel heights, Din l-Art Helwa was consulted several times, and its advice was heeded. It is a great shame that a subsequent government reversed that decision entirely.
It is our role as a conservation watchdog to speak out. However, we cannot guarantee that the powers that be will indeed listen or take note. Many a time, politicians in Malta place their own political agenda before the environmental needs of the country. I can only hope that I am mistaken in this.
Joanna Spiteri Staines is a senior architect and associate partner with Architecture Project. She has specialised in restoration and rehabilitation of historic buildings. She is a council member of Din l-Art Ħelwa and forms part of the environmental team.