The past weeks have been characterised by revelations of project upon project proposing tall buildings, drawing various reactions from different sectors of society, including independent MP Marlene Farrugia, who tabled a parliamentary motion proposing a moratorium on large projects, particularly those which include tall buildings.
Both main political parties have already expressed their disagreement with the notion of a moratorium, but have not made further comment on the rest of the motion, which, one presumes, will soon be discussed.
This is an important step in itself – the country’s highest institution will delve into a debate on urban quality matters.
The motion also calls on Parliament to support the Chamber of Architects and Civil Engineers’ proposal of 2007 for the establishment of an independent design review panel, as opposed to the recently established Design Advisory Committee which forms part of the Planning Authority.
The design review panel as conceived by the chamber would consist of a group of competent, learned professionals from diverse sectors of society. Submission of projects to this panel would be voluntary and open to any project at the design stage, even prior to being submitted to the Planning Authority for its review.
The main remit of the panel would be to assist the developer and the professional team engaged on the project in achieving excellence in design, in encouraging projects which give back to society by providing a sense of place and of identity.
It would consist of a participative process, involving the views of all stakeholders, and would provide a qualitative analysis of proposals, placing the public’s well-being at par with the project’s particular interests.
We cannot afford to focus our efforts primarily on promoting glitzy towers which no one is really sure that we need in certain areas
The chamber also called on government to submit all public projects to this panel for review, because it is in the interest of society that public funds are utilised in the best possible way.
Design quality should be the key driver of public projects, and design review can ensure that this is achieved. This concept would, to most, appear to be essential, but sadly this is not always the case.
Various examples spring to mind, including the much-criticised partial demolition of the Qala school and the more recent design of Castille Place, both of which the Chamber of Architects and Civil Engineers strongly criticised. One of the recently announced public projects to have caught the chamber’s eye concerns the proposals for the new Ta’ Qali Crafts Village.
Setting aside the debate on the need for this project or otherwise, there is, however, a whole lot to be said about its design, or rather the apparent lack thereof.
It is mediocre at best and reflects a provincial mentality which appears to be stuck in a perennial rut of trying to emulate our vernacular idiom – and failing miserably at it.
It is also symptomatic of a culture which gauges the viability of a project by how cheaply it can be built, rather than attributing value to the quality of space and to the intrinsic benefits that can result.
The fact that this will be an EU-funded project further demands a quality-driven project.
It is proposals such as this which emphasise the need to give importance to our approach, across the board, to the quality of our built environment.
Because we cannot afford to focus our efforts primarily on promoting glitzy towers which no one is really sure that we need in certain areas, while at the same time relegating the rest of the island to mediocrity and pseudo-design.
Because urban quality matters.
Simone Vella Lenicker is a council member of the Chamber of Architects and Civil Engineers.