The approval of the structure plan for the Maltese islands in the early 1990s brought about a revolution in the Maltese planning system which has been largely implemented by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (Mepa).
In particular, chapter 15 of the structure plan deals with conservation and contains 18 policies which form the basis of the conservation strategy currently in force. One of the principal goals of these policies was the establishment of urban conservation areas.
Prior to this, the temporary provisions schemes had defined what are still known as village cores. These were subsequently studied in greater detail by means of a process which was finally completed by the approval of the local plans. These local plans defined the Urban Conservation Areas (UCAs), and more recently, the design priority areas, which have been given specific policies.
Another key document which has had considerable influence in steering change within urban conservation areas is the “Design Guidance for Development within UCAs”. More general policies are given by the “Policy and Design Guidelines 2005”. These documents are available on the Mepa website: www.mepa.
org.mt.
One of the first decisions taken by the authority, soon after it was constituted, was the setting up of a Heritage Advisory Committee. The committee involvement in the development-control process was gradually increased until by 1997, all applications falling within a UCA or village core boundary were being assessed by it. The committee not only examined the applications before giving its advice, it also carried out site inspections on approximately 30 per cent of the applications referred to it.
Other organisational changes within the authority that had a direct bearing on UCAs were the establishment of a UCA Team and a DCC specifically constituted to decide applications falling within UCAs. This paper seeks to assess the results of the time and effort expended towards Mepa’s efforts in the regeneration of UCAs. A number of enquiries have been considered and the analysis and results are presented here together with the conclusions reached.
However before examining these results, it is pertinent to point out that conservation is a process that goes far beyond romantic antiquarianism, although this suggestion is often made. Our heritage is a valuable asset because it not only defines who and what the Maltese really are, but given its numerous unique features, it becomes a material asset that can make a positive contribution to economic prosperity and quality of life. Not only does heritage give us a sense of identity, it is also one of the factors that persuade tourists to visit our islands. For it is our monuments – major and minor – that are the most attractive feature of our homeland. Proof of this is the success of the museum called The Limestone Heritage which explains the traditional process of quarrying our building stone in what was formerly a disused quarry.
Data collection and analysis
The data sets examined are those covering the years 1993-2006. The data for 1993 is somewhat unreliable because the village core definition was not properly set out. The change in computer software enabled a better definition of these boundaries. The data for 2006 is necessarily incomplete as data refers up to October 2006. However it is felt that enough data is available to make a reliable assessment on which to base the conclusions which this paper will propose. For the range of years considered, the datasets compiled are as follows:
• the total number of applications;
• the number of applications falling within a UCA and the locality of these applications;
• the number of approved applications involving demolition of the site and the locality of these applications.
The analysis carried out is based on various percentages which express the various criteria being considered for comparison. The use of percentages as against whole numbers renders the material easier to understand and trends are easier to read in percentages than numbers.
Data analysis
The first question asked is whether the UCAs are decaying, crumbling and retrograde areas and whether there is any interest in development within UCAs. Furthermore, one may wish to enquire whether the development-control policies and guidelines for UCAs act as a stimulus or as a disincentive for their vitalisation. Table 1 shows the percentage of all applications in a particular calendar year which fall within a UCA. It will be seen that on average, approximately 15 per cent of all full-development applications submitted to Mepa fall within a UCA. Until 1995, the percentage of applications was smaller and this is because the UCAs were still in the process of being designated.
More surprising is the unusually high percentage sustained in 2002 which was just over 24 per cent. A more detailed analysis of the full-development applications submitted within UCAs for that year reveals that there were over 200 applications submitted for the installation of domestic satellite dishes. The amendment to the Development Notification Ordnance in May 2005 put an end to this surge in applications because the installation of satellite dishes was redefined as permitted development.
This unexpected number can be more readily understood if one considers that this was the first time that the price of satellite receivers fell, to the extent that it was possible for a considerable portion of the Maltese public to watch the World Cup football matches from the Far East on satellite in the comfort of their own homes. Incidentally, this high figure also indicates that the UCAs are inhabited by a vibrant population that is up to date with the latest technological development – a far cry from the suggestions of muzew or presepju that are sometimes heard regarding the effects of the UCA development control policies. In fact, the survival and success of these areas is the result of their ability to meet society’s current needs in preserving the traditional characteristics which give a sense of familiarity to the localities.
The next enquiry regarded what percentage of applications falling within UCAs were granted permission for the demolition of the existing building (Table 2).
The rationale behind this query was to ascertain the general condition of the buildings within UCAs and whether the inhabitants of the UCAs were anxious to sell their property to speculators in order to make a fast buck. It is considered that the total demolition of an existing building is not a conservative process but a destructive one, which not only causes considerable change in the urban fabric and density but also contributes negatively to the ever-increasing volume of inert waste which these islands are generating.
Once again, the graph shows an almost-steady 15 per cent as the average of the permitted demolitions within all the UCAs over the study period. The only exception was 2003, when the figure rose to a record 19 per cent.
Consideration of the corollary of this statistic indicates that the rest of the applications within UCAs are either refused permissions or approvals for other – possibly more conservative – modes of development. It may be argued that the relatively low percentage of permitted demolitions within UCAs would tend to indicate that there is a considerable amount of conservative development going on, even though the demolition of a single building often has a considerable impact on the streetscape.
In this regard, it is pertinent to point out that the authority’s policies tend to accept a degree of sensitive change especially where such a change would extend the building’s useful life. This approach results in wider benefits through urban regeneration and the improved economic viability of an area, as well as a reduction in the volume of inert waste generated. The success of these policies can be seen in particular UCAs where the property is advertised in estate agents’ brochures as “converted” or “ripe for conversion”.
The numbers of permitted demolitions were re-analysed by local councils in order to try and understand which UCAs were under the greatest re-development pressures. The graph indicates that the UCAs of Birzebbuga, Dingli, Gzira, Mellieha, Msida, Nadur, St Julian’s, St Paul’s Bay and Xewkija are under the greatest pressure for re-development. Some of these localities may come as a surprise to some. However, greater incentives may be necessary so as to induce less drastic change in these localities before their essential character is lost forever.
Trend analysis and
implications
The analysis of the data under study has revealed that there is a lively interest in the development of UCAs in the Maltese islands indicated by the percentage of full-development applications affecting sites within them. This means that the historic cores of our settlements are being subjected to considerable transformation and this is probably the most certain proof that they are still alive and inhabited by an active portion of our society. It is also this portion of society that has either taken a conscious decision to move into a historic setting or has always lived there and not wished to move away.
At this point, one should mention that the ingress of new people into an existing community should not be considered as a negative trend. New inhabitants quite often occupy properties which have been vacant for some time and only they, it seems, have the courage to take on the conversion and conservation of these dilapidated properties. Terms such as “gentrification” are simplistic in that they imply that people are being forced out of their homes by richer outsiders.
However, these definitions ignore the concept of social mobility in which people may choose to move to a new locality if they wish to and they also have the right to buy and sell their property. Moreover, population movements, whether at the macro or micro level, have occurred continuously throughout history and these have contributed to the evolution of societies, rather than their decay. Decay is only said to occur when the population of an area ages and is not renewed. Like Hal Millieri or Bir Miftuh, such a settlement is doomed to die.
The type of applications being submitted indicate that not only is there a considerable amount of development taking place within UCAs but that on the whole, a considerable portion of this development is of a conservative nature. This means that not only is the existing historic fabric of the UCAs being modernised and reused but also that the essential characteristics are being retained.
This implies that not only the intensity but also the rate of change within UCAs are being controlled by Mepa’s policies and that these controls are not stifling requests for sensitive developments in many UCAs. However, there are a number of UCAs where development pressures are such as to endanger the character of the area because a high demolition rate implies a fast rate of change and a considerable increase in the intensity of development. For some areas such as Gzira, Mellieha and Nadur, to name but three, the knell has already sounded and it may be pointless to attempt to conserve at this late hour.
However, many positive results of current UCA development-control policy can be noted if only one takes the time to look for them. Many buildings in numerous UCAs have been rehabilitated, although it appears that some UCAs are more fashionable than others and this increased “fashionability” has lead directly to increased conservation, possibly as a result of the higher prices that property can command in these localities. Mepa’s direct intervention, as in the Valletta Air-Conditioning Unit Exercise has lead to the removal of a considerable number of unsightly air-conditioning units from the facades as well as the upgrading of a number of shop fronts. Such proactive intervention has led to a significant improvement in the ambiance of a number of streets.
Conclusion
Our UCAs continue to be areas of special character that still attract people to live within them. The inhabitants of the UCAs are a dynamic population that renews itself by both migration as well as internal growth.
The requests for development attest to the continued interest that manifests itself within these historic localities. Public consciousness has evolved over the years and the ideas behind heritage conservation and the reuse of the existing historic fabric have achieved wide esteem. However the balance is always dynamic and the function of Development Control is to remain vigilant and curb excessively-destructive and short-sighted schemes in favour of more balanced long-term conservative plans in which the proposals are commensurate with urban regeneration and the achievement of higher environmental standards.
The experience which the authority has gained over the years now forms a compendium of possible solutions which are often suggested to would-be developers, either before an application is submitted or during the application process itself.
A measure of sustainability would appear to have been achieved and this is comforting.
Dr Mallia is manager, Heritage Advisory Committee.
(NOTE: The author wishes to thank Mr Stephen Ferrito for his generous assistance in the extraction of the datasets from Mepa’s database used in the analyses described in this paper)