The updating of local plans will provide an excellent opportunity to rethink urban planning in Malta and is necessary, architects who spoke with The Malta Independent on Sunday said.

David Felice, a founder of architectural firm AP Valletta, expected that by now there would have been the next wave of local plans "that would hopefully have been better than the first wave. They are all nearly 20 years old. That is a long time. But this will be an excellent opportunity to rethink urban planning in Malta".

"It would also be great if a review starts integrating how to make a town or village more liveable, in terms of outdoor spaces and streetscapes," adds Rosanne Asciak, a recently appointed partner at the same architectural firm. "With most people now living in apartments, the need for outdoor space is crucial - but is enough being provided?" 

She said that a mentality change will also be needed when it comes to on-street parking expectations of residents.

"The focus (of the review of the plans) should be the common good," Felice adds.

AP Valletta has over 30 years of experience in the architectural field, having first opened its doors back in 1991, albeit under a different name.

"The nature of our profession has changed dramatically since when we first started. It's a completely different work environment," Felice, who helped found the firm, said.

One major change is that the nature of the work has become much more specialised than it used to be, he said. To this end, AP Valletta recently appointed seven new partners to its leadership team. All those who became partner have been at AP Valletta for a long time, Felice explains. "The new partners are specialised in their specific areas, which is different than in the past when architects would work on everything. But projects were smaller and less complex back then, while there was less regulation than there is today," he adds.

Asciak, one of the seven newly-appointed partners, said that one issue which has developed over the years is that the number of capable masons has decreased. "To find someone really skilled in traditional stone workmanship is hard."

Asked about the increase in material prices today, Asciak said that it has had an impact on the design of buildings. "If a client's budget stretches so far, you have to try and work with it, without reducing the quality and aesthetics of the building. It's about trying to make things work without compromise."

Felice said that architects have more of a responsibility to explain to clients how projects will perform economically, especially in the long term. "When you present a concept for a project to a client, you would have to explain how it would work in economic terms."

There's another side to this, Felice said. "Historically, the cost of stone was artificially very low, at a time when most construction was carried out using limestone, one of our very few natural resources. Probably our most precious one and one that is finite. From an economic framework, the use of stone was always pushed because it is one of those factors which moved the economy."

Sustainable buildings

This, he said, brings up principles of sustainability and decarbonisation which are by their own nature very difficult to aspire to in a small island like ours.

In terms of where they foresee Malta going in terms of the kind of resources used for construction, they believe it will be about looking back. "In some cases it will be about going back to the roots of traditional construction," Asciak said, highlighting the use of traditional resources. "There are ways of reusing resources coming to light, such as the use of reconstituted stone, using waste material and rebuilding with it in a different way. We will also have to look at ways of reducing energy consumption for buildings."

Felice said that on the macro scale it also comes down to attractiveness, which he said is a unique selling point for Malta. "We are now building similarly to buildings abroad, with large foreign or local contractors adopting systems whereby they import cement from one country, steel from another, and so on. We always seem to be looking at the lowest bar. That makes the built environment become similar to the built environment abroad, which is not what Malta should be about. The special selling point of our islands is that it is special in terms of its built and natural environment. By looking back and seeing how things were being done in the past, and by being innovative in the way we can rethink that, it would make Malta more of a special location."

Regarding sustainable buildings, Felice highlights some difficulties. "We have a particular situation in Malta; it is difficult to create any form of genuinely sustainable buildings. Most projects, which claim to be Net Zero or close to Net Zero, are only so due to the energy generated by the installation of PV panels. We don't really look at the way we construct a building and the material we use in that building, but that is understandable to some degree. For example, timber is the best material to use in that respect, but in our case it would always have be imported, processed, carry shipping costs, and so you end up carbonising anyway. But this is not necessarily the only way forward."

Felice said that the country had a stock of older buildings that remain unused. "We don't always have to develop 'new' to such an extent," he said, mentioning the reuse of existing buildings or groups of buildings. Many unused buildings have been repurposed successfully and added value. However, there is still a stock, he said. "Take the Grand Harbour area, anything between Valletta and Paola is made up of one long series of often vacant or under-utilised buildings and infrastructure."

Planning and architecture

A major criticism of the construction sector is the uglification of the country, with a lack of uniformity on streets. 

"It is a problem," Felice said, "but I don't think this is merely an architectural one. We have a malady in this country that we confuse planning with architecture, we muddle them together and think they are the same thing. Take for example the issue of heights of buildings next to each other, this is not solely an architectural issue. Those are planning issues. Someone, somewhere, is deciding what the heights of buildings are meant to be."

"If we had to delve into the real issue, it is a political problem. Until we reach the day when we see that the planning regime and planning policies are independent of political influence, the country won't move on from this, because we have a history of thinking that political direction is required for planning policy. We need to move away from that line of thought, because the quality of our built environment requires long-term planning and not short-term convenience, " Felice said.

"There has to be an economic vision of course, but planning should then be in the hands of experts who are translating the direction of that vision and implementing it." The whole process of translating the economic, social and cultural vision into planning should be in the hands of planning experts, he said.

In parallel, Asciak adds, "there is a detachment between the liveability of the urban environment you are creating by putting the urban plan together, which dictates scale, height, streets and private and public landscaping". 

Its not only a lack of urban planning, she said, but a detachment from the needs of the people who are going to live or work in it. "It's the macro situation that first needs to be fixed."

When asked if architects are to blame for the uglification of the urban environment, they said that there are a number of stakeholders involved, with architects being among the main ones. "We all have a responsibility," Felice says, adding that the nature of the issue is also that, in some way or other, everyone has a direct relationship with the construction industry. "For example, the fact that we aspire to be home-owners makes us all in some way responsible. Of course as architects we have a responsibility, yes, architects should take some of the blame. It is not an easy environment to work in, we have to decide what our principles are and adhere to them."

The government has been pushing the concept urban greening forward over recent years. Asked about this, he said: "It's a pity that we have to talk about urban greening in the first place, as the implication means that the country is trying to fix something it got wrong."

He fears it is becoming a buzzword. "Sustainability itself is such a buzzword and I sometimes wonder if we all have the same understanding of what it means. Even greenwashing is becoming a buzzword. It is not good enough for our authorities to tell us that now urban greening is important." We should be going back to the planning policies and ensure that they promote the introduction of a better balance between buildings and open space, he said. "The issue lies there. And government should lead the way in its own projects to set the example."

Asciak adds that focus should also be on protecting limited resources, giving the example of rainwater and harvesting it on an urban scale while looking at how it will be used. "It is also about the type of 'greening' that will be used. Are they sustainable plants that can survive with little-to-no irrigation or will they increase the load, requiring more water to keep them alive," she asks.

One of the most effective ways to green a country is through agriculture, Felice adds. "We have practically killed the industry over time. A healthy agricultural sector is important as food availability is the next big issue our society will have to face." He spoke of the need to look at how the country can revive this sector. "That in itself will improve the green quality of our environment."

"I am not thrilled to instead have a public organisation finding little patches of concrete in between buildings and saying it will turn them into a garden when the problem is bigger than that. The bigger problem is what we need to be addressing," he adds.

Both architects agree that the country should have a skyline policy. "It would be good to have," Asciak said. "Especially given that Malta is so small and you can see the tall buildings from anywhere."

She also said that when dealing with applications in Valletta, "there is a rigorous process which is good and keeps the locality under control". 

As for whether there should be more rigorous controls across the board, Felice believes that if the common good is the most important target, "then of course it has to be rigorous".

Asciak adds that it is easy to understand the reason behind the level of attention given to Urban Conservation Areas and Valletta when it comes to planning policies. "Perhaps it is worth considering that the same quality and attitude should be applied to the rest of the building zones, as at the moment it does feel that what happens outside of the UCA doesn't really matter," she said.

"Then ideally, rather than simply establishing what the lowest bar is and ensuring everyone is above it, we should be promoting innovation, improvement and new ideas," Felice adds. "That is the type of planning regime we would like to see, which to be fair we do see sometimes but too often limited to specific cases."

As for the lack of uniformity in building designs along streets, there is a distinction being made between heritage areas and newer building zones, Felice explains. "When a development is taking place in a historical area there are many protection systems in place, but if a development is in a new zone it's not really watched over with the same attention because it is new. This doesn't make sense as the new zones will make our future heritage."

There is also attention to the context of a building in a UCA zone, Asciak adds, "which is what is lacking" in other areas. "What happens (in newer zones) is that there are individual blocks, governed by policies, but the context in terms of how they come together is not really considered".

'We need to understand the context and history of a building'

Regarding the process of making interventions to heritage buildings, the first step is research, Felice explains. "We need to understand the context but also the history of the building. Buildings relate their own narrative. That very much leads you in the direction you should be developing the design, in terms of where and how you are intervening within that historical context."

Asciak said that the use of more modern materials is not necessarily an issue. "Sometimes technology helps, sometimes structurally it is required." When intervening, "you are tying to the narrative and history of the building, even if you are implementing change or repurposing it, but don't just retain the facade and destroy everything behind it and call that architectural heritage".

"As with everything, there are different levels of how far you take it." She said it all depends on the building and what someone can and wants to do with it. "It starts from the developer or investor and what their brief is."

Felice said that the best contemporary work on the island is generally seen when dealing with heritage buildings. "That is one area where I think we collectively do quite interesting work. They are pleasing to our environment, in addition to having the advantage of utilising existing buildings."

There's also a question of value that comes into play, he said. "If we did less, wouldn't the value of what we have increase more?"

AP Valletta's evolution has always been about sticking to its principles, they said, adding that new leadership will mean more incisiveness and rounded thinking around those principles. "We have all been working together for years, shaping our shared ideas for the built environment. It's a moment of celebration for us that we are now entering this new chapter of the practice's lifespan together." They said that AP Valletta remains focused on addressing today's most pressing urban problems through its projects. "The practice works to understand how urban life impacts human progression, and how the architectural profession is best placed to shape it."