A future for our past

April 18 was International Day for Monuments and Sites. Malta joined the rest of the world in celebrating this day. Heritage Malta conducted a number of guided tours at a number of sites, Ta' Hagrat temples at Mgarr, the Malta Maritime Museum in Vittoriosa, the National Museum of Archaeology in Valletta and the megalithic sites of Hagar Qim and Mnajdra at Qrendi and Ggantija at Xaghra, Gozo.

This coincided with the Malta at War Day organised by Fondazzjoni Wirt Artna at Couvre Porte, Vittoriosa. ICOMOS Malta, the local committee of the International Council of Monuments and Sites, had already organised a half day seminar on April 2, entitled Heritage at Risk, focusing on Vilhena Palace at Mdina.

All these are commendable initiatives that help draw the attention of both scholars and the general public to our cultural heritage. This increased attention is necessary to maintain these monuments.

The sheer amount of significant monuments sometimes makes it too much to adequately protect and maintain them. Valorising them ensures that those responsible for these monuments can get the funds required.

However so many of our main heritage sites have been inadequately managed and protected. Significant improvements are being made and we should gradually start seeing the improvement. The Saflieni Hypo-geum project has now been ready for quite some time and the deterioration stemmed.

The work of the rehabilitation committees can be seen and, although much remains to be done, continue to channel public funds into the conservation of the buildings and monuments in Mdina and Rabat, Valletta and Floriana, and Vittoriosa, Cospicua, Senglea and Kalkara.

The proposals for the Hagar Qim and Mnajdra Design Competition have been assessed and it is hoped that the momentum gained will be maintained. The much needed shelters for the temples and the setting up of the archaeological park are long overdue.

The Roman Domus at Rabat is being reorganised and the brief of protective shelters for the Tarxien temples is being discussed. Simi-larly, the setting up of Heritage Malta and the re-organisation of what was the Museums Department is also contributing to a general improvement of the care of our heritage and museums.

But is this our built heritage? Yes, but not only. Apart from the main monuments, sites and museums, our islands boast numerous chapels and churches, stately houses, farmhouses and dwellings, corner niches and the occasional statue placed strategically in the widening of the otherwise narrow winding streets of our towns and villages.

The fate of these monuments varies. As expected, the attention and restraint in intervening on these monuments cannot be the same as for the more important monuments. But this has resulted in significant losses.

The 1992 legislation that established the then Planning Authority and the drafting of the Structure Plan restrained the excesses of the previous decades. It prevented the further opening up of the village cores and the widening of their characteristic streets, and has protected some of the more significant buildings. It has established what is permissible in the village cores and promoted the use of timber and wrought iron.

And yet the quality of our town centres continues to deteriorate. Our streetscapes are increasingly losing their coherence. So many buildings have been brought down to be replaced by ill-fitting new development. Several so-called restorations and conversions are actually more damaging than years of neglect.

Facades are hacked away or sandblasted, losing the all important top few millimetres of stone and creating numerous micro-cracks that facilitate further deterioration. Walls prone to rising damp are rendered over in cement rich renders or covered with impervious cladding, thus pushing the humidity even higher. Plastering is removed using sharp tools, usually scraping away not only the plaster but also the stone. Often the pointing of walls does not match the colour of the stone, making the façade look like a massive jigsaw puzzle.

It seems that the country still lacks the ability to take care of its heritage in a natural manner. This despite the impressive number of concerned organisations and authorities in a country our size: government agencies such as the Malta Environment and Planning Authority and the Restoration Unit within Ministry for Resources and the Infrastructure, the rehabilitation committees, Heritage Malta and the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage, educational institutions such as the Architecture and Civil Engineering Faculty, the Institute for Masonry Construction and Research, and the Institute for Baroque Studies at the University of Malta and the Malta Centre for Restoration, non-governmental organisations such as Din l-Art Helwa, Fondazzjoni Wirt Artna and ICOMOS (Malta).

But this is to be expected as the approach to the management of change in our town and village cores has been reactive. To date we have MEPA policies and guidelines that are used to control development as planning applications are assessed. Apart for the much discussed and rather basic Renzo Piano masterplan for Valletta, I am not aware of any attempt to study the streetscapes and develop a coherent site specific plan to guide these changes.

A welcome change is the recently launched masterplan for Mdina. Such a study identifies the value of the city, what makes it unique, what detracts from its significance and also what can be done to improve it. Also interesting is the possibility of financial assistance available through the historic buildings scheme.

It is high time that we devote more resources to our heritage, not only the monumental ones but also our 'lesser' heritage. If the quality of our town and village cores is to improve, a proactive approach such as that for Mdina must be adopted.

An approach that is site specific, that differs depending on the area being studied, on the individual street or group of buildings, but that is based on common design guidelines such as those currently recommended by MEPA. A master plan that indicates what is to be retained and valorised, what is to be done to improve the quality of the conservation area, what is of no significance and hence can be demolished.

But cultural heritage is a common good and it is only fair that it is not borne solely by the owners of the properties. Proposals in line with such a masterplan are to be sustained on condition that the techniques used are as approved. Proposals in conflict with the plan are to be discouraged. This is in fact an extension of what is already being done for timber balconies in Valletta and the Three Cities. Just as funds are made available to those who need to replace their timber balconies, funds or tax incentives are to be developed for the restoration of our historic buildings.

To date the drafting of regulations and guidelines have protected our village cores from the excesses of previous years. However, there has been a steady deterioration of the fabric and cohesion of our towns and villages. It has now become important to adopt a proactive approach and guide the good intentions of property owners to the benefit of all. To achieve this, our village cores must be studied and valorised, site specific recommendations developed and proposals in accordance with these recommendations sustained.

Mark Azzopardi BE&A, M.Sc., A&CE, is a conservation architect with a Masters in conservation technology for masonry buildings. He is a member of the Valletta and Floriana Rehabilitation Committee and a committee member of ICOMOS (Malta). Apart from his private practice, Mr Azzopardi also lectures the vocational students at the Malta Centre for Restoration and the postgraduate students at the Institute for Masonry Construction and Research at the University of Malta.