A care home project that is so strongly opposed that its development is stalled has won a global award, prompting its architects to question “the contrast between its international recognition and local dismissal”.

Valentino Architects blame the “state of paranoia” about development that the Maltese, including themselves, have been forced into due to the exploitation of the urban environment.

The controversial design for the Ħal-Caprat Care Village for older dementia patients was crowned the winner of Community and Civic category of the 2022 AR Future Projects awards, run by the long-standing and prestigious The Architectural Review journal.

But despite the international accolade, the studio’s project has struck a negative chord with the public, the cultural heritage watchdog, environmental NGOs, and the local council, who strongly objected to it, leaving PA/07492/19 suspended and “awaiting review of recommendation”.

The development application sought permission to demolish an existing building, excavate and construct a five-storey care home in Triq tal-Grazzja and Triq Xmun Attard in the Urban Conservation Area of Żebbuġ, sparking the anger of objectors.

They described the proposal as “totally out of context and out of scale with the surrounding traditional character of the neighbourhood, providing poor urban design and negatively affecting town planning within an Urban Conservation Area”.

The overall winner of the AR Future Projects award was a Norwegian project but Valentino Architects’ Ħal-Caprat project came “highly commended” by the AR Future Projects awards for the criticised Ħal-Caprat, as well as winning in the Community and Civic category, with chief design officer for the city of Los Angeles, Christopher Hawthorne, one of the judges, describing the success of the project to be “its urban approach and how it creates a village within the village”.

A need for community co-designing

The contrast between the project’s international recognition and its local dismissal made for an important case study on the Maltese public’s relationship with new development, which has been “heavily – and understandably – coloured over the past decade by hyper-densification and construction”, said Sandro Valentino, one of the architects behind Ħal-Caprat.

The public’s “rightful aversion” to new development and the disruption it brought was compounded by the general lack of trust in architects, developers and the entire planning system, Valentino continued.

To counter this, Malta’s planning process needs to become more public-facing in the early stages of a project’s design, he insisted.

Without this step in the planning process, well-meaning projects become tarred by the same brush

As things stand, people are unaware of a project’s intention and impact until they see a Planning Authority site notice affixed to a façade – “an impossible process by which to communicate the nuance behind the design of any project”.

This needs to change, he insisted, pushing for the idea of ‘community co-designing’ – a participatory approach where community members are treated as equal collaborators in the design process.

Strong opposition to project

Meanwhile, Ħal-Caprat is on hold and objectors maintain the development application runs counter to planning policies designed to avoid such “drastic interventions” within Urban Conservation Areas (UCA) and to protect their character.

While it may have won an international award for the community and civic category, locally, the residents considered the project to be detrimental to their health and standard of living.

There is criticism of the height of the five-storey development in a predominantly two-storey area that critics say would negatively impact the neighbourhood and strong residential community.

The home would also dwarf a nearby 17th-century chapel and generate traffic in an already busy and narrow one-way street, as well as create a dangerous precedent for future developments in the area.

In its opposition, the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage described the proposed development as “excessive and inappropriate”, creating extensive blank party walls that would adversely affect the UCA, while the demolition of the existing façade in favour of a non-vernacular design was in breach of policies.

Both the Design Advisory Committee and the SCH stated that “the proposed design, volume and massing is totally unacceptable”.

It was recommended for refusal on the grounds that it was incompatible with the urban design and environmental characteristics of the UCA.

Architects' counter arguments

Valentino Architects said they studied and recognised the concerns and damning objections to Ħal-Caprat and have examined how to address the Żebbug residents’ concerns.

Contesting the height issues and blank party walls, they claimed these have been decreased overall, and that the scheme’s frontage matches the street façades, receding towards the centre of the site as it rises and mitigating visual discord with its surroundings.

“Its massing has been purposefully designed to mimic the physiognomy of a traditional Maltese village,” they justified, pointing out that “the typology of the building warrants an architectural and urban presence that distinguishes itself from a residential scope” in the same way that a każin in a village square is generally larger.

Putting the height down to “a degree of stature” that a building of its nature deserved, the architects said “urban design and architecture are so much more than building height, volume and scale.

“They also relate to human beings and the environment – in this case, the role a building can play in curating the relationship between people living with dementia and the existing community.”

Overall, the commentary around the project has been “coloured by a misunderstanding of its intention”, said Valentino.

Malta’s planning process needs to become more public-facing in the early stages of a project’s design

The problem was being borne by architects, but the onus to fix it must be addressed by national policy, he said.

“Without this step in the planning process, well-meaning projects become tarred by the same brush, in the eyes of the public, as the gross overbuilding that has been allowed to take place across the islands.

“This plays into how people are able to judge the merits of new proposals versus how they are seen by independent critics – and that’s the crux of the contrast.”

Building recognisability

Valentino Architects worked with Perit Alexia Mercieca, specialised in dementia care design, to ensure the urban community residence would respond to its residents’ needs as studies show cases will triple over the next 30 years.

Sited on the grounds of a former winery, it builds on existing urban patterns to emphasise familiarity and sensory awareness.

Residents would live within walking distance of the main village core, with the home becoming a secondary peripheral node.

The building’s lower facade is rendered in a dusty red hue that extends into the public courtyard, amplifying its identity and recognisability.

Windows echo forms in nearby village architecture, again building recognisability – a proven visual aid for people with dementia.

“We believe that a care home located in the heart of a village and its community could play a significant role in improving its residents’ provision of care and quality of life,” said Valentino Architects.