Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/534048
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 28 JUNE 2015 15 for ruining the landscape, with projects that have the potential to cause much more serious prob- lems…. "The question is slightly incor- rect, because Malta's urban land- scape was ruined by the policies we have in place. We have very strict policies: they tell you, in this area, you can have four floors… the re- cess has to be so big, etc. In brief, you have a step-by-step formula you have to follow. Now, Malta has highly talented architects. If you give them a proper challenge, the talent is there: all they need is the opportunity." But they've had so much op- portunity already. We've already mentioned the Sliema seafront (sorry for the bias, but it's my home-town)… and just look what they did with that opportunity. To embroider Mintoff's analogy, they punched Sliema in the mouth and broke all its teeth… "The Sliema seafront was a real estate opportunity. The buildings are all adjacent, so you only had the façade to play with…" And because the policies permit- ted different heights at different times, he goes on, the result was mismatching heights interspersed with plenty of ugly support walls. "With tower blocks it's different. You're not just designing a façade, but a standalone building." Meanwhile, people are also wor- ried about the infrastructural im- pact on their neighbourhoods. If you're going to build skyscrapers in already densely populated areas, you will also dramatically multiply existing problems concerning traf- fic, parking, etc., while increasing local demand for services such as garbage collection, water and elec- tricity provision, drainage, etc. All this places a considerable strain on the local community… "All true. The trouble is, we are designing from the pavement in- wards. We are not looking beyond the pavement into the street…" But can the areas earmarked for high-rise take this added pressure? "No, they clearly can't…" So… aren't we creating a recipe for disaster here? "Yes, we are. I can't argue with that… unfortunately in Malta we have a reactive attitude towards such things. When we see that the Kappara roundabout isn't work- ing, we say: 'let's see how we can solve it.' Then we draw up plans, then we allocate the money, and eventually we do something about it. Now: coming back to Sliema: it's already a problem today. Call me optimistic, but I think that if it becomes an even bigger problem, maybe we'll start thinking about how to solve it. I know it's not an ideal situation; I'd love it if things were different…." I somehow doubt that Sliema residents will warm to that par- ticular view. Starting with the lo- cal council, which has insisted that the town cannot go high-rise without an underground transport system… Mintoff nods. "I understand their position completely. If we have the money in this country to build skyscrapers, there has to be a little investment in this huge infrastruc- tural project to try and start miti- gating the problems. So yes, we have to start thinking outside the box. And we have to start thinking longer term…" And yet, we seem to be doing precisely the opposite. The govern- ment has just launched a revised 'Strategic Plan for Environment and Development' (SPED), and Chris Mintoff expresses doubts re- garding the time-frames. "SPED will be reviewed in five years' time," he tells me. "What sort of strategic plan is that? Five years is how long it takes you to complete a project. So by the time your project is up and running, SPED will already be redundant…" All this only compounds the view that, even at policy level, the atti- tude seems to be 'build now, ad- dress problems later'. By Mintoff's own admission this is a flawed ap- proach. So shouldn't KTP be talk- ing about this more, seeing as the move towards high-rise seems to already be taken as fact? "We do talk about it. We don't manage to get 3,000 marching in Valletta about it; 'lack of foresight' might not be a very sexy issue to protest about. But we do push for it: our reaction to SPED was that we need a longer-term policy…" Meanwhile, there are a few is- sues that might attract crowds for a demonstration. One frequently disregarded impact on high-rise is the effect on the skyline in other areas. Today, the upper part of Fort Cambridge is already visible from the other side of the Grand Harbour. It can be seen jutting above the Valletta skyline from the Three Cities. 40 storeys are more than double the height of Fort of Cambridge. So wouldn't the new tower be twice as visible, rising up directly above Valletta… over- shadowing it, humiliating the 16th century fortifications… and that's not to mention the view of Mdina from the south and east of Malta, when three skyscrapers go up in Mriehel. Is this the sort of architectural vi- sion we want for Malta? Mintoff acknowledges once again that the situation is not ideal. "These priorities have never been discussed. We haven't drawn up proper policies to protect the view of Valletta… like we haven't ad- dressed the infrastructural impact of high-rise buildings. We have to put this reactive attitude behind us…" So wouldn't opposing the new high-rise direction – at least until we get these policies together – be a good start? After all, those build- ings haven't gone up yet. There is still a chance to stop what even Chris Mintoff argues is an archi- tectural direction that hasn't been properly thought through… "It is an option. We could have a capping on the height in order to safeguard the view of Valletta. I haven't discussed it with anyone. Should we look into it? Yes, defi- nitely…" I would rephrase that question slightly: should we look into it be- fore giving people permits to go up 40 storeys? "Yes. Ideally we should try to break this reactive approach. But we have to deal with the situation as it is, not as we would like it to be. From an architectural point of view, I welcome the challenge of high-rise. I think it will elevate the standards of architecture in Malta. But that's only from an architec- tural point of view. As for the in- frastructural problems: I wouldn't want to touch those with a barge- pole" Somebody will have to, how- ever… He nods. "Yes. And perhaps go- ing high-rise will force us to ad- dress those issues we have to date ignored." Interview CHRIS MINTOFF, chairman of the KTP [Chamber of Architects], welcomes high- rise development as a challenge to architects, but warns against a short-termist approach architectural revolution PHOTOGRAPHY BY RAY ATTARD