The Biccerija is in a state. Let’s do what previous government administrations have done with the area in the past. Let’s clear everyone out.
So, having dealt with the social problems, we need to address the built environment next. The buildings are currently disintegrating at an extraordinary rate, so why not help them along and pull down the ones that are about to succumb to gravity anyway? They’re old, damp, expensive to maintain and a nightmare to renovate, so why not have them replaced? Portomaso seems to be a winning formula, so let’s build something similar in the bottom end of Valletta: all sleek steel, mega yachts and pink render. Pack in the residential units, as many with sea views as possible, and then we can sit back and work out the financial profit.

Yes? No? A bold but regressive step towards the future? Most probably. Replacing a part of this downtrodden area with a new landscape is an aggressive answer to the problems faced by a UNESCO World Heritage city. Allowing the built fabric to deteriorate, on the other hand, smacks of apathy. Although, as a nation, we don’t seem particularly averse to changing the built environment, and whilst the Sliema and Gzira area is a frenzy of demolition and tower building, Valletta’s fringes are incapable of generating real change. Not through lack of desire, or ideas, but through a lack of decision; and negligence can be just as damaging as bringing in the bulldozers. Change, from the conservator’s point of view does not necessarily entail damage or loss of value. Quite the opposite, the aim of conservation in fact is to prevent damage or loss of value by creating change and by channelling enough resources to avoid heritage from falling into ruin. Demolition or large new additions are, however, not the only way to change the fortunes of an area.

A number of initiatives have been suggested for improving the Biccerija, all with varying degrees of viability. Trolling through the long list of previous proposals, we’ve noticed that many initiatives were thinking big – perhaps too big. To lay down the vast sum of money required to create a new commercial seafront area in such a marginalised area for example, is a huge risk, and whilst it might inject much needed life into the area, where this kind of project could really go sour is in the execution. On the other hand, the nodal approach from Entrust’s report (that inspired this series of articles) has got us thinking that maybe small steps within the area itself would be much more effective. The Biccerija probably doesn’t need any new buildings. What it needs is a strategy for reusing the area’s key structures in a more constructive way.
Yet developing new uses for historic buildings is not a simple task. It will come as no surprise that conservation, restoration, re-use and the associated ethical questions that accompany these fields, create a particularly troublesome maze. The spectre of authenticity seems to constantly arise and cause a certain discomfort, mostly due to the fact that every individual seems to have his own interpretation as to what authenticity truly is and how much importance one should ascribe to it.

A large number of conferences have been held and charters drawn up defining authenticity and outlining the importance of appropriate use. The landmark reference document for conservators on the subject is the Nara Document on Authenticity, drafted in 1994 as a result of a conference held in Nara, Japan. It discusses the importance of authenticity with particular respect to the diversity of culture and heritage, and states that authenticity judgements may be linked to spirit and feeling, in addition to the physical quality of the historic building itself. Unfortunately, deterioration is a natural and unstoppable process however much we try to slow it down, and therefore appropriate, considered change is the only weapon we have against either losing a building entirely or fossilizing it at a particular time period, rendering it unusable for our own age. According to the Nara Charter, retaining “memory” is just as crucial as retaining the building itself. As a result, restoring anything ‘to its former glory’ – a term that flies about with worrying abundance - is not the ideal approach however altruistic it sounds.

M.E. Spoke to Perit Claude Borg, the current executive co-ordinator of Valletta Rehabilitation Committee on the topic of sensitive re-use and the difficulty of retaining cultural significance.

“If you ask the building what it wants, if you read the building well, it is suggesting what use it can take… What is the building suggesting?” he asked. A rather esoterical concept perhaps, but an intriguing one. Let’s pick a building and see what it suggests.
One of the most significant buildings in the Biccerija is the Auberge de Baviere. At the outset, what the Auberge de Baviere, certainly does not suggest to us is the Government Lands Department and 106 employees rattling around inside it. It’s a large, elegant palazzo, with sea views and excellent access to Valletta’s main road network. The rear of the building forms part of the Biccerija core, but the front still touches the seaward edge. Mr Borg also pointed out that: “By creating activity zones on the periphery, one safeguards the spirit of the place within the core, but the creation of a policy and management of the transversal routes connecting the core to the periphery itself is the real trick.” Essentially, tackling the Auberge could be the first step, if not the key, to revitalising the area.

To state the obvious, the Lands Department does not appear to be creating much activity in the core of the area through its use of the Auberge, and is certainly not utilising the space to its full capacity. So let’s move them elsewhere. And in their place? Well, it’s tough to find a room in a good hotel in the capital, so with Government department turned out, let’s transform it into a five star boutique hotel replete with locally sourced antiques, gourmet chocolates on the pillows and a restaurant specializing in luxury Maltese cuisine. A move like this would certainly generate more activity in the area, but in terms of authenticity and appropriate use, would this action be ethical and correct? We were surprised to discover that historically speaking, the answer is could quite possibly be yes.
M.E. checked the facts with Dr. Keith Scibberas: “The Auberge de Baviere is one of Malta’s finest late Baroque palaces and was built in the 1690s by Gaspare Carniero. It was actually built as a private residence, but was appropriated by the Anglo-Bavarian Langue in the late eighteenth century”. Would he be against transforming it into a boutique hotel? “Being such an important palace, any new use should not encourage great alteration.” Dr Scibberas began carefully. “To turn it into a five star boutique hotel, you’ll need a very clever architect who can insert the necessary utilities whilst respecting the historic fabric. It could be done well, but ideally, any interventions should be reversible and speak a contemporary language. New uses should respect the past whilst looking to the future. Certainly, using important palaces as office space is not suited to their original spirit”.

M.E. also spoke to Professor Denis De Lucca, director of the International Institute for Baroque Studies at the University of Malta. “I think that would be a very good idea”. replied Professor De Lucca when we proposed the concept of a boutique hotel. “The functions of the Baroque age are not longer valid – and as the only Valletta Auberge that has direct sea views, it could serve well as a magnet for social interaction in the area if used as a hotel”. M.E. also learned that although the Auberge has had a number of uses in its lifetime, its original purpose was actually rather multifarious too. “Auberge buildings served as a point of reference for the military and administrative affairs of the various langues of the knights, and were used variously as bases for military command, a refectory where knights could eat, VIP residences for short periods, venues for entertainment and even partially as an old people’s home for elderly knights”

“However” he added, “The Auberge de Baviere has a long history of misuse. Many alterations have been carried out and so any new usage should address these and re-interpret the interior space in relation to the exterior”.

Valletta’s Mayor, Dr. Paul Borg Olivier gave M.E. his thoughts on such a radical change of use for the Auberge:
“There’s no doubt that the Auberge de Baviere could serve as a primary magnet to the area, and its use is crucial to the redevelopment of the area, because whatever decision about what happens there will act as a catalyst”. He said, adding: “Currently, it has a faceless use which gives no spirit to the area”. So what about transforming it into a boutique hotel? “I could see it as a hotel.” He conceded. “The authenticity of the idea is there, and it would give the building back an original function in a contemporary use”. “However,” he went on to say, “One has to be extremely careful not to intimidate the residents of the area. The use of the Auberge as government offices has no impact on them - they simply ignore it, but the change of use to a hotel must include them, not put up a barrier - it can’t reflect an aura of exclusivity”.
If government won’t be persuaded to relinquish the building entirely, would a different governmental use inject some life into the area? Private investment is often very heavily reliant on the continued success of the business model chosen, so to keep the Auberge in government hands might be one way to guarantee funds for its future upkeep - lest we forget, there are already enough privately owned Valletta buildings in a derelict state. “Whatever it might be, it has to be integrated. The Mayor concluded. “The viability and sustainability of any new use should not only be based on the building, but on the strengths and weaknesses of the area as a whole”.
The opportunity for interaction between residents and architecture is evidently key, a sentiment also echoed by Perit Shirley Cefai, a conservation architect currently lecturing Conservation Ethics at the University of Malta, who extended the scope of Dr Borg Olivier’s statement. “How would the regeneration of the Biccerija fit with the rest of Valletta, and the harbours?” she asked.

M.E. approached Minister Austin Gatt on the subject, curious to find out how he would feel about his department being ousted from the Auberge. Unfortunately we did not manage to obtain a response from Minister Gatt directly, but received the following statement from a Government spokesman:
“Such a decision would have to have a sound business case to back it up. The Government is certainly in favour of boutique hotels in Valletta and there are many buildings (a number of disused buildings in Merchants Street would come to mind) that would lend themselves ideally for this purpose. There is something to be said, however, for the view that Auberges have a vocation as public utility buildings. It may be argued that housing the Lands Department is beneath the dignity of the Auberge de Bavarie and there are several other public utilities that could be considered for this site”. Back in December 2006, M.E. published an interview with Lawrence Gonzi. The Prime Minister emphasised he was at, the time, unhappy with the level of private investment in Valletta, stating that “it could, and should be a lot higher”. Yet another M.E. article published this time last year revealed that the Government owns a great deal of vacant property in the city - exactly how much, they’re not sure – although we did establish that quite a number of properties fall within the boundary of the Biccerija area and actually includes the central ex-biccerija building itself. The desire for more investment in Valletta from the leader of the government is apparent. As the owner of a large number of large properties, government has the opportunity to make the first step that might encourage skittish private investors to follow them into the Biccerija and kick start the regeneration process for the area. Regeneration need not tackle everything at once. This can prove an expensive operation, quite often impossible to realise, and not always in the best interests of the area. City districts develop their character over time but one decisive action could provide the necessary platform for a less forced, more organic course of regeneration. Admittedly, many questions have been asked and there are still more we would like to generate; but when it comes to an area in such need of intervention, how many questions do we really need to ask before taking action?