Applying macro urban morphology to urban design … · Applying macro urban morphology to urban...

Urban Morphology (2006) 10(1), 23-40 © International Seminar on Urban Form, 2006 ISSN 1027-4278

Applying macro urban morphology to urban design anddevelopment planning: Valletta and Floriana

David W. ChapmanSchool of Property, Construction and Planning, Faculty of Law, Humanities,

Development and Society, UCE Birmingham, Perry Barr, Birmingham, B42 2SU, UKE-mail: [email protected]

Revised version received 14 December 2005

Abstract. The paper examines the macro urban morphology of Valletta andFloriana, and lessons that may be drawn to inform future urban design anddevelopment planning there. The macro-morphological regions are outlined,and this sets the context for an analysis of the ways they, and the topography,plan units and the fixation lines of the fortifications, interrelate to createdistinctive urban forms and spaces. This provides the context for discussionof the ways the analysis of these complexes of urban form and space couldcontribute to urban design and development planning more widely in practice.

Key Words: urban form, space, macro analysis, context, innovation, design,development planning

Urban design and development planningrequire method and creativity: appraisal of theexisting urban form and its context are critical.The challenge is to capture the physical, social,environmental and economic conditions inways that can be used to enable conflicts to beovercome and opportunities realized. Theexisting urban form of an area is often criticalto decision-making, but can understanding ofurban morphology more generally become acreative design tool? Valletta and Floriana inMalta have been chosen as the opportunity toexplore this in practice, because they presentsome distinctive morphological characteristicsand challenges, and they reveal how differentmorphological regions and features can resultin some quite unplanned and unpredictableplaces. The area is also useful as the townplan of Floriana has been studied in somedepth by Garret (1996) and the suburb issubject to contemporary urban designproposals.

Many of the seminal works of urbanmorphology and urban design can be traced to

the early 1960s. M.R.G. Conzen’s town-plananalysis of Alnwick (1960), Kevin Lynch’sThe image of the city (1960) and GordonCullen’s Townscape (1961) are stillinfluential. Synergies between their works aresignificant, and the paper seeks to build uponthese.

As Conzen showed (1960, p. 4), it ispossible ‘to establish some basic conceptsapplicable to recurrent phenomena in urbanmorphology and to lead to an explanation ofthe arrangement and diversity of an urban areain terms of plan types and resulting geograph-ical divisions’. Since his early work otherscholars, including Whitehand, Moudon andLarkham, have explored the subject, and thisstudy draws upon their work. The aim is toexplore the potential for using macro urbanmorphological analysis to inform urban designand development planning. For, as Lynchremarked, ‘understanding a locality demandstime and effort [and] the site planner suffers achronic anxiety about [the] spirit of place’(1960, p. 5).

24 Applying macro urban morphology

The relationship between urban morph-ology and townscape was identified bySmailes (1955, p. 101) who explained that‘urban morphology ... is not merely two-dimensional in scope. On the contrary, it isthrough the special importance which the thirddimension assumes in the urban scene thatmuch of its distinctiveness and variety arise’.He also identified the critical relationshipbetween the natural context, built form andspatial qualities, pointing out that ‘apart fromsuch quality of tone and the character impartedby natural features of its site, the townscapedepends for its distinctiveness and varietyupon the balance between spaces andstructures, and upon the varied textures thesepresent’ (Smailes, 1955, p. 104).

The importance of space in urbanmorphology is being recognized, but stilldeserves further exploration. Larkham (2002,p. 95), commenting upon a paper by Adolphe(2001, pp. 183-4), identifies this lacuna.While observing that ‘the paper seems morecorrect when it explains that ‘urban fabric is infact made up of urban spaces’’, Larkham goeson to note that ‘although the author isexplicitly referring to ‘nonbuilt spaces’, thisseems rather an over-simplification’. Thework of Krier (1979) in defining typologies ofurban space is helpful in general terms but inpractice it needs place-specific analysis.

The aims of analysis can vary greatly, asmay the levels of depth or generalizationrequired. Kevin Lynch (1960, p. 2) concen-trated upon the ‘clarity or ‘legibility of thecityscape’’, defining legibility as ‘the easewith which parts can be recognized and can beorganized into a coherent pattern’. Theobjectives, scale and resolution needed foranalysis and prescription present a challenge,and it is important to find ways in whichsynergies can be achieved between depth ofmorphogenetic analysis, qualitative appraisaland development planning.

The issues of scale and resolution have beenaddressed by Moudon (2002, p. 38) whoexplored the grain and areal extent of analysis,from micro to macro. The differences betweenthe scale and levels of resolution used bydifferent disciplines is also discussed, for

example by architects concerned with the plotand regional planners who use a level ofresolution ‘at yet a higher level ofabstraction’. It is suggested that ‘onlyarchitects and urban designers considerelements of urban form’ with ‘all other alliedprofessions replacing these elements byabstract concepts such as density and land-usemix’ (Moudon, 2002, p. 38). But, as will beconsidered later, would architects and urbandesigners be helped in their creative andprescriptive work of design by some clearerappreciation of urban morphology?

Hall (2000) has shown how morphologymay inform development plans, and in earlierwork he has suggested how analysis candefine ‘design areas’ and contextual policies(1996). McGlynn and Samuels (2000) haveoffered the idea of the ‘funnel’, ‘sieve’ and‘template’ as a means of linking analysis withprescription. Their approach is based on ahierarchy of elements from the macro to themicro (as the sieve), and employs the conceptof the funnel developed from the work ofKropf (1993). These are used to create a‘template’ that ‘embodies the numerouselements and relationships which togethercharacterize a locality’ (McGlynn andSamuels, 2000, p. 85). It is this that theysuggest can guide designs for individual sitesand also wider design guides or codes. Butcan it be used to innovate? The concept isdeveloped later in this paper to ‘abstract’ amacro analysis of Valletta and Floriana, whichis then used to inform critical evaluation of arecent master plan for the development ofFloriana.

Before exploring this application of urbanmorphological analysis to future urban designand development planning in Valletta andFloriana, it is important to sketch thedevelopment of Valletta and Floriana.

Valletta and Floriana

Malta consists of a small archipelago in theMediterranean. Its two main islands are Maltaand Gozo and inhabitation can be traced to5000 years BC (Bonanno, 1991; Trump,

Applying macro urban morphology 25

Figure 1. The Grand Harbour as shown by French engineers c. 1798-1800.Reproduced from Hughes (1969, p. 119).

2002). Until independence in 1964, theyexperienced successive occupation, includingPhoenician, Carthaginian, Roman, Byzantine,Arab, Norman, Spanish, French and British.

Valletta was planned as the new fortifiedcapital city of Malta following the protractedsiege in 1565 of the Knights of St John’s firststronghold at Birgu (just over the GrandHarbour in the ‘Three Cities’). Later landwarddefences were reinforced with outer lines offortification, and subsequently Floriana wasset out between the lines. Figure 1 showsValletta on the Sceberras peninsula, withFloriana between its landward defences, andthe ‘Three Cities’ on the opposite side of theharbour.

Valletta and Floriana are inextricably linkedphysically and functionally and today theyform the capital and administrative heart ofMalta. Thake and Hall (1993) provided a cityprofile of Valletta, and the metropolitan regionhas been analysed by Chapman and Cassar

(2004).The three principal periods of development

in the study area were the building of Vallettaand its fortifications; the development ofFloriana as a suburb between two lines offortification; and the additions and adaptationscarried out by the British colonial admini-stration, including the reconstruction followingthe Second World War.

Building Valletta

Valletta was built on a peninsula that sitsbetween two great natural harbours. After theKnights of St. John had repulsed theiraggressors, the Grand Master, Jean de laVallette, ordered that the hard, rocky limestoneSceberras peninsula had to be occupied.Francesco Laparelli was commissioned andbegan the work of design in 1565. Buildingwent ahead rapidly with most of the planned


sites occupied by 1582 (Garret, 1996). Thehistory of the building of Valletta has beentraced by various authors including Blouet(1967), de Giorgio (1986) and Hughes (1956).

The geography and topography of Malta’sGrand Harbour region had a critical influenceupon the strategic planning but, ironically, thetopography was wholly ignored in develop-ment planning. Laparelli’s decision ‘that thegrid should be implemented regardless ofterrain’ (Garret, 1996) is critical to the spacesformed between the grid and the fixation lineof the fortifications. Figures 2 and 3 show theplanned fortifications and street layout, andFigure 4, from Harrison and Hubbard’sreconstruction plan (1945), shows the topo-graphy over which they were laid. Figure 5shows an attempt to represent the three-dimensional relationships, but it stillunderstates the major variations of level thatexist in reality.

Friedman (1992, pp. 105-6) has alreadyshowed that the ‘relationship between theindividual building and the town [had] altered

in a fundamental way’ during the late four-teenth century and in the Renaissance, whenthe annexation and private use of public spacewas controlled, and ‘private builders adheredmore strictly to property lines and accepted aspart of the cost of construction the expenses ofan elaborately articulated façade.’ As shownby Figures 2-5, by the time Valletta was built,the urban form was being even more firmlycontrolled and regulated by the plan anddevelopment conditions.

Developing Floriana

The threat and fear of invasion continued longafter the completion of the Vallettafortifications and proposals for a new landfront to be built across the Sceberras peninsulawere implemented. The Floriana Lines,named after the engineer Peitro Paulo Floriani,were completed in 1719. They enclosed anextensive landward hinterland, which had been

Figure 2. Drawing of the new city of Vallettaby Lafrery (1566). Reproduced from

Hughes (1969, p. 67).Figure 3. Laparelli’s third drawing,

developing the city layout. Reproduced fromGanado (2003, p. 498).


Figure 4. The topography of the Sceberras peninsula, as illustrated by Harrison andHubbard (1945).

Figure 5. Giacomo Bosio’s drawing of Valletta (Istoria della Sacra Religione di S.Giovanni Gerosolimitano, Rome 1594-1602). Reproduced from Hughes (1969, p. 77).


Figure 6. W.H. Smyth’s Map of 1822. Reproduced from Bonnici and Cassar (1994).

kept open beyond the glacis to maintain openlines of defence, vision and fire. A fewbuildings existed in this fringe belt before thereconstruction of the Floriana Lines, butdevelopments occurred later with the establish-ment of a new suburb, Floriana, between 1700and 1800 and the continued development ofFloriana as a base for British occupiers from1800 (Garret, 1996). The glacis beyond theFloriana lines has remained open as a second‘outer’ fringe belt despite inter-war ArtNouveau style proposals to develop it. Figure6 shows Valletta at the end of the Sceberraspeninsula, with the new land front created bythe Floriana Lines, and the new suburbbetween them and the Valletta fortifications.

As can be seen, only part of the area wasoriginally developed as the suburb, and a widedefensive strip was kept clear in front ofValletta itself. Garret (1996) has carried out anin-depth town-plan analysis of Floriana.

Figure 7 is redrawn from her work and showsthe main phases of development.

The importance of fringe belts has beenincreasingly realized by urban morphologistssince their definition by Louis (1936).Whitehand and Morton (2003, 2004) haveexplored the ways they may influence urbandevelopment, and note that ‘fringe belts werefirst identified as being associated with formerfortification zones’ (Whitehand and Morton,2003, p. 819). This is particularly relevant tothis study of Valletta and Floriana. They alsoshow the importance of other ‘features circum-ferential to the city’ (Whitehand and Morton,2003, p. 820) and show how recognizing thedistinctive characteristics of these belts can beimportant to analysis and policy-making.Development in Floriana, as in many fringebelts, occurred slowly between the lines offortifications, and it continues today. Somecontemporary proposals are examined later.


Figure 7. The main phases of development in Floriana. Redrawn from Garret (1996).

Figure 8. The Floriana lines, with gardens above and vegetation below.Photograph by the author, 2000.


Figure 9. Harrison and Hubbard’s reconstruction plan for Valletta and Floriana (1945).

British development, adaptation andconurbation

The British colonial period from 1800 wasstrongly influenced by the tripartite nature ofgovernance of the military, naval and civilfunctions (Borg, 2001). These city, port andfort roles affected administrative relations andphysical development. British public healthstandards had a significant influence upon theurban development patterns during thenineteenth and early-twentieth centuries.Damp-proofing and ventilation standards wereimproved, and a significant change to the formof development occurred in the new suburbsoutside Valletta and Floriana where a‘geometric territoriality based on longrectangular plots with varying back-gardenspace … soon led to the emergence of moreregular streetscapes more in line with the rowhouses of England than the traditionalvernacular idiom of the older village cores’(De Lucca, 1988, p. 319). Within Valletta andFloriana there was the incremental addition ofthe new service property and defences, but themost significant impact resulted fromreconstructing the city after the Second WorldWar.

Malta’s airfields, and especially the GrandHarbour, were critical for the British, and themain target for the German and Italian powers.

Sustained bombardment between 1940 and1942 caused extensive damage and loss of lifein Valletta and Floriana, and the Three Citiesof Birgu, Bormla and L’Isla. The events aregraphically painted by Ritchie (undated c.1943) and in Monserrat’s novel (1973).

The work of rebuilding was immediate. In1943, before the cessation of hostilities,consultants Harrison and Hubbard werecommissioned to prepare a reconstruction planfor Valletta and the wider area around it. Theirfinal report was published in January 1945,and Chapman (2005) has examined theimplementation in practice. Figure 9 showsthe proposals, including the reconstruction ofbomb-damaged street blocks and slum areas;the opening-up of a broad new boulevardthrough Floriana; a new bus terminus at CityGate; a broad access road to Valletta; and theopening-up of new squares and arcades.

The proposals for Valletta itself wereconcerned largely with rebuilding, especiallyof housing, but they also involved opening upnew civic squares where bomb damage createdthe opportunity. Inside Town Gate, FreedomSquare was formed, and in front of St John’sCo-cathedral a new square was created by thecutting back of the corners of two bomb-damaged blocks. The squares adopted thestrictly rectangular form used historically, butwith the innovation of a surrounding arcade.


For Floriana the much-widened access roadhad two very early subways, a series of newbuilding blocks and arcaded shops and cafés,and an expansive circus provided a new busstation in front of Valletta. Their proposals forextension of the gardens were not realized,which was a pity for, as Ganado (1977) says,‘the ‘town planners’ were the lovers’ friends,and wanted Floriana to be surrounded bygardens’.

Abstracting form and space

Having traced the key periods of developmentit is now possible to consider a macro analysisof the urban form and space. To represent thissimply and spatially, an analytical grid andabstract diagram have been used. The griddraws upon the concept of the funnel, sieveand template from McGlynn and Samuels(2000) and is based upon micro-analysis ofpatterns of form and content. The funnel helpsto identify levels of variety at different spatialscales. The sieve entails ‘vigorous sifting of alarge amount of data in order to isolate thesignificant … [findings]’ (McGlynn andSamuels, 2000, p. 84). These are employed togive an elemental analysis of the main morph-ological characteristics and regions, includingdistinctive patterns of urban space, which canbe used to help to evaluate new developmentproposals. It is not seen here so much as a‘template’, but as a potential design tool.

From this analysis some quite distinctivecharacteristics of urban form and space can befound. These are abstracted in Figure 10, andthey are briefly summarized below.

Fortifications, both seaward, harbour edgeand landward

These are characterized by the scale of themasonry, and powerful fixation lines and‘edges’ they produce. The seaward fortifi-cations closely follow the peninsula, creatinga high defensive wall with few gateways intothe city, and steep level changes between sealevel and the city. The two major belts of the

landward defences, with deep ditches andearthworks, accentuate level changes andoperate as strong fixation lines.

Grids and street blocks

In Valletta these overlay the ‘hog-backed’topography of the peninsula, creating dynamicchanges in form and space despite the simplelayout. The close grain of the grid of narrow,sloping streets creates a distinctive character.The large tall street blocks sometimescomprise single buildings, for example theAuberges of the Knights. Others contain manybuildings with a mixture of uses within blocksboth horizontally and vertically.

Floriana sits on a flatter plateau and enjoysmore convenient gradients for the pedestrianand for building. While the scale of the blocksis similar to that in Valletta, they are set inmore expansive spaces and only really comeinto close relationship with the fortificationson the land front. Thus the character of theplace is quite different from that of Valletta.Here it is the open space that predominates inthe users experience and, unlike the tighterenclosures of Valletta, there are many moreopen prospects.

Adaptive reconstruction after the SecondWorld War

This adaptive redevelopment represents asignificant change in urban form even thoughthe scale and form of the street blocks were notunlike those of the predecessors: the openingup of space, and the roadways engineered forthe motor vehicle, produced a new form andcharacter of space – the boulevard and the‘highway’.

Floriana fringe belt and government property

Within the fringe belt, between the Vallettafortifications and the Floriana suburb, there isa broad area characterized by expansivespaces and relatively low-density independent

Table 1. Summary analysis of the study area at various scales of resolution

City-Settlement

Collectively the diverse characters of the parts of Valletta and Floriana are subsumed into a powerful form and image. Therugged topography and the ‘build-up’ in the massing of the urban form produce a memorable identity, especially whenseen from a distance across the surrounding harbours. The distinct relationships between the built forms and enclosure ofpublic space creates a similar sense of identity within.

DistrictsValletta: dense stone characterThe sub-areas in the Valletta core are strongly unified intoan identifiable whole.

Floriana: open green characterThe sub-areas in Floriana core are characterized by strongcontrasts between the large defined street blocks and theexpansive spaces around them.

QuartersValletta harbouredgesPowerful stonebastions, harbouredges andaccretions.

Valletta landfront and CityGate- Areasforming an identifiable‘belt’.

Valletta coreDense urbanform of blocksenclosing tightstreets andsquares.

Floriana coreLarge scale streetblocks enclosingand withinexpansive space.

Floriana landfrontThe glacis,fortifications andthe gardens.

Florianaharbour edgesThe bastionshave visualcharacter fromoutside, but notwithin.

Landmarksandmonuments

The Siege Belland gunemplacements

City Gate, andthe Cavaliers

The CarmeliteChurch and StPaul’s

St PubliusChurch

Porte des BombesN/A

Character-sub-areas

Fort St Elmo

Marsamxettharbour edges

Grand Harbouredges

Civic squareswithinfortifications.Gardens andspaces on thefortifications.Ditches andspaces outsidefortifications.

Republic Street– ‘spine’ andlinked civic spaces.Historic streetblocks – originalform.Reconstructedareas

The Floriana‘suburb’

The Mall andopen fringe belt‘in front’ ofValletta

The‘government’property

Argotti Gardens

The Hornworks

The glacis

Sa MaisonGardens

The cemetery

The old prison

Green Space

Upper and LowerBarracca‘ceremonial’gardens andlinear gardensalong streets.

HastingsGardens on topof thefortifications. None

The Mall: apromenadegarden on the siteof the Knights’exercise area.

Extensive gardenson and beneaththe fortifications,and naturalcolonization inplaces.

‘Hidden’gardens, thecemetery and thecolonizedditches.

Forms ofspace

Complexgeometries of‘unplanned’spacesbetween core andedge.

Combination ofplanned squaresand ‘unplanned’spaces definedby thefortifications.

Tightly enclosedstreets andplanned publicsquares, overdramatictopography.

Broader streetsand larger opensquares. Stillenclosed and on aflatter plateau.

Combination ofplanned squaresand ‘unplanned’spaces defined bythe fortifications.

Open andexpansive spacesaround core andextending to theedge.

Streetpatterns

N/A

Strict grid withinthe peninsularedge.

Strict grid withinblocks. Newform approachroads.

N/ABlocks Large, tall and

solid rectangularblocks set at theback edge of pavement.

Arcades in some reconstructionblocks.

Large, tall andsolid rectangularblocks set at theback edge of pavement.

Arcades alongnew approachroad to Valletta.

Built forms

Relatively simplegeometries of longcurtain wallsforming thefortifications.

Complexgeometries ofthe bastions,cavaliers, andditches.

Complexgeometries of thebastions,cavaliers, andditches.

Relativelysimplegeometries oflong curtainwalls formingthe fortifications.

Plots N/A N/A

Buildingelements

Raking walls,‘slit’ openingsand ditches.Gandjola (orwatchtowers).

Stone walls, cantilevered balconies, metal windowgrills at ground floor.Arcades introduced to edges of publicrealm in reconstruction areas.

Raking walls,enlargedopenings,ceremonial gate.

Raking wallsand ‘slit’openings.

Materials Predominance of Globigerina (Franka) limestone for fortifications and the buildings.Harder coralline limestones used for paving and exposed areas.

Numerous timber balconies give distinctive character, but modern materials are intruding in places.


buildings. Unlike the dense and tight-knitgrids and blocks elsewhere, the buildingsgenerally ‘sit’ in space rather than defining it.And these buildings and spaces date fromvarious periods from the Knights up untiltoday. It is this area that presents the majoropportunities for development in the future,and it offers the opportunity to explore theapplication of urban morphology to informdesign thinking later.

Four typologies of space

In addition to the broad morphological regions‘abstracted’ above, there are also fourtypologies of space.

1. The planned and formal spaces within thegrids.

The main streets and squares in Valletta andFloriana follow a formal rectangular plan setwithin the grid, and open spaces are generallyformed by a set back of one of the streetblocks. With relatively few open spaces, onlythe main central spine street (now known asRepublic Street) has significant width andopen space, though a hierarchy of street widthand block size can also be identified.

2. The ‘coincidental’ spaces formed betweenthe grids and the fortifications.

In contrast to the planned spaces there is awealth of more varied spaces and places.Some were used by the Knights for assemblingtroops, while others have been adopted assettings for monuments. Where the grid meetsthe fixation line of the fortifications, somefascinating spaces and relationships are found,with strong enclosure, complex geometries andconsiderable changes in level.

3. The expansive spaces of Floriana.Within Floriana space is always more openand expansive than in Valletta. There aresimilar formal squares, the largest being in theGranaries, and there is also an important lineargarden, the Mall, which is on the site of theKnights’ early exercise ground. It follows anaxis that continues from Argotti Gardens to

Fort St Elmo. Together these form a powerful‘spine’ that unites Floriana with Valletta alongan important processional route.

4. The ‘hidden’ gardens and green spaces.While Valletta is generally ‘hard’, with a fewimportant green spaces, Floriana by contrasthas many ‘hidden’ gardens within it and on thesurrounding fortifications. These provide greatqualities of form and beauty. Some provideimportant space for local residents, and others,like Argotti Gardens, are tucked away asbotanical gardens. Some are cemeteries and inother places they are simply spaces colonizedby vegetation between the bastions. They allhave a power of form that responds to, andresolves, the junctions between the complexgeometries of the fortifications. In Valletta,the Upper and Lower Barracca Gardens arepopular and accessible places for differentusers; another garden, the Hastings’ garden, isa setting for an important memorial.

The hierarchy of landmarks and monuments

Overlying the broad morphological regionsthere is a pattern of landmarks andmonuments, large and small. Principal amongthe landmarks are the two distinctive churchesin Valletta which add dramatically to the formand skyline of the city from across Marsamxettharbour (Figure 4). The first to be constructedwas St. Paul’s Anglican Cathedral built in1842, which has the slender spire found inmany protestant churches. The second is theCarmelite Church, which replaced the muchearlier war-damaged structure between 1958and 1981. It is located just inland of St. Paul’sand it has a massive dome rising high abovethe Valletta skyline. The ecclesiastical rivalryfor visual prominence in the urban form, as acelebration of faith, is clear.

A series of smaller monuments also act aslocal landmarks, and they give structure andconnection to the open spaces and gardens.Interestingly De Lucca (1988, p. 321) notesthat the siting of Sir Alexander Ball’smonument in the Lower Barracca in 1809 wasdesigned ‘exclusively to fit into an ‘open’ as


Figure 11. Valletta landmarks. Photograph by the author, 2005.

opposed to a ‘closed’ context, thus militatingagainst the baroque ideal of integrationbetween buildings and subservient surroundingspace’. This example of the influence ofEnglish neo-classical ideas upon the nature ofurban form and space reveals a lot about theorigins of the contrasting morphologicalelements.

The significance of coincidence

Two ‘coincidences’ can be identified in theurban forms of this study area. First, there isthe coincidence between the grid ofdevelopment and the topography, and secondlythere is the coincidence between the grid andthe fixation line of the fortifications. Thediscovery of these coincidences is not new,and von Meiss (1990, p. 47) identified two‘types of contradiction in groupings of urban... forms’, one ‘accidental’ and the other‘dependent on the process of composition’.

The study has also indicated the importanceof the nature of open spaces in creatingdistinctive qualities of both urban form andplace, and two typologies of space, the plannedand the coincidental, are identified. Theformal squares within the grids contrast

sharply with the spaces created by thecoincidences between the rigid grids of streetsand blocks on the one hand with the complexgeometries of the fortification lines on theother: here serendipity creates many happyaccidents of space. Spaces that can beperceived and experienced as distinctive placesin a coherent, although coincidental, belt thatis formed between the two powerful morph-ological forms.

The three-dimensional coincidences are alsosignificant, as the generally common buildingheights, when overlaid upon the distinctive andpronounced topographical form, producesalmost continuously changing relationships offorms and spaces. The few powerful land-marks punctuate this undulating fabric, givingidentity, legibility and distinctiveness.

‘Complexes’ of urban form: lessons forurban design and management

Having considered the macro urban morph-ology of Valletta and Floriana, it is instructiveto examine the lessons for contemporary urbandesign. In doing so it is also useful to considerthe lessons of the reconstruction work after theSecond World War.


Lessons from the past

The implementation of the reconstructionplans produced by Harrison and Hubbard(1945) has been examined by Chapman(2005), who concluded that the consultantsrapidly developed a scholarly appreciation ofthe Maltese culture and environment, and thatmuch of their work drew directly upon theurban forms that they found there. This isclearly shown by Garret’s analysis (Figure 7),where the new blocks adopt and extend thehistoric grid. But it was also evident that theyintroduced some significant innovations,including opening up new squares andintroducing arcades along the primary activeedges for streets and squares. This helped toretain the urban form relationships betweenblocks, while also opening up space at theground level. The approach was popular inUK reconstruction plans of the same period,and the results in Malta were very successful.However, these innovations in Malta werealways strongly contained within the historicgrid of streets and blocks. The consultants did,however, introduce the completely new‘engineered’ form for the primary vehicleroutes.

Chapman (2005) also noted that where theconsultants carried their plans through toimplementation the results were generally verygood, but when implemented later and byothers, the results were generally far below theoriginal design intentions. The difficulty ofcommunicating the ‘understanding’ of designstrategies from originators to implementerswas seen as a major contributor to thisproblem.

From further analysis of the outcomes oftheir works it is also now concluded that,where reconstruction built upon establishedpatterns of form, for example the faithfulextension of the grid of the Floriana suburb,far more successful results were achieved thanwhen new patterns were adopted. This wasparticularly so where new layouts were‘adjusted’ to the fortifications, rather than tocelebrate the character and diversity of thecoincidental relationships that might beformed.

Lessons for the future

The fortifications of Valletta have beendesignated as a World Heritage Site and thepower and distinctiveness of their formdeserves to be maintained. The combinationof powerful masonry and defensive geometriesproduce impressive forms and spaces, butsome later accretions obscure the clarity of thatform, and many of these deserve to beremoved. With an analysis of morphologicalfeatures and the assets of the World HeritageSite this should now only be a matter of time.

The main area of potential future change,and where the lessons of this study mayusefully be applied, is along the north-westside of Floriana, where a strategy for develop-ment has been commissioned (TibbaldsMonro, with Gardner Stewart, 1995). Theconsultants’ report offers many insights, andthough they have clearly learned from thecontext, further research and analysis couldenable the proposals to be refined even further.A copy of the proposed layout for the area isillustrated in Figure 12 and, as can be seen, theproposals do extend the grids of the streetblocks in many ways. The proposals alsoutilize the arcade, square and courtyard asdesign tools that are very sensitive to the Maltacontext (Figure 13). But there are also featuresof the illustrative master plan that could berefined and developed further with reference tothe existing com-plexes of urban form andspace.

Two key areas could benefit from develop-ment at the strategic level, and both relate tothe lessons that can be seen from theexperience of reconstruction. The first is theimpact on form and space of adopting curvi-linear and engineered patterns for the principalvehicle routes. The second is the ad hocaccommodation of the building blocks to thelines of these roads and the geometries of thefortifications. With a more definite use ofthe form and grid of Floriana, and withrelatively few changes to the road layouts, thecoherence of the suburb and the variety ofcoincidental spaces around it could beenhanced.


Figure 12. The illustrative masterplan for Floriana(Tibbalds Monro and Gardner Stewart, 1995).

Conclusions

Although the conclusions here are specific toValletta and Floriana, the value of urbanmorphology for conservation and reinforce-ment of urban form more generally is clear.The work of Kropf, McGlynn and Samuels,Hall and others has shown that urbanmorphology can support character appraisal aswell as design, conservation and contextualpolicies. But it is important to note that urbanmorphology can potentially, just like Cullen’sapproaches to analysis developed in Town-scape (1961) and notation (1968), be used asan innovative design tool – a tool that buildsupon deep appreciation of existing urban formsto create exciting new ‘chance relationships’ inurban form and space. Thus the findings heredo suggest practical ways that analysis ofurban form can contribute to future urbandesign and development planning more

significantly and widely.In practice, such appraisal is still in no way

the norm and, as Rouse (2004) claims, thereare too many ‘plans where the model seems tohave dropped from the sky’. Much moreneeds to be done to engage in more scholarlyanalysis and understanding of urban form andqualities of place. It is only with this under-standing that it is possible to intervene, even ifthe designer, as Lynch (1971) observes,eventually decides to cut across the grain ofthe place.

It is not possible to fully elaborate theanalytical methodology within the scope ofthis paper, but it is clear that the scale ofanalysis selected to identify the macro com-ponents, and their interaction, is criticalbecause it can help in defining the qualities ofboth planned and unplanned places. Theimportance of abstraction of this analysis forapplication to design has also been demon-


Figure 13. An extract from a promotional brochure illustrating the Floriana DevelopmentBrief (Gardner Stewart Architects and Masterplanners, undated c. 2003).

strated, but it is the potential of utilizing theresults of analysis as an innovative design toolthat is most significant. A key conclusion isthat relationships between different morph-ological components, existing and proposed,can be utilized in achieving quality incoherence and variety in urban form and space,and critically the creative power of coinci-dence has much to offer in producing new anddiverse urban forms. More work andindividual design creativity will be needed totranslate the potential into reality through theexploration of design method and decision-making, but it will be worth the effort. And itis important, for as Sitte (1898, p. 52) said,

‘modern town planning has … not had muchluck with irregular design’.

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance ofthe anonymous referees who have advised upon thispaper. Thanks also to the Fondazzjoni Patri-monju Malti for permission to reproduce the workof Quentin Hughes in figures 1, 2 and 5; JosephBonnici for permission to reproduce figure 6;Albert Ganado for advice upon the source ofLaparelli’s map reproduced in figure 3 (and theLaparelli family archive for permission to use it);Gardner Stewart Architects and Masterplanners and


Tibbalds Monro for permission to reproduce theirwork for Figures 12 and 13; the Malta Environmentand Planning Authority and Arthur Yarnell of UCEBirmingham for their help in producing Figures 7and 10, Malcolm Borg of the Ministry of UrbanDevelopment for his advice, and Ray Cremona ofthe Malta Environment and Planning Authoritylibrary for assistance with reference material andmaps. I am also grateful to David Cassar for thetranslation of a number of passages from Malteseinto English.

References

Adolphe, L. (2001) ‘A simplified model of urbanmorphology: application to an analysis of theenvironmental performance of cities’,Environment and Planning B: Planning andDesign 28, 183-200.

Blouet, B. (1997) The story of Malta (ProgressPress, Valletta).

Bonanno, A. (1991) Malta; an archaeologicalparadise (M.J. Publications, Valletta).

Bonnici, J. and Cassar, M. (1990) The Royal OperaHouse Malta (Gutenberg Press, Zabbar).

Bonnici, J. and Cassar, M. (1994) The Malta GrandHarbour and its dockyard, (Gutenberg Press,Zabbar).

Borg, M. (2001) British colonial architecture:Malta 1800-1900 (Publishers Enterprises Group,St Gwann).

Chapman, D. and Cassar, D. (2004) ‘Valletta’,Cities 21, 451-63.

Chapman, D. (2005) ‘Knowing and unknowing:reconstruction and development planning inMalta from 1943’, Journal of Urban Design 10,229-52.

Conzen, M.R.G. (1960) Alnwick, Northumberland:a study in town-plan analysis Institute of BritishGeographers Publication 27 (George Philip,London).

Cullen, G. (1961) Townscape (Architectural Press,London).

Cullen, G. (1968) notation: the observant layman’scode for his environment (Alcan, London).

De Lucca, D. (1988) ‘British influence on Maltesearchitecture and fortifications’, in Mallia-Milanes, V. (ed.) The British colonialexperience 1800-1964 (Mireva Publications,Msida) 313-27.

De Lucca, D. (1990) ‘Tradition and change in theMaltese built environment’, in Architecture inMalta: evolution of a culture (Society ofArchitectural and Civil Engineering Students,

University of Malta) 9-15.Friedman, D. (1992) ‘Palaces and the street in late-

medieval and Renaissance Italy’, in Whitehand,J.W.R. and Larkham, P. J. (eds) Urban land-scapes: international perspectives (Routledge,London) 69-113.

Ganado, A. (2003) Valletta Citta Nuova : a maphistory (1566-1600) (Publishers EnterprisesGroup, San Gwann).

Ganado, H. (1977) Rajt Malta Tinbidel (MidseaBooks, Sta Venera).

Gardner Stewart Architects and Masterplanners(undated c.2003) Architecture, master planningand urban design (Gardner Stewart, London).

Garret, R. (1996) Floriana: a study in town-plananalysis (Floriana Local Council, Floriana).

Giorgio, R. de (1986) ‘The building of Valletta’ inArchitecture in Malta: historical aspects(Society of Architectural and Civil EngineeringStudents, University of Malta, Msida) 34-8.

Hall, A.C. (1997) ‘Dealing with incrementalchange: an application of urban morphology todesign control’, Journal of Urban Design 2,221-39.

Hall, A.C. (2000) ‘How morphology can improvedevelopment plans’, Urban Morphology 4, 29-32.

Harrison, A. St. B, and Hubbard, R.P.S. (1945)Valletta and the three cities (Government ofMalta, Valletta).

Hughes, Q. (1956) The building of Malta; duringthe period of the Knights of St. John ofJerusalem 1530 - 1795 (Alec Tiranti, London).

Hughes, Q. (1969) Fortress, architecture andmilitary history in Malta (Lund Humphries,London).

Krier, R. (1979) Urban space (Academy Editions,London).

Kropf, K. S. (1993) ‘An enquiry into the definitionof built form in urban morphology’, unpublishedPhD thesis, University of Birmingham.

Larkham, P. J. (2002) ‘Misusing ‘morphology’?’,Urban Morphology 6, 95-8.

Louis, H. (1936) ‘Die geographische Gliederungvon Gross-Berlin’, in Louis, H. and Panzer, W.(eds) Landerkundliche Forschung: Krebs-Festschrift (Engelhorn, Stuttgart) 146-71.

Lynch, K. (1960) The image of the city (MIT Press,Cambridge, MA).

Lynch, K. (1962) Site planning (MIT Press,Cambridge, MA).

McGlynn, S. and Samuels, I. (2000) ‘The funnel,the sieve and the template: towards anoperational urban morphology’, UrbanMorphology 4, 79-89.


Monserrat, N. (1973) The Kappillan of Malta(Cassell, London).

Moudon, A.V. (2002) ‘Thinking about micro andmacro urban morphology’, Urban Morphology6, 37-9

Ritchie, L. (undated c. 1943) The epic of Malta(Odhams Press, London).

Rouse, J. (2004) ‘Masterplan masquerade’,Building Design, 9 January, 8.

Smailes, A.E. (1955) ‘Some reflections on thegeographical description of townscapes’,Institute of British Geographers, Transactionsand Papers 21, 99-115.

Sitte, C. (1898) City planning according to artisticprinciples translated by G.R.Collins (1965) (Phaidon, London).

Spiteri, S. (2001) Fortresses of the Knights (BookDistributors, Hamrun).

Thake, C. and Hall, B. (1993) ‘Valletta cityprofile’, Cities 10, 91-102.

Tibbalds Monro with Gardner Stewart (1995)‘Floriana development brief’, unpublished reportfor the Government of Malta.

Trump, D.H. (2000) Malta: prehistory and temples(Midsea Books, Sta Venera).

Von Meiss, P. (1990) Elements of architecture:from form to place (Van Nostrand Reinhold,London).

Whitehand, J.W.R. and Morton, N.J. (2003) ‘Fringebelts and the recycling of urban land: anacademic concept and planning practice’,Environment and Planning B: Planning andDesign 30, 819-39.

Whitehand, J.W.R. and Morton, N.J. (2004) ‘Urbanmorphology and planning: the case of fringebelts’, Cities 21, 275-89.

M.W. Beresford

The death has occurred of Professor MauriceBeresford at the age of 85. He was primarily aneconomic historian, occupying the first Chair in thatsubject in the University of Leeds, in 1960.However, he was always interested in the evidenceprovided by the landscape, whether urban or rural.

He became well known to historians ofsettlement form for his pioneering work on thedeserted medieval village of Wharram Percy(Yorkshire), together with the archaeologist JohnHurst. Over some 40 years they jointly directedannual archaeological seasons which, in addition tovaluable insights into the form and history of thevillage, trained several generations of UKarchaeologists.

The development of the medieval urban networkwas an early research interest. Using documentarysources he was able to chart the ‘plantation’ of newtowns in the high-medieval period, noting theirrelationships to phases of conquest (for example inWales and Gascony) and remarking on theirregularities of form – ‘straightness as the mark ofthe town-planner’, as he later said (1985, p. 13).

However, of more direct relevance to urbanmorphologists, Beresford had a long-standinginterest in changing urban form. Work ondocumentary sources led to significant work on theback-to-back housing types of Leeds, and to amajor monograph on the outward expansion ofLeeds in the Georgian period. Together this workdemonstrates processes of piecemeal, incremental

changes from agricultural to urban landscapes, andhow the industrial-era residential townscape wasshaped by field and property boundaries: a‘morphological frame’. He was also deeply awareof the processes of incremental growth ofinstitutions such as universities and, in studying hisown, he made some interesting observations on thecolonization of formerly public and residentialplaces. In his work on Leeds he related economicprocesses of booms and slumps to the developmentof the urban landscape.

Like others of his generation his publishedoutput was less than is currently fashionable: he hada habit of ‘making bricks only when I detectabundance of available straw’ (1985, p. xii).

Major publications

Beresford, M.W. (1954) The lost villages of England(Lutterworth, London).

Beresford, M.W. (1967) New towns of the Middle Ages(Lutterworth, London).

Beresford, M.W. (1971) ‘The back-to-back house inLeeds, 1787-1939’, in Chapman, S.D. (ed.) Thehistory of working class housing (David and Charles,Newton Abbott) 93-132.

Beresford, M.W. (1985) Time and place: collectedessays (Hambledon Press, London).

Beresford, M.W. (1988) ‘East End, West End: the face ofLeeds during urbanisation, 1684-1842’, Publicationsof the Thoresby Society 60/61.

Applying macro urban morphology to urban design … · Applying macro urban morphology to urban...

Documents

Transcript of Applying macro urban morphology to urban design … · Applying macro urban morphology to urban...