Housing interventions carried out in accordance with current regulations in the Old City of Aleppo, both before and after the Syrian war, are minor in comparison to those carried out without a license and illegally. This suggests current policies are inadequate and needs upgrading.
This article critically reviews current Syrian policies and their implementation on residential heritage in the Old City of Aleppo with the aim to identify gaps and propose directions for modifications. Next to a review of the text of official policies and implementation documents, the archive of the Directorate of the Old City has been consulted and license applications, presented in the period 2018–2022, have been examined. Moreover, interviews with decision-makers from academics and practice were conducted.
Major limitations of these policies and relative application procedures have been identified: these involve: legal/administrative, economic and social aspects.
The specific needs have been highlighted and some proposals for improvement made.
1. Introduction
Interventions on residential heritage in the Old City of Aleppo, carried out both before and after the Syrian war, have been rarely executed in accordance with current regulations. More often, interventions have been carried out with-out a license and illegally (Kousa et al., 2021). The long bureaucratic procedures related to the enforcement of the regulations have been identified as one of the main causes that discourage the residents to carry out repairs in a proper way (Kousa et al., 2021).
The efforts of the Directorate of the Old City of Aleppo to up-grade these policies have shown to be ineffective. Moreover, it’s debatable whether existing Syrian policies and regulations can be applied to a post Syrian-war context without any change. The extent of devastation, involving 70% of the buildings (Kousa and Pottgiesser, 2019), the urgency for reconstruction and the costly and time-consuming procedures for obtaining permits suggest that policies might need to be significantly modified (Kousa et al., 2021).
In order to provide direction for improvement, a critical analysis of current policies and their implementation procedures is necessary.
In this article, current Syrian policies, and specifically those related to residential heritage in the Old city of Aleppo, are critically reviewed with the aim of identifying obstacles to their application, gaps and improvable points to be considered when advancing proposals for their improvement.
2. Research methods
The research methods consisted of an analysis of the historic development of Syrian policies related to intervention on (residential) heritage starting from the 19th century, necessary to understand how and why recent policies and regulations have been established.
Next, a critical review of the current Syrian policies and regulations related to housing in the Old City of Aleppo and the process of obtaining reconstruction and restoration permits in the field has been carried out. This review has been complemented by case studies and by interviews with decision-makers from academia and practice.
Based on the results obtained, obstacles to the application, gaps and improvable points to be considered in proposals for their modification have been identified.
3. Historic background on heritage policies in Syria
In order to understand how and why recent policies and regulations have been established, the historic development of heritage-related policies cannot be ignored. This section provides a short summary of the developments of policies and regulations concerning (residential) heritage in the Old City of Aleppo in the period from the 19th century up to 2020 (Figure 1).
The visual is a timeline with three horizontal bands labeled “Actions” at the top, “Political events” in the middle, and “Legalization” at the bottom. A solid horizontal line with an arrow at the far right forms the main timeline axis, with circular markers placed along it to indicate dated events. In the top band labeled “Actions”, vertical guide lines extend upward from hollow circular markers on the timeline to text labels. From left to right, these labels read: “Establishing of Aleppo Municipality in 1860”; “Opening of the National Museum of Aleppo 1931”; “Appling partly (Gutton) master plan 1954”; “Appling (Banshoya) master plan 1974”; “Listing of the old city as a historic area of national importance 1976”; “Inscribing of the old city in the list of UNESCO W H S 1986”; “Establishing of the Directorate of the Old City 1992”; “Initiating the rehabilitation project (G I Z slash Aleppo Municipality) 1993”; and “Placement of the Old City on the List of World Heritage in Danger 2013”. Along the central band labeled “Political events”, filled circular markers appear directly on the timeline line, each accompanied by red text placed above or near the marker. These read, from left to right: “The end of Ottoman Empire 1918”; “The beginning of the French Mandate 1920”; “Syria’s independence 1946”; “The outbreak of the Syrian-war in Aleppo 2012”; and “The end of the war in December 2016”. In the bottom band labeled “Legalization”, vertical guide lines extend downward from hollow circular markers to text labels. From left to right, these labels read: “First antiquities law 1938”; “Syrian Antiquities Law (decree No.222) 1963”; “Building Control System (decree No. 39) 1990”; “Housing Fund 1994”; “Development Plan 1998”; “Renovation and Restoration Guidelines 1999”; “Organizational Chart 2007”; and “A proposal to amend Building Control System 2020”. All events are aligned chronologically along the single horizontal axis, progressing from earlier years on the left to later years on the right, with consistent spacing and clear visual separation between the three labeled categories.Timeline of main political events (full dots) and Syrian policies and related actions (empty dots) in the Old City of Aleppo between 1860 and 2020
The visual is a timeline with three horizontal bands labeled “Actions” at the top, “Political events” in the middle, and “Legalization” at the bottom. A solid horizontal line with an arrow at the far right forms the main timeline axis, with circular markers placed along it to indicate dated events. In the top band labeled “Actions”, vertical guide lines extend upward from hollow circular markers on the timeline to text labels. From left to right, these labels read: “Establishing of Aleppo Municipality in 1860”; “Opening of the National Museum of Aleppo 1931”; “Appling partly (Gutton) master plan 1954”; “Appling (Banshoya) master plan 1974”; “Listing of the old city as a historic area of national importance 1976”; “Inscribing of the old city in the list of UNESCO W H S 1986”; “Establishing of the Directorate of the Old City 1992”; “Initiating the rehabilitation project (G I Z slash Aleppo Municipality) 1993”; and “Placement of the Old City on the List of World Heritage in Danger 2013”. Along the central band labeled “Political events”, filled circular markers appear directly on the timeline line, each accompanied by red text placed above or near the marker. These read, from left to right: “The end of Ottoman Empire 1918”; “The beginning of the French Mandate 1920”; “Syria’s independence 1946”; “The outbreak of the Syrian-war in Aleppo 2012”; and “The end of the war in December 2016”. In the bottom band labeled “Legalization”, vertical guide lines extend downward from hollow circular markers to text labels. From left to right, these labels read: “First antiquities law 1938”; “Syrian Antiquities Law (decree No.222) 1963”; “Building Control System (decree No. 39) 1990”; “Housing Fund 1994”; “Development Plan 1998”; “Renovation and Restoration Guidelines 1999”; “Organizational Chart 2007”; and “A proposal to amend Building Control System 2020”. All events are aligned chronologically along the single horizontal axis, progressing from earlier years on the left to later years on the right, with consistent spacing and clear visual separation between the three labeled categories.Timeline of main political events (full dots) and Syrian policies and related actions (empty dots) in the Old City of Aleppo between 1860 and 2020
A first regulated approach to residential heritage in Aleppo dates back to the first half of the 19th century. At that time, following the earthquake of 1822 which destroyed approximately 60% of the urban fabric of the Old City of Aleppo, new systems for the administration of endowed buildings were devised. These included, e.g. long-term rents and replacement contracts, meant to attract private capital and facilitate restoration and reconstruction work. Later on, with the Ottomans establishing the first municipal authority in Aleppo in 1866, further radical changes took place in the city's social, administrative, and economic life. The Ottoman law of 1884 dealt with the protection of historical monuments and established the foundations of the work of the Directorate of Antiquities, an institution that developed during the French mandate in Syria (1920-1946) (UNESCO and UNITAR, 2018).
In the early days of the French Mandate in 1923, the French art historian and archaeologist Jean (Sauvaget, 1941), drew up a list of Islamic monuments to be protected in Aleppo and the National Museum of Aleppo was opened in 1931. Moreover, new master plans were developed with the aim of regulating Aleppo's modern expansion. The initial independence period, following the end of the French mandate in 1946, was marked by radical modernization. In 1954, the master plan of the French urban planner André Gutton, aiming at establishing two major east-west wide axes, was developed and partly implemented. This intervention caused serious damage to one-tenth of the ancient fabric inside the city walls; entire neighborhoods of the old city outside the walls were destroyed and many important historical monuments were lost (Windelberg et al., 2001). In 1954, under the auspices of UNESCO, Syria signed the first Hague Convention and Protocols, which regulates the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict (Sarhan, 2014).
In 1963, the Syrian Antiquities Law No. 222 was enacted: this is the first Syrian law to govern the protection of cultural heritage, with special attention to historic monuments (Syrian Arab Republic, 1999). However, despite this law was already in force, large sectors of some residential neighborhoods were demolished in the 1960s and early 1970s. In this period, random interventions were common in the old city: some neighborhoods were partially destroyed by the implementation of master plans between the 1950s and 1970s and new high-rise buildings were built in their place (Windelberg et al., 2001). The new high buildings under-mined the quality of the traditional houses, by preventing cool winds to ventilate the courtyards and thus negatively affecting their microclimate. In addition, the height difference, which allows a view inside the courtyards from above, deprived the courtyard houses of their privacy (Jaber, 2013). As a result, inhabitants were motivated to emigrate from the Old City of Aleppo to new districts, and light-industrial and commercial functions appeared along the new wide streets.
In the same period, the Japanese urban planner Gyoji Banshoya suggested to limit the impacts of Gutton's plan. However, he planned a new north-south axis, which would have demolished more monuments and further segregated the historic quarters. His plan met the strong opposition of the society, and its implementation was stopped. Similarly, other proposals, which aimed to open streets in the historical urban fabric or remove areas from the old city, were rejected. In 1976, the General Directorate of Antiquities and Museums (DGAM) declared the whole Old City of Aleppo inside the walls as a historic area of national importance (Khirfan, 2014). In this area, demolition and construction were prohibited, except by order of the authorities. At that point, however, about 25% of the historic buildings had been permanently lost (Khanji, 2017). Following this declaration as a historic area of national importance, Law No. 222 was put into effect to guide and control interventions in the old city, and a Protection Committee was established to supervise its application (UNESCO and UNITAR, 2018) (further details will be described in Section 4).
Between 1978 and 1986, new neighborhoods were added outside the walls of the old city, including the northern part (1983) and, the eastern part (1986). In stages and through a long decision process, the city inside the walls and part of its early expansion, which is now known as the Old City of Aleppo, were declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site (Gaube and Wirth, 2007) (Figure 2).
The detailed plan map of a city with a dense street network drawn in thin black lines. Three large contiguous areas are highlighted with semi-transparent color fills and thick boundary outlines. A red shaded area occupies the lower central portion of the map and contains a dense cluster of streets and blocks, with a large oval-shaped open space near its center. A blue shaded area lies above and slightly to the left of the red area, forming an irregular polygon with tightly packed streets. A green shaded area extends vertically along the right side of the map, following a long, narrow shape that widens toward the top and bottom, also filled with a dense street pattern. Each colored area is outlined by a distinct boundary line that follows the street edges. The surrounding city fabric outside the colored zones is shown in grey and white, with roads, intersections, and blocks clearly visible but not filled. On the right side of the map, a legend box displays colored line symbols corresponding to the three areas, with text labels aligned beside each symbol. A north arrow symbol is placed near the lower right portion of the map. Below the map, a note reads: “Note(s): The Old city inside the walls (1978), The Old city outside the walls” for the red region, “the northern part (1983)” for the blue region, and “the eastern part (1986)” for the green region.Stages of inscribing the Old City of Aleppo on the World Heritage List
The detailed plan map of a city with a dense street network drawn in thin black lines. Three large contiguous areas are highlighted with semi-transparent color fills and thick boundary outlines. A red shaded area occupies the lower central portion of the map and contains a dense cluster of streets and blocks, with a large oval-shaped open space near its center. A blue shaded area lies above and slightly to the left of the red area, forming an irregular polygon with tightly packed streets. A green shaded area extends vertically along the right side of the map, following a long, narrow shape that widens toward the top and bottom, also filled with a dense street pattern. Each colored area is outlined by a distinct boundary line that follows the street edges. The surrounding city fabric outside the colored zones is shown in grey and white, with roads, intersections, and blocks clearly visible but not filled. On the right side of the map, a legend box displays colored line symbols corresponding to the three areas, with text labels aligned beside each symbol. A north arrow symbol is placed near the lower right portion of the map. Below the map, a note reads: “Note(s): The Old city inside the walls (1978), The Old city outside the walls” for the red region, “the northern part (1983)” for the blue region, and “the eastern part (1986)” for the green region.Stages of inscribing the Old City of Aleppo on the World Heritage List
In 1990, the Building Control System (decree No. 39) was issued by the Aleppo municipality. This system was the compass guiding the building and conservation works in the old city, and was adopted on the cadastral maps of the Old City of Aleppo dating back to 1927 and 1931 (Aleppo City Council, 1990).
Following this declaration as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, the Old City Technical Committee was formed and the Directorate of the Old City (DOC) was established in 1992. In 1993, in collaboration with the Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), (DOC) developed an integrated project for the old city. Later on, other international organizations were involved, e.g. Arab Fund for Social and Economic Development and Aga Khan Trust for Culture (UNESCO and UNITAR, 2018).
Following a rigorous inspection of the factors that contributed to the deterioration of the old city's urban fabric (1993–1997), in 1999, the Development Plan for the old city was completed and the strategies and tools used for implementation were defined (Knefaty, 2015). Especially with regard to housing, a survey conducted in 1993 on Old Aleppo households showed that approximately one-third of the total housing stock was in such poor conditions that structural repair was urgently needed to avoid collapse. In response to the urgent need for action, in 1994 the rehabilitation project established a micro-credit scheme (housing fund) (Fischer and Gangler, 2012).
In 1999, the Syrian Antiquities Law No. 222 was amended to address the protection of the old city and the treatment of encroachments on it (Syrian Arab Republic, 1999). Aleppo's organizational chart and the building control system of the Old City of Aleppo were released in 2007 (Aleppo City Council, 2007).
In the summer of 2012, the Syrian civil war escalated in Aleppo and resulted in the city being placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2013 (Hinz and Richard, 2013). In December 2016 the city's conflict came to an end, leaving massive destruction in its aftermath. In January 2017, UNESCO conducted a rapid assessment mission to Aleppo to evaluate the damage to its World Heritage Site caused by the Syrian Civil War. During a meeting held in Aleppo in January 2019, the “Vision and Planning Framework” for the reconstruction and recovery of the property was presented. This framework includes key-objectives, such as developing a reconstruction and recovery plan, establishing a new governance and planning framework with special area plans, building operational and financial tools for reconstruction and recovery, and financing reconstruction within a specified timeframe. The document also emphasizes the need to reassess the property's integrity and authenticity, in light of the damage. However, no corrective measures or timeframe for their implementation have been identified (UNESCO, 2019). In 2020, a project to amend the building control system in the Old City of Aleppo was proposed (Aleppo City Council, 2020). It is worth mentioning that in February 2023, UNESCO led a mission to Aleppo to learn about the city's rescue needs, because of the earthquake that hit the area on February 6, 2023.
4. Current laws and procedures applicable to residential heritage in the old city of Aleppo
This section includes (1) a comprehensive description of currently valid Syrian policies and laws, promulgated between 1963 and 2020, with a focus on those applicable to residential heritage buildings in the Old City of Aleppo; (2) classification of residential buildings; (3) responsible authorities and their role in the application process for license; (4) application process for license.
4.1 Policies in the old city of Aleppo
4.1.1 Syrian Law of Antiquities 1963 (decree No. 222), amended in 1999
The Syrian Law of Antiquities No. 222, in place since 1963, is the main policy regulating all heritage management issues in Syria. After the Old City of Aleppo was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List in 1986, the Antiquities Law was updated in 1999 to address the old city's protection and deal with infractions. According to this law, all immovable properties built by man more than two hundred years ago are considered “antiquities” and fall thus under the jurisdiction of the antiquities authorities, which are represented by the General Directorate of Antiquities and Museums (DGAM). Properties from a more recent period which have historical, artistic, or national characteristics may also be considered antiquities, if the Antiquities Council has given its approval and a ministerial decision to register them has been issued. A group of neighborhoods, buildings, one building, or a portion of them may be included in this decision.
Ownership of land does not confer the right to dispose of any immovable antiquities that may exist on its surface or within its confines. Immovable antiquities include historic buildings, such as traditional houses. This law does not consider interventions on antiquities. Anyone who modifies an antiquity without permission faces penalties (Syrian Arab Republic, 1999).
4.1.2 Building Control System 1990 (decree No. 39), amended in 2007
The Building Control System is a set of regulating laws to prevent uncontrolled interventions in the Old City of Aleppo. This system was developed based on Resolution No. 39 of 1990. It consists of 10 chapters, that this paper classified into four basic levels of (1) definitions and legal reference; (2) urban requirements; (3) requirements related to licensing works; (4) violations and penalties (Aleppo City Council, 1990, 2007). Figure 3 summarizes the content of the Building Control System, with a focus on building classification and the aspects connected to residential heritage in terms of urban indicators.
The structured flow diagram is arranged from left to right. On the far left, the label reads “The Building Control System”, with a vertical line extending downward and branching horizontally to several categories. The first branch is labeled “Requirement related to licensing works”. From this label, three sub-branches extend to the right. The top sub-branch is labeled “Heritage indicators and classification of buildings”, connected to a large blue rectangular panel on the right that contains a vertical list of bullet points reading: “Self-registered archaeological properties”, “Outstanding properties within the fabric”, “Properties located within the fabric and contains distinctive elements”, “Properties within the fabric that do not contain distinct special elements”, “Modern properties within the fabric”, “Multi-storey buildings on the main axes”, and “Transition areas”. Below this, a second sub-branch labeled “Allowed works in the old city” connects to another blue rectangular panel listing: “Demolition and reconstruction” and “Additions to existing buildings”. A third sub-branch labeled “General conditions of License” connects to a blue panel listing: “Urban conditions”, “Architectural conditions”, “Merge, sort, and unify”, “Functional conditions”, and “Environmental conditions”. A second main branch from the left vertical line is labeled “Urban requirement”. This connects to a sub-branch labeled “Planning and urban indicators for housing”, which points to a blue panel listing numerical and dimensional rules, including: “Max number of floors: 2 floors”, “Max investment factor: 1.4”, “Small dimension of the courtyard: 4 meter”, “Ceiling corridors and staircases: Not fixed materials”, “Max area ratio of the basements that were created to the area of the property and for one floor only: 25 percent”, and “Minimum ratio of afforestation area to courtyard area: 10 percent”. A third main branch is labeled “Definition and legal reference”. This leads to a blue panel listing “Terms, in the context of this system” and “Cadastral maps of the Old City of Aleppo (1927 to 1931)”. A fourth main branch is labeled “Violations and infractions”. It connects to a blue panel listing “No details” and “Identified ways to deal with violations and penalties for violators”. All blue panels are aligned vertically on the right side of the diagram and are connected to their corresponding labels by thin lines and bracket-like connectors.The content of the Building Control System of the Old City of Aleppo
The structured flow diagram is arranged from left to right. On the far left, the label reads “The Building Control System”, with a vertical line extending downward and branching horizontally to several categories. The first branch is labeled “Requirement related to licensing works”. From this label, three sub-branches extend to the right. The top sub-branch is labeled “Heritage indicators and classification of buildings”, connected to a large blue rectangular panel on the right that contains a vertical list of bullet points reading: “Self-registered archaeological properties”, “Outstanding properties within the fabric”, “Properties located within the fabric and contains distinctive elements”, “Properties within the fabric that do not contain distinct special elements”, “Modern properties within the fabric”, “Multi-storey buildings on the main axes”, and “Transition areas”. Below this, a second sub-branch labeled “Allowed works in the old city” connects to another blue rectangular panel listing: “Demolition and reconstruction” and “Additions to existing buildings”. A third sub-branch labeled “General conditions of License” connects to a blue panel listing: “Urban conditions”, “Architectural conditions”, “Merge, sort, and unify”, “Functional conditions”, and “Environmental conditions”. A second main branch from the left vertical line is labeled “Urban requirement”. This connects to a sub-branch labeled “Planning and urban indicators for housing”, which points to a blue panel listing numerical and dimensional rules, including: “Max number of floors: 2 floors”, “Max investment factor: 1.4”, “Small dimension of the courtyard: 4 meter”, “Ceiling corridors and staircases: Not fixed materials”, “Max area ratio of the basements that were created to the area of the property and for one floor only: 25 percent”, and “Minimum ratio of afforestation area to courtyard area: 10 percent”. A third main branch is labeled “Definition and legal reference”. This leads to a blue panel listing “Terms, in the context of this system” and “Cadastral maps of the Old City of Aleppo (1927 to 1931)”. A fourth main branch is labeled “Violations and infractions”. It connects to a blue panel listing “No details” and “Identified ways to deal with violations and penalties for violators”. All blue panels are aligned vertically on the right side of the diagram and are connected to their corresponding labels by thin lines and bracket-like connectors.The content of the Building Control System of the Old City of Aleppo
According to the Building Control System, any change in the Old City of Aleppo requires a license. Owners of buildings can apply for a license for restoration (“ترميم”) and/or rebuilding (“إعادة البناء”) provided that the original external boundaries of the properties are respected and the internal architectural spaces, as specified on the cadastral map, are kept. The cadastral map, dating back to 1931 and has never updated, serves as basis for determining the planning and elevations of properties in the old city. Restoration refers to work done on buildings whose structures are not permitted to be demolished. Rebuilding is the process of rebuilding buildings whose structures are permitted to be demolished because of building safety (Aleppo City Council, 2007).
According to the Building Control System, it is permitted to entirely or partially demolish buildings in the Old city only in exceptional circumstances, depending on their classification, solely with the requirements of construction safety, and with the approval of the relevant authorities. In the case of partially destroyed buildings, the damaged parts must be rebuilt in an original state using traditional materials.
Additions to existing buildings can only be applied to buildings with residential and tourist function. It is not permissible to demolish or alter the basic architectural elements such as iwan, decorations, etc. in any way. The additions should consider the continuity of the original building material, using minor differences to make visible a distinction between the original material and the updated one.
All work on heating, air conditioning, solar energy, and communications systems must be approved by City Council management and done in accordance with restoration standards. These lasts include the technical conditions and dimensions of the architectural elements, the quality of materials, and the method of use.
4.1.3 Restoration with the help of the Housing Fund 1994
From 1994 to 2006, the Municipality of Aleppo, in collaboration with the GTZ project “Rehabilitation of the Old City of Aleppo,” was able to secure financial resources for restoration through emergency and rehabilitation loans, with local and international support from a number of organizations, in the form of donations or investments. Initially, the micro-credit scheme (“emergency fund”) was reserved for the most urgent residential repair works on residential heritage. The primary target group consisted of families living in extreme poverty in the Old City. Overall, the Emergency Fund began financing housing with an amount of fifty thousand Syrian pounds without additional benefits, in addition to providing the necessary technical advice and facilitating licensing procedures. The Emergency Fund contributed until 2001 to the restoration of more than 270 housing units. In 1997, a second, larger credit scheme (“rehabilitation fund”) allowed homeowners or tenants to engage in larger rehabilitation work. This fund targeted the attention to the restoration of distinctive architectural elements and the addition of service facilities in the housing, according to the building control system. An outright grant of one hundred and fifty thousand Syrian pounds was allocated without recovering any part of it, in addition to providing the necessary technical advice and facilitating licensing procedures. This second fund was initially restricted to the projects in pilot areas for which detailed master plans had been developed (Bab Qinnasreen, Al-Farafra and Al-Jdayde neighborhoods). Both funds were merged into a single “Housing Fund” in 2004, and the area interested expanded to include the entire Old City. Besides, technical support for construction works was provided free of charge until 2006 and included a cost estimate, engineering advice on construction and restoration techniques in accordance with building regulations, and construction work supervision.
A Technical Committee formed by a municipal decree was involved in the issuance of restoration permits, in addition to the core team from the fund section. The committee was in charge of reviewing applications at regular meetings, identifying issues that need clarification during inspections, and approving or rejecting applications (Fischer and Gangler, 2012).
4.1.4 Development plan 1998
Within the framework of the rehabilitation of the Old City of Aleppo project, a comprehensive development plan was issued; this provides a general framework and includes ten strategies for upgrading the historical urban fabric in line with the scope of sustainable development. This article focuses on the strategy related to housing and social development. This strategy aimed to improve the conditions of the housing stock in the Old City of Aleppo and operated on two levels: (1) improvement of quality of single residential buildings and (2) improvement of overall quality of residential neighborhoods, based on the assumption that rehabilitation of the housing stock is crucial for urban conservation and development.
By improving the living conditions, this strategy aimed to reverse the trends of migration and to contribute to the preservation of the residential function in historic neighborhoods. Unfortunately, the actual achievements were limited and negligible compared to the size of the Old City and its population (Windelberg et al., 2001).
4.1.5 The Renovation and Restoration Guidelines 1999
In 1996, an additional informal framework of laws, the Renovation and Restoration Guidelines were developed and formally adopted in 1999. These Guidelines were developed by local experts in collaboration with the Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), as a comprehensive guideline for all interventions in the traditional houses in the Old City of Aleppo. They consist of a set of standards, including a list of detailed criteria for restoration of housing elements, with a focus on preserving these elements and using traditional construction techniques and materials. These guidelines were drafted in accordance to the principle of the Venice Charter (GTZ, 1999). The renovation and restoration guidelines have been incorporated into the Building Control System as binding requirements. These guidelines can improve the accuracy of decision-making, as the Building Control System 1990 (decree No. 39) does not address specific scenarios, such as the allowable changes to the building and the specific principles for each building component. More details are given in Figure 4.
The diagram is arranged horizontally from left to right. At the far left, the title reads “The Renovation and Restoration Guidelines 1999”, aligned above a vertical guiding line. From this vertical line, multiple horizontal arrows extend toward the right, each pointing to a specific guideline category written in black text. The first arrow points to “Replacing of the wooden roof”, which is connected by a curved bracket to a blue rectangular panel on the right. This panel contains two bullet points: “Recommend using reinforced concrete” and “it’s allowed, if the ratio of collapsed wooden beams exceeds 60 percent”. Below, the next arrow points to “The division of courtyard”, connected to a blue panel listing three bullet points: “Creating new openings is not allowed”, “The partition should be reversible”, and “Provide an open space at least 30 percent of the new property area”. The next arrow points to “The division of the room”, linked to a blue panel that lists “Creation of new openings in the internal and external facades not allowed” and “The separation wall should not harmful to the existing openings”. Below this, an arrow labeled “The division of the hall” connects to a blue panel containing the single statement: “It is prohibited to split the hall vertically”. The following arrow labeled “Close Iwan” connects to a blue panel with the statement: “Not recommended”. Next, the arrow labeled “Replacing of the wall” connects to a blue panel listing “The original stone should be reused” and “Modern techniques can be used to support construction”. Below, the arrow labeled “Adding a bath room, a toilet and a kitchen” connects to a blue panel listing “It should be placed in hidden places” and “It is recommended to use existing rooms or spaces to accommodate new services”. The next arrow labeled “Adding a room” connects to a blue panel listing “It is not allowed to add a new room on the ground floor” and “Using natural stone in building new rooms”. The final arrow labeled “Covering of the courtyard” connects to a blue panel listing “It is prohibited to cover the courtyard with permanent structures” and “Should be partly with light or transparent construction”. All blue panels are aligned vertically on the right side of the diagram, each connected to its corresponding guideline label by curved bracket lines.Main regulations in the Renovation and Restoration Guidelines (1999)
The diagram is arranged horizontally from left to right. At the far left, the title reads “The Renovation and Restoration Guidelines 1999”, aligned above a vertical guiding line. From this vertical line, multiple horizontal arrows extend toward the right, each pointing to a specific guideline category written in black text. The first arrow points to “Replacing of the wooden roof”, which is connected by a curved bracket to a blue rectangular panel on the right. This panel contains two bullet points: “Recommend using reinforced concrete” and “it’s allowed, if the ratio of collapsed wooden beams exceeds 60 percent”. Below, the next arrow points to “The division of courtyard”, connected to a blue panel listing three bullet points: “Creating new openings is not allowed”, “The partition should be reversible”, and “Provide an open space at least 30 percent of the new property area”. The next arrow points to “The division of the room”, linked to a blue panel that lists “Creation of new openings in the internal and external facades not allowed” and “The separation wall should not harmful to the existing openings”. Below this, an arrow labeled “The division of the hall” connects to a blue panel containing the single statement: “It is prohibited to split the hall vertically”. The following arrow labeled “Close Iwan” connects to a blue panel with the statement: “Not recommended”. Next, the arrow labeled “Replacing of the wall” connects to a blue panel listing “The original stone should be reused” and “Modern techniques can be used to support construction”. Below, the arrow labeled “Adding a bath room, a toilet and a kitchen” connects to a blue panel listing “It should be placed in hidden places” and “It is recommended to use existing rooms or spaces to accommodate new services”. The next arrow labeled “Adding a room” connects to a blue panel listing “It is not allowed to add a new room on the ground floor” and “Using natural stone in building new rooms”. The final arrow labeled “Covering of the courtyard” connects to a blue panel listing “It is prohibited to cover the courtyard with permanent structures” and “Should be partly with light or transparent construction”. All blue panels are aligned vertically on the right side of the diagram, each connected to its corresponding guideline label by curved bracket lines.Main regulations in the Renovation and Restoration Guidelines (1999)
4.1.6 Building control system (proposal 2020)
Following the devastation caused by the Syrian war, amendments to the Building Control System were proposed in 2020, this system incorporates conditions for reconstruction that are similar to those in the old system. However, it allows for the use of modern technologies and appropriate materials in the reconstruction of property. In the absence of necessary documents for reconstruction, the system permits designing structures that resemble buildings with a similar function during the original era of construction. In related to general conditions for licensing, in particular urban conditions, the system is concerned with preserving public spaces, mainly limited to preservation of the facades overlooking public spaces, and prohibits any intervention of them without permission from special committees. One of the shortcomings of this system is that it fails to provide guidance on how to handle the buildings to be rebuilt, which could result in non-uniform application of the conditions (Aleppo City Council, 2020).
4.2 Implementation of the laws
In this section, the implementation of the laws reported in Section 4.1 is analyzed. In order to understand this complex process, the classification of housing is reported, the responsible authorities are identified and the process of requesting a license for intervention on a residential heritage building located in the Old Aleppo city is elucidated.
4.2.1 Classification of houses and allowed interventions
According to Guidelines 1999 and Development Plan, residential buildings are classified as follows (GTZ, 1999); (Windelberg et al., 2001):
Important historic residences (palaces),
Historically valuable houses,
Houses with historically valuable architectural features,
Houses without historical importance.
Depending on the building's categories, different types of interventions are allowed or not with respect to specific condition, as reported in Table 1.
Residential building categories and allowed interventions are summarized based on restoration guidelines and development plan
| House category | General principle | Replacement of original materials | Partitioning of floor plan |
|---|---|---|---|
| (I) Important historic residences (palaces) | Not permitted (exceptions require examination) | Not permitted (exceptions require examination) | |
| (II) Historically valuable houses | Houses should be restored as closely as possible to their original state | Permitted in case of structural safety, with permission of the Antiquities Department | Permitted provided original materials are not damaged |
| (III) Houses with historically valuable architectural features | Valuable architectural elements should be restored in accordance with the guidelines | Permitted for not valuable architectural elements, provided historically significant architectural elements are preserved | Permitted in accordance with the guidelines |
| (IV) Houses without historical importance | The facade should be restored according to the historical ideal model | Permitted | Permitted in accordance with the guidelines |
Source(s): Author
4.2.2 Responsible authorities
Several authorities are involved in rehabilitation of residential heritage building located in the old city. The responsible authority at the national level is the Presidency of the Council of Ministers; the involved ministries are the Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Tourism, Ministry of Endowment “Awqaf,” and Ministry of Local Administration and Environment. These are represented by the Aleppo Governorate's affiliated institutions or Directorates, which are the Antiquities and Museums Directorate, Tourism Directorate, Endowments Directorate and the Municipality of Aleppo (Figure 5). The Directorate of the Old City (DOC) was established under the Municipality of Aleppo to guide the rehabilitation of the old city. It includes three departments (the department of permits, emergency and monitoring, the department of implementation and maintenance, and the department of urban studies and planning) covering studies and planning; permits and monitoring, and implementation and maintenance (Figure 6) (Knefaty, 2015).
The diagram is arranged vertically from top to bottom with a clear hierarchical structure. At the top center, a blue rectangular box reads “Presidency of the Council of Ministers (Syria)”. A single horizontal line extends downward from this box and branches into four vertical connectors leading to four main columns below. In the first column on the left, a rectangular box reads “Ministry of Culture”. Inside it, a blue box reads “The Tourism Directorate of Aleppo”. In the second column from the left, a rectangular box reads “Ministry of Tourism”. Inside it, a blue box reads “The Antiquities Directorate of Aleppo”. In the third column, a rectangular box reads “Ministry of Endowments”. Inside it, a blue box reads “The Endowments Directorate of Aleppo”. In the fourth column on the right, a taller rectangular box reads “Ministry of Local Administration and Environment”. Inside it, another rectangular box labeled “Municipality of Aleppo”. Inside this box, a nested blue rectangle reads “The Directorate of the Old City (D O C)”.Authorities involved in decision-making regarding the development of the Old City of Aleppo
The diagram is arranged vertically from top to bottom with a clear hierarchical structure. At the top center, a blue rectangular box reads “Presidency of the Council of Ministers (Syria)”. A single horizontal line extends downward from this box and branches into four vertical connectors leading to four main columns below. In the first column on the left, a rectangular box reads “Ministry of Culture”. Inside it, a blue box reads “The Tourism Directorate of Aleppo”. In the second column from the left, a rectangular box reads “Ministry of Tourism”. Inside it, a blue box reads “The Antiquities Directorate of Aleppo”. In the third column, a rectangular box reads “Ministry of Endowments”. Inside it, a blue box reads “The Endowments Directorate of Aleppo”. In the fourth column on the right, a taller rectangular box reads “Ministry of Local Administration and Environment”. Inside it, another rectangular box labeled “Municipality of Aleppo”. Inside this box, a nested blue rectangle reads “The Directorate of the Old City (D O C)”.Authorities involved in decision-making regarding the development of the Old City of Aleppo
The diagram is arranged vertically with a clear top-down hierarchy. At the top center, a wide blue rectangular box reads “The Directorate of the Old City (D O C)”. From the bottom edge of this box, a line extends and branches downward into three vertical connectors, forming three parallel columns. In the left column, a blue rectangular box reads “The Department of Permits, Emergency and Monitoring”. Below it, a white rectangular box with a blue outline is titled “Main tasks”. Inside this box, three stacked rectangles list the tasks in sequence: “Completing the procedures for granting building licenses after the approval of the committees”, “Detecting properties that needs rapid intervention”, and “Supervising the implementation and preventing violations”. In the center column, a blue rectangular box reads “The Department of Implementation and Maintenance”. Beneath it, a box titled “Main tasks” contains two stacked rectangles reading: “Supervising ongoing projects and Organizing their estimated statements” and “Maintaining sewers, sidewalks and streets”. In the right column, a blue rectangular box reads “The Department of Urban Studies and Planning”. Below it, a box titled “Main tasks” contains three stacked rectangles listing: “Conducting urban studies and social survey”, “Conducting traffic, architectural and documentary studies”, and “Conducting infrastructure studies and following up on their implementation”.Organizational structure of the (DOC) and main tasks of the different departments
The diagram is arranged vertically with a clear top-down hierarchy. At the top center, a wide blue rectangular box reads “The Directorate of the Old City (D O C)”. From the bottom edge of this box, a line extends and branches downward into three vertical connectors, forming three parallel columns. In the left column, a blue rectangular box reads “The Department of Permits, Emergency and Monitoring”. Below it, a white rectangular box with a blue outline is titled “Main tasks”. Inside this box, three stacked rectangles list the tasks in sequence: “Completing the procedures for granting building licenses after the approval of the committees”, “Detecting properties that needs rapid intervention”, and “Supervising the implementation and preventing violations”. In the center column, a blue rectangular box reads “The Department of Implementation and Maintenance”. Beneath it, a box titled “Main tasks” contains two stacked rectangles reading: “Supervising ongoing projects and Organizing their estimated statements” and “Maintaining sewers, sidewalks and streets”. In the right column, a blue rectangular box reads “The Department of Urban Studies and Planning”. Below it, a box titled “Main tasks” contains three stacked rectangles listing: “Conducting urban studies and social survey”, “Conducting traffic, architectural and documentary studies”, and “Conducting infrastructure studies and following up on their implementation”.Organizational structure of the (DOC) and main tasks of the different departments
The involvement of authorities in the rehabilitation of a building depends on the ownership of the building.
4.2.3 Process from application to completion
In this section, the application process for obtaining a license for intervening on a residential building in the Old City of Aleppo is described. In the case a resident decides to restore or rebuild his/her house, a request must be submitted to the DOC before any action is taken. More specifically, the request needs to be submitted to the single window initiative (one-stop-shop) which is aimed at facilitating the procedures of obtaining licenses, making it easier for residents. The single window system allows residents to submit all necessary documents and applications in one place, which reduces the time and effort required to obtain permits. This initiative is a tool of the Development Plan's strategies. Afterwards, the DOC makes an on-site investigation and takes a preliminary decision on whether to approve the project or not, according to Syrian laws (Table 2).
Residential building categories, related procedures and responsible authorities
| House category | Procedures | Responsible authorities |
|---|---|---|
| (I) Important historic residences (palaces) |
| Technical Committee and Antiquities Directorate |
| (II) Historically valuable houses and (III) Houses with historically valuable architectural features |
| Technical Committee |
| (IV) Houses without historical importance |
| Technical Committee |
Source(s): Author
In addition to what is stipulated in the Building Construction System, the procedure steps mentioned below must be followed when requesting a license for restoration or rebuilding:
A license application is prepared by the resident and submitted to the DOC. This request should include (1) a description, photographs, architectural plans for the current situation of the building, illustrating the problems; (2) architectural plans for the proposed situation, certified by the engineer who conducted the study, and a report justifying the request to restore or rebuild in whole or in part.
The office of the Old city inspects the property subject of the application and prepares a detailed report with justified suggestions. In addition to a review of the license request, this detailed report, prepared by the office of the Old City, must include (1) a list of the parts that are subjected to be restored or rebuilt, the interior additions that must be removed and detailed pictures of the ceiling, windows, etc. (2) proposals for to be rebuilt parts, including heights and sizes, considering e harmony with the surrounding area and preservation of underground connections.
The license request and the report by the office of the Old city are submitted to the Technical Committee, this committee provides a recommendation.
The Directorate of the Old City issues the license, following the recommendation of the Technical Committee and paying the fees.
Depending on the type of work residents need to do there are some limitations:
In the case of excavation works in connection with construction or demolition works, these are supervised by a representative of the Directorate of Antiquities and Museums, and carried out under the supervision of an architect from the DOC, who submits a weekly report to the DOC.
In case of demolition, alteration of the building or part of it, or change the use of any property without the necessary license, the property is sealed with red wax, and the violator is due to return the property to its original condition. In the event of refusal of returning the property to its original condition, the city council shall return the property to its original condition at the expense of the person concerned, with a seizure sign placed on the property until the re-turn expenses, in addition to the fees and fines incurred, are collected (Aleppo City Council, 1990).
In the above-mentioned procedure steps, many authorities are involved in the process, and a detailed application legislation is used to explain the entire procedure and the role of the responsible parties (The Directorate of the Old City, 2007). (Figures 7 and 8) illustrate the whole procedure (two phases) and the responsible parties involved in each step.
The flowchart is arranged vertically and titled at the top with a rounded rectangle reading “Step in procedure (Phase 1)”. Below this title, the content is divided into four horizontal bands labeled on the left as “Step 1”, “Step 2”, “Step 3”, and “Step 4”, each band containing rounded rectangular process boxes connected by arrows. In the first band, “Step 1”, a green rounded rectangle at the top reads “Initial application request”. A downward arrow connects to a blue rounded rectangle reading “Straightening Scheme”, followed by another downward arrow to a darker blue rounded rectangle labeled “Verification of the application”. Another arrow leads to a rounded rectangle reading “Registration of the application”. This continues downward to a larger dark blue rounded rectangle labeled “Inspection and preparation of the report with stamping the current status plans and audit of the proposal”. A downward arrow connects this box to the next band. In the second band, “Step 2”, a wide orange rounded rectangle reads “Review and forward the report with reasoned proposal”. A downward arrow connects this box to the next band. In the third band, “Step 3”, a red rounded rectangle reads “Appropriate and necessary recommendations to follow up on licensing”. Below it, a light blue rounded rectangle reads “Specific cases to be reviewed”. Beneath this, a downward arrow labeled “Yes” leads to a dark red rounded rectangle labeled “Approval the plans”. A downward arrow connects this box to the next band. In the fourth band, “Step 4”, three vertically stacked rounded rectangles appear. The top green box reads “Regesteration”. A downward arrow connects to a yellow rounded rectangle labeled “Approve the plans”, which then connects downward to a purple rounded rectangle reading “Discharge clearance”. A left and upward arrow labeled “No” loops back from “Specific cases to be reviewed” to “Initial application request”. A curved arrow labeled “Inquiries directed the resident” on the right side loops back from “Appropriate and necessary recommendations to follow up on licensing” to “Initial application request”. A right and downward arrow labeled “Resident’s answers” extends from “Initial application request” to “Appropriate and necessary recommendations to follow up on licensing”. At the bottom of the diagram, a legend spans the width of the flowchart. It consists of small colored rectangles with text labels identifying responsible parties. The labels read “Aleppo City Council”, “Resident”, “Syrian Engineers Syndicate”, “The Antiquities Directorate”, “Finance Directorate (Finance Directorate, Collection Division)”, “The Directorate of the Old City (District engineer, Registry office, responsible engineers)”, “Technical committee including Directorates of the Old City, Antiquities, Endowments, Tourism, Engineers Syndicate and University of Aleppo”, and “Old Aleppo protection Committee including Aleppo governor, Head of the Aleppo city council, the executive office of the governorate and city councils, etcetera”.Steps in procedure and responsible parties by colors in the first phase of the approval process of the license, according to Building Control System and its application legislation
The flowchart is arranged vertically and titled at the top with a rounded rectangle reading “Step in procedure (Phase 1)”. Below this title, the content is divided into four horizontal bands labeled on the left as “Step 1”, “Step 2”, “Step 3”, and “Step 4”, each band containing rounded rectangular process boxes connected by arrows. In the first band, “Step 1”, a green rounded rectangle at the top reads “Initial application request”. A downward arrow connects to a blue rounded rectangle reading “Straightening Scheme”, followed by another downward arrow to a darker blue rounded rectangle labeled “Verification of the application”. Another arrow leads to a rounded rectangle reading “Registration of the application”. This continues downward to a larger dark blue rounded rectangle labeled “Inspection and preparation of the report with stamping the current status plans and audit of the proposal”. A downward arrow connects this box to the next band. In the second band, “Step 2”, a wide orange rounded rectangle reads “Review and forward the report with reasoned proposal”. A downward arrow connects this box to the next band. In the third band, “Step 3”, a red rounded rectangle reads “Appropriate and necessary recommendations to follow up on licensing”. Below it, a light blue rounded rectangle reads “Specific cases to be reviewed”. Beneath this, a downward arrow labeled “Yes” leads to a dark red rounded rectangle labeled “Approval the plans”. A downward arrow connects this box to the next band. In the fourth band, “Step 4”, three vertically stacked rounded rectangles appear. The top green box reads “Regesteration”. A downward arrow connects to a yellow rounded rectangle labeled “Approve the plans”, which then connects downward to a purple rounded rectangle reading “Discharge clearance”. A left and upward arrow labeled “No” loops back from “Specific cases to be reviewed” to “Initial application request”. A curved arrow labeled “Inquiries directed the resident” on the right side loops back from “Appropriate and necessary recommendations to follow up on licensing” to “Initial application request”. A right and downward arrow labeled “Resident’s answers” extends from “Initial application request” to “Appropriate and necessary recommendations to follow up on licensing”. At the bottom of the diagram, a legend spans the width of the flowchart. It consists of small colored rectangles with text labels identifying responsible parties. The labels read “Aleppo City Council”, “Resident”, “Syrian Engineers Syndicate”, “The Antiquities Directorate”, “Finance Directorate (Finance Directorate, Collection Division)”, “The Directorate of the Old City (District engineer, Registry office, responsible engineers)”, “Technical committee including Directorates of the Old City, Antiquities, Endowments, Tourism, Engineers Syndicate and University of Aleppo”, and “Old Aleppo protection Committee including Aleppo governor, Head of the Aleppo city council, the executive office of the governorate and city councils, etcetera”.Steps in procedure and responsible parties by colors in the first phase of the approval process of the license, according to Building Control System and its application legislation
The flowchart is arranged vertically and titled at the top with a rounded rectangle reading “Step in procedure (Phase 2)”. Below the title, the content appears within a light shaded background and is organized as a single vertical sequence labeled on the left as “Step 4”. At the top of the sequence, a green rounded rectangle reads “Registered request”. A downward arrow connects to a blue rounded rectangle labeled “Calculation of Fees”, followed by another blue rounded rectangle reading “Fee audit”. The sequence continues downward to a blue rounded rectangle labeled “Copy the license application”, then to another blue rounded rectangle reading “Verification of license copies”. Below this, a blue rounded rectangle reads “Sign the plans and copies of the license”. A downward arrow leads to a yellow rounded rectangle labeled “Audit the structural study and approves it”, followed by another yellow rounded rectangle reading “Audit”. ”. The sequence continues downward to a green rounded rectangle labeled “Pay the fees to”. From this second green box, a horizontal branching line extends to the right, connecting to two rounded rectangles: a blue one labeled “Aleppo City Council” positioned higher, and a yellow one labeled “Syrian Engineers Syndicate” positioned lower. Returning to the main vertical flow, a blue rounded rectangle below the green boxes reads “Final Auditing, Detection, and Signature”. This continues downward to a blue rounded rectangle reading “Approval the license”, and finally to a green rounded rectangle at the bottom labeled “Having the license approved”. At the bottom of the diagram, a legend spans the width of the flowchart. It consists of colored rectangles with text labels identifying the roles associated with each color. The labels read “Aleppo City Council”, “Resident”, “The Directorate of the Old City (Technical Assistant, Fee Auditor, Transcriber, The Department of Licensing and Monitoring, district engineer, Head of Old Aleppo Directorate)”, “Old Aleppo protection Committee including Aleppo governor, Head of the Aleppo city council, The executive office of the governorate and city councils, etcetera”, and “Syrian Engineers Syndicate (Structural engineer, Head of the department)”. The colors in the legend correspond to the colors of the process boxes in the flow diagram.Steps in procedure and responsible parties by colors in the second phase of the approval process of a license, according to Building control system and application legislation
The flowchart is arranged vertically and titled at the top with a rounded rectangle reading “Step in procedure (Phase 2)”. Below the title, the content appears within a light shaded background and is organized as a single vertical sequence labeled on the left as “Step 4”. At the top of the sequence, a green rounded rectangle reads “Registered request”. A downward arrow connects to a blue rounded rectangle labeled “Calculation of Fees”, followed by another blue rounded rectangle reading “Fee audit”. The sequence continues downward to a blue rounded rectangle labeled “Copy the license application”, then to another blue rounded rectangle reading “Verification of license copies”. Below this, a blue rounded rectangle reads “Sign the plans and copies of the license”. A downward arrow leads to a yellow rounded rectangle labeled “Audit the structural study and approves it”, followed by another yellow rounded rectangle reading “Audit”. ”. The sequence continues downward to a green rounded rectangle labeled “Pay the fees to”. From this second green box, a horizontal branching line extends to the right, connecting to two rounded rectangles: a blue one labeled “Aleppo City Council” positioned higher, and a yellow one labeled “Syrian Engineers Syndicate” positioned lower. Returning to the main vertical flow, a blue rounded rectangle below the green boxes reads “Final Auditing, Detection, and Signature”. This continues downward to a blue rounded rectangle reading “Approval the license”, and finally to a green rounded rectangle at the bottom labeled “Having the license approved”. At the bottom of the diagram, a legend spans the width of the flowchart. It consists of colored rectangles with text labels identifying the roles associated with each color. The labels read “Aleppo City Council”, “Resident”, “The Directorate of the Old City (Technical Assistant, Fee Auditor, Transcriber, The Department of Licensing and Monitoring, district engineer, Head of Old Aleppo Directorate)”, “Old Aleppo protection Committee including Aleppo governor, Head of the Aleppo city council, The executive office of the governorate and city councils, etcetera”, and “Syrian Engineers Syndicate (Structural engineer, Head of the department)”. The colors in the legend correspond to the colors of the process boxes in the flow diagram.Steps in procedure and responsible parties by colors in the second phase of the approval process of a license, according to Building control system and application legislation
4.3 Review of case studies and expert interviews
4.3.1 Case studies
The case studies research consisted in the analysis of request of license for intervention on residential heritage buildings in the Old city, presented in the period 2018–2020 and found in the Directorate of the Old City archive.
In Winter 2020, the archives of the Old City Directorate were consulted. 107 licenses for residential buildings were granted in 2018, 81 in 2019, and 92 in 2020. The number of licenses required over a three-year period is small in comparison to the number of residential buildings in Aleppo's old city, which is approximately 1,600. This can be explained by residents refusing to return to the city's neighborhoods and by the fact that owners often carry out interventions without licenses. 16 cases were examined (Table 3) and selected based on the following criteria:
Licenses for different types of intervention (reconstruction and restoration work).
Presence of building violations (old/new).
Types of ownership: full ownership, co-ownership and endowment ownership.
Analysis of the selected case studies
| Case study | Average duration of licensing procedures in months | Type of license | Validation of the license | Applied law | Procedures | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cadastral number | One | Three | Six | Minor restoration | Restoration | Rebuilding | 6 months | One year | Restoration guidelines | Building control system | Syrian antiquities law | Property registration request | Straightening scheme | License request | Architectural inspection and proposal | Payment of fees | Quittance | Submit a rebuilding proposal | Study the proposal | Approval | Control of work by the directorate of antiquities | Control of work by police |
| 1068 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
| 3033 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
| 1702 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
| 2216 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
| 2133 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
| 4113 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
| 1651 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| 3157 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| 495 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| 1437 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| 632 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| 3850 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| 4008 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| 1985 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||
| 1844 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||
| 320 | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||
Source(s): Author – data collected in the field work at the Old City of Aleppo (2020/2021)
Based on the examined cases the following conclusion can be drawn:
The applicants are most often the owner.
In the case of co-ownership, if one or more owners are not present, the remaining shared owners must submit a pledge to the Aleppo City Council agreeing to bear all of the restoration's consequences and effects.
In case of endowment ownership, the tenant must apply to endowment directorate before beginning the licensing procedures to obtain “no objections” to the restoration work.
The main reasons for requesting a license are minor restoration work, restoration or rebuilding.
The licensing procedures can take from one month for minor restoration works to six months or more for restoration and rebuilding.
The restoration guidelines 1999 are followed in the minor restoration works, while the rules reported in the Building Control System and its appendixes are followed in the restoration and rebuilding works.
The license is valid for six months for minor restoration works, but one year for rebuilding.
Many institutions, including the Aleppo City Council, the Technical Committee, the Directorate of the Old City, the Directorate of Antiquities and Museums, the Syndicate of Engineers, the Directorate of Finance, and the Police, are involved in licensing procedures and monitoring implementation.
4.3.2 Interviews
A diverse group of participants with a range of academic and professional backgrounds having a variety of perspectives were selected based on their presence in Aleppo and their involvement with the current reconstruction process. The participants from academia included historians, professors and faculty members from the Faculty of Architecture and engineers who have a master's degree in the field of Archaeology and Rehabilitation of Historic Cities. Additionally, the group from practice included practitioners such as the director of the Directorate of Antiquities and Museums of Aleppo, members and the director of the Directorate of the Old City, the president of the Al Adeyat Archaeological Society, technical committee members, economists, members and the chairman of the real estate involved in the reconstruction of some projects in the Old City, the director of the Citadel of Aleppo, contractors who have experience in the restoration of numerous historic buildings in the Old City and engineers who have received awards for their work on reconstruction projects in the Old City.
During interviews, a series of open-ended questions were asked and topics for discussion were raised using an interview guide. The following topics were covered: barriers to the implementation of Syrian legislation related to residential heritage, and barriers to the successful implementation of sustainable housing restoration and/or rebuilding. Regarding the barriers to implementation of Syrian legislation on residential heritage, all respondents agreed on the need to upgrade the Syrian legislation. Specifically, they highlighted the need to reduce the restrictive and bureaucratic procedures that hinder the issuance of licenses.
Some experts from academia pointed out that too many committees are involved in the approval process, and the lack of knowledge among certain committees or certain committee members hinders licensing procedures.
Experts from practice reported that the Building Control System is an inapplicable law, as it is better suited for museum artifacts rather than for restoration or rebuilding of housing. They also referred to the exceptions and violations of the laws by other government agencies, such as the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Tourism and the Ministry of endowed “Awqaf” which own some buildings. These exceptions are often due to corruption or other interest. According to experts, measures to modify the building control system and simplify procedures have been initiated, but they are few and ineffective.
Regarding the barriers to the successful implementation of sustainable housing restoration and/or rebuilding, experts were asked whether they thought that the restoration and/or rebuilding of the residential heritage has been be approached from a sustainability standpoint, and whether successful initiatives had been taken to meet the requirements outlined in the Development Plan 1992 because of the Development Plan's time limitations.
The experts from academia emphasized that the topic of sustainability is a wide-ranging topic which requires expertise, which is currently lacking. They also pointed out that the current legislations for the Old City do not address the issue of sustainability, especially in regards to social aspects. Despite the brief mention of sustainability in the Development Plan's strategies, almost all respondents reported that no social aspects were considered in the implementation of these strategies. Although a survey conducted on Old Aleppo households in 1993, only one respondent mentioned a social survey conducted as part of the Pilot Project in Al-Fayadah Neighborhood, which was part of the GTZ/Old Aleppo Revival Project, as a preparation phase prior to the issue of the Development Plan.
There was conflicting opinion among the experts interviewed about the role of the community in decision-making. From the point of view of the interviewed academics, involvement of residents in decision making is crucial for the implementation of programs that meet the needs of the community. Differently, from the perspective of the responsible authorities, residents are partners not in decision-making, but in notifying the mukhtars [1] about their problems that need to be addressed.
The respondents, including experts from academia and practice, were also asked to comment and explain the reasons for barriers to the use of alternative energies. The experts from academia cited there is no objection to the use of alternative energies, but because of their high expense and the lack of specific rules, the alternative energies are not provided.
The experts from practice stated that institutions do not have the capacity to rebuild houses, so it is a privilege and unrealistic to secure resources such as solar energy.
When asked whether restoration and/or rebuilding of the residential heritage can be reconciled with broader recovery plans that address sustainable development, and about the main challenges that the laws need to address in this regard,
All respondents reported that only the physical aspect is currently being worked on. While “revival” should include social, health, environmental, and economic factors, these aspects are not addressed by the law and are being ignored in practice.
Other experts, primarily economists, pointed out that the sanctions imposed on Syria have resulted in an increase in prices that are not proportionate with people's income. At the same time, the cost of enforcing the regulations is high and transferring money to Syria, is complex, particularly since the adoption of Caesar's legislation, which in turn led to the declining economic condition and rising exchange. As a result, many people in the Old City have lost hope and want to leave.
5. Discussion and conclusion
This research critically reviews of the current policies and their development during time, and assesses their current application by means of an analysis of some case studies and of interviews with key-actors in the process, such as authorities and decision-makers from academia and practice. The main goal of this research is to identify gaps and improvable aspects in current policies and their application, to be considered when advancing proposals for their improvement.
The policies and their application have shown to have some major limitations, concerning legal/administrative, economic and social aspects.
A first problem of the policies is the long bureaucratic procedure (up to six months) needed for any intervention. This can be particularly challenging in the cases of co-ownership, i.e. when buildings are owned by Endowment Ministry or different parts of the same building are owned by different persons, who are often not resident anymore in Aleppo. Streamlining the procedure, such as reducing the number of steps and institutions involved in the licensing process, could help to speed up the intervention and encourage owners to follow the prescribed procedure. Additionally, legal clarification of the ownership structure is an important and essential component of reconstruction.
When analyzing the current policies and application in the case studies, they appear to be not be flexible enough to accommodate to the needs of the residents, which have evolved in the last decades. Until today, the entire building asset in the Old city is subjected to the Syrian Law of Antiquities (1963); this prescribes strict protection measures that do not take into account contemporary living needs. For example, regulations do not allow or restrict some types of intervention, such as installing heating systems, adding service spaces, etc. which are among the most common reason for intervention (Kousa et al., 2021). Possibly, alternative policies focusing on requirements and quality of the interventions rather than prescribing specific techniques and materials could provide some flexibility while still preserving historic values.
In general, it emerges that a lack of knowledge negatively affects the policies. First of all, not enough information is available about the residential heritage, and even less about their state of conservation after the Syrian war. In fact, the cadastral maps are not updated and only few detailed surveys of the residential buildings in the Old City of Aleppo are available, covering only a limited area (e.g. recent research paper on post Syrian-war housing in the Old City of Aleppo (Kousa et al., 2021). These surveys should be extended to include other neighborhoods and the entire of the Old City of Aleppo.
Next to this, there is currently no inventory of the resident's needs, apart from few examples (Kousa et al., 2021; Corsten, 1995), and these needs are not taken into account in the current regulations. This lack has contributed to uncontrolled interventions on many buildings to meet the needs of privacy, new infrastructure, and services, as well as the urgent need to repair roofs and walls damaged by the war. In order to improve regulations concerning residential heritage in the Old City of Aleppo, it is crucial to involve the local community in the decision-making process and to consider their needs in upcoming policy modifications. All relevant parties, including local communities, academic authorities, unions and the private sector, should be given the opportunity to participate.
Next to lack of information on the state of conservation of the residential heritage and the needs of the inhabitant, it emerges from the interviews that there is also a lack of background knowledge among those responsible for implementing the interventions, who may be young and inexperienced in technical, historic, and legal aspects. Knowledge support from academia and NGOs could help to provide adequate competences to the committee members, for example by means of workshops and seminars.
There is lack of knowledge also at the level of execution of the intervention. Due to the war, traditional knowledge of building material and construction techniques has been lost and the current craftsmanship is often not specialized enough to work on heritage building. New education programs would help to create specialized craftsmen. Suitable documentation of the old techniques, e.g. by involving old craftsmen, would make this knowledge available to younger people.
In addition to the legal, administrative and social issues discussed above, there are also economic challenges that make renovation difficult. The renovation costs are high and, at present, there is no economic support available. Banks refuse to give loans to residents, and it can be difficult to transfer money from other countries to Syria, so financing interventions is difficult. Possibly, the development of incentives, such as emergency funds, soft loans, legal services, tax exemptions, etc. could improve residents' ability to restore and rebuild their houses.
Concluding, this paper highlighted the main limitations of current policies. The specific needs for improvement have been addressed and some general proposals made. In future research, approaches to similar international situations will be assessed, with the aim to come to suitable and feasible suggestions guidelines for the improvement of policies for revitalizing residential heritage in the Old City of Aleppo.
The research reported in this paper has been supported by Katholischer Akademischer Ausländer Dienst: KAAD and Gerda Henkel Stiftung “Patrimonies” in Germany.
Note
The neighborhood mukhtar serves as a bridging link between the neighborhood residences and public bodies including particularly the municipality.
