Recent controversies surrounding urban development in Nicosia have raised serious questions about local authorities’ commitment to protecting the city’s architectural and cultural heritage. Two key examples—the demolition of a historic building at the corner of Arnalda Street and Stasinos Avenue and ongoing proposals to build high-rise structures near Famagusta Gate—have drawn sharp criticism from archaeologists, architects, and heritage advocates who accuse officials of dismissing expert concerns.

Earlier this year, a building at Arnalda Street and Stasinos Avenue was demolished despite its notable architectural features. The Cyprus Architects Association condemned the incident, underscoring systemic gaps in how authorities identify, protect, and list potential heritage sites. They argued that local municipalities and the EOA failed to act on critical data, resulting in the permanent loss of a building deemed historically and architecturally significant by independent experts. The Association also called for more robust legal and financial incentives to encourage private property owners to preserve heritage structures, and for expedited processes when heritage designation is under review.

This pattern of authorities overlooking or downplaying serious concerns reemerges in the ongoing dispute over proposed high-rise buildings near Famagusta Gate—one of the most iconic segments of Nicosia’s Venetian walls. Plans have ranged from 36 floors initially to a “compromise” of 25 floors, yet the Department of Antiquities and the Association of Cypriot Archaeologists maintain that even a scaled-back high-rise would undermine the medieval character of the area.

Critics draw parallels between the demolition case and the Famagusta Gate proposals, suggesting that local authorities, and particularly the EOA, appear to prioritize development interests over expert testimony. In each instance, relevant stakeholders have presented compelling evidence on the potential adverse effects of unchecked building projects, yet these warnings have frequently been overshadowed by economic arguments for urban “revitalization.”

Under Cypriot law, any development that might affect an ancient monument or its surroundings must receive permission from the Department of Antiquities, whose role is to safeguard the country’s cultural heritage. In the case of Famagusta Gate, heritage experts argue that allowing high-rises would fundamentally alter the visual harmony and historic atmosphere of the Venetian walls and surrounding neighborhoods.

Stakeholders also highlight Nicosia’s bid for the European Capital of Culture, stressing that the city’s credibility—and potential success—hinges on maintaining its unique identity. High-rise projects, they argue, not only diminish the historic skyline but also jeopardize a rare opportunity to showcase Nicosia’s cultural treasures on an international stage.

Nicosia’s local planning regulations limit building heights in the area around Famagusta Gate to eight floors. A “discretionary” provision can sometimes permit an additional two floors, but the Department of Antiquities insists that this does not apply when a development is adjacent to a protected monument. In several communications, the Department underscored that the best way forward is to respect existing legislative and zoning rules, which aim to prevent visual and structural disruptions to the historic walls.

While the Nicosia Municipality previously signaled support for the development—arguing that it might revitalize a long-neglected section of the city—the initial application did not advance due to opposition from both the planning authorities and the Department of Antiquities. The debate intensified once local government was restructured, transferring key planning responsibilities to the Nicosia District Administration Authority (EOA). According to public statements, the EOA has explored a “compromise” solution to reduce the tower’s height from 36 to... 25 floors. However, heritage advocates argue that even a 25-floor structure remains fundamentally incompatible with the area’s historic character.

Both the Department of Antiquities and the Cypriot Archaeologists advocate for a collective, multi-agency review process for major construction proposals in historically important areas. They caution that quick-fix zoning changes or unchecked “discretionary” approvals risk prioritizing short-term economic gains over long-term cultural and social benefits. They also urge the state to take more decisive action in protecting historically significant buildings, many of which have been lost or compromised due to developmental pressures.