TheArchitectV12011 PDF

Issue 1 May 2011
The Australian Institute of Architects: WA Chapter

Factory House(s)
Professor Simon Anderson
Review by Simon Pendal
Balcatta Courtyard Houses
iredale pedersen hook
Richard Weller Interview
Community or Privacy
Martin Dickie
Sustainability, Universal Access
and the Premises Standards
Student Work
Byron Last
Emily Van Eyk
Heather MacRae
India Collins
Pavilion Project Review
Daniel Juengling

ARCHI TECT
ARCHI TECT
THE
The Architect May 11
2
EDITORIAL
This is the rst issue of The Architect for 2011, and it is an
honour for me to take over the role as editor from Brad
Cook, who has done a fantastic job over the past few years,
and should be applauded for his work. The Architect plays
an important role in our community, and has a long and rich
history, something which I hope to maintain and strengthen
during my term as editor. The Architect was an important
part of my education, and signicantly inuenced the path
that I have taken since, and I hope to be able to continue
the legacy and build upon its success. One of the longest
running publications in the country, the importance of the
magazine in creating and documenting our built history
cannot be underestimated. I hope the journal can continue
to facilitate discussion amongst the WA architectural
community, providing a forum for critique and commentary.
The aims for my term as editor are to return the journal to a
printed form, whilst retaining an online version, and to nish
the archiving of the magazine, which Brad Cook began.
With these objectives, I hope to build on the readership and
interest so that the journal can continue into the foreseeable
future.
The Architect exists for the members, and can only continue
and grow with support from its readers. Please contact me,
or the Institute if you have any comments, suggestions or if
you would like to contribute in anyway.
This issue contains no building rates; but these will return
next issue.
Andrew Murray
May 2011
WARRANTY Persons and/or organisations and their servants and
agents or assigns upon lodging with the publisher for publication or
authorising or approving the publication of any advertising material
indemnify the publisher, the editor, its servants and agents against
all liability for, and costs of, any claims or proceedings whatsoever
arising from such publication. Persons and/or organisations and their
servants and agents and assigns warrant that the advertising material
lodged, authorised or approved for publication complies with all
relevant laws and regulations and that its publication will not give
rise to any rights or liabilities against the publisher, the editor, or its
servants and agents under common and/or statute law and without
limiting the generality of the foregoing further warrant that nothing in
the material is misleading or deceptive or otherwise in breach of the
Trade Practices Act 1974.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER The material contained in this
publication is general comment and is not intended as advice on any
particular matter. No reader should act or fail to act on the basis of
any material contained herein. Readers should consult professional
advisors. The Australian Institute of Architects, its ofcers, the editor
and authors expressly disclaim all and any liability to any persons
whatsoever in respect of anything done or omitted to be done by any
such persons in reliance whether in whole or in part upon any of the
contents of this publication. All photographs are by the respective
contributor unless otherwise noted.
PRODUCED FOR
Australian Institute of Architects WA Chapter
33 Broadway Nedlands WA 6009
t (08) 9287 9900 e wa@raia.com.au
f (08) 9287 9909 w www.architecture.com.au/wa
COVER PHOTO:
Factory House(s), Rob Frith
EDITOR
Andrew Murray AIA
e wa.editor@raia.com.au
EDITORIAL ASSISTANCE
Trent Woods AIA
DESIGN
Clare Wohlnick
PUBLISHER
ADVERTISING
Kim Burges
t (08) 9287 9900 e kim.burges@raia.com.au
3
PRESIDENTS MESSAGE
Since taking on the role of State
President of the Institute at the
beginning of March, I have been
pleased to receive messages of
congratulations and offers of support
from many members. Encouragingly,
many members have expressed
genuine interest in the activities
of the Institute and have indicated
a willingness to participate in
the ongoing development of our
organization. This is a good sign for my
focus for the rst part of my 2 year term
as State President that is to engage
the membership more directly in the
strategic development, organization
and execution of the activities
undertaken by the Institute here in WA.
We are very fortunate in WA to have
excellent staff to support the goals of
our Institute and its members. Meino,
Kim and Voula do a fantastic job
representing the Institute, managing
day to day business, coordinating
our committees and organizing our
events. They do everything we ask
of them, and more. But it is not their
Institute it is ours. We, the members,
own the Institute and we need to
take responsibility for its ongoing
strategic development and subsequent
activities. As with all member based
organizations, the output for members
is only as good as the input from
members. So if you think things at
the Institute can be done differently,
or better, dont just comment to your
friends about it, get involved and help
make a difference.
You may ask why is my focus on
member engagement when there is so
much work to be done in promoting
the importance of design to the
community, advocating the interests of
the profession to government, property
groups and contractor organizations,
and participating in public dialogue
regarding signicant public
infrastructure projects? The Institute
has over 11,000 members nationally,
with about 1,000 members in Western
Australia. That represents a great
resource largely untapped. Whilst
continuing to address our outreach
objectives as best we can, my intention
is to develop our organizational
structure and to leverage the input
of our members in order to maximize
the extent and effectiveness of the
activities we pursue in the future.
It is early days, but already we are
identifying key Institute activities
where we will be engaging more
direct member input into planning and
execution of our future programmes.
These include our Awards programme,
Architecture Week and Member
Communications (including this
magazine). If you want to participate
directly in these or other activities of
the Institute, or you have ideas you
wish to share, then we look forward to
hearing from you. Together, we can
continue to develop the effectiveness
of our Institute so that ultimately we
can make a meaningful contribution
to improving our community through
architecture.
One such member that has for many
years been highly engaged with the
Institute is our immediate past state
president, Rod Mollett. On behalf of
all members, I wish to congratulate
and thank Rod for his outstanding
contribution to the Profession thorough
his roles with The Architects Board,
the Architects Accreditation Council
of Australia, and of course the Institute
in particular for the last 4 years as
State President. In his time as State
President, Rod has ably represented
WA members in lobbying government
regarding: Development Assessment
Panels, Residential Design Codes, the
Multi Unit Housing Code, Cathedral
Square, the Urban Design Framework,
Strategic Planning and Governance
of the Capital City, the Central
Metropolitan Perth Sub Regional
Strategy, the Outer Metropolitan Perth
and Peel Sub Regional Strategy, as well
as being instrumental in gettingThom
Mayne to Perth and pushing for further
international speakers to visit WA.
Rods efforts on National Council and
National Executive have contributed to
benecial changes for the WA Chapter.
I look forward to continuing to work
with Rod on Chapter Council and will
value his experience and advice.
David Karotkin
David Karotkin
4
Hello there
We have said a sad farewell to Rod
Mollett who has stood down as State
President after four years. A special
thanks to Rod who has worked
extremely hard for the Institute over
those years. He was an inuential
voice in having WA better represented
nationally and locally regarding WA
government issues on urban design
and tendering issues. We are very
appreciative of Rod who has supported
the staff so ably and considerately. He
has made our lives much easier with
his encouragement and assistance.
Luckily, Rod remains as Immediate Past
President and will continue to support
us and the incoming State President
David Karotkin.
A warm welcome to David Karotkin who
will be overseeing the Chapter for the
next few years. We look forward to the
changes he envisages which he has
itemized in his message.
Sponsors
A big thanks to our sponsors whose
assistance allows us to hold such large
events as the Awards Exhibition and
the Awards Night.
They are:
Colorbond BluescopeSteel
Mondoluce
AECOM
Scoop Publishing
Laminex
Midland Brick,
Total Project Solutions
Corporate Theatre
Public Creative Brand Design
Consultants
And new supporter FMC Australasia
Pty Ltd (HomeGuard and termite
protection)
STATE MANAGERS MESSAGE
Awards Exhibition night on 14th
June 2011
We have had 141 entries for the
Architecture Awards the most ever.
Most of you would have received your
invitations and we hope to see you on
the night so you can view the A1 Boards
and enjoy convivial company with your
peers. As you know it will be free to
members and $35 to non members.
We will also be awarding the EG Cohen
Medals and the Emerging Architect
Prize.
Awards Night 17th June 2011
The above will be held at the Burswood
on the 17th June. We will have Vince
Sorrenti as the Master of Ceremonies
so it should be a funny night. We are
having a committee look at the whole
Awards procedure so you may nd
next years awards may be completely
different. If you have any ideas for this
please let me know.
CPD
With 20 hours CPD being compulsory
for architects in WA, courses ll up fast.
Do keep an eye out for upcoming
courses in our email news and enrol as
soon as possible so you dont miss out.
Thats all for now.
Cheers
Meino
Meino Mirkva
5
PRESIDENTS COCKTAIL PARTY 29 MARCH 2011
Peter Hunt Prize Winner- Alexandra Mackenzie
6

MERGE 2011 Architectural Events Calendar
January July
1 Public Holiday - New Years Day 4 MERGE ABWA APE Briefng
3 Public Holiday - New Years Day 6 Refuel WA - Contract Law Negligence
11 MERGE Meetng 1 12 MERGE Meetng 7
26 Public Holiday - Australia Day TBC MERGE - Talk on a Practce 3
February August
8 MERGE Meetng 2 2 ABWA APE Enrolment
9 MERGE ABWA APE Briefng 9 MERGE Meetng 8
16 Refuel WA - Environmental Contaminaton and Implica-
tons on Human Health and Building Design
TBC MERGE - Talk on a Practce 4
TBC (23) MERGE - Talk on a Practce 1 30 ABWA APE Writen Examinaton
28 Refuel WA - E-Tools Sofware for Sustainable Design
March September
1 ABWA APE Enrolment 12 Refuel WA - Liquidated Damages
4 WA Architecture Awards Closing Date 13 MERGE Meetng 9
7 Public Holiday - Labour Day TBC MERGE - Small Bar Tour
8 MERGE Meetng 3 TBC MERGE University Presentaton Curtn / UWA
12 EmAGN Natonal Competton Part 1
17 Refuel WA - Property Acquisiton Pitalls
24 Dulux Study Tour 2011
Emerging Architect Awards 2010/ 11
April October
2 EmAGN Natonal Competton Part 2 10 ABWA APE Oral Examinaton
5 ABWA APE Writen Examinaton 11 MERGE Meetng 10
6 Refuel WA The Stainless Edge Using Stainless Steel to
Maximum Efect
17 Aust. Inst. of Architects - Architecture Week
12 MERGE Meetng 4 18 Aust. Inst. of Architects - Architecture Week
13 Refuel WA - Geothermal Power 19 Aust. Inst. of Architects - Architecture Week
14 - 16 Natonal Architecture Conference , Melbourne 20 Architecture Week - 3 Over 4Under
22 Public Holiday - Good Friday 27 Natonal Architecture Awards
25 Public Holiday - Anzac Day 28 Public Holiday - Queens Birthday
26 Public Holiday - Easter Monday
May November
9 Refuel WA - Copyright and Intellectual Property TBC MERGE - Talk on a Practce 5
10 MERGE Meetng 5 15 MERGE Meetng 11
TBC SONA MERGE Film Night
TBC MERGE University Presentaton Curtn / UWA
17 WA Architecture Awards Presentaton
23 ABWA APE Oral Examinaton
June December
6 Public Holiday - Foundaton Day 13 MERGE Meetng 12 - Wrap-up
14 MERGE Meetng 6 25 Public Holiday - Christmas Day
TBC MERGE - Talk on a Practce 2 26 Public Holiday - Boxing Day
7
Professor Simon Anderson, Faculty of Architecture,
Landscape & Visual Arts, UWA
FACTORY HOUSE(S)
Project Credits
Practice Team:
Simon Anderson, Diana Goldswain,
Sarah May, Domenic Trimboli
Structural Consultant:
Andreotta Cardenosa
Builder: Michael Bradshaw
Photographer: Rob Frith
Project Summary
Our clients are both academics and
own a 360sqm R40 medium density site
on a corner beside the university. They
have two children and have elderly
parents living with them for six months
every year.
They wished to build an affordable,
multi-generational, low energy use,
contemporary house for their own
long-term occupation, yet preserve the
options inherent in the duplex zoning
of their site.
The local government authority
allows two storey developments and
has no streetscape policy given the
heterogeneity of the location. R40
zoning permits two dwellings and
requires maximum 55% site coverage,
1m and 4m street setbacks for corner
sites, setbacks of 1-2.5m for all other
neighbours for walls containing non-
major openings, two car parking bays
behind the setbacks for each house.
Given the budget our design is fully
compliant with all authorities.
The house(s) are designed and built like
factory buildings. Off-form full height
insulated concrete panels standing on
slab-on-ground form the structure and
external walls. Precast panels in various,
but limited number of, sizes are used
to not only allow for building efciency
but also provide the variety needed to
accommodate residential design. A
light weight steel roof structure ties the
panels together and supports a low-
pitched Zincalume roof lining.
The design allows for industrial
building sub-contractors to complete
the earthworks, concrete footings and
slab-on-ground, panel manufacture
and erection, steel roof framing and
erection, steel wall and oor framing,
suspended ooring, roong and
insulation, paving and driveways.
All internal walls are cold formed steel
framing and plasterboard allowing
a single sub-contractor to bring the
house(s) to lock-up, apart from the
aluminium external joinery and sun-
shades which are manufactured and
installed by a single sub-contractor.
Cabinets were installed by a carpenter
using at-pack cupboards and
bench tops.
The planning maximises northern
exposure and puts parents and children
upstairs and over cars at opposite ends
of the house(s) separated by kitchen
and living rooms and numerous doors
with the grandparents accommodated
downstairs and self-contained.
Residential design requires architecture
of exibility and variety within a
similarity of means. We tried to design
a complex ordering of spaces from a
limited palette of materials.
The scale and solar intensity of our city
and state suggest a spreading logic of
deep shade. We tried to capture this
horizontal scale.
In the future the house(s) may be split
to produce two independent houses
of various possible conguration and
the panels were engineered to accept
a third oor should this one day be
permitted.
8
Review by Simon Pendal FACTORY HOUSE(S)
Simon Andersons most recently
completed commission, a new
house, sits atop a corner site along
Nedlands Fairway, ringed by a narrow
perimeter garden. The new building
houses three generations of the same
family- Grandparents within a self-
contained one-bedroom apartment
on the ground oor, Parents on the
rst oor above, while the two adult
children occupy the other end of the
house above a ground-oor studio
and workshop space. Between these
sleeping wings two cars are parked
within the body of the house while the
large living, dining and kitchen space
operates as an open plan apartment
at the rst oor level. The academic
client couple had a simple brief we
wanted a shoebox.
The house has been carefully designed
with economy and efciency in mind. It
is fabricated primarily from repetitive
insulated pre-cast concrete wall
panels, a concrete ground oor slab
and steel framed rst oor and roof.
Internal walls and external inll panels
between the perimeter pre-cast wall
units are light steel framed. The roof
is metal and windows are standard
aluminium. Floors are either exposed
concrete or particleboard. Walls and
ceilings are painted plasterboard,
while the external sunshading is simple
bolt-on steelwork. The project was
designed to be made watertight using
the minimum number of general trades,
especially wet trades.
The house cost less than $1500/sqm,
an extraordinary feat in Perths market
of recent times. The rooms are simple,
well lit, and are oriented and ventilated
for passive thermal comfort. The
palette of steely-coloured concrete,
white plasterboard (and cabinetwork)
and blonde timber is subtle.
The interior surface of concrete is
almost velvety.
This project is the rst full realization
of Andersons work as described in
his co-edited book Take-7 where
he establishes an agenda in stark
opposition to what he considers to be
the regressive forms of production of
Perths residential market;
Yet one area of small-scale
building provision, the commercial
factory building, does show signs of
the advances in industrial building
techniques. Why? Because the
commercial imperative allows one to
ignore history, style and aesthetics,
and to concentrate on buildings as
physical systems expected to have
certain measurable outcomessuch
as affordability, sustainability and
exibilityare essentially quantitive
topics and warrant rational attention.
1
Review by Simon Pendal
The Factory House(s) addresses all
of these criteria, and rationally so.
The critique of this house however,
needs to consider the broader body
of Andersons work over the last two
decades. Early projects such as the
Wherehouse
2
and Her House
3
are those
by which students, practitioners and
academics at both a local and national
level know the author. The inclusion
of the Wherehouse in the Australian
exhibition curated by Shane Murray
and Nigel Bertram at the 2006 Venice
Architecture Biennale (Micro Macro
City) occurred twelve years after the
Wherehouses completion and attests
to the gravity of this work.
For the Venice Biennale Anderson
writes;
The Wherehouse is a manifest
rejection of the structural and
material excesses, hyper-aestheticism
and wastefulness of contemporary
residential architecture. It is a
rhetorical and living monument to
the death of the houseAnti-form,
anti-craft, anti-techtonic, but hopefully
anti-dote.
4
Promoting the idea of just space in
deance of what he considers to be
the laboured, irrelevant and misguided
attentions of contemporary practice,
Anderson has held to this gritty and
provocative position for two decades.
9
Citing Robert Venturi and Marcel
Duchamp, he seeks to have his work
arise out of the cultural circumstance
from which it is conceived and to y an
intellectually and physically irreverent
ag in opposition to the pervasive
aesthetic views of contemporary practice
and established thought. In his own
words his work has consistently been
direct, inexpensive and as big as possible
given the varying constraints of a project.
He decries the fetishism of the overly
complex craft-basis of contemporary
practice as being regressive and for
failing to be culturally relevant.
To nd accord or fault with this position
is not the point. Andersons position
comes out of substantial effort, erudite
criticism, immense knowledge and
constant practice. The question is; how
well does the Factory House(s) reside
within his own musings? If we judge
the work according to his Take 7 text
it would marry neatly with his published
intentions- it would be a successful built
experiment much like that of Charles
and Ray Eames own house of 1949
which exhibits simplicity, efciency,
directness and resourcefulness. The
greater question is whether the Factory
House(s) is a critical advance upon (or
at the very least an equivalent to) the
more polemical works of his earlier
practice The Wherehouse and Her
House those projects considered
capable of sustaining Anderson as of one
of Perths most formidable educators
and advocates for what is a distinctly
original school of thought capable of
inviting sustained conversation nearly
two decades later.
These early works solved problems, were
crude and outrageously inexpensive
to build, could be made within the
skill limits of an average tradesperson,
accepted contingency and ultimately
realized the pursuit of just space. But
these works were more than just the sum
of these parts- they were loaded and
witty works of architecture in spite of
their modest means.
In respect to the Factory House(s) I
lament the absence of the plays on
local culture and precedent that are so
much more than the pursuit of efcient
construction techniques as learnt from
factory construction. The Wherehouse
calls to mind the Hearth Stair of
the Vanna Venturi House, the BBQ
kitchen (instead of a standard hotplate,
Anderson installed a standard BBQ in a
brick benchtop), the cross of concrete
paving slabs marking the place of the
original house that was demolished
to make way for his Wherehouse - X
marking the spot. Does this garden
arrangement refer to the conguration
of a paradise garden or taking it a step
further was he saying RIP to the
original dwelling?
In the case of Her House, setting
aside the obvious references to the
Vanna Venturi House and the similar
relationship between Client and
Architect, there is the mythology of the
place that has arisen out of Andersons
direct, no-fuss but wry approach. This
house was constructed as a fake, an
arts and crafts house of red brick with a
white colorbond gable broken up with
uncomfortably thin strips of shiny PGI
or zincalime to mimic its tudor roots.
This house was required by the local
authority to remain in keeping with its
neighbour in an attempt to appease
the local heritage lobby of the time.
Anderson relished the making of a fake
in this situation. The irony of this tale
is that the original house, so precious
at the time, has since been demolished
and now the fake is the thing that
remains. If you are a fan of myth and
narrative in works of architecture they
dont come better than this in Perth.
The above could be construed as
esoteric games in architecture, but like
it or not Anderson was building a name
and a body of work in direct pursuit
of something specically Perthian.
This is to be admired. The question
that remains is whether the Factory
House(s) is an extension to Andersons
body of work or a departure from it.
As a house it manages to deliver its
clients a generous, efcient, rational
and inexpensive house far better in
quality and passive performance to
its rival - the McMansion. This alone
it to be applauded. By housing
three generations of the same family,
six people in total, it champions
cross-generational care, community
diversity and humane and dignied
aging. Andersons approach here,
as well as with the Concreto Houses
(Mt Lawley 2009) addresses housing
affordability, sub-letting and alternative
superannuation or income streams
by using such strategies. All these
facets of the Factory House(s) show an
insightfulness worthy of consideration
throughout contemporary
house building.
FACTORY HOUSE(S) Review by Simon Pendal
10
The hallmarks of vintage Anderson, the
language and idea-based witticisms of
his earlier work - those that have kept
him on the margins of practice but
within the national critical consciousness
- are absent from this latest project.
These imbued projects with myth,
narrative and joy in buildings that were
sometimes brutally tough and in need
of such embellishments. These made
the work culturally relevant. The pursuit
of cost and constructional efciency
seems to have marginalised these earlier
experiments within Andersons working
consciousness. The Factory House(s) is
economically and socially sustainable
but is it culturally so? A merging of the
devices and thinking of the earlier work
with this recent advancement in his
practice would, in my view, complete
what is an incomplete triad.
Simon Pendal

1.
Anderson, S. (2008) Take 7, Housing
Australia- How Architects can make a
difference: Edited by G.London and
S.Anderson, ACT, Australia, AIA Publishers.
2.
Anderson, S. (1994) The Wherehouse,
Transiton No. 44/45: Edited by P.Brew,
Melbourne, Australia, RMIT Publishers.
3.
Nordek, M. (1995) Her House,
Transition No. 48: Edited by P.Brew,
Melbourne, Australia, RMIT Publishers.
4.
Anderson, S. (2006) Micro Macro City:
Edited by S. Murray N.Bertram, ACT, Australia,
AIA publishers.
Pendal and Neille Architects
Lecturer, Department of Architecture and Interior Architecture, Curtin University
11
12
13
iredale pedersen hook BALCATTA COURTYARD HOUSES
Balcatta Courtyard Houses
IPH were engaged by the Department
of Housing to design a 2 bedroom
courtyard house under the standard
Homeswest brief and specications.
This project was instigated by Geoffrey
London, Government Architect, to
explore the possibilities of such a
housing type within the context of
Perths suburbs.
The intent was to provide a well
designed alternative housing model
for public housing tenants, responding
to their needs and to sustainability
principals.
The context for the project is that of a
1960s suburb largely re-developed in
the 1980s and 90s- where most of the
original houses have been demolished
and replaced with grouped dwellings
from sand or red colour bricks with
hip roofs. The project responds to
this context by inverting the hip roof
to provide delight and sensible eaves
heights to the courtyards.
Delight is created with the use of brick
in relation to the suburban context,
bands of red and cream bricks dialogue
with horizontal lines of neighboring
buildings and create a substitute for
the missing roof.
The common driveway is located to
the south of the complex, providing
a breeze corridor between the
neighbouring properties allowing
cooling breezes to reach
openings in the units.
The driveway also provides additional
privacy to the outdoor living areas of
the southern neighbours, and prevents
over-shadowing.
A verandah and screening element
to the street provides a counterpoint
to the simple masonry forms of the
development.
The design teams response was to
create a courtyard design that provided
a home for a variety of tenants with
varying levels of privacy within the
context of a restricted site. The most
private space is the shaded courtyard
in the centre of each house, with the
required carport spaces forming a
second more public outdoor space,
and the common access driveway
providing the communal space for
informal interaction between tenants.
The kitchen windows are located to
provide surveillance along the common
driveway, and an entry porch is used to
form an entry vestibule in the east wall
of each unit.
The courtyard design makes for a
dwelling with a small footprint but with
a generous feel that provides spaces
that take advantage of Perths mild
climate. The design provides good
solar access in winter and effective
breeze paths in summer, without
compromising acoustic privacy.
The wall cavities and roof sheeting are
installed with Aircell Retroshield, with
batts on the ceiling plane.
The Department Ofcers advised that
the likely occupants would be single
mothers with 1 or 2 children, older
people without ambulant disabilities.
With this possible occupant make-
up audible privacy both between
units and to the adjacent neighbours
was seen as a critical issue. This was
addressed by the use of masonry
dividing walls between units and the
buffering of living spaces with laundry
areas. The roof forms also reduced the
amount of sound transfer. Interaction
between inhabitants is encouraged
by planting lemon and orange trees
in the courtyards with the hope that
householders will swap produce from
their trees.
14
1 0 6 2 4
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
1. ENTRY
2. KITCHEN
3. LIVING
4. COURTYARD
5. BEDROOM
6. BATHROOM
7. STORE
8. BEDROOM
9. LAUNDRY
10. TOILET
1
2
3
4
5 6
7
8
9
10
A
A
W

I

L

C

O

C
K

A
V

E

N

U
E
1 0 6 2 4
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
15
0 3 1 2
FRONT ELEVATION
0 3 1 2
SECTION
16
RICHARD WELLER INTERVIEW
TA - Richard, can you briey outline the
role of the UDC
RW - Its role was dened by the people
who worked hard to set it up, and then
in particular by Professor Ruth Durack
who directed the UDC for its rst 5
years. Its mission was and remains to
teach, research and practice urban
design as best as possible.
What aims do you have for your time as
director of UDC?
The highest. I want it to be
interdisciplinary, vital, experimental,
contentious, rigorous, professional,
inuential, prestigious, open, rich,
international and happy.
What are some of the projects the UDC
are undertaking right now?
At the moment we are looking at
Brendan Grylls notion of Supertowns,
we are doing our homework on Activity
Centres (as these are a key bi-partisan
component of Perths inll urban policy)
and we are scoping national settlement
patterns to accommodate population
growth out to mid century. But more
than that, the UDC, which I plan to
rename as the AUDC (Australian Urban
Design Centre) needs to be active
around the Indian Ocean Rim.
Do you see room to move and expand
your role in the community/how do you
plan on doing it?
Enormous room. The UWA has moved
Future Cities toward the top of its
priority research area list and the
general public are really interested in
the future of their city and their state so
my job is to bring the university and the
public into the same space as often as
possible.
The UDC is strongly connected to UWA,
including researchers and designers
from the Faculty; are current students
involved with the centre and research
assistance?
There are no students doing research
or design in the UDC right now but the
door is wide open and on a project by
project basis I always make a point of
trying to involve the students.
What changes do you hope to see
during your time as director of UDC,
which direction would you like to see it
take over the next few years?
By now everyone has now realised
that the city needs to be appraised
holistically so urban design, which by
denition tries to do this, is fashionable.
As a term Urban Design was coined
at Harvard in the 1950s. Since then
the discipline and profession has
suffered from vagary and has therefore
been easily appropriated by anyone
who wants to add a bit of cache to
their otherwise relatively narrow
service. Through teaching, research
and practice the UDC s role is to
signicantly elevate what is meant by
urban design.
What is the biggest issue facing Perth
at the moment that the UDC is involved
with, or hope to be involved with?
Perths long-term resilience in the
face of environmental limitations and
population growth and the fact that
sprawl is all we really know. This also
has to be understood as part of a
global situation where we will have a
stable (and even declining) population
of about 9 billion people by mid
century and most of them will live in
cities, many we havent even designed
yet and which all will face problems of
basics such as food and water.
In Boomtown 2050, you discuss the idea
Landscape urbanism, how this might
be integrated or shape the work and
research being undertaken at the UDC?
Landscape urbanism is one of many
urbanisms vying for attention but I
think its quite important and certainly
Harvard have staked quite a bit on it by
appointing Charles Waldheim as their
new Chair of landscape architecture.
What it means is that you try and shape
cities from the ground up instead of
from the top down. Landscape systems
rst, infrastructural systems second
and cultural systems third put them
all together carefully and you have a
resilient 21st century city. It also follows
on from Koolhaas who pretty much
said architectural objects are useless in
terms of the urban issues we face.
How important is it to have an
organisation like the UDC for our city,
especially a city that is growing as
rapidly as ours?
I think its the right thing in the right
place at the right time. In regards to
urbanism and infrastructure there
is a lot happening in WA but there
isnt a lot of directly related research
or genuinely innovative and creative
thinking. Its not because we dont
have talented people, its because
in a boomtown no one has any time.
The UDC should be a place which
can make some time for a range of
experts from university and industry
to come together so that they form
ways of leading and underpinning the
developmental changes going on in
this state.
As witnessed by the recent Waterfront
discussion, Urban Design on such
a large scale faces a lot of public
backlash; do you nd the work and
research you present are met with much
resistance?
No. At the research end of things I
use scenarios and people like being
presented with options. But thats
easy. The real work begins when
we get serious about implementing
a particular design. Then there
will naturally be some resistance.
Resistance is a fundamental part of
democracy and urban evolution and
designers have to work with it to
improve their product. The problem is
when you meet resistance for ulterior
motives apart from the quality of the
design in question. Further to that
the really BIG problem for Perth is
that someone can propose a 4 storey
building in Cottesloe and World War 3
will break out, but start bulldozing the
landscape and building a suburb for
40,000 people on the outskirts of the
city: no one blinks.
Richard Weller recently took over from
Ruth Durack as the Director of the
Urban Design Centre (UDC) in Perth.
The Architect spoke to Richard about
the work being undertaken, and the
plans for his term as Director.
17
COMMUNITY OR PRIVACY Martin Dickie
Are privacy requirements reducing
neighbourliness?
In 2002 WAs Planning Commission
introduced a new form of planning
code, incorporating a performance
approach which mirrors that in
the Building Code of Australia.
Adjustments to what are called the
Residential Design Codes
(or R Codes) were made in 2008 but
difculties remain.
The Big Issue in WAs R Codes is
Privacy. When considering an elevated
oor, a planning ofcer may well spend
more time considering privacy than any
other of the Codes issues. Certainly,
when laying out a home, privacy has
to be one of the rst considerations;
some houses have been designed
solely to avoid a submission due to
privacy questions.
Provisions for visual privacy were rst
introduced with the Performance
Approach in the 2002 Codes, and
required four pages of information
to support one page of provisions.
A further ten pages were issued
subsequently in the form of an Advice
Note. The present version still has eight
pages to explain the issue and the
suggested requirements.
What is privacy?
One reason for the complexity and
confusion is that there is uncertainty
about what is being protected. What
is privacy; is it desirable and what is
a reasonable level of protection in
the suburban context? The dictionary
denition suggests that privacy is not a
quality to be sought:
privacy n LME The state or condition
of being withdrawn from the society
of others or from public attention;
freedom from disturbance or intrusion;
seclusion. (SOED)
Should planning codes encourage
withdrawal from society? The R Codes
in their insistence on surveillance of
the street suggest that their objective
is instead engagement. Element 6.2.4
requires buildings to be designed
to provide for surveillance between
dwellings and the street, and 7.3.2
asks for buildings designed to provide
surveillance of the public domain and
communal spaces...
Witold Rybczynski in his 1986 book,
Home, A Short History of an Idea,
points out that there was no concept
of privacy within the house in the
Middle Ages; one room was used by
many people for living, dining and
sleeping. In 17th century France the
life of the family continued to take
place in one room. Nevertheless, a
desire for a greater measure of privacy
was evidenced by the separation of
the masters from their servants...
At this time the separation of living
from working places meant that the
house was becoming a more private
place. ....Within the home however,
personal privacy remained relatively
unimportant.
In their seminal 1963 book Community
and Privacy, Serge Chermayeff and
Christopher Alexander state Privacy
is most urgently needed and most
critical in the place where people live...
They go on to suggest: It is our
further contention that to contain this
No Desire for Privacy - The owners of this house in Scarborough obviously value the view
more than being seen from the street
kind of dwelling, and to develop both
privacy and the true advantages of
living in a community, an entirely new
anatomy of urbanism is needed, built of
many hierarchies of clearly articulated
domains.
The sledgehammer of the R Codes
deemed-to-comply provisions provides
no hierarchy, no articulation and no
consideration of the subtleties within
which a sense of community grows.
Performance criteria are only a little
more nuanced: to site and design
buildings to meet projected user
requirements for visual privacy and to
minimise the impact of development
on the visual privacy of adjoining
residents in their dwellings and private
open space.
A concern for privacy may well come to
WA from an English heritage. But in the
UK, a desire for privacy is mitigated by
recognition of the value of community.
A 2003 study Perceptions of Privacy
and Density in Housing, prepared
for the Popular Housing Group by
Mulholland Research and Consulting
in the UK examined higher density
housing. There are no density gures
but some types examined appear
to resemble Perths suburbs.
Some excerpts:
.... quotations paint the English as a
peculiarly private nation: curmudgeonly
characters who prefer to skulk in their
homes behind drawn net curtains
rather than socialising with their local
community in continental style street
life. Our research indicates that this is
only a half truth. The English do value
their privacy in their homes. In higher
density living, however, this privacy is
necessarily underpinned by a strong
sense of community responsibility.
The most successful developments
in our research were those where the
values of privacy and community were
seen as complementary parts of a
complete whole: the yin and yang of a
harmonious neighbourhood.
Windows faced one another across the
courtyard but there were no privacy
18
problems. This is because they were,
in the main, kitchen windows where
privacy was not of primary concern; also
the neighbours were on friendly terms
and unembarrassed to acknowledge
one another.
Most of our sample wanted their
private garden, patio or yard to be fully
screened by high fencing or walls so
that outsiders could not easily see in.
They had often replaced or fortied
existing barriers to ensure they were
at least head height. Bushes and trees
were also planted to give extra privacy.
There was a minority of people, mainly
located in the North, who did not
want their garden or patio to be such
a fortress. They liked the opportunity
to chat across the garden fence and to
be aware when their neighbours were
in. They preferred to have a more open
design of screening, using spaced
wooden slats or trellising. Their territory
was clearly marked but they felt in close
contact with their neighbours.
There were some aspects of higher
density living that were seen as
advantageous to security. The
closeness of living in terraced housing
made it easier to summon help in an
emergency, particularly as the degree
of sound insulation often was poor. The
fact that properties overlooked one
another to a degree, and were often
grouped around courtyards or squares
made it easier to spot intruders.
Do we need community?
The term community is used in both
broad and narrow contexts. I suggest
that it should include a sense of
belonging and pride, a common bond
and shared identity, the willingness to
help neighbours and support them in
times of need and perhaps also the
suspicion of outsiders. (Rudlin & Falk:
Building the 21st Century Home 1999
p101). The R Codes appear to embody
this view, referring to street setbacks as
providing the opportunity for casual
and safe interaction (which) enhances
a sense of community. Referring
to privacy they also point out that
differing community expectations in
different situations also should be kept
in mind.
In the minds of the Codes compilers
a sense of community keeps us safe.
A habitable room window with a clear
view of the street avoids undesirable
events. But we should not be allowed to
look into neighbouring spaces behind
the street setback line. This has allowed
undesirable activities such as drug labs
to take advantage of the privacy of
our suburbs.
The Codes standards are
meaningless
The following is from Lewis Keebles
1952 book Principles and Practice of
Town and Country Planning:
Most people do not seek complete
visual privacy in an uncurtained room,
but like to feel that they are not under
detailed observation from the opposite
side of the street and there is a
tremendous difference between 50 feet
and 70 feet..... I feel condent in saying
that to a person of normal sensitiveness
a distance from facing windows of 70 ft
provides a general feeling of comfort,
while a distance appreciably smaller
than this gives a general feeling of
discomfort.
Neighbourly Spaces - An illustration prepared by CABE showing how
outdoor spaces in the UK can be overlooked by neighbours
Seventy feet is 21.3 metres and it must
have been Keeble or some similar
authority that the committee drafting
the 2002 Codes had in mind when they
remarked in the Guidelines:
.... side setbacks alone cannot,
realistically, be deemed to achieve
adequate standards of privacy, because
the setback distances required to
achieve privacy are much greater than
those provided in the Codes. Indeed
it is inconceivable that any practical
setback, even on a large lot, could
achieve absolute visual privacy.
In the case of active habitable spaces,
including outdoor living areas,
balconies, etc an effective privacy
separation distance would be of the
order of 15m or more. Clearly, this
is not realistically achievable. An
acceptable compromise setback, where
intervening screening is not provided,
would perhaps be of the order of 7.5m.
The Codes objective is stated as to
achieve an effective privacy separation
distance but then it is admitted In
practice, some degree of compromise
is necessary. Distance-to-boundary
requirements are reduced to 6m if
views are through a window and to
4.5m from bedrooms, the most private
rooms. There is but one indication
of the purpose of the provisions; in
discussing screening the Guidelines
say: .... the objective of protecting
visual privacy. A reasonable test of
this is whether the screening prevents
recognition of persons or the precise
nature of private activity.
Inappropriate Screening - Strict enforcement
of Codes provisions means that this balcony
has an obtrusive screen but the glass-enclosed
room behind has an unrestricted view. But both
only look at the neighbours solid wall
19
So the Codes intend that I should not
be able to tell if the person next door is
my neighbour or a robber! No wonder
evaluation of performance criteria is
inconsistent when the standards are so
compromised. Since it is unclear what
is intended it is pious but unrealistic
to hope: In many cases, a more
effective, more mutually benecial
outcome can be achieved through the
application of good design, directed at
meeting the Performance Criteria.
(Guidelines p26)
Suburban Mores
Our suburbs appear to be dominated
by a mindset that reduces community,
that means that we have only a nodding
acquaintance with our neighbours in
the few seconds that we drive our cars
into or out of a garage. In our gardens,
as a result of the near-universal use of
1.8m SuperSix fences we have come
to expect complete visual separation:
an outdoor cubicle farm. I can hear
my neighbour but cannot see him, so I
have no relationship on which to build
community. Worse, I cannot see into
his property to check if the screaming I
hear is childish exuberance or domestic
violence; if the breaking noise is a
dropped plate or a thief.
but by a desire for separation. People,
while paying lip service to the idea of
community, have sought, through the
location and design of their home, to
reduce contact with others.
when we look to the future it may
well be that our reliance on the family
rather than the community will become
less tenable. ..... the family is much
less common than it once was and
will become even less so in the future.
.... we believe that the concept of
community will be a potent inuence
on the twenty-rst century home.
(p101)
Seeing and being seen
Viewed objectively, the Codes privacy
standards seem to be inverted. If
someone with voyeuristic tendencies
wants to watch his neighbour he is
well served by a 4.5 setback in his (or
her) bedroom. Concealment behind
glass and curtains encourages illicit
viewing. On a balcony such anonymity
is not possible; a person is exposed to
view and is part of the external scene.
Despite the Codes contention that
these active habitable spaces are of
most concern, balconies are likely to
be inhabited for a signicantly shorter
part of the year than a glazed indoor
space. Why then should they be set
back an ineffective and wasteful 7.5
metres?
Protected View - Here the local planner
still required balcony screening to protect
this view. Outdoor living areas are almost
invisible
It is also unrealistic to not take
impervious balustrades into account.
Since users generally sit down on
balconies, a solid balustrade blocks
views in or out and provides good
privacy for neighbours and the
balconys residents as well.
Pressures on Performance
In the way that they are presently
used, the evaluation of performance
criteria appears to be no more than
the exercise of personal preference.
Yet this should not be so: the criteria
should be seen as standards that are
interpreted with an understanding of
their objectives.
The Codes Guidelines attempt to set
some reasonable limits:
..... it must be understood that absolute
privacy cannot be expected in all cases.
Often it may be achievable only at too
high a cost in terms of orientation,
access to winter sunshine, security
or some other desirable objective.
Nevertheless, a reasonable level
of privacy can usually be achieved
through good design.
However it is nearly impossible to
convince a planning ofcer to accept a
performance application on this basis.
Who decides?
In conclusion I would like to quote
Matthew Cremona in a 2003 article on
Public Places, Urban Spaces. Despite
the rather confused syntax, I agree with
his opinion that
The permeability of the public/ private
interface should be controlled by
private users. In practice, however, the
necessary degree of control is often
absent: instead of enabling users to
choose how much privacy they want
through the use of adjustable lters,
by making permanent physical and
visual barriers, designers often decide
for them.
Designers and Western Australias
planning authorities should just
withdraw from this area and let the
residents decide how much privacy is
appropriate.

Martin Dickie is an architect in private
practice and his opinions carry no legal
or statutory weight. These interpretations
and suggestions should be discussed with
the relevant local authority to establish its
position.
The Usual Solution - Thousands of similar
slatted screens have arisen on side walls of
balconies in recent years
We should enjoy the benets of
suburban densities, which include
a degree of neighbourliness,
community and surveillance which
helps to ensure safety for ourselves
and our property. These days, the
neighbours burglar alarm is more likely
to signal a defective battery than a
break in. We all seem to have accepted
that we will eschew any of the benets
of living only 2-3 metres apart.
According to Rudlin & Falk urban
trends over the last hundred or so
years have been driven not by the
desire of people to live in communities
20
SUSTAINABILITY, UNIVERSAL ACCESS AND THE PREMISES STANDARDS
Building Regulations and Standards
are being developed progressively in
response to changing demographics
and needs within society. The
population is increasing, we are
living longer, are getting taller and
there are more obese people now
than in preceding generations. To
accommodate future generations
buildings should cater for these trends.
This will make our emerging building
stock easier to use, more durable and
have a longer working life. Future
generations will not be forced to pay
for modications and adoptions as
frequently if our design standards
seek to cater for people with greater
exibility and differing abilities.
The Access Regulations and Standards
have been developed to provide safe
environments on the basis of equity of
use and to sustain the quality of human
life in a dignied way.
The Disability (Access to Premises
Buildings) Standards 2010 (Premises
Standards) is due to come into
operation on the First of May 2011.
They are the logical outcome of the
operation of the Federal Disability
Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA92),
which prohibits discriminatory action.
It extends its scope to include the
principle of dignity of individuals in
their use of spaces in buildings and
requires building owners and managers
to provide a safe and equitable
environment. It is enforceable by
complaints being heard by a Federal
Court. .
Most buildings serve to house the
activities of people with a wide range
of ages and abilities and tness for
purpose is of primary importance in
achieving satisfaction and aesthetic
pleasure.
Buildings designed with sustainability
in mind generally have a longer life
than their occupants with the result
that it is close to 100% statistically
likely that, at some stage, a number
of their occupants and visitors will be
either temporarily or permanently
disabled. Accessibility is therefore
an important aspect of sustainability.
When implemented correctly it allows
people to be where they need to be
independently, efciently and with
dignity and in doing so frees their own
and others time resource. Further
it allows for building use when a
transitory disability occurs and provides
a less dangerous environment.
Retrotting to meet individual needs
can largely be avoided and in any case
suitable structural provisions should be
made so that retrotting, if required, is
least costly.
The Building Code of Australia and
associated Australian Standards have
progressively introduced requirements
to improve access but improvement
in the overall level of access has been
slow. There has been little evidence
of a proactive approach from the
building industry to fully address its
responsibilities under the DDA. Use
of the DDA complaints mechanism
with resolution (or otherwise) on the
basis of isolated legal disputes has
not delivered an holistic approach to
access. Systemic change has therefore
not been possible, as people who
have been discriminated against have
reportedly found the complaints and
Federal Court process too daunting.
At long last the perceived need for all
people, irrespective of their ability/
mobility, to be able to enter and move
freely in and around buildings has been
codied. There are many examples
of what is proposed already extant in
numerous regional shopping centres
and cinema complexes. In these
buildings the owners and operators
have seen a commercial advantage
in providing the means for people to
be able to enter and move freely in
and around their premises. Transport
infrastructure has similarly been
progressively upgraded an accordance
with the provisions of the Transport
Standards that have been operating
since October 2002.
Our communities include a huge range
of people, with a wide range of abilities.
Some disabilities are permanent,
others are temporary due to accidents,
illness etc. and include such limitations
as those experienced by parents with
young children in pushers etc. All
people have the basic human right to
participate in the broadest range of
social activities.
In addition to providing access
through building solutions there is
a need for adequate provision for
waynding, both inherent in the design
by logical ow of spatial arrangements,
and by readily identiable, clear and
intelligible signage. It is incumbent
upon building designers to make
provision for this broad range of
building occupants and visitors.
The DDA92 in Section 32 says, simply,
It is unlawful to contravene a disability
standard. Therefore to comply with
Federal Law, all buildings identied in
Section 2.1 of the Premises Standards
which are the subject of an application
for a building permit on or after 1st
May 2011 must meet the Access Code,
regardless of the version of the BCA
which the building surveyor uses to
assess the application. It should be
noted that there is no provision for a
period of grace.
An important aspect, which is often
overlooked, in respect of the legal
relationship between BCA 2011 and
PS 2010, is that it is not BCA 2011 that
requires compliance with PS 2010
but the Federal Act DDA92 through
PS 2010 that in Clause 2.1 (1) (b) and
Clauses 2.1 (4) and 2.1 (5) requires
relevant buildings to meet the Access
Code, which involves compliance with
BCA2011 where it is applicable.
None of the foregoing affects the
right of persons who consider they
have suffered discrimination on the
grounds of their disability to complain
about a building design. This remains
enshrined in the Act but compliance
with the Premises Standards will mean
a complaint in respect of matters
covered by the Standards cannot be
upheld.
Australian Standards AS 1428.1 &
AS 1428.4, both of which have been
updated over a number of years, were
re-published in 2009 and amended
in 2010 as part of an agreement to
align the technical requirements of
the BCA, DDA & Australian Standards.
AS 1428.4 was renumbered as AS
1428.4.1. The updated standards were
altered to accommodate a wider range
of the population than was included
in previous editions and are now
reference documents to the Access
Code and the BCA.
AS1428.1 & AS1428.4.1 address the
built environment; internal tout is
also covered by the DDA. AS 1428.2
which will be re-written to include
furniture, internal tout and equipment
is currently on the agenda of Australian
Standards to be complete within
a two year time frame. While not
legally referenced by legislation, the
publication of this standard would
provide some guidance for designers
and building owners and operators. AS
1428.4.2 relating to waynding within
buildings and AS 1428.8 Adaptable
21
Housing are also listed for nalisation
and publication within the next two
years. Other standards that may be
developed by Standards Australia
in the future include access to the
external environment. The DDA
includes external as well as internal
environments, as with AS 1428.2, this
information will provide consistent
principles for designers and building
owners and managers.
Similarly to BCA 2011 and the Access
to Premises Standard, principles
of sustainability are progressively
being enshrined in legislation refer
to BCA Section J, The Building
Sustainability Index (BASIX) and the
Nationwide House Energy Rating
Scheme (NatHERS), an initiative of
Commonwealth, State and Territory
Governments through the Ministerial
Council on Energy, whose enhanced
sustainability provisions (NSW) are
being prosecuted by organisations
such as the Green Building Council.
There have been many and varied
repercussions of recent very signicant
steps forward in both the access and
the green agendas. An in-depth
investigation of the interrelation
between these two critical social
movements will no doubt be the
subject of many more detailed future
commentaries and investigations
The Australian Institute of Architects
is progressively providing, through
Acumen, a comprehensive guide
for members; including a full range
of details from the legal to practical
design advice.
A guide to the Premises Standards
is currently in course of preparation
by the Australian Human Rights
Commission and will hopefully be
available on their website by the time
this is published; the address will be:
http://www.humanrights.gov.au/
disability_rights/standards/PSguide.
html
The Architectural profession in
Australia has embraced some aspects
of sustainability and now faces the
challenge of providing universal access.
In the words of Daniel Libeskind,
Good design should be for everyone.
The foregoing was provided by the
Australian Institute of Architects
National Access Work Group which
was set up in July 1998. Reporting to
National Practice Committee, the group
comprises representatives from all States
and Territories Chapters together with
representatives of the Australian Institute
of Landscape Architects, the Australian
Property Institute and the Association of
Consultants in Access Australia; meeting
quarterly by teleconference they provide
coordinated practice guidance, on matters
related to Access to Premises, to the various
organisations members.
For further information contact the Institute.
Edited for The Architect WA by Peter Jones.
SUSTAINABILITY, UNIVERSAL ACCESS AND THE PREMISES STANDARDS
22
My project is conceived from the May
Holman Centre on Salvation Terrace on
Perths Salvation Loop, which has been
left in a state of ruin following a failed
attempt to revitalise the building at the
onset of the global nancial crisis. Now,
having been devoid of function or event
for years, this project begins at its end.
The Death of the May Holman Centre.
This project proposed a narrative
exploration of the buildings re-
inhabitation. The narrative, its structure
and characters were adoptions of those
in J.G. Ballards novel High Rise, in
which the established hierarchical and
stratied social order of a luxurious high
rise apartment building descends into
chaos. Similarly this projects narrative
is to follow the buildings current state
of decline, and the inhabitants entropic
decent in pursuit of a new personal
freedom. A new truly free life, liberated
from the shackles of consumerist
social order.
An architectural intervention was
proposed within the carcass of the
May Holman Centre, which was to be
generated though the narrative of
Ballards High Rise and my previously
conceived Salvation Loop. Rather
than starting with program and site
diagrams as a means of generating
architecture, it was proposed that this
narrative, its events and characters, with
all their inherent meanings were to be
the architectural generator. Tschumis
Three Square strategy is sited here.
Tschumi, rather than examining
program, a predetermined set of
expected occurrences, examines event,
an indeterminate set of unexpected
outcomes.
The narratives protagonist begins as a
participant in his own Salvation Loop.
He identies the abandoned 18 storey
May Holman Centre, located between
Salvation City and Plunder City, at the
eastern end of Salvation Terrace on the
Salvation Loop, as the appropriate
location for his escape from the Loop.
Previously occupied by the Magistrates
and District Court Rooms and other
law enforcement agencies, of which
remnants of their existence remain, the
building represents the enforcement of
the Salvation Loop social structure that
our protagonist desires to destroy.
However, there lies the paradox in the
protagonists liberation. The rejection
of the external freedom, the rejection
of living within the regulated constraints
of the Salvation Loop, revealed an
alternate inner consciousness as his
ultimate reality. A reality excluded from
society. Marking the narratives nale
in the protagonists psychological
liberation is his complete digression to
that of an infant and the ultimate return
of his esh to his mothers.
In front of him the children in the
sculpture-garden were playing with
bones...the women were looking intently
at Wilder... In their bloodied hands they
carried knives with narrow blades. Shy
but happy now, Wilder tottered across
the roof to meet his new mothers.
(High Rise)
The ultimate digression and demise of
the protagonist coincides with that of
the May Holman Centre, and its return
to the mother from which it came. And
as with the structure of High Rise, the
conclusion to the May Holman Centre,
having begun at the end, ends at
the beginning.
Byron Last
This is Narratives of Architecture as
Entropy
RECENT UWA HONOURS PROJECTS
STUDENT WORK
23
STUDENT WORK
24
The project is a new building for
Scitech situated in the Perth Cultural
Centre. Scitech is an interactive science
museum; it is one of Perths most
successful tourist attractions and when
the lease expires in two years they aim
to be occupying purpose built premises.
A new building would mean a new
identity and an attempt to reach a wider
audience; it would promote Scitech
as a major science and technology
communicator and encapsulate the
museums focus of interactivity and
experience. The site was chosen for
mutual benet, it would gain as much
if not more from the venture as Scitech
would. The injection of life and fun that
an architecture dedicated to Scitech and
its patrons would bring to the austere
and intimidating cultural centre would
be invaluable.
The brief encouraged research and
experiment into architecture that not
only caters for children but allows
people of any age to regress or
remember what childhood was like. As
a result I focused on phenomenology
as it appropriately delves into memory,
sensation and mien often triggered by
level or threshold or a bodily reaction to
the surrounding environment. I treated
the building as if it were a series of
events characterised by their level and
sensory clues, rstly a visitor descends
into the dark, robotic computer cellar of
STUDENT WORK
Emily Van Eyk
25
Scitech, slowly ascending through the
main galleries into more open space
to eventually break through to the
perplexing, undened playful roof.
Technically speaking this proposal
offered challenges with tight site
constraints and evolving program,
the architecture had to literally be
experiential and interactive, it was an
adage of Scitechs that I understood
to be at the crux of my design. This
in mind I aimed to constantly design
in all dimensions and resisted solely
orthographic projection. This proved a
fruitful experience and produced some
interesting unforseen results like the
idea for the sloped grassy terrain of the
PCC.
This project was a successful one for me,
I think the reason being that although
I enjoyed the research and the whole
process of independent design, most
of all I had fun. My supervisor, Sophie
Giles, was a constant source of energy
and enthusiasm and each meeting was
an entertaining one.
STUDENT WORK
26
STUDENT WORK
Heather MacRae
ENABLING PLACE: Housing the
displaced Sudanese in Perth.
This project involved the design of
housing and community facilities for
the most recent signicant group of
migrants: the displaced South Sudanese
refugees. The aim was to create an
environment that would provide
suitable social spaces to enable the
refugees to come to terms with their
surroundings and achieve a sense of
place. The chosen site was in the suburb
of Mirrabooka, in the City of Stirling
a local government precinct that is
home to 50% of the Perth Sudanese
community.
The Sudanese are a completely new
migrant group to Australia. Their tribal
backgrounds, extensive years in refugee
camps and high levels of trauma and
torture have meant that adapting to
western ways of living is very difcult.
Feelings of isolationism and a lack of
place prevail. Studies show that this
group nd it signicantly more difcult
being a migrant and are less connected
with their new home compared with
other migrant groups.
The question was in this project,
how can architecture help this
new, signicantly uprooted group
of refugees?
27
I approached this problem of Sudanese
resettlement through a top-down
western and a bottom-up Sudanese
mode of research. Through consultation
with the South Sudanese community,
The Metropolitan Migrant Resource
Centre and the City of Stirling,
I developed my brief to include
orientation housing, a community
centre, a Migrant Resource Centre and
a Womens Centre. Signicant focus
was to also be on the spaces that lie
between the built form with community
gardens, gathering spaces and play
areas to be integrated.
The main focus of the brief was housing
for 150 people, to be of an interim
nature, allowing for an easing into the
landscape of the host city. Acting as
a mediator between lost past homes
STUDENT WORK
and the future Perth home, the housing
catered for the specic cultural needs
of the community while providing a
framework for western living.
With an examination of the ideas
of movement and mobility, both
theoretically (Bourdieu and Iain
Chambers) and in the Sudanese way of
life, I developed the driving concept of
the path and the nook. The path being
a productive entity; it is the spine and
life force of the site. It weaves inside
and outside, through public and private
and most importantly, it intersects.
It is through this that gradients and
thresholds are created and as Bourdieu
suggests, it is these spaces that are of
most signicance to the migrant.
The nook can be seen as the dwelling
place, it shelters and protects. It forms
part of the therapeutic landscape and
restores a sense of opportunity. With
Bachelard in mind, it is a space that can
encourage day dreaming, an activity
that can unlock past memories of home.
In the context of this design, it can
be seen that a fundamental aspect
is to allow for a certain living in
movement, where architecture walks
the line between the past the future.
With guidance from supervisor Phil
Goldswain, this project, I believe,
successfully dealt with the complicated
task of refugee reterritorialisation to
enable place through architecture.
S
I
N
G
L
E

W
O
M
A
N

U
N
I
T
S
28
Australians are coast dwellers. For
most, it is the coast, not the outback,
which is central to an Australian identity.
Metropolitan beaches along the coast
are a cultural hub for many Australians,
and our white sandy beaches are
the most popular tourist attraction
for international visitors. Typically
development along the coast in
Australia, on the threshold between land
& ocean, does not connect meaningfully
to place. Buildings at Cottesloe Beach
are a case in point.
Cottesloe Beach Re-imagined focuses
on the foreshore precinct west of Marine
Parade. For this project the Indiana Tea
Rooms building (built in 1996 on top
of existing 1983 concrete facilities) will
be demolished, as it can be argued the
facilities provided; are not in line with
what is required from such a heavily
used local and tourist destination,
and do not connect meaningfully to
place. To justify the demolition of this
building, what constitutes a meaningful
connection to site/place needs to be
dened:
1) PORTRAY A UNIQUE SENSE
OF AUSTRALIAN SPACE
Vast, open, loose, and linear. This sense
of space is unique and should be valued
and expressed in our built form. As
Phillip Drew states, The essence of
Australian space is the open boundary.
2) BE SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE
Buildings that connect in as many ways
as possible with the local cycles and
processes, both natural and human
(P. Buchanan)
Provide a range of experiences, for
a range of different users, at varying
times of the day and year- people enjoy
the beach in different ways. Built form
must respond to the climatic conditions
of the site. Particularly important to
create areas that are protected from
the predictable prevailing AM & PM
summer and winter winds. Shelter from
the sun and wind is key.
STUDENT WORK
India Collins
29
STUDENT WORK
The Indiana Tea Rooms building does
not full the criteria stated above.
Cottesloe Beach Re-imagined replaces
facilities provided in the current
building, as well as providing additional
cultural, social, and recreational facilities
- with the above criteria as the
key driver.
Situated on such an exposed West
facing site, orientation becomes crucial.
The proposed cafes, restaurants,
cultural centre, and beach facilities face
North West up the beach rather than
due West to minimise glare and protect
users from the predictable South
Westerly afternoon breeze.
The project aims to not touch the earth
lightly but instead fully engage with
the landscape to create multiple entry
points, view points, terraces, and a
range of spaces to protect users from
the harsh wind and sun at different
times of the day and night. Unlike the
current Tea Rooms building, which sits
above the beach-scape cut-off from its
users, the proposed buildings are fully
integrated with the grass terraces and
boardwalks to connect to the beach-
scape and its users in as many ways as
possible.
TEA ROOMS SITE
Skate Park
Playground
Coffee / bar pavilion
STREET SITE
Restaurant
Cultural / Community Centre
Cafe
Retail
ROCK SITE
50m Lap Pool
Wading Pool
Change Facilities
Spa
Bar / restaurant
30
Daniel Juengling PAVILION PROJECT REVIEW
In 2010 the UWA Cultural Precinct held
a competition to design a pavilion
structure that would be erected in
front of Winthrop Hall. Italian architects
Elisa Mansutti and Luca Pavarin took
rst place. Convocation, the UWA
graduates association, sponsored The
Pavilion Project.
The competition brief required entrants
to design a pavilion that addressed
the ambitious task of providing shelter
for those urgently in need, whilst
incorporating green technologies, in
remote areas and communities at times
of disaster and distress. As food for
thought the competition now seems
more than appropriate in light of recent
disasters such as this years Queensland
oods and the Japanese tsunami. The
brief required the added complexity of
fusing art and architecture and being
environmentally friendly.
With any disaster response
architecture, by implication there is
a need for a solution that is easy to
assemble and cheap to fabricate many
times over. Without addressing this,
any proposal is in danger of being
outmoded by a more economically
efcient version. Short to mid-term
emergency shelter responses by
architects are commonly overlooked
due to a lack of economic efciency
and unnecessary complexities. Costs
in production and erection snowball
and limit their appropriateness to the
task at hand. An example is the highly
publicised paper housing by Shigeru
Ban that recently came under criticism
by David Neustein on the Australian
Design Review website . As Neustein
points out, complex solutions like Bans
rarely advance beyond the prototype
stage. An obvious conclusion would
be that an army specied tent is more
appropriate in areas of distress than
an overtly aestheticised cardboard
structure. If you require shelter in its
most rudimentary form why not reduce
it to the absolute denominator.
The competition brief stated that the
shelter was to be assembled by non-
skilled workers and without power or
lifting gear. The Pavilion Project was
to be 100sqm in size, lending itself
to more than primarily a shelter and
potentially be used as a ceremonial
public space.
All undergraduate and recent
graduates of architecture were eligible
to enter. The uniqueness of this
competition, and arguably the jewel
in the crown for the winner, was the
invaluable practical experience offered.
The winners had the opportunity to
oversee the project through to its
physical completion. Beyond exposure
to the community, this competition
helped establish a professional and
independent design direction for the
winners. An opportunity to execute a
small project distanced from potential
liabilities that a larger project might
involve.
Winthrop Professor Geoffrey London
headed the jury. Other jurors included
Richard Hassell, Sean Godsell, Abbie
Galvin and Peter Corrigan. The jury
congratulated all participants.
Overall the entries noted were
detached from a contemporary
parametric stylising that seems so
common in recent publications. They
were also noted as innovative and
poetic though not all were capable
of being deliverable, when mass-
produced, to developing countries at
a cost of US$12,000. This was another
key requirement. Regarding Mansutti
and Pavarins winning entry, Professor
Geoffrey London stated the following
in the jury report:
This [winning] proposal is a deceptively
simple tent-like form capable of
meeting the competition criteria and
of being developed into an easily
constructible signal of hope, a refuge
of folded planes. While it will meet
the utilitarian needs of basic shelter, its
schema allows the potential to expand
into a grander and more ceremonial
version.
The winning concept was based simply
on the reconguration and merging
of better tent designs to create a new
type suitable to the requirements of
the given brief. Mansutti and Pavarin
devised a solution free from guy ropes.
The shelter resembles origami-like
assemblage of triangular surfaces
xed in tension across 13 near vertical
supports.
PAVILION PROJECT REVIEW Daniel Juengling
31
The spatial layout within the structure
hosts a small private sleeping quarter
in each corner. These frame a larger
central communal area. The bell tent
design informed the structures internal
common space; the divided rooms
of your average camping tent guided
the development of the four corner
sleeping areas.
Their winning competition panel alludes
to a larger spatial hierarchy, an idea of
aggregating these structures to form a
community. Openings occur on all four
sides of the structure, providing access
to common space between adjacent
tents and when assembled en masse
larger courtyards may form.
To remain environmentally neutral, the
designers suggest in their proposal
using timber as supports and fabric
rejects from factories sewn together to
form the skin.
cuts of material sewn together sourced
from factories around Perth.
In maintaining a humanitarian approach
one must consider the potential
accessibility to such a design. To
remember Bucky Fullers adage,
it has to be everybody or nobody.
Mansutti and Pavarins project could
help protect all human life by adhering
to Buckys concepts of shared
knowledge. The project could remain
detached from patents, copyrights and
trademarks and be made available as a
ready to assemble set of drawings via
the Internet, adopted where necessary
by those in need.
The form of the winning entry has an
implicit exibility, adaptable to local
construction techniques and readily
available materials. One could imagine
it on a timber platform supported
by piers and bearers in areas of high
rainfall, or anchored to the ground in
arid clearings, just as easily as it was
assembled using 13 aluminium posts in
front of Winthrop Hall.
Beyond any agreement or
disagreement with disaster responsive
architecture one must remember the
endearing and unique feat particular
to this competition. A design by two
young graduates was built. There
should be more opportunities like this
available. It would be lovely to see the
architectural profession supporting and
promoting young independent ideas
and practice more frequently.
Daniel Juengling
Daniel Juengling is an assistant professor
at UWA.
Upon visiting the structure in front of
Winthrop Hall at UWA one cant help
but notice its sturdiness. It is very well
made. A factory produced layered
fabric stretches across 13 strategically
placed, very thick aluminium supports.
This differs from the original proposal,
though understandably. In its currently
constructed state it functions as a
sturdy pavilion. It hosts exhibitions and
doubles as a shelter prototype. The
visitor can easily imagine that in its
anticipated state as emergency shelter
it could be made from whatever is
at hand.
I believe this is the strongest
characteristic of Mansutti and Pavarins
design. The structures implied
potential. It can be adaptable to a
host of sizes, scales, time periods and
functions whilst still maintaining their
signature and design intent. However it
would have been nice to see the skin as
they intended - a collage of random off
1. Neustein, D., A Paper-Thin Humanitarian
Ethos. (2011) Available from : <http://www.
australiandesignreview.com>
[15th April 2011]
32
Daniel Juengling PAVILION PROJECT REVIEW
BEL
1.
2. 2a.
3.
4.
CONSTRUCTION
6.
5.
zip
strip of
waterproof fabric
waterproof fabric
on the ground
OUTSIDE
INSIDE
the zips permit to fix the tents on
the ground fabric and stop water
flow in case of rain
1
2
fold part 2,
sew it up
with part 1
corners tents
mosquito nets
central tent
sewing of different fabrics
zips to close the tent
to the outside
diagram of different lenghts of fabric with seams and zips
1
22
RECYCLE REUSE USE
WOODEN POLES
n4 - 218 cm
n4 - 250 cm
n4 - 334 cm
n1 - 375 cm
SCREW
used to tie ropes with poles
ZIP
ROPE
lenght: 132 m
take production rejects
from fabric factories
sew together the
fabrics collected
produce other design prod-
ucts reusing tent fabrics
MOSQUITO NET
surface: 40 mq
LINSEED OIL
to waterproof the fabric
RECYCLED FABRIC
(preferably cotton duck)
fabric below (pavement) : 144 mq
fabric above: 128 mq
MATERIALS AND THEIR USE
common space between two tents
common space between all the tents
where there can be the element of
union: the fire
P
R
O
P
O
S
A
L

O
F

A
G
G
R
E
G
A
T
I
O
N
corners tents
mosquito nets
central tent
sewing of different fabrics
zips to close the tent
to the outside
diagram o
common space between two tents
common space between all the tents
where there can be the element of
union: the fire
m
entry t n e t r e n r o c t n e t r e n r o c
the tent is fixed to the pole
with a cap
the ground fabric is fixed in the pole with screws
higher than the ground, so there isnt seepage
of water
BELL TENT
It is a simple structure
supported by a single
central pole and
covered with a cotton
canvas. The tent is
stabilized by guy ropes
connected around the
top walls and being held
down by pegs in the
ground.
The nomadic tent is
covered by some layers
of fabric to protect the
people against external
environment. Type and
number of layers
depend on territory
climate.
NOMADIC TENT
It is used in areas at
time of disaster to
shelter people without a
home. The structure is
simple to made but
doesnt provide privacy
to dwellings because it
is a great single room.
EMERGENCY TENT
The camping tent is
divided in rooms and
permit the people
remaining alone or
staying in group. Clos-
ing system is fast and
simple to do because is
made of zips.
CAMPING TENT
R
E
S
E
A
R
C
H
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
keep a square sheet fold it like the image below and you obtain the
central/public tent
then place the private tents
in the central tents corners
PROBLEM
solving the urgent need for SHELTER with green technologies in remote areas and communities at times
of disaster or distresses.
SOLUTION
mans basic instinct are: searching food and providing shelter to protect himself against the environment
using avaiable materials and objects. The result can be everything: a cardboard box, a mass of branches
or a single canvas folded on a pole.
The solution for the problem could be the creation of a tent for its lightness, portability, easiness of
construction and little amount of materials.
hole the ground for the poles
fix the fabric on the ground with pegs
place the poles in the holes
use the ropes to tie poles
together and with the ground
fix the fabric on poles and ropes
947926
Construction
After digging out the holes for the poles you have to spread one large waterproof fabric on the ground and
fx it with pegs. This fabric should be previously provided with zips and openings for the poles. At this time
you can thrust poles on the ground and tie them together with ropes. Before disposing the cloth upon the
structure you should prepare it, sewing the pieces of mosquito net with the waterproof cloth and fxing zips
to close the sheets. The main tent is formed by a unique canvas that is folded as an origami. The number of
cloth layers upon the structure depends on the territory climate.
The internal space is divided in four closed tents that can be used as bedroom and can be opened to inside
and outside. These corner tents are the private part of the pavilion while the central area is public and has
four entries. The Pavilion Is designed to be free, in fact the fabric sheets can be moved to create an open high
space.
Green technologies
- the use of recycled material to reduce the cost taking production rejects from fabric factories.
These rejects are sew together to make a large canvas that is waterproofed by the natural
linseed oil;
-To reduce wasted materials all the tents compontents can reused to make other design
products;
- the use of lightweight materials as ropes, poles and fabric, to allow an easy transporation
(because they take up little space) and a quick construction;
- the construction doesnt need any kind of power or lifting gear, all the manufacturings can be
handmade;
-when you dismantle the structure the only signs leaved by the structure are the thin holes
used to thrust poles.
Winning competition panel

immense social impact they had on the communities they
were in.
The subtitle, Building Modern Australia, is an important
aspect of the book, as the history of community buildings in
Australia, parallels the burgeoning modern movement in the
mid-twentieth century. Community facilities came to the fore
at a time when modernism was in full swing, and the examples
illustrated are some of the best works of the time, including
James Birrels work to Seidlers Bowling Club. Enthusiasm for
modern styled municipal buildings is understandable, helped
by the fresh, clean interiors, casting off the darkness and stale
air from earlier times. With their clean lines, better articulation
of space and improved sanitary conditions, it is easy to see
how this style was so widely adopted and promoted for its use
in community work.
As shown throughout the book, community infrastructure
is vital for creating well being and a sense of place in a
community, and the last chapter touches upon how this is
diminishing in todays world. Because of the shift in housing,
and planning approaches, the emphasis has moved away from
a need to create community buildings, like communal pools.
The absorption of these facilities into the family home, results
in less of a perceived need for these civic spaces.
This is an essential book for anyone interested in the
development of our built and social history, and it is good
to see WA is not left behind. It is often at the centre of the
discussion, with plenty of illustrated examples from around
the state, from early modern work to projects currently under
construction.
Community- Building Modern Australia, is a new book that
investigates the history and social implications of various
municipal buildings around Australia in the mid-twentieth
century. These facilities, ranging from infant health centres
to libraries, signicantly impacted on the development of the
nation and constructing a sense of place, especially pertinent
in small towns and developing suburbs. The book is edited
by Hannah Lewi and David Nichols, with chapters written by
themselves and others including Philip Goad, and generously
illustrated with photographs and ephemera.
The book is broken down into chapters each chronicling
the history, development and social impact of a different
type of municipal buildings. The types covered are Infant
Health Centres, Kindergartens, Libraries, Swimming Pools,
Bowling Clubs, Civic Centres, Memorials and Public Art.
This is bookended with a broad history and overview at
the beginning, and ends with an examination of the 1970s
onwards, and the current state of community facilities and
attitudes.
Each chapter and type unfolds roughly the same way. The
circumstances surrounding its foundation, and subsequent
versions, usually listing early examples in each state, social
impacts and reception within the community, and then a
case study or two that examine the architectural qualities of
that type. From an architectural point of view, the building
analysis is at times a bit light on, it is more a focus on the social
implications of the work.
Although at times the text is somewhat dry, it is a remarkably
comprehensive history of community buildings in Australia,
and for that, it is a crucial text. Australian built history is
woefully under explored, and this book adds an important
part of the puzzle, and furthers the understanding of our built
surrounds. For me, it was fascinating to discover how these
buildings came to be, the rst libraries for example, and the
-Andrew Murray
Community- Building
Modern Australia
Edited by Hannah Lewi and
David Nichols.
UNSW Press, 2011.
59.95 rrp

Ecological considerations are now an integral part of our everyday
lives. But living green demands little more than respecting natural
resources, learning from local traditions, and listening to our own
practical instincts. For anyone thinking of designing, building,
remodeling or furnishing a modern home, this all-in-one publication
provides practical inspiration for dwelling stylishly, sensibly
and sustainably.
New Natural Home
Dominic Bradbury with
photographs by Richard
Powers
Thames and Hudson, 2011
ISBN 9780500515617
$49.95, hard cover
A Place in the Sun:
Innovative Homes
Designed for Our Climate
Australia and New Zealand
Stuart Harrison
Thames and Hudson, 2010
ISBN 9780500500217
$69.95, hard cover
Narrow Houses: New Directions in
Efcient Design
Avi Friedman
Princeton Architectural Press, 2010
ISBN 9781568988733
$73.50, hard cover
Prefab Houses
Arnt Cobbers and Oliver Jahn
Taschen, 2010
ISBN 9783836507530
$130.00, hard cover
Living in Australia and New Zealand is now more than ever about
adapting to our unique environment. This collection of cutting-
edge dwellings showcases thoughtful design solutions that respond
to different climactic conditions to maximize the suns potential.
The architects approaches are varied. Some are as simple as
north-facing living areas to maximize light, whilst others are more
technical, such as passive design to reduce energy use
or retrotting.
Presents twenty-eight examples of exemplary, newly built houses around
the world, including conversions of old structures to new uses and the
insertion of new homes (and residential clusters) into an existing urban
fabric. Accompanying project data includes site plans, solar orientation,
physical footprint, livable square footage and detailed oor plans
and interior photography. A comprehensive overview of the practical
considerations of designing and planning a narrow house is included,
along with a brief survey of the history and evolution of this remarkable
housing type.
Once regarded as a cheap, easy solution for urgent housing problems,
the prefab has evolved to become a synonym for ambitious design and
sophisticated detailing solutions. The amazing history of prefabricated
houses started in England in the 1830s with a building kit for emigrants
moving to Australia. Even today, prefabricated houses provide a high
percentage of living spaces in many countries of the world. This book
covers prefabs from the USA via Europe to Asia and Africa, giving insight
into the various industrially prefabricated components, the difculties
of delivery to the building site, and the intricacies of assembly and
completion. As well as tracing the liaison between modernism and
industrialization that evolved to produce the latest prefabricated
solutions, it also features a unique compilation of one-off prefabricated
houses by well-known international architects, as well as successful
dwellings manufactured off-site for everyday modern living.
Reviews provided by Bofns Bookshop
806 Hay Street, Perth
t: 08 9321 5755
e: info@bofnsbookshop.com.au
www.bofnsbookshop.com.au

TheArchitectV12011 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

TheArchitectV12011 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Issue 1 May 2011

The Australian Institute of Architects: WA Chapter

You might also like