Changing direction. summer Mapping the way forward for architectural practice. Contemporary ways of working for tomorrow

Transcription

1 summer 2013 BEST PRACTICE Contemporary ways of working for tomorrow INTERVIEW Rory Hyde talks about the future for architects with David Neustein NSW ARB Linkage Grants Furthering the profession through research Changing direction Mapping the way forward for architectural practice IN PROFILE The reality for regional practices

2 Editor Laura Wise Editorial Committee Chair Joe Agius Editorial Committee Noni Boyd Callantha Brigham 8. Contents President s message Letter to the editor Matthew Chan matt@scalearchitecture.com Art direction and design Jamie Carroll and Ersen Sen leadinghand.com.au Copy Editor Monique Pasilow On the cover: Detail from the mind map of the practice structure of Dunn & Hillam Architects featured on page 11. Image: Ashley Dunn Chapter news and views 2012 DARCH Horse Awards Managing Editor Roslyn Irons 07 Country Division Architecture Awards 2012 Advertising roslyn.irons@architecture.com.au Subscriptions (annual) Five issues $60, students $40 monica.love@architecture.com.au 08 Best practice Matt Chan discusses forwardthinking models of working with Jad Silvester, Chris Bosse, Andrew Burns and Ashley Dunn Editorial & advertising office Tusculum, 3 Manning Street Potts Point NSW 2011 (02) A conversation from the edge Rory Hyde and David Neustein ISSN Published five times a year, Architecture Bulletin is the journal of the Australian Institute of Architects, NSW Chapter (ACN ). Continuously published since Funding the future of architecture: a review of current NSW ARB linkage grant projects The latest innovation in commercial framing The new AWS ThermalHEART Commercial range is thermally broken to minimise the transfer of heat and cold between the internal and external environment. ThermalHEART Commercial framing is 51% more thermally efficient than standard aluminium framing - maximise efficiency and comfort with ThermalHEART systems. Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in articles and letters published in Architecture Bulletin are the personal views and opinions of the authors of these writings and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Institute and its officers. 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 herein. Readers should consult professional advisers. The Australian Institute of Architects NSW Chapter, its officers, editor, editorial committee and authors expressly disclaim all liability to any persons in respect of acts or omissions by any such person in reliance on any of the contents of this publication. Print and paper Printed by Rostone Print using soy-based vegetable inks on FSC mixed source certified paper, manufactured to ISO environmental accreditation using elemental chlorine-free (ECF) pulps. Plates and paper offcuts from the printing process are recycled. Patrons Architecture Bulletin thanks its Patrons for their support Gold Patron Hassell Silver Patrons Bates Smart Cox Architecture Group GSA Bronze Patrons fjmt (Francis-Jones Morehen Thorp) Lend Lease Design Mirvac Design Tanner Kibble Denton Architects Supporter Buzacott Architects Technical Sponsor Architectural Window Systems Working in the regions: Sarah Aldridge profiles four practices Technical feature: Thermally broken aluminium windows and doors in demand as designers seek sustainability and compliance Technical Sponsor AWS Design for survival Syed N. Sibtain details earthquakeresistant building design in Afghanistan The meaning of beauty Steve Kennedy Art and architecture: Always was, always will be Laura Wise interviews recent Sydney public art collaborators Julie Cracknell, Peter Lonergan and Reko Rennie Presenting for practitioners Michael Heenan Review: Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture (book) David Neustein Obituary: Charles Weatherburn thermalheart.com.au Architecture Bulletin Summer

3 president, s message The City of Sydney s burgeoning small bars, laneways and night-time economy policies provide opportunities for projects in which architects work collaboratively with artists and others to develop distinctive new places that surprise and entice citizens, and lift the spirit. Photo: Neil Fenelon The City of Sydney has been an exemplary client and advocate of architecture during the time Clover Moore has been Lord Mayor. This is important for us as Australia s one global city. To remain competitive, Sydney needs to provide an environment of great amenity in order to attract and retain high-knowledge workers that can otherwise choose to live anywhere in the world. The council s Sustainable Sydney 2030 project contains many of the elements of good strategic planning we have been advocating at a State Government level for many years. The City of Sydney takes engagement seriously; the canvassing of business and community views took place over a three-year period, resulting in a plan that is being implemented with the same rigour as it took to create it. The Lord Mayor and key staff report on progress at regular intervals and the rate of change is impressive. With former Australian Institute of Architects National and NSW Chapter President Graham Jahn as Director of City Planning, the council has embraced design excellence as a touchstone for its vision of the new sustainable city. Its design advisory panel includes some of the country s finest design talent, and design competitions are regularly held for the development of key sites. As a result, City of Sydney projects have won numerous awards. Projects like the Surry Hills Community Library, Paddington Reservoir Gardens and Pirrama Park have reinvigorated previously lost space to create delight and community support for the people who use them. In 2010, Lord Mayor Clover Moore was awarded the President s Prize by my predecessor, Brian Zulaikha. The Chapter has built on that recognition by offering her the opportunity to create a Lord Mayor s Prize as part of our NSW Architecture Awards program. This would be a great opportunity to celebrate the work of architects as place makers and collaborators. The City of Sydney s burgeoning small bars, laneways and night-time economy policies provide opportunities for projects in which architects work collaboratively with artists and others to develop distinctive new places that surprise and entice citizens, and lift the spirit. The popular art installations in city lanes also indicate what could be achieved in collaboration with an architect. I have recently had the pleasure of discussing this prize with the Lord Mayor and senior staff from the City of Sydney and look forward to including it in next year s awards program. Together, we envisage a prize that recognises architects and projects that, through their creativity, have played a key role in bringing new life and texture to otherwise forgotten corners of the city. The Chapter is also working with the council to improve its procurement processes. In my meeting with the Lord Mayor I was able to take this one stage further. I noted the Institute s concern that the City of Sydney s current procurement processes are unnecessarily onerous and do not meet the interests of either the council as commissioning client or of architects as design service providers. In particular, the necessity for practices to prepare a conforming, fully priced tender with locked-in fees for consultant teams of up to 20 or more seems both unnecessary and wasteful. I proposed an alternative method: a two-stage process where the first-stage focuses on the selection of the lead consultant the architect their scope of work, level of service, methodology and fee. Then, with the certainty of a commission, the successful architect would assemble their consultant team, demonstrating a level of contestability and value for money at that point. I am confident that as well as saving tenderers the time and resources required to compile their bids, this simpler process would also save the council s resources required to review the competing bids. All in all, it should result in quality projects at significantly less preparation cost. The Lord Mayor expressed interest in this proposal; I look forward to reporting back to members on its implementation. Meanwhile, under the guidance of NSW Minister for Planning and Infrastructure Brad Hazzard, a new era of planning in New South Wales is about to begin. The Institute has been fully engaged in the process of developing the NSW Planning Review white paper that will give shape to the ideas proposed in the green paper; by the time you read this, the paper and the draft exposure bill will have been released. I will continue to advocate for a planning system in which design and design expertise play a central role. Matthew Pullinger NSW Chapter President Letter to the editor Urban design v public transport; definitely In Edward Duc s letter to the editor (Architecture Bulletin, September/October 2012), he felt obliged to comment on the article Is Newcastle off track? (Architecture Bulletin, May/June 2012), prepared by myself and Michael McPherson. In return we believe we need to respond to those comments. The point of our article is that the dilemma for the city of Newcastle is not just an issue of a 4 kilometre spur of rail line but rather an appropriate urban design solution for the entire CBD. While Ed felt we ignored his Hunter Independent Public Transport Inquiry (HIPTI), its focus was on transport, which is only one component of the total urban design assessment of Newcastle. The very fact that Newcastle is a peninsular, with an existing elongated east-west axis along the traffic arteries, gives real credence to the creation of north-south connections through the rail-line blockage to the harbour. This connectivity would provide a raft of benefits including the reinforcement of city precincts and the establishment/linkage of a quality public realm. The ease of getting to Newcastle by train from many neighbouring towns and cities is merely part of the transport solution. A recent study by APP/GHD for the Hunter Business Chamber demonstrates that rather than the current heavy rail, an integrated transport scheme utilising a rail/road interchange with a comprehensive bus system will provide far greater accessibility across a larger service area for all users. An improved transport system doesn t mean more buses adding to congestion, however the retention of a cleared rail corridor does allow for a future light rail system when a critical mass warrants the need. This same study also shows that the funding required to carry out this integrated transport scheme is less than 25 per cent of the $500 million indicated by Ed. A relatively small expenditure that would return a significant multiplier value to the city from the development prospects it would unlock in the original CBD. When Suters and DEM prepared the original Honeysuckle Master Plan 20 years ago, it incorporated the removal of part of the heavy-rail line spur. The main reason for this was to ensure an uninterrupted connection between the original CBD and the new Honeysuckle precinct, so as to maintain a seamless city framework; anything less is piecemeal. All new buildings in Honeysuckle are required to address the old CBD as well as the new precinct, and all actually do. While many architects are accused of being naive, particularly when it comes to business acumen or even common sense, Michael and I are happy to stand by our convictions. David Rose and Michael McPherson Editor s note: On Friday 14 December 2012 the NSW Minister for Planning and Infrastructure Brad Hazzard unveiled his government s plan to revitalise Newcastle including the decision to remove the heavy rail line barrier and replace it with a green corridor. 2 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

4 chapter news & views Chapter Manager s report A very happy New Year to everyone and I hope you are enjoying the holiday break. While it may have taken place a little while ago now, I thought it worthwhile to report back to you on the success of the 2012 Sydney Architecture Festival. The media campaign succeeded in reaching a diverse range of target audiences through a wide array of media stories across all major channels including radio, television, local and metropolitan press, architecture and lifestyle magazines and a much increased presence online. On behalf of the Chapter I would like to extend my thanks to the Institute participants, committees and the NSW Chapter staff who were involved in or affiliated with 24 of the 70-plus events held during the 10-day festival, including everyone involved with the Architecture on Show program, ArchiKIDZ, ArchiCAREERS, and Patrons news Cox Richardson Adelaide Studios (above), the new home for the South Australian Film Corporation designed by Cox Richardson (in association with Adelaide-based Grieve Gillett), has won the National Award for Commercial Architecture at the Australian Institute of Architects 2012 National Architecture Awards in Perth. This follows winning the Keith Neighbour Award for Commercial Architecture at the Institute s SA Chapter Awards. Meanwhile, The Darling Hotel, located in Pyrmont, has won Best New Hotel Construction & Design at the 2012 International Hotel Awards in London, congratulations to design director on both projects Joe Agius, project architects Michael Bradburn (Adelaide Studios) and Alex Small (The Darling), and their respective teams. Image: courtesy the South Australian Film Corporation. Photo: Peter E Barnes. the Martin Place Shelter project, to name a few. It was quite an achievement. Another very successful initiative was the Super Sydney project, organised by Tim Williams and Andrew Burns, for which more than 504 interviews were conducted across 42 Sydney councils resulting in some very interesting insights into the local community s knowledge, sentiments and wisdom. We welcomed Pierre Mansat, Deputy Mayor of Paris, to officially launch the project thanks to the French Consulate, Alliance Francaise and the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority. We are pleased to advise that there will be a variety of CPD sessions held prior to the 31 March registration deadline including a revised format for the free ArchiTECH series, which will now be case study driven. Award-winning architects, together with their consultants and building and product manufacturers, will give greater insight into why particular design specification decisions are made. Mirvac Design Mirvac Design is a multidisciplinary architectural practice of around 100 people. They provide master planning, design, documentation, interior design and graphic design services to Mirvac and their joint venture partners. They are committed to creating communities that enhance social networks and positively contribute to the urban environment in which they exist. Mirvac Design s current community focus is on two major urban regeneration projects in Sydney. The first is Harold Park (below) containing 1,200 apartments along with 3.8 hectares of public open space and associated infrastructure, with construction now commenced. The other is Green Square where they have received master plan approval for the 5 hectare site for public domain, retail, residential and commercial uses over 210,000 square metres of gross floor area Sydney Architecture Festival opening night at Tusculum. Image: Max Lloyd. It will be another very busy year for the Chapter and we look forward to seeing you soon. Roslyn Irons NSW Chapter Manager Bates Smart Bates Smart won a City of Sydney Design Excellence Competition to design 180 Thomas Street, Sydney (above) and construction has commenced, with the project deemed eligible for bonus height on the grounds of design excellence. Located in the heart of Haymarket, the building will enliven the adjacent Ultimo Pedestrian Network by creating a plaza that extends the public domain, and will express its vertical movement in a landmark glass volume. The building s form is articulated by a series of seemingly random, stacked, horizontal volumes of varying heights. Each horizontal layer is expressed by a differentiated solar shading system, resulting in a layered effect of stacked, linear boxes. The building is designed to achieve a 5 Star Green Star rating. Advocacy update The Built Environment Committee tabled two submissions in late October. The first responded to the draft long-term transport master plan, a disappointing document that completely avoids the arguments for a second airport; surely the single most urgently required transport facility in the state s medium-term future. While paying lip-service to the need to integrate land use, transport and infrastructure planning, the transport plan seems to have been prepared in a planning void. On a brighter note, the second submission responded to NSW Fair Trading s review of strata and community title laws. The Institute has been arguing for the relaxation of the 100 per cent voting rule for more than a decade. In this recent submission we proposed 75 per cent for buildings with up to 10 owners, rising to 80 per cent for larger buildings. The Chapter also regards demolition/ rebuild as only one of the options that needs to be considered by body corporates in older multi-residential buildings. The decision to terminate a strata scheme should be preceded by a renewal feasibility study into the defects of the building and options for their correction. The benefit of this approach is that, in cases where repairs are not urgently required, the scheduling and timing of any retrofitting can be adjusted to the financial capacity of owners over a relatively long period of time. The critical ingredients are clever, creative design and minimal adjustment of the existing fabric to achieve the desired results. Murray Brown Policy and Professional Development Manager DARCH update Congratulations to all the recent winners at the DARCH Horse Awards 2012, a new initiative that recognises and celebrates outstanding contributions by non-architects in the pursuit of a high-quality built environment. Thank you very much to the 2012 Committee for their dedication and commitment throughout the year. We look forward to a new year packed with great events, the first of which will be the Sandcastle Competition held with the Young Engineers Australia (Sydney) at Tamarama Beach on Saturday 2 February. A Regi(fru)stration Seminar will also be held on Monday 4 February for those interested in getting registered. For more information on these events visit or darch@architecture.com.au to join the DARCH mailing list. Newcastle Division The NSW Regional Office for Newcastle and Country Division has a new space located at Shop 2, 149 King Street Newcastle. The official opening of the office also celebrated the launch of the 2013 Newcastle Division Architecture Awards, which are currently open for nominations until 1 February To nominate, please visit Nominations are open to all members who have completed projects within the Newcastle Division boundaries within the past three years. The 2013 Awards presentation evening will be held on Friday 8 March and winners will be given the opportunity to enter their projects in the state awards. Upcoming Newcastle Division events include: 26 February: NSS 1, Carbon-Centred Approach to Sustainable Design 8 March: 2013 Newcastle Division Architecture Awards presentation evening 13, 20, 27 March: University and Institute Design Lecture Series A full calendar of 2013 events is available at NSW Country Division The NSW Country Division Committee for has been elected with Sarah Aldridge of Space Studio (pictured below) as the new Chair. New NSW Country Division Committee Chair Sarah Aldridge. Newcastle and Country Division members celebrate the opening of the NSW Regional Office last November. Upcoming Country Division events include: February Albury: Healthy Architecture Seminar and Architecture on Show April Kiama: Professional Practice Seminar and Architecture on Show Please visit for more information on these events NSW Architecture Awards open for entries Entries are now being accepted for the 2013 NSW Architecture Awards. An exciting new development for the NSW Awards is the Lord Mayor s Prize for design excellence in the public domain, which will recognise creative collaborations and exciting additions to public space. Entries in all categories except Houses are eligible for this prize. For key Awards dates and the entry handbook, visit Please note, online entries close Thursday 28 February 2013, with all entry materials due to the NSW Chapter Office at Tusculum by Friday 8 March Correction The lower image on page 22 of Architecture Bulletin November/December 2012 was taken by Michael Ford. 4 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

5 awards 2012 DARCH Horse Awards 2012 Country Division Architecture Awards Residential Architecture Alterations and Additions Non-Residential Architecture Alterations and Additions Announced last November at Tusculum, the 2012 DARCH Horse Awards recognise and celebrate outstanding contributions by non-architects in the pursuit of a highquality built environment. Award categories included: Builder; Client; Developer; Government Authority; Consultant; Subcontractor; and Urban Provocateur. DARCH would like to thank the Institute s EmAGN and NSW Chapter office; the award sponsors: SJB Architects, Mirvac Design, Wood Solutions, Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects and Tanner Kibble Denton Architects; and the jury: Annabel Lahz (Lahznimmo Architects), Philip Vivian (Bates Smart), and Ken McBryde (Innovarchi) for their time and expertise. For more information on the winners and commendations please visit Developer DARCH Horse Award David Kaunitz of Kaunitz Yeung Architecture Nominated by Aaron Leeman-Smith of Order Architects DARCH Horse Commendation Oliver Johnstone of BUILT Nominated by Llewela Griffiths of TZG Architects Builder DARCH Horse Award Rod Windrim of Windrim Building Contractors Nominated by John Rose of Tanner Kibble Denton Architects DARCH Horse Commendation Nick Scotece of Patterson Building Group Nominated by Constance Trofimovs of DTB Architects DARCH members and friends celebrate the Awards at Tusculum DARCH Horse Award winners. Images: Tamara Graham Government Authority DARCH Horse Jury Award Darlene Van Der Breggen of Sydney Olympic Park Authority Nominated by Annabel Lahz and Philip Vivian DARCH Horse Award Nick Tobin of Willoughby Council Nominated by Gabrielle Suhr of SJB Architects Client DARCH Horse Jury Award Geoffrey Leeson of UNSW Nominated by Annabel Lahz of Lahznimmo Architects DARCH Horse Award Stephanie Smee and Paul Schoff Nominated by Sam Crawford of Sam Crawford Architects DARCH Horse Award Dani Milner and Paul Schmuckler Nominated by Hannah Tribe of Tribe Studio Architects Consultant DARCH Horse Jury Award Richard Green of TTW Nominated by Annabel Lahz of Lahznimmo Architects DARCH Horse Award Paul Connett of Hughes Trueman Nominated by Gabrielle Suhr of SJB Architects Jury Category: Subcontractor DARCH Horse Jury Award Dirk Janessen of Craft Metals and Greg Cunningham of ARC Roofing Nominated by Ken McBryde of Innovarchi DARCH Horse Jury Award Andrew Gore of JWI Louvres Nominated by Philip Vivian of Bates Smart Urban Provocateur DARCH Horse Award Roderick Simpson of Simpson and Wilson Nominated by Joe Loh of SJB Architects The 2012 NSW Country Division Architecture Awards were announced at the Division s annual conference held in Napier, New Zealand last October. Thanks to all the presenters, speakers, delegates and sponsors for what was a great night of celebration of the work of Country Division members. Residential Architecture Houses Architecture Award: Possum Creek House Architect: Space Studio Commendation: Killen Falls House, Brooklet Architect: Jackson Lane Architects Commendation: Tallow Beach Residence Architect: Oceanarc Architects Commendation: Ourimbah Road Architect: Tricia Helyar Architect Non-Residential Architecture New Architecture Award: St Clare s Trade Training Centre Architect: Austin McFarland Architects Architecture Award: Gloucester Preschool Architect: Austin McFarland Architects Small Projects Award Architecture Award: The Tardis Studio Architect: Michael Marshman DARCH Horse Commendation Daniela Caiazza and Lou Rendina Nominated by Shaun Carter of Carterwilliamson Architects Commendation: Salt Beach House Architect: Scott Carpenter Architect Commendation: Davis Dental Surgery Fitout Architect: Chris Jenkins Designs Commendation: Lourdes Hospital Dubbo Architect: Havenhand & Mather Architects 6 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

6 Best Practice: Forward-thinking models With the direction of architectural practice in question, Matt Chan spoke with four architects who are rising to today s challenges with models of working aimed at delivering design excellence tomorrow - no matter their size or shape. Introduction by Marcus Trimble, Super Colossal, and Matt Chan, Scale Architecture Interviews by Matt Chan Practice formation and structure has been a fertile topic of discussion in recent months. The Australian Pavilion at the 2012 Venice Architecture Biennale, curated by Anthony Burke, Gerard Reinmuth and Toko Concept Design, displayed the work of six architectural formations, addressing questions of how the profession may reshape itself in response to new and demanding external forces. Coinciding with the exhibition was the publication of Rory Hyde s Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture (reviewed on page 27), which looks at alternative practice models that are actively meeting these challenges, and the architects, designers and activists behind them. Both the pavilion and book try to answer the question: What is an architect today?. They suggest the discipline is becoming increasingly marginalised in the production of the built environment and question where architecture s agency lies. The answer suggested by the two lies somewhere outside of the traditional model. What, then, becomes of the architecture office operating in a more traditional manner? How do these offices structure themselves to deliver design excellence within an economically challenging and, occasionally, culturally hostile environment? For the following four architects working across practices of varying sizes, the model for winning and delivering architectural projects takes many forms. Jad Silvester Hassell Practice type: Networked Staff: 900 globally Role: Architecture Principal Matt Chan: You worked for a number of high-profile offices before starting your own award-winning, practice (Silvester Fuller), and now you find yourself again with a role in a bigger office. Can you describe the situation of your current practice and how it has been structured? Jad Silvester: Hassell is a multidisciplinary practice, operating globally and combining expertise in architecture, interior design, landscape architecture and planning. We have teams of principals leading each discipline across a collective of 14 studios spread throughout Australia, China, South-East Asia and the UK. The size of each project team depends on the nature and stage of the project. The advantage with a larger practice is that you can move people in and out of projects fairly easily. MC: So, now that you ve been on both sides of the playing field, comparing bespoke small practice to larger practice, where do you feel the advantages lie? JS: Specifically in the context of winning work, the differences are often related to both experience and perceived risk. For many clients a large practice is seen as a safer option, especially for larger projects. There is a perception, especially among commercial clients, that big practice means experience, security and dependability because you can draw on a larger internal resource pool. It s basically about limiting risk. They see you as a big organisation with the security that comes with that. With small practice, a lot of the commercial clients often see risk associated directly with a perceived lack of experience. The reality is that for many clients risk aversion often places a limit on the opportunities inherent in invention and exploration, areas that a smaller practice may use to market itself. MC: Would you describe your model as traditional or contemporary, and does it matter? Given the fact that the profession/clients/developers traditionally operate in a commonly described conservative market, is it an advantage to be one or the other? JS: In the current market a traditional model is an advantage. At Hassell, the office structure is certainly quite traditional, however, it is also something we continually look to evolve. When you get to a certain size of practice you need structure and you can t perform without it. However, we are continually tweaking and refining the studio structure to ensure we remain contextually relevant, and responsive to a contemporary climate and project demands. Big practices have traditionally been sector focused, but we re at a point now where we are looking to complement that expertise with a design process that we apply across those sectors. There s been a conscious decision to say we want to be one of the best design studios globally. So how do we get there? You don t get there on sector expertise alone; you need a design process, a methodology that, when combined with experience can unlock the real opportunity in each project. The belief that specialisation in a particular field will always lead to the best outcome is a tricky one to challenge. Changing that perception of our profession is one of the biggest challenges we face. While experience certainly carries value, it requires a balance with perspective. They are the two values experience and perspective, connected by a rigorous design process that we aim to bring to each project. MC: Can you describe your involvement in international relationships; and do they form a specific focus for your practice? JS: This is where the traditional model deviates. Five to 10 years ago, there existed a fairly straightforward design/executive architect responsibility split in most collaborations. This was often a reflection of the experience or particular specialisations of the collaborating teams. This is less interesting for us now. The types of collaboration we are excited about now identify teams who can bring to the table unique or complementary perspectives. It s the sharing and combining of these perspectives that adds real value in contemporary collaboration and results in a genuine collaborative relationship within the team. MC: Do you think this is an emerging trend for Australian architectural offices, and is this central to the way forward for your practice? JS: It s certainly easier now than it was before, [but] time will tell whether it s a sustainable model. What is really interesting for us is to see how these collaborative processes will develop and what form collaborative practice will take in the next evolution, how these boundaries will shift or dissolve Hassell s design for Harbin Airport, China. Image: Hassell. 2. LAVA s competiton winning entry for the Addis Ababa National Stadium and Sports Village in Ethiopia. Image: LAVA. Chris Bosse LAVA (Laboratory for Visionary Architecture) Practice type: Networked Staff: 45 globally Role: Founding Partner Matt Chan: Can you describe how you have currently organised your practice, and what you are aiming to achieve by this? Chris Bosse: LAVA was established in 2007 as a networked practice in Sydney, Stuttgart (Germany) and Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates). We have since opened small offices in Saudi Arabia, Shanghai (China) and now Berlin (Germany). We are a multidisciplinary, multi-geographical office. All of us at LAVA have come from commercial backgrounds, and have a lot of experience in terms of how you don t want to run an office. Our idea is that you have multiple offices with a flat hierarchy, which creates a platform for collaboration where we can brainstorm together on every project. The principle behind it is actually the pursuit of happiness; because, at the end of the day, this is our life, right? MC: From the outside, one would describe your office as a contemporary practice, but do you think there is an advantage in being seen that way? CB: We find that everybody likes the idea of a contemporary office, but when it comes to the crunch, clients often still prefer the traditional model. Even when we have put in tender bids together with bigger firms, having built a team with both amazing ideas and an amazing track record, the feedback we sometimes get still says it s better to have one point of contact and so on. The traditional model is that all the experts are employed in house: the specification writer, the stadium expert, the lawyer, etc. All of a sudden, the minimum office size is people, and your only job becomes getting work in to feed these people. So I think we still have some way to go. But we believe the way we work is a model of the future. For instance, we could employ one specialist sustainability expert, but why would we do that when we could employ Transolar and have the best sustainability consultants in the world? Why buy a cow if you just want a glass of milk? MC: Could you describe then, your current area of design expertise? CB: As opposed to the traditional model, where you are a specialist in one thing, we are kind of specialists in everything. One day we might design a piece of furniture or an installation for Customs House, and the next a stadium in Ethiopia... I think that, as architects, to actually reduce yourself to one specialisation is minimising the contribution our profession can make. MC: In a way, your office is set up as almost a pure design office; was that a conscious decision? CB: Traditionally, you start with small projects, but we started the other way around. It kind of just happened that we designed an apartment tower for Michael Schumacher first. But we cooperated from the beginning with people like Wenzel and Wenzel who actually specialised in delivering projects for other high-profile offices such as David Chipperfield. I wouldn t say that this reduces us to a purely conceptual level, because that s dangerous as well. Our intent is that the conceptual level is something that carries through the entire project, so we make sure we are involved from beginning to end. MC: What is the strategy to bridge the gap between the desire for cutting-edge design and being able to deliver services in a way that removes risk from the client? > 8 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

7 CB: You have to demonstrate a kind of seamless integration of these two components, and the only way to show this is to go through the process and then build the outcome. However, the biggest roadblock for every young architect is lack of built work; projects take between two and 20 years to get going, depending on how big they are. And that is increasingly so, as the nature of clients changes to become even more risk averse. For example, the Sydney Opera House would have never happened if you looked to an architect that had built five opera houses before. At the end of the day, for us, it means we have to keep pushing that and deliver built outcomes over the next five years. We have projects under way in China, in Saudi Arabia; once they are built, hopefully in the next two years, we will be able to demonstrate how that works in practice. Andrew Burns Andrew Burns Architect Practice type: Sole practitioner, with collaborators Staff: 1 plus contract staff and part-time assistants Role: Director Matt Chan: Can you describe how you have currently organised your practice, and what you are aiming to achieve by this? Andrew Burns: My practice is about two things: design excellence and social transformation. I sit between these things, with a couple of people helping me. I m aiming for design excellence, that idea of architecture that you might find in a 1960s monograph on Louis Kahn. My focus is on that old-school definition of architectural excellence, but I m trying to find new forms of it. For instance, Australia House has a foundation in the domestic architectural traditions of Australia, say, in the work that Glenn Murcutt has done, and very much what Nick Murcutt and Rachel Neeson did. It s a response to that, but I m striving to find something slightly more abstract: the idea that the building can have an object quality rather than a tectonic quality. Abstraction offers a sharper experience. So when I think of an object quality, I am more interested in what Donald Judd would do as opposed to Jurgen Mayer H. I think, strangely enough, that my practice is on a continuum between an architectural practice and a contemporary art project. I can see myself in the future taking on contemporary art projects as well as architectural projects. It s a forum for precision of thought, and an area that allows self-initiated investigation. I enjoy that mode of engagement with the world, and I can see myself shifting towards that in some ways. MC: So, would you describe your current practice structure as traditional or contemporary? AB: The residential clients perceive it as a traditional model and the other clients perceive it as a traditional model with an artistic sensibility. I would say I am a traditional person, but I want to make exceptional architecture, and that traditional 3. Australia House by Andrew Burns Architect. Image: Brett Boardman. 4. Mind map of the practice structure of Dunn & Hillam Architects. Image: Ashley Dunn. approach gives people confidence. I m attempting to suppress personal authorship; this is something that perhaps questions the traditional approach. I am not seeking to have a signature other than clearly articulated geometry and a material consideration, because I think if you have a signature, it puts a barrier between the visitor and the work. MC: In the absence of signature, what would you say is your current area of deign expertise? AB: I d say projects that have a cultural function in themselves, beyond being a cultural venue. They re of a scale that is very controllable and are able to be documented quickly. Yet there are still many stakeholders my work in London and Japan, and for Sherman Galleries, all had multiple stakeholders funding partners, authorities, and consultants... I think of it as training for working on complex projects, yet these are simple projects. MC: You could say that if you were a more commercially focused practice, you wouldn t necessarily invest time in putting together competition entries and expressions of interest? AB: I would say that I am focusing on opportunities for excellence. I can see myself doing commercial work but I want to do it really well. The strongest thing I can do is maintain a pure level of architectural thought; a sincerity of thought. People recognise that and it creates opportunities, so I guess I am getting behind that and seeing where things lead. MC: Australia House is particularly amazing in terms of how quickly it was realised as a built work, but also on an intellectual level, without compromising the quality of the design outcome. It seems like a picture of ideal circumstances. AB: I think it was. I also have a good way of understanding what things are critical to a project what needs to be hung on to and what doesn t and that allows me to be fairly flexible while still achieving a high level of design outcome. With Australia House, I didn t have any angst about resolving and modifying it; one of my priorities was to be someone good to work with and assist the project s flow. It was finished three weeks before the opening, which was pretty tight, but it had to run to program. It s an important part of my approach in that I can balance a precise outcome with flexibility. Ashley Dunn Dunn & Hillam Architects Practice type: Small office with a regional focus Staff: 5 Role: Co-Founding Director (with Lee Hillam) Workshop 1 Pty Ltd t/a Dunn & Hillam Architects ACN ABN Matt Chan: Can you describe how you have currently organised your practice, and tell us what you are aiming to achieve from this? Ashley Dunn: It s collaborative; it s about integrating life and work as one thing. Lee and I set up the practice 12 years ago in Newtown, and as soon as we decided to have children, we built the studio in Botany so we could carry on working together. Having children meant we either had to stop working together or outsource the care of our kids neither of which we wanted to do so working from home allowed us to stay in touch and allowed us to both be involved in the kids growing up. We ve also been interested in building our own work, which is what we did in Botany. We ve set our studio up to have an ideal maximum size of 10 people. The way we go about employing people is to engage people that aren t necessarily like-minded, but have similar interests in the way in which they want to live their life: being interested in community, being ethical and sustainable in all meanings of the word. As a result of that we have managed to make a stable environment where we work collaboratively on projects when they come in. MC: With your regional work, do you have local partners on the ground? AD: No, we ve never partnered with another office; although we ve toyed with the idea, we tend to just go out there. With the library in Junee, we moved up there for about six months. It s on the train line, so we could easily move between there and the office. We have invested in a really good IT set-up with a virtual private network, so that wherever we are we have access to everything all the time. For instance, with our current Alice Springs House project, which we re working on now, we have a webcam and we re able to screen, share and look at images on site and drawings as if we were sitting around the table. So rather than going up there every fortnight, it means going up there every month. MC: Do you think it matters if you are seen as a traditional or contemporary office? AD: I don t think it matters. I think it s detrimental to label yourself one or the other, or to overtly try and be one. I think if someone looks at us from the outside, we are very conservative in the way we practice, but I don t think the things we are trying to do are traditional or conservative in any way. But there is a lot to be said for tradition. As an architect, you can get lost in the idea of being original, however, it s not always about being original, it s about being appropriate. MC: So with this response of appropriateness, what is your area of design expertise then? AD: Expertise is something that we fight against in the traditional sense of the word. There s a need for expertise in designing hospitals or laboratories in technical projects. Our expertise is in complex projects: difficult sites or briefs, multiple stakeholders, reduced budgets... We also have a lot of experience in dealing with community. We re willing to be part of and work from within a community as well, and not just engage with a community as outsiders. We also put a lot of focus into life-cycle cost analysis. We examine the economics of how much things cost now and see what will save money over a five or 10-year period. To do this, we monitor and measure the performance of our buildings, working with our clients to collect performance information about projects we ve built. We commission this research, working with the University of New South Wales, who have the facilities to crunch the numbers. The data we collect is overlaid with questionnaires and other qualitative means of understanding our buildings. We use this as research, and with it we ve been able to better educate our clients, and ourselves. MC: So do you think small practices have the ability to compete with larger practices? 4. AD: I think we can, it is a misconception that small practice can t compete on delivery, but I actually think they re better at delivering on big, complex projects. There are a number of studios in Sydney doing fantastic work, who could take an opera house or a theatre tomorrow and do an amazing job in a timely fashion and at a competitive price. But we re never given the option to do it, because people believe you ve got to be an office of people. Caruso St John s Walsall Art Gallery was done by a team of four people, on time, on budget, and it is an amazing building, and highly detailed. 10 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

8 A conversation from the In his new book, Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture (reviewed on page 27), Rory Hyde questions the role of the architect and presents myriad alternative paths for architectural practice. David Neustein spoke with the author about the genesis of the book and asked what he sees as fundamental to the future place of the profession. David Neustein Rory Hyde David Neustein: How did you select your interview subjects? Did they come to you at once, or was it a gradual process? How categorical do you feel the selection is? Rory Hyde: The list of subjects came at me from different directions. For some I started with the role like strategic designer, or community enabler and then sought out the best person to represent that idea. For some, the person came first because I either knew them or their work, and then I tried to structure the conversation around an aspect of their practice I was keen to explore. And a few I had even interviewed before I d thought about doing a book, but they really fit. The selection is by no means categorical; I could easily fill another book tomorrow with a whole other set of people and practices. And the book is meant to convey that; it s pluralist and open rather than definitive. DN: One of the critiques of Future Practice offered by my University of Technology, Sydney Masters students (who reviewed your book for an assignment as part of their professional practice course), was the lack of a convincing economic model for operating beyond conventional architectural practice. Of course, it could be argued that conventional architecture itself lacks a convincing economic model. How would you speak to this? How are we emergent practitioners going to get paid? How will we value our own work? RH: The book is not intended to be a how-to guide on running an alternative practice, but equally I feel that all of the examples are convincing economic models, because all of the people in the book are making a living out of working this way. Not all of them are operating as for-profit companies, however, some are supported by posts in universities or institutions, some fund their work by acting as consultants, some do the alternative stuff on the side of a traditional architectural practice, and many are a mix of all these and more. I feel we are in a transitional phase, there s not yet a clear understanding of what an expanded architect might be, the services they might offer, or how they might get paid. And I think that s a good thing, for now. Having said all that, what I m more interested in is how designers can engage in the economics of projects. One example from the book is the Fintry Development Trust, which I discuss with Indy Johar, who consulted on it. Here, a town was approached by an energy company who wanted to put a wind farm up on a nearby hill. Instead of reacting in the predictable NIMBY fashion, the enlightened folk of Fintry wanted in on the project, and formed their own energy company and invested in a wind turbine of their own as part of the larger array. The revenue generated now gets poured back into the town for social and sustainable projects. For me it s a really great example of where people can engage in real economics and energy, beyond allotment gardens, for instance. DN: In your recent article for the Architecture Association s Fulcrum broadsheet, you interpreted Volume magazine s motto To Beyond or Not to Be as military strategy: either stoically defend the fort or prepare an audacious counterattack. You point out that in taking the latter option, architects risk losing their core attributes. The questions then are; first, are we starving enough to consider leaving the fort, or have we outlasted enough previous sieges to know better? Second, beyond the safety of academia, how do we identify new markets that value architectural attributes? RH: For me, all this comes down to how we define what our core attributes actually are. If, as some architects believe and more critically, the commissioning public believe it s our ability to define and refine architectural form, then I think we ll be in trouble. Alternatively, if it s our ability to operate strategically, long term, at large scales, and from a social perspective, then I think we ll be in great shape. And by no means does that second path discount the formal aspects of architecture, which has to be there, that s how our strategic vision is manifested in the world, but we need to present it as just one part of a larger strategy. As for how to identify new markets that value this kind of thinking, that s the harder part. But as I said before, we re in a period of transition, and I m convinced that this kind of approach is the way forward for a better built environment in Australia. So it s up to us to catalyse the movement, and really make it happen! It feels like, at the moment, when we are facing our biggest challenges - as a profession, as a society, as a planet - our response is at its most polite. DN: Can we now talk about Venice? You participated in Formations, the Australian Exhibition at the 2012 Venice Architecture Biennale. Did that experience offer any insights into potential futures for architectural practice? How closely does the focus on practice formations align with your insights into emerging alternatives for architects? RH: I see the Formations exhibit as more evidence of this transition that s occurring in architecture at the moment. It s a topic that many people are tackling, it s clearly gaining some momentum, and it s terrific to be a part of that. However, the biennale as a platform is a really difficult one in which to make an impression. It s been said plenty of times before, but there s simply just too much stuff. So, to be perfectly honest, that experience has led to very little, and I think it s time to re-evaluate what we bring to these kinds of events, and, in particular, how we connect with a larger conversation, which would seem to be the real opportunity of being in Venice. DN: Watching from a distance, I was generally bemused by the Common Ground theme, replete with self-affirming messages. The new zeitgeist seems to involve admiration for the slums, claiming community gardens as avant-garde actions, and replacing confidence in a sustainable future with an acceptance of resilience in the face of overwhelming forces. Is this fair? Are you concerned that a focus on new forms of practice might lead down this garden path? RH: There is, of course, also a lot of really intelligent stuff in the biennale, but if you had to be really concise, I think your summary is fair. I m not sure that a focus on new forms of practice will necessarily lead us there, however. The unstated agenda of Future Practice and how I present it in lectures is about architects getting back in the game of large scales, of long terms, of strategy, of economy, of public opinion shaping, of visionary thinking, and engaging with the murky dark matter of bureaucracy and policy to see these things through. Each of the people in the book illustrates these points in one way or another. I have little patience for urban farming or avant-garde actions to be honest. It feels like, at the moment, when we are facing our biggest challenges as a profession, as a society, as a planet our response is at its most polite. Yes, localism and enthusiasm for making change is a good thing, but I also think it s our responsibility as a discipline that shapes space, to re-engage with the big issues, and to not be afraid to tackle them on a big scale. David Neustein David Neustein is an architecture critic and designer. Co-founder of Other Architects, he teaches within the Master of Architecture course at University of Technology, Sydney. 12 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

9 Funding the future of architecture Recent NSW Architects Registration Board pilot linkage grants are assisting in University of Technology, Sydney and the University of Newcastle. Here, each of academically and professionally. funding three new research studies being undertaken by teams at the the teams outline how their work will further the field of architecture, Harnessing the Architect s Potential for Expanded Agency within Contemporary Design and Development Practices. School of Architecture, University of Technology, Sydney. Research team: Dr Kirsten Orr, Associate Professor, Associate Head of Architecture (UTS) Melonie Bayl-Smith, Director Bijl Architecture and Adjunct Professor (UTS) Dr Jason Prior, Research Director, Institute for Sustainable Futures (UTS). Architects have changed how they think about their role in, and influence on, the built environment but this is not reflected in the policies regulating Australian architectural practice. Our project seeks to understand the changing values, world views and imperatives of the architectural profession and to compare them with the quantifiable measures of performance that are embedded in Australian processes for the registration of architects and national competency standards in architecture. Do existing performance measures adequately describe the contemporary architect? Does it remain possible to think of the architect as a single type? What does this mean for the regulation of the architectural profession? In-depth interviews with architects will provide a means to reflect upon and understand the ways in which architects see themselves within the dynamic and complex professional context. Australian architects understanding of their place in the study The UTS study includes a critique relating to the potential for the expanded agency of architects, a topic explored as part of the United States pavilion at last year s Venice Architecture Biennale, which members of the research team attended as part of their fieldwork. Image: Melonie Bayl-Smith. construction industry, the built environment and broader society is being challenged by the advent of new digital design tools, construction technologies, building procurement practices, innovative materials and alternative ways of thinking. 1 To this list must be added the effects of changing financial markets, volatile ecologies, social transformation and the subsequent increasing complexity of development practice. Rory Hyde s blog and recent book 2 speculate about what all this might mean for the architectural profession. Most recently, the exhibition Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture, in the Australian Pavilion for the 2012 Venice Architecture Biennale, has explored innovative architectural practice types and their design output. 3 There is strong evidence that the profession is evolving and adjusting its aspirations, expectations and actions. Complementing the formal interviews with architects, our project will engage the wider architectural community by means of an online survey, dialogue facilitated by social media, and by a series of consultative change-management workshops that reflect on current thinking and practices as a means to inform thinking about future practices. We will explore the reflective space of architecture and track the shifting foundations that legitimise the profession within contemporary society. The definition of what architects are qualified to do and the skill sets they are expected to have are clearly delineated by the requirements of Australian architectural registration processes 4 and the National Competency Standards in Architecture. 5 However, changes to the roles assumed by architects, to the boundaries of the discipline and to the rules of the game demand evaluation. There is a growing schism between the realities of contemporary practice and the quantifiable measures of performance that govern it. By highlighting discrepancies, our project seeks to inspire changes in the regulation of architecture. This is significant at a time when a national system for the registration of Australian architects is being finalised and when national competency standards are soon to be reviewed. We hope our project will also have substantial benefits in terms of clarifying more broadly the profession s changing relationship with the construction industry: a sector that lags in its adoption and integration of innovative practices, processes, systems and materials. Through our research we are seeking to provide leadership and frameworks for the renewal of the built environment professions generally. Footnotes: 1. Paolo Tombesi, Blair Gardiner & Anthony Mussen. Take 5 Looking Ahead: Defining the Terms of a Sustainable Architectural Profession, Royal Australian Institute of Architects, Rory Hyde. Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, Also, blog 3. Anthony Burke and Gerard Reinmuth. Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture, 13th International Architecture Exhibition, Venice, Italy, Australian Institute of Architects, For example, NSW Architects Act 2003 No 89, available online inforce/act cd+0+n/ 5. Architects Accreditation Council of Australia, National Competency Standards in Architecture, 2008, available online Structures of Architectural Practice: A Ethnographic Study of Architectural Practice. School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of Newcastle. Research team: Dr Hedda Askland, Research Associate, University of Newcastle Ramsey Awad, Senior Lecturer, University of Newcastle Dr Michael Chapman, Senior Lecturer, University of Newcastle Prof Lindsay Johnston, University of Newcastle Prof Lawrence Nield, University of Newcastle. This research project will examine architectural practice through a focus on the management and organisational dynamics of the architectural profession. While there is an emerging field of research in this area, it tends to focus on the legal and commercial aspects of practising architecture, at the expense of a more detailed understanding of the cultural, creative and aspirational values that structure our profession and the impact this has on productivity, commercial viability and innovation. In order to expand current understandings of architectural practice, this project will draw upon methods from anthropology and management in order to sketch a more diverse and inclusive model of the peculiarities of architectural design and the organisational and cultural conditions that underlie it. The research will adopt analytical models from management and anthropology study in order to develop a profile of the culture of architectural practice in Australia generally, and Sydney specifically. The research sets out to establish organisation and management as critical fields in the creative design process that have ongoing relevance for both scholars and practitioners. The exploration of architectural practice and design management is a relatively new scholarly field that has only recently attracted academic interest and generated a discernible critical discourse. The first interdisciplinary conferences and publications on architectural practice and management, in the early 1990s, were instrumental in setting up an academic forum for the exploration of practice and management, and added legitimacy to architectural practice as distinct from other management structures. These have, however, generally focused on the operational and internal pressures that limit architectural production. Within this expanding discourse, the relationship between creativity and architectural management has been submerged. While this discourse has established the architectural practice as an independent and highly idiosyncratic organisational structure, the significance of management structures in influencing architectural creativity and financial viability has been relatively under-represented or overlooked. The study will look at the broad and varied landscape of architectural practice within Sydney. Given the city s strategic regional significance and increasing international profile in architecture, Sydney is a complex commercial environment for architectural practices, and, as a result, creates a unique and idiosyncratic culture in which design operates. The city is a complex web of relationships, with an architectural culture interwoven between powerful, large and firmly established commercial practices, a recent influx of global influences (and experience), and a highly ambitious new generation of young and talented designers who have graduated from university within the past 10 to 15 years. This cross-fertilisation of activities and backgrounds creates great diversity and scope in regard to architectural practice, which the study sets out to both draw from and quantify. As well as interviewing designers in all areas (and levels) of architectural practice, the study will investigate the designers relationships with consultants, collaborators and councils in order to gain a picture of the social structure of design practice and its internal dynamics. The primary purpose of this study is to reflect upon the cultural and structural conditions of architectural practice, with an emphasis on the technological, social and economic factors that are reinventing architectural practice and the design process in general. The study aims to provide a contemporary overview of the broader contextual issues of architecture, and uses ethnography as a method to expand upon the current research. By reframing architecture as a network of organisational and social relationships, this research will provide a profile of the dynamic and continually evolving culture and structure of architectural practice in Sydney. > 14 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

10 funding the future in profile Developing a Model of Collaboration for Intercultural Architectural Practice. School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of Newcastle. Research team: Dr Harpreet (Neena) Mand, Head of Discipline, Architecture, University of Newcastle Dr Jamie Mackee, Senior Lecturer, University of Newcastle Prof Tony Williams, Head of School, University of Newcastle Prof Lawrence Nield, University of Newcastle Satvir Mand, Cox Richardson. The proposed research aims to contribute to the advancement of Australian architecture internationally by developing a model of intercultural collaboration. The developed model intends to enhance the capability of Australian architects to engage with their Asian counterparts, eliciting strategies to guide the efficiency of the process and enhance the product of intercultural collaboration. The proposed study will analyse intercultural collaboration from the perspectives of both Australian and Asian architects. Research into intercultural collaboration in architectural practice is vital to understand collective action in the architectural design processes and how it may succeed and improve quality of the end product. Joint ventures between Australian and Asian architects are increasing. Collaboration in architecture has been studied primarily in relation to architects working with artists or structural engineers, and to a lesser degree with other professions. In the wider context, collaboration between architects and the various stakeholders involved in the construction processes has been central in Japanese architectural practice. Collaborative alliances are increasingly considered essential to the successful study completion of large projects. In the Journal of Applied Behavioural Science (1991), Donna Wood and Barbara Gray provide a comprehensive survey of different theoretical perspectives on collaboration. 1 Based on case studies, they propose six theoretical perspectives explaining collaborative alliances derived from different domains: Resource dependency theory Corporate social performance theory/ institutional economic theory Strategic management theory/social ecology theory Micro-economics theory Institutional theory/ negotiated order theory Political theory. However, they conclude that none of these theoretical perspectives provide a comprehensive model of collaboration. Chris Huxham, in his article Theorising Collaboration Practice, theorises collaboration practice around five themes: common aims, power, trust, membership structures and leadership. 2 Although these themes provide concepts for analysing collaborative alliances, they do not provide a model of intercultural collaboration in the way different architects, groups or individuals communicate to form successful partnerships in the design/construction field. In our proposed study, collaboration is defined as collective input with others in a joint project effort to achieve a common output. In order to achieve common goals, and despite divergent agendas, the process demands a multitude of acute, collaborative intercultural communications between the concerned parties. The study will evaluate the national and professional culture through textual analysis of regulatory framework, and analysis of institute journals and national awards. It will use case study methodology to focus on the practice-level culture of Australian and Asian architectural firms. At the practice level, the study proposes a multidimensional model of collaboration to evaluate the delivery of joint ventures. In the paper Studies in Collaboration: North Sydney and Chatswood Stations in Sydney 3, Harpreet Mand and Satvir Mand suggest that an effective collaboration requires: the formation of common objectives an understanding of the implications a clear allocation of responsibility a shared pool of knowledge the co-presence of all collaborators a coordinated structure of design and management. The study will evaluate how these are formulated and operate in different contexts. The research will be conducted in two stages. In stage one, with the assistance of the NSW Architects Registration Board linkage grant, the research team will review literature on issues in collaboration between cultures, and identify Australian architecture practices working in Asia along with their Asian counterparts. The initial research will conclude with a paper outlining a preliminary model for evaluating intercultural collaboration. In stage two, with further funding, the preliminary model will be revised with the aid of research that examines the impact of various levels of cultures through key case studies. Footnotes : 1. Donna Wood and Barbara Gray. Toward a Comprehensive Theory of Collaboration, The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, June Chris Huxham. Theorising Collaboration Practice, Public Management Review, Volume 5, Issue 3, Harpreet Mand and Satvir Mand. Studies in Collaboration: North Sydney and Chatswood Stations in Sydney, Working in the regions Working in regional New South Wales can have its challenges: salaries are lower than those in the city; a broad range of skills is required to deal with the wide variety of project types on offer; association with other architects is often difficult; and the overall level of design awareness in the community is low. But, with nearly 300 members in the NSW Country Division, there must be some benefits to regional practice: a better work/life balance and a strong connection to the local community, perhaps? Through conversations with fellow small practitioners, some new to the country and others more established, Sarah Aldridge, co-owner of Byron Bay practice Space Studio and Chair of the NSW Country Division, reveals what it s really like to work in the bush. Altitude Virginia Wong See and her architect partner Hamish Holley lived and worked in Sydney for 15 years before moving to Armidale to establish Altitude. I worked as a sole practitioner from our studio in Glebe and Hamish was a builder, mostly constructing projects we had both designed, says Wong See. A desire to combine their businesses, as well as wanting a better work/life balance, prompted their move to the country last year, where they now live and work in a 1950s Neutra-esque house. Much lower house prices and a lower cost of living [in Armidale] prompted us to reduce our fees so we were more accessible to a larger While now based in Armidale, Altitude continue to work on Sydney based projects including this recent interior for a client in Glebe. Image: Aimee Crounch. Much lower house prices and a lower cost of living [in Armidale] prompted us to reduce our fees so we were more accessible to a larger client base. Space Studio client base. As a result we are currently working on some very interesting smallbudget projects for clients who would otherwise not have considered engaging an architect, explains Wong See. Wong See and Holley have also noticed a greater variety in the projects they are offered, and have seized the opportunity to form working relationships with specialist practices to bring new skills into the area. We are collaborating with a large Sydney firm who are experienced in urban design, on a tender to upgrade the CBD of a nearby town. Threedimensional architectural software and the internet enable us to work in this way and we see ourselves as a conduit, bringing in expertise that is of real benefit to the local community. Being 1,000 metres above sea level and in a distinctly different climate zone to Sydney has also presented Wong See and Holley with new challenges. We are adapting our work to cater for increased insulation requirements and have a far greater emphasis on energy-efficient heating systems. Terms such as double glazing, condensation, frost and snow, as well as RFS BAL rating (Rural Fire Service Bush Fire Attack level rating), and koala habitat have entered our everyday language! Jason Trisley and Sarah Aldridge moved to Byron Bay from London four years ago to establish Space Studio. While Trisley grew up on the mid north coast of New South Wales and did his architecture training at the University of Newcastle, Aldridge spent her childhood in cities around the world, then trained and worked in London before moving to Australia in Sarah had never lived outside a city before, so it was a big decision to make our home in a regional area, says Trisley. They both admit that it was a bit of a shock making the transition from leading project teams in a practice of 50, to suddenly having to rely solely on their own combined skills. There was a funny moment early on when we had to prepare our first tender package, says Trisley. Reality hit home fairly hard that we were going to have to do it all by ourselves without any help! When they first moved to Byron they were struck by the apparent lack of design quality in regional areas. We were keen to try to address this in some way, but weren t initially sure how. By tapping into the wealth of likeminded professionals in the area, including > 16 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

11 in profile 2. Jason Trisley (third from left) from Space Studio at a Design Advisory Panel (Northern Rivers) community workshop. Image: Dominic Finlay Jones. 3. Russell McFarland (right) and Dylan Wood (centre) from Austin McFarland with supplier Michael Baker (left) of Lincoln Brickworks in Wingham. Image: courtesy Austin McFarland. 4. Michael Marshman & Associates recent work for a local community group s Art in the Garage project. Image: Michael Marshman. Most of our projects are generated through referral and we hope this is a testament to these relationships the owner of Lincoln Brickworks, which is based on a mutual respect for each other s craft and has resulted in a collaboration to develop new brick types, introductions to each other s clients, as well as a strong personal friendship. Despite a long-term aspiration to continue to practice from their office in the main street of Wingham, McFarland admits they miss the architectural community in Sydney. Going from being surrounded by architects to becoming the only architects in the village was a huge shock. Becoming active members of the Country Division has fulfilled, at least a couple of times a year, that feeling of still belonging to our clichéd black-wearing passionate tribe. Michael Marshman & Associates In his new first-floor studio located atop a coastal cliff in Tathra, a beautiful town on the New South Wales south coast, Michael Marshman is aware of a thick sea fog enveloping the coastline and visibly wafting through the front door of his new office. I had a well-resourced and prominently located office in Bega, on the far south coast of New South Wales, since 1987, but last year, during a prolonged period of little work, we radically downsized. His new daily grind starts with a walk and swim at the beach, followed by breakfast and then a one kilometre bike ride to work. Work/ life balance tick! he exclaims. Marshman works with Gillian McMillan, 4. architects, landscape architects, a town planner, a public artist and an environmental engineer, they have recently founded the Design Advisory Panel (DAP) for the Northern Rivers. DAP provides pro-bono advice to the local community with the ambition of raising the quality and awareness of design in the built environment. We have completed our first community project and are talking about doing some kind of pop-up event this year to promote design within the broader community, explains Trisley. Despite a decrease in work in the past year, Trisley says they are committed to staying in regional New South Wales for the long term. We are fortunate to have some good clients and opportunities, and there are certainly worse places to practice than Byron Bay. Reality hit home fairly hard that we were going to have to do it all by ourselves without any help! Austin McFarland Architects Austin McFarland Architects is the Winghambased practice of Russell McFarland, Carolyn (Austin) McFarland and Dylan Wood. McFarland and Austin met at the University of Technology, Sydney, and worked in the city before deciding to relocate to the mid north coast of New South Wales to set up practice together and improve their work/life balance. Wood joined them a couple of years later after phoning out of curiosity to see if there really were architects in Wingham and has been an integral part of the team ever since. Austin McFarland do not specialise in any one particular area, preferring instead to embrace the broad range of work typically generated in a rural area. We believe this to be one of the skills you require to be successful outside the larger cities, says Austin. In the eight years they have been practising in the Manning Valley they have sought to make a positive contribution to the local and greater regional area through their work and the relationships they develop. Most of our projects are generated through referral and we hope this is a testament to these relationships, she says. Austin sees their proximity to manufacturers and suppliers as a major benefit of their location. We can visit joiners, timber mills and steel manufacturers to learn firsthand about their crafts and how to integrate them into our work. She cites as an example their relationship with Michael Baker, his colleague of seven years. We have established a working partnership based on good communication and a stubborn perfectionism, he says. He feels their biggest challenge is that the work they do is not really understood or valued. Because good design and architects are not valued as highly in regional areas, our services are not sought as a priority when new developments in our area are considered. And he isn t just referring to new-home builders, but also local authorities, other professionals inside and outside the construction industry, and successful local organisations. They have no idea what architects are good for. Like other architects working in the country, Marshman cites a benefit of regional practice as the variety of projects on offer. I always welcome enquiries, no matter how small the budget or modest the brief. Quite often these unassuming jobs turn out to be open to quirk and whimsy and I can explore the use of different materials and design solutions to create a great outcome. Such an example explains Marshman was a local disability organisation that wanted to expand its successful Art in the Garage project, which for many years had operated from a small, single-car garage. As many of the clients have significant physical disabilities, the design had to achieve a highly accessible environment on a single level. I didn t charge for the work, but instead received other rewards ; because being part of this isolated community means that everyone contributes what they can to make it an even better place to live. As they say, what goes around, comes around eventually. 18 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

12 architech Technical Feature Thermally broken aluminium windows and doors in demand as designers seek sustainability and compliance For many years commercial buildings were rated under Section J in the Building Code of Australia (BCA) simply by using the performance values of glass. More recently the BCA requires windows to be assessed on their whole value: the combined effect of frame and glass. This change has seen compliance with Section J of the code become harder to achieve without the use of better performing products or design compromise. Over the past five years an increasing number of window and door manufacturers within Australia have added thermally broken aluminum window and door systems to their product portfolio. Growing awareness of and demand for energy efficient building materials has driven product development in this area, resulting in an offering of window and door systems that deliver significant improvements in thermal efficiency and insulation properties. A thermally broken window can be defined as one in which the frame and sash components have been split into interior and exterior elements and joined using a less conductive material. Thermally broken aluminium windows deliver many advantages, most importantly improved thermal performance. The advantages of aluminium are maintained such as strength, durability and stability yet the drawback of thermal conductivity is overcome. This makes thermally broken aluminium windows an ideal solution for commercial building applications and high-end residential projects where large, complex glazing solutions are required. Thermal break technology Within Australia thermally broken aluminium window systems typically utilise one of two technologies to achieve the desired outcome of minimising heat transfer through the aluminium frame: one, pouring and debridging; or two, extrusion zipping. Pouring and debridging In thermally broken window systems using pour and debridge technology the window frame is first extruded as a single piece incorporating a hollow trough in the centre. This hollow trough is then filled with a plastic that hardens to form an intermediate piece. The connecting piece of aluminium is milled away leaving only the injected plastic to join the two halves of aluminium. Functionally the resulting piece is cut, mitred and assembled like a simple aluminium extrusion. Thermally the plastic slows the heat flow between the inside and the outside. Extrusion zipping In thermally broken window systems using extrusion zipping technology, individual extrusions are designed and extruded for the interior and exterior elements of the aluminium frame. These profiles are then joined using a number of polyamide strips, carefully positioned to maximise the insulation properties of the window. The strips are knurled and clamped between the interior and exterior aluminum elements and a machine is used to zip the strips to the aluminium, creating a single profile with the same strength and expansion properties as a traditional aluminium window frame ensuring long-term functionality and durability. Thermally broken aluminium windows were a key feature of the design for The Flannery Centre in Bathurst (NSW). Architect: Crawford Architects. Image: Paul Godsell. The Flannery Centre: a case study in the use of thermally broken aluminium windows and doors Named after renowned environmental advocate and 2007 Australian of the Year Tim Flannery, the Flannery Centre in Bathurst (NSW) was built under the Green Star rating system run by the Green Building Council of Australia. Crawford Architects were appointed to design the sustainable, practical and iconic centre, which is now a world-class green skills and sustainability education centre in Bathurst. Building material and product selections were made with the objective of minimising the ecological footprint of the centre during construction and throughout its life cycle. Reverse veneer construction detailing, rammed earth walls and commercial thermally broken window frames are all contributing techniques and systems implemented in the building. Glazing for the centre presented a challenge with the design calling for large custom window solutions. To meet design aspirations around energy efficiency, the glazing system needed to have very low Uw values, provide long-term durability and deliver a contemporary aesthetic that complemented the modern building design an interpretation of the rural shed split with galleries and a student hub. AWS s ThermalHEART range of thermally broken aluminium windows and doors was chosen for the job. The completed project is a building with a reduced ecological footprint and a dramatically low energy demand. AWS ThermalHEART Architectural Window Systems (AWS) developed a thermally broken range of aluminium windows and doors in The initial product release included sliding door, bi-fold door, hinged door and awning window systems. Since then the range has continued to expand and now includes a comprehensive offering of CentreGLAZE and FrontGLAZE framing in 100mm and 150mm platforms, along with a compatible door system for hinged, pivot or sliding installations. We ve worked hard to make sure we can offer architects and designers a full and complete range of thermally broken systems for their projects, which will deliver excellent performance outcomes, comments AWS Designer Mark McCleary. McCleary cites one of the major challenges in developing a thermally broken window system was ensuring the size of the profiles was consistent with that of traditional non-thermally broken framing. In Australia, architects and builders commonly work with 100mm and 150mm framing platforms. When you are incorporating a thermal break into the system you need to ensure the break is wide enough to give the insulation improvements you re looking for, without making the profiles overly large or inconsistent with market expectations. We chose to use an extrusion zipping method to achieve our thermal break; this method allows you to create a true, wide break in the aluminium to maximise the thermal performance. The polyamide strips that provide the insulation are very stable and have Detail of the AWS ThermalHEART system. similar strength and expansion properties as aluminium to ensure the finished thermally broken profiles are highly stable, consistent and strong. An added bonus with this method is the ability to offer dual colour extrusions one colour inside, one colour outside something previously unavailable to the Australian market, which really adds some flexibility for architects. When architects choose ThermalHEART they can work with the extrusions like they would any other commercial framing; it s proportionally the same. Our ThermalHEART systems have the same strength, durability and expansion properties as non-thermally broken framing, the systems are easy to specify, they are 100 per cent Australian designed to suit the Australian climate and market, and they solve many problems associated with Section J compliance, says McCleary. Architectural Window Systems is a Technical Sponsor of Architecture Bulletin 20 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

13 Design for survival Decades after it was destroyed by an earthquake, the village of Saighanchi in northern Afghanistan is now an example of successful earthquake-resistant building design; it has withstood subsequent quakes and, in turn, strengthened the local community. Syed N. Sibtain, the architect behind the design, discusses the project s development and its legacy. Recent years have brought horrific natural disasters to this planet: floods, fires, famines and earthquakes. As I write, news has come of an earthquake in the Van province of Turkey, bordering Iran, measuring 7.2 on the Richter scale, with a death toll yet unknown. So far there has been little mention in the media of the rural communities living in heavy mud-brick housing extremely vulnerable to earthquakes. The fact remains that most people killed by earthquakes are the poorest of the poor in rural areas of the less-industrialised countries. It is an unfortunate fact that when technologists consider measures to control loss by earthquake, it seems that the safety of property is given priority over the safety of lives; and when they do consider lives, the town and city dwellers have priority over those marginalised rural communities. There is an urgent need for the development of earthquake-resistant building systems for those living in villages. Apart from being earthquake resistant, such housing must fulfil three main criteria: it must be economically viable, culturally acceptable, and capable of being built and maintained by the villagers themselves. Many decades ago a severe earthquake in Qazwin, Iran, which claimed over 30, 000 lives, affected me greatly and led me, in my architecture studies, to focus on Iran. After further research, I embarked on the 1. development of an earthquake-resistant building system. The system I devised was based on modern technology, was economically viable, could be constructed of local and readily available materials, employed traditional crafts and promised to be culturally and aesthetically acceptable to communities that traditionally built in heavy masonry. The opportunity to apply the building system came when an earthquake destroyed the village of Saighanchi, in northern Afghanistan, on 21 March I had been in the country looking for a suitable site for an earthquake-resistant village and went to survey the site; it was decided to rebuild the village using my earthquake-resistant building system. With grants from agencies in Australia, Denmark and the Netherlands, the reconstructed village of Saighanchi was built as a self-help project. The villagers were trained by a small team of expatriate volunteers (architects, builders and social anthropologists) from Australia, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands. The objectives were to create a safe and socially, culturally and aesthetically acceptable village; to build the community to become selfreliant through education and training; to provide a model for integrated village development focused on health, nutrition, agriculture and the environment; and to provide a model that could be replicated for other earthquake-prone regions. The building system The earthquake-resistant building system is essentially simple, consisting of a wall structure and an independently supported roof. The wall system was developed from the traditional arch, the load-bearing properties of which have been well demonstrated. Thus the wall is formed from a laterally inverted shallow arch. Short wing walls are added to the enclosure to improve aesthetics, provide shade and to produce an appearance of walls being straight instead of being slightly curved. When seismic stresses are applied to the face of such a wall, the stresses are transferred as within an arch, and the wall becomes very much stronger than a conventional wall. If, however, stress is applied to the inner face, the wall will fail and when it does it will fall outward only, leaving the roof intact. Thus the occupants are protected from falling masonry and flying rocks. The dome-shaped roof is derived from the structure of the yurt. The structural elements may be made of timber or steel and the dome covered by boards, mats or reeds. The top of the roof and the exterior and interior of the walls are rendered with kahgil, a mixture of mud and straw, which creates surfaces impervious to rain and snow. The village The reconstruction of Saighanchi village took 16 months to complete. The period was spread over three years from 1977 to 1979, as it was not possible to work through the winter months and peak agricultural periods. Traditionally, a village is not planned; it simply develops organically and grows according to need and population numbers. The plan of organically developed villages can be seen to reflect a number of environmental constraints and potentialities as well as general social structure and interaction. Saighanchi was planned with an arrowhead formation of houses and lanes where the villagers still experience their former lifestyle. As they walk through the lanes, visit friends, fetch water, milk their animals or go to prayers, relationships with people and with places have been maintained. New Saighanchi consists of the following components: 25 family houses, a domestic and drinking water supply from a deep well, banks of toilets with septic tanks, a communal bathhouse with a solar heating system, cattle sheds, a school, a teacher s house, a mosque, a credit union/co-op office and a workshop for training the local population to maintain and manufacture village infrastructure, for instance, windmills and solar panels were manufactured in the village by the villagers. To provide a softer environment, tree planting (mulberry, apricot and almond) was carried out. Augmented by land reclamation and irrigation by windmill, farming land was increased by 25 per cent. 1. A 2007 photo of the village s school building, partially damaged by ongoing conflict in the region. 2. One of the two windmills manufactured in the village as part of the rebuilding process. 3. The village of Saighanchi as it stood following the building work in the late 1970s. Images: courtesy Syed N. Sibtain Self-help From the start it was made clear that this was a self-help project with the objective of building the community, not just the village. The younger men and boys were more motivated to learn new technologies and some of them became more skilled than the training team in the use of instruments such as the theodolite. The villagers built the houses and amenities, not for themselves but for the village. On returning to Saighanchi after 18 months, and several earthquakes, we found no cracks in any of the buildings. Thirty years and hundreds of earthquakes later, the building system prevails. Those who have survived are fully employed as technicians and tradesmen, yet remain farmers. They are all self-reliant with literacy and numeracy. All children go to school. Traditionally some families had up to 12 children, but in 2011 most families had only two or three. Through health and hygiene training the community as a whole is healthy, especially the women. To evaluate the success or failure of any strategy for development, the completed project must be studied intermittently over a prolonged period and into a new generation. Saighanchi, as it stands today, has been partially destroyed by aerial bombing from various forces in the ongoing civil war. I long for the day when peace descends on the land to allow people to rebuild, not just their villages, but also their communities. Syed N. Sibtain PhD 22 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

14 theory art The meaning of beauty The Institute s 2012 ArchiTHEORY series, curated by Steve Kennedy and Stephen Varady, set out to question the postmodern relativist proposition that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Featuring presentations by the curators, as well as Dr Paul-Alan Johnson and the late Denis Dutton, the series sought to reclaim the notion of beauty as the expression of a deep human need. While acknowledging the variety of views as to what this yearning means, the talks affirmed its constancy and universality. Here, series cocurator Steve Kennedy gives his insight into the series and why architects should unashamedly embrace beauty in their work. The critic Alexander Nehamas in his book Only a Promise of Happiness: The Place of Beauty in a World of Art 1 argues that: The perception of beauty manifests a hope that life would be better if the object of beauty were part of it. This hope can shape and direct our lives for better or worse. We may discover misery in pursuit of beauty, or find that beauty offers no more than a tantalising promise of happiness. But if beauty is always dangerous, it is also a pressing human concern that we must seek to understand, and not suppress. The idea for this series, The Meaning of Beauty, came from a friend of Stephen Varady and mine, Howard Moutrie, who asked us both to give separate papers on what he had observed as being a passion we jointly shared. This led to the two of us discussing not only our commitment to, and deep interest in, beauty, but also our concern at its loss of importance in architectural discourse. Personally, I cannot understand why we are so afraid to engage with and discuss beauty. I have been very interested in not only the resurgence of interest in beauty in art theory, but also the work of people such as the late Denis Dutton who bring a progressive Darwinian perspective to the discussion. Dutton argued that: Evolution s trick is to make things beautiful to make you satisfied just looking at them. 2 The South Australian photographer Alex Frayne was quoted in the November/ December 2012 issue of Australian Art Review as being interested in inscape : the concept developed by the poet Gerard Manley Hopkins to discuss the individual essence and uniqueness of every physical thing. Frayne says that what inscape offers is: The idea of beauty in everything just waiting to be discovered. 3 The 2012 ArchiTHEORY series, which formed part of the Institute s ongoing commitment to theory as part of CPD was, we hope, the model for future discourse: intimate, focused, intense and different. As I noted in my talk in the second part of the series, Marx was right, Beauty Matters, the following quote from French philosopher Jewish Museum, Berlin. Architect: Daniel Libeskind. Image: Stephen Varady. Simone Weil is, I think, the most significant for us as architects and artists and takes us straight back to Karl Marx: The beautiful is that which we desire without wishing to consume it. We desire that it should be. 4 This longing and desire, if I understand Weil correctly, is at the core of my personal fascination with beauty. It is for me what makes beauty so compelling, intriguing, addictive and elusive. Plato said the ideal is always unattainable. The perfect sunset is only a copy or intimation of perfection, not perfection itself, if for no other reason than it will fade and decay. But it still fills our hearts and souls with wonder, and joy, and longing, and pain, and happiness. So we desire it, strive for it and set it as our ideal. And, our endeavour as intelligent and sentient beings is to produce beauty as a way of expressing ourselves. The Italian idealist philosopher Benedetto Croce in his treatise, Theory of Aesthetic, said: We may define beauty as successful expression or better, as expression and nothing more, because expression, when it is not successful, is not expression. 5 To clarify this Croce looks at beauty s opposite: ugliness. Croce describes ugliness as unsuccessful expression. 5 Think about it: all those ugly buildings are simply unsuccessful expression. Steve Kennedy Kennedy Associates Chair, CPD Committee Footnotes: 1. Alexander Nehamas. Only a Promise of Happiness: The Place of Beauty in a World of Art, Princeton University Press, Dennis Dutton. A Darwinian theory of beauty. TEDxTalk, February dutton_a_darwinian_theory_of_beauty.html 3. Unexpected Artefacts, Australian Art Review, November/ December Simone Weil. Gravity and Grace, Routledge Classics, Benedetto Croce. Aesthetic (The Great Modern Treatise on the Theory of Art, Containing Both the Theory of Aesthetic and History of Aesthetic), Noonday Press, Art & Architecture: Always was, always will be Known for their work on public and private art projects, architects Julie Cracknell and Peter Lonergan s (Cracknell and Lonergan Architects) most recent venture has been to work with artist Reko Rennie to transform a former Commonwealth Bank building in Sydney s Taylor Square into one of the city s latest Streetware public art projects. Architecture Bulletin editor Laura Wise spoke with the three collaborators about their experience of working together to realise this project, which has, in just a few short months, become a beloved new part of the city s landscape. Laura Wise: Reko, can you briefly describe your work Always was, always will be? Reko Rennie: Always was, always will be uses geometric diamonds, referencing my associations to north-western New South Wales and the traditional markings of the Kamilaroi people. Across the front of the building facade, neon text Always was, always will be is incorporated across the geometric diamonds. As a temporary work on this Sydney site the meaning is clear: this was Gadigal country and always will be Gadigal. LW: How did Cracknell and Lonergan Architects come to work with you on Always was, always will be? What was involved in working with them on this project? RR: I had actually approached Julie and Peter earlier in 2012 about working on a large commission for La Trobe University in Melbourne. I had seen the work Julie and Peter had done and was very impressed with the scale they worked in and the execution of previous works. The City of Sydney Streetware tender then became available, so in collaboration with Julie and Peter, I presented a design, and fortunately we were successful. There were more than 600 entries! Julie and Always was, always will be at Taylor Square, Sydney. Artist: Reko Rennie. Architects: Julie Cracknell and Peter Lonergan. Image: Paul Patterson, City of Sydney. Peter have a long involvement with the arts and are quite passionate, so it s been great to work with other like-minded artists. LW: What do you think working with architects has brought to this piece in particular, and, moreover, how did it impact your working style? RR: Working with architects like Julie and Peter helped turn my design into a reality. There was only two weeks to install this work, and for a single artist to paint all that wall space with multiple coats of paint and organise scaffolding and permits... it was unrealistic. That is where the architectural experience really helped: to logistically work out how to turn the designs into a practical application, within time and budget. I would not have been able to achieve this work if it wasn t for the team at Cracknell and Lonergan. LW: Peter, how did you approach this piece with Reko knowing that you were working with a pre-existing building? How did its architecture shape and influence the project? Peter Lonergan: Reko s work is very architectural and, while it is imbued with cultural significance, we had noticed the distorting effect of Reko s signature work on the La Trobe piece. It reminded me of the dazzle camouflage of the early 20 th century and we thought it would have a flattening effect on the building at Taylor Square that would start to mediate the detail back into the body of the building. The text Always was, always will be is a very strong message. LW: Peter and Julie, you have a history of working with artists on both public and private art projects. What has been the drawcard for you in undertaking such work? PL: Artists have a unique and rare way of looking, seeing and representing. These public art projects are great to be involved with, particularly Aboriginal art and artists who have big strong stories to tell that should be strongly represented. We can contribute technological know-how and manpower. Julie Cracknell: It enriches the way we work. There is an equality in collaboration; the generosity is enriching. LW: A final question for all of you, what place do you feel art has in the contemporary practice of architecture and vice versa? RR: I personally believe art has a huge place in architecture, why should art just adorn the interior walls of a building or space. I am certainly interested in more outside works and I think if there is a balance with the design and artwork, each can be complementary. PL: Artists and architects have a great symbiotic correspondence. Architects are not artists and should not think that they are. If you hang back and facilitate, the art and architecture both will benefit. JC: The contemporary practice of architecture is over bureaucratised to the extent that it has become artless; architecture can be much more than it has become. Originally commissioned to be on show until March 2013, the City of Sydney has recently confirmed a two-year extension to the exhibition of Always was, always will be at 1 5 Flinders Street, Darlinghurst. 24 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

15 Presenting for practitioners review Presenting projects is an important part of architectural practice that inevitably involves public speaking. Making presentations can be a daunting experience, but, with the right training, anyone can become a confident and proficient presenter. Here, seasoned presenter and Allen Jack+Cottier CEO and Principal (Design), Michael Heenan shares his secrets. 1. Prepare Prepare Prepare Nothing is more important than repeated and thorough preparation. You should read through your presentation, aloud and timed, at least five times, including once in front of your colleagues/friends/family. With practise, you should be able to deliver the presentation with limited notes, so you can concentrate on a great delivery. 2. Understand what the presentation is about Before you sit down to draft your presentation, analyse what its exact objectives are. These will determine how you structure your talk. 3. Remember to introduce yourself At the outset, clearly state your name, your firm, the name of your project, and the category you are entering. You would be surprised how many people forget to do this. Consider putting your name and project title on every image. 4. Acknowledge and thank the team Either at the very start or end of your presentation, acknowledge the client and your team, including consultants. Be sure to also thank the audience to clearly signify the end; don t just peter out. 5. Start strong In a packed day of jury presentations you have a limited amount of time to make an impact, so use the start of your presentation to maximum advantage. High-impact images should be used up front. Push the positive and don t start with the negative, such as talking about all the problems you had to deal with on the project. You are talking about your solutions, not the things that you should have done or couldn t do. 6. Finish strong Finish your presentation by saying how well the building has been working, how people have reacted to it, why they love it. Use your best images as the backdrop. 7. talk to the audience People often make the mistake of talking only to the judges; however, it s vital to always include the audience. Above all, don t talk to the screen. Many presenters do this, and, as a result, turn their back on the audience. You have a small screen in front of you, so use it. 8. Make sure you are the master of your technology Nothing looks more inept than a presenter who can t work the equipment. Give yourself the best chance by getting there early, and, if possible, testing the presentation tools out. Think about where you want to stand. Don t be afraid to rearrange the microphone, lectern, even the lighting and where people are sitting if it s a client presentation; that way you feel 100 per cent comfortable. 9. Leave your hero image on the screen When you finish, leave your strongest image, your name and the project title on the screen as you answer questions. Don t forget you are still on display at the end of the presentation. Demonstrate your mastery of the project, and the presentation, by knowing the slide numbers for the crucial slides so you can immediately find them in answer to questions. 10. Answering questions Give short, sharp and clear answers that are generally in line with what the judge is asking; don t revisit all the trials and tribulations. Don t forget that the audience is still there, so include them in your answers. 11. Nerves Treat nerves ahead of an important presentation as a form of adrenaline that will make it the best presentation you ve given. If you have practised in front of your colleagues, you know you can do it and do it well. If still unsure go to another room five minutes beforehand and say your first five lines out loud. You have now done everything possible so settle down completely and enjoy it! 12. Have fun Enjoy and relish the process of sharing your project with your audience. Make them feel like you re having fun, and that you absolutely love your project and love showing it to them; passion and enthusiasm for one s work is irresistible, even to the toughest judges. Michael Heenan Michael Heenan will be a judge along with architect and Chapter Councillor Shaun Carter and architecture media expert Rosemary Luker at a special ArchiBUSINESS workshop for 2013 NSW Architecture Award entrants on Tuesday 5 March For more information and to reserve your place contact NSW Chapter Events Coordinator Eleni Ragogo - eleni.ragogo@architecture.com.au. Michael Heenan practises his presenting skills in front of colleagues ahead of the 2012 World Architecture Festival. Book review Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture Author Rory Hyde Publisher Routledge RRP $49.95 Members $ Two months ago I fell awkwardly while playing basketball. My right ankle swelled to elephantine size, but X-rays revealed no break or fracture. So it was with disbelief that I received the news from Craig, my physiotherapist, that my ankle would never be the same again. In his kind, New Zealand accent, Craig explained that my anterior talofibular ligament had ruptured. Rather than regenerating, the ligament would be replaced with useless scar tissue. Why, other than a desire for sympathy, do I present this anecdote? Because, just as my physiotherapist has a pleasant voice, Rory Hyde s book Future Practice is an engaging and entertaining read. But, like Craig, Hyde has some difficult news to impart: that the architect s role as building designer has become redundant. As someone who likes designing buildings as much as he enjoys playing basketball, I find this idea supported though it may be by evidence and expert opinions somewhat hard to accept. Subtitled Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Future Practice comprises 17 interviews with individuals and organisations, selected by Hyde to encompass a range of emergent possibilities for architectural practice. Each of these practitioners has been given a descriptive title, as if part of a collector s set. For example, Mel Dodd of muf is described as The Double Agent, Marcus Westbury of Renew Newcastle is The Community Enabler. Natalie Jeremijenko ( The Environmental Medic ), an art professor devoted to public health, shrugs off attempted labels, memorably claiming that I call myself whatever it s strategic to call myself. Co-host of The Architects radio show on Melbourne s RRR, Hyde is an experienced and skilful interviewer. He manages to avoid the pitfalls of archispeak, while demonstrating knowledge of each practitioner s respective methodologies and projects. The edges referred to in the book s title and encountered in his interviews are multiple: we meet inventors and editors, project managers and historians, and leap in scale from bumper stickers to skyscrapers to city makers. As Dan Hill points out in the foreword, only some of Future Practice s protagonists are architects, and the subject matter is of relevance to all design disciplines. So what has drawn us to this edge, and what do we hope to find on the other side? In his introduction, Hyde dramatically depicts the crisis of relevance that has led to a search for exemplars beyond architecture s traditional domain. His attempt to redefine architectural practice is timely. Formations, the Australian exhibition at the 2012 Venice Architecture Biennale, sought to look beyond the architect s focus on building, while Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture (2011), also published by Routledge, promised a new paradigm for the profession. None of these rethinking exercises, however, point to a specific redefinition of the architect s core competencies, which supersedes the relationship to construction. In fact, exploring the edge conditions of Future Practice, we frequently encounter the notion of architect as generalist. Should we, therefore, be expending energy rethinking architectural practice, or could we merely find a fitting name for the type of practitioner discussed within and change our business cards: strategic designer, anyone? As someone who has chosen to operate outside the conventional office structure, departing Australia for the Netherlands and branching into academia, media and advocacy, the author clearly tows his own baggage. He launches his interview with educator Liam Young with the quote that architects skills are wasted on buildings, and suggests to Jeremijenko that calling yourself an architect is really a death sentence. These hyperbolic pronouncements are in line with the book s informal tone, which perfectly suits the compact, public transport-ready format. Indeed, and as Marcus Trimble has pointed out in his review of this book for Architecture Australia, the content of Future Practice originates in a post on Hyde s popular blog. 1 So will I have to abandon my dreams of erecting basketball stadia? Despite frequent declarations to the contrary, little concrete evidence that architecture can be relevant without buildings is presented. Future Practice begins with Dan Hill s declaration this is not a book of predictions, and ends, perhaps appropriately, with a blank page. That s not to say that the specific destiny of the architectural profession might not be contained within. A quick scan of the book s imprint reveals that it was first published in Perhaps this book and its contents really are from the future. David Neustein - November 2012 Footnotes: Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013 Architecture Bulletin Summer

16 obituary Charles Weatherburn ( ) Few architects or major builders practicing in Sydney from the early post-world War II years until the late 1980s would not have crossed paths with Charles Weatherburn, universally known as Charlie. For much of this time he held senior positions in the office of the NSW Government Architect s Branch, by far the largest and most comprehensive architectural office in the state, during a period when it was rapidly expanding to cope with the demands of the increasing population. He was involved with countless projects for schools, hospitals, police stations, universities and public buildings of every species, not to mention the most spectacular of all: the Sydney Opera House. He characteristically worked behind the scenes, designing several hospital buildings, but for the most part variously organising contract drawings and specifications, supervising construction, developing procurement and management systems, coordinating large teams of architects, engineers, quantity surveyors and administrators within the office, and commissioning numerous colleagues in private practice to work jointly on design development and contract documentation. Charlie rose to leadership of the office, serving from late 1974 until his retirement in 1978 as the eighteenth Government Architect. His vast experience and tough early life had equipped him admirably for the job. Charlie was born in Canley Vale (NSW) in 1916; in 1927 he was dux of the local primary school, but shortly after, at the age of 14, had to go out to work, completing the Leaving Certificate by evening study at a technical college. During the difficult Depression years Charlie attended Sydney Technical College, again at night, and worked by day in four different offices, including Fowell Mansfield and the Rural Bank. He gained his architectural certificate in 1938 and joined the NSW Department of Public Works, where he was to remain for 40 years, interrupted only by World War II. He volunteered for army service in 1942 and by the time he left to return to civilian life, only four years later, had already been promoted to the rank of lieutenant, a testament to his diligence and ability. Postings followed as a district architect in country offices of the NSW Department of Public Works, first in Narrabri and then for four years in Cootamundra, where he had to deal with everything from hospital additions and classroom extensions in outback public schools, to the renovation of toilets for police sergeant s residences. His return to the Sydney head office coincided with the arrival of the first of the young university-trained graduates who were joining the Government Architect s Branch team. As one of that breed I have warm early memories of meeting Charlie and quickly learning to respect his experience and skills. In the late 1950s, his was the guiding hand in contract organisation and building management leading to the realisation of the new Woolley-designed School of Chemistry at the University of Sydney, which broke new ground with its precast concrete floor system, exposed aggregate external cladding, complex services and curtain wall technology. Other major projects were to follow where his communication skills and knowledge of the building industry were invaluable: among many were the new Mona Vale hospital, multi-storey city government office buildings, and, later, extensions to the New South Wales Parliament House designed by Andrew Andersons. During the turbulent times on the Opera House site following Jørn Utzon s resignation, Ted Farmer as Government Architect was adviser to Minister For Public Works Davis Hughes; Charlie, as Farmer s deputy, became deeply involved. Those working in the Hall, Todd and Littlemore team still recall how Charlie s common sense and pragmatism which may not have endeared him to all were instrumental in helping steer the project to completion. During his time as Government Architect Charlie was closely involved with many hundreds of projects, none more important than the efficient delivery of Westmead Teaching hospital, developed from the design of Ross Bonthorne and at the time the largest building project in Australia. He remained generously supportive of the highly talented younger generation in the office, working closely with Donald Coleman as his immediate design adviser. The office was awarded a Sulman Medal and four Merit Awards during his time as Government Architect, but he went out of his way to ensure that it was the actual designer who received recognition and credit. After retiring in 1978 Charlie worked as a consultant for the next 10 years with Devine Erby Mazlin, and, undeterred, for almost a further decade was honorary architect to the Australian Red Cross NSW. In 2009, he moved to Queensland s Sunshine Coast where he died last October at the age of 96. Charlie may have been an architect whose work was little publicised, but his immense contribution to our profession and society deserve the fullest respect and acknowledgement. Emeritus Professor Peter Webber When Quality Matters... Model-Tech 3D specialises in the highest quality models for presentation, marketing and DA. We utilise advanced techniques, colour and texture matching, and a computer controlled cutting system to ensure our models are clean, precise and visually exciting. To view our portfolio of completed projects or discuss your options and possibilities, please call Russell Pearse. MODEL-TECH 3D Level 6 / 2 Foveaux Street Surry Hills NSW 2010 T: F: E: russell@modeltech3d.com.au ARCHITECTURAL MODELMAKERS Steve Mosley Matt Scott Rob Flowers phone: sydney@modelcraft.com.au Advertise in architecture bulletin T: E: roslyn.irons@architecture.com.au 28 Architecture Bulletin Summer 2013