Architecture

The low-density suburb of Glenfield in south-west Sydney will be transformed into a “thriving mixed-use precinct” at the gateway to the planned Aerotropolis, under a place strategy released by the New South Wales Government.
The Glenfield Place Strategy, now open for public feedback, outlines how the precinct will be re-zoned to include around 7,000 new homes, with improved transport and education facilities and expanded public space.
An urban design report prepared by Group GSA describes the design intent for a number of different “character areas,” which will feature a variety of different housing types to meet the community’s needs. Overall, the strategy puts an emphasis on sporting facilities and education, with existing schools such as the Hurlstone Agricultural High School to be retained and a potential new primary school to be built.

The area was chosen for renewal due to its proximity to transport, in particular the South West Rail Link. The station precinct will become an “accessible employment hub,” supported by a new medium-rise residential neighbourhood overlooking the northern riparian open space corridor.

In the adjacent town centre, the Glenfield main street will be the public retail and community spine. Group GSA describes “a vibrant mixed-use street connecting the train station, employment hub and urban square to the new district level recreational open space and playing fields.”

View gallery

A concept image prepared for the Glenfield Place Strategy.

The north-west character precinct will be a green one- to two-storey low-density residential neighbourhood; the south-west precinct will be designed for low- and medium-rise residential buildings surrounded by extensive parkland and green landscaping; and the southern precinct will continue the transition from low to medium-density dwelling forms, with further increases in building heights.
“Since the opening of the South West rail link by the NSW Government in 2015, Glenfield is strategically located at the junction of three major rail lines, putting it within an easy train commute to major centres at Liverpool and Campbelltown, an emerging centre at Leppington and only 45 minutes to the heart of Sydney’s CBD,” said planning minister Rob Stokes.

“These geographic advantages mean that Glenfield is poised for a complete transformation and as a result, future residents will be able to live in an area with new homes, close to thousands of jobs, great public transport and 30 hectares of open space.
“The strategy outlines a vision for a new town centre, shared streets which prioritise walking and cycling, improved cycleway connections and upgrades to regional active transport links.”
The place strategy also includes a plan for green links connecting open spaces over the next 25 to 30 years, along with sites for potential health and community facilities within the town centre.

Planning for a major upgrade to Cambridge Avenue is also underway to cater for the expected growth.

Education minister Sarah Mitchell said the government was committed to protecting and expanding the Hurlstone Agricultural High School.
“This plan includes protecting Hursltone Agriculural High School, which is the State’s oldest government boarding school, and retaining 50 hectares of land for agricultural education purposes,” she said.
“The investment will deliver enhanced farm facilities, reflecting the latest in agricultural practices building on the important role the school plays in developing future ag pioneers.
“The strategy reinforces the NSW Government’s commitment to ensuring the school remains at the centre of this community.”
The strategy is on public exhibition until 12 February 2021. More

One of the first carbon-neutral apartment buildings in Australia will be built in a former light-industrial area in Fremantle, WA, having received planning approval.
Designed by Hillam Architects, the four- to five-storey mixed-use apartment building, named Montreal Commons, is the first building to be approved for Development WA’s Knutsford East Village.
Housing 39 apartments and a ground-floor cafe, the development will include 75 kW of developer-funded solar photovoltaic on the roof. It will trial a unique power trading model where the strata company owns the solar infrastructure and generates passive income to offset owner levies by up to 50 percent.

Hillam Architects says in a design statement that the building will reflect and reinterpret the rich, light-industrial heritage of the Knutsford precint, abstracting the surrounding sawtooth roofs within the serrated edges and angles of the facade.

View gallery

Montreal Commons by Hillam Architects.

“This angular facade provides moments of familiarity, creating a dialogue with the existing industrial fabric,” the architects state. “Our proposal does not seek to imitate or mimic the existing architectural fabric, rather to provide a contemporary reinterpretation of the existing character while also looking toward the future goals and aspirations for the precinct.”
The building neighbours Fremantle Golf Course and other apartment projects are planned for adjacent blocks. Also proposed for the Knutsford East Village is WA’s first Nightingale housing apartment buildings, designed by EHDO.

A key design move for the Montreal Commons building is the creation of a central courtyard by cutting into the massing from the west, improving views, light and ventilation. A view corridor has also been cut through the volume from north to south and a series of green, open-air communal spaces are terraced down the building.
“The spatial arrangement of the courtyard, periphery walkways and main stair echo the utilitarian layout of a working factory floor,” states Hillam Architects. “The central courtyard space anchors the building and serves as both a recreational space for residents [and] a privacy buffer between apartments.”
Aspect Studios in the landscape architect for the project.
The development has been approved by the Inner South Joint Development Assessment Panel, having been supported by Fremantle council’s Design Advisory Committee. The project is scheduled for completion by late 2022. More

Federal environment minister Sussan Ley has approved the widely derided $498 million redevelopment of the Australian War Memorial in Canberra that would entail the demolition of the existing Anzac Hall.
The minister approved the project “based on Departmental advice,” despite a submission against the proposal from the Australian Heritage Council.
The proposal to demolish Anzac Hall has drawn criticism from architects, heritage experts, former directors of the Australian War Memorial and distinguished Australians who have described the proposal as “wasteful” and “a mark of disrespect.”

Anzac Hall, designed by Denton Corker Marshall, won the Sir Zelman Cowen Award for Public Architecture in 2005. It is set to become the first winner of that award to be demolished.

View gallery

A proposed glazed link between the existing building a new Anzac Hall designed by Cox Architecture.

The redevelopment proposal includes a new southern entrance designed by Scott Carver, a new Anzac Hall and glazed link designed by Cox Architecture, as well as the extension to the Bean building, public realm works and the refurbishment of the main building, designed by Emil Sodersten and John Crust and completed in 1941. The heritage facades will remain unchanged.

The Australian Institute of Architects attacked the government for its “disgraceful decision” which “undermines confidence in Australia’s heritage protection framework” and constitutes “an abject failure of government to meaningfully consider the community’s perspectives on the project.”

“The expert heritage advice from multiple government-commissioned and independent assessments regarding the adverse impacts knocking down Anzac Hall will have on the site’s heritage values was unanimous and has been ignored by the Minister,” said Clare Cousins, past national president of the Institute and spokesperson for the Hands Off Anzac Hall campaign.
Minister Ley said, “The Australian War Memorial holds a sacred place in the hearts of Australians and there are 29 strict conditions of approval to minimise and mitigate the residual impacts on the site’s National Heritage and Commonwealth Heritage values.”

However, the Institute disputes effectiveness of the conditions. “It is nonsensical to suggest that any of the 29 conditions can, or will, ‘minimise and mitigate’ the impacts from demolishing a building in its entirety – there can be no bigger impact on a building than its total destruction.
“This is a disgraceful decision that sets a dangerous precedent for the future of our nation’s heritage. It comes towards the end of a deeply flawed process notable for its lack of transparency and genuine consultation.
“Announcing the outcome for such a controversial proposal in the last hour of parliament on the final sitting day of the year can only be seen as a calculated attempt to once again avoid the scrutiny and criticism the government knew this decision would attract.”

View gallery

The proposed expansion of the Australian War Memorial will be most significant investment since its establishment after World War One.

Shannon Battinson, the Institute’s ACT chapter president, added, “This is a bitterly disappointing decision that reflects a comprehensive failure to listen to the advice of experts and the wishes of the community alike.”
“This is the wanton destruction of a much-loved public space and all the talent and effort – not to mention taxpayer dollars – that went into it.
“Anzac Hall was designed to stand and stand with expansion for 30, 40, 50 years to come. To condemn it to the scrap heap now is a real travesty.

“Approving the destruction of Anzac Hall, when the site’s Heritage Management Plan expressly requires its conservation, is one of the most appalling examples of disregarding heritage protections and rubber-stamping a major public project in recent memory.”
The director of the Australian War Memorial Matt Anderson said the proposal has cleared its first hurdle. “This is the first of three major approval processes required to progress the development, which aims to honour the commitment of the 100,000 Australians who have served our country over the past 30 years.” More

A University of Queensland proposal to change the strategic direction of the School of Architecture has caused major concerns and uncertainty among its academic staff, whose roles would be “disestablished” to facilitate the new direction.
The shift in strategy emerged from the school’s Septennial review, conducted in 2019. Since the review, the school has introduced a new Master of Urban Development and Design degree and in 2021 it will begin teaching a Bachelor of Design degree.

Under its proposal, 20 (19.5 full time equivalent) continuing academic positions will be disestablished and replaced with 18 positions – nine will be architecture-focused roles and the remaining nine will be in a new design stream. Fixed term academic staff and casual staff are not affected.
The proposal has blindsided the academic staff, who were aware of the two new degrees but had not expected the transition to happen through what they have described as a “spill and fill” process.

“The staff in the school knew that change was coming because of these new degrees,” said Kelly Greenop, a senior lecturer at UQ School of Architecture.
“But we weren’t prepared for the fact that that would mean the disestablishment of positions and especially this recategorization of architecture and design.

“A spill and fill like this is a really extreme measure. As a union delegate, I’m concerned not only for the school but for the precedent it sets for the university.”
A spokesperson for the head of school told ArchitectureAU that UQ was seeking to grow and diversify to ensure its future success. They said the new direction “echoes feedback from industry, students, and academics.”

“The school now requires new discipline streams and an appropriate academic profile to support the introduction of new teaching programs and research fields if it is to achieve its strategic profile and remain competitive in the global market,” the spokesperson said.
Greenop believes the proposal lacks necessary detail and may not meet the criteria to trigger a major organizational change under and The University of Queensland Enterprise Agreement 2018 – 2021.

“It seems to us that since we’re still going to be teaching two architecture degrees – the Bachelor of Architectural Design and the Master of Architecture ­– that there is going to be substantial continuation of what staff would do at the school.

“In our opinion as a union the school hasn’t fully answered all the requirements of such a proposal under the enterprise agreement, such as the likely effect on workload. And if there’s a shift in established positions, what work is no longer required? Which is what would be a trigger for the disestablishment of positions. That’s what I’m really not clear about.
“Having said that, this isn’t the final proposal, this is one for consultation and we are hoping to get more information from the university.”

The consultation period concluded on 2 December. Submissions made to the university included a petition to stop the “spill and fill” which had gathered more than 1,100 signatures.
The Queensland chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects also submitted a letter outlining concerns from its members, which include students and graduates. The letter, provided to ArchitectureAU by the Queensland chapter president reads, “The changes appear significant and the way they are occuring is of considerable concern to many members of the Institute.”
The letter also asked the school to address the Institute’s concerns regarding the level and standard of education offered and research capacity under the proposal.

“How will the School manage the continuity of specialist knowledge and research, along with providing supervisors with equivalent qualifications, standing and backgrounds for those currently undertaking high degrees through research?”
“How will the proposed changes to the School achieve balanced and relevant research?
“With the proposed increase in courses offered and reduction in full-time equivalent academic staff, how will the School meet the Architectural Accreditation Council of Australia’s course accreditation requirements? Will the student size be reduced in line with the reduction in FTE dedicated architecture staff to maintain an optimal teacher/student ratio?” the letter continued.
Greenop said the proposal should have been discussed with staff in a more strategic way first. “But that isn’t how UQ has chosen to roll it out, which we find is one of the most disappointing things,” she said.
“We understand the university landscape is changing, that higher education is really under pressure. But there’s a lot of things we can do if we work in a much more consultative, collaborative fashion and that’s what we would really like to see happen.”
The school stressed that the change is not financially motivated or related to issues caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The decision to issue a Change Proposal to disestablish 20 positions was taken to give effect to a new operating model and academic profile,” a spokesperson for the school told ArchitectureAU. “It is not in response to current financial circumstances or pressures.”
Negotiations with the university are ongoing. More

SJB has designed a “boutique” commercial building for a prominent inner-city intersection at 117 Flinders Street, Surry Hills, in Sydney. Development approval was granted for an apartment building on the site in 2017 by the Land and Environment Court. SJB was also the firm behind that project, but the latest proposal indicated that a commercial building is better suited to the site.
The building will rise to four storeys along Flinders Street with an additional lower ground level along Hutchinson Place and basement levels throughout. The massing has been designed to correspond to adjacent buildings; on the northern edge level four is set back to allow the top volume and parapet to align with the building ay 99-115 South Dowling Street; and the southern end steps back in height and along South Dowling Street to match the scale of the adjacent terraced houses.

View gallery

The Hutchinson Place elevation.

The rich textural material palette also seeks to reinforce the masonry character of Surry Hills while incorporating contemporary detailing to ensure the building speaks of its own period.

“Playfully combining interesting textures and surfaces, the use of a simple and high-quality material palette for the building’s interior and exterior creates a beautiful workplace with a timeless and sophisticated identity,” states SJB in planning documents.
“The blond brick facade provides a highly textural warm tone, complemented by the crisp colour-matched metalwork around windows, awnings and balustrades.”
Black Beetle Landscape Architecture and Design has drawn up landscape plans for the project, which is being developed by Stasia.
The estimated cost is $14.7 million. The development application is on exhibition until 11 December. More

Brisbane City Council has finalized its vision to transform an 18-hole inner-city golf course into a 64-hectare public greenspace replete with revegetated forests, native bushland pockets and restored waterholes.
The release of the Victoria Park Vision follows a lengthy public consultation process which included the gazetting of five speculative designs for the space prepared by Conrad Gargett, Urbis, Lat27, Place Design Group and Tract.
Brisbane City Council partnered with Lat27 to deliver the vision document. Lat 27 was the lead consultant, supported by Aurecon, Wilkinson Eyre Architects, CDM Smith, Codesign, Design Flow, Project for Public Spaces and Catherine Brouwer Landscape Achitects. Council also engaged an Aboriginal engagement consultant to work with Traditional Custodian groups.

A draft vision was released in January of this year, with public feedback incorporated into the final version. The design shown in the visions is not a fixed plan but a “flexible spatial framework,” which will provide the foundation for a masterplan to be developed from 2021. The golf course is scheduled to close for construction to begin in July 2021.

“Victoria Park will strengthen Brisbane’s reputation as one of the world’s most liveable cities, while providing a uniquely Brisbane destination for people of all ages and abilities,” said Brisbane mayor Adrian Schrinner.

View gallery

Conceptual design for Victoria Park (Barrambin), Brisbane.

Known to many Aboriginal people as Barrambin, the area officially known as Victoria Park is on the traditional lands of both the Turrbul and Jagera nations.
The vision document says the project will celebrate Aboriginal cultural heritage and connection with the landscape, with the restoration of the park’s natural biological systems potentially providing Traditional Custodians a space to “practice and revitalise their cultural traditions and customs in the park.”

Key to this will be the restoration of a chain of waterholes that once flowed into the Brisbane River, as well as the creation of a large lake.
The park will also feature a cultural and visitor centre that will “welcome residents and tourists and take them deeper into the park’s natural environment and the city’s heritage.”

The vision statement notes that buildings in the park could offer a modern interpretation of traditional architecture, “mimicking the form of the landscape and the design of Aboriginal gunyahs (shelters) or traditional fish traps.”

Another key proposal depicted in the vision document is a sculptural canopy walk, winding through the trees of the park.
Also proposed is the transformation of a gentle slope on the park’s southern side into community gardens, a small urban farm or urban orchard.
The current driving range and putt-putt course will be retained along with a bistro and function centre as part of a hilltop precinct.
When the golf course is closed in mid-2021, the council will prioritize public access, “allowing visitors to enjoy the greenspaces while it is being transformed into a natural retreat and urban park for adventure, discovery and reconnection.” More

Two of the world’s most prominent architecture practices have withdrawn from a climate change action movement they helped establish.
Foster and Partners and Zaha Hadid Architects are both founding signatories of Architects Declare, which began in the UK in May 2019 and kicked off a global movement of architecture practices signing a declaration acknowledging that “the twin crises of climate breakdown and biodiversity loss are the most serious issues of our time.”
However, the two founding signatories have fallen out with the rest of the steering group over a prolonged and public spat about their involvement with aviation projects.

In withdrawing from the declaration, Foster and Partners founder Norman Foster issued a statement saying, “Agriculture and aviation are not going to go away and they will both need the most sustainable buildings to serve them together with the architects who can most responsibly design them.”

Foster and Partners came under fire for various airport projects including a luxury resort in Saudi Arabia that will have climate-controlled aircraft hangars for private jets. The practice formally withdrew from the declaration on 2 December.

“We are disappointed that Foster and Partners has chosen to withdraw from the declarations and we would welcome a conversation with them on the points raised,” said Architects Declare UK in a statement.

“We recognize that addressing the climate and biodiversity emergencies challenges current practice and business models for us all, not least around the expansion of aviation. We believe that what is needed is system change and that can only come about through collective action.”

Zaha Hadid Architects, too, have faced criticism over its airport projects including Western Sydney Airport, designed in collaboration with Cox Architecture.
Tensions reached breaking point when Patrik Schumacher delivered a speech at the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat conference on 17 November during which he said, “We need to allow prosperity and progress to continue, and that will also bring the resources to overcome [the climate crisis] through investment, science and new technology,” reported The Architects’ Journal.

“That must be built on continued growth and cannot be built on a panicked shrinking of the economy, [which would] lead to massive regressions and political upheavals.”
Architects Declare UK hit back and issued an ultimatum: “We believe these statements are fundamentally in conflict with the Architects Declare commitment to ‘advocate for faster change in our industry towards regenerative practices’. We also believe these statements are scientifically flawed and decades out of date in terms of informed intellectual thought.

“To date we have avoided calling out individual practices recognizing that we all struggle sometimes to do what is necessary. However, when statements are made that contradict the fundamentals of the declaration, we have no option but to speak up. Sadly, there remain signatory practices who appear determined to continue with business as usual. This is seriously undermining the effectiveness and credibility of AD, so we call on those practices to either join the wave of positive change or have the integrity to withdraw.”

One day after the withdrawal of Foster and Partners, Zaha Hadid Architects followed suit.
“Regrettably, we are withdrawing from Architects Declare. As a founding signatory, we agreed to continue and accelerate our work towards progressive change in our built environment. However today we need to recognise that we have a significant difference of opinion with the Architects Declare steering group on how positive change can be delivered,” the practice said in a statement.
“For us, how change is delivered requires discussion, co-operation and collaboration, and this must be debated without condemnation.
“Architects Declare’s steering group has unilaterally decided on its own precise and absolute interpretation of the coalition’s commitments. By doing so, we believe they are setting the profession up for failure. Redefining these commitments without engagement undermines the coalition and trust.

“We saw Architects Declare as a broad church to raise consciousness on the issues; enabling architectural practices of all sizes to build a coalition for change and help each other find solutions. We need to be progressive, but we see no advantage in positioning the profession to fail. In fact, it would be a historic mistake.”
Architects Declare Australia spokesperson Caroline Pidcock issued a statement calling for Australian signatories to stick together.
“Along with our UK colleagues, we are disappointed that Foster and Partners and Zaha Hadid Architects have chosen to withdraw from the commitments of Architects Declare UK,” she said.
“As the steering group of Australian Architects Declare, we don’t believe it’s our role to take a stand on issues on behalf of our signatories. That’s not what this movement is about. We’re not spokespeople for a passive group of professionals, we’re enablers – facilitating, building bridges, fostering a community of action – for tens of thousands of architects. From the largest practices in our country, to tiny practices in regional areas, every one of us signed because we want to take action and we want to do it together.” More

A 23-storey hotel tower would be built above the former Universal Film Manufacturing Co building in Sydney, under plans submitted to the local council.
The red-brick warehouse building at 499 Kent Street, variously described as being in the Art Deco or inter-war Stripped Classical styles, was designed in 1936 by architect P. William Ritchie.
The building was warehouse and film exchange for Universal Film Manufacturing Co. The original plans incorporated film storage vaults and a projection theatre. It is locally heritage listed for its association with the film industry as well as its architectural style.

The concept plan for the hotel development, prepared by PTW Architects, calls for the four-storey building to be adapted to house two storeys for retail use and two storeys for the hotel. Set back eight metres, the tower above would accommodate 220 hotel rooms.

View gallery

The concept proposal for 499 Kent Street.

PTW Architects states in planning documents that the design will contribute to an understanding of the building’s historic context within an evolving streetscape.

“The proposed tower envelope will seek to provide a physical and visual separation with the original face brick façade,” the urban design statement notes. “This will enable the urban form, scale and detailing of the former Universal Film Manufacturing Company Warehouse to continue to be an important historic urban element within the public domain of Kent Street.”
Should the concept proposal be approved a competitive design alternatives process will be undertaken to find a final design.

Related topics More