The new <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/yarraville-green-42-stephen-street-yarraville-vic-3013">Yarraville Green</a> development in Melbourne's inner west is showing that landscaping can be just as influential as architecture, with buyers responding strongly to the garden-first approach adopted from the outset by developer Excelon Projects and the project's design team.

Excelon appointed Six Degrees Architects and landscape architects SBLA to work collaboratively on the development, with a brief to create "a sustainable, design-led building with a focus on community."

That approach has resonated with buyers. According to Next Chapter Director Tom Hirini, who is leading the sales campaign, the landscaped communal garden has become one of the project's defining features, alongside its boutique scale and European-inspired cluster housing concept.

Local downsizers, right-sizers and established families already living in Yarraville and surrounding suburbs have accounted for the majority of purchasers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144913 project_image_fid=297740]

Yarraville Green will comprise 53 homes, including apartments and townhomes, arranged around the shared central garden to maximise connections to the landscaped open space. Parking has been moved underground, allowing the ground plane to be dedicated to greenery, pedestrian movement and communal spaces.

The landscape extends well beyond passive planting. Productive garden beds, a pergola, communal gathering spaces, garden sheds and a pet wash have all been integrated into the masterplan, creating spaces designed to encourage everyday interaction between residents.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144913 project_image_fid=297741]

The interiors continue Excelon's focus on craftsmanship, incorporating bespoke elements by Melbourne artisans including leadlight detailing by Adadaz, hand-turned timber hardware by Auburn Woodturning and blown-glass lighting by Ruth Allen.

Sustainability has also been embedded throughout the project, with Yarraville Green targeting an average 7-star NatHERS energy rating through passive design principles, rooftop solar servicing common areas and rainwater harvesting for landscape irrigation.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144913 project_image_fid=297735]

Construction continues to progress at Yarraville Green, with structural works well underway and framing works approaching completion under builder Balmain &amp; Co. The project remains on track for completion in mid-2027.

Apartments at Yarraville Green are currently priced from $625,000, while townhomes start from $1.4 million.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=144913]

Joel Robinson

Garden-led design drives buyer demand at Yarraville Green

National diversified developer Fortis has officially launched Crest &amp; Walker, its latest Brisbane apartment development, with construction now underway on the 20-storey Newstead project.

Award-winning builder BINAH has commenced construction on the Bureau^Proberts-designed building, which will deliver a limited collection of 65 two and three-bedroom apartments on Kyabra Street.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=145922 project_image_fid=373556]

The project marks Fortis' fourth active residential development in Brisbane, following River House, which is nearing completion, alongside projects in New Farm and Hamilton as the national developer continues to expand its South East Queensland pipeline.

Fortis General Manager – Development Queensland Dan Boman said Crest &amp; Walker reflects the developer's long-term commitment to delivering design-led residential projects in Brisbane's established inner-city suburbs.

"We're proud to be strengthening our presence in Brisbane with Crest &amp; Walker, particularly in such a sought-after lifestyle destination as Newstead," Boman said.

"Every Fortis project is shaped by its context, and we approach each one with the respect and care it deserves.

"Our focus is always on creating places that feel connected to their neighbourhood and elevate the everyday experience for residents. Newstead continues to evolve as one of Brisbane's most sought-after urban communities, and Crest &amp; Walker reflects our ambition to contribute meaningfully to that story."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=145922 project_image_fid=373559]

Positioned between Gasworks Plaza and James Street, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/crest-walker-newstead-12-kyabra-street-newstead-qld-4006">Crest &amp; Walker</a> has been designed as a boutique residential address offering privacy and generous living spaces within one of Brisbane's most established lifestyle precincts.

The building features a contemporary brick podium softened by integrated landscaping, while the upper levels are characterised by restrained architecture and enduring materiality. Interiors have been designed to maximise natural light, acoustic performance and long-term liveability.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=145922 project_image_fid=373583]

Residences comprise spacious two and three-bedroom floorplans, with two-bedroom apartments priced from $1.55 million and three-bedroom, half-floor residences from $3.95 million.

Residents will have access to a wellness-focused rooftop featuring a swimming pool, sauna, steam room, landscaped dining spaces and outdoor lounge areas overlooking Newstead and the Brisbane CBD.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=145922 project_image_fid=373571]

Sales are being managed by Slaite Projects, with Fortis expecting strong demand from owner-occupiers seeking a high-quality, design-focused apartment in one of Brisbane's most tightly held inner-city suburbs.

Completion of Crest &amp; Walker is slated for late 2028.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=145922]

Fortis expands Brisbane pipeline with launch of Crest & Walker in Newstead

The enormity of delivering a true skyscraper in Australia's new development market is often overlooked.

It has taken the best part of a decade since plans for Chevron One were first unveiled, but the 41-storey tower is now complete, with residents collecting their keys and moving into what has become one of the Gold Coast's most recognisable new landmarks.

Rising 127 metres above Chevron Island, Chevron One stands almost twice as high as any other building on the island. Its scale places it alongside the trio of towers at Jewel, arguably the last truly significant addition to the central Gold Coast skyline when they were completed around six years ago.

While there are several developments underway around a similar height to Chevron One, they are more concentrated within clusters of the highest towers in the city. The fact Chevron One sits within a developing precinct, looking back at the other high-rise developments in Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach, makes it a different proposition altogether. It will certainly become a reference point on the Gold Coast skyline.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6515 project_image_fid=68833]

Developer Bensons Property Group is behind the 41-storey tower, which has 229 apartments, along with an exhaustive list of resident amenity spread across what is the largest development site ever assembled on Chevron Island.

The tower has been the talk of the town for years, says Ray White Projects Gold Coast agent Caitlin Rosenboom, who is selling the remaining apartments.

"People have been watching Chevron One go up for years," Rosenboom says, adding that many prospective buyers have been surprised by the scale of the views once they step inside.

"It's only when they walk through a completed apartment that they truly understand the position of the building," Rosenboom says.

"The views are jaw-dropping. Whether you're looking east over the ocean, across Surfers Paradise, along the river systems or out to the hinterland, every level offers something different but equally impressive."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6515 project_image_fid=360215]

One of Chevron One's defining advantages is its location on the eastern side of Chevron Island on Stanhill Drive, a position which protects the views forever.

"There's only one row of houses between Chevron One and the water, and the height restrictions along the river means views from Chevron One can never be built out,"&nbsp;Rosenboom says.

While new apartment developments continue to emerge across the Gold Coast, Rosenboom says opportunities to secure a completed apartment with this level of outlook are becoming increasingly rare.

"The size of the site is something that would be incredibly difficult to replicate today," she says.

"That's allowed Chevron One to deliver the sort of amenity, open space and resident facilities that very few projects can offer. There are not many completed apartment buildings on the Gold Coast right now that can compete with the combination of scale, quality and amenity."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6515 project_image_fid=68839]

There's around 2,000 sqm of amenity solely for the use of residents of Chevron One. Club One features a uniquely shaped swimming pool that mirrors the footprint of the building itself, set within a extensively landscaped gardens. There's also an indoor pool and spa, a fully equipped gym with a Pilates room, a yoga garden, a bookable private dining area and lounge that can host up to 30 people, and a 24-hour concierge service.

As for the buyers, Rosenboom is fielding enquiry from everywhere: Sydneysiders and Melburnians looking at the new and off-the-plan market following the changes in the Federal Budget, as well as those looking to relocate, through to South East Queenslanders seeking either a permanent home or a weekender bolthole.

"The Gold Coast lifestyle continues to resonate with people relocating from the southern states, and when they see the views and the quality of what's been delivered at Chevron One, it becomes very easy for them to understand the appeal," Rosenboom says.

A diverse mix of one, two and three-bedroom apartments remain available, with each offering "something a little different", be it the orientation and views, configuration, or level, to suit a wide variety of buyers.

The remaining apartments are ready to inspect in person, by appointment.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=6515]

A decade in the making: Residents to move into Chevron One as construction wraps up

A general rule of thumb in new apartment developments is that the penthouses get the rooftop.

It's a formula that's become commonplace across Australia's apartment market. Residents might have access to a pool, gym or barbecue facilities on a dedicated lower level, but the most desirable outdoor spaces are typically reserved for the highest-priced homes at the top of the building.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sherpa-property-group">Sherpa Property Group</a> has taken the opposite approach.

Rather than dedicating the rooftop to a handful of buyers, the Gold Coast developer has made it the centrepiece of its Flourish collection, creating expansive shared spaces from the best vantage point in the building.

The philosophy has reached its most ambitious expression at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flourish-soleira-palm-beach-1150-1160-gold-coast-highway-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Soleira</a> in Palm Beach, where two rooftop precincts connected by a skybridge will deliver one of the most extensive lifestyle offerings seen in a residential apartment project on the Gold Coast.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=374053]

"We're seeing a clear move toward developments that offer more than just an apartment," Sherpa Group founder Christie Leet said.

"People want spaces that support how they actually live, whether that's working from home, staying active, or spending time with family and friends.

"That's where amenity becomes critical. It's not just about what's included, but how those spaces are designed to be used every day."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=374052]

The breadth of amenity has already attracted buyers across multiple demographics. Younger first home buyers have been drawn to Soleira's one-bedroom apartments, a product rarely delivered in Palm Beach, while families have responded to practical inclusions such as the shallow children's pool adjoining the main lap pool and the extensive communal recreation areas.

Instead of a single rooftop, Soleira delivers two distinct lifestyle zones.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=372547]

The southern rooftop has been dedicated to wellness, featuring a gym, yoga and Pilates studio, work-from-home facilities, a wellness centre, spa, and hot and cold plunge pools.

The northern rooftop focuses on recreation and entertaining, incorporating a heated resort-style pool, private dining rooms, pizza ovens, barbecues, a golf simulator, children's recreation areas, and what is expected to be the Gold Coast's first rooftop basketball court, which will also double as a squash court.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=374054]

Beyond the rooftops, Soleira will introduce 1,500 sqm of curated retail beneath the towers, creating one of Palm Beach's first genuinely mixed-use lifestyle precincts where cafés, restaurants and convenience retail become part of residents' everyday lives.

Sherpa has also retained management rights across the development, allowing it to oversee the long-term operation of the building through a 24-hour concierge model. The developer is also exploring additional revenue streams within the precinct aimed at helping offset ongoing body corporate costs for residents.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=370962]

While Soleira is the largest project Sherpa has delivered, the rooftop-first philosophy has been evolving for several years.

It began with <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/amargo-6-12-sixth-avenue-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Amargo</a>, the first project released under the Flourish brand. Rather than competing at the ultra-luxury end of the market with oversized half-floor and full-floor residences, Sherpa focused on creating lifestyle-driven apartments supported by resort-style shared spaces.

Amargo introduced more than 800 sqm of rooftop amenity, combining wellness facilities, heated pools, entertaining areas, cabanas, pizza ovens and private dining spaces into what was designed as an extension of residents' homes rather than a facility used only occasionally.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=146527 project_image_fid=366550]

That approach continued with Flourish Oasis, where the same amenity-led philosophy was refined into a more boutique development. Strong demand from Sherpa's growing VIP database saw much of the project sold before it reached the broader market, reinforcing buyer appetite for apartment communities centred around shared lifestyle experiences.

Flourish Amargo is slated for completion mid-way-through next year, with Oasis to be delivered by late 2027. Flourish Soleira is expected to complete in 2030.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=150017]

Sherpa takes amenity to the sky as Flourish Soleira captures booming Palm Beach demand

As apartment living continues to evolve across Sydney's growth corridors, the quality and distribution of shared spaces is increasingly shaping how residents experience home. Rather than functioning as add-ons, amenities are being embedded into the daily rhythm of a building, supporting everything from quiet retreat to social interaction, often within a single vertical community.

At <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/aeris-melrose-park-nursery-street-melrose-park-nsw-2114">Aeris</a> in Melrose Park, this approach is resolved through a layered amenity offering that unfolds from ground level through to its upper podium. Developed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sekisui-house-australia">Sekisui House Australia</a> in partnership with Hankyu Hanshin Properties, the project introduces 468 apartments across two towers and a mid-rise building, positioned at the highest point of the broader masterplan.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=426 project_image_fid=359199]

The amenity experience begins at street level, where two courtyards sit within a landscaped setting that connects residents to the wider network of parks and green spaces. These green spaces are not isolated pockets but part of a wider pedestrian network that links Aeris to the surrounding <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/melrose-park-nsw-2114">Melrose Park</a> precinct, including Central Park, future schools, and the Town Centre opening in July 2026. The result is a transition that moves from public to private without abrupt boundaries, allowing residents to pass through shaded, tree-lined environments before reaching the building itself.

Moving upward, the focus shifts to the level five podium, where the primary communal facilities are concentrated. This space brings together a 16-metre swimming pool, outdoor seating areas, and a communal BBQ zone arranged to take advantage of elevated outlooks. Seating is positioned beneath pergolas, creating pockets of shade that extend the usability of the space throughout the day. The pool edge aligns with views toward the wider district, reinforcing the sense of elevation that defines the project’s positioning.

In the adjacent building, this is complemented by quieter, more contemplative spaces, including an outdoor cinema set within the same level. Positioned to operate primarily in the evening, it introduces a different tempo to the shared environment, shifting from daytime activity to after-hours use without requiring separate zones.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=426 project_image_fid=360299]

The podium also accommodates an intimate private resident gym. Located on the lower levels, it gives residents convenient access to fitness facilities without leaving the building.

Above, the elevated podium sky deck extends the amenity offering, providing additional open-air spaces with elevated outlooks across the surrounding landscape. While more restrained in program, this upper level reinforces the project’s vertical progression, from ground-level greenery to elevated outlook, allowing residents to move between distinct spatial conditions within a single address.

This distribution of amenities reflects a deliberate response to how residents use space across the day. Sekisui House Australia Sales and Marketing Director Peter Kalaf points to the role these shared areas play in shaping buyer demand. Aeris has been conceived as more than a collection of apartments, with the podium pool, gym and outdoor cinema forming part of a broader lifestyle offering that extends the home beyond each individual residence.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=426 project_image_fid=360300]

What distinguishes Aeris is not the inclusion of these elements individually, but how they are arranged in relation to one another. Active, social, and passive spaces are layered vertically rather than separated, allowing residents to choose between them without leaving the building or moving far from their apartment. This proximity supports both routine use, such as a morning swim or evening workout, and more occasional gatherings, whether around the BBQ area or within the cinema setting.

The amenity design also sits within a broader framework of connectivity across Melrose Park. The Melrose Park Town Centre, anchored by Coles and Dan Murphys, features a mix of retail, dining, health and lifestyle offerings, bringing everyday convenience closer to residents. By the end of the year, more than five hectares of parks and open space, equivalent to around seven football fields of green space on residents' doorstep, will further enhance the precinct, allowing the internal facilities at Aeris to operate as an extension of the wider neighbourhood rather than a substitute for it.

Construction at Aeris continues to gather momentum, with ground floor slabs expected to be completed in late 2026 before the first sections of the buildings begin to rise above ground.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=426]

Elevated amenity anchors daily life at Aeris, Melrose Park

The Red and Black Architect

<html><body>
Over the weekend Melbourne’s biggest celebration of art, music and architecture delighted a massive half a million people. White Night Melbourne, a one-night-only sensory spectacular, saw a diverse crowd of people flood into the central business district for the serious business of soaking up all the cultural events on offer. With over 70 events spaced over a large area it was impossible to meaningfully visit every site within the 12 hour festival, however here is a selection of the delightful experiences of 2015.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Zo0huDmgcfA" width="640"></iframe>

<h2>Keyframes</h2>

This lighting exhibition used stick figure like lighting sculptures and carefully programmed lighting sequences to animate and imply movement. Watching the figures move across the NGV reflection pond brought to mind flip book style animation. The piece was put together by Groupe LAPS under the artistic directorship of Thomas Veyssiere. The quick movement and at times comedic sound track made this a crowd favorite at the southern end of the festival.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/keyframes.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Keyframes"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/keyframes.jpg?itok=AqtRGTml" title="Keyframes" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Keyframes</figcaption></figure><h2>4 Elements – Royal Exhibition Building</h2>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_4086.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The Royal Exhibition Building as never seen before"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_4086.jpg?itok=ZTxN29vm" title="The Royal Exhibition Building as never seen before" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Royal Exhibition Building as never seen before</figcaption></figure>This was really the biggest highlight of White Night 2015. Projected upon the World Heritage listed Royal Exhibition Building, this multimedia experience perfectly blended the art forms of animation, dance, music and architecture to create a truly memorable event. At times the facade appeared to have been overgrown by vines which then catch fire as a figure dances across the massive canvas. With artistic direction by Nuno Maya, and an original sound composition by French composer Sylvain Moreau this carefully curated projection piece was a big crowd favorite.

The Royal Exhibition Building is arguably the most significant building in Melbourne. It was design by prolific architect Joseph Reed and construction was completed in 1880. It is the only still surviving Grand Hall to house a 19th Century International Exhibition. This building was also used for the opening of the first Federal Parliament of Australia in 1901.

The original exhibition of this piece was in Cascais, Portugal on a much smaller and less ornate buildings. It is interesting to see what a difference the change in architecture makes to this piece. The scale and monumentality of The Royal Exhibition Building makes it the perfect canvas for projections. If you wanted to see 4 elements, it was best to see it in Melbourne.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_4111.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The Royal Exhibition Building as never seen before"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_4111.jpg?itok=-SSXSRPB" title="The Royal Exhibition Building as never seen before" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Royal Exhibition Building as never seen before</figcaption></figure><h2>Old Melbourne Gaol</h2>

A trip to the Old Melbourne Gaol impresses upon the visitor the power that a space can possess over an individual. Matched with a sinister history of captivity and executions this building oozes an uneasy atmosphere. This atmosphere and history overwhelmed the temporary and slightly out of place art exhibition of ‘Seven Deadly Sins’ by artist Terry Taylor.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/seven-deadly-sins.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Seven Deadly Sins within the Old Melbourne Gaol"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="773" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/seven-deadly-sins.jpg?itok=L2fpijlZ" title="Seven Deadly Sins within the Old Melbourne Gaol" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Seven Deadly Sins within the Old Melbourne Gaol</figcaption></figure><h2>Eat Me</h2>

Inspired by the 150th anniversary of the publication of Alice in Wonderland, this multimedia projection was located within the State Library Reading Room. The striking visual experience was created by renowned French artists Antoine + Manuel and set to a beautiful soundtrack by Sui Zhen. Like the Royal Exhibition Building, the State Library of Victoria was also designed by Architect Joseph Reed. His work on the reading room created a spectacular space. To transform this iconic chamber with a projection of millions of stars is something that had to be seen to be believed.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/eat-me.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="‘Eat Me’ Inspired by Alice in Wonderland"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="394" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/eat-me.jpg?itok=q5rzN9YM" title="‘Eat Me’ Inspired by Alice in Wonderland" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>‘Eat Me’ Inspired by Alice in Wonderland</figcaption></figure><h2>Draw/Delay</h2>

This event explored the artistic methods of drawing as a performance piece. The collaboration between artist Kellie O’Dempsey and musician Mick Dick, was an action collage with sketches on paper projected on to a wall merged with simultaneous paint brushed directly upon the ‘canvas’, all set to a moody soundtrack. The live nature of this event showcased the creative process of the artist rather than just the ‘finished product’ making it an ideal inclusion in the White Night programme.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_4151_0.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Draw / Delay saw traditional drawing artwork colide with multimedia to create a performance piece"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="773" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_4151_0.jpg?itok=L11pcvEJ" title="Draw / Delay saw traditional drawing artwork colide with multimedia to create a performance piece" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Draw / Delay saw traditional drawing artwork colide with multimedia to create a performance piece</figcaption></figure><h2>Ghostly Machines</h2>

The experience of visiting Hamer Hall is in itself something special. The ‘Ghostly Machines’ performance was conceived by the production technicians at Arts Centre Melbourne who use the high tech Sound lighting and scenery mechanisms to deliver the venue as performance art.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/ghostly-machines.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Ghostly Machines"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="647" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/ghostly-machines.jpg?itok=N9ZOtsVq" title="Ghostly Machines" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Ghostly Machines</figcaption></figure>With approximately half a million people flocking into the Melbourne CBD this event really challenges the notion of what Melbourne culture is. Yes we have our sporting events, such as the Melbourne Cup or the AFL Grand Final but this event is something different. Unlike most of our sporting carnivals with long histories, this is only the third Melbourne White Night. It is also refreshing to have an event which is not associated with alcohol consumption or gambling.

White Night in many ways marks a significant step in the evolution of Melbourne from a single purpose commercial precinct to a 24 hour multipurpose hub. As a city – through creative pursuits of art, design, architecture, dance and music – Melbourne has shown of its credentials as an international city with a creative soul.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_4161.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Illumination and imagination"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_4161.jpg?itok=EBrdpWCw" title="Illumination and imagination" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Illumination and imagination</figcaption></figure><figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_4271.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The Crucible, fire breathing dragon"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_4271.jpg?itok=mWZbpFq5" title="The Crucible, fire breathing dragon" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Crucible, fire breathing dragon</figcaption></figure><figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/flinders-st-wonderland.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Flinders Street Wonderland"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/flinders-st-wonderland.jpg?itok=8Yydhl9M" title="Flinders Street Wonderland" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Flinders Street Wonderland</figcaption></figure>Michael Smith is Director of Melbourne architecture firm Atelier Red + Black. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2015/02/23/white-night-2015/">The Red + Black Architect blog</a>.
</body></html>

redblackarchitect

White Night 2015

<html><body>
Over the summer months, Melbourne has been a treasure chest of extraordinary architectural experiences. In case you missed them over the break, here is a three pack of summer specials.

<h2>MPavilion, by Sean Godsell</h2>

Situated in within one of Melbourne’s much celebrated public gardens, the MPavilion was an activity hub for discussions, performances and of course, coffee consumption. The MPavilion, designed by Architect Sean Godsell, is very much in keeping with his design ethos. Refined, distilled and precise, the pavilion is cool and calculating, robust yet light.

For an excellent review of the MPavilion, check out <a href="http://thedesignfiles.net/2014/10/mpavilion/">Stuart Harrison’s piece</a> for the Design Files.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/image34_0.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="MPavilion"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="838" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image34_0.jpg?itok=QeGLD2HI" title="MPavilion" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>MPavilion</figcaption></figure>This particular MPavilion is the first of four temporary bespoke structures which will be designed and built for a particular summer season. A substantial thank you must be given to the <a href="http://www.mpavilion.org/naomi-milgrom-foundation">Naomi Milgrom Foundation</a> who will fund these four projects. This bold financial commitment, really highlights Melbourne’s excellent design and architecture culture.

<h2>Reflection Model: Shinto Shrine of Itsukushima, by Takahiro Iwasaki</h2>

For an architectural model to be a full art exhibit in and of itself, it must be something spectacular. This is clearly the case for Takahrio Iwasaki’s Reflection Model of the Shinto Shrine of Itsukushima. This is the third and largest piece in the series of reflection models which explore the relationship between the building and the reflecting water. The scale and level of detail in this piece is extraordinary. Given the free admission price at the National Gallery of Victoria (International) it is very much a must see.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/image30_0.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Shinto Shrine of Itsukushima"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="467" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image30_0.jpg?itok=qFBRBH4W" title="Shinto Shrine of Itsukushima" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Shinto Shrine of Itsukushima</figcaption></figure>The Reflection Model is open to the public at NGV International within the Asian Art Temporary Exhibitions until April 6 2015.

<h2>Exxopolis, By Architects Of Air</h2>

This piece of temporary architecture, known as a luminarium, is really something that has to be experienced rather than described. It is an inflatable maze of geometric chambers which completely immerses the occupant in an environment of pure and vibrant colours. Inspired by Gothic and Islamic Architecture, Exxopolis is one of twenty different luminaria produced by <a href="http://www.architects-of-air.com/">Architects of Air</a>.

This experience was in someways similar to the enveloping experience of the current <a href="http://www.nga.gov.au/jamesturrell/">James Turrell</a> exhibition at the National Gallery of Australia, albeit less refined and more whimsical. This whimsy and vibrancy however makes it particularly popular with young children.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/image33.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Exxopolis "><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="1225" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image33.jpg?itok=ILIJ_2jW" title="Exxopolis " width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Exxopolis</figcaption></figure>Melbourne has become a remarkable design city in recent years. When we think of this culture we naturally think of our permanent landmarks. Sometimes however the temporary can be even more breathtaking. They feed into the idea of Melbourne as an events hub whilst providing sustenance for deep thought, or a backdrop for summer fun.

Michael Smith is Director of Melbourne architecture firm Atelier Red + Black. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com">The Red and Black Architect blog</a>.
</body></html>

Melbourne's Architectural Summer

<html><body>
One of the most significant additions to Melbourne’s world class Architecture in 2014 is a building full of expectation and promise. Some buildings have more expectations on them than others. When a new school of architecture such as the new Melbourne School of Design is built the design stakes are rarely higher. Every aspect of the building will be continually measured analysed, photographed, critiqued and criticized for the life of the building.

The Melbourne School of Design is the outcome from a competition process won by John Wardle Architects (Melbourne) and NADAAA (Boston). The MSD is built upon a site of high strategic importance being centrally located within Melbourne University’s Parkville campus and surrounded by a context of large educational buildings from a variety of decades.

The new building replaces the previous Architecture building by Brian Lewis that was completed in 1964 and also the Old Commerce building with the exception of the historic facade.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_3243.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="MSD eastern entrance"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="773" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_3243.jpg?itok=RLabGMbB" title="MSD eastern entrance" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>MSD eastern entrance</figcaption></figure>As a side story, the historic facade of the Old Commerce building was in fact designed by one of Melbourne’s most prolific and important architects Joseph Reed. It was originally attached to the Bank of New South Wales building in Collins Street, until that building was demolished in 1932 and the facade was transplanted to the University of Melbourne site. The MSD is now the third building to be adorned with Joseph Reed’s Renaissance Revival facade.

With such high expectations what has been the result?

From the exterior this building is most defined by the curtain like facade which is crafted out of perforated zinc panels. This metallic veil is complemented by highly refined and sublimely detailed concrete panels which provide a sculpted but robust feel which is carried into the ground floor thoroughfare. It is important to note that the zinc panels are not merely decoration, they are strategically placed to work functionally as solar shading. The Architects here have resisted the temptation to create a single gesture building by continuing the veil around to the southern facade.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_3256.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Eastern stair and facade"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="580" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_3256.jpg?itok=En81ZLnB" title="Eastern stair and facade" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Eastern stair and facade</figcaption></figure>This southern facade may be seen as the buildings greatest weakness. The pixilated window placement and the exposed concrete panels create a very flat facade composition particularly when compared with the dynamic zinc veil. This is not to say that this is bad architecture rather that it is less potent than the rest of the building.

To some degree the subdued Southern facade is made up for by the interesting intersection between wall and landscape at ground level. A continuous glazed wall playfully evokes a fabric skirt which is having a Marilyn Monroe moment, interrupting the vertical of the wall.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_3233.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Southern facade at dusk"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_3233.jpg?itok=d-OJ-hHc" title="Southern facade at dusk" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Southern facade at dusk</figcaption></figure>If the Southern Facade is the greatest weakness, undoubtedly one of the greatest strengths is the dramatic atrium space. This has to be one of Melbourne’s very best interior spaces.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_0339.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="A stunning interior"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="870" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_0339.jpg?itok=rGmmv14m" title="A stunning interior" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>A stunning interior</figcaption></figure>The centre piece of this architectural composition is the floating stalactite like structure which dramatically descends from the coffered ceiling. Housing a single classroom space on each level this timber sculpture is exquisite in its precision and form. The impressive timber volume hovers tantalizing close to the work space below it, inviting the occupier to reach out instinctively.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/image31.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Various internal aspects"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="631" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image31.jpg?itok=jxw4bETl" title="Various internal aspects" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Various internal aspects</figcaption></figure>One of the more unusual design decisions within this building is the widespread use of wire mesh which clings to the periphery of the atrium. Used on mass, this wire takes on a net like character that at times seem at odds with the precision of the timber panels. The benefit of this wire is that it does not reflect sound the way a glass balustrade might. It also allows a greater felling of openness and connection from the circulation spaces to the atrium which is unparalleled in Melbourne.

Ultimately this building must be a building about learning in order to be a success. It is in this regard that the building must have it’s greatest impact.

The more formal studio spaces have been placed along the southern side of the building to get the most use from the gentle southern daylight. Vertical surfaces throughout this zone have been naturally equipped to double as pin boards to facilitate work to be displayed and reviewed. Whilst the building may not have the variety of learning spaces of say the Swanston Academic Building, there are several options for the type of spaces students can occupy.

The opportunity for students to learn from the building itself has also been a strong consideration. Structural elements at several points have been left exposed to be studied by curious observers.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_3548.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Library with expressed ‘wishbone’ concrete beams"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="773" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_3548.jpg?itok=D-fQHs3p" title="Library with expressed ‘wishbone’ concrete beams" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Library with expressed ‘wishbone’ concrete beams</figcaption></figure>A building such as this demanded excellence and it is hard to argue that this building is anything other than successful. What has been delivered is a hardworking piece of architecture which is in places exquisite and dramatic whilst at others is stripped-back and experimental. It is not a single idea but a collection of ideas to be read interpreted and analysed for years to come.

Michael Smith is Director of Melbourne architecture firm Atelier Red + Black. This article originally appeared on <a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/">The Red and Black Architect blog</a>..
</body></html>

Red + Black Review: Melbourne School of Design

<html><body>
In an eight-page, plastic-wrapped newsletter released late last week, the Linking Melbourne Authority announced amongst spin and puff that the development plans required as the final step of the planning permit had been endorsed by the Planning Minister. On any other planning permit these development plans, or ‘endorsed drawings’ as they are also known, will detail all the design modifications from the permit conditions and essentially finalize the design which has been approved.

Whilst they will not detail the construction engineering aspects they typically cover such things as final finishes, proposed overall dimensions and all the features and aspects of the design proposal related to planning. In any other project, be it a 100 storey tower or a minor residential extension, these plans are public documents. However such is the secrecy around the East West Link that, like the ‘business case’, these documents are under lock and key away from public scrutiny.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/western-portal-copy_0.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The western portal"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="317" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/western-portal-copy_0.jpg?itok=A6X4r73M" title="The western portal" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The western portal</figcaption></figure>As a consequence of this veil of secrecy very simple questions pertaining to what has been approved cannot be answered. In Parkville, seven tollway flyovers cut through a residential precinct. The animation gives perhaps the best indication of what residents should prepare themselves for. It is very difficult to determine if sound and privacy barriers will be installed, what height and form they will take and how effective they will be.

Other basic questions include how tall are these flyovers? How far away are they exactly? How will the road be lit at night?

This situation leads to only two possible conclusions. The first possibility is that these issues have been resolved in the development plans, as they should have. These details are then being deliberately withheld from public scrutiny, for the benefit of the Liberal Party election prospects and public relations.

The second possibility is that these details have not been finalised and are therefore not part of the development plans which were endorsed by the Planning Minister. This would be an absolute disaster as the controls for what constitutes an acceptable design response would be transferred to either the LMA or the construction consortium who would be entitled to build whatever was expedient and cheap for them to construct.

<h2>Secret Property Reports</h2>

The Victorian Government’s dungeon of secret documents has also been expanded to include the Property Impact Reports which were required as a condition of the planning permit. These reports supposedly document local properties which will be impacted and were used to determine which properties would be offered voluntary acquisition. Was it comprehensive? Which properties were reported upon? What did it take into consideration?

Only very few guards within the secret dungeon have access to this document, so it is impossible to say. Despite this, from media reports it is possible to draw a rough map of which properties have and have not been offered acquisition. Whilst any number of government ministers can trot out the catch phrase ‘the line had to be drawn somewhere’ it is clear from this rough map that the line that was actually drawn does not treat properties fairly based on distance.

The line that separates between an optional exit and 5+ years of misery prioritises houses over others and does not use logical features such as existing laneways to determine its location.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/acquisition-map-copy.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Acquisition map"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="595" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/acquisition-map-copy.jpg?itok=jNdxxRTR" title="Acquisition map" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Acquisition map</figcaption></figure><h2>Purpose of mystery buildings confirmed</h2>

In a previous post discussing the then newly released final design, two newly proposed ‘mystery’ buildings in Parkville were highlighted by a freeze frame shot on the official video. At the time with no announcement or description of what they were, we were left to guess the purpose. After a subsequent twitter exchange and a discussion with the Linking Melbourne Authority, it has been confirmed that these two buildings will be the new 24 hour Freeway Control Centre and the Operations and Maintenance Management Facilities.

These buildings should have been included within the Comprehensive Impact Statement and public hearings process but were omitted. In order to make this location work for the emergency operations vehicles an additional ground level road through Royal Park will also be required. The alternative fastest route into the tunnel is a 3.5KM trip via Brunswick road.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/east-west-link-ops-maintenance-centre.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="East West Link operations maintenance centre"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="310" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/east-west-link-ops-maintenance-centre.jpg?itok=986DeHBM" title="East West Link operations maintenance centre" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>East West Link operations maintenance centre</figcaption></figure>Planning details such as the number of car parks for these facilities, shadowing impacts, building form, window location and overall dimensions are all either secret or as yet un-designed. The design should have been finalised in order to have been included on the development plans for endorsement.

<h2>West Parkville to be cut off</h2>

Another detail which has snuck through broader analysis is the road connection between West Parkville and the western and southern suburbs. In order to facilitate large traffic volumes exiting Citylink from the north, the only connection via Lennon Street will be entirely cut off. This will add over 2.5 kilometres to any trip going west via racecourse road or south via boundary road or Citylink.

Linking Melbourne Authority is aware of this problem and have verbally agreed to investigate possible solutions.

<h2>Real life ‘Utopia’ spin</h2>

In a case of life mimicking art it seems that the PR department at the LMA has taken a leaf out of the fictional ‘Nation Building Authority’ depicted by the ABC comedy/documentary Utopia. In order to sell the extension of the wetlands (at the expense of Royal Park’s Ross Straw Field) the glossy brochure announced the following:

<blockquote>
The wetlands will be accessible by a series of high quality boardwalks and complemented by a significant water themed playground, a new education and interpretative centre, and community facilities including barbecues, seating and shelters.
<cite>Linking Melbourne Authority, Western Gateway Brochure (page 2)</cite>
</blockquote>

This description was accompanied by an artist impression indicating a vague building within a park setting.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/fictional-park-impression.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Fictional park impression"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="295" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/fictional-park-impression.jpg?itok=8T7cVvMS" title="Fictional park impression" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Fictional park impression</figcaption></figure>Naturally the education and interpretive centre was not included in the consultation process, Comprehensive Impact Statement or in the public hearings. It was therefore a big surprise that it was included as part of the ‘final design’. There has been no discussion about how this centre would operate, if there would be buses dropping off school groups or the design location or footprint of any of these buildings.

Furthermore it is not entirely clear if the Linking Melbourne Authority even has a planning permit to construct these buildings as they are not ‘normal’ to the purpose of providing a transport link. In response to being pushed on these questions, the LMA reportedly told the City of Melbourne (on October 7) that the Education Centre would not be a staffed centre but a series of interpretive signs around the wetlands. Perhaps the LMA should tell that to their media spin unit.

The issues highlighted here are a summary of some of the known unknowns. The Liberal Government would have you believe that this project is ready to start in a few weeks yet the public has very little idea of what has even been approved. With such a secretive process the question is: what else is being kept in the secret dungeon of documents with the business case, property reports, signed construction contract and the development plans?

The public deserves to know. Architecture is for Everyone.

This article originally appeared on the <a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2014/10/22/east-west-link-and-the-secret-development-plans/">Red and Black Architect's blog</a>.
</body></html>

East West Link and the Secret Development Plans

<html><body>
Former Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett has expressed his disappointment about the negative impacts that the proposed East West Link design will have on the Melbourne gateway landmark. Tweeting in response to my questions, Mr Kennett sees the value of the cheese sticks being lost by the new flyovers.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/jeff_kennett">@jeff_kennett</a> what do you think about the domination and obscuring of the gateway cheese stick by the East West Link design?
— Red+Black Architect (@Red_Black_Archi) <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/Red_Black_Archi/status/517075700881178624">September 30, 2014</a>
</blockquote>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/Red_Black_Archi">@Red_Black_Archi</a> I do not like or agree with losing the value of cheese sticks which form a gateway into the wonderment of Melbourne
— Jeff Kennett (@jeff_kennett) <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/jeff_kennett/status/517078492886753280">September 30, 2014</a>
</blockquote>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/jeff_kennett">@jeff_kennett</a> me either! The proposed EWlink design dilutes the potency and value of our city's unique and iconic gateway
— Red+Black Architect (@Red_Black_Archi) <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/Red_Black_Archi/status/517080359666581504">September 30, 2014</a>
</blockquote>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/Red_Black_Archi">@Red_Black_Archi</a> Agreed
— Jeff Kennett (@jeff_kennett) <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/jeff_kennett/status/517083942688526336">September 30, 2014</a>
</blockquote>

This is in reference to my article published on <a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/">The Red and Black Architect blog</a> yesterday, as seen below.

<h2>State Government Reveals Final East West Link Design</h2>

This week the Napthine Victorian Government signed a secret contract worth $6.8 Billion, with the Lend Lease led consortium to build the eastern stage of the East West Link toll road. In what has now become the standard approach from this Government, the public were left in the dark with regards to almost every detail. From financial business case to the property impact reports, the actual route of the road and the physical design of it.

If you are joining this story just now there is some important back reading for you to do.

<ul>
<li><a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/east-west-tollway-to-trash-an-inner-city-oasis/">East West Tollway to Trash an Inner City Oasis</a></li>
	<li><a href="/news/atelier-red-black-reveals-a-better-east-west-link-design">A Better East West link Design Revealed</a></li>
	<li><a href="/news/planning-to-fail-east-west-link-part-1">Planning to Fail: East West Link (Part 1)</a></li>
	<li><a href="/news/planning-to-fail-east-west-link-part-2">Planning to Fail: East West Link (Part 2)</a></li>
	<li><a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2014/07/27/saving-west-parkville/">Saving West Parkville</a></li>
</ul>
A day after signing the State into a massive financial black hole, the government has revealed the final design to be constructed. This is of course pending the outcome of the two separate court actions and a probable change in government. So what have we just bought, is the design any good and were there any surprises?

<h2>Eastern Portal</h2>

The Eastern portal road design was one of the few known outcomes from the planning permit approval. This road design tears up heritage streets and imposes the visual bulk of a flyover upon the surrounding residential areas.

The good news however is the demise of the ridiculous vertical ‘feature’ on the bridge which detracted from the heritage listed Clifton Hill Shot Tower. This design element was completely superfluous and caused additional negative impacts for zero positive gain. It will not be missed by anyone other than perhaps the Planning Minister Matthew Guy, who in his planning approval deliberately and recklessly contradicted the Assessment Committee who had found it to be unacceptable. Clearly wiser more educated heads have prevailed in this case.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/eastern-portal-copy.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="View of the Eastern Portal (Clifton Hill and Collingwood)"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="326" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/eastern-portal-copy.jpg?itok=9SBAHRCE" title="View of the Eastern Portal (Clifton Hill and Collingwood)" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>View of the Eastern Portal (Clifton Hill and Collingwood)</figcaption></figure>Significant emphasis has been placed upon the acoustic tube refered to as the ‘Sound Wave. On the positive side it looks like it could be a dynamic and interesting form. It does seem however that the residential areas in most need of the noise protection (on the left of the picture above) seem to miss out all together. Hopefully this can be resolved to the satisfaction of those unfortunate residents.

<h2>Western Portal</h2>

Up until the point at which the design was released on Tuesday, the suburb of West Parkville was in limbo. Whilst the project had for weeks already been approved, no one could be sure where the roads would go, which properties would be demolished and how badly residents would be affected.

The bizarre situation for residents was that they would need to look in the newspapers or catch a TV news bulletin to determine if they would have a home in 6 months time. It was a public game of spot your home, with the winners getting to see their neighborhood be ripped apart over the 5 year construction period whilst the losers lost their home all together.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/western-portal-copy.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The Western Portal"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="317" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/western-portal-copy.jpg?itok=J0QXjqdi" title="The Western Portal" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Western Portal</figcaption></figure>The outcome was disastrous for West Parkville. Any hopes of a better design which could save the 55 homes, Ross Straw Playing Fields and the White’s Skink habitat were dashed. The planning permit recommendation to investigate relocating the portal west of Oak street was clearly too soft to have any impact on the design. The work done by Safety Net on an alternative which was proven to be feasible by traffic engineers commissioned by the City of Melbourne, was largely ignored. One aspect of this design that was not ignored was the provision of the Flemington Road access at the Citylink interchange, rather than within Royal Park itself. This will help save a section of Royal Park that would have otherwise been lost forever.

The overall news for Royal Park is however, far from good. As well as the permanent loss of virtually all of the parkland west of the Upfield Train line, there was the added bad news of a large electrical substation which is now required to power the tunnel boring machines. Yet again a significant impact on the environment and the public that was not accounted for in the Comprehensive Impact Statement (CIS).

Whilst discussing Royal Park it is also important to note that this project will be the third incursion into our largest public urban park in a decade. The Commonwealth Games village, the Royal Children’s Hospital and now East West Link have all eaten significant portions of the park. This is incredibly short sited of a city claiming to be the worlds most livable. All levels of government need to be looking at ways to permanently protect our rapidly shrinking urban parkland. It is too important to lose.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/green-cheese.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The new green cheese stick"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="314" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/green-cheese.jpg?itok=_HBf46PY" title="The new green cheese stick" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The new green cheese stick</figcaption></figure>Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the proposed design is how the Linking Melbourne Authority and the Lend Lease consortium would address the connection with the Melbourne Gateway and the yellow ‘cheese stick’. The answer is with the use of mimicry. Not content to leave the iconic work of Denton Corker Marshall remain the cohesive entry for Melbourne, the new proposal is a classic case of ‘my project is bigger than yours’. The Cheese Stick has been duplicated, enlarged and set closer to vertical as a beacon to all who drive by. In a way green is a fitting colour for a yellow cheese stick gone bad. Not content with being taller and larger, the new triple decked flyovers are likely to substantially block the views of the original landmark, damaging its original purpose. This outcome, in my view at least, is unacceptable.

With the radical changes to West Parkville that are proposed, two mystery buildings were also subtly included into the scheme without explanation or clarification. Located beneath one of the seven new flyovers, are two new buildings built upon the land currently occupied with townhouses. Neither of these were within the reference design and therefore they were not discussed in the CIS or hearings either.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/mystery-buildings.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="It's a mystery!"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="209" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/mystery-buildings.jpg?itok=9E_v29kA" title="It's a mystery!" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>It's a mystery!</figcaption></figure><h2>Debney’s Park</h2>

Another surprise inclusion is a new road through Debney’s Park between Mount Alexander Road and Racecourse Road, under the existing sound tube. Whilst this is a substantial blow to the Debney’s Park area which is currently a playground for a community of disadvantaged children, the silver lining is the $15 Million allocated for planning and implementing a new master plan for the area.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/new-road.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The new road as rendered"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="314" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/new-road.jpg?itok=OBaY3ajB" title="The new road as rendered" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The new road as rendered</figcaption></figure><h2>The Northern Interchange (Formerly the Ormond Road Off Ramp)</h2>

Residents in Moreland now have more reason to feel cheated as the Ormond Road off ramp has been unexpectedly expanded to include an on ramp from Brunswick Road. One has to seriously wonder what the point of all the discussion surrounding traffic modeling at the public hearings was for, given the substantial last minute changes to the proposed connections.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/surprise-brunswick-road-onramp.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="A new on ramp from Brunswick Road"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="320" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/surprise-brunswick-road-onramp.jpg?itok=dkXYWlzW" title="A new on ramp from Brunswick Road" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>A new on ramp from Brunswick Road</figcaption></figure>The Northern Interchange has now also been given a replica set of red matchsticks. This is a desperate attempt to salvage something of the entry gateway that will be dominated by this project. The new sticks are clearly too far away to be read cohesively with the existing ones whilst simultaneously blurring the ability to navigate via these landmarks.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/new-red-matchsticks.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="New Red Matchsticks"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="321" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/new-red-matchsticks.jpg?itok=6cXbI8PJ" title="New Red Matchsticks" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>New Red Matchsticks</figcaption></figure>All in all, the design will not rescue this project. All to often where impacts could have been reduced, they haven’t been. Royal Park will be permanently scarred with a portion amputated completely. West Parkville will be sliced and segmented with the loss of 55 homes unnecessarily. The iconic Melbourne Gateway experience will be lost among flyovers and diluted by a new green parody.

As well as being the most expensive urban project in the state’s history, it will also be among it’s most destructive. Terrible politics, a rushed process, a secret business case, poor planning have all led to a mistake of mammoth proportions.

What do you think about the impact of the East West Link design on the Melbourne Gateway? Have your say below.
</body></html>

Jeff Kennett voices concerns over East West Link design

<html><body>
Recently the Melbourne media has reported that the winning design for the <a href="/news/public-transport-architecture-seagull-on-a-hot-chip-thoughts-on-flinders-street-station-competition-entries">Flinders Street Station Design Ideas Competition</a> by Hassell and Herzog &amp; De Meuron would cost a whopping $2 billion to build. Naturally this has drawn many to question the wisdom in undertaking the design competition in the first place. After all if we cannot afford to build it, what is the point?

Firstly some background. Launched in November 2011, the competition with total prize money of $1 million attracted 117 entrants both local and international. The process was in two stages with six entrants being shortlisted to further develop their schemes. The public was invited to engage in the competition via a website survey and voting process which considered the following criteria:

<ul>
<li>Overall design merit</li>
	<li>Transport Function</li>
	<li>Cultural Heritage and Iconic Status</li>
	<li>Urban Design and precinct Integration</li>
</ul>
The Jury panel to determine the final outcome of the competition was led by the Victorian Government Architect and was made up of various experts on transport, heritage, finance and Architecture. They also (to the criticism of many) included a non-expert, chef George Calombaris who was included as a ‘notable Victorian’. In addition to the criteria put to the public, the Jury also had to evaluate two additional criteria:

<ul>
<li>the development delivery</li>
	<li>value for money.</li>
</ul>
So did the Victorian taxpayer get value for money out of the Flinders Street Station Competition if the final design might cost $2 billion? Absolutely yes! Even if the winning design is never built the $1.6 million spent is some of the hardest working taxpayer dollars that the government has spent.

Here is why:

<h2>The value of professional advice</h2>

The $1.6 million bought a massive amount of professional advice. Under ordinary circumstance the same advice would have likely cost over $11 million.

Warwick Mihaly on <a href="http://panfilocastaldi.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/vote-flinders-street-conclusion/">Panfilocastaldi</a> did the following rough calculation on the hours spent by architects.

<ul>
<li>Total Prize money = $1,000,000</li>
	<li>Competition organisation = $600,000*</li>
	<li>Total competition cost = $1,600,000*</li>
</ul>
*source Herald Sun report of $1.6 mil total competition cost

<ul>
<li>Number of Stage 1 entrants = 117</li>
	<li>Average time spent on each Stage 1 entry = 400 hours</li>
	<li>Number of Stage 2 shortlisted entrants = 6</li>
	<li>Average time spent on each Stage 2 entry = 3,000 hours</li>
	<li>Total time spent by all entrants = 64,800 hours</li>
	<li>Average value of architects’ time = $180 / hour</li>
	<li>Total value of architects’ time = $11,664,000</li>
</ul>
<h2>The value of artistic endeavour</h2>

How much would it cost to commission 10 of the world’s best painters or sculptors to each prepare a substantial piece of work? Once you then add in 108 other artists from around the country it would clearly be substantially more than a mere $1.6 mil.

As a comparison the federal Government in 1973 purchased a single Jackson Pollock painting Blue Poles. The price paid by the federal government in 1973 equates to approximately 10.9 million dollars in today’s currency. I would argue that the work of Zaha Hadid (just one of the entrants) is at least as influential in the architecture world as Jackson Pollock’s work in the art world. If we are serious about artistic endeavour we need to invest in a wide variety of art forms.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/pollock-blue-poles.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Blue Poles by Jackson Pollock"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="253" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/pollock-blue-poles.jpg?itok=9XRU3hLx" title="Blue Poles by Jackson Pollock" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Blue Poles by Jackson Pollock</figcaption></figure>To take another example of an artistic endeavour, the State and Federal Government both pour substantial amounts of fund into the film industry.

<blockquote>
In 2005-06, the Australian Government provided $140 million in funding for film and video, and state and territory governments contributed $75.4 million.
<cite><a href="http://www.australiacouncil.gov.au/resources/reports_and_publications/subjects/funding/funding_of_film_and_video">Australia Council: Funding of film and video</a></cite>
</blockquote>

I am not for a moment suggesting that this support is a poor investment, but rather highlighting how comparatively small the investment in the architectural competition by comparison. Indeed given that the final six designs all featured animated fly throughs, there is no reason why this couldn’t have been partly funded within this larger budget.

To make even more out of the money invested in this competition, a physical travelling exhibition should be established to showcase the cutting edge work. Only a fraction of the design proposals have been seen by the vast majority of the public and this is therefore a golden opportunity to further the value of the competition.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/hassel-and-herzog-de-meuron.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="An Image from the winning design by Hassel and Herzog &amp; De Meuron. Image © Hassell Studio"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="331" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/hassel-and-herzog-de-meuron.jpg?itok=7CPjRxGB" title="An Image from the winning design by Hassel and Herzog &amp; De Meuron. Image © Hassell Studio" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The winning design by Hassel and Herzog &amp; De Meuron. Image © Hassell Studio</figcaption></figure><h2>The value of a broad community discussion</h2>

How much would a 19,000 person focus group to discuss the future of Flinders Street Station have cost? I honestly don’t know but I would think at least $50 per person ($950,000 total) under normal industry circumstances would be a starting point. As part of the competition the community were offered the opportunity to provide their feedback on 6 potential designs. Their opinions were not moderated and the report that was generated provides a great deal of feedback for a way forward.

<h2>The value of a long term vision</h2>

Even if we cannot afford to start building today, there is an inherent value about having a long term plan for our most important landmark. Flinders Street Station is not going anywhere. It will likely be around beyond the lifetime of anyone living today. If we refine the plan further, or if we pursue a new design in the future based on what we have learnt from this process, it will still have been worthwhile.

<h2>A final word to the Cynics</h2>

There are some who say that architects were just ‘in it’ for themselves and that this competition was just a method of handing architects money. There is categorical proof that this is not the case. Even the winner will likely have lost money on this competition having been paid $500k. The numbers just don’t stack up. The number of hours put in to generate the quality required far outstrips the prize. It is the equivalent of saying doctors who volunteer in third world countries are only doing it for the free flights and accommodation.

So why did architects participate? There are many reasons. The big firms are definitely in it to win it. It might strengthen their ability to be given other projects or raise their profile. For the small architects it is far more about participating in the culture of architecture than being a sensible business decision. Architects feel a duty to the built environment. For them it is about being part of the discussion, providing alternate possibilities and helping to ensure that the winning design is the best by being compared with the rest.

PS - If I still haven’t convinced you that it was worth spending $1.6 million on the competition, perhaps we could just shorten the 8 Kilometre East West Link tunnel by just 160 Centimetres and get that money back! In fact we could scrap the entire $18 billion East West Link Project and finance the construction of Flinders Street Station and eight other major projects like it for the same price! If you are concerned about a waste of money, start there!

Michael Smith is Director of Melbourne architecture firm <a href="http://redblackarch.com.au/">Atelier Red + Black</a>. This article originally appeared on <a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/">The Red and Black Architect blog</a>.
</body></html>

Was the Flinders Street Station competition value for money?

<html><body>
<blockquote>
There are some people who say you shouldn’t mix politics and music, or sports and politics. Well… I think that’s kind of bulls*#t.
<cite>Adam Clayton, U2</cite>
</blockquote>

Politics and culture have an intrinsic relationship upon each other. Whilst there are some people who attempt to separate the two, in order to justify their apathy, a quick read of a typical Melbourne newspaper would show how politics is so effectively entwined with our cultural pursuits. Architecture endeavours to reflect our culture but it is also caught up within it.

In the 2010 State election, Victorian’s voted in the Liberal / National Party coalition. The new government was led by Ted Baillieu – an Architect who was sworn in as Premier of the State. Among the more public pre-election commitments was the Flinders Street Station Design Ideas Competition. This policy was implemented within the first 12 months with the international competition launched in November 2011.

The decision to run a competition for Melbourne’s most important landmark is quite controversial to this day. The detractors would argue that with no commitment to undertake the project, the efforts and the taxpayer money used to run the competition have been wasted. This would appear quite short sighted given the importance and the longevity of the landmark in question. As a result of Victorians voting in a design-intelligent Premier, we now have a fantastic design which has proven design merit.

This design allows the public and the decision makers to talk about the project in specific detail rather than in the abstract.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/img_3191.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Parliament House, Melbourne."><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="435" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_3191.jpg?itok=iBFksIm-" title="Parliament House, Melbourne." width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Parliament House, Melbourne.</figcaption></figure>A far more subtle policy resulting from an Architect Premier was the introduction of the Design Review Panel at the Office of the Victorian Government Architect. This service offers high level independent design advice to various Government bodies who procure or approve public projects. Typical projects include hospitals, libraries, transport infrastructure projects and community master plans.

Between 2012 and 2014 over 100 projects have been reviewed under this system. To accurately assess the quality of the design review program, an audit by SGS Economics was undertaken in December 2013. This independent review found overwhelming support for the scheme from those who had participated, proving with hard evidence the value of design.

<a href="http://www.ovga.vic.gov.au/images/VDRP_Key_Achievements_June2014.pdf">Click here</a> for further information on the key achievements of the Design Review Panel.

In July 2012 the Government then decided to embark on the most significant reform to the planning system in 30 years. The process began with a set of proposed changes which were open to public submissions. Naturally, given the city shaping nature of the proposed changes, The Australian Institute of Architects put forward their considered opinion. In their <a href="http://www.architecture.com.au/docs/default-source/national-policy/121001-viczoningreview-final.pdf?sfvrsn=2">submission</a> they highlighted some points of agreement such as the benefits in reduction of red tape. However there were also grave concerns about the process and the consequences.

<blockquote>
One effect of mandated outcomes is likely to be a greater focus on height rather than design as the relevant arbiter of what defines acceptable development.

A strategic justification and narrative to explain the zone changes is needed, and the process that has informed them lacks clarity.
<cite>Australian Institute of Architects, September 2012</cite>
</blockquote>

Next in the series of reforms were the changes to the Architects Act and the Architects Registration Board of Victoria mooted in <a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2012/12/14/a-red-and-black-investigation-into-the-future-of-the-architects-registration-board-of-victoria/">November 2012</a>. This was deeply concerning to Architects in Victoria at the time, however the fact that the Premier himself was an Architect provided significant reassurance to the profession.

At the time the Victorian President of the AIA, Jon Clements provided this comment to the Red and Black Architect:

<blockquote>
It is fair to say that under the current government leadership, noting that the Premier is himself an architect and an Institute member, that it is highly unlikely that we will see any diminishment of the role of the architect in the building industry.
<cite>Jon Clements, December 2012</cite>
</blockquote>

Then three months later the politics changed. The political train wreck of MP Geoff Shaw threw the Baillieu government into crisis upon his resignation from the Liberal Party. Hours later Ted Baillieu had also resigned as leader of the Liberal Party and as a consequence Dennis Napthine was installed as the new Victorian Premier.

Perhaps in an effort to make his own mark and stamp his authority, Napthine ordered a restructure of the government departments which resulted in the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure (DTPLI) being established on the 9th of April 2013. With this change, the Office for the Victorian Government Architect was relegated from reporting directly to the premier, to instead working under the DTPLI. Yet again the importance of design was eroded from what was previously a design conscious government.

Since then the planning reforms have been pushed through and are currently being finalized. In the Winter edition of Architect Victoria, the AIA once again highlighted the dangers and consequences of the State Governments actions.

<blockquote>
The Institute believes that the proposed zoning changes, if implemented in the form requested by local councils, will be a huge step backwards for planning and design in Melbourne.

The risks faced are very real:

Reduced housing affordability

Reduced diversity of housing for aged and low income households

Difficulty for small-medium scale developers to find suitable sites.
<cite>Australian Institute of Architects August 2014</cite>
</blockquote>

As bad as the situation has become, an even bigger concern is that it appears that the peak body of Architects is being flat-out ignored by the Planning Minister, Matthew Guy.

<blockquote>
In the last four years the [Victorian] Chapter [of the Australian Institute of Architects] has only been able to secure one direct face to face meeting with the [Planning] Minister. He has refused all invitations to attend institute events in this time.
<cite>Alison Cleary, Victorian Chapter Manager of the Australian Institute of Architects.</cite>
</blockquote>

This is akin to the Minister for Health refusing to meet with the Australian Medical Association. It projects incompetence and arrogance of the highest manner. Furthermore it is not as if Matthew Guy is himself an expert on the Built Environment. Matthew Guy’s comments (<a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/planning-minister-matthew-guy-no-fan-of-ugly-hoyts-cinema-building/story-fni0fit3-1226814345343">as reported in the Herald Sun</a>) regarding Melbourne’s Brutalist Architect expose his limited understanding.

<blockquote>
People use the term brutalist architecture to legitimise ugly buildings.
<cite>Matthew Guy, Minister for Planning</cite>
</blockquote>

Again to analogise this to the medical profession, this statement is the equivalent of the Health Minister making a comment such as ‘people use the term mental illness to legitimise hospital care’. Both outrageous comments should draw instant condemnation of a minister so out of touch with their field of influence.

Within a single term of government from 2010 to 2014 we have gone from a design-intelligent and architecturally progressive State Government, to one which has marginalized those best able to advise it. The public who voted in the Architect Premier in 2010 have every right to feel let down by the party politics that has led to this point.

In November 2014, Victoria will head to the polls to elect the next Government. More than anything Victoria deserves a government that is willing to take and act upon advice from experts in all fields and not just presume that it knows best. We need a new Planning Minister who will listen to the Australian Institute of Architects. We need the Office of the Victorian Government Architect reporting directly to the Premiers Office as it was always intended to. Finally we need to end this obsession with building the East West Link at all costs. The built environment is too important to be the plaything of politicians.

Michael Smith is Director of Melbourne architecture firm <a href="http://redblackarch.com.au/">Atelier Red + Black</a>. This article originally appeared on <a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/">The Red and Black Architect blog</a>.
</body></html>

Architecture and Politics

<html><body>
As <a href="/news/planning-to-fail-east-west-link-part-1" target="_blank">previously</a> <a href="/news/planning-to-fail-east-west-link-part-2" target="_blank">reported</a>, Matthew Guy has used his extraordinary powers as Planning Minister to approve the East West Link permits. In doing so he has ignored the majority of recommendations put to him by the independent Assessment Committee. This project was a major test case for how well planning law functions for major infrastructure projects. Unfortunately for those wanting a rigorous, logical, evidence based and transparent process the system has failed.

Aside from the question of the East West Link project is how do we fix the planning system so we can learn from the mistakes?

1. Prohibit the use of a reference design to obtain planning approval.

The use of a reference design to achieve planning approval is a terrible concept. Without a real design which has considered real opportunities and real constraints we cannot discuss the project in any meaningful way that would represent the reality of the project. It is absurd that we needed the East West Link project to prove this point. It causes angst and confusion for the community who have no certain design to even direct their comments and criticisms. A reference design is clearly not acceptable to any other private project in the planning system for good reason.

2. Enable the independent Assessment Committee to determine if sufficient information has been provided to assess the proposal. If they deem it insufficient remove the authority for anyone to approve the project until such time as it has been provided and assessed.

The Victorian Planning System gives unfathomable powers to the Planning Minister. Clearly further checks and balances are required. If the Assessment Committee has insufficient information to assess an application it should have the power to prevent any approval being granted until such time as the information is provided and assessed. Good decision making cannot occur without good information to base those decisions.

3. Require the Assessment Committee determine if design alternatives have been sufficiently considered. Prohibit the approval of projects requiring property acquisition unless the Assessment Committee has determined that design alternatives have been sufficiently considered.

If property is being acquired, land owners and in this case home owners have a right to know if there is a better way to achieve the project. Political considerations should not override a proper planning and design process.

<blockquote>
It appears to the Committee that the LMA have not fairly responded to or considered alternative designs
<cite>Remarks from the Assessment Committee</cite>
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
No alternative design was exhibited and no alternative has been tested in the manner of the flyover. I do not agree that it is appropriate to describe the exhibited project as unacceptable in the absence of a demonstrated proven alternative
<cite>Remarks from Matthew Guy in his East West Link approval decision</cite>
</blockquote>

4. Require the Assessment Committee determine if community consultation has been sufficient. Prohibit the approval of projects that fail this test.

This requirement would enshrine community consultation as a mandatory requirement in undertaking major infrastructure projects. With the consequences of insufficient consultation being a substantial delay to the project, the proponent would see it as vital that they always cleared tis hurdle first time.

5. For public projects over a $1 Billion require that the business case and procurement method also be within the scope of the Assessment Committee.

It is not for the Assessment Committee to dictate how the government spends its money. However this provision would make sure that the public would have a right to be informed of the financial implications of major infrastructure.

6. Require that the Planning Permits are granted prior to the tendering process beginning. Design changes from the tendering process should be dealt with as amendments to the permit and be subject to their own rigorous planning process.

This requirement achieves two key benefits for the state. Firstly the tender process could accurately reflect the project as approved, avoiding nasty surprises. This would assist in preventing price blowouts due to limiting and controlling variations to the design. Secondly it would provide an opportunity for community consultation and assessment on substantial design changes.

In a democracy, people have a right to transparency and a right to be heard. The East West Link reality where four suburbs have an approved project with an unknown design is a sad example of our broken system. For those screaming at the politicians to ‘rip up the contracts’ for East West Link, don’t forget that there was also a broken system that contributed to this disaster. We need to reform this system urgently or we are destined to repeat the same mistakes.

Victoria Deserves Better. Architecture is for Everyone.

This post originally appeared on <a href="https://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2014/07/04/fixing-the-victorian-planning-system-in-the-wake-of-east-west-link/">The Red and Black Architect blog</a>.

Lead image courtesy Permitted Development.
</body></html>

Fixing the Victorian Planning System in the wake of East West Link

<html><body>
Continuing from yesterday's <a href="/news/planning-to-fail-east-west-link-part-1" target="_blank">repost of part one</a> from the <a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/planning-to-fail-east-west-link/" target="_blank">Red and Black Architect blog</a>.

<h2>Parkville</h2>

The suburb of West Parkville is arguably the most impacted by the East West Link reference project. The proposal put forward by the LMA involves the destruction of the Ross Straw Field, sensitive ecosystems and 55 homes to provide the ‘western portal’ to the tunnel and connection to Citylink.

Comments from the Assessment Committee:

<blockquote>
The location of the western portal shown in the Reference Project is unacceptable, as is thehorizontal and vertical alignment of the ramps from the western portal to CityLink. The Committee recommends further alternatives be investigated.

The impacts on these communities [In Parkville West] have been subject of cursory assessment and consideration. The Committee does not accept that the application of the UDF [Urban Design Framework] will have the capacity of “mitigating these visual impacts”. The Committee considers that the impacts need to be avoided through adoption of a different design outcome.

The resultant negative impacts of these southerly links on the residential communities of Parkville West, Travancore South, Flemington Public Housing Estate and Kensington residents are of such a scale that in the view of the Committee, they should not form part of the approved Project and that further work needs to be done.

The Manningham Parklands are the most visually impacted part of the Project area. The Committee considers that the evidence in support of the Reference Project in this area is unconvincing, and it was persuaded by the evidence and submissions made by experts, community groups and individuals.
</blockquote>

Comments from the Minister for Planning, Matthew Guy:

<blockquote>
The Committee considered that the visual and related impacts of the Reference Project within Precinct 3: Royal Park represented an unacceptable intrusion into Royal Park. The Committee found that the reduction in open space, the permanent loss of trees, the realignment of the tram line and the increase in road and traffic-related infrastructure within the Park were matters which can and should be avoided.

A condition of my approval decision for the Project is that the Elliott Avenue interchange is deleted and that a connection between the Project and Flemington Road be examined. I note that a connection between the Project and Flemington Road has not yet been the subject of detailed design. For this reason I have included a condition on the approval decision that a Development Plan showing the design for the connection between the Project and Flemington Road be submitted to me to my satisfaction.
</blockquote>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/ew-planning-status2.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Planning status in Parkville"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="373" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/ew-planning-status2.jpg?itok=wJFZ8Q_Y" title="Planning status in Parkville" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Planning status in Parkville</figcaption></figure>Red and Black Architect (R+BA) comments:

It is welcoming that the minister recognised that the proposed impacts upon Royal Park and West Parkville by the reference project were unacceptable. Indeed the deletion of the Elliott Avenue interchange is to be commended. What is less positive is the planning situation that the entire suburb of Parkville now faces. The project has approval but the roads are to be redesigned. Individuals and community groups are in the dark about what the changes are and are effectively locked out of the future planning and design process. This feels undemocratic and disrespectful towards the impacted communities.

<h2>Part B and Arden Macaulay</h2>

Part B of the East West Project involves essentially duplicating the elevated Citylink freeway along the Moonee Ponds Creek and then terminating at the Melbourne Port. The key issues with this precinct are the environmental impacts on the Moonee Ponds Creek, The social and amenity impacts on Debney’s Park and the nearby public housing and the viability of the proposed Arden Macaulay Structure Plan to revitalise the underutilised area.

Comments from the Assessment Committee:

<blockquote>
The Committee is not convinced that the LMA has adequately researched design alternatives for Part B, including consideration on the east side of CityLink or further in‐tunnel options. In addition on traffic grounds Part B is not justified in the short to medium term.

Since the Committee hearing concluded, there have been a number of statements issued by the State Government in relation to works on CityLink, and in particular the CityLink connection to the West Gate Freeway. This connection was mentioned a number of times during the Hearing as being a major contributor to congestion on the Bolte Bridge, even though CityLink appeared to have spare capacity.

The occupation of part of the Vision Australia property in Barrett Street, very recently upgraded as a national facility, suggests an inadequate planning and evaluation process and supports the perception that the Project has been designed [with] inadequate attention to its impacts and [designed with an alignment] following the ‘line of least resistance’

The Committee considers the intrusion into this proposed “dense, mixed‐use inner city suburb” is unacceptable, due to its impacts on the planned residential and mixed use redevelopment ambitions outlined within the Arden‐Macaulay Structure Plan Area.

The Committee considers that in terms of its significant visual impact on the Moonee Ponds Creek corridor and buildings and public spaces adjacent to the route, the extent of residential property acquisition that is to be acquired and its proximity to residential properties that are not to be acquired, Part B is an unacceptable design outcome.

The Committee acknowledges that the Reference Project does meet some of the many Urban Design Principles, but it remains concerned that any alternative design for the Project may not be a more complete example of the Urban Design Principles in action than the Reference Project.

The Committee considers that the Reference Project is not an acceptable response to the Urban Design Principles

Part B has not been adequately assessed, and should be set aside until the proposed Widening of CityLink and the Tullamarine Freeway, and the proposed WestLink connection is better understood and resolved. This should take into account a number of key issues, including:

(a) Resolution and development of Part B with greater integration with the Arden‐Macaulay Structure Plan.

(b) Key locational impacts such as the Vision Australia premises, SP AusNet site, the Flemington Housing estate (and its playgrounds, gardens and the community centre), and the apartments at 18 Bent Street.

(c) The alignment of the Moonee Ponds Creek and the potential to enhance its function as an open space corridor as part of the Arden‐Macaulay redevelopment.

(d) The reservation of the proposed WestLink alignment.
</blockquote>

Comments from the Minister for Planning, Matthew Guy:

<blockquote>
I have determined that Part B should be approved at this time subject to the design and implementation addressing as appropriate the recommendations of the Committee. Accordingly, the resolution of the design of the southern connection between Parts A and B of the Project will be addressed by the conditions I have imposed on the approval decision which require the preparation of a Development Plan for certain aspects of the Project including the southern connection. The Development Plan will be required to be in accordance with the Urban Design Principles and the Performance Requirements …and must be prepared to my satisfaction.

I intend to establish an advisory group comprising the Chair or Deputy Chair of the Committee, the Victorian Government Architect (or Associate Victoria Government Architect) and representatives of the DTPLI Planning group, VicRoads and the Department of Treasury and Finance to advise me on the Development Plans that I have required be submitted to my satisfaction.
</blockquote>

R+BA comments:

By approving Part B of the East West Link, the Minister has essentially ripped up a four year long detailed planning process that resulted in the Arden Macaulay structure plan. This plan would have facilitated a revitalisation of the precinct and supported a contemporary medium density community environment. The backbone of this work was the opening up of the Moonee Ponds Creek as an environmentally sensitive public open space. This parkland would have provided high quality amenity and provided sensible justification for higher density residential developments. The East West Link will now doom the creek to be little more than an overshadowed drain.

The way in which the permits were granted has left the majority of the project up to a further redesign process to meet the satisfaction of the planning minister. The question is how can the community trust this Minister given how he has recklessly disregarded so much of the expert independent report?

<h2>Conclusion</h2>

This project has been a rushed political propaganda exercise from its inception. It is suffering from terrible planning, woeful design and a community consultation process that is hopelessly inadequate. The planning process has remarkably left a greater level of uncertainty upon its conclusion than it had going into the Assessment Committee two months ago. If ever there was an example of how not to build infrastructure this is it.

As a final remark I would also like to extend my sympathies to those who have had their lives turned upside down by this ordeal. Hundreds will be displaced from their homes and thousands will see their neighbourhoods and parklands be permanently torn apart by this political idiocy. There is no justification for the level of hurt this is causing.

Architecture is for Everyone.
</body></html>

Planning to Fail: East West Link (Part 2)

<html><body>
<a href="/news/planning-minister-approves-eastern-section-of-east-west-link" target="_blank">Last Monday</a> the largest and most destructive planning permit in Melbourne’s recent history was granted by Planning Minister Matthew Guy. The contentious East West link toll road is now approved to cut a swathe of destruction through Melbourne’s inner north. Coinciding with the announcement was the public release of the Assessment Committee report, the outcome of the 30 day hearing into the project.

The Assessment Committee’s findings contain massive criticisms of both the planning process and the proposed project. Whilst it does ultimately recommend that part A of the project from the Eastern Freeway to Citylink is approved, it does so through gritted teeth and a very long list of changes and protections. It makes no such recommendation for Part B of the project which they felt was inadequately addressed in the Comprehensive Impact Statement (CIS).

<h2>Will the project work from a traffic perspective?</h2>

Comments from the Assessment Committee:

<blockquote>
By 2031 with the Project constructed, there will be marginal changes to total vehicle trips, vehicle hours travelled, traffic speed and public transport trips compared with not having the Project constructed. The Project will clearly reduce travel time on the route between Hoddle Street and CityLink/Tullamarine Freeway. However, traffic volume increases on the approach routes and CityLink /Tullamarine Freeway, combined with the Zenith model neglecting intersection delays, show the benefits will not be as significant as the LMA document suggests.
</blockquote>

Red and Black Architect (R+BA) comments:

The Assessment Committee went on to find that many aspects of the reference design were not warranted having been presented with all of the available traffic data. Subsequently their recommendations included the removal of the Elliott Avenue entry and exit and also the removal of the connection at Citylink to the south. The flyover at Hoddle Street was also recommended to be deleted due to insufficient traffic demand. The Planning Minister in response has only agreed to the removal of the Elliott Avenue entry / exit in Royal Park and its replacement with a connection to Flemington Road.

<h2>The Reference Design</h2>

Unlike a typical planning application, the Linking Melbourne Authority achieved their planning approval via a reference project. This reference project is indicative only and will ultimately not what is built.

Comments from the Assessment Committee:

<blockquote>
The Committee considers that the process of reaching the design that is the Reference Project has not been one that follows a logical path of identifying viable options, evaluating them, engaging the community in the process at an early stage when such input can be incorporated, testing the preferred option against robust criteria, adjusting it and then proposing it with supporting justification.

The reliance on the Reference Project as the key expression of how the Project might be delivered has created angst and confusion in the community. In essence, the Reference Project, while not a real project, has been considered and assessed as such,and it has failed to deliver an appropriate outcome

As the Reference Project is a concept and not a ‘real’ project, it has made it difficult to fully assess the impacts of the Project, as they may occur or not, depending on whether the final Project is quite similar or very different to the Reference Project. In practical terms this has caused the following issues:

• Lack of certainty on key technical issues such as tunnelling approach leading to difficulty in fully assessing potential impacts;

• Lack of certainty on other issues such as social and economic effects;

• The generation of significant community concern and stress about Reference Project elements that may not be in the final Project

At the end of the day it is not up to the Committee to redesign the Reference Project. As put by LMA, the Reference Project is purely a concept for assessment purposes. However the Committee is concerned that even the Reference Project appears to be based on a limited design brief that would likely produce suboptimal outcomes when viewed across a range of community objectives, not just road design.
</blockquote>

R+BA comments:

The community has been let down massively by the use of the reference design in lieu of the actual proposal. If anyone other than the state government tried this method of seeking planning approval they would be laughed out of council and/or VCAT. The State Government should be setting the highest of standards for how the planning process should run, not scraping the bottom as they have done in this case.

<h2>The Eastern Section</h2>

The Eastern Section of the project involves the tunnel portal near the Hoddle street and Eastern Freeway Connection. The critical issues around this area include the acquisition and displacement of residents, the design impacts upon heritage streetscapes and the beautiful Clifton Hill shot tower and traffic issues.

Comments from the Assessment Committee:

<blockquote>
The Committee finds that there is no justification for the Hoddle Street flyover shown in the Reference Project based on traffic volumes and other impacts discussed later in this report. There is insufficient justification for the construction of the proposed sidetrack. Further, the Committee considers there is an opportunity to investigate relocation of the tunnel portal or portals east of Hoddle Street, and it has recommended accordingly.

The Committee considers that the design of this intersection, as well as the proposed land acquisition for the temporary sidetrack on Alexandra Parade, is the consequence of road design taking precedence over other considerations

The tower is listed on the Victorian Heritage Register (No. H0709) and is classified by the National Trust (B3798). It is, in [heritage Architect] Mr Nigel Lewis’ opinion, [that the tower] is of “global significance” as it has the most distinctive design for a shot tower due to its scale, design and patterned brickwork. Mr Lewis cited two international experts who have visited the site, one of whom was impressed with the visual impact of the tower on the surrounding area and how it dominates views from many locations due to its isolated location on relatively flat ground. Mr Lewis considered that it is imperative that the aesthetic and landmark values of this “remarkable structure” are not devalued by the Project.

The Committee does not support the above ground structures (apart from necessary overhead signs, lighting and sound barriers) at the Eastern Freeway/Hoddle Street interchange to preserve the visual integrity of the Shot Tower.
</blockquote>

Comments from the Minister for Planning, Matthew Guy:

<blockquote>
I have rejected the committee’s finding that the option for a flyover at the eastern end of the project would be unacceptable for the following reasons.

(a) The Project is of such significance to the state, and the interchange so critical to the design, that it is necessary and desirable that the eastern portal and access be resolved sooner rather than later and with this approval

(b) In rejecting the flyover the Committee relied upon the possibility of an alternative design. No alternative design was exhibited and no alternative has been tested in the manner of the flyover. I do not agree that it is appropriate to describe the exhibited project as unacceptable in the absence of a demonstrated proven alternative.

I do not accept that the flyover should be rejected on the grounds of cultural heritage. Any detrimental impact on cultural heritage values is more than offset by the benefits of the project and the landmark potential of the flyover.
</blockquote>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/lma-view-from-smith-st.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Linking Melbourne Authority image view from Smith Street"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="291" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/lma-view-from-smith-st.jpg?itok=4kfcyK7u" title="Linking Melbourne Authority image view from Smith Street" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Linking Melbourne Authority image view from Smith Street</figcaption></figure><figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/lma-view-from-wellington-st.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Linking Melbourne Authority image view from Wellington Street"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="288" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/lma-view-from-wellington-st.jpg?itok=crOP5BGc" title="Linking Melbourne Authority image view from Wellington Street" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Linking Melbourne Authority image view from Wellington Street</figcaption></figure>R+BA comments:

The approach shown here by Matthew Guy in my view is alarming, arrogant and misguided in the extreme. Firstly, Mr Guy is of the view that it so important that the project start immediately that he is not willing to allow time to properly design the project. Anyone who has ever started any construction project would be aware that failing to take time to plan and design can only lead to a poor result. To take such a foolhardy approach on the biggest transport project in the state’s history is baffling.

Another alarming aspect of Guy’s comments relate to the provision of alternative designs for the eastern section. He has somehow implied that it is the objector’s responsibility to provide a better design than the LMA reference design and that by failing to do so, no such design is possible. To someone with no legal qualification this seems like the equivalent of reversing the burden of proof. Councils, organisations and individuals were given no budget by the state government to commission their own designs. The planning system should not require them to prove a better solution, just that the proposed solution is unacceptable. To take this back to a smaller project example what the minister has said is that if you don’t like your neighbours extension you must redesign it for them or risk having it approved.

Atelier Red + Black and Safety Net for Royal Park worked pro bono for many weeks in order to provide an alternative design to save Royal Park. If they had the resources to work for free on the Eastern end as well, maybe the minister might have considered a redesign of this aspect.

The final outrageous point from Mr Guy is that the Clifton Hill Shot Tower is less important historically and culturally than the proposed Hoddle Street Flyover which will act as a monument to Mr. Guy. Mr Guy has a poor record of understanding heritage issues pertaining to architecture and the built environment. In January he was quoted in the Herald Sun newspaper as saying:

<blockquote>
People use the term brutalist architecture to legitimise ugly buildings
<cite>Matthew Guy, <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/planning-minister-matthew-guy-no-fan-of-ugly-hoyts-cinema-building/story-fni0fit3-1226814345343">"Planning Minister Matthew Guy no fan of 'ugly' Hoyts Cinema building"</a> 
(January 30, 2014)</cite>
</blockquote>

If this is the extent of Mr. Guy’s knowledge of heritage he should be taking the advice of experts rather than dismissing them.

Continued in <a href="/news/planning-to-fail-east-west-link-part-2" target="_blank">part two of this series</a>.

This post originally appeared on <a href="http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/planning-to-fail-east-west-link/" target="_blank">The Red and Black Architect blog</a>.
</body></html>

The Red and Black Architect

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

The Red and Black Architect

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News