lEArNiNG spAcEs Of TOmOrrOw

---

THE MELB OU R N E R EVIEW A PR I L 201 2

FORM DESI GN

PLA N N I N G

I N N OVATI ON

Learning spaces of tomorrow Sarah Ball discusses radical transformations in the design of learning enviroments

YOUNG AND ENGAGED Alison Cleary on the new generation at the Australian Institute of Architects.

62

The feeling of a room

Byron George discusses an elusive quality of design and architecture.

63

Make my city work

The Property Council of Australia launches a new campaign.

67

60 the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012

the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012 61

FORM

FORM

ONGOING CHALLENGES TO RETAIL

In regard to adverse impact tests on existing businesses or activity centres (p. 244), the PC recognises this is a generally accepted consideration in Australia’s planning jurisdictions. The PC finds that “if, as a result of a new out-ofcentre development, the existing centre declined, the conclusion which should be drawn would be that the community prefers the mix of services the new development is able to offer”. In fact, the PC goes further to say that it is the community that would “put the existing centre out of business” by withholding their patronage from the existing centre that does not provide them with what they want (p. 245). But we need to acknowledge the major economic, social and land use implications of this viewpoint in regard to the fate of existing centres. And, while acknowledging that ‘dead’ centres are prevalent in the USA, the PC states that regulation allowing new malls to develop nearby to an existing centre is only one reason for ‘dead’ centres in the USA (with other reasons including lack of anchor tenants, and changes in the socio-economic profile of catchments).

Retailing and the Productivity Commission Inquiry Report

W

hether you’re looking for a solid doorstop or just some general reading , the Productivity Commission’s (PC) Inquiry Report on the Economic Structure and Performance of the Australian Retail Industry (Australian Government, No.56, 4 November 2011) does the job. And those with an interest in planning and development will enjoy the option to read the heavy tome. The PC’s Terms of Reference required it to undertake an inquiry into the implications of globalisation for the Australian retail industry, with a view to informing the Commonwealth Government on whether current policy settings are appropriate in this environment. The 460-page report looks at: the structure, performance and efficiency of the industry; drivers of structural change (globalisation, the digital economy, etc); online purchasing; tax arrangements; and regulatory and policy issues that impact on structural change in the industry. Of the many aspects of retailing under examination, a relevant one for consideration by those in the planning profession is the PC’s finding that planning and zoning regulations are complex, excessively prescriptive, and anti-competitive. This will not be news to most of us. The PC notes how zoning can unnecessarily reduce land available for particular uses; overly prescriptive local planning rules inhibit entry and cause unwarranted delay and costs through compliance burdens; and adverse impact tests provide inappropriate protection for existing businesses and activity centres. Consideration is also given to out-of-centre developments. The PC is of the view that such locations should be permitted where it is likely to generate a net community benefit, even if there are detrimental impacts to an existing centre or to the commercial interests of an individual business within that centre. The advent of on-line shopping means that the flexibility of the planning system becomes an increasingly important consideration in the capacity for bricks-and-mortar retailers to compete and improve their productivity. Underlying the PC’s approach to retailing is a desire to encourage higher business productivity, to promote the interests of the consumer, and to ensure that planning and zoning regulations don’t impede the ability of the retail industry to respond to changes in consumer preferences and retail formats. The PC concludes that “planning and

...the consumer generally prefers to visit centres where shopping amenity and accessibility to a range of retail choices are high; but this cannot be achieved in an optimum manner if the shopping strip or centre also has an array of office and light industrial uses that break up the retail continuity and reduce the amenity of the shopping visit”.

Assessing economic and social costs However, a journey through urban and suburban America indicates a proliferation of ‘new’ centres or malls, while older versions lie vacant next door or nearby. This must mean (from the PC’s perspective) that America has a deficit of anchor tenants and ever-changing

The PC also mentions that, among other factors, “rigid heritage regulation” is a reason preventing alternative uses of space in a timelier manner (p. 245). In this regard, we can only wonder where heritage legislation stands vis-àvis retail development policy in the PC’s view. Another aspect highlighted by the PC is that “a proposed development’s impact on the viability of an existing centre (should) be undertaken during the strategic planning stage or major review, rather than in the context of specific businesses during development assessment processes” (p. 247). The PC says dealing with specific planning applications “is likely to lead to adverse competition outcomes” (p. 249), although how this would result is not clearly demonstrated by the PC. However, this approach overlooks the reality that proposals to rezone land to provide for major retail development may well occur outside of the time a strategic plan is prepared for an area. Experience indicates that the rezoning process involving Panels Victoria offers the best available

opportunity for all parties to put their case for or against a proposed rezoning to allow more retail development. Even from the PC’s viewpoint, waiting for five years or more for the preparation of the next town centre strategy plan or review to take place could involve an extensive waiting period for a developer/retailer seeking to improve the consumer’s access to retail! Much of the material presented in the PC report is of interest to those involved in all aspects of achieving good planning for activity centres, such as the need to ‘future-proof ’ activity centres so that their (potential) future expansion can be readily achieved (while avoiding significant tracts of land lying idle for years or hampered by fragmented residential and commercial landholdings). Uniform ‘as-of-right’ uses are also promoted for retailers, and could result in less ‘spot’ rezoning. The aspect of ‘gaming’ – whereby third parties can avail themselves of objection or appeal rights in an attempt to prevent a development or slow a development – also makes for good reading (p. 255), especially in the context of regulatory controls and compliance costs. The chapter on retail tenancy leases is also worth the read, with the PC indicating that Australia’s more regulated planning environment (which restricts floorspace provision) means landlords don’t have to offer retail space on terms that would be otherwise more favourable to their tenants if more floorspace was made available (p. 272).

And the chapter discussing on-line retail sales is illuminating, with on-line sales now equivalent to 6% of total retail sales in Australia, and with growth of between 10% and 15% pa forecast to 2013 (p. 87). Overall, the PC report is an easy read, providing much material to debate in retail and planning circles. However, the focus on productivity, revolving around the entry of new retailers to the marketplace and the importance of consumer preferences, while very important, overshadows any discussion of the significant role of existing town centres and shopping centres as part of our urban and community fabric, and underplays the attempt by planning regulations to provide some order of ‘balance’ in a system that otherwise appears to serve communities well. Yes, innovation in planning regulation and control is required, but the proliferation of new centres in an otherwise ‘unplanned’ or ‘less planned’ manner should be avoided because of the wider community costs involved.

INFORMATION John Henshall, LFPIA, Essential Economics Pty Ltd [email protected]

Photography by Trevor Mein

John Henshall

catchment profiles or, more likely, the lack of planning regulation in America contributes to this dereliction of assets, resources and urban fabric – all of which has its own ‘economic cost’. And social cost. In Australia, our planning system has direct experience of these external costs and has to deal with them on a regular basis.

zoning regulation which restricts the location of retail outlets or store formats has a negative influence on retail productivity growth” (p. 227). In reaching this conclusion, the PC draws on experience in other countries, including the USA and in Europe. The PC also notes that “landlords’ underlying concerns seem to be less about retaining civic or public amenity and more about preventing or delaying the arrival of a new competitor”, and that “land use restrictions, by constraining the supply of appropriately zoned land, drive up property prices” (p. 231). Furthermore, the PC observes that planning and zoning regulations delay, restrict and even prevent the entry of new competitors, or unduly raise the cost of starting a new business (p. 235). Planning system used to thwart new development Experience in the planning sector in Australia indicates that, regularly, landlords and existing retailers use the planning system to thwart the establishment of new centres and the introduction of new retailers. Of course, sometimes this is for very good reasons and with positive outcomes for the wider community. However, it seems that the PC report overlooks certain other important considerations associated with the retail industry and planning. These considerations include recognition

of the important role of the retail centre’s hierarchy; the importance of critical mass associated with a centre’s size and role; the importance of maintaining and enhancing shopping amenity; and recognition of the considerable ‘sunk’ cost by both the public and private sectors in existing centres. One aspect is worthy of consideration at this point, namely the PC’s consideration of introducing “broader business zones” to treat general retail and bulky goods the same, and – in the longer term – to have one “open zone” or multiple use zone where a broad variety of land uses can be considered – such as retail, commercial and even some low-impact industrial uses” (p. 241). This approach, the PC argues, would remove artificial distortions created by the planning system, both within retail (general and bulky goods) and between retail and other businesses (e.g. commercial and light industrial). However,

Melbourne 237 Napier Street, Fitzroy VIC Australia 3065 Phone 1800 800 777 Email [email protected]

a concern with such an approach revolves around centre function and amenity. Commercial (i.e. office) and retail uses generate different types of trips, and they impact on local amenity in different ways. For example, the consumer generally prefers to visit centres where shopping amenity and accessibility to a range of retail choices are high; but this cannot be achieved in an optimum manner if the shopping strip or centre also has an array of office and light industrial uses that break up the retail continuity and reduce the amenity of the shopping visit. More thought needs to be given to the PC’s findings in this respect. Try to imagine your own shopping centre or strip where a proliferation of light industrial and office uses intervene in the streetscape, resulting in longer walking distances to get to the shops and probably more traffic congestion and conflicts with trucks serving light industrial activities.

Sydney 21 Boundary Street, Darlinghurst NSW Australia 2010 Phone 02 9332 1600 Email [email protected] Adelaide 1000 Chairs Phone 08 8293 4658

Melbourne 237 Napier Street, Fitzroy VIC Australia 3065 Freecall 1800 800 777 Phone 03 9417 0077 Fax 03 9417 0011 Email [email protected]

Perth Katsui Phone 08 9385 3005 Newcastle HVD Phone 02 4929 6066

Sydney 21 Boundary Street, Darlinghurst NSW Australia 2010 Phone 02 9332 1600 Fax 02 9332 4073 Email [email protected]

www.thonet.com.au

Adelaide 1000 Chairs 45 Gilbert Street, Adelaide SA Australia 5000 Phone 08 8232 2155 Perth Katsui Phone 08 9385 3005 Newcastle HVD Phone 02 4929 6066

Cutler and Co, Andrew McConnell’s stylish new eatery in Fitzroy, Melbourne Tables, chairs and stools supplied by Thonet, commissioned by Architect Pascale Gomes-McNabb

Jorg – North Fitzroy, Melbourne Featuring the Classic Reissue No100 La Verna with Ebony finish and Tolix Tabourets 75cm with custom powder coat.

62 the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012

the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012 63

Form

Form

Somebody drew that… Byron George

Alison Cleary

T

A new home for the Institute

he leadership of architecture is experiencing a shift to a new generation of engaged, active professionals. Younger members of the Australian Institute of Architects are shaping architectural practice and debate locally and nationally through involvement in councils and committees. This transition is being demonstrated at the Victorian Chapter, with a number of key appointments to Victorian and National Councils from its younger member ranks, and a bold new headquarters under construction. 2012 gives a fresh face to a profession that is traditionally governed by established representatives. In March Jon Clements took on the role of Victorian Chapter President, replacing Robert Puksand. Jon is a founding partner and director of Jackson Clements Burrows Pty Ltd Architects ( JCB). JCB was established in 1998 with Tim Jackson and Graham Burrows to form a collaborative team with a shared commitment to the exploration of innovative architecture driven by environmentally sustainable design principles. JCB’s work has been nationally recognised through numerous Institute and Industry awards and has also been widely published throughout Australia and internationally. Prior to the formation of JCB, Jon studied architecture at Deakin University (Geelong) and was subsequently employed with Jackson Architecture (formerly Daryl Jackson Architects), gaining valuable experience working on larger institutional and educational projects. In the current industry environment Jon’s challenge will be to also ensure that the profession focus on protecting its future particularly in the areas of procurement, risk and remuneration. He sees his role as also one of supporting and encouraging the younger generation of architects to participate in the Institute and become engaged in promoting and protecting the value of architecture within our community. It is the new generation of architects that holds the future of the profession in its hands. Joining Jon on Chapter Council as a newly elected councillor is Stuart Harrison, architect, communicator and architectural advocate. One of this new generation of architects, Stuart is director of the award-winning firm Harrison and White Architects (HAW), based in Brunswick. He has taught architecture widely, including running the Australian Architecture course at RMIT. He founded and co-hosts The Architects on Melbourne community radio station 3RRR and has interviewed architects and designers from around the world. His recent book, 46 Square metres of land doesn’t normally become a house, for Thames & Hudson, promotes compact and innovative housing in Australia and New Zealand. He has also written for Architecture Australia, Monument and Lonely Planet, is a

regular correspondent for Architectural Review Australia and has appeared on ABC-TV’s Art Nation. At a national level, Victorians are playing key roles in the Institute. At the recent National Council elections two Victorians were elected to represent members across the nation. Maggie Edmond and Bryan Miller, both well known in their hometown of Melbourne, bring a wealth of expertise and knowledge to the Institute’s governing body. Further, in May this year, a Victorian will take on the position of National President. Shelley Penn is a Melbourne-based sole practitioner who mixes the fine scale of residential work with the big picture of working with government in various ways to advance the quality of design in the built environment. Her work has received several awards within Australia, and has been published and exhibited nationally

and internationally. She has continually contributed to the advancement of architecture and the built environment through her practice, and through advising, writing, teaching and advocacy about architecture and design. Shelley’s work includes advice to government and the private sector on design matters for numerous developments and public places. She was a member of the Architects Registration Board of Victoria from 2006 to 2009, and was Victoria’s first Associate Victorian Government Architect from 2006 to 2010. Currently Deputy Chair of the Heritage Council of Victoria, a board member of the Linking Melbourne Authority, and the Acting Chair of the National Capital Authority, Shelley takes on the role of National President of the Institute from current president, Sydney-based architect, Brian Zulaikha.

The redevelopment of 41 Exhibition Street, the Institute’s premises in Melbourne, began late last year with the demolition of the existing building, and will continue throughout 2012 as the new building rises on the site. While essentially a simple commercial office tower, 41 Exhibition Street will be a fundamental statement about the Institute and Australian architecture and will be exemplar in form, function and sustainability. The project’s inception dates back to 2006, when National Council commissioned consultants to prepare a detailed feasibility study for the site, encompassing a range of potential options for its future. These options varied from renovation to relocation and were debated at length. In 2008, after extensive and rigorous consultation, National Council decided that the site would be redeveloped into a small office tower that would set the standards in Australian architecture. Following a two-stage design competition, the commission to design the building was awarded to Lyons with a concept that explored ideas about the hybrid public/commercial building, the engagement of the Institute with the public and creating a benchmark sustainability project. Hickory Group, one of Australia’s largest building companies, is managing the build. They have been involved in some of Melbourne’s most recent innovative projects, including 50 Albert Rd in South Melbourne, Vogue in South Yarra, ARK in Richmond and Little Hero Apartments in Melbourne’s CBD. 41 Exhibition Street is an exemplar redevelopment that will lead the market by showing how a very small CBD site can be transformed to deliver a high quality, highly sustainable, innovative commercial building. It will be a centre for architecture in Victoria, both literally as the Institute’s headquarters, and symbolically.

W

hen was the last time you walked into a room and felt something? Think about it – we spend most of our time in buildings, but most of them are as anonymous to us as people in a crowd. What is it about some rooms that make us stop, give us that short intake of breath, or that warm fuzzy feeling? I remember when Crown Casino first opened. Here was a building designed to make people feel something. Whether it was awe at the eaten-all-thelollies-in-the-jar kind of way, or the sheer scale of the spectacle, with flames and fountains and a colourful audio-visual gold sequin flash. It certainly worked for a while, encouraging thousands of people to part with their cash, but that kind of splash only works for a while, until we become used to it. Then it just becomes another accessory that we’re a little sick of, relegated to the drawer of experience where things that once meant something live. Spaces like that rely on reinvigoration, whether it’s the 6-7 year retail fitout cycle or new things and events dreamt up by the marketing department. I’m not talking about that kind of experience. Think about your home and where you like to spend most of your time. What kind of environment is that? Where do you like to sit and be on your own? When we design restaurants, the main aim (apart from making sure the kitchen and service points work), is to try and ensure there are no bad tables. Different people want different things, sure, but we have all had experiences when entering a restaurant and the disappointment of being seated at “that” table, the one near the toilet door, or near the front door on a cold evening, bracing yourself for that cold blast every time someone enters. It’s the same thing with homes. New houses and apartments are commonly marketed in terms of square metres, number of bedrooms and “luxury” finishes and fittings. What they don’t say is that the “study” in that two bedrooms plus study apartment is the left over space with no windows at the back of the hallway, and the third bedroom in that display

Most of the things that we truly value in terms of our homes and rooms are the intangibles. The quality of the light at a certain time of day. Feeling cozy. The coolness and dappled shadow of shady courtyard on a hot afternoon. A sense of where you are in the world. Good spaces are crafted to relate to the human body. They have a sense of scale and proportion that mean something to a human being. They just feel right, whether the purpose is to overwhelm, nurture, excite or calm. Let’s take this back to basics. Give a building and interior a good sense of proportion that relates to a human being – and by this, be conscious of what kind of effect you are trying to achieve. Know where the sun comes from and how to manipulate it so it enters the room when you want it to and not when you don’t. Understand how air will move through the building and design it to catch breezes when you want it to without having to rely too much on mechanical systems. Make it fit for purpose. Do this and you are probably 90% there to creating a good building. The rest is about poetry, whether you want to take the “kick it in the guts” philosophy of Peter Corrigan, or restrained and refined approach of Sean Godsell (both whom are architects I respect). Maybe I’m just an old fashioned phenomenologist, but if you’re an architect and you don’t get these things right, you’re not really doing your job. Probably the master of this is the Pritzker prize winning Swiss architect Peter Zumthor. Images here are of the 2012 Serpentine Pavilion he designed in London. Every year a prominent architect is invited to design the pavilion in Hyde Park which is up for the summer of that year. Zumthor’s pavilion is exquisitely simple in plan and composition, and provides a breathtaking place of respite and contemplation. It is perfectly scaled to the human being, accentuates the effect of the landscape in the courtyard, and doesn’t have any unnecessary ornamentation or decoration. To me it has a permanent and timeless quality, something that is very hard to achieve.

Copyright Peter Zumthor, photograph BY John Offenbach.

Generational change at the AIA

home is a 3x3m box facing a fence down the side of the house where the air conditioning condenser is. These are not spaces you want to spend time in. They might sell more apartments and “tick boxes” on a Saturday afternoon, but really what they are there for is to squeeze that extra dollar out of the sale. Buildings designed by real estate copywriters. If you go visit a speculative display home, do yourself a favour and turn all of the lights out. Then go and sit on the sofa and look at what you see.

This is probably the most elusive quality when it comes to design and architecture – and almost completely absent in the current discourse. Timelessness. The requirement for shelter hasn’t changed that much in the past few hundred years, yet buildings designed and built just 30 years ago are torn down because they are no longer seen as relevant or functional. Maybe we all just need to try a little harder.

INFORMATION Byron George and partner Ryan Russell are directors of Russell & George, a design and architecture practice with offices in Melbourne and Rome. russellandgeorge.com

www.ghd.com

INFORMATION Alison Cleary is Victorian Chapter Manager, Australian Institute of Architects architecture.com.au

TRULY INTEGRATED - ARCHITECTURE | INTERIOR DESIGN | BUILDING SERVICES | STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

64 the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012

FORM

Jessalyn Salim and Dianna Sari Dewi.

Dean Benstead and Mel Prince.

Andrew Luke, Valerie Mack and Chris Correll.

DIA Graduate of the Year Awards Daniella Casamento

Brian Petersen and Stacey Bennett.

V

ictoria and Tasmania’s top design graduates for 2011, design industry leaders, educators, sponsors and representatives from the Victorian Government Department of Business and Innovation celebrated the Graduate of the Year Awards at Corporate Culture on March 21. Established by the Design Institute of Australia, the awards recognise excellence in emerging designers in the disciplines of Graphic Design, Industrial Design, Textile Design, Interior Design and Interior Design & Decoration.

Frances Gaffney and Chris Domingo.

Erica Adams-Atkinson and Nicolette Atkinson.

Participating Victorian and Tasmanian tertiary institutes nominated their most talented 2011 graduates based on academic performance and future aspirations in the design industry. Established designers from each discipline assessed over 60 anonymous portfolios and selected finalists from each category for interview with a panel of judges. Interviews informed the judges of the depth of each finalist’s design solutions, communication and visual presentation skills, work ethic and potential to make an impact on the Australian design industry. Dean Benstead, industrial design graduate of RMIT University, was awarded the Overall GOTYA for his design of a compressed air-powered motorbike, the ‘O2 Pursuit’, and also won in the category of Industrial Design. James Harper, Victorian President of the DIA, commented, “The judges were impressed that Dean’s project appeared production-ready and that he had applied his design skills so well to enrich a new piece of technology. They were pleased to see the development sketches on the board and it was felt that the design was beautifully researched, realised and presented.”

Findlay, representing the judges in this category, commented that “Strickland’s entry explored three different problems and offered intelligent creative solutions drawing on an understanding of multidisciplinary design processes. But best of all, I think Sarah has a passion for design that will sustain her as a brilliant designer in the future.” The GOTYA for Interior Design was won by Swinburne Institute of Technology graduate Frances Gaffney, “for her ability to consider the aesthetic, functional, economic, social and environmental dimensions of the spaces created... Strong environmental concerns clearly guided her design philosophy and her approach explored ways to reduce our environmental footprint,” said judge Valerie Mack. Gaffney also received a Colourways Colour Award. While a GOTYA was not awarded in the category of Interior Design & Decoration, the judges noted the high level of academic performance and work ethic of the runners up Sean Olfield of Box Hill Institute and Kate Pieters of RMIT University, also a recipient of a Colourways Colour Award. Colourways Colour Awards were also presented to Graphic Design graduate Michelle Yann of the Australian Academy of Design, Industrial Design graduate Tate Anson and Textile Design graduate Mara Kapsis both of RMIT University. GOTYA recipients are automatically entered into the national Graduate of the Year Awards to be announced in Sydney at designEx in May.

Textile Design GOTYA was awarded to Sarah Strickland of RMIT University. Egle

Sarah Whiting and Adam Whiting.

BONUS iCON TRAY WORTH $120 WiTH ANY pURCHASE OvER $500* *pRESENT THiS AD iN STORE TO CLAiM YOUR COMpLiMENTARY iCON TRAY DESigNED BY gORDON TAiT. LiMiT TO 1 TRAY pER CUSTOMER. OffER vALiD UNTiL MAY 31. $500 TRANSACTiON MUST BE MADE iN A SiNgLE SALE.

Graduate of Swinburne Institute of Technology, Jordon Rowe, won in the category of Graphic Design. The judges noted, “It was intriguing to see the rise in digital design for screen shown in this year’s entries... Judging the finest graduates is always a challenge but we concluded that Jordon’s exceptional user-centred design and branding made him worthy of first place.”  Fiorella Gasparetto and Gianni Favoro.

Andrew Fedorowicz and Chris Lowe.

SYDNEY SHOWROOM 611 ELIZABETH ST REDFERN NSW 2016 P 61 2 9310 1333 E [email protected] Jacqueline Johnson, Jeff Tsang and Julia Sutterby.

MADE IN MELBOURNE

MELBOURNE SHOWROOM 176 JoHNSToN ST FITZRoY vIc 3065 P 61 3 9419 7484 E [email protected]

ONLiNE TWITTER @TAIToUTDooR FAcEBooK.coM/TAIToUTDooR

tAIt.BIz

66 the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012

the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012 67

FORM

FORM • 24 percent approved of Melbourne’s road network and congestion management; • 43 percent approved of Melbourne’s public transport system; • 33 percent agreed that Melbourne has a good range of quality affordable housing; • 13 percent rated the Victorian Government as ‘fair’ in the level of taxation applied when people buy or sell property, and 31 percent rated performance as ‘very poor’; and • 38 percent agreed that Melbourne has good approaches to environmental sustainability and climate change. Melbourne came in as the third most liveable city in Australia. Positive outcomes of the survey found that the highest level of support was for the following activities:

We owe it to Melbourne to make our city work Jennifer Cunich

M

elbourne has all of the trademark qualities of a liveable city, with the title to prove it. Melbourne is a strong city, a vibrant city, a city to call home.

Learning spaces of tomorrow As universities look to better prepare students for ‘the real world’, should the design of education facilities be learning lessons from workplace design? Sarah Ball

A

re we ready for the real world? Discussions on many industry peers’ lips are that the educational spaces of yesterday and today aren’t adequately preparing graduates for the expectations and demands of ‘the real world.’

The physical environment plays an important role in determining the reputation of an educational institution, and the success of the inhabitants that occupy its spaces – the teachers and the students. Future trends in teaching and learning indicate that student collaboration will continue to thrive

and grow, supported by increasingly complex educational technologies and the use of social media. The ‘known’ format of today’s lectures is set to drastically transform and edge towards a format of greater interactivity between students. So what does this mean spatially? Woods Bagot recently launched ‘Issues For a New Future’ – a commentary on the current issues facing business schools in the 21st century and beyond. Within this series of papers, we touch on this shift in teaching patterns and table some ideas of exactly what it might mean spatially. Enter ideas of communities and villages. We

believe that diverse environments – from cafes to learning spaces, media hubs and private nooks – all contribute to the idea of a campus village. In the same way that a village is simultaneously fragmented (through separate facilities and services) and united (through a sense of community and public space), the business school ‘village’ can be designed to similarly fragment and unite. By creating a varying terrain of spaces from large to small, noisy to quiet, public to private, and collaborative to individual, the village concept has the capacity to instil a strong campus-based learning experience. And why does the creation of communities on campus prepare students for the real world? In many ways this approach emulates the business workplace: a series of terrains, presenting alternative work environments according to the activities being undertaken and with whom. In brief, the future direction of learning on university campuses is similar in many respects to the strategy behind future workplace environments. Learning is moving away from a focus on the teacher to direct more attention to the student. Hence, more emphasis is placed upon students developing generic skills such as working in teams, project management, and problem solving – an attempt to prepare graduates to hit the ground running in the real world. We are also witnessing this trend in our academic spaces for tomorrow: this change in

the future direction of learning is quite obviously affecting the academic environment. This theory has been put into practice in Woods Bagot’s design for Deakin University’s new Burwood Highway Frontage Building, Set to be a world-class educational facility, what’s unique about this project is that the spaces are more akin to today’s workplace environments than your traditional academic office spaces. Inside the building, new generation academic workspaces feature strongly. A combination of office and more open-plan work spaces alongside informal and formal meeting spaces enables increased interaction and collaboration. The design provides task, social and rest spaces to promote collegiality and seeks to connect departments, students and the faculty by fostering a sense of community among every individual that uses the building.

INFORMATION Sarah Ball is a Principal of Woods Bagot and is one of the company’s leading education specialists in architecture, interiors and masterplanning. Recently, she has been instrumental in the design of leading educational projects such as Deakin University Building I in Melbourne – a project shortlisted for the World Architecture Festival Awards in 2011.

Our population is growing, a fact that we are all aware of. It’s safe to say that Melbourne will absorb the majority of Victoria’s population growth. And as we grow in number, we need to figure out how to protect and enhance Melbourne’s trademark qualities. As a city, Melbourne has performed pretty well for a while. We’ve had plenty of jobs, adequate public transport and enough housing. You could even say that Melbourne has been the ‘golden child’ of Australia – or at least Melburnians would. The identity of this city is strong; we know who we are as Melburnians, we love our city with conviction and we know what we want for its future. So here are the facts: we’re growing, we want to remain the most liveable city in the world and we want to live in a city that works. Melbourne has two choices: smart, planned growth or confused, ad-hoc growth. It actually is as simple as that. Melburnians, our governments and our communities get to make this choice collectively. The choice is simple and glaringly obvious. We need to get smarter as a city. There’s no doubt about it. We are entering the next era in the lifecycle of our city. We owe it to Melbourne to be smart about how the city grows. We’ve had our chance to tiptoe around the issue of what Melbourne needs. The time for

shyness has passed. Now is the time to grab the future of our city with both hands and mould it, build it, grow it. Melbourne’s story is unique but also reflects the state of Australia’s cities nationally. The Property Council of Australia’s recently launched campaign – Make My City Work – will reignite the discussion about the future of Australia’s cities. In Melbourne, our residents have spoken – and they are calling for change. Melbourne must radically decrease congestion, improve transport services and increase housing affordability. The results of the latest My City: The People’s Verdict survey (undertaken by Auspoll for the Property Council), paint a picture of what Australians really think about the liveability of our cities. Melbourne residents have issued a clear demand for major reform to the way our city is managed. Melbourne’s performance lags in comparison to other capital cities across Australia. More significantly, it falls well short of the expectations of its own residents. My City: The People’s Verdict tested the views of 603 Melbourne residents (among 5231 polled nationally) – benchmarking Melbourne’s performance against 17 attributes that define good cities. The survey established which attributes of a city mattered most to residents, the relative performance of capital cities and the performance of state governments on key issues. The Victorian Government’s performance on key aspects of urban and housing policy was also tested. The survey found that only:

to come. They are also asking for an overhaul of the way we plan, fund and deliver infrastructure to get back ahead of the transport and congestion curve. Policymakers need to respond now with a comprehensive set of reforms to streamline Victoria’s planning system, develop a proper program for planning, funding and delivering infrastructure and really highlight the vision for Melbourne’s future. Make My Melbourne Work is going to create an exciting narrative about how we actually do this. This is your city, your future. Get involved, get signed up and together we can make Melbourne work.

• The conversion of old industrial sites to apartments and town houses; • More apartments at major transport and retail centres; and • More medium density housing, such as town houses, in middle and outer suburbs. The survey showed that Melburnians want smart, planned growth. Melburnians do not want confused uncoordinated growth. We need to get smarter as a city as we enter the next phase in the life of Melbourne. We owe it to ourselves to be smart about how the city grows. Melbourne residents want to see progress on major strategic initiatives that will guide growth and make sure Melbourne keeps moving in years

INFORMATION Jennifer Cunich is Victorian Executive Director, Property Council of Australia Add your voice to the Make My City Work campaign and sign up at makemycitywork.org.au

68 the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012

the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012 69

SOCIALS

SOCIALS

GREAT BRITAIN AT CROWN

JAMES MORRISON CONCERT A jazz band flash mob, wowing crowds in Degraves St, announced the James Morrison Jazz Residency at The InterContinental Melbourne The Rialto. The first show delighted the capacity audience in Market Lane Bar on March 16. James appears again on June 8, during the Melbourne International Jazz Festival and again at Spring Racing Carnival time.

The Australian launch of the UK’s global GREAT campaign, showcasing the best of Britain around the world, took place on the eve of the Melbourne F1 Grand Prix weekend. To mark the launch, Hugh Robertson MP hosted an event at Crown Casino. Some of the best known names in British motorsport were in attendance, including F1 champions, Damon Hill and Sir Jackie Stewart, along with Williams CEO Alex Burns and Mercedes Benz F1 CEO Nick Fry. Photos: Jesse Spezza

Francesca Cumani.

Photos: Matthew Wren

Callum Adamson, Luke Price, Seebs Llewellyn and DaveBurn.

Stuart Gill.

Shane Douglas, Julie Zeman, James Morrison and Bec Normond.

Robyn Davies and Rob Davies.

Kate Peck and Katie Sneat.

Andy Lee and Hamish Blake.

Chris and Jaime Allan.

Wayne and Chery Keene.

Paul Ternent and Gwendolynne Burkim.

Lydia Lassila and Lauri Lassila.

Lauren Gunston and Fraser Gunston.

Will Woods and Debra Page.

Jean and Dean Critchley.

Jenny Philippe and Matthew Jones.

Celebrating Graffiti and Stencil Art through Sandra Bardas Metro Gallery in Armadale was the venue for the recent launch of the Sandra Bardas: Mini Book #21 from the Macmillan Mini-Art Series. Launched by The Age Zone writer Michael Short, the Bardas family was joined by Ken McGregor, Dean Sunshine, Vicki Vidor, Vanessa O’Hanlon, Kane Bowden, Sally Nagle and 100 other guests to pay tribute to Sandra Bardas’s exuberant, creative life.

Bill Burrows and Claire Tonge.

Aaron McCoullough and Hugh Studley.

Bringing Wine back to Earth – on the Roof

Jolyon White and Olivia Metcalf.

How Not to Drink Wine Like a Wanker returned to the Food and Wine Festival this year with an exciting new venue – the HASSELL rooftop. Appropriately renamed Wine Wanker on the Roof, sommelier Dan Simms and bar owner Miss Pearls entertained the crowd with their hilarious mockery of wine pomposity.

Brad Werner and Rachel Justice.

Photos: Matthew Wren

Photos: George Haig Voh and Kane Bowden.

Sandra Dubs and Judy-Ann Stewart.

Dean Sunshine and Belinda Bardas.

Peter Streker, Jackie VanVugt and Sandra Craig.

Beth Charles and Vicki Vidor.

David Bardas and Alex McCulloch.

Pat Farrance and Ian Farrance.

Annie Howard, Jill Rounds and Wendy Allgood.

Ellen Kittson and Miss Pearls.

Ali Wilson, Dominigue Choromanski and Tamzen Hayes.

70 the MELBOURNE REVIEW APRIL 2012

FORM INFormANT What’s On In April Planning Institute of Australia Friday 20 April

Mass Transit Horizons PIA / University of Melbourne Time: 8:45am - 4:45pm This one-day workshop will review traditional approaches toward the economics of mass transit projects in the context of current challenges and growth pressures. For registration and other information please contact Renae Louis on (03) 9810 3158 or at [email protected]. au, or visit www.mccp.unimelb.edu.au/ masstransithorizons

20-22 April

Urban Design Forum, Melbourne and Bendigo The central theme for NUDF2012 is urban design in regional cities across Australia, where 20+% of our population lives. We will explore the role of Local, State and Federal Government in regional cities, consider the education/ skill development needs, and look at the work being undertaken by private sector designers and developers in making sure regional cities are part of our low-carbon sustainable future. To register please download and fill out the registration form at www.planning. org.au/documents/item/3699, or for more information please e-mail bruce@ urbaninitiatives.com.au

29 April-2 May

National Planning Congress “Planning for a Sunburnt Country”, Adelaide For more information www.piacongress.com

Property Council of Australia Tuesday 17 April 2012

Environmental Upgrade Agreements

– green your building whilst saving costs Time: 7.15am for 7.30am to 9.00am Venue: Zinc @ Federation Square Speaker: Scott Bocskay, CEO, Sustainable Melbourne Fund The Property Council is bringing together experts from the environmental upgrade schemes from New South Wales and the City of Melbourne to provide insight and all the details needed to green your building and save costs. propertyoz.com.au/vic

Doyle, Sam Sangster, CEO, Places Victoria, Mina Guli, Chief Investment Officer, Peony Capital and Deputy Chairman, Australian Chamber of Commerce (Beijing ) The annual Victorian Sustainable Development Conference, now in its fifth year, brings together leaders from the property, government and academic spheres to discuss and share sustainability strategies.  In 2012, the conference will be focusing on the carbon price, government and industry partnerships, alternative energy and green investment.

Neff SMarT SaviNgS C aShbaCk

propertyoz.com.au/vic

Wednesday 18 April

Retail Leases Act Time: 9.00am to 1.00pm Venue: Minter Ellison Lawyers – Rialto Speakers: Minter Ellison Lawyers Property team This half day professional development course, presented in conjunction with Minter Ellison Lawyers, will provide delegates with valuable information about the Retail Leases Act and the practical tools required to successfully manage your centre and retailers through the Act in Victoria. propertyoz.com.au/vic

Friday 27 April 2012

Innovation and Excellence Awards Time: 12 noon for 12.30pm to 2.00pm Venue: Palladium at Crown Join the Property Council as we profile the Victorian finalists for the 2012 Property Council of Australia/Rider Levett Bucknall Innovation and Excellence Awards. Category winners to be showcased and the Victorian Development of the Year award to be announced.

Australian Institute of Architects Victoria Architecture Awards The Victoria Architecture Awards will be presented at a gala dinner held at the Palladium Room at Crown on Friday June 29. For more information contact the Award Coordinator Libby Richardson on 8620 3810. vicawards.architecture.com.au

PUrChaSe 2 Neff aPPLiaNCeS 5% CaShbaCk PUrChaSe 3 Neff aPPLiaNCeS 7.5% CaShbaCk PUrChaSe 4 Neff aPPLiaNCeS 10% CaShbaCk award winning german design and engineering has made Neff a leading brand in europe – and now australia. Combine from the range of ovens, cooktops, specialty appliances, a coffee machine, rangehoods and dishwashers to recieve cashback. Neff also comes with a 4 year guarantee and has been writing kitchen history since 1877. for fur ther information, your nearest retailer, or an appliance demonstration see our website or call 1300 727 421.

propertyoz.com.au/vic

Wednesday 13 June 2012

Sustainable Development Conference Time: 8.00am to 4.30pm Venue: Grand Hyatt Melbourne Speakers: Mark Dreyfus QC, Secretary, Department of Climate Change and Energ y Efficiency, Lord Mayor Robert

hUrrY – LiMiTed TiMe 5Th MarCh TO 7Th MaY, 2012 www.neff.com.au

Terms and conditions apply - visit www.neff.com.au or see in-store for details. Offer only applies to orders placed 5th March - 7th May 2012. Cashback by redemption only.