mar-apr 2012

Brutalism: a heritage issueOnce thought by many to be too ugy to love, Brutalist buildings are a potent symbol of their time.

UTS BUilding 1Michael Dysart sets the record straight

new BrUTalSim The legacy of the Government Architect’s Branch

concreTe poeTry Iconic and award-winning buildings

neTwork evenTS Autumn calendar

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

contents7.

on the coverThe Sydney Masonic Centre, a fine example of Brutalism. Michael Bogle discusses the origins of Brutalism on page 10. photo: Max Dupain

Network events: Autumn calendar06

Editorial 03

President’s message02

Concrete poetry: award-winning buildings 60s-80s Noni Boyd, Glenn Harper12

The Heritage Committee reports on 201122

Beauty of the beast Michael Bogle10

23 Interiors under threat: the Hillam House gets a reprieve for its Paul Kafka furniture

Book review: Encyclopedia of Australian Architecture Peter Tonkin24

Darling Harbour Bicentennial Redevelopment Project Noni Boyd 19

New Brutalism and the legacy of the Government Architect’s Branch Peter Mould 14

UTS Building 1: In the architect’s own words Michael Dysart 16

News in brief from around the NSW Chapter04

Goldstein Hall and the Surry Hills Police Centre Anne Higham07

editor Peter Salhani abeditor@architecture.com.au

editorial committee chairJoe Agius joe.agius@cox.com.au art direction and design Jamie Carroll and Ersen Sen leadinghand.com.au

copy editorMonique Pasilow

managing editorRoslyn Irons

advertising roslyn.irons@architecture.com.au

Subscriptions (annual)Six issues $60, students $40 monica.love@architecture.com.au

editorial & advertising officeTusculum, 3 Manning Street Potts Point NSW 2011 (02) 9246 4055

ISSN 0813-748X Published six times a year, Architecture Bulletin is the journal of the Australian Institute of Architects, NSW Chapter (ACN 000 023 012). Continuously published since 1944.

disclaimerThe views and opinions expressed in articles and letters published in Architecture Bulletin are the personal views and opinions of the authors of these writings and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Institute and its officers. Material contained in this publication is general comment and is not intended as advice on any particular matter. No reader should act or fail to act on the basis of any material herein. Readers should consult professional advisers. The Australian Institute of Architects NSW Chapter, its officers, editor, editorial committee and authors expressly disclaim all liability to any persons in respect of acts or omissions by any such person in reliance on any of the contents of this publication.

print and paperPrinted by Rostone Print using soy-based vegetable inks on FSC mixed source certified paper, manufactured to ISO 14 001 environmental accreditation using elemental chlorine-free (ECF) pulps. Plates and paper offcuts from the printing process are recycled.

patronsArchitecture Bulletin thanks its Patrons for their support

Gold Patron Hassell

Silver Patrons Bates Smart Cox Architecture Group GSA

Bronze Patrons fjmt (Francis-Jones Morehen Thorp) Lend Lease Design Tanner Architects

Supporter Buzacott Architects

Technical Sponsor Architectural Window Systems

14.

16.

1

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

president,s

message

pho

to: N

eil F

enel

on

the most valued and tangible aspects of Institute membership.

Over recent years, there has been much talk informally among members about taking the publication online. Recognising that some people prefer print communication and others digital, Architecture Bulletin editor Peter Salhani has suggested a cost-effective evolution from the current print-only model, to a combined print and digital model that would expand its content and make it more immediate, relevant and accessible.

The idea is to make the print edition a more substantial quarterly publication (rather than bimonthly), possibly with a stronger pictorial focus, and, concurrently, to run an online Architecture Bulletin blog for articles, news and current events, including T@T.

The blog would link to the Chapter website but adopt its own distinct identity, just as Architecture Bulletin currently does. As well as offering members more immediate updates, it would allow members to respond directly to articles online, making feedback more direct. Longer term, the plan would be to expand the blog as a resource space.

Together with Editorial Committee Chair, Joe Agius, and with the support of Chapter Council, we feel this is a promising opportunity that will be welcomed by members, both for the potential of improved service and the profile-raising opportunities it offers to contributors. However, we’d like to know your thoughts before embarking on any changes, so get in touch with either myself, Joe or Peter.

open governance

It’s now common for organisations and public authorities, like local councils, to publish meeting agendas and minutes online. We think the NSW Chapter should also be part of this move to open governance and greater transparency. It’s important that members are aware of discussions held on their behalf and for their benefit.

Online publication will enable you to quickly scan minutes for subject matter of particular interest. Additional benefits are:• Interested and engaged members will gain an insight into the range of issues discussed by the Chapter Council and its committees; and• Potential new committee members can

match their interests with the most appropriate committee by better understanding the depth and breadth of issues addressed by each committee.

Welcome to the new year, I hope everyone had a chance to rest over the holiday break. The NSW Chapter and Chapter Council is looking forward to a full 2012. Motivated by the desire to constantly find new ways to improve our service to members and the profession, I’d like to share some of the new proposals being considered and implemented at the moment.

Tuesdays @ Tusculum

The Tuesday Night Talks series has been a prominent fixture on the Chapter calendar for many years. The quality and range of talks, over the past few years in particular, has been outstanding, thanks to a small and dedicated team led by Andrew Burns.

This year, the program continues with a new name, Tuesdays@Tusculum (T@T), reflecting both a broadening of the events, and a refocus on Tusculum as a cultural hub. Gillian Redman-Lloyd, our new Events & Marketing Manager, is coordinating T@T with the Chapter’s newly formed Design Culture Committee. As well as talks, the 2012 program will include films, Q&A forums, exhibitions and conversations across the generations (older architects interviewed by younger ones, as well as some events sitting slightly left of architecture’s traditional centre.

The 2012 program began on 21 February with a presentation by Marc Stringa on planning projects in the Middle East. T@T events will be listed in the weekly e-news and posted on the Chapter website under ‘events’: www.architecture.com.au/nsw. Importantly, T@T is also being promoted on public websites like http://whatson.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au , which we hope will open the series to a broader audience.

architecture Bulletin

I’m sure you share my enthusiasm for Architecture Bulletin, both as the Chapter’s journal of record and a forum for discourse about the practice of architecture in New South Wales. It consistently rates as one of

editorial

A common thread can be traced through the features in this heritage issue of Architecture Bulletin, and that is the lack of statutory protection in New South Wales for postwar architect-designed buildings and the designed landscapes within which they often sit.

There are currently a number of award-winning modern buildings under threat of substantial alteration or demolition. Since November 2011, the Institute’s Heritage Committee (NSW Chapter) has been informed of potential demolitions of a Harry Seidler-designed house at Penrith and a Glenn Murcutt-designed house in Terrey Hills. In addition, part of Goldstein Hall, a Sulman Award-winning university hall and residence complex designed by the NSW Government Architect’s Branch in 1964, is in the process of being demolished as we go to print.

The cry has been ‘it is not a heritage item’, but has the process been followed to fully assess its significance? Heritage listing is currently the mechanism by which buildings are protected at a local, state or national level. Many recent award-winning buildings and their landscape design have no statutory protection, as they are too young to be considered heritage items. As a result, most modern architecture has no statutory protection. State-owned buildings (including institutions) are frequently not in LEP heritage schedules as they are generally dealt with under Section 170 of the NSW Heritage Act.

Inclusion on the NSW Chapter’s Register of 20th Century Buildings of Significance does not provide protection against alteration or demolition, as the register is not a statutory one. Such is the fear of, or contempt for, the ‘H-word’ that the Institute’s own Tasmanian Chapter has renamed its heritage committee, and its consideration is now of ‘architecturally significant’ buildings.

Occasionally an award-winning modern building or complex makes it on to the State Heritage Inventory, Tocal College’s CB Alexander Campus at Paterson is a rare example. These buildings were identified during the Section 170 process. State Government agencies are required to maintain a heritage register, but not all building types have been assessed, as certain agencies specifically exclude interwar and postwar buildings.

Other countries have better mechanisms for the protection of their 20th century built heritage. English Heritage has recently undertaken considerable work in the assessment of 20th century buildings,

including postwar items, listing a wide range of building types: tube stations, public housing and banks, including Richard Rogers’s Lloyd’s Bank in London. The listings are not restricted to so-called iconic buildings. Prototypes or early examples of new housing forms have also been identified and listed. Similarly, in New Zealand, iconic postwar buildings such as the Futuna Chapel (pictured) in Karori—which was awarded the New Zealand Institute of Architects 25 Year Award—have been listed as heritage items, receiving statutory protection under the relevant district plan.

Of all New South Wales buildings to have received the Institute’s Enduring Architecture Award over the past decade, only four have any statutory protection: three public buildings (including the Sydney Opera House) and one Glenn Murcutt house. Even Darling Harbour, a precinct redeveloped as a bicentennial project, is now being master planned once again. What will happen to the award-winning structures on this site once their functions are superseded?

During the 1960s, the buildings designed by the NSW Government Architect’s Branch were considered to be among the best architecture in the country. Many of these fall into the category of Brutalism, the focus of this issue of Architecture Bulletin. The influences on Brutalism in Australia were many. As Peter Mould, NSW Government Architect Emeritus, elegantly reminds us in this edition, pages 14-15: “Individual strands evolved. Apart from the brutalist movement from England, other influences were: Scandinavia, particularly the work of Alvar Aalto; the organic school

John Scott’s design for the small Futuna Chapel (1958-61), Karori, New Zealand, combined Western influences such as Le Corbusier’s chapel at Ronchamp, with symbolic elements from traditional Maori architecture. It received the NZIA Gold Medal in 1968 and a 25 Year Award in 1986. The proposed sale and redevelopment of the site resulted in the establishment of a foundation to care for this diminutive chapel, which continues to be used for ceremonies and also as a recital venue. photo: Noni Boyd.

an expanded patrons program

The Design Culture Committee has also been considering an initiative proposed by our Chapter Manager Roslyn Irons. For some years there has been a Patrons Program to support Architecture Bulletin. We’re convinced there are some significant opportunities for the Institute to expand a Patrons Program to also promote and enhance the culture of architecture in this state.

An expanded program might allow the Chapter to raise the profile of architecture in New South Wales by:• Establishing an alumni alliance of

esteemed New South Wales Fellows and Life Fellows to acknowledge their projects’ valuable contribution to the built environment;

• Creating a comprehensive knowledge base of information about New South Wales architecture, projects and buildings; and

• Lifting the profile of the profession by positioning architecture at the forefront of design and culture in New South Wales.

The new Patrons Program would fund the development of a fully searchable database to:• Honour and celebrate the work of

members of the profession through exhibitions, archives, photographic collections and oral histories;

• Facilitate closer links with aligned organisations and institutions;

• Publish work advancing architectural knowledge; and

• Provide data for scholarly research.The program would function in a

similar way to the ‘friends’ programs of other cultural organisations and university alumni groups. It would develop our profession’s credibility with decision-makers in government and the community, and build on our professional networks. Funding for the program would be sourced from willing practices, patrons and new sponsors.

I hope you will see the wonderful opportunities opened up by these ideas. I particularly welcome your reactions and suggestions before we get into full launch mode. Contact me at mpullinger@hassellstudio.com

Matthew PullingerNSW Chapter President

exemplified by the work of Frank Lloyd Wright; and the architecture of Asia, particularly Japan, which was seen to be human, accessible and sophisticated.”

Why, then, are these award-winning buildings now being demolished, painted or wallpapered beyond recognition? In the past, institutional buildings that were too small but still sound and serviceable were given to another user. The National Art School in Darlinghurst, for example, had a number of prior incarnations: a convict stockade, a jail and a prisoner-of-war camp. Until relatively recently, public buildings were continually added to in order to cater for their expanding programs, as can be seen with the Australian Museum, the State Library of New South Wales, the Art Gallery of NSW and the Sydney Town Hall.

When did large-scale public buildings suddenly become disposable? What will the New South Wales postwar architectural legacy be if we continue this trend of demolishing buildings (particularly brutalist buildings) for institutional or corporate rebranding purposes, or because some simply dislike their aesthetics? Recent demolitions tend to be justified with arguments that the replacement building will be sustainable. But what is the environmental cost of demolition and reconstruction, and what is the cultural cost of erasing award-winning postwar buildings from our cities and our memories, when instead they could be creatively extended or adapted?

Dr Noni BoydNSW Chapter Heritage Officer

32

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 54

chapter manager’s report

We would like to take the opportunity of congratulating the new incoming Chapter Councillors on their successful nomination to Chapter Council. Congratulations to our successful candidates Shaun Carter, Nigel Bell, Louise Nettleton, Adam Haddow, Emili Fox and Joe Agius.

This year saw a record number of nominations for the six positions falling vacant and, with the introduction of the new online election process, a record number of members voting. There were 1,345 electronic votes and 16 postal votes, a substantial improvement on the traditional postal election process. We have received many positive comments from several members regarding the simplicity of the online election process.

March sees an office move for the Newcastle and Country Divisions. Kate Griffith and Melissa Laney will move into new premises further along King Street providing a shopfront for architecture, seminar facilities for CPD, meeting rooms, and a hot desk for Institute members and staff visiting Newcastle on business.

The Chapter’s event calendar commenced with a record number of architects attending the DARCH Regi-frustration event. More than 160 architects attended the information evening to learn more about registration and PALS. We are also very pleased to report that since the online PALS course was introduced in New South Wales in 2010, there have been 270 architects register for the online course and attend supplementary tutorials at Tusculum and in Newcastle. Similarly, the Refuel and ArchiTECH CPD events have record attendances.

Congratulations to our new Life Fellows. During 2011 Michael Dysart, Richard Johnson, Paul Pholeros, Peter Tonkin, Col James, Michael Neustein, Peter Stutchbury, Peter Stronach, Richard Thorp, Peter Phillips and Peter Mould were elevated to Life Fellow status in recognition and acknowledgement of their contribution to the profession and the Institute.

Finally, a very big thank you to our outgoing councillors Gerard Reinmuth, Kim Crestani, Hannah Tribe and Ben Hewitt for the contribution to the Chapter.

Roslyn IronsNSW Chapter Manager

cox architecture has been appointed as lead architect working in collaboration with Robertson + Marks, for the redevelopment of the Sydney Cricket Ground Northern Stand (above). The venue’s new Northern Stand will replace the stadium’s existing Noble, Bradman and Messenger stands. The Northern Stand redevelopment is the first project of the master plan being developed by the Sydney Cricket and Sports Ground Trust, and the second stage of the SCG redevelopment. The design proposal for the new Northern Stand is to reinforce and rejuvenate the time-honoured traditions and character of the world-famous SCG, it will complement its legacy and heritage, while at the same time showcasing the next evolution of stadia design.

moves & appointments

melonie Bayl-Smith has been appointed Adjunct Professor to the UTS School of Architecture, along with Billy Feuerman.vanessa dudman was appointed a Practice Director of Cronepartners Architecture Studio. richard Francis–Jones, Design Director of fjmt, has been appointed a 2012 Honorary Fellow of the American Institute of Architects (AIA). This is among the highest honours the AIA can bestow upon a colleague who has contributed significantly to architecture and society. Richard will be conferred with the Honorary Fellowship and medal at the investiture ceremony in Washington DC in May. James perry has been promoted to Associate at fjmt. He currently leads the firm’s Tasmania Museum and Art Gallery redevelopment team. peter poulet has been appointed the 23rd NSW Government Architect, following the retirement of Peter Mould in January 2012.

patrons news Poulet started in February, having served as the State Architect of Tasmania from 2009.vicki van dijk has been appointed the new Principal of PMDL’s Sydney studio. adrian yap has been promoted to Senior Associate at fjmt, having joined the firm in 2010. He led the team for the Chemistry Research Laboratory 2 project at the University of Oxford.

australia day Honours

graham Jahn, former National President of the Institute, was made a Member of the Order of Australia ‘for service to architecture, particularly through the promotion of excellence in urban design and planning, to professional associations, and to local government and the arts’. kerry Hill was appointed as Officer of the Order of Australia ‘for distinguished service to architecture, particularly as an ambassador for Australian design in South- East Asia, and as an educator and mentor’.

national conference: Experience 10-12 may 2012, Brisbane

Norway’s Kjetil Thorsen, South Africa’s Peter Rich and Japan’s Koji Tsutsui are among 15 speakers invited to talk about the importance of the direct physical experience of architecture in an image-rich world. Experience is the first National Architecture Conference to be held in Brisbane in over 25 years. Satellite events include tours, the Brisbane Regional Awards, and events by SONA and EmAGN. See the full program at architecture.com.au/experience.

riBa president’s medals Student awards

Australian architecture students fared particularly well at the 2011 RIBA President’s Medals Student Awards, probably the most prestigious international accolades for student work. In the Silver Medal category for the best design project, University of Sydney students Duncan Corrigall and Daniel Spence were runners-up for their project ‘Metamorphoses: Echo’s Retreat’. And University of Melbourne students Hannah Robertson and Dr Milinda Pathiraja won the Dissertation Medal and the Outstanding Thesis Award respectively. Congratulations to all. Australian architecture looks set for a bright and interesting future.www.architecture.com/Awards/RIBA.

Heritage property

In the 2009 Heritage edition of Architecture Bulletin, Professor James Weirick wrote about Redstone at Telopea, a well-preserved Walter Burley Griffin house. The house will soon be listed for lease with Modern House, a new agency specialising in architect-designed houses, particularly mid-century classics. Established in late 2011 by former advertising Creative Director and architecture enthusiast Marcus Lloyd-Jones, Modern House is all about finding appreciative buyers for houses of heritage value, not those looking to exploit land value. Lloyd-Jones has also just listed for sale 78 The Bulwark, one of four houses by Bill Lucas in Castlecrag. It’s a fine example of the architect’s approach to create harmony with the bush setting. www.modernhouse.co.

Seniors Housing award

Leo Campbell of Campbell Luscombe Architects was awarded ‘Most Outstanding Architect in Over 50s Housing in the World’ at the Globals Over 50s Housing — Healthcare Awards in London on 24 November 2011. The Globals Awards are sponsored by the UK-based Over 50s Housing Publishing Group. More than 1,260 developers, operators and managers from 102 countries were evaluated, and 20 awards made. A lifetime achievement award was given to Professsor Hans Becker (Humanitas Group, Netherlands), considered one of the leading seniors living/aged care thinkers in the world.

master class Scholarship 8–22 July 2012

For the twelfth annual Glenn Murcutt Architecture Master Class in July, Stormtech (manufacturers of architectural grates and drains) is offering half the cost ($3,300), for an Australian architect under 30 to participate in the two-week residential Master Class at Shoalhaven. Details at www.ozetecture.org.

iwan lobbying sees leichhardt councilappoint an architect as Heritage adviser

The Inner West Architects Network (IWAN) has for over a decade taken Leichhardt Council (LMC) to task over what we see as their peculiar, agenda-based and dysfunctional planning assessment process. Although LMC, to its credit, has always listened to our feedback, they have remained largely unwilling to reform their planning and processes.

In particular, the Heritage assessment process of LMC has been in desperate need of reform. For a council that places enormous importance on heritage and often requires expensive and detailed Heritage Impact Statements (HIS), there has been very little, if any, feedback from their Heritage Adviser. Their last adviser was part-time, almost always unavailable to discuss decisions, and rarely (if ever) responded to the HIS prepared by other experts, and costing thousands of dollars.

The council was also well known for taking an extremely conservative approach to heritage, and for being overly concerned with the ‘look’ of buildings rather than the history. The result has been considerable frustration and dissatisfaction among the planning, architectural and heritage fraternities, and the community at large. No-one was happy.

IWAN sees the role of Heritage Adviser as critical to the planning process, particularly in an area such as Leichhardt where the elected officials [most notably the Greens] give significant weight to the staff ’s heritage advice.

Councils need advisers who are across their brief and able to clearly articulate their decisions from a consistent, known and supported position. Having a heritage adviser who is an architect, understands architecture, is willing to engage in the discussion of heritage with the applicants and prosecute a sophisticated and unambiguous council position is vital.

In the second half of 2011, when IWAN became aware LMC was advertising the position of Heritage Adviser, we approached the Director of Environmental Services (Peter Conroy), and Head of Planning (Elizabeth Richardson) regarding the process by which the new Heritage Adviser should be selected. IWAN proposed that the panel recruiting the new Heritage Adviser should include ‘external’ as well as internal members, and put forward names that we thought would be ideal to join the panel.

From this recommendation, LMC appointed a panel of four that included the Director of Environmental Services and Head of Planning, plus two people from IWAN’s list.

In January 2012, Catherine Macarthur was announced as LMC’s new Heritage Adviser. Macarthur is an architect with over 20 years experience in heritage conservation, including in all three tiers of government, and joins LMC from the NSW Government Architect’s Office. IWAN members who have worked with Catherine sing her praises.

This is a great result for planning and architecture in Leichhardt. It’s also a fantastic result for IWAN and its members who have worked tirelessly to improve planning at LMC for more than a decade. We congratulate Leichhardt Council for its courage in making this change. We look forward to working with Leichhardt and other inner-west councils on programs to improve the planning process, and we wish Catherine Macarthur well in her role.

Shaun Carter (for IWAN)

PS: Are you a small practitioner struggling to find information or help with...whatever? Then join your local architecture network! IWAN represents the Inner West of Sydney, but there is one for each region. The Networks are at the coalface of the daily struggle of small practice and provide a peer group to support each other.

For lease: Redstone (above) at Telopea. photo: Eric Sierins. For sale: a Bill Lucas Castlecrag house (above). photo: Modern House.

chapter news

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

goldstein Hall and philip Baxter college: residential colleges at the University of new South walesDesign Architect: Peter Hall (1931–1995)Documentation: Schmaehling and PartnersStage 1: 1962. Stage 2: 1964. Philip Baxter College: 1966

E.H. (Ted) Farmer was New South Wales Government Architect 1958–1973, during a period when the population to the State surged due to postwar immigration. Major new infrastructure was needed and the scale of the challenge was unprecedented in the long history of the office. His predecessor Cobden Parkes believed that it was inappropriate for a public office to enter designs for architecture awards and Farmer, too, held this view. But when, unknown to him the new young architects in his office submitted their designs to the Institute of Architects and were successful he

There are two significant projects that bookend the period of Brutalism in New South Wales: Goldstein and Philip Baxter Residential Colleges at the University of New South Wales (1962–66), and the Sydney Police Centre at Surry Hills (1975–87). Brutalism is a polarising style, not just in architectural circles, but for the public at large. These are buildings people either love or hate, and questions about their preservation recur time and again. Part of the Goldstein Hall group of buildings is now set to be demolished, making for this timely discussion by architect Anne Higham about the significance and heritage value of these ingenious award-winning buildings.

Two of a kind

gave enthusiastic support. Under the guidance of the remarkable Harry Rembert as head of the Design Room, the new graduates, including Ken Woolley, Peter Hall, Peter Webber, Michael Dysart, Andrew Andersons and Lionel Glendenning, were soon responsible for the design of numerous very large and important projects, an extraordinary opportunity for architects at the beginning of their careers. What followed were six Sulman Awards, two Blacket Awards and countless Merit Awards for excellent architecture.

Today, at a time when Farmer’s legacy is under threat of demolition, along with several other significant Sulman Medal1 buildings, it is revealing to revisit his Hook Memorial Address of 11 May 1973.

Farmer said in part: “…Mumford said that historic accumulations of culture form the top soil and humus in which the higher life of man has flourished, and if the historic roots of culture be ploughed up, what is left is a bare surface of non-historic experience, which will not sustain human life or thought. Perhaps, then, one of the greatest duties of our profession is to jealously guard this inheritance from the past and explain its relevance to the present.”

Farmer then commented: “What seems to me to be the most difficult situation at present is how to preserve the authority of our profession. How its, I hope, informed opinions can be heard in all the wild turmoil of ‘progress’ and ‘development’ that the media and financiers enjoy. Amid the wild orgy of destruction of our familiar environment how can we find the means to make an effective protest without being looked upon as crackpots? Let me say that what some of our brothers have been saying so vehemently is nearly always right. >

1.

2.

ANSR

architects network Southern region Contact: Paul Fiegel (02) 9529 6466 pfiegel@pacific.net.au Venue: Camelia Gardens Teahouse, Caringbah Cost: $20

13 march 6–9pm Seminar Venue: Kogarah Community Centre, Premier Street, Kogarah CPD points: 2.5 (Formal) Cost: $30

5 april 8–9.15am monthly meeting CPD points: 1 (Informal)

3 may 8–9.15am monthly meeting CPD points: 1 (Informal)

8 may 6–9pm Seminar Venue: Kogarah Community Centre, Premier Street, Kogarah CPD points: 2.5 (Formal) Cost: $30

7 June 8–9.15am monthly meeting CPD points: 1 (Informal)

BANG

northern Beaches network Contact: Adam Pressley 0412 348 575 adam@aaarchitect.com.au Venue: On Shore Brasserie, 16 The Strand, Dee Why Beach

CPD points: 1 (Formal)

20 march 7.30–9am Breakfast workshop: glass structures Discussion lead by Tom Simmat

24 april 7.30–9am Breakfast workshop: exempt and complying development code Speaker: Tom Bowden and Heath McNab, Insight Certifiers

22 may 7.30–9am Breakfast workshop: new leps – recent changes and problems Speaker: TBA

19 June 7.30–9am Breakfast workshop: acoustic and thermal insulation for domestic projects Speaker: Ray de Silva, Dynamic Composite Technologies

COUNTRY DIVISION

Contact: country-nsw@architecture.com.au, or Kate Griffith (02) 4960 4200 kate.griffith@architecture.com.au

27 april mini conference. Fee psychology and negotiation Venue: Kiama

22 June regional seminar. intertwined: design and materiality Venue: Wingham

GREATWAN

western Sydney network Contact: Gustavo Saborido (02) 0408 264 389 gasab@ozemail.com.au Venue: Community Youth Centre (Level 1) 40 Alice Street, Harris Park CPD points: 2 (Formal)

8 march 6–9pm green points / wood products / wood in bushfire-prone areas Speaker: Stephen Mitchell, Timber Development Association

10 may 6–9pm Beauty in architecture Speakers: Steve Kennedy and Stephen Varady

IWAN

inner west network Contact: Howard Smith (02) 9818 5552. To check you’re on the iwan@topica.com notification list, email davidgbl@tpg.com.au coffee meeting venue Rosebud Cafe, 654 Darling Street Seminar venue Le Pan Quotidien, 54 Norton Street, Leichhardt

9 march 7.30am coffee meeting

23 march 7.30am cpd seminar

13 april 7.30am coffee meeting

27 april 7.30am cpd seminar

11 may 7.30am coffee meeting

25 may 7.30am Houses tour

8 June 7.30am coffee meeting

22 June 7.30am cpd seminar

LOWAN

lower north Shore Small practices group Contact: Clare Carter (02) 9438 4200 clare@contemporary.net.au Venue: Piato Restaurant, 123 Blues Point Road, McMahons Point

13 march 8–9.30am in conversation: Hugo Tugman of Architect Your Home (UK)

8 may 8–9.30am practising freehand drawing Speaker: Rena Czaplinska

12 June 8–9.30am Topic TBa

NEWCASTLE DIVISION

Contact: Kate Griffith (02) 4960 4200 kate.griffith@architecture.com.au

archiTecH lunch venue SOHO on Darby Street, Cooks Hill

Seminar venue Travelodge, Corner King and Steel Streets, Newcastle

7 march 1–2pm archiTecH lunch: Blinds Nice CPD points: 1 (Informal)

12 march 5.30–7.30pm University lecture series Venue: The Delany Hotel

19 march 5.30–7.30pm University lecture series Venue: The Delany Hotel

28 march 5.30–7.30pm University lecture series Venue: The Delany Hotel

4 april 1–2pm archiTecH lunch: Ritek CPD points: 1 (Informal)

24 april 4pm newcastle divison agm All members welcome

1 may 5–8pm lower Hunter Urban design awards launch Venue: Newcastle Regional Museum

2 may 1–2pm archiTecH lunch: ABN Lift Consultants CPD points: 1 (Informal)

6 June 1–2pm archiTecH lunch: Builtsmart Modular Homes CPD points: 1 (Informal)

SEA

Sydney east network Contact: Philip Abram (02) 9363 2222 philipabram@mail.com Venue: Hughenden Hotel, 1 Queen Street, Woollahra Cost: $25 CPD points: 2 (Formal)

21 march 6pm Beauty in architecture Speakers: Steve Kennedy and Stephen Varady

18 april 6pm designing for accessibility Speakers: Howard Moutrie and Harry Sprintz

9 may 6pm managing risk in architectural practice: tales from the front line Speaker: David Vaughan (Ebsworth Lawyers)

13 June 6pm designing for water and energy efficiency Speaker: John Caley

SPUN

Upper north network Contact: John O’Brien (02) 9361 6378 obrienarchitect@optusnet.com.au Venue: Garrigal Terrace Room, Roseville Golf Club Cost: $35; students $20. Includes dinner; bookings only.

CPD points: 2 (Formal)

26 march 6.30–9.30pm designing for light & ventilation Speaker: Professor Alec Tzannes, Dean, UNSW

23 april 6.30–9.30pm documents & copyright Speaker: Chris Shaw (Reynolds Bowen & Gerathy)

28 may 6.30–9.30pm designing to avoid condensation in buildings Speaker: Ray de Silva

26 June 6.30–9.30pm preparing das in heritage conservation areas / Heritage impact Statements Speaker: heritage architect Robert Moore and heritage planner Paul Dignam (Kuring-gai Council)

network events: autumn

6 7

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

The mistake they made is being too emotional, intolerant and terribly bad salesmen.

“Those of us who try to protest must realise that we are dealing with astute ruthless people who — given the validity of assumption that a rising gross national product, improvements to property, ever expanding markets and all the rest of it, are good things — are acting perfectly logically and sensibly within a money-based philosophy.”2

The Institute’s NSW Heritage Committee is nominating the University of Sydney’s Fisher Library, Goldstein and Philip Baxter Colleges, Macquarie University Library, and UTS Kuring-gai Campus to the NSW Government State Heritage Register3. However, the University of New South Wales’ residential blocks are threatened by demolition, and the fates of the Macquarie University Library and UTS Kuring-gai Campus have yet to be determined.

Harry Rembert entrusted Peter Hall with the design of a series of important buildings. Hall’s designs included major extensions to Darlinghurst Courthouse and the Registrar General’s Building, Sydney. These were followed by several university projects, all of them significant buildings. For the University of New South Wales there was Goldstein Hall with its hall, residential wings and separate master’s residence, and Philip Baxter College. For the University of New England, Armidale, Hall designed new buildings for the chemistry

and agricultural economics departments; and at the newly established Macquarie University, the first stages of the University Library. In his forthcoming book on Peter Hall, (The Phantom of the Opera House), Peter Webber records: “Of them all it was Goldstein Hall that was to attract most attention to Hall as a young architect of outstanding ability. His design was robust, original and atmospheric. But, critically, it heralded that here was an architect who was also deeply sensitive to the physical and psychological needs of the people who were to experience his buildings. It was formally opened on 30 June 1964.” The next stage of accommodation, the Philip Baxter College, was opened in 1966. Goldstein Hall was a seminal work of Brutalism that received critical acclaim with the Architecture & Arts Award and the Institute’s Sulman Medal.

Donald Gazzard’s insightful 1964 review of the Goldstein College, published in Building Ideas, recognised not only the individual merit of the buildings but also the influence he expected they would have among younger architects.

Russell Jack states in his 1980 thesis on the Government Architect’s Branch that the Goldstein Hall and Philip Baxter College “group of buildings is undeniably one of the highlights of the Branch’s golden period”.1. Goldstein Hall at the University of New South Wales.

photo: Max Dupain. 2. Sydney Police Centre in Surry Hills. photo: Public Works Department. 3. Goldstein Hall interior. photo: Max Dupain. 4. A vaulted atrium in the Sydney Police Centre. photo: Public Works Department. The sketch of internal gardens shows the original concept. The south-north section below shows much of the Police Centre below ground.

Sydney police centreDesign Architect: Richard DinhamProject Engineer: F. Rozmus Landscape Architect: Bruce RickardSTAGE 1: 1987. STAGE 2: Not built.

The golden period of design continued after Ted Farmer’s retirement in 1973, his successors, Peter Webber, Charles Weatherburn and Ian Thomson, and the second and subsequent groups of design room men included many exceptional design architects who made significant contributions to the work of the Government Architect’s Branch. (Russell Jack mentions Rodney Connors, Donald Coleman, Leslie Reedman, Ross Bonthorne, John McKinney, Colin Still, Brian McDonald, Leif Kristensen and David Turner).

A late brutalist building, the Sydney Police Centre officially opened on 11 March 1987, though planning had commenced in 1975 and building work began in 1980.

The overall envelope comprises two levels below ground (reducing its mass), with an additional three levels facing Goulburn Street and five levels facing Campbell Street. The building is aligned on an east-west axis, with large floor areas pulled apart at their centre and ‘stacked’ to achieve sun control to north facades and to facilitate penetration of sunlight to the lowest levels. This sunny space incorporates circulation corridors and stairs with overhanging gardens and landscaped spaces designed by Bruce Rickard and Richard Dinham.

High-quality, low-maintenance finishes and detailing were used to achieve durability and longevity for this ‘public building’. Public access in this congested part of the city is encouraged by landscaped breathing spaces across the site.4

Three concrete finishes have been utilised to accentuate the nature of the structure: a vertical boarded finish to the walls and columns, a bush-hammered finish to horizontal

surfaces, and spandrels are edged by smooth and recessed borders. Adjustable aluminium sun louvres — horizontal to the north and vertical to the south — provide sun protection, privacy and security for occupants.

The Sydney Police Centre assists in establishing a built transition between the residential area of Surry Hills and the high-density high-rise of the southern sector of the CBD. It successfully integrates a massive building by using the expressed structure to break down its scale. The building envelope encloses a gross floor area of 32,000 square metres, with a nett occupied area of 24,000 square metres. Building functions include parking, Charge and Cell Complex, Shooting Range and Armoury, Gymnasium, Operational Sections of the City Police Station, Scientific Investigation Section, Communications Branch, Ballistics Unit, Telephone Centre, Computer Centre, Security Control Centre and Disaster Coordination Centre. No residential streets need to be used for site access.

Anne HighamRetired Heritage Officer, NSW Chapter

Footnotes

1 When the Sulman Exhibition was held at MOS in late 1997, six Sulman award-winning buildings had been demolished. In the five years following that event and the publication of Architecture in Transition The Sulman Award 1932–1997, four more buildings had been adversely altered. Two others had been altered: Australia Square (1967) and King George V Hospital for Mothers and Babies (Sulman 1941), and several painted, including Goldstein Hall (1964), Orange City Council Library & Regional Gallery (1986) and Powerhouse Museum (1988). Warringah Library (1966) and UTS Kuring-gai Campus (1978), Goldstein Hall Residential College (1964) and the Exhibition Centre Darling Harbour (1989) are under threat of demolition.

2 In 1980 Russell Jack states “Farmer could see no panacea. He advocated preservation and the teaching of the young the value of their heritage and environment. He saw the danger of the package dealer exploiting economic situations to the detriment of the built environment.”

3 The only Sulman Award-winning buildings currently listed on the State Heritage Register are Liner House (Sulman, 1961) and the Sydney Opera House (Sulman, 1992). The Institute’s nomination of Marcel Breuer’s Brutalist Torin building has resulted in its listing on the State Heritage Register.

4 The use of innovative integrated landscape design is an important feature of brutalist architecture in New South Wales. Landscape architects who worked with the Government Architect’s Branch and the other significant brutalist architects of this period included Bruce Mackenzie, Harry Howard, Bruce Rickard, Allan Correy and Richard Clough.

5.

3.

“Those of us who try to protest mustrealise that we aredealing with astuteruthless people who are acting perfectlylogically and sensiblywithin a money-based philosophy.”

98

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

The term ‘Brutalism’ or ‘New Brutalism’ was coined in the mid-1950s in the office of British architects Alison and Peter Smithson. The Smithsons claim the expression was invented as an ironic retort to the UK Architectural Review’s journalistic phrase-making with terms such as ‘New Monumentalism’, ‘New Empiricism’ and the like.1

The Smithsons believed in “… an urbanism in which functionally compatible buildings, like the components of a tea set, would acquire a kind of neutrality and family likeness with the space between them becoming the collective of the spaces that each of the buildings carries with it.”2 They were certain that architecture could address social and cultural problems and solve them with design.

Writing in the 1950s, Reyner Banham said that “The New Brutalism eludes precise description, while remaining a living force in contemporary British architecture.”3 With obligatory Le Corbusier references, Banham then offered an outline of brutalism’s principal design attributes. Drawing on the built examples in 1955, Banham identifies several elements that were to remain constant in later decades, and in particular, four defining characteristics of Brutalist architecture programs:1. Formal, axial plans (a formal legibility

of plan);2. An emphasis on basic structure (a clear

exhibition of structure);

3. Candidly expressed materials and finishes (materials ‘as found’ or ‘off-form’);

4. Predominantly concrete, but integrating glass, brick and timber.4

was it different in australia?

The Encyclopedia of Australian Architecture acknowledges the Smithsons’ ethical framework and accepts Banham’s working definition for Australian Brutalist work.5 Marshall Clifton and Tony Brand’s 1961 Hale School Memorial Hall in Perth is cited as one of Australia’s earliest civic or commercial-scale Brutalist buildings. Although the raw concrete has now been painted, the Memorial Hall retains the elements that Banham described in 1955.

The new South wales approach

When formal Brutalist architecture began to appear in New South Wales in the 1960s, they were expressions of new concrete building methodologies and styles, rather than Smithson-inspired philosophical expressions.6 In 1968, a spokesperson for the NSW Department of Public Works stated that “The natural finishes of [Brutalist] Hornsby Technical College were selected not because of any fashion for ‘brut’ concrete, but because years of school and college maintenance has shown the Government Architect the value of

upkeep-free materials.”7 A number of singular innovations were introduced with the regional variant in New South Wales’ commercial-scale buildings adding to the style and methodology of Brutalism in light control, plan development, interior architecture and landscape.8

light

Unlike Britain’s Northern Hemisphere where natural light is welcomed, Australian sunlight is an important element to control. Innovative Brutalist light control measures in New South Wales include: • the precast ‘sun visors’ of the Metropolitan

Water, Sewerage and Drainage Board Building (McConnel, Smith and Johnson, 1966);

• the narrow lancet-like windows and partly cantilevered entrance porch roof of the Reader’s Digest Building (John James and Associates, 1967);

• the excavated site and deeply recessed horizontal strip windows of the Associated Chambers of Manufacturers of Australia Building (Enrico Taglietti, 1968);

• the panoply of louvres and ‘sun visors’ of the William Balmain Teachers College (now the UTS campus, Kuring-gai) (NSW Government Architect, 1971); and

• the exaggerated projecting eaves and reductive glazing of the windows of the Dixon Library, University of New England (NSW Government Architect, 1973).

Scale

Brutalist commercial and civic buildings are generally large-scale buildings that consistently use outsized and frankly expressed building elements. Among the earliest Brutalist buildings in New South Wales to candidly express these exaggerated building elements are Goldstein Hall residential college, at the University of New South Wales (NSW Government Architect, 1964) and Randwick Girls High School (NSW Government Architect, 1966).

The lure of exaggerated scale in civic building continued with the Brutalist-inspired planning by the late Walter Abraham at the Macquarie University campus. The Macquarie University Library (NSW Government Architect, 1967), the original Teaching Block (Stafford, Moor and Farrington, 1967) and the Macquarie University Student Union Building (Ancher, Mortlock, Murray and Woolley, 1970) are notable Brutalist works. Assisted by the load-bearing capabilities of reinforced concrete, these buildings also provided opportunities for monumental interior spaces.

interior architecture

In many of the Brutalist buildings in New South Wales, the interior often introduces large-scale ceremonial spaces. Design emphasis is often placed on processional entrances and often cavernous, internal reception areas. This architecture can be found in many of the Edwards, Madigan, Torzillo and Briggs (EMTB) buildings including the Warringah Council’s Civic Centre (1973), the High Court of Australia (1980) and the National Gallery of Australia

(1982), Canberra; the Masonic Centre (Joseland, Gilling and Associates with T.W. Hodgson and Sons, 1978); the Sydney Police Centre (NSW Government Architect, Richard Dinham, design architect, 1978), and many other works.

landscape

In New South Wales, landscape design features in a number of Brutalist commissions, especially when greenfield sites allowed planning to retain or reintroduce native plantings. Bruce Rickard, Alan Correy, Bruce Mackenzie and others advocated the use of indigenous vegetation in their landscape architecture. Citing only a few designers and landscape commissions, Mackenzie developed the William Balmain Teachers College, Kuring-gai program; Richard Clough developed the Macquarie University scheme; and Harry Howard and Associates was responsible for the initial landscaping of EMTB’s High Court od Australia Building and the adjacent National Gallery of Australia, Canberra.9

Michael Bogle

Footnotes

1 ‘On Brutalism’. Alison Smithson and Peter Smithson. Without Rhetoric. An Architectural Aesthetic 1955-1972, Latimer New Dimensions, 1973, p.2, p.6.

2 Reyner Banham. ‘The New Brutalism’. Architectural Review, December, 1955, pp.355–361.

3 Reyner Banham. ‘The New Brutalism.’ Architectural Review, December, 1955, p.357. These issues are expanded in his book The New Brutalism. Architectural Press, 1966.

4 Irenee Scalbert, ‘The Smithsons and the Economist Building Plaza’ in Architecture is not made with the Brain. The Labour of Alison and Peter Smithson. Architectural Association, 2005, p.24.

5 Geoffrey London. ‘Brutalism’. The Encyclopaedia of Australian Architecture, Cambridge University Press, 2011, p.110.

6 The notable exceptions were the dense Pythagorean maxims of Colin Madigan of Edwards, Madigan, Torzillo and Briggs and the informal ‘Manifesto of Natural Materialism’ developed by some of the architects in the NSW Government Architect’s Office. For ‘Natural Materialism’, see Michael Bogle’s interview with Michael Dysart. 14 June 2011 (NSW AIA Heritage Officer files).

7 ‘Technical College’. Constructional Review, March, 1968, pp.14–17.

8 “[The Smithsons’] Robin Hood Gardens [housing commission] went down in history as an utter failure. It was horrifically vandalised by its residents and it spelled the end of the designers’ international status as star architects. The Smithsons’ greatest mistake may have been their exaggerated and possibly naïve confidence in the capacity of architecture to provide a solution to social problems.” Dirk van den Heuvel. ‘Recolonising the Modern. Robin Hood Gardens today.’ In Architecture is not made with the Brain. The Labour of Alison and Peter Smithson. Architectural Association, 2005, pp.32-37.

9 Harry Howard. “Landscaping of the High Court of Australia and the Australian National Gallery.” Landscape Australia. March, August, 1982, pp.208-215.

1.

2.

Design historian Michael Bogle charts the rise of a genre that gave us some of our grandest modern interiors.

1. & 4. The Masonic Centre in Sydney; the original podium by Joseland, Gilling and Associates with T.W. Hodgson and Sons, 1978. photos: Max Dupain. 2. Warringah Council Civic Centre by EMTB embodies the complex geometries the practice became known for. photo: Max Dupain. 3. & 5. The Reader’s Digest building in Surry Hills by John James has a variety of finishes to its cavernous concrete volumes. photos: John James.

BEAUTYBEASTOF THE

3.

4.

5.

1110

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012Architecture Bulletin March / April 201212 13

Born of a new post-World War II shift in architectural thinking towards re-evaluating social concerns with urban responsibility, Brutalism evolved to combine new ethical concerns with aesthetic formalism. Its robust and imposing buildings not only had an explicit structural expression, they were inventively designed for new uses in commercial and institutional buildings. Australian Brutalism was wonderfully eclectic, with architectural influences extending beyond strict English Brutalism to encompass Le Corbusier and the Japanese Metabolist movement.

To date, there has been little if any comprehensive assessment of significant brutalist buildings within New South Wales. To encourage

concrete poetry

recognition and conservation of these buildings, the NSW Chapter of the Institute, through its Register of 20th Century Buildings of Significance, is assisting the NSW Heritage Branch in compiling nominations of significant modernist buildings — including those late modernist brutalist buildings — for inclusion on the State Heritage Register. Let’s hope taking the lead forges greater recognition of these important and beautiful buildings beyond mere fashion.

Glenn Harper Associate, Hassell

1.

3.

5. 7.

6.

4.

1. wentworth Union Building, University of Sydney (1968–1972, 1987, 1991–1992) darlington Ancher Mortlock Woolley

Ken Woolley, of Ancher Mortlock Woolley designed three student union buildings: Macquarie University, the University of Newcastle and the University of Sydney. At the time of construction there were still separate men and women unions at Sydney University, however, both contributed towards the cost of the new building. The Wentworth Union Building was described by Joseph Buch in a 2007 guide to the university’s architecture as “...the most sculptural of the University’s buildings”. Its design features “a deeply cantilevered top floor with projecting sun hoods over the expressed semicircular sun hood and recessed lower level, all punctuated dramatically by its connection to the overhead pedestrian bridge”. The Wentworth Union Building received the 1972 Institute’s Merit Award. In 2003 an international design competition, Campus 2010, was held. One of the outcomes of which was the reworking by John Wardle of the pedestrian bridge connecting the Wentworth Union Building to the main portion of the campus. photo: Max Dupain.

3. The alexander mackie college of advanced education (1975–1980) oatley NSW Government Architect

This college received a Merit Award from the Institute in 1980. Its design was the work of the NSW Government Architect, John Thompson, the principal architect, Les Reedman, the project architect, Colin Still and landscape architect Bruce Mackenzie. Working drawings for the college, which was to be erected within a brick pit, were prepared in 1975. Site works and the skeleton of the complex were built between 1975–1977, however,

7. University Union, macquarie University (1965) ryde Ancher Mortlock Woolley

The choice of off-form concrete and the structural grid for this building were set by the existing library building. The building is planned around an east-west ‘service and vertical access spine’ and was intended to be extended. Lounges and galleries were to the south and larger volumes were to the north. The building forms one side of the main quadrangle of the university. A model of the imposing structure was published and, later, photographs. “The Union Building works outwards from its basic cuboid shape. Its strong forms and tough finishes seem to express youth, non-conformity and impatience with formality [that] is the spirit of today’s university student.” (Cross Section, 1 May 1970). It was not only the university buildings by Le Corbusier in Europe and America that were influential in this design, the university buildings by Australian architect John Andrews at Harvard, US, and in Canada, which departed from the traditional quadrangle form, were also much admired. photo: Cross Section, 1 May 1970. dr noni Boyd.

6. warringah civic centre (1970–1973) dee why Edwards, Madigan, Torzillo and Briggs (EMTB)

The Warringah Civic precinct, including the Warringah Civic Centre, and the Warringah Library (1965–1966) was designed by Colin Madigan and Chris Kringas of Edwards, Madigan, Torzillo and Briggs with landscape by Bruce Mackenzie. The complex was built in two stages, the first of which received the Institute’s 1966 Sulman Award. Described as “an outstanding example of both the harmonious development of a rugged bushland site and the design of visually strong and dramatic structures”, the impressive complex was built on a sandstone shelf forming a ‘new Acropolis’ above the town centre. The complex is recognised by the Institute as having significance, though there have been a number of redevelopment proposals in recent years. photo: Max Dupain.

4. Sirius apartments (1976–1980) The rocks Tao Gofers for the NSW Housing Commission

In 1976, the Green Ban that had halted the redevelopment plans of the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority (SCRA) was lifted to allow for the construction of a substantial public housing block on a site occupied by Housing Board buildings erected in 1913–1916 after the realignment of Cumberland Street. These bond stores, warehouses and government office buildings had, in turn, replaced a series of sandstone townhouses erected in the 1840s along similar lines to London townhouses. A prototype for the Sirius Apartments complex was built at Brighton Le Sands, and still survives. The carefully modulated block, inspired by Moshe Safdie’s Habitat 67 in Montreal, Canada, contrasts with the public housing complex Greenway, on the other side of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, designed by Morrow and Gordon and built during 1948–1953.photo: Courtesy Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority.

5. reader’s digest Building (1965–1967) Surry Hills John James

John James designed the Reader’s Digest Building to fit comfortably into its context, a jumble of warehouses and terraces. James’s ‘philosophical opposition’ to Brutalism is often quoted. He based his carefully crafted designs on humanist considerations, such as the framing of views. The facade rhythms were derived from a naturally occurring sequence, the Fibonacci sequence: the facade was designed to ‘grow out of the street in the way of the renaissance palazzo.The roof garden by Bruce Mackenzie is one of the first postwar examples, and was notable for the use of Australian plantings (with exotics for colour) and sculptures by Douglas Annand. The composition was described in the August 1968 edition of Cross Section as “A mannerist relish of junctions detailed with extraordinary ebullience and stairwells of hectic drama”. The Reader’s Digest building is arguably James’s most well-known work. photo: Cross Section, 1 August 1968.

a funding freeze halted completion, the contract for which was let in April 1978. The pit became an attractive lake that collects stormwater from the surrounding area, and was described in the 1980 Public Works Annual Report as “a unique solution to the accommodation requirements of the client on an ‘environmentally hostile’ site. The use of water as a landscape element and the inclusion of dramatic shadows on the building form reflect the influence of Mexican architecture on the project architect’s approach to design. photo: Max Dupain.

2. Sydney masonic centre (1974–1979) Joseland and Gilling civic Tower (1999-2004) PTW

The Sydney Masonic Centre was designed in the early 1970s by the longstanding firm of architects Joseland and Gilling. Only the podium was initially erected; this was completed in 1979. The intended tower was added 30 years later to designs by Peddle Thorp and Walker. The glass tower idea initially submitted by the developers, who had purchased the air rights, was scrapped in favour of a design that drew closely on the initial proposal. Max Dupain’s photographs capture the qualities of the foyer and exterior of the recently completed first stage. photo: Patrick Bingham-Hall.

A gallery of iconic and award-winning Sydney buildings from the 1960s to the 1980s.

2.

6.5.

3.

4.

2.

1.

7.

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 15Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

New BrutalismPeter Mould reflects on buildings that exemplified the prolific era of new Brutalism in the government architect’s Branch

Reyner Banham writing in The Architectural Review (UK) on New Brutalism in 1955 described its qualities as having formal legibility of plan, clear exhibition of structure, and valuation of materials for their inherent qualities ‘as found’. He goes on: “In the last resort what characterises the New Brutalism in architecture as in painting is precisely its brutality, its bloody-mindedness.”

This Brutalism was adopted in Sydney and helped inform the movement that became known as the Sydney School. This school was a direct response to the local context and, particularly, Sydney’s bushland setting. The influences on it were many, and individual strands evolved. Apart from the brutalist movement from England, other influences were: Scandinavia, particularly the work of Alvar Aalto; the organic school exemplified by the work of Frank Lloyd Wright; and the architecture of Asia, particularly Japan, which was seen to be human, accessible and sophisticated.

The 1960s and 1970s were prodigious times in the office of the Government Architect and buildings ranging across multiple types and uses were designed in the manner of New Brutalism. Hospitals, police stations, courthouses, schools, TAFE and CAE

colleges, university buildings, and a suite of government office buildings were constructed across the state.

There were many works making strong statements about the role and presence of government in local communities. Some were self-referential and oblivious to their setting, and were placed uncomfortably in their context.

Some, however, were among the best examples of architecture of their era. Two that stand out are Kuring-gai College (1971-80) by David Don Turner and Goldstein Hall (1962-64) by Peter Hall. They both use off-form concrete in a muscular way to give sculptural form and texture. Both use a limited palette and bring outside finishes inside, and both have strong spatial qualities. They both also harness the strength of the Australian sun and use the contrast of shadows to enhance their modelling. Their settings are, however, strikingly different.

a college in the bush

Kuring-gai College’s strong, confident response to its brief is expressed by organising its program along an internal street, which provides opportunity for informal meeting in spaces that vary in size and character while allowing exploration and surprise.

But its greatest strength is its response to the site. The original design concept was for a close interaction between architecture and landscape, with a desire to preserve as much of the natural vegetation as possible. Settled on a rocky outcrop above the Lane Cove National Park, the college is staggered over

decision as well as an ideological one, and the dense planting of the roof terraces helped to moderate the bulk of the building. These terraces also encouraged a relationship from inside to outside.

an urban campus

Goldstein Hall was more urban. It was set among residential colleges on the north part of the University of New South Wales campus and follows the residential college tradition of enclosed courtyards. J.M. Freeland in Architecture in Australia: a history wrote, “Goldstein Hall had all the emotional feeling of a great medieval hall, at the same time its appearance was pure 1965.”

Off-form concrete blades and beams order the building and give formal expression. They frame the deeply articulated north facade with its abstract composition of light and shade, the concrete set against the recessed and shaded glass wall behind. To the east and west the concrete blades extend the full height of the building and create loggias at the ground and upper levels and provide sun screening to the windows aligned with them. This simple device at once gives scale to the elevation and order to the plan, a simple formal proposition

of structural primacy and regular planning. The composition is ordered but abstract, robust but romantic.

The associated residential buildings are separated by courtyards, but linked by covered walkways. They are simple, almost austere, and reminiscent of Hall’s extension to the Registrar General’s building in the city, but the form of the hall is more expressive and sculpturally strong. The textured materials give surprising warmth to the buildings. The roughness of sawn timber simply stained, the stripped board formed concrete and clinker bricks, and the earthiness of the quarry tiled floor combine to give the space somberness and tranquility. It is an extremely confident building.

Under threat

Today Kuring-gai College is owned by the University of Technology, Sydney and is the subject of redevelopment proposals, and possible resale. The concrete of Goldstein Hall has been painted grey (to look like concrete?) and is being encroached upon by a larger college development which will overshadow the northern courtyard and pool. The residential buildings are scheduled for demolition.

Much of our modern heritage has already been lost, and more is under threat. The NSW Heritage Council now investigates projects for listing under themes: it is currently investigating Modernism as a theme and will, over the next year, place on its Register (and so help to protect) our important modernist heritage.

For now Kuring-gai College, and the hall at Goldstein College, remain intact as fine examples of their type. Together with many others of the idiom, these buildings well express Banham’s definition in their formal legibility of plan, clear exhibition of structure, and expression of the inherent qualities of materials. They are among the best buildings of their time in Australia and stand well against overseas examples of the New Brutalist style.

Peter Mould NSW Government Architect Emeritus

1. Early drawing of Goldstein Hall showing the boarded form-work concrete. 2. Grand dining hall, Goldstein College. 3. Hall and courtyard with Bert Flugelman sculpture and original concrete plank paving (now gone). photo: Peter Hall. 4. Kuring-gai’s internal avenue. photo: Bruce Mackenzie. 5. Landscaping was integral to Kuring-gai’s plan. photo: Max Dupain. 6. Early illustration shows Kuring-gai College as a citadel on the hill. 7. A stairwell detail shows the college’s vibrant palette. photo: Bruce McKenzie.

five levels and its geometric forms visually tie it to its setting. They step up the site reinforcing the topography with the strength and harmony of an evolved hilltop village.

Landscape design by Bruce Mackenzie reinforces the relationship of the college to its setting, reflecting the Sydney School preoccupation of responding to the bush. The use of native species, capable of flourishing in the harsh environment, was a pragmatic

14

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

Unfinished symphony?architect Michael Dysart sets the record straight about the social context and design innovations behind the ‘UTS tower’, and the grander scheme for this site that was never built.

University of Technology, Sydney, Building 1Completed 1979, Government Architect’s Office

It is interesting to revisit one of your buildings after a 50–year interval and review whether the inherent principles and values are still relevant. The historical context of the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) Building 1 at Broadway is important, but to understand this building properly, it must be viewed through an early–1960s lens.

Two Federal Government education reviews took place in the early 1960s: the 1961 Martin Committee (on the future of tertiary education) and the subsequent Wark Committee in 1965. Both emphasised the need for alternative educational streaming in parallel to the existing university model, and advised that Federal Government funding should be extended to these new entities, sometimes called Colleges of Advanced Education.

The Wark Committee Report encouraged the renewal of existing inner-city sites, including high-rise solutions that were close to urban transport. The location of the proposed New South Wales Institute of Technology (NSWIT), sharing the site of the old Sydney Technical College, was fortuitous as it was adjacent to Central Railway, a major transport hub.

The master planning report 1968

Most State Government Master Planning reports are reactive. The Master Planning report prepared in May 1968 by the Government Architect’s Office with the Sydney Technical College came two years after the July 1966 approval for the Stage 1 Tower (now known as UTS Building 1), and had no bearing on Stage 1, except for a certain hubris of the Sydney Technical College expansionist philosophy.

However, master planning had become essential in order to define ownership, usage

evolving plans: the Tech Scheme 1962

Planning began in 1962 for the Department of Technical Education on a Broadway site with a limited footprint between Harris and Jones Streets. Departments to be included were Electrical, Mechanical and Structural Engineering, with laboratories, workshops, lecture theatres and administration.

The design delineated five buildings from five to eight stories, over a two-level podium. It established a construction methodology that allowed the buildings to be built over a five-year period. The fragmented and undulating facade was set back from the street allowing sunlight to penetrate to Broadway.

The pinwheel Scheme 1964

As the NSWIT was becoming established, changes in philosophy, and subsequent changes to the architectural brief — which in turn affected the scale of the project — were continual. To address this, a pinwheel planning

and zoning of the existing land adjacent to Sydney Technical College (which had been acquiring sites on this land on an ad hoc basis). The State Planning Authority (SPA) was rezoning the eastern portion of Harris Street for educational purposes; the Sydney Markets were moving to Homebush, leaving their site vacant; and the proposed Western Distributor was cutting a swathe through Ultimo generally. All this created enormous opportunity, with expectations to match.

The ambitious master plan for Ultimo was a diagrammatic outline of the site’s potential and was based on Sydney Technical College’s projected student enrolment of 60,000–70,000 (which we at the Government Architect’s Office thought unrealistic given that the University of Sydney had 23,000 students at the time).

The plan was to accommodate the future requirements of both the existing Sydney Technical College and the proposed NSWIT with integrated and shared common facilities across some 40 acres in this unique location.

The proposed master plan adopted the existing street typology and provided a model for progressive development as neighbouring sites became available. It had the potential to elevate pedestrian/student movement one level above the street/service zone, and create garden courtyards and quadrangles at the new pedestrian level. The emphasis on permeability and student movement throughout the site included proposed land bridges over Harris Street and Railway Square.

The master plan we prepared in 1968 was never intended to be an architecturally definitive proposal, but a response to the ambitions of the client at the time (Sydney Technical College and the NSW Institute of Technology) and an attempt to draw their attention to the physical consequence of a student enrolment of 70,000.

3.

1. The 1962 Tech Scheme involved a sequence of four buildings distributed across the site, designating the Institute of Technology, Sydney Technical College, School of Business Studies, School of Catering, the Union Library and student accommodation. The concept for this redevelopment was part of a NSW Government strategy to offer greater practice-focused tertiary education at a time of post-WWII optimism. The redevelopment of the 16-hectare Ultimo site was not only argued on the need for an increase of new and improved teaching facilities for advanced education but, more importantly, as a symbol of new education. The high ideal of the redevelopment, as stated in a 1968 joint publication by the GAB and the NSW Department of Technical Education, was for it to “symbolise to the community the new significance of technical and advanced education in our time”. This was to be modified many times before building began. photo of model: courtesy Michael Dysart. 2. A sketch showing the integration of the atrium / Student Union with the landscaped concourse to the north. drawing: Michael Dysart. 3. By 1966 the plan was to have three buildings of 13, 22 and 16 storeys with two basements and five podiums. glenn Harper. photo: Max Dupain.

1.

proposal evolved, giving an open-ended, loose-fit planning flexibility to the project that allowed for incremental increases in plan form, including variable high-rise elements that could be extended within the limits of lift capacity of the various towers. It also allowed for lateral multi-use flexibility of lecture rooms, which could be made available to various disciplines.

The design principle was similar to the Tech Scheme but on a much larger scale, encompassing bridges between towers and sky gardens. This proposal, while architecturally exciting, did not find favour with the quantity surveyors who deemed it too expensive.

The (present) 1966 Building 1

It was becoming clear that the various engineering departments of the NSWIT wanted their own building identity, and Electrical Engineering was given the first priority as the tenants of Building 1, the first of three engineering towers proposed for the Broadway site.

An essential component of the electrical teaching methodology at the time involved wall-mounted equipment and experimentation. This precluded windows at eye level for the majority of Building 1. It was pointed out that this was a short-sighted policy as building uses change over time, but the client was adamant. This was a major factor in the form and facade methodology of the current UTS Building 1: a three-metre-high band beam with strip windows over.

engineering

By way of personal background, I gained entry to an experimental secondary school in the UK where normal schoolwork was confined to four days with a Ruskin-style trade/craft on the fifth. The curriculum aim was to produce future architects, engineers and builders with an emphasis on seamless integration and understanding of these three disciplines. Our school houses were named Adam, Lutyens, Nash and Wren.

So, for me, the integration of architecture and engineering was always a fundamental driver in the design of NSWIT, and the adoption of advanced structural solutions was expressive of the structure and services to the students studying these disciplines. Equally, the mechanical and electrical engineering components were integrated and expressed where possible throughout the building. Nothing was to be concealed behind false ceilings, render or gyprock. There was a ruthless integrity in the practical application of these issues throughout the complex. >

“while this has been interpreted byothers as a Brutalistresponse, nothingcould be further from the truth.”

2.

1716

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

As part of Sydney’s Bicentennial Redevelopment Project, a study of the historical development of Darling Harbour was commissioned. The Maritime Services Board had proposed its redevelopment in 1974, however, this did not immediately proceed. In 1984 a conservation study coordinated by the Special Projects Section of the NSW Government Architect’s Branch identified the individual heritage items and made a brief assessment of the items of cultural significance. The report was placed under lock and key by Laurie Brereton, then State Labor Minister for Public Works (1984–1987), and was not circulated.

Initially the redevelopment was coordinated by the Public Works Department. Feasibility and transport studies were prepared in 1983, followed by an Exhibition and Convention Centre market study in 1984. The master plan for the proposed redevelopment was exhibited in the Parliament House, Sydney in December 1984 and a new agency, the Darling Harbour Authority, was created to manage the process and the project.

Under threat: darling HarbourBicentennial redevelopment

From working precinct to leisure centreThe MSJ Group (McConnel Smith & Johnson) was appointed as the Project Design Directorate, and a draft development strategy appeared in 1985, followed by design guidelines. A series of iconic new buildings set within extensive landscaping and pedestrian areas was proposed that would completely change the use of the harbour from a working precinct to a recreational precinct. Preliminary reports regarding the major proposed new buildings, such as the Exhibition and Convention Centre, were provided by the individual architects selected by the Darling Harbour Authority through a process managed by head contractor, Leighton Contractors.

out with the oldUnder the redevelopment strategy, the majority of existing buildings

at Darling Harbour were to be demolished, rather than adaptively re-used, despite a number of them being of a scale and character that would have made this possible. In the Darling Harbour Bicentennial Redevelopment Project, only the hydraulic pumping station (owned by the Sydney & Suburban Hydraulic Power Company) and a truncated section of the Pyrmont Bridge were retained, along with buildings on the edge of the precinct, the warehouses and market buildings lining Sussex Street and the Shelbourne Hotel. The fruit and vegetable markets had been relocated to Homebush in 1975, however, a number of the market buildings erected by the Municipal Council of Sydney survived. >

While this has been interpreted by others as a brutalist response, nothing could be further from the truth. During my years at the NSW Government Architect’s Branch (GAB) (1955-69), I was fortunate to be part of Harry Rembert’s design room at a time when respect for materials and economy of means was a natural response to postwar austerity; that ethos included a questioning of slick modernism and, for that matter, ‘beton brut’.

The NSWIT building was a celebration of integrated architectural engineering principles and rigour; nothing more, nothing less.

Tower

The irrevocable client decision on the Building 1 facade band beams opened up an opportunity to express these bands as structural elements and reduce the forest of columns at podium level normally associated with a tower form.

As a consequence, the tower structure was reduced to eight columns supporting the post-stressed band beams cantilevering some 8 metres to the mitred corners of the tower; these band beams, in turn, supported an exposed twin-T flooring system spanning back to the building core. This system was alternated at each floor, providing a balanced pinwheel from core to external columns. It also provided column-free space within the tower, which the client chose to partition with masonry rather than lightweight alternatives.

podium

Capitalising on the spatial dynamic of the entry atrium, a minimum of columns was required to maintain uninterrupted spaces and flexibility at podium level. A post-stressed pre-cast ‘pan’ system was adopted. This was an integrated and sophisticated system providing seamless, column-free spaces that allowed for inevitable changes over time.

This pan system was supported on deep post-stressed beams at the stepped podium edges, with bronze capping plates expressing the post-stressing capping plates and frequency. These advanced structural solutions for both the podium and tower of Building 1 were intended to be expressive of both structure and services to the students studying within these disciplines.

materials

By the 1960s the GAB had already experienced curtain-wall failures, leaving pre-cast as the only realistic alternative for the NSWIT building. The industry pre-cast methodology at the time was to cast a 20-millimetre decorative layer, followed by the pouring of the main structural form at a later stage. The panel was finally washed or acid etched for an exposed aggregate finish.

I made the decision to cast the pre-cast as a through mix and avoid the potential of delamination (concrete cancer failure). However, this meant the exposed aggregate colour was the same as the standard concrete mix. I sourced and specified an appropriate aggregate from a quarry in Grafton, the colour approximated a washed Sydney sandstone similar to Sydney Parliament House, however, it was not used, which was disappointing.

Although excavation for Building 1 had started while I was still with the GAB, construction was undertaken and completed long after I had left to go into private practice.

There was no consultation with me as the building progressed, so a number of details and plans that were key to my original concept were lost from what was eventually built.

atrium concept

Stage one of the NSWIT project was conceived as the social, administrative and ceremonial gateway of the new complex, however, in its restricted location it could never match the landscaped quadrangles of traditional universities. Consequently the entry space was designed as a more contemporary urban alternative to the Oxbridge model: a dynamic atrium space housing the student union and providing a social meeting point for a mix of full-time, vocational and part-time students, many of whom would miss the traditional university environment.

The Student Union was to have all the usual facilities but on a more sophisticated and ambitious scale, including a number of food outlets, bars and restaurants opening on to adjacent terraces and a green quadrangle to the north. A hidden oasis, this quadrangle was planned with rainforest species and included extensive fountains acting as cooling towers for the air-conditioning plant, which was all part of the expressed engineering ethos. The Great Hall and function rooms were also located to increase people interaction and movement, and reinforce the importance of this entry atrium as the dynamic hub of the NSWIT.

Detailed planning of all these facilities and services formed part of the tender documents but, in another disappointing outcome, the Student Union was comprehensively deleted without any explanation as to why.

It was amusing for me more recently to read the UTS Master Plan 2020 describing “the potential of the atrium as the ceremonial, social and administrative heart of the campus”: those were my exact words and planning intent some 50 years ago.

Michael Dysart Michael Dysart & Partners

4. UTS Building 1, orphaned on Broadway. With its roughly stepped podium, and tower, the building has been the subject of countless proposed revisions. photo: Glenn Harper. 5. The GAB concept plan included pedestrian walkways and stepped podiums, defining courtyards and street edges, with connections to Central Station and Harris Street, and alignment to George Street and Broadway.

4.

5.

18 19

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012 Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

Transport corridors

Market Street serves as a reminder that Sydney’s food markets had long been located in the heart of the city, and all of the meat, fish, fruit and vegetables were delivered either via Pyrmont Bridge, the Darling Harbour Rail Yard, or unloaded at the series of nearby wharves. The Market Street approach to the Pyrmont Bridge was removed to allow for an approach to the Sydney Harbour Bridge from the new Western Distributor. The remainder of the bridge was conserved and returned to working order; however, modifications to the significant fabric of the bridge were made so that the monorail could run above it. Salvaged stone elements from the eastern approach have been utilised in public parks and squares in Pyrmont. A pedestrian link was built from Market Street up to the bridge deck.

During the redevelopment, a section of the semicircular iron wharf was discovered. Part of this structure remains buried and is listed on the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority’s (SHFA) Heritage Conservation Register, another part was placed in the collection of the Powerhouse Museum, but has since, according to the heritage listing, been ‘scrapped’.

In contrast to the semicircular Circular Quay, which was designed by the

Commanding Royal Engineer George Barney in the mid-1830s and constructed from locally quarried sandstone, the curved Iron Wharf in Darling Harbour was built in 1869–1875 to designs by Edward Orpen Moriarty of the Public Works Department using both imported and colonial materials. The technologically advanced Iron Wharf was constructed of imported lattice girders and employed concrete in the foundations and hardwood for the decking. Similar improvements were proposed for Circular Quay, however, these did not go ahead.

Once the Iron Wharf was completed, the railway sidings were commenced. The series of large curved goods sheds that followed the curve of the wharf were demolished in the lead-up to the Bicentennial. The scale and complexity of the public works undertaken in New South Wales in the late 1860s, which included the large sandstone workshop and Fitzroy Dock on Cockatoo Island, the Iron Wharf in Darling Harbour, and Belmore Basin in Wollongong, rivalled works being undertaken in England. With the exception of the goods line, part of which is now utilised by the city’s Light Rail, the entire Darling Harbour Rail Yard, including the series of goods sheds used for wool, fruit and refrigerated meat, was demolished.

industrial heart of Sydney. A pedestrian promenade on the curved embankment to the head of the cove linked one end of the Pyrmont Bridge to the other, continuing towards the new Sydney Aquarium.

Philip Cox Richardson Taylor and Partners (now Cox Architecture) received the Sulman Award for the Sydney Exhibition Centre in 1989. Woodward’s spiral water feature (one of his most loved works), received the Walter Burley Griffin Award for Urban Design in 1992, having won a National Award for Landscape Architecture Civic Design the previous year.

already out of fashion?

Proposals have already been submitted for a new Sydney Multifunctional Convention and Entertainment Centre (SMCEC). The Preliminary Environmental Assessment Report (March 2011) notes that there are heritage items on and in the vicinity of the site, but makes no mention of the more recent award-winning buildings by the internationally renowned architects Philip Cox and John Andrews or the landscaping by MSJ Group. The preliminary environmental assessment also makes no mention of the much loved fountains that are an integral part of the precinct.

The preliminary Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) notes the proposal is to erect

a new Entertainment Centre that will be a ‘world-class, iconic design, 6 Star Green Star facility’, however, the rating is unlikely to be achievable if the environmental cost of demolishing the existing structures is included. Following the construction of the new SMCEC, the Sydney Entertainment Centre site will be released for development.

What will be the fate of the existing Convention Centre and Exhibition Centre if a new, larger facility is built beside them? John Andrews’s two other major works in Sydney have both been altered (including the Sulman Award-winning American Express building on the corner of King and George Streets) and his original design intention severely compromised.

The lack of protection for award-winning modern architecture is currently highlighted by the case of the Sulman Award-winning Goldstein Hall, at the University of New South Wales, which is in the process of being demolished.

Will this also be the fate of the award-winning components of the various bicentennial redevelopment projects in Sydney? While a number of the structures within the area formerly managed by the Darling Harbour Authority (now managed by SHFA) are listed on the government agency’s Section 170 Register, the register (as available online) does not include recent items such as the Spiral Water Feature, the Exhibition

“The proposal to erect a new Entertainment Centre that will be a ‘world class, iconic design, 6 Star Green Star’, is unlikely to be achievable if the environmental cost of demolition of the existing structures is included.”

previous page: The Sydney Exhibition Centre by Cox Richardson Taylor, with the urban stream by MSJ Group. photo: Patrick Bingham-Hall, courtesy Cox Architecture. 2. March 1986 Master Plan, courtesy MSJ Group. 3. The Exhibition Centre seen in its broader context as part of an urban precinct. photo: Patrick Bingham-Hall, courtesy Cox Architecture.

Selectively spared

The fruit and vegetable markets fared a little better, and selected elements have been retained. Market buildings No.1 and No.2, designed by the City Architect, are now home to Paddy’s Markets, with The Peak Apartments tower above. Another of the former market buildings has been substantially reworked and is now the University of Technology Building 5. The former fish market was demolished. The temporary fruit market (later known as the Corn Exchange) on the corner of Sussex and Market Streets, designed by the City Architect George McRae in 1887, now contains commercial office space, though some of the distinctive elements of its facade have been removed. This building was erected so the old city markets between George and York Streets could be demolished and a new market building — The Queen Victoria Building — erected. McRae designed both the temporary and the new permanent market building. Like many of the multistorey warehouse buildings erected between Darling Harbour and Sydney Cove, goods could be unloaded from vessels at quay level, and then loaded on to trucks at the Sussex Street level. The pumphouse (the Sydney & Suburban Hydraulic Power Company’s pumping station) near Dixon Street supplied hydraulic power for lifts and wool presses in the warehouses and markets throughout the city. In the conversion of the pumphouse to a pub (the Pumphouse) in 1975, elements indicating the original use of the building were retained, as was the name.

in with the new

During the bicentennial redevelopment a number of iconic structures were erected including: the Australian National Maritime Museum and the Sydney Exhibition Centre (both designed by Cox Richardson Taylor); the Sydney Convention Centre designed by John Andrews International (with later additions by Ancher, Mortlock Woolley); and the Harbourside complex (which was based on a similar example at Baltimore in the US). Extensive landscaping works were also undertaken, including the circular Tumbalong Park and the surrounding urban stream by MSJ Group, the connecting Darling Walk, and the spiral fountain (designed by the late Robert Woodward in 1988) outside the Sydney Convention Centre. A walled Chinese Garden was built on a site that had once been the

Centre or the Convention Centre. In contrast, the Chinese Gardens, which were also a bicentennial project, have been listed. Perhaps protection for award-winning designs, significant modern buildings and designed landscapes could be built into planning schemes and considered in all government agency Section 170 registers.

Dr Noni BoydNSW Chapter Heritage Officer

1.

2.

20 21

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

detrimental alterations to the internal configuration of a house designed by Henry Epstein and the removal of its Paul Kafka built-in furniture.

The Willoughby LEP heritage schedule did not specify the interior, but the council’s heritage inventory report had been upgraded to include an assessment of the interior and recommendations for its conservation. Assessed under Willoughby LEP 1995, the council was able to consider the impacts of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the local heritage item by referring to its own inventory report. Under recent changes to the state planning system, the success at 40 Findlay Avenue may not be replicated without identification of the interior on the local council’s heritage schedule.

On 31 March 2006, the NSW Government gazetted the Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Order that prescribed a standard format and content for local environmental plans, with 42 mandatory clauses aimed at improving clarity and consistency.

1., 2., 3. Reported as being under threat in the May–June 2010 Heritage edition of Architecture Bulletin, the Paul Kafka built-in furniture inside Henry Epstein’s 1948 Hillman House has been given a reprieve with Willoughby Council refusing an application for interior alterations that affected the work, affirming the important relationship between many modernist architects and furniture designers. photos: Lindy Kerr and Ray Joyce, courtesy Historic Houses Trust.

The Institute’s NSW Chapter Heritage Committee had a busy year in 2011. The Committee was active in its expansion of the 20th Century Register of Significant Buildings, contributed to the Institute’s CPD program including the June ‘Design in Context’ session, and coordinated the ‘Sustainable Heritage’ edition of Architecture Bulletin.

The Committee’s working group also progressed the Institute’s upcoming ‘Alterations and Additions’ publication, a guideline document for building owners and design professionals to promote high- quality design and building conservation. This is the final in a series of three publications jointly prepared with the NSW Heritage Branch on infill development and adaptive re-use, and, pending funding, it is hoped to be completed this year.

Since late last year the Committee has been prioritising potential nominations of significant Modernist places to the NSW State Heritage Register. As part of the Heritage

Branch’s ‘Designing for the Modern World’ theme, the Committee hopes to nominate 20 buildings to the NSW State Heritage Register to strengthen recognition of the state’s 20th century heritage.

The year also saw the retirement of Anne Higham who has been engaged by the Institute since 2002 as the Chapter Heritage Architect. Anne’s architectural career spans over 40 years with particularly energetic involvement in conservation practice in New South Wales. After graduating in 1970 she worked for Collard,

Clarke & Jackson Architects, then Bruce Rickard & Partners and Philip Cox &

Partners, before joining the Public Works Department in 1986.

Her practice extended across all aspects of architectural design,

including schools, office buildings, sports and recreation buildings, seniors’

housing, commercial and industrial buildings, shopping centres, interior design and, notably, heritage conservation. With particular expertise in the conservation of Sydney sandstone, Anne was a coordinator on the PWD’s stonework program and lectured on the topic at The University of Sydney and the University of Technology, Sydney. Her contribution to professional practice has been recognised by awards too numerous to mention from 1970 to the present. In 2010 Anne was awarded a Life Fellowship of the Institute.

Anne’s encyclopedic knowledge of architectural history and conservation practice in New South Wales will be much missed at the Institute. She will continue to make a positive contribution to the Heritage Committee.

In 2012 the Committee welcomed Dr Noni Boyd as Anne’s successor at the Institute as its Heritage Officer. Noni has over 20 years’ experience in heritage architectural practice in New South Wales, Norfolk Island and New Zealand, and has worked with the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority and the Government Architect’s Office.

The Heritage Committee currently has 15 members, all of whom participate on a voluntary basis, and two officers in attendance from the Institute (Noni Boyd and Murray Brown). The Committee meets monthly at Tusculum and is seeking to expand its membership. Those interested in joining the committee should contact Noni Boyd at the Institute to register interest, on 9246 4006.

portrait: Anne Higham retired from the NSW Chapter in December 2011. One of her favourite projects while with the Department of Public Works was Dawes Point (Tarra) Park (above). Combining her conservation and landscape architecture skills, Anne provided the specialist advice for the conservation of the old sandstone battery. Designed in association with the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority, Dawes Point (Tarra) Park won the 2002 Lloyd Rees Award for Civic Design. The jury noted: “The success of the project lies in its seamless interweaving of archeology, conservation and interpretive reconstruction to form a new civic precinct of unique urban character in Australia.”

The yearthat was

Supporting this, the template’s definition of ‘heritage item’ limits the listing to ‘the location and nature of which is described in Schedule 5’. The NSW Department of Planning’s practice note (PN 11-001) requires that the name of each item include a brief description of those things that are part of the heritage significance of the item, including any interior features. One example given is ‘Buckle House (former) (street facade, awning, part interior)’.

Earlier versions of the template’s definition of a heritage item offered greater flexibility by including the provision for the mapping of the entire site and by providing the option for the item to be specified in further detail in councils’ heritage inventory reports, giving councils the flexibility to upgrade the information on its heritage inventories whenever information came to light. The latest version of the template requires a legislative amendment to Schedule 5 to alter the description of an item.

The latest version puts the onus on the consent authority to nominate where interiors are significant, yet many interiors are only identifiable by access with the owner’s permission, which is usually only possible if a development application has been lodged. The potential interaction of the compulsory clauses and the dictionary definitions is yet to be tested and will raise a number of questions: • How crucial will the Schedule 5 description

be in the assessment process? • Will the role of a Heritage Assessment or

Conservation Management Plan in the assessment of a development application be limited to those parts of the item described?

• To what extent do significant components of an interior need to be specified for their protection to be upheld by the Land and Environment Court?

• How can complex interiors be succinctly described?

• What purpose will the heritage inventory reports play in identifying interiors not described?

• How are the terms ‘altering’ and ‘changes’ to be interpreted without a definition of these words in the template?

• To what level can the term ‘making changes to its detail, fabric, finish or appearance’ prevent loss of components within an interior such as applied finishes, fixtures and hardware?

• How is ‘structural change’ to be interpreted? • Is the removal of a chimney breast and its

supporting flue a structural change?

interiors under threat

heritage committee

A recent landmark ruling sees the protection of modernist interiors heading in the right direction, though the battle is far from over, reports the NSW Chapter Heritage Committee.

The interiors of heritage items, if carefully protected and conserved, reveal invaluable information about the past, including social structures, taste and attitudes, and the availability of natural and technological resources.

While protection for interiors of more decorative or picturesque architectural styles of the early 20th century and preceding periods have acquired increased community support with the passage of time, modernist interiors of the mid to late 20th century remain undervalued; overlooked because of their simple understated design, economic use of materials and emphasis on honest functional expression.

The successful protection of a modernist residential interior at 40 Findlay Avenue, Roseville on Sydney’s North Shore last year established a positive precedent for the conservation of modernist buildings and their interiors. In June 2010, Willoughby City Council refused an application that proposed

• Is the removal of a staircase a structural change?

Fortunately, the nature of the standard LEP template is such that future changes to the compulsory clauses could be made, and the Department is giving further consideration of submissions advocating change.

resources

The Standard Instrument (Principal Local Environmental Plan) is available at http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au (Search for ‘EPIs’ ‘in force’ with ‘Standard Instrument’ in ‘Title’.)

For information about the Standard Instrument go to http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/LocalPlanning/tabid/246/language/en-US/Default.aspx

For the Department of Planning Practice Note PN 11-001 visit http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=7bV7WbOVGJw%3D&tabid=247&language=en-US

1.

2.

The latest version of the Standard Instrument (LEP) has implications for the protection of interiors of local heritage items and moveable heritage. Section 5.10 ‘Heritage conservation’ is compulsory. Clause 5.10(2)(b) limits the need for a development application for alterations to the interiors of heritage items, to structural changes, or to any part of the interior that is specified in Schedule 5, this being the key location for the heritage schedule in the standard instrument.

3.

22 23

Architecture Bulletin March / April 2012

book review

When Quality Matters... Model-Tech 3D specialises in the highest quality models for presentation, marketing and DA. We utilise advanced techniques, colour and texture matching, and a computer controlled cutting system to ensure our models are clean, precise and visually exciting. To view our portfolio of completed projects or discuss your options and possibilities, please call Russell Pearse.

Level 6 / 2 Foveaux Street Surry Hills NSW 2010

T: 02 9281 2711 F: 02 9212 5556 E: russell@modeltech3d.com.au

www.modeltech3d.com.au

M O D E L - T E C H 3 D

Advertise in architecture bulletinT: 02 9246 4055E: roslyn.irons@architecture.com.au

This mighty volume begins with an introductory ‘Rationale and Structure’, which clearly positions the work: the encyclopedia is not a history, nor a ‘technical handbook or dictionary’, but a collection of entries on various subjects linked only by their location in, or direct relationship with, Australia.

It sets a position, too, for the entries: they are deliberately focused on architects and firms, “as the biographies and output of architects and firms have been instrumental in the development of architecture in Australia” (p.xix). This is not the entirety of the subject matter of the entries: there is also a wide range on more general topics from Aboriginal architecture to Zoological Gardens: on a very select range of building types and materials; and even on a few very influential individual buildings such as Parliament House Canberra and the Sydney Opera House. Long entries cover the architecture of particular states and regions, though not of cities. Entries on practitioners are limited to those whose work began before 2000, although more recent projects by these practitioners are listed and illustrated, so the work is relatively current.

Extensive and clear cross-referencing enables many paths to be followed, thus stories are built up as sequences of facts, leaving the reader to flesh out many of the connections in time, place and production, in style and politics. In this lies much of the work’s charm: every time I look up something in particular, I wind up browsing six or seven other entries, linking aspects of Australian architecture in new ways, finding familiar people and work, and discovering new ones. There are some nice alphabetical adjacencies: ‘J.J Clark’, the architect of what Andrew Dodd calls “arguably Australia’s finest classical building” (p.150), is followed by ‘Classical Tradition’; ‘Digital Technology’ precedes ‘DIY (Do-It-Yourself )’; while Jim and Joan Kerr and Philip and Louise Cox are reunited in print. The thread of cross-references leads the reader across the country and over the entire period of its occupation.

The book’s no-nonsense design reflects its authoritative aim of endurance rather than a fashionable polemic. The 500 illustrations are not really enough for this reader, and there are very few plans, but the mix of recent and historic photos, perspective drawings and a few cartoons is well chosen and comprehensive.

Editors Philip Goad and Julie Willis precede the alphabetical series of entries with an ‘Outline History of Australian Architecture’, full of references to individual entries to flesh

The encyclopedia of australian architecture editors Philip Goad and Julie Willispublisher Cambridge University Pressrrp $150 members $135 www.architext.com.au More than five years in the making, The Encyclopedia of Australian Architecture is the most ambitious work of its kind ever completed in Australia, bringing together more than 225 architectural writers, critics, academics and historians, with over 1,000 indexed entries, and 500 photographs and drawings.

out the necessarily brief overview. It is titled ‘Making Place’, but there is only a passing study of the Indigenous approaches to place, and to the European efforts at colonisation, intriguingly referred to as an ‘Enlightenment Project’, a topic that has had too little study and is fundamental to an understanding of the development of the various Australian colonies. This essay concludes with an overview of Federation Square, the architecture of which, in the editors’ view, “represents a new maturity in understanding the place” (p.xxxvi ), and thus the publication of The Encyclopedia of Australian Architecture can mark “that point of mature departure” (p.xxxvi). Predictions of future maturity have a habit of falling flat, but perhaps this new understanding of climate and place, and the role of our unique Aboriginal culture, will genuinely lead us to a more mature and considerate architecture.

The introduction acknowledges the only other widely published overview of Australian architecture: John Maxwell (Max) Freeland’s Architecture in Australia: A History (Cheshire, 1968). Through its multiple authorship, The Encyclopedia of Australian Architecture avoids the selectivity and bias that was so annoying in Freeland’s book, although, with the passing of time (and of the author), this aspect now seems endearing, especially in light of this new and truly comprehensive reference work.

Contributors are not indexed, which is a pity. The list is long, and it would be good to be able to link the entries as a kind of cross-reference of the interests and critical stance of the contributors themselves, as their ‘voices’ differ significantly.

Given the enormity of this undertaking, various minor factual errors are easily forgiven, especially as I could find no real omissions in the list of entries. At last we can define our own architecture, its breadth and many facets, its major flow in parallel with that of the world beyond, its endearing dead ends, its successes and failures. The publication is worthwhile in print rather than as an online database: with a sound editorial policy, the process of selection and prioritisation ensures that the relative importance of the subjects of entries can be communicated through a hierarchy of knowledge, without the risk that Pamela Anderson can appear more prominent than Hannah Arendt or Marie Curie1 . An indispensible resource.

Peter TonkinTonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects

1. Web 2.0: Amateur Hour or Mass-ive Knowledge? A debate with Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales and author Andrew Keen, Commonwealth Club San Francisco, 28 Feb 2008.

SHARE OFFICE FOR LEASENEUTRAL BAY• CorbenArchitectshasspareofficespace

forlease

• Upto5workstationsand4personconferenceavailable

• Moderngroundfloor,openplanofficewithqualityfitout

• Sharedreceptionand20personconferenceroomavailable

• Fullyequippedkitchenwithcommercialexpressomachine

• 2largeformatprinters,2copiers,2printers,fax,libraryetc

• Rental$220-250/week/workstationincallcostsdependingonnumber

• Undergroundcarparkingavailable

• ContactPennieon99041844

24

THERE’S A LOT IN A NAME, WE’VE CHANGED OURSTAKE YOUR IDEAS TO NEW HEIGHTS WITH ELEVATE ALUMINIUM SYSTEMS

COMMERCIAL ALUMINIUM GLAZING BY

We’re elevating our commercial range of products to new potentials with

a new name befitting the innovation, quality and superb design ideals our

systems are designed upon. Elevate Aluminium Systems. The new name

for AWS Commercial Joinery. Take your ideas to new heights with Elevate,

visit elevatealuminium.com.au to find out more.

STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH � DURABILITY � STYLE � ARCHITECTURE � INNOVATION � EFFICIENCY � COMFORT � STYLE � STRENGTH �

AWS_Elevate_AB_FP_Ad_210x297.indd 1 2/02/12 10:46 AM