Foreword - Australian Institute of Architectsdev.architecture.com.au/i-cms_file?page=13538/21st_century_canberra.pdf · reflect our changing demographic character and aspirations,

21st century canberra

ForewordClimate change and its impacts are upon us. Research into this phenomena and our societies’ capacity to adapt have highlighted the opportunities to make our cities more efficient, more sustainable and, if we are clever about it, more equitable.

The research has shown us that the way we manage our cities and create buildings is often wasteful and does not sufficiently account for affordability, intergenerational equity and access to the positive aspects of city living. Focussing on liveability in the here and now alone can make us lose sight of the more complex relationships between the city of today and the evolving city in which we and future generations will live.

As recorded in the State of Australian Cities Report 2010 produced by the Major Cities Unit of Infrastructure Australia, our major cities are key drivers of Australia’s economy. Their ability to support production and innovation and to compete on an international scale will underpin our future economic vitality.

The Australian Institute of Architects is committed to actions that contribute to improving our cities’ sustainability. This involves prompting discussion not only about the physical form, but also the way we live. The affluent lifestyle, which many Australians enjoy, is overwhelming our increases in energy efficiency, and must be transformed to significantly reduce the energy consumed whilst still maintaining a rewarding quality of life. This challenge presents an extraordinary opportunity for our community to imagine and enact new ways of living that reflect our changing demographic character and aspirations, while reducing demand on the natural systems that sustain us.

Canberra is a young city. It is a time to ask questions about how we live that will shape our future: how will Canberra evolve to meet the challenges of climate change, to adapt to shifting demographics and to foster economic innovation?

In setting out current thinking about a range of sustainability issues, in distilling core propositions and possible scenarios for a more sustainable future, this document seeks to contribute to this critically important debate. What actually happens will be partly the result of the vision we set and partly changes that will emerge over time.

This is a pivotal time in the history of our cities and the Institute encourages the community to participate in developing ideas about how we shape the future.

Sheila Hughes

ACT Chapter President The Australian Institute of Architects

Moving Towards a shared susTainable vision for a susTainable ciTy

IntroductIonIn 2009 the ACT Chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects convened the ‘Sustainable Cities Fora’. Focusing on the national capital, this series of seven public seminars and two public workshops sought to draw out current research and practice around the issue of defining and creating a sustainable city.

The project was underpinned by three core concepts:

• Climate change and its emerging impacts require immediate action and the transformation of the cities in which we live is a key area in which we can act.

• Now is time for the community to engage in open, vigorous debate, creating the vision that will transform Canberra into a liveable, sustainable, and adaptable city.

• An integrated approach to design, responding to the findings of scientific research, is essential if we are to create sustainable ways of living.

We are indebted to Allen Kearns and his colleagues at CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems for their initial assistance in formulating the series of talks, and thank the numerous speakers from CSIRO, other research institutions and practitioners who gave freely of their time and expertise.

Participants at the forums and workshops included members of the Institute and our allied professionals, students and individuals, local government staff and local political representatives. Two speakers presented at most of the forums and the discussions that followed were lively.

This report sets out the issues, insights and ideas generated by the forums and workshops. It is neither a statement of policy, nor a prescription for specific actions. Rather, it is intended to stimulate discussion and debate, encouraging the community as a whole to look afresh at our city, and to create a new vision for a sustainable future. It is a first step, and the Institute’s ACT Chapter looks forward to taking the discussions further with a series of public workshops and discussions in 2010–11.

The report is presented in three sections:

• A summary of the key issues arising from the 15 talks. The full presentations, accompanied by diagrams and images, are available at www.architecture.com.au (follow the links through the “Events/State Events/ACT Chapter/Past Events/ Sustainability Forums 2009”).

• A design brief to effect the transformation of Canberra to a sustainable city for the 21st century, presented as a set of seven core propositions.

• Four hypothetical scenarios, each incorporating the propositions, which present visions of what a sustainable Canberra could look like in the year 2070.


contextThe ideas presented in this report are focused on discussions about Canberra, a young city. The result of the 1913 competition to design the new Federal capital, Canberra has, since its inception, been a planned city. Built in an era dominated by the ideal of suburban living and the rise of the automobile, Canberra’s built environment showcases the evolution of the ‘great Australian dream’: its expansive, low density suburbs extend around 50 kilometres from north to south, and are linked by a network of arterial roads and parkways.

Canberra’s distinctive features informed discussions about the challenges and opportunities the community faces in shaping a more sustainable city:

• The city’s fundamental purpose as the seat of Australia’s federal government, means that a high proportion of employment is directly or indirectly related to government activity.

• The inspired beaux-arts central city planning of Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahoney sets the city within its striking landscape, and creates vistas into the rural areas and inner hills that define the city’s urban areas.

• The city is based on the Holford Y-Plan structure of nodal town centres, which are linked by a simple linear parkway framework.

• Canberra is an inland city located in Australia’s southern highlands in the water-supply-stressed Murray-Darling basin.

• The city has physical, economic and social interrelationships with the NSW towns of Queanbeyan and Yass, due to their close proximity.

• Canberra has an expansive form characterised by low density, suburban housing with limited areas of higher density housing.

• The population is relatively affluent.

• Canberrans enjoy a high level of access to retail, cultural, educational and recreational facilities.

• ACT land is owned and controlled by the ACT Government, which since self-government has obtained a significant proportion of its revenue through the sale of leases.

This document acknowledges that there is no single climate change ‘solution’ that will suit all cities. The planning and design outcomes required to create a more sustainable future will be shaped by the opportunities and challenges of location, the legacy of a city’s built environment, its landscape and infrastructure, as well as current and emerging economic and social structures.

The problems are complex and will not reveal simple answers. However, this complexity provides the opportunity to identify niches that can support many different activities and ways of living, creating a rich and fulfilling place to live.

Figure 1: view of central Canberra


SectIon 1: the Forum program – ISSueS and IdeaSDr Matthew beattycanberra’s urban forM: environMenTal perforMance of our suburbsMatt Beatty, our first speaker, made the point that “urbanisation and climate change are the biggest challenges we face with regard to social, environmental and economic sustainability”. He noted that many climate change trends are locked in and cannot be mitigated. While this is true to some extent of urbanisation, we do have opportunities for shaping future city (re)building. He highlighted the need to understand urban human and environment interactions in developing adaption strategies, and the need to link individual, neighbourhood, and landscape scales in our thinking about urban form.

Matt introduced ideas about links between urban design, ecological function and ecosystems services. The study of the impacts of landscaping streets and private land in various Canberra suburbs showed the benefits that could be derived in terms of reducing heat stress, and improving human health and well being through social as well as physical interventions.

Matt’s key points included:

• the opportunity to intervene at a neighbourhood level;

• the importance of a nuanced response consisting of multilevel actions – e.g. retrofitting our cities, greening urban areas and effecting behavioural change; and

• the need to monitor our interventions, to question if they have achieved what we needed and to be prepared to adapt what we are doing progressively.

colin stewartreshaping our suburbs – an archiTecT’s invesTigaTionsColin’s passionate presentation asked why we seem to be beset with policies that hamper change. Colin highlighted that within our city fabric there are numerous, significant opportunities to retrofit: developing interstitial spaces, major transport corridors and brown field sites, while protecting our suburban heartland and the urban qualities the community values. He challenged us to provide a more walkable city, where any housing built in a higher-density environment must at least match the best low energy performance of a detached suburban house. He highlighted the opportunity to use our existing infrastructure more intensively.

Colin recommended that we don’t build new suburbs on extreme fringes but that we look at more flexible approaches, particularly with regard to building height and density targets for all new development in existing urban areas. He emphasised the importance of addressing delays in planning approval processes for brown field developments, and achieving change without extensive social disruption.Figure 2: diagram showing possible transport focused centres

along the existing intertown main road network

Diagrams: Colin Stewart Architects


Paul howorthcosT of dispersal – lifecycle cosTs for a suburban ciTyPaul’s presentation provided an overview of Assessing the Costs of Alternative Development Paths in Australian Cities, a paper commissioned by Parsons Brinckerhoff, and published by Curtin University.

This paper demonstrated the comparative costs of inner-city redevelopment and conventional suburban fringe development, considering:

• provision of infrastructure;

• costs of transportation;

• greenhouse gas emissions; and

• health costs.

The study found that when each of these costs are compared between the two urban forms, conventional suburban fringe development is consistently higher.

• Infrastructure provision costs are 2.7 times higher.

• Transportation costs are twice as high.

• Transport greenhouse gas emissions are 2.1 times higher.

It also found that ‘active travel neighbourhoods’ provide savings in direct and indirect health care costs, compared to developments that encourage car dependency.

The paper’s main conclusion was that the costs of dispersed, low-density environments exceed those of higher-density developments. In addition, low-density environments can obscure the lifecycle costs of dispersal, costs that are often carried by those least able to afford them, leading to issues of inequity.

Figure 3: new City Edge suburbs covering rural land, requires all new infrastructure (physical and social)


35

)) WA

30

s/ca

pita

)

SA

NT

25

(tonn

es Qld

ACT

20

ssio

ns (

NSW

Vic

15

HG

em

is

Tas

10$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000

GH

$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000

Annual per-capita income

Dr christoPher Deychanging canberra’s fooTprinTOne estimate puts the ecological footprint per capita, which the world could support, at 2.1 global hectares per person. The research work carried out by Chris and his colleagues at the University of Sydney’s Integrated Sustainability Analysis (ISA) group, has shown that Canberra has the highest ecological footprint in Australia at 8.5 global hectares per person. In the past decade this has grown, despite increased awareness of climate change.

The parameters analysed by ISA are complex and identify a full suite of activities that create greenhouse gas emissions and consume energy. Chris broke down the contributing factors to highlight that changes to urban form will have limited impact without a more holistic consideration of how we live, and he noted that some consequences of urban consolidation could be negative. For example, there is currently no positive impact on ecological footprint where new built forms are no more energy efficient than their predecessors, or when householder savings are simply transferred to discretionary spending on goods, recreational travel and services. He concluded that the benefits of densification are debatable, nuanced solutions: in a very general sense, how we live in the environments we create is more important than what we live in.

Higher levels of per-capita emissions, or ecological footprints, actually come from our cities’ central areas. This is due to the relative affluence of inner-city residents, reflected in their consumption patterns. Chris noted the relatively limited impact of the urban form on greenhouse gas emissions and energy use, demonstrating that built form, shelter and transport comprise 18% of total emissions and 15% of total energy use. By contrast, goods, services and food contribute a total of 60% of emissions. With this in mind, Chris reflected that the challenge is to consider how we live and what we do with our time, rather than focusing simply on where we live.

Figure 4: graph showing relative GHG emissions across states and incomes

Figure 5: graph showing relative ecological footprints across states and incomes

9

8int )

ACT

NSW8

foot

pri

s/ca

pita NT

Qld7

o log

ical

e c

tare

s

SA

Tas

6Eco (he

Vic

WA

5$10 000 $20 000 $30 000 $40 000

WA

$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000

Annual per-capita income


Guy barnetthuMan fuTures – liveabiliTy of The ciTyGuy’s talk posed the question “what is the interplay between liveability and sustainability?” Liveability was used to describe the overall contribution of the urban environment in influencing the quality of life or wellbeing of residents. It included facets of environmental quality, neighbourhood amenity and individual wellbeing.

Despite the fact smaller households are more numerous, as a result of a range of social trends, house size has grown by 35% in 21 years. The residential sector uses 60% more energy now than in 1975 despite a population increase of only 35%. This resource consumption trend is driven by affluence and lifestyle preferences.

Guy reported that research suggests liveability does not necessarily contribute to sustainable development or sustainable communities. He stated that there is little discussion about the relationship between these concepts, and whether they are mutually reinforcing or potentially in conflict. He concluded that:

• a good quality local environment is one of the key building blocks of sustainable cities;

• liveability is an important component of sustainability, but not sufficient in its own right: it presents a ‘here and now’ perspective on addressing human needs but does not necessarily take into account human impacts on the environment;

• liveability, nonetheless, is a useful starting point for community engagement and is a potential catalyst for wider changes to more sustainable behaviour. It provides a focus on the connections between the individual’s lifestyle, their streets, neighbourhoods and communities.

He suggested that the design process should offer opportunities for participants to explore and understand trade-offs in urban social-ecological systems, noting that cities comprise heterogeneous communities with multiple value sets, belief systems and criteria.

Guy asked whether we are able to shift from a ‘command and control’ system of planning to a strategic navigation of cities as complex systems, allowing for experiments and adaptation and the coproduction of knowledge and understanding.

Figure 8: Gould Street Canberra terraces with hedged front gardens

Figure 6: Love Street Brisbane townhouses linked to the city by ferry 10 minutes walk away

Figure 7: people in Victoria Park


Dr ian lawrencewaTer ManageMenT and iMplicaTions for canberra’s designIan highlighted the projected changes in the local availability of water: a decrease of around 10% in rainfall but a 40% decrease in discharge from land to reservoirs by 2050, due to the impact of climate change. He noted government responses focussed on water management: reducing usage and increasing recycling.

Ian’s research has developed WSUD (Water Sensitive Urban Design) methods. These are founded on an understanding that conventional waste management practices, which are based on conveyance, treatment and discharge, are not sustainable. WSUD applies a holistic and integrated land and water based approach to determine which character and pattern of urban form best meets a range of complex objectives. Best practice in this field requires integrated, holistic and interactive design. It needs to identify and develop adaptive capacity within the landscape, building on natural water flow, detention and recycling pathways. It complements centralised systems with dispersed systems that locally capture, store, conserve and use water resources.

He illustrated how these strategies introduce richness to the urban landscape by designing the urban form to incorporate overland flows, swales and wetlands and to intercept pollutants. He noted that “ecological studies have highlighted the key role of multiple dispersed, diverse and interactive ecosystems in maintaining a resilient adaptive whole” and the “need to reflect this structure in future urban form and services provision”.

Figure 9: dry creek to manage peak flows in the landscape at Brisbane’s Southbank


Dr GrahaM turnersusTainabiliTy challenges and urban developMenTGraham highlighted the immense size of the sustainability challenge we face. He noted that while more compact development may ease pressures, it might not avert large environmental impacts or be resilient and able to adapt to change over time.

Focussing on water in Victoria, he compared more compact urban form water use, and the energy required to supply it, with low-density sprawling form. While significantly reduced, compact urban form water use was nonetheless growing. He emphasised the key link between water supply and energy use, as technology such as desalination was employed to address shortfalls in availability. Reducing water and energy use hinges on the key issues of demand management and reducing consumption.

Graham highlighted the following factors for consideration:

• Despite migration, the rapidly aging population is likely to reduce the size of Australia’s workforce, requiring an increase in productivity to retain current levels of economic growth.

• Degradation of our agricultural land, which could critically impact on food production in 4–6 decades is masked by increasing areas of land being used.

Graham noted that usual approaches to problem solving, using single-issue based solutions, could produce perverse outcomes in other areas. Rather, integrated approaches were required. He proposed that sustainability required more innovation, less consumption and less work, noting that local self-sufficiency although less efficient, may be more resilient.

Dr Paul trantercreaTing child friendly ciTies – where do The children play?Paul’s talk focussed on the ways in which cities designed around our car based lifestyle and the way we live have alienated our children from their local social and physical environment disempowering them and adversely affecting their health. Paul advised that Australia’s cities rated poorly compared to other developed nations, in terms of children’s freedom as measured by various parental licences to act independently. Our cities have declined by these measures as we have restricted our children’s ability to move freely through the city. For example driving children to school has increased dramatically. He suggested that creating sustainability is ‘child’s play’: that is, the features of child friendly cities are also features of sustainable cities. Both share the freedom to safely and playfully explore the environment and provide a sense of connection with community and neighbourhood. He quoted Colin Ward:

“Oneshouldbeabletoplayeverywhere,easily,loosely,andnotforcedintoa‘playground’ora‘park’.Thefailureofanurbanenvironmentcanbemeasuredindirectproportiontothenumberofplaygrounds”.

This quote highlights the need to make entire cities child friendly, rather than restricting children to what have been referred to as ‘childhood ghettos’.

To achieve these changes Paul suggested we need to change social values as well as the design of our cities: to slow down, provide space and time for unstructured activity and interactions, improve the design of neighbourhoods, and develop a sense of the collective. Neighbourhoods should be designed to have features such as facilities close to home, transport choices that enable children to move independently within the city, and streetscapes and public places with edges where people interact and where there is passive surveillance.


louisa carterTransiT orienTed developMenT (Tod)Louisa commenced her talk by identifying the variety of acronyms that have developed around different types of development linked to public transport. She considered the key differentiator between urban developments was transit availability, which had a direct impact on the capacity to encourage a shift in modes of travel away from cars.

She noted the difference between transit-oriented developments and the United States’ west coast focus on ‘new urbanism’. These traditionally-designed neighbourhoods, generally self-contained Greenfield developments, do not address travel sustainability including out of area trips and commuting.

Louisa identified the following principles for TOD:

• maintaining time efficiency of public transport (PT);

• ensuring transport is a priority, including the integration of development and transport infrastructure in each locality;

• promoting a small number of key employment destinations with excellent transport access, defined as areas within 250m of a public transport station comprised principally of destination land uses;

• provision of mixed use environments to support PT trip chaining by integrating work and services in TOD locations;

• provision of high quality pedestrian and cycling networks, linking PT stations and activity centres; and

• a city wide parking strategy that reflects the intended character of the urban area. This would include a focus on short-term public parking in destination areas and limited parking provision for residents in TOD areas.

Louisa also highlighted the need for modelling the performance of urban areas to provide an evidence base for decision makers.

Figure 10: traffic congestion created at schools at the start and end of the day


Dr shiroMa MaheePalaTowards The developMenT of waTer sMarT ciTiesShiroma highlighted the pressures of a reduction in water supply due to climate change and an increase in consumption resulting from population growth. She emphasised the continuing need to maintain the health of our rivers and waterways given their critical impact on future water supplies to our cities.

She described the crucial link between water and energy use, as energy is required to treat, pump and process water and sewerage in our cities. Shiroma noted that while this energy consumption needs to be managed, the energy consumed to heat domestic water is 6.5 times higher than the energy used to deliver urban water and sewerage services. A 15% saving in residential hot water could offset the energy used to provide urban water.

Shiroma referred to the work of Associate Professor Rebeka Brown at Monash University and the National Urban Water Governance Program, highlighting the need for us to move to “Water Sensitive Cities”. The idea behind this research is shown in Figure 12 and Shiroma noted that we are currently at the “Water Ways City” moving towards the “Water Cycle City”.

Shiroma stated that water-smart cities would have:

• secure water supplies;

• reduced energy use and GHG emissions;

• improved waterway health; and

• improved social amenity and behaviours.

She proposed that to create water-smart cities we need a mix of decentralised and centralised solutions, combined with an improved community attitude to water use. The challenge is to find the right portfolio of options and best operating regime for that portfolio.

Her message was that communities should combine decentralised options (rainwater tanks, storm water harvesting and dual pipes) with alternative centralised systems (reduced use, aquifer recharge, recycling water, desalination) and an integrated urban water management system that considers the total water cycle.

She noted implementation of decentralisation is being hampered by the lack of:

• nationally accepted regulation and guidelines;

• nationally accepted governance structures around maintenance and operation; and

• understanding of actual performance as opposed to theoretical modelling, where the broader sustainability impacts are still unknown.

Figure 11: map of Australia showing rainfall decline from 1986 to 2006

Figure 12: diagram showing stages of progression to water sensitive cities


JaMie Dawsondesign for waTer ManageMenT in The urban landscapeIn his presentation Jamie discussed principles for design for water management in the urban landscape with a focus on a number of his own projects and some exemplar projects around Australia. His examination covered projects of many types including: landscape works that are part of larger architectural projects; autonomous major landscape works; some minor works projects associated with urban road renewal; and local government water sensitive urban development (WSUD) projects.

Major architectural and urban projects included: the Innovations Centre at the University of Canberra; ‘City Edge’ in Canberra’s northern suburb of O’Connor, a government housing project, where a wetland within the city stormwater system was provided by the development to detain peak flows from the site and surrounding districts; wetlands at the Melbourne Docklands leading to a Yarra tributary; and the Woden Pitch and Putt Golf course, which is constrained by flood mitigation from two conjoining storm water channels.

Jamie argued for a closer connection between WSUD and urban planning principles and practice, noting that a “denser city is better for the reticulation of water and sewage removal. There is currently a lot of capacity in both the sewer system and water network”.

Figure 13: University of Canberra Innovation Centre landscape

Figure 14: view across O’Connor Wetlands to city edge


Dr JaGo DoDsonenergy and ausTralian urban forM: paradoxes and probleMsJago’s presentation highlighted the complexity inherent in considering the relationship between urban form, energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. His VIPER maps showed the strategic risk associated with transport energy dependence in our cities:with the most vulnerable communities being lower income groups living on the periphery of our urban areas, which are typically poorly serviced by public transport. The VAMPIRE maps, such as the one for Sydney below, accentuate the links between low income and location, further highlighting the overlap in vulnerability to mortgage rises and inflationary effects in these communities. This is linked to distances travelled and costs of transport to service a sprawling urban form.

Distribution of medium-density dwellings does not necessarily correlate with less vulnerability. The map of Sydney showed that lower vulnerability areas have a significant proportion of denser development but that denser outer areas can also be highly vulnerable.

Jago noted that research on current Australian operational efficiency of dwellings by type indicated that semi-detached forms were the most efficient. Low to medium-rise followed as the next most efficient with both detached and high-rise dwellings shown to be significantly less efficient. However, based on current household size, the per capita efficiency of detached housing improved.

Jago reiterated that the actual total energy consumption is, as identified by Christopher Dey, more closely tied to affluence and increases in consumption and discretionary spending.

This talk illustrated that energy, design and social factors interact in complex ways. Jago suggested this could make urban form a less significant factor in the debate about sustainable cities, and recommended that our debates need to be nuanced. He also noted most of our future urban form already exists and that all new buildings require rigorous eco-design.

Figure 15: Sydney vampire map 2006 produced by Griffith University


John McDonalDK2 aparTMenTs – a case sTudy in design of MediuM densiTy energy efficienT housingJohn presented the K2 Apartments project. This project was the result of a competition for environmentally sustainable housing for inner city Melbourne, run by the Victorian Government’s Office of Housing. The project comprised a mix of one and two bedroom apartments of various types, located in four multi-storey and eight-storey blocks. Variety is reflected in the built form which is also shaped by design strategies to provide energy efficiency and create a landscape setting with places for outdoor recreation.

K2 uses a fully integrated suite of elements to deliver both reduced energy and water consumption and a high level of amenity to residents. These include:

• Modular apartments set out between masonry walls (thermal ribs) that, with exposed concrete ceilings, create thermal mass to stabilise the temperature within the dwellings

• Modular apartments to maximise flexibility of layouts within a rational structure

• Single loading of apartments off a screened southern corridor to allow natural ventilation while controlling heat loss and providing shelter from weather

• Stepped and shaped building forms across the site, maximising solar penetration to apartments in winter and shading in summer

• Green spine through the site linking the urban courtyards on Raleigh Street, and private central courtyards that provide recreational areas for residents and opportunities to interact with neighbours and visitors

• Extensive integrated solar hot water and photovoltaic panels on the roofs to harvest energy for the complex; the panels are angled for optimal performance and to provide shading to lower levels

• Harvesting and reuse of rain water and grey water

• Disabled access throughout the site, and apartments suitable for wheelchair access

• Maximising site open space by maximising cars parked at grade below the taller southern blocks

These apartments achieve energy and water efficiency and provide a model for denser development in inner city areas.

Figure 16: DesignInc section through K2

Figure 17: K2 Apartment central courtyard


anDrew Mackenziesuburbs under pressureAndrew’s work focussed on a study he is undertaking on the landscape aspects of the redevelopment of Duffy, in the wake of the Canberra bushfires. His work demonstrates that within the original street and block structure of this suburb, the move to larger family homes is reducing the opportunity for private landscaped areas to contribute to Canberra’s urban forest, even within an area where blocks sizes have not been reduced.

Professor tony caPon“healTh by design”Tony noted three main problems with our current settlement patterns, which are affecting health:

• centralising our food supply;

• separating residential areas from the places where we work; and

• engineering physical activity out of our environment.

In response he proposed three main changes:

• Return to local ways of living, with shops and services within walking distance of where people live

• Provision of jobs and infrastructure concurrent with any new urban development

• Improved conditions for active travel – walking, cycling and public transport

Tony referred to research documenting the relationship between our current city forms and their physical and social infrastructure, leading to negative health outcomes such as obesity, stress, and depression. He noted reduced daily physical activity and lack of social contact were contributors to these outcomes. Tony’s talk illustrated the linkages between sustainability measures, climate change amelioration and health benefits.

Figure 18: Geelong Waterfront Park exercise class

Figure 19: charity fund raising walk around Lake Burley Griffin


SectIon 2: a deSIgn brIeF For a SuStaInable canberra In the 21St centuryFollowing the first half of the seminar series, which focussed on the issues to be addressed to create more sustainable cities, the ACT Chapter of the Institute of Architects held the first of two public workshops. The workshop’s purpose was to develop a design brief for Canberra in the 21st Century. Workshop participants responded to the Institute’s draft brief, providing responses to key questions.

In light of the workshop responses and the forum discussions, we refined the brief, distilling it into a set of seven propositions to guide change.

The propositions outlined below are intended to stimulate debate and to provoke thought. While some are aspirational, setting out targets that may not seem achievable, these ideas prompt us to consider how they could be realised.

Figure 25: Carpark House

Figure 20: cluster housing Figure 21: urban terraces & townhouses Figure 22: apartments on boulevards

Figure 23: dual occupancy Figure 24: terrace mews


propoSItIon 1Canberra’s distinctive character as the nation’s capital, a south-east NSW regional centre and home to its people should be reinforced as the city develops.

canberra as The naTion’s capiTal• Canberra is a unique city by both international and

national standards. It is the nation’s capital, a regional centre and home for over 300,000 people.

• The original vision of a city within a visible natural landscape setting and with extensive landscape vistas will be maintained.

• The city form will maintain symbolic value and provide places and settings for national events.

• Politically and institutionally, Canberra has an extensive knowledge base.

• Canberra’s urban public realm provides a landscaped environment with aesthetic, environmental and amenity benefits.

ciTy econoMy• Canberra and Queanbeyan will expand their role as a

major regional centre. Together, they will be the focal point for many business, social, health, education, and transport activities in South-East NSW. As a regional centre, Canberra and Queanbeyan City will have a diverse economic base building on its national capital role, its regional centre role and locally generated business opportunities.

• Increasing population and the distribution of Commonwealth employment will support the development of sustainable urban form and rapid and effective public transport.

• The economy will continue to achieve a good balance between the public and private sectors.

• The city form of Canberra-Queanbeyan will be considered as an integrated whole, reflecting their economic, social, geographic and resource interdependence.

propoSItIon 2 The growth of the city should be contained within the existing town centres and their surrounding urban areas

ciTy forM• On growth rates projected in 2010, Canberra’s future

population will be contained within the existing boundaries of the currently defined urban area.

• Population density of the city will increase to sustainably support and use the existing city infrastructure: population should increase across the city and all existing, depleted suburbs should, as a minimum return to their original maximum population.

• Physical and social infrastructure will be extended geographically only if population growth rates are such that evidence based analysis shows it can be sustainably supported and maintained.

• A balance between city development and landscaped or conservation open space will be created, to ensure landscape areas are maintained sustainably, in good condition to maintain the landscape setting for the city and to provide recreational, productive and environmental benefits.

governance• Governance policy and planning measures will support

the transition to denser forms, which consider and maintain existing social capital.

• Development models and planning controls will support the innovative use at higher densities of existing subdivision patterns and infrastructure, as well as amalgamated blocks to enhance diversity of building types, ages and cost structures.

• The cost of future infrastructure supply and maintenance should be incorporated into consideration of any city form transformation.


propoSItIon 3 Suburban population density should be sufficient to support service delivery sought by residents whilst maintaining a high level of amenity

liveabiliTy TargeTs• The city will be retrofitted to distribute population

density, which will support a high level of shared use of health and education facilities.

• Retrofitting existing suburbs where the population density has been significantly depleted, will increase population to levels sufficient to sustainably support services such as public transport, local shops, schools and health services, and to effectively utilize available infrastructure.

• Retrofitting existing suburbs will improve the environmental performance of all existing buildings to current BCA requirements.

• A diverse range of housing types, such as apartments, townhouses, duplexes and terraces, single and cluster housing will contribute to population density and lifestyle choice, providing variety in title, streetscape, urban form, private open space, spatial qualities and usage.

• A range of housing types will be distributed throughout the city.

• The landscape setting will be sustainable and resilient, and balanced with development within the city boundary. The landscape setting will provide opportunities for community gardens or allotments, biodiversity-rich wetlands along the water network as well as sports grounds, public parks and nature reserves.

• Public housing will be incorporated into and distributed through all neighbourhoods particularly those on public transport routes in single housing/medium density/high density areas.

• Services and housing for demographic groups that require support (lower income, the aged, disabled, etc) will be geographically distributed in a coordinated way to provide increased capacity for individuals to live within a familiar community.

• Community groups and land titles that support alternative housing structures will be supported (e.g. POACH now ECOH, which forms a small-scale, cheap rental community where tenants maintain the houses)

propoSItIon 4 Living in diverse housing types in Canberra without a car should be a viable choice for all groups in the community, regardless of where they live

low carbon TransporTaTion TargeTs• The relationship between city form, public transport

and walkability will be transformed so that living without a car is viable at a reasonable time cost.

• By 2070, 70% journeys to work and school will be by foot, bicycle and public transport.

• The public transport network will provide a level and frequency of service tied to changes in land use distribution that allows people to manage multiple destination journeys.

• Activity nodes along transport routes will contain community, institutional, educational, recreational, and community service facilities.

• The city form ,population density/and distribution generate sufficient population within a walkable distance of public transport to support its provision.

• Public transport infrastructure will benefit from employment distribution in the city, increasing and distributing demand for local area and inter-town services.

• The walking distance to key public transport will be extended with improved pedestrian amenity, visual interest and safety through passive surveillance and the presence of people.

• Town centre parking will be proportionally reduced and costs will reflect the lost opportunity cost on the land consumed by roads and parking structures. Distributed park and ride facilities will be used as population densities increase, to extend the reach of effective public transport services.


propoSItIon 5Canberra’s urban form will provide an environment that contributes to individual and community wellbeing

civic values• The city form will support interaction between

citizens to build a civil society based on interpersonal connections and community safety.

• The city will provide good quality of living to people on wide range of incomes without dependence on high levels of individual consumption.

• Affordable housing will be located throughout the city so people of limited means can locate according to proximity to services, employment centres and family/social networks.

• Community provision of facilities for individual and group activities will supplement those in the private realm to increase use of shared facilities and the opportunity for individuals to meet.

• The city will be accessible for everyone at all stages of life.

public realM • The public realm will provide a landscape and urban

setting that supports active lives and healthy outcomes for children and adults.

• A diverse scale and character of landscape areas will accommodate a wide range of recreational and productive uses.

• The public realm will provide a physical and social environment where children can roam freely with relative safety and learn through free play and risk taking.

• The city fabric, form and transport structures will support active means of movement through the city.

• The public realm landscape, supplemented by private open space landscape, will provide ecological services including amenity, thermal comfort, and biodiversity

• Streets will become places of social interaction with an appropriate balance between access, through movement and pedestrian amenity

propoSItIon 6 Development of the city’s infrastructure and fabric will capture opportunities to conserve and generate resources

energy• All buildings (industrial, commercial and residential)

will be designed to minimize energy use for temperature control and lighting, and will have a high level of amenity.

• New city subdivisions will be structured to support passive and active solar energy efficient building design, particularly in lower density areas.

• Retrofitting of existing urban areas will improve buildings’ environmental performance, including orientation for passive and active solar design.

• Distributed energy generation and local grid infrastructure will be created and, in conjunction with modified governance of leasing and supply, will support a reduction in the carbon costs of energy production.

• Landscaping of the public realm, supplemented by the landscape in the private realm, will provide thermal comfort benefits at city scale and will contribute to controlling heat island effects.

MaTerial and nuTrienT resources• Waste streams will become resource streams, with

a focus on water, energy, material and nutrient extraction.

• Land use planning will support the application of urban ecology principles at a wide range of scales and for a variety of land uses.

• The city will generate its own resources through harvesting materials, energy and water to reduce demand on the hinterland.


waTer • Water supply and distribution will be decentralised

with ‘fit-for-purpose’, diverse water supplies collected and used to match appropriate demands (e.g. potable water, irrigation, household non-potable water and industrial use).

• ‘Fit-for-purpose’ water use within buildings and the public realm will be combined with recycling to substantially reduce demand on potable water.

• Water resource management will be actively monitored to manage the human and habitat health implications of recycling.

• The city landscape will consist of a mix of vegetation with reduced water demand to achieve a sustainable landscape setting.

• The community and government will understand and manage the city’s water system to ensure the health of our river system.

land• Urban growth containment and rigorous protection

measures for prime agricultural land and biodiversity, will protect rural land as agricultural and habitat areas.

• The nutrient waste from our city will be harvested and used to improve rural land adjacent to the city to increase cultivation and shade and to reduce the heat island impact from cleared landscapes.

local food • Communal gardens and food production will form part

of the open space network within and around the city.

• Local food production will use locally generated compost and nutrients to reduce dependence on fertilizers.

• Housing diversity and civic design will enable residents to choose dwellings where they can grow food within their private open space, in communal gardens or allotments.

propoSItIon 7Engaging the community in development of the city form will be based on knowledge and awareness of the consequences of choices

capaciTy for adapTion• In developing our city more sustainably we will maintain

the capacity, including the physical and socio-political flexibility, to adjust to emerging climate change impacts or other unexpected changes to the civic environment.

• Researchers will monitor the impact of actions and changes in the urban environment. This information will enable the community, through its representatives, to make evidence-based decisions that will adjust behaviours and patterns of activity to deal effectively with unexpected outcomes.

cosTs and benefiTs• Government will be accountable for setting rates and

charges that will reflect the cost to the community in providing public services and infrastructure for urban areas. Information upon which these charges are based will be publicly available.

• Community input will help to determine a base level of energy and water consumption. Pricing mechanisms will be used to promote change, with higher costs charged for consumption that exceeds this base line as a result of inefficient building stock and lifestyle choices. Strategies to address potential inequitable impacts on the disadvantaged in the population would also be developed with community input.



SectIon 3: ScenarIoS For a SuStaInable cIty – canberra In 2070The Sustainable Cities Forum concluded with a second workshop in November 2009, attended by a mix of Institute members, students, allied professionals and public servants. We asked participants to consider the following scenario of Canberra in 2070 and then to imagine what the city could be like in 60 years’ time.

• Two generations ago, between 2010 and 2013 there was an intensive debate about the future of Canberra. The participants agreed on seven propositions.

• The government prepared a plan to create a city that would adapt to, and where possible ameliorate, the impacts of climate change.

• Canberrans initially resisted the plan. However, between 2015 and 2020 the adverse effects of the changing climate became too great to ignore. Attitudes began to change rapidly.

• Then, between 2020 and 2030 climate change migrations began.

• Today, in 2070 we live in a transformed national capital. When we look at the city form we see that the propositions have held and the plan has been largely achieved.


scenarios for a susTainable canberra in The 21sT cenTurySome participants found it hard to imagine a scenario where current planning policies and economic drivers did not hold sway. Many asked provocative questions that teased out some interesting ideas. As always with such a large and complex issue, people brought the discussion back to tangible and familiar spaces and places, whose size and character was readily understood and could be debated.

From the ideas generated at this workshop four hypothetical scenarios emerged, which we see as valuable models to stimulate thought, discussion and debate about the future of our city.

• A city of distinctive places

• A city of streets

• A city of forests, woodlands, orchards and gardens

• A city of cities

These scenarios, described in detail below, are not plans. Nor are they presented as concrete options, from which only one may be selected and pursued. We present them as collections of ideas that can help to stimulate thought and debate. We see them valuable models to form the starting point of vigorous community discussion about the Canberra of the future.

theMe 1a ciTy of disTincTive placesOne group of workshop participants brought Canberra’s places and precincts to the fore, focusing on how these could be retained and developed to ensure the distinctive qualities we see today could still be found in 2070. Examining the question of density, the participants looked at different scales of interwoven communities – local, civic and regional – and how their interaction could produce sustainable “liveability”.

The discussion generated the following core themes, which fed into the first scenario, described below:

• The qualities of specific places can generate distinctive communities by enhancing choice of lifestyle and social associations.

• The future city should ensure equity of access to housing: protections should be provided for those in rental properties; and new title structures should be created to provide a greater variety and choice of dwellings.

• Distinctive places can be created by merging the private sphere with public spaces: enabling people to engage in civic life

• One of Canberra’s distinctive characteristics is the variety in open space network, and the interaction between the natural, pastoral and urban landscapes.

• Canberra’s boundaries are defined by regional character and ecology, rather than artificial borders which can distort planning contexts and outcomes.


scenario 1canberra’s villages and TownsCanberra has been transformed since 2010. In two generations the fabric of the city has changed, but it is still possible to see traces of Canberra as it was 60 years ago.

Closely-settled ‘villages’ have emerged in distinctive places around the town centres and on the city’s fringes. Pialligo, one of the most central, can be seen from the International Air and Rail Transport Hub. In 2070 it still provides a green oasis along the river and orchards where Canberra residents still pick their own apples. Pialligo now forms part of a city-wide network of community gardens and commercial cultivators, who feed the city with local produce. It continues to be a popular weekend destination for people with a passion for gardening.

The town centres themselves have transformed over time, becoming centres for living, working and recreation. As residents have flocked to these mixed-use residential areas, public spaces have become finer grained, catering not only to daytime office workers and shoppers but also to recreational visitors and residents.

Suburban housing around the town centre areas has remained typically lower-rise but is now much more mixed and more densely populated. House sizes are varied, and individually titled terraces, townhouses and communal cluster-housing have added variety beyond Canberra’s original bungalows and duplexes.

The suburbs’ development has been supported by increased public transport infrastructure and planning policies. The number of cars needed for ease of amenity has reduced, and in some cases, car ownership per dwelling or business is limited. But those who saw Canberra early in the century would still recognise the characteristic landscaped frontages onto tree-lined streets.

Group centres between suburbs, linked into the high frequency public transport network, are typical across Canberra. Here, as in the town centres, higher density apartment living, close to lively streets and squares, has attracted individuals and families looking for a more urban lifestyle, with ready access to community facilities, local employment and shops.

Local centres within suburbs have continued to develop, serving niche markets and providing spaces for specialist goods and services. Over time they have become destinations from surrounding areas and across the city. Some are distinctive ‘village’ centres, and the hub of close-knit, local communities.

Overall, the number of people living in the city and close to each of the town centres has increased. The city streets are busy as people move easily around their local areas to access facilities, catching frequent buses to more distant destinations.

Figure 28: Urban Food Acton

Figure 26: townhouses Canberra

Figure 27: inner city park with childcare


theMe 2a ciTy of sTreeTs – TribuTaries of acTiviTy The workshop identified urban consolidation, creating higher-density in Canberra’s suburbs, as a clear requirement to limit the unsustainable extension of suburbs and their supporting infrastructure. However, participants highlighted the need to balance the desirable attributes of our suburbs in 2010, with the changes required to introduce denser living patterns.

In 2010, the current Territory Plan supports more intense development along a limited number of major avenues, and also suggests a pattern of density around nodal points, such as local shopping centres. In doing so, connectivity is a key consideration: pockets of density must be connected to each other to support the delivery of public transport and other services for all.

scenario 2canberra’s inner norTh Canberra’s early civic infrastructure could support a far greater population than that for which it was built. In 2010 the community recognised the value of this legacy: the capacity to increase inner-city living reducing the need to expand the city’s boundaries.

By 2070, development in Canberra’s inner north has not just provided more housing in close proximity to shopping centres. Here, a network of denser, mixed-use development along the main streets and avenues has transformed the city. While there are still areas of lower density housing, which provide private gardens for families who want them, as well as opportunities for cooperative housing, the main streets are characterised by denser, two to four-storey development. This higher-density development has created areas of specialist shops, service businesses and small offices at street level, which are close to transport. This has made living locally easier and has provided a variety of lifestyle choices.

These areas have seen a return to a more varied housing stock: townhouses, apartments and terraces provide many with the opportunity to live in the inner city. Major avenues in the inner north have become civic boulevards lined by apartments up to six-storeys high. The combination of employment, services and dwellings in these areas has created streets that are highly social tributaries of activity.

Inspired by cities that grew organically around trading routes, Canberrans have added design elements to create sustainable and flexible spaces. Architecture takes into account not just of the definition of the public places, but also minimal use of resources and the capture of energy and water.

EPIC, the Exhibition Centre, is still a venue for major events but is now serviced by a main stop on the rapid transit system, allowing ready access for all Canberrans. On weekdays the structured, event-overflow car park provides a ‘park and ride’ facility for people coming into the city centre. The racecourse has long since moved to the open spaces along Majura Lane and a new suburb, serviced by the light rail linking Gungahlin, Civic and Queanbeyan is in its place.

Figure 29: Bordeaux Boulevard

Figure 30: multi-layered streetscape in Paddington, incorporating public park, heritage, housing and public transport


theMe 3a ciTy of foresTs, woodlands, orchards and gardensCanberra is known as the ‘bush capital’ for its setting and for the landscape qualities and open spaces within the city fabric. These characteristics are highly valued by many of its residents. However, the workshops identified emerging concerns with food security, food quality and an increasing desire to source local produce.

Participants reflected on the high percentage of open space in Canberra under civic maintenance and management regimes. They noted the limits to the large open spaces’ recreational, aesthetic and productive qualities, given the ability of the dispersed population to support only low-cost regimes for such large areas.

The participants agreed that the setting, recreational and biodiversity value of the hills and ridges that define the bush capital’s inner areas are clear. However, they questioned whether the same could be said for all the open areas within the city, and saw new opportunities for these spaces, described in the scenario below.

scenario 3belconnenIn 2070 Belconnen has become one of a group of city centres that make up Canberra. Lower- rise, denser development in inner Belconnen has focussed on a central, high-frequency public transport loop, which provides access to the town centre and links it to Canberra’s other centres.

The land area devoted to cars has been reduced as the public transport routes have become established. Open spaces within the Ginninderra Drive land corridor have been expanded and transformed by a series of community gardens, market gardens and orchards along Ginninderra Creek. These draw on water recycled from buildings and roads nearby.

The land has been progressively improved through the long-established practice of harvesting green and other biological waste for compost in the city. This productive landscape supports a richer environment for residents of the denser housing developments of inner Belconnen, and provides locations for markets and other community activities.

Adjacent to the gardens, cluster housing, low-rise apartment complexes and streets of terraces provide a range of housing choices for a mixed community. A network of wide pathways brings residents on bicycle and by foot from the lower density suburban areas to share the active open space.

In Belconnen and beyond, the roofs of the houses and public buildings incorporate solar energy collectors, which capture the sun’s energy to heat water and create electricity. Fifty percent of Canberra’s electricity is now generated through dispersed solar systems and commercial solar generation collectors are mounted on the expansive rooftops of commercial and industrial areas.

At the edge of Belconnen’s parkland near transport stops, and at key points throughout the city, residents use ‘park and ride’ facilities to commute and to move through greater Canberra. Bicycles and small electric cars are now the modes of choice for personalised travel, reducing the land required for these facilities.

Figure 32: forest landscape street

Figure 31: productive city vineyard


theMe 4a ciTy of ciTiesRecent reports into sustainable city forms for Australia propose the establishment of urban areas formed by interconnected, smaller city-centres within regions. This ‘Y-plan’ established five interconnected town centres in Canberra: Belconnen, Woden, Gungahlin, Tuggeranong and Civic, with a sixth regional centre in Queanbeyan.

Workshop participants noted that Canberra’s existing ‘Y-plan’ infrastructure may provide the structure for a more sustainable city in the future, if combined with developing distributed areas of density around each town centre

scenario 4belconnen Town cenTreBy 2070, Belconnen’s role as a primary town centre within Canberra has been confirmed and strengthened. Highly efficient and accessible public transport networks have reinforced and invigorated its connections to Civic and the other town centres. These networks now provide high speed, dedicated express bus links along the major corridors of Belconnen Way and Ginninderra Drive, which are fed by regular bus connections that trawl the inner suburbs and denser, walkable neighbourhoods near transit stops. This hierarchy of transport ensures Belconnen residents have convenient access to major employment, retail and community facilities.

High density housing of six to eight-storeys frames Belconnen Way and other major avenues, focused at denser, mixed use areas at transit stops, which provide local services and shops. The local community is diverse with a mix of incomes—single people, couples and families—and cultural groups, who occupy housing that varies from townhouses and terraces to apartments.

Government planning regulations and utility costs has ensured environmental efficiency in new buildings. Developers are required to demonstrate water catchment and reuse capacity, energy saving measures, and the use of recycled materials. Integration in high-rise housing of passive thermal design with energy efficient cooling, heating and ventilation has become a standard feature. Solar orientated apartments attract a premium. Local parks have been created around the existing trees to offer residents recreational opportunities. These trees, and those that line urban frontages, provide shade to passersby and have been built on the urban forest traditions of Canberra’s earliest settlement.

The University of Canberra now plays a major role in the everyday life of Belconnen. Mixed use development (including residential) on the university grounds and sites on its perimeter has improved the integration and connection of the university with the Belconnen town centre. High quality pedestrian and cyclist routes allow residents and students to move between study and shops with ease. The early landscape qualities have been retained through careful planning and the University has grown. It attracts diverse research organisations and businesses, which collocate on the campus in an environmentally efficient development that extends across the whole site.

Within Belconnen, land has been retained for some trades and services activities. Offering a diverse range of services, including new technologies that have emerged over recent decades, this innovative centre has become a popular destination within the town. Elsewhere in the town centre new commercial and residential development provides a high quality of life and a permeable connection with Lake Ginninderra.

Figure 34: Kingston Foreshore Park

Figure 33: Southbank Brisbane


glossaryActive travel neighbourhoods are conducive to cycling and walking, enabling people to meet the recommended minimum of moderate physical activity (30 minutes per day).

BCA: Building Code of Australia

Brownfield sites describes vacant land that has previously been used for commercial and/or industrial purposes and which may require remediation.

Decentralised water refers to water that is provided by a central utility, but is harvested locally from stormwater or recycled water and then distributed through a second pipe system for non potable uses.

Ecological footprint per capita is a measure used to represent human consumption. It represents the amount of the Earth that is required to produce the resources consumed per person often within a defined group such as Australians Canberrans etc.

Fit-for-purpose water means that quality is appropriate to use. Thus, potable water would be used only for human consumption, while alternative sources such as greywater, industrial water, rainwater and stormwater would be used for other purposes, such as irrigation, toilet flushing and the like.

GHG: Greenhouse Gas

‘Heat island effects’ refers to the phenomenon of temperatures in some areas that are significantly higher than in surrounding areas. This is often ascribed to the heat retention of urban building materials, and waste heat resulting from high levels of energy use.

Interstitial spaces, in the context of Colin Stewart’s presentation, refer broadly to the spaces between buildings. The core concept is that the quality of these spaces has an enormous impact on recreation, social activities and pedestrian movement.

Lifecycle costs include the cost of funding, creating, servicing, maintaining and demolishing for recycling of urban development, and the capital and recurring costs of providing services to the population.

Retrofitting cities/suburbs, in the context of this report, refers to the process of adapting existing spaces to make them more sustainable. Retrofitting can include a mix of planning, design and construction principles that together can increase energy efficiency, population density, and diversify housing types and land use.

Single loading of apartments means in this context that apartments are positioned on only one side of a corridor.

Trip chaining means carrying out one or more errands as part of a trip (e.g. including shopping as part of a commute).

Urban ecology principles take a holistic view of creating socially, economically and ecologically sustaining human settlements. They look at the interrelationships between all built forms, processes and the environment, taking into account energy efficiency; green space; active travel; water use; waste; and building materials. In particular it refers to the opportunities to create synergistic relationships that reduce environment impacts such as turning wastes into resources.

VAMPIRE: The Vulnerability Assessment for Mortgage, Petroleum and Inflation Risk and Expenditure is an index developed at Griffith University by Jago Dodson and Neil Sipe (2008). Based on ABS census data, it is an indicator of relative vulnerability to increased petrol prices, interest rates and inflation, illustrating those areas most at risk within cities.

VIPER: The Vulnerability Index for Petroleum Expenditure and Risks, is an index created by by Jago Dodson and Neil Sipe (2005) to assess socio-economic oil vulnerability in Australian cities.


figure crediTs1, 6–9, 13, 18, 20–21, 23–24, 26–28, 30, 33–34 Photographer: Sheila Hughes

2 Colin Stewart

3, 19, 22, 32 Photographer: David Flannery

4–5 University of Sydney

10 Photographer: Paul Tranter

11 Bureau of Meteorology

12 Wong and Brown (2008)

13 Landscape Architect: EnvirolinksArchitect: Daryl Jackson Alistair SwaynPhotographer: Sheila Hughes

14 Landscape Architect: EnvirolinksArchitect: Cox Humphries MossPhotographer: Ben Wrigley

15 Griffith University

16 DesignInc

17 Architect: DesignIncPhotographer: Peter Hyatt

21 Architect: Townsend and AssociatesPhotographer: David Flannery

25 Architect: Collins Caddaye ArchitectsPhotographer: Stefan Postles

26 Architect: Collins Caddaye ArchitectsPhotographer: Sheila Hughes

28 Architect: Fender KatsalidisPhotographer: Sheila Hughes

29 Photographer: Alan Morschel

30 Architect: Tonkin Zuliaka GreerLandscape Architect: JMP DesignPhotographer: Sheila Hughes

31 Photographer: Katharine Campbell

34 Architects: Cox Humphries MossLandscape Architect: Red BoxPhotographer: Sheila Hughes

Sponsorship

Colin Stewart Architects GHD

Documents

Foreword - Australian Institute of Architectsdev.architecture.com.au/i-cms_file?page=13538/21st_century_canberra.pdf · reflect our changing demographic character and aspirations,