Good architecture for Canberra – we wish

The problem is the current planning system. Over the years it has evolved in to reactionary legislation; the community object something, lets stop that happening.
The planning system needs an overhaul if we are to get any kind of decent development and the only way you will get a developer to give you something good is if you give them an incentive.
“If you provide a stunning architectural design, we will give you additional development rights”. This is how it works everywhere else.

With that definition, I’m happy to be a NIMBY too!

Bush Capital is just an old name that used to apply to Canberra.

I was in Deli a few months ago, and even there (although I was not there to be sight-seeing), I saw more evidence of keeping large trees in the city, working roads & buildings around them.

There & in The Netherlands, I saw more innovative architecture; more beautiful buildings; new development built sensitively beside old; and old, maintained & updated to current standards to make them environmentally current. Eg. tripple glazing (they’ve had doubleglazing as regular requirement for over 30 years in most places).

Poor Canberra.

We really have become a “would be if we could be” haven’t we? How very sad. But there do not seem to be any leaders here. Barr took us to the tram & “we” voted him back in – God help us!

It would be interesting to have a little more information in that little poll above.
It would be good to know the age distribution of the voters.
It would also be good to know the proportions of the voters who are Canberrans – live here because they have done for a long time, know the social history of the place & how the whole city functions, and how many are people who have moved in recently from other cities which were not designed this way & who cannot get their head into a space that is not Sydney or Brisbane or . . . who cannot concieve of a city without a CBD, where light industry is confined to specific, planned areas and where people live & raise their children away from transport corridors.
I think the results may be more useful.

Paul you write “Again – good architecture and great landscapes – not too much to ask for – is it?”

Well unfortunately what is good and great to you may well be mediocre to someone else and vice versa of course.

I know you love Dickson shops, but to me that highlights to worse of 1960’s architecture. Cold featureless and windswept (in winter). But matter of opinion right?

Benjamin Rose said :

It’s been many years since anything interesting was built in Canberra and unfortunately it will be many years before anything interesting or innovative is built in Canberra.

There are some unique buildings in Canberra that represent arguably interesting solutions for the clients needs at the time (almost exclusively for the federal government via the NCDC). Cameron, Callam and Benjamin Offices … represent to me good architecture despite their questionable aesthetics. Visit the parked Doctor Who space station that is Callam Offices and do some research and you’ll uncover a diamond of architecture (albeit incomplete and in the rough)…

…It’s gone from thought out solutions to satisfy building users to barely satisfying the end user while cutting corners on basic functional design and presenting a trendy spin on Soviet apartment aesthetics with gaudy colours picked from Microsoft Paint.

The examples of Benjamin/Cameron and Callam offices might be “interesting solutions” in so far as it is incredibly intriguing that someone would propose such designs as “solutions”, or that someone would actually give the nod to go ahead and build them. Ask anyone who has worked in those buildings and they’ll tell you that they certainly were NOT a successful solution, hence why they have spent long periods largely empty (or have had to be “repurposed” for other uses).

Perhaps I’m wrong, but I thought a large part of architecture was about aesthetics, so I struggle to reconcile your comment that a building could represent good architecture while having questionable aesthetics.

It’s also rather ironic that you conclude your remarks with a reflection on the period of these buildings by saying “it’s gone from thought out solutions to satisfy building users…” when the buildings cited failed to do just that (satisfy building users), as well as being horrible eyesores to everyone else.

I often look at the apartment buildings currently being built (or recently built) and wonder what people will think of the designs in 20-30 years time. Some are fairly timeless, while others…. well, let’s just wait and see!

Isn’t the architects’ creed “If the public like it….then it must be in bad taste”?

It’s been many years since anything interesting was built in Canberra and unfortunately it will be many years before anything interesting or innovative is built in Canberra.

There are some unique buildings in Canberra that represent arguably interesting solutions for the clients needs at the time (almost exclusively for the federal government via the NCDC). Cameron, Callam and Benjamin Offices along with the Sir Edmund Barton building and Campbell Park represent to me good architecture despite their questionable aesthetics. Visit the parked Doctor Who space station that is Callam Offices and do some research and you’ll uncover a diamond of architecture (albeit incomplete and in the rough).

Granted the offices are obviously not housing of any kind (except for re purposed sections of Cameron Offices) but it best explains the change of mindset for civic planners and developers in Canberra.

It’s gone from thought out solutions to satisfy building users to barely satisfying the end user while cutting corners on basic functional design and presenting a trendy spin on Soviet apartment aesthetics with gaudy colours picked from Microsoft Paint.

I would like to see more adventurous architecture. Much of what is out there is too similar. However, when I hear many people complain about today’s architecture, I suspect they yearn for more mock Tudor and the like, not more adventurous designs, because that is too hard for them to handle.
Here are some pictures of the mentioned la Confluence, Lyon:
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=La+Confluence+in+Lyon&client=firefox-b&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiy6ufi_9vRAhXLXrwKHS9uDUEQsAQIKg&biw=1687&bih=989#imgrc=_

rommeldog56 said :

So, what drives the proliferation of those higher density, square’ish, cement, leggo land dog boxes often dressed up with a splash of gaudy coloured paint, in Canberra ??

Is it that the cost of land to developers is so high that they need to cut corners on architecture, design and aesthetics ? Do developers “follow the leader” and build more of what sells – more of the same ?

Are they just squeezing every cent of profit because buyers do not care as much now about the look or design of unit blocks ? – after all, u live inside a unit, not so much outside ? Or is it that the planning authorities just don’t give a toss at the expense of pressure from the ACT Labor/Greens Govt to raise revenue/push DA’s through asap ?

Will the newly appointed ACT Govt Architect be ready, willing and able to fix this trend ?

Our planners/developers are trying to emulate this:

https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2014/10/la-confluence-in-lyon-europes-biggest-urban-development-project/

Some of the already completed units at the Kingston Foreshore are straight out of the Lyon vision.

So, what drives the proliferation of those higher density, square’ish, cement, leggo land dog boxes often dressed up with a splash of gaudy coloured paint, in Canberra ??

Is it that the cost of land to developers is so high that they need to cut corners on architecture, design and aesthetics ? Do developers “follow the leader” and build more of what sells – more of the same ? Are they just squeezing every cent of profit because buyers do not care as much now about the look or design of unit blocks ? – after all, u live inside a unit, not so much outside ? Or is it that the planning authorities just don’t give a toss at the expense of pressure from the ACT Labor/Greens Govt to raise revenue/push DA’s through asap ?

Will the newly appointed ACT Govt Architect be ready, willing and able to fix this trend ?