If you asked Sydney-siders what future they saw for such a valuable part of our landscape; what would they choose:

• a public park on the harbour, or
• a private casino?

This was the question I put to the Planning Assessment Commission panel at the public hearing on Modification 8 to Concept Plan 06_0162, the Barangaroo casino proposal.

I also said:

‘I am here today to discuss MOD8 with you in a way, and in a language, that I believe the average person in Sydney would understand and relate to. Planning can sometimes be by necessity technical and the language almost impenetrable with jargon.

I will simplify it because we need to explain these significant city making proposals in a way that brings the people of Sydney along with us.

What planning fundamentally needs to do, is to include the citizens in the discussion of the how and why the city is changing and how and why these changes are in the public’s interest, or not.

That is not to say as professionals we abandon the field and delegate our responsibility to the people. Quite the opposite. What we need to do is have the conversation about what type of Sydney we want to have, and argue the merits of any proposal.

The Australian Institute of Architects believes we, as professionals of the built environment, need to lead the discussion:

• to have an intelligent discussion about the opportunities of change;
• but also, to inform the people what they will lose;
• to present a balanced view and argue for the merits of any change;
• and these arguments need to always start, and end, on how a change is in the public interest.

This is the test that you as delegates of the government need to be sure and certain any application passes before approval is granted.’

I queried how the Department of Planning could largely ignore the views of the Minister for Planning’s expert design assessment panel (including NSW Government Architect Peter Poulet) in its recommendations to the Commission.

I disputed how the proposal could even be regarded as a modification when the changes proposed were so significant. I said:

‘A reasonable person would think this is a new development application. The average Sydney-sider would think this is a new DA.’

I also answered the question I posed at the head of this message:

‘What do you think they would say (to the choice between a public park on the harbour or a private casino)?

I can tell you what they will say.

They would say they would want a public park on the harbour.’

The Planning Assessment Commission is expected to make its determination on the casino proposal in the next few weeks.

Shaun Carter
NSW Chapter President

Commenting on Barangaroo

The NSW Chapter has had a keen interest in the re-development of the public land at Barangaroo for a number of years.  We made three submissions in 2010 and 2011 focusing on the quality of the concept plan and on the process for assessing development proposals at Barangaroo South.

The finalists in the James Packer casino design competition prompted a letter by then NSW President Joe Agius in 2013, which was then picked up by the Sydney Morning Herald’s State Political Reporter Sean Nicholls.

It was my turn in late March when I criticised the Department of Planning & Environment’s decision not to include some of the design review panel’s key recommendations in its submission to the Planning Assessment Commission, which makes the final decision on the development application. These comments generated some spirited contributions to the Herald’s letters column the next day.

Articles about the design review process by Anne Davies and Sean Nicholls were published in the Herald in the last two weekends.

Changes to the proposed podium include revised cladding and a seven-metre-wide recess.
Photo: Planning and Environment

20^th Century heritage has been a major focus of Institute activity in the past few months.

Saving the Sirius

I have been chair of the Save our Sirius group since November last year. You may recall that Minister Hazzard had announced that the building would be sold for re-development; he also expressly rejected the idea of heritage listing for the building.

Sirius is listed on the Chapter’s Register of Significant Architecture. Read the citation here.

We also endorsed the Heritage Council’s decision to recommend the listing of Sirius on the State Heritage Register.

We need to be more than the sum total of our bank balance. Whilst heritage is a challenging issue for development in NSW, exemplar buildings that are recommended for heritage listing need to be protected. This is a fight we have to have.

Saving the Powerhouse

We also strongly object to the Premier’s intention to move the Powerhouse Museum to Parramatta, and to sell the Ultimo for re-development to pay for it. The Institute supports the proposal for a sister building to the Powerhouse in Parramatta, but not at the expense of the Powerhouse in Ultimo. The building is listed on the Chapter’s Register and on the statutory Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012. The adaptive reuse won the Institute’s Sulman Medal in 1988.

I have written an opinion piece that was submitted to the Sydney Morning Herald but not published.

I encourage you all to join our fight for our 20th century modern heritage.

Advocacy and the media

One of the key tasks of Chapter Presidents is to be the representative voice of the architecture profession in the public domain. Advocacy is certainly seen by members as probably my major focus, and it’s certainly a role I both enjoy and also take very seriously.

Easy to say but hard to do! Even with a life span of two years in the role it takes a while for journalists and the media generally to know there is a new person in the role, especially coming in to it hard on the heels of the highly effective media presence of my predecessor, Joe Agius.

So the first year of my term was a learning curve, both for me and for the journalists and media with whom I need to interact. It has taken some time to be known by media outlets and journalists but I feel we now have made good connections, especially with the Sydney Morning Herald’s urban affairs and built environment writers. Institute staff have played a key role in generating these connections.

The fight for the Sirius has been the major focus of my media activity in recent weeks, including discussions with the Herald’s Jacob Saulwick and an interview on 2SER-FM. I have also been interviewed regarding the changing role of the Government Architect’s Office and, in the property media, choosing an architect rather than a building designer.

 I am also proud of a deal we have struck with the Sky News Saturday property program for a weekly seven minute segment featuring a different architect each week, gender balanced of course.  And there is daily advocacy and information via my Twitter feed.

I am sure you will agree that we would like to get more media exposure for the Institute’s views, for the public good, on architecture in general and design in particular, but we have to recognise that it is the editors of the individual media outlets that determine their own priorities. They will only run articles or op-eds if they believe their audience will be interested. That is why it is important for us to continue generating debate on architectural and urban issues in our own publications and discussion forums.

Shaun Carter
NSW Chapter President

Dear Members

I am pleased to welcome the following members as new Chapter Councillors following the recent elections:

Steven Donaghey (dwp|suters)

Ashley Dunn (Dunn & Hillam Architects)

Kathlyn Loseby (Turner)

Peter Smith (Smith & Tzannes)

Congratulations also to Alex Kibble (Tanner Kibble Denton Architects), who was re-elected as Chapter Councillor from the previous term.

And my thanks to outgoing councillors Nigel Bell, Kirsten Orr, Shahe Simoneon and Paul Walter for their contribution to the previous Chapter Council. And we also welcome Monica Edwards (Cox Architecture) who has been appointed to replace the position of Kirsten Orr who has resigned.

Coalition for NSW Planning Reform

The Institute was a founding member (with PIA, the Property Council and the Sydney Business Chamber) of this group of professional, property and business groups. Formed in August 2007, we gained government support for several substantial planning system improvements, such as the delegation of major project assessments to the Planning Assessment Commission and the creation of the Housing Code and Joint Regional Planning Panels.

We also supported the White Paper and the draft planning legislation introduced into Parliament by the O’Farrell Government. But that legislation failed to pass the Legislative Council.

Earlier this month I was part of a delegation that met with Planning Minister Rob Stokes to urge the Baird Government to adopt some significant initiatives that would improve the functioning of the planning system under the current legislation, while also providing stepping stones towards a more comprehensive overhaul through new legislation at a later date. These include:

• replacing all current State Environmental Planning Policies with State Policies and Regional and Subregional Plans;
• a new standard LEP;
• template DCPs;
• piloting the public participation principles outlined in the White Paper;
• greater use of independent hearing and assessment panels and similar arms-length assessment models;
• complying development assessment models;
• non-discretionary development standards, particularly in the standard LEP; and
• certification by certified professionals of certain elements of development (e.g. architects verifying the plans for complex buildings and building elements).

The Minister gave us a good hearing. I am confident that with further consistent lobbying, both as an individual organisation and as a member of the coalition, we will achieve these necessary improvements to the current complex planning system.

Vale Paul Pholeros

It’s almost a month ago now, but the untimely passing of one of our greatest colleagues still hits me with terrible force. He was a true innovator and visionary, for whom architecture was a means of providing dignity and honest shelter to many outback families. His life and example offer us the best possible role model. We may not individually choose the path he followed, but we should be inspired by him to do the best we can in using our professional skills to improve the world we live in.

Shaun Carter
NSW Chapter President

Greetings to all NSW Institute members and my best wishes for another busy and productive year. While the overseas economic situation is unsettled, to say the least, the indications are that the national economy will perform at least as well in 2016 as it did in the previous year.

Architects of influence

One of the key ways architects can achieve strategic improvements in the built environment is through their appointment to influential positions. A case in point is Graham Jahn AM, a Life Fellow of the Institute and the Sydney City Council’s Director City Planning I Development I Transport. In his time in this critical position Graham has made a major contribution to the city’s built environment by influencing the development community to improve design quality and make positive contributions to the city’s public domain.

The past year ended well, with two Institute members appointed to highly influential positions.

Firstly, the appointment of Institute member Rod Simpson as Environment Commissioner in the newly created Greater Sydney Commission is an extremely positive move. Rod’s experience and expertise make him admirably suited for this new role. He led the urban design and spatial planning component of the City of Sydney’s Sustainable Sydney 2030 Strategy and has been Director of the Urban Design Program at the University of Sydney for the last four years. Prior to these achievements he developed the Green Olympic Village concept, was Manager of Urban Design at the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust and was involved in the development of the ‘City of Cities’ metropolitan strategy for Sydney.

Another esteemed Institute member was recognised in a major appointment late last year. Helen Lochhead has been appointed Dean of the Faculty of Built Environment at the University of NSW, replacing Professor Alec Tzannes. Helen has moved on from her roles as Deputy NSW Government Architect and Adjunct Professor at the University of Sydney. Previously she has also taught at UTS and internationally at Harvard, MIT, Columbia University and the New York Institute of Technology.

Helen is a previous recipient of both Fulbright and Churchill Fellowships, and most recently completed a Loeb Fellowship at Harvard University interrogating proposals and governance models for more resilient and liveable cities. She is a Fellow of the Institute and is Honorary Secretary of the National Council.

Congratulations to both Helen and Rod on these prestigious and influential appointments.
Best wishes
Shaun Carter
NSW Chapter President

There has been progress on a number of fronts in the big picture built environment space:

Coalition for NSW Planning Reform

This loose grouping of like-minded built environment organisations, including ourselves, PIA, AILA, the Property Council and the Sydney Business Chamber, first came together in August 2007 to lobby the then Labor government. We had several wins along the way, such as the delegation of major project assessments to the Planning Assessment Commission and the creation of the Housing Code and Joint Regional Planning Panels.

Our principal focus this time is to convince the Baird Government that the process of planning reform shouldn’t stop just because the O’Farrell Government failed to win the support of the Legislative Council to pass its new planning legislation two years ago.

There was broad community and industry acceptance of the White Paper reforms, specifically in areas such as strategic planning, community participation and infrastructure delivery. It was mainly in the area of development assessment that the major differences and contentions arose.

The coalition is therefore proposing that Minister Stokes moves quickly to implement these reforms while also laying the groundwork for the eventual re-introduction of the new planning bill.

Greater Sydney Commission

In last month’s message I welcomed the government’s announcement of the shape of the Greater Sydney Commission, while noting that design was absent from the scheme.

I have since written to the Department of Planning & Environment recommending four inter-related proposals:

Built Environment Committee

As the principal focus of the Commission’s work is the re-configuration of the built environment of the region I have recommended the creation of a built environment committee sitting alongside the Commission’s other committees to focus on this essential task.

Observer status for the Government Architect’s Office (GAO)

It is clear that the GAO will be adopting a more strategic role in the future, giving it the opportunity to provide advice on the achievement of design excellence across the government and public sector agencies. In my proposal it would share observer status with Infrastructure NSW and UrbanGrowth NSW.

Design for Sydney

I envisage Design for Sydney operating in a similar manner to Design for London within the local planning context, identifying opportunities to use major infrastructure projects to create new connections and public spaces, and advising on the implementation of major public benefit programs- such as the green grid strategy. It could be comprised of design experts in key government agencies.

Design review panel

The Commission’s Sydney Planning Panel will determine major developments currently assessed by the Sydney East and West Joint Regional Planning Panels. I therefore propose a design review panel to provide both strategic design advice and design advice on specific development proposals to the panel, following the procedures outlined in the SEPP 65 Apartment Design Guide. The panel should be chaired by the GAO, as is currently the process in South Australia.

Circular Quay                                                                                                                                                        

While we welcomed the Premier’s announcement of a major review of the Circular Quay wharves last month, he missed the opportunity to address the strategic renewal of the precinct as a whole.

Circular Quay fulfils a number of key roles in the city:

• Birthplace of modern Australia
• Road, rail and ferry transport hub
• Centre of a harbourside walk leading in the east to the Royal Botanic Garden and in the west to Walsh Bay and Barangaroo
• Link between our two greatest tourist attractions, the Rocks and the Sydney Opera House
• Leading retail, hospitality and restaurant district

To say Circular Quay is underwhelming in the way it presents itself in these major roles is an understatement. It’s not only the wharves that look tired. The whole precinct lacks a unifying idea. It’s full of visual clutter, particularly round the station, and it presents too many barriers to the enjoyment of a unique maritime experience.

Circular Quay could be one of the world’s great outdoor rooms, on a par with Piazza San Marco in Venice, London’s Trafalgar Square and the Place de la Concorde in Paris. Fixing it isn’t rocket science.

Key government agencies have been preparing a renewal plan for the last five years. We know what to do, we just need the political will to decide to do it.

Bays Precinct

The Institute has been an enthusiastic supporter of UrbanGrowth NSW’s approach to the re-imagining of this massive site west of the Pyrmont peninsula. They have gone out of their way to engage with the professions, the experts and the community in the run-up to the development of the eight sites in the precinct.

Now the first step in the development process has been taken. I attended a briefing last week in which three parcels of land including the White Bay power station have been offered for development proposals focusing on the adaptive reuse of the State Heritage structure into a technology hub adjacent to facilities for the health, education and creative industries.

I have severe misgivings about this announcement for the re-development of 10 hectares of waterfront land. Where is the master plan for this site – and how will it connect with the rest of the precinct? How will it integrate into the adjacent suburbs? Where is the commitment to fine grain and multiple players and many authors? How will public transport service this area? These are just a few of the questions I want answered.

Thank you.

Shaun Carter
NSW Chapter President