Recently Deloitte published a report recommending that Adelaide needs to double its annual population growth between now and 2027 in order to increase from 1.7m to 2m people.

It reminded me of an article which talked about the size of population where a city becomes economically self-sustaining – the notion that if enough people are doing and buying enough things, then enough money and employment is going around that it creates a perpetual economic motion.

I consider myself a relatively accomplished web surfer. I’ve self-diagnosed numerous serious illnesses and recently ordered the children fidget spinners that won’t be delivered until after the craze is past. But on this one, I just could not find that article. What I did find was quite significant bodies of work from Western Australia contemplating employment self-sufficiency – where a region has enough employment for everyone who lives there to work locally, and so the commute becomes a thing of the past. This is different to economic self-sufficiency, but equally interesting, and WA are taking it seriously.

So many of our major projects are based on mass transit. Roads or rail, trams and the supporting infrastructure of stations and connectors which then lead to further residential focus and clustering – remember TODS. Much of this transit is based around getting the worker to work, and increasingly also the student to education or the patient to care as we drive efficiency by centralising services. However, while we save on care and education, we spend on transit and we pay with time. Our time; priceless time.

It is a positive thing that the politicians have heard our message to maximise public transport instead of resource heavy private travel, but could there be another message to focus on not needing it?

We do consider employment lands in our planning system, but in reality Adelaide is a very CBD centric city. We don’t really contemplate ‘city’ type jobs being elsewhere.

My own practice moved to Chesser Street 2 years ago, and we love it because there is a buzz which comes from people. Most other similar practices in SA are also already in or moving to the city, yet all of us could actually deliver our work from any metro location. If we had a few offices north and a few south we may get enough people working there to have a buzz too. We could just swap team members based on geographic spread, and we’d all get back the time of the commute. I don’t think we value time enough. It’s pretty precious when you think about it. We design to save money and resources; we should also design to save personal time.

I like Deloitte’s idea of a bit more size and a bit more money moving around. I think international education, defence, agribusiness, energy and gas and tourism area all future builders, but I like the idea of spreading it too.

I’ve heard Playford self-promoted as the CBD of the North. I hope it works. I hope a bold community steps up for the South, and I hope the people who gain another hour a day use it for something special.

Mario Dreosti
SA Chapter President

The Institute provides members with a community of practice to support and educate the profession.  The launch of the Student Mentor Scheme for 2017 was held last Thursday and it was fantastic to see – and hear – new connections between students and architects being formed.  The Student Mentor Scheme provides a very real and effective way of supporting the future of the profession.

As Glenn Murcutt said at this year’s conference, he considers it his responsibility to give back to the profession.  As a sole practitioner he does this through teaching.  Being a mentor provides another avenue.

Thanks to all who contributed to the organization of this program including Zaf from the SA Chapter, our fabulous SONA reps Chantelle, Steph and Andrew and the SA Chapter Education Committee chaired by Craig Buckberry.  Thanks also to the architects and students who are participating.  We trust that you will all benefit from the program.

I am also pleased to report that the SA Chapter Practice Committee is taking shape.  This is very heartening given the range of practice related issues that the Institute has been working on in recent times.

Having an active and engaged group of members who can develop our position in relation to these issues and strengthen the relationships that have been developed with stakeholders will enable the profession to maintain an effective voice in these discussions.  This will also position the Institute as a valued source of informed opinion into the future.  This is particularly important in the lead up to the state election.

As professionals, architects have a responsibility to each other and the public to be engaged in this way.  The Institute provides a platform for advocating for design and built environment positions that is not necessarily open to architects as individuals.  The Institute’s resources – including policy, national benchmarking, access to key stakeholders and staff support – provide members with the capacity to effectively contribute to debate and build the value and credibility of architecture.

Demonstrating the benefits of architecture through built outcomes is not enough.  Informed engagement in political and public discourse is required to ensure that architects are seen as expert advisors whose opinion is sought after and respected.

I’m with Jan Gehl.

Well I think it was Jan Gehl who said that it doesn’t really matter what buildings look like above the ground floor because most people don’t look up.

Increasingly valid in our device driven world…. did you know there are a dozen apps which use your smart phone camera to view the ground on your screen so that you can walk while texting!? Incredible. I thought I had a clever idea there. So I’m with Jan Gehl… if he said that.

It was local heritage advisor Richard Woods who once said to me that glass is not see though. Much to my chagrin at the time because it came in the context of a review, but you know, he was right. Glass is of course often see through, but in real life with frames and reflections and security wipe cards and safety banding that covers half the pane, glass is often not really see through, and is a very real barrier.

What looks open and flowing and connected in our carefully crafted renders is really a strong line of separation.

Which brings us back down to that ground floor, and the ground plane, the activation and the daily life…the things that Jan and I were talking about in the first paragraph.

We all talk about activated frontage. It’s written in numerous plans and guidelines and we present it back as a feature and planning approval tick box. I think from our own life experience we all know what it means, and I think from our own holidays and lane-way evenings we know what it feels like. I think we know that it’s not just a franchised coffee shop in the foyer, or the fact that we wrote ‘tenancy’ on part of the floor plan. We know that activation does not just mean see through, it means people and activity. It can happen in the open and it can happen inside. It’s the buzz of a community where occupants are going about their daily lives, doing chores and dining, or shopping and working, or cooking and cleaning, or talking and writing, or reading, or playing…and you can be a part of it.

So why do we still float on glass? The reflective barrier kind of glass.

Even some of our most notable new buildings meet the ground with walls of perfectly rendered glass. In fact I suggest that most of our new buildings are still sitting above a ground plane of sealed glass.

So I’m with Jan, and Richard, and real life at the ground plane.

I think architects and our collaborators can craft the solutions.

Architects operate in an increasingly complex contractual environment. This applies to the varied contracts using for procurement of projects to the contracts between architect and client. Increasingly procurement contracts and client/architects contracts are becoming one, with novation to the contractor becoming increasingly prevalent for government and commercial projects.

The SA Chapter has a number of initiative in progress in response to this changing landscape. These include:

• Ongoing discussions with DPTI regarding their proposed amendments to the standard AS4122 contract. This joint initiative with the ACA and Consult Australia has resulted in DPTI withdrawing the proposed amendments pending further review.  In the interim the standard AS4122 contract is being utilized.
• Engagement in development of the Office of the Industry Advocate’s Industry Participation Policy, which has highlighted the positive input that architects can make provided they are engaged under a contract that enables them to exercise their full professional capabilities.
• Forums to enable collective review of the STEM projects and provide support for the practices involved. The most recent, which was delivered in conjunction with the ACA, focused on the contracts that the architects had signed up to and their options, obligations and risks moving forward.

All of these activities highlight the need for architects to be mindful of what they sign. Checking the details of the contract after it is executed is not good practice. Nor is signing anything provided by government on the grounds that, on previous experience, they won’t enforce the penalty clauses. For a start government contracts may result in the architect being novated to a contractor, as is occurring on many of the STEM projects. Secondly, government is increasingly seeking to modify contracts to make consultants more accountable for costs arising from errors and omissions. This includes resulting variation costs as well as costs for re-documentation.

Fear of losing a project on the grounds that you won’t sign a client prepared contract should not outweigh the very real risks of signing a contract that will not be supported by your insurance policy. Insurance brokers offering architectural professional indemnity policies will generally review a contract and highlight any clauses that they will not cover without a very significant increase in premiums, rendering the contract effectively uninsurable. Architects should make use of this service every time they receive a non-standard contract. If your insurer does not offer this service you should consider changing to one that does.

This review service will often highlight issues including clauses relating to:

• warranting of services by the architect
• Amendment to clauses relating to proportionate liability
• Amendment to clauses relating to limitation of liability
• Certification of construction by the architect

If these or other issues are identified then architects should draw this to the attention of the client, or risk being in contravention of Clause 59 (1) of the Architectural Practice Act 2009. It should be noted that these issues will be common to all industry standard PI insurance policies and therefore apply to all practices tendering for the project. Entering into a contract with such clauses will void the practice’s insurance policy, which the client will have invariably stated as a condition of entering into a contract. It is therefore in the client’s interest to amend the contract as proposed by the insurance review.

Standard contracts modified after 12 November 2016 may also be subject to the Unfair Contracts Act https://www.accc.gov.au/business/business-rights-protections/unfair-contract-terms .Examples of terms that may be unfair, include:

• terms that enable one party (but not another) to avoid or limit their obligations under the contract
• terms that enable one party (but not another) to terminate the contract
• terms that penalise one party (but not another) for breaching or terminating the contract
• terms that enable one party (but not another) to vary the terms of the contract.

Contracts can be reviewed by the ACCC or the SA Office of Consumer and Business Services http://www.cbs.sa.gov.au/ to determine if they are unfair under the Act.

In summary, the profession needs to follow best practice in relation to all contractual matters including client/architect agreements. If enough architects refuse to sign unfair and unnecessarily onerous non-standard contracts then clients will come to realise that they are not worth the legal fees they have paid to have them prepared. So, before you sign, consider whether it is worth entering into a contract that risks your business and your registration.

SA Chapter Practice Committee

The Institute’s National Practice Committee has been reinstated. This committee, in conjunction with the Acumen Content Review Panel, are charged with identifying and responding to issues relevant to current practice and preparing advisory notes to support the profession.

Michael Hegarty was appointed as the SA representative to the Acumen Content Review Panel earlier this year. To support him in this important role we are reforming the SA Practice Committee. The committee will have six standing meeting per year and will identify issues affecting SA practice, develop and review Acumen content and prepare responses to practice issues to government and other stakeholders. If you are interested in being involved in this group or would like additional information please contact Nicolette Di Lernia – SA Executive Director.

From national membership survey data one of the key activities expected of the Institute is to promote the value of architecture and good design.

Not a surprising expectation, but I think they are two different things.

The value of good design is about better outcomes through successful design. Some outcomes can be empirically quantified and some can remain less defined but should still be understood and valued. Health and workplace are two fields where improved design solutions can be validated by data which supports improved patient recovery and improved culture and productivity. Sustainability outcomes can be measured and assessed. We know this data exists and yet being able to communicate it simply and broadly seems to evade us. I think there is a role for the Institute here.

The other value of good design is less tangible. It is about beauty, and delight and the things that engage and uplift, foster and support the human spirit. Our awards programme speaks to some of these elements and we must find better ways of communicating this value more broadly. The human spirit exists also in correctional services, aged care facilities and the small business on an arterial road and while these seldom make for awards entries, we must still champion the contribution of good design there.

However architecture is a large and complex profession and we are not simply design consultants. Promoting the value of architecture is about promoting the many other things we do as well, and perhaps being less willing to hand them away.

Architects are the most broadly engaged professional in the development process. The involvement throughout a project timeline and the degree to which we interact with every input from authorities, to user groups, to consultants to trades and so on…is singularly unique. The depth of our specialties and expertise as a profession ranges from detailed technical knowledge to social and physiological understanding to broad master plan and feasibility thinking. Even with the plethora of professional inputs in larger projects, the scope of the lead architect still almost always involves resolution of the client brief, through to coordination of all the consultants and varied levels of administration of the construction. Despite this reality, we seem to accept feasibilities which consider only land use and costs without an architectural proposition, we seem comfortable with a role called ‘BIM manager’ separate to the architect who actually coordinated all the inputs that made the model, and on the presentation side, we hand out the design we created and the model we built for an external party to visualise…often with trees that don’t grow in South Australia.

If we are to be seen as the crucial partner in the development of the built environment, we must unwaveringly consider ourselves that way too.

The jury presentations for the 2017 SA Awards program occurred on Saturday.  79 entries across 12 categories made for a busy and interesting day, with ODASA once again providing a wonderful venue. Thanks go to the entrants, the jurors and the SA Chapter staff, all of whom come together to make the awards program possible. SA Awards Manager Gillian Redman-Lloyd, Awards Director Adam Brown and Deputy Awards Director Pippa Buckberry deserve a special mention for coordinating and delivering a highly successful, well managed outcome.

Public attendance was modest but it was great to have interested people attend. It was an opportunity to improve their understanding of the complexities of the issues that require consideration when working on a project and the innovative thinking that architects employ to produce highly resolved outcomes that add real value to people’s lives. It also demonstrates the considerable talent within the SA architectural profession.

The exhibition of entries is at ODASA until 28 April. Following the Awards presentations on June 10 an exhibition of winning projects at Adelaide Airport and the Lightening Talk showcasing key projects will provide further opportunities for public exposure. These will be complemented by the Institute’s award publication and local media coverage.

The jury presentations also provide a forum for perfecting architects’ presentation skills. As a profession, architects are constantly presenting their work – to clients, funding bodies and assessment panels; in graphic, written and verbal forms. This comes more naturally to some architects than others.

Successful presentation requires consideration of audience, constraints and your own personal style. Developing an ability to identify and clearly articulate the elements of a project that are most relevant in a particular context requires preparation and practice. Being able to present this information within the required time/word limit is also an art.

Presenting well is vital for winning submissions, bringing clients along on the architectural journey and achieving innovative outcomes that test regulatory constraints. The SA Chapter will continue to support our members in developing presentation skills, with the Awards jury presentations being one forum for doing this.

Mac Young: 1969 – 2017

It is with considerable sadness that the SA Chapter learned of the death of Mac Young last week. Mac, who had recently left Hassells to return to Tasmania, was a quiet achiever who brought considerable design skills to his projects. He will be missed by many within the Adelaide design community.  Our thoughts are with his family.

The start of the year is often a time of change and renewal.  For the SA Chapter of the Institute this means a number of things.

Firstly, we have a new Chapter Council and President.  Joining the Council in 2017 are Sarah Paddick and Simon Best.  They already contribute in a number of ways and we look forward to having them involved in the Council.  Incoming President Mario Dreosti has also been an active member over many years and his extensive practice experience and engagement with professional bodies, government and stakeholders will enable him to be a highly effective advocate for the profession, particularly as we head into the election next year.

We extend our sincere thanks to outgoing Councillors Sally Bolton, Sean Humphries, David Brown, Leah Salamon, Eddie Lukac and Steve Grieve and thank them for the contributions they have made to the Institute and the profession.  Their departure leaves three vacant positions on the Council and we are working to fill these places soon so that we can operate at full capacity.

We also acknowledge the incredible energy, passion and intelligence that David Homburg has brought to the role of Chapter President over the last two years.  He has been instrumental in fostering productive relationships with government bodies and the community at a time of ongoing change.  This has greatly assisted the profession in being viewed as a valued contributor to a number of issues including planning reform, local content and government procurement.  David has also championed the role of architects in strategic decision making, highlighted the role of design as the connector between people and technology and advocated for early engagement to maximise the benefit that architects’ unique set of skills can deliver.

The second change has been in our Major State Sponsor.  As noted last week the SA Chapter has enjoyed a productive relationship with Fielders over many years.  However, in 2017 we welcome Revolution Roofing as our new Major State Sponsor.  We look forward to working with them across a broad range of programs over the next five years and beyond.  The Revolution Roofing team are already actively engaging with a number of programs, so please make them welcome.

Finally, the SA Chapter has reviewed all of our programs so that we can direct our resources effectively and maximise benefit to the full spectrum of our members.  Programs including Co-opertition, EmAGN and SONA have a refocused and re-energised scope in 2017.  The Academic Practice Forums, ArchiEd, STEM forums and Architecture on Show are also continuing this year.  All provide valuable perspectives on architectural practice, explore our ability to add value in different contexts and expand the understanding of those outside the profession regarding what we do.

If this has resulted in some members receiving an unusually high volume of Comms, we apologise.  The aim is not to overwhelm but to make sure that members are aware of the many and varied opportunities that exist to participate.  We look forward to your doing just that.

First of all, welcome back to everyone from what I trust was a relaxing break over Christmas (even if it now seems a long time ago!).

Although Chapter Council hasn’t met yet for 2017, we have still been active in promoting the message that Good Design is Good Business across a number of activities.

The FAD (Festival of Architecture and Design) Advisory Group has met twice in this period to assist the Institute in developing a strategic plan to deliver FAD as a regular and well regarded fixture in Adelaide’s Festival’s calendar. We are fortunate to have on this advisory group the services of Greg Mackie OAM, Trish Hansen (SAHMRI), Nikki Hamdorf (Jam Factory), Nick McArdle (Adelaide Crows), Associate Professor John Spoehr (Flinders University) and Dino Vrynios (GGA). They are providing valuable input into establishing the FAD brand long term. While this work is being progressed, the Chapter is developing the program for this year’s FAD event in October.

We have also continued our engagement with DPTI regarding revised conditions of contract for state government projects. The meetings have been heading in the right direction and we are aiming to arrive at a mutually agreeable set of contract conditions soon. Allied to this has been a discussion around how to assist the government in preparing better briefs for projects, and getting architects involved at the inception stages for projects. This discussion is occurring at multiple levels within government and we are aiming to see some results during the first half of this year.

With DPTI discussions proceeding well, we have turned our attention to local government procurement. Many members have advised that they are doing work with local governments across South Australia, and have expressed the view that procurement processes could be streamlined. There are many similarities with the DPTI discussions that we can draw on and we’d be interested in hearing about your experiences as we develop a policy in this area. I’d encourage you to contact the Chapter Office to share your thoughts.

Finally, with my term concluding at the end of February, this will be my last e-News as SA Chapter President. I would have to say it’s been a great experience representing the profession here in South Australia and I’d like to thank all of you who’ve contributed to our efforts over the past two years. I think we’ve achieved a lot in that time in raising the profile of architecture within the decision makers in this state.

Congratulations to incoming President Mario Dreosti. There’s always much to do, and I know that with your support, he’ll continue to drive the relevance of the profession within South Australia on behalf of you, the members.

Welcome back after what we hope has been a relaxing and enjoyable break. The SA Chapter has another active and interesting year ahead and we look forward to sharing this with you, our members. 

In 2017 the Institute will continue working with Government regarding project procurement, planning reform, changes to local heritage legislation and increasing the use of South Australian services and products in construction projects. Through this work we can clearly demonstrate that architects have expert knowledge regarding these issues and can make valuable contributions to the development of robust, well resolved responses that will provide South Australia with best practice outcomes.

Architects involved in the STEM projects being rolled out in 139 schools across the State were also brought together by the Institute last year to evaluate progress to date and develop strategies for maximising the value these projects. Through an ongoing series of discussions with representatives from DECD and DPTI we are considering issues ranging from how to measure the impact that this program has on the number of students progressing to STEM related tertiary study to how to maximise the economic benefit for South Australia. 

The complexity and capacity of architectural practice and how architects can better understand and measure their impact will be discussed at the Academic/Practice forums that commenced last year. Exploration of topical issues will also take place through programs such as Architecture on Show and Design Conversations. These programs provide an opportunity for architects and the community to come together to discuss the ability of design to improve our environment and quality of life.

The headline event for 2017 is the return of the Festival of Architecture and Design – FAD. Scheduled for October, FAD explores the best of South Australian design and includes professional forums as well as opportunities for the public to engage with local designers. Planning has commenced and information will be released as it becomes available via the website http://www.fad.org.au/

The Institute’s awards program also provides a platform for celebrating the outstanding achievements of the profession. The awards exhibition opens on Friday March 17, with the jury presentations occurring on Saturday March 18. The jury presentations, which are open to the profession and the public, provide a unique insight into the complex decision making processes and diverse influences that generate excellent architecture. The program culminates with a presentation dinner on 10 June, with winners participating in a Lightning Talk a few weeks afterwards. Join us as we celebrate the best of the best. 

In addition to these advocacy and public engagement activities, the SA Chapter has a range of programs tailored to specific sections of our membership – students, new graduates, small and emerging practice and retired members. They provide valuable networking opportunities, with attendees frequently commenting on how much they enjoyed sharing their experience with others. Understanding that we are not alone in the challenges we face and that collectively we can achieve positive change is affirming.

The SA Chapter looks forward sharing these events and programs with you. Here’s to a stimulating 2017.