DOCSLIB.ORG

Australian War Memorial Development Project Submission 70

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Australian War Memorial Development Project Submission 70 Having worked as a senior architect on many award winning public projects throughout Australia, including Melbourne GPO, Brisbane international Airport, Southbank Post Expo Redevelopment, and one you would be quite familiar with, Empire Theatre Redevelopment in Toowoomba, I realize that for clarity, submissions are best if as brief and clear as possible. Apologies if this wanders a bit, but it is a complex issue for me. 1. The proposal for the new extension includes the demolition of the Australian Institute of Architects nationally award-winning Anzac Hall, by Denton Corker Marshall. Besides being unacceptable waste of public resources for a project that that has only just been completed, it is quite an insult to our architecture community, and others, to demolish what should be heritage listed work, and is an important and integral part of the War Memorial complex. Any new work should just be forced to work around it or dig underneath it. 2. Spending $500 million of taxpayer funds, at this time and at that place, is very problematic. It is ironic that with COVID 19, we are in the midst of the greatest pandemic since the Spanish Flu, which started during WW1. I think it is very important to spend money right now on important public cultural infrastructure, but that the spend be distributed throughout the nation. The idea that the Australian War Memorial having many satellite sites around Australia is not unreasonable. As you would realise, it is very expensive for Queenslanders to get to Canberra, so why not have, like say the Smithsonian Museum or The Imperial War Museum in the UK, dedicated satellite sites of the Australian War Memorial distributed throughout our nation? 3. For example, Oakey in Queensland has an old tin shed museum that houses very important pieces of the nation’s collection of historic aircraft including, Vietnam era Hueys, GAF Nomads and a Pilatus Porter and maybe a Blackhawk? (Have not been there for quite a while). Why not upgrade it, provided a suitable outdoor liturgical space for the Anzac Day etc, and an adjacent Reflection Space dedicated to both the deceased members killed on duty of those units, along with a Roll of Honour of all have served. This could be built for around $10m, and given Oakey’s problems with PFAF foam, it would be seen as a great gesture from the Commonwealth to support this community. 4. Another site worthy of consideration for a satellite location of the AWM is located near Gallipoli Barracks, Enoggera. This site would have the ability to display a large quantity of defence materiel in a spectacular setting. South East Queensland has so many historically important bases, and therefore so many veterans and serving members of the Defence Force resident there, all of whom have to jam into the very tiny Anzac Square in the Brisbane City on Anzac Day, to celebrate, commiserate and reflect. 5. There are sites and communities around the nation, many forgotten, that could benefit from having a War Memorial satellite facility being built and dedicated to all past and present members of the ADF and their families from those particular regions. Canberra does not deserve all of the attention, or economic stimulus, that would be generated by this current proposal. In spreading the spend, also ensure that small builders and smaller professional practices such as architects and engineers are engaged. Do not do a disastrous Rudd COLA scheme and give all the work to a giant like Lend Lease and have them absolutely ‘screw” consultants and subcontractors whilst merrily overcharging Government. That was a national disaster in project delivery. SUMMARY The existing Australian War Memorial serves as an important focus for those that have served, and the community as a whole, but it is not the time to concentrate even more the Commonwealth’s funding for remembrance on that one site. Widen the scope of the Memorial’s functions and more widely distribute those functions as well. Clearly the current location has run out of space. Walter Burley Griffin did not, I think, see the Memorial locus being a huge, ever expanding site in his masterplan for Canberra. (That ASIO, Defence Russell, the Australian War Memorial and Duntroon all coexist, side by side in Canberra as they do, certainly makes it more economical for spies, but I do not think that economy formed part of Burley Griffin’s thinking at the time. The direct line of site, and responsibility, from those who decide on wars at Parliament, and those who fight and suffer those wars at the Memorial, was a masterstroke of planning.) The AWM’s role as a mausoleum and museum, also does not adequately, I think, accommodate the entire defence family needs, including in my case, provisioning of any memorial space for those families that have lost loved ones in training accidents. Training for battle is almost as dangerous and battle itself, and yet I feel that Defence and the Commonwealth almost blame my brother (and others in his circumstances) for being such a clot as to die in a training accident. In my brother David’s case, there is way more to that story. However, as I was told by an assistant in the basement library, “the Memorial is only for those who have died on duty”. “In your brother’s case” he may as well have said, “it sweeps lives under the rug”, an attitude that I found quite distressing. It is no wonder there is such a problem with PTSD after service, and not just with personnel, but also with their families. Please save Anzac Hall and spread the spend (and the love). Sincerely, RICHARD GROVES Richard Groves FAIA AIA. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Thinking About Architecture and Portraiture
    18 PORTRAIT 33 PORTRAIT 33 19 Thinking about architecture and portraiture Portraits + Architecture is an experiment. In the twenty-first century the social, The exhibition at the National Portrait cultural and ecological imperatives Gallery presents the work of seven of architectural practice resonate leading Australian architect teams with strongly with artistic, philosophical commissioned photographic portraits and sociopolitical ideas and actions. by seven Australian photographers. Many architects, designers, artists and The participants have been asked to writers are interested in how issues think about their creative practice in of sustainability and ethics relate to a new way. Portraits + Architecture innovation and creativity in technology, explores the relationship between aesthetics and functionality. We are creative thinking and identity and increasingly aware of the impact of incorporates new photographic portraits the built environment on our daily of creative individuals and groups. lives, how the design of our dwellings, The architect teams are known for workplaces and public spaces affects our their contemporary and highly distinctive psychological and physical wellbeing. work. They have made significant Portraits + Architecture explores contributions to Australian architecture the thinking that informs creative and design culture. The photographers architecture practice rather than work across a spectrum of fine art, the details of specific buildings or commercial, and design practice and architectural projects. The selection of have produced bold and original the participating architect teams was photographic portraits for the exhibition. based on the original nature of their 20 PORTRAIT 33 PORTRAIT 33 21 practice. As a group, they represent a photographer to create a suite of portrait Portrait of CO-AP 2009 in the exhibition entry zone, where diversity of scale, working from different photographs in response to a defined Ross Honeysett visitors are invited to participate in locations in Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage Management Plan Final Report
    Australian War Memorial Heritage Management Plan Final Report Prepared by Godden Mackay Logan Heritage Consultants for the Australian War Memorial January 2011 Report Register The following report register documents the development and issue of the report entitled Australian War Memorial—Heritage Management Plan, undertaken by Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd in accordance with its quality management system. Godden Mackay Logan operates under a quality management system which has been certified as complying with the Australian/New Zealand Standard for quality management systems AS/NZS ISO 9001:2008. Job No. Issue No. Notes/Description Issue Date 06-0420 1 Draft Report July 2008 06-0420 2 Second Draft Report August 2008 06-0420 3 Third Draft Report September 2008 06-0420 4 Fourth Draft Report April 2009 06-0420 5 Final Draft Report (for public comment) September 2009 06-0420 6 Final Report January 2011 Contents Page Glossary of Terms Abbreviations Conservation Terms Sources Executive Summary......................................................................................................................................i How To Use This Report .............................................................................................................................v 1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background..........................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Media Release EMBARGOED TILL 10 NOVEMBER 2011, 2030 HOURS SINGAPORE TIME
    Annex B Media Release EMBARGOED TILL 10 NOVEMBER 2011, 2030 HOURS SINGAPORE TIME ANNEX B: PRESIDENT‟S DESIGN AWARD 2011 JURY PANEL 1. Ms Lei-Mei Julia Chiu Executive Director Japan Institute of Design Promotion (JDP); and Professor Musashino Art University (Japan) 2. Mr John Denton Founding Director Denton Corker Marshall Pty Ltd (Australia) 3. Mr Brandon Gien Managing Director Good Design Australia; and Chair Australian International Design Awards (Australia) 4. Mr Garrick Hamm Creative Partner Williams Murray Hamm (United Kingdom) 5. Prof Heng Chye Kiang Dean School of Design and Environment, National University of Singapore (Singapore) 6. Mr Fernando Menis Founder Menis Arquitectos (Spain) 7. Mr Mok Wei Wei Architect & Principal W Architects Pte Ltd (Singapore) 8. Mr Neil Porter Director Gustafson Porter Ltd (United Kingdom) 1 | 18 Annex B Media Release EMBARGOED TILL 10 NOVEMBER 2011, 2030 HOURS SINGAPORE TIME 9. Mr Matthias Sauerbruch Founder and Director Sauerbruch Hutton Architects (Germany) 10. Mr Richard Seymour Co-Founder Seymourpowell (United Kingdom) 11. Mr Michael Sorkin Founder Michael Sorkin Studio; and Chair New York Institute for Urban Design (United States of America) 12. Mr Tai Lee Siang Group Managing Director, Architecture Ong & Ong Pte Ltd (Singapore) 13. Mr Tan Yoong Owner and Designer Tan Yoong (Singapore) 14. Ms Jureeporn Thaidumrong CEO and Creative Chairwoman nudeJEH (previously JEH united) (Thailand) 15. Mr Tham Khai Meng Worldwide Creative Director and Chairman Worldwide Creative Council Ogilvy & Mather, New York (United States of America) 16. Mr Nathan Yong Furniture Designer Nathan Yong Design (Singapore) 2 | 18 Annex B Media Release EMBARGOED TILL 10 NOVEMBER 2011, 2030 HOURS SINGAPORE TIME Jury Biographies Ms Lei-Mei Julia Chiu Executive Director, Japan Institute of Design Promotion Professor, Muasashino Art University (Japan) Leimei has spent most of her adult life working to help designers and students of design promote their work across national and cultural barriers.
    [Show full text]
  • Mr Hugh Andrew O'neill
    Citation - Hugh O’Neill Born in 1933 and educated in Melbourne, Hugh Andrew O’Neill earned a Bachelor of Architecture from The University of Melbourne in 1956. He has gone on to make an outstanding contribution at a national level to architectural education, and has been instrumental in fostering Indonesian-Australian cultural relations over a period of more than fifty years. While studying at the University of Melbourne, O’Neill met a considerable number of Colombo Plan scholars who introduced him to the culture and arts of the Asian region. O’Neill joined the Australian Indonesian Association of Victoria in 1956 and through this started a life-long association with the country and the broader cultures of the region. Through these contacts, O’Neill undertook volunteer aid work from 1958-60, served on the Association’s Committee (1962-75), was Chair of the Volunteer Graduate Scheme to Indonesia (1963-70), and President of the Australian- Indonesian Association (1969-72). This led to his membership (1972-99) and chairmanship (1983-9) of the National Committee of the Overseas Service Bureau, Australian Volunteers International. His commitment to education has also been significant. Over a period of more than thirty years, O’Neill taught architectural design to successive generations of first year architecture students at the University of Melbourne, in effect providing the initial training of Victoria’s top architects including eventual Australian Institute of Architects Gold Medal winners such as Denton Corker Marshall and Gregory Burgess. However more significantly, O’Neill pioneered the teaching of Asian architecture at the University of Melbourne from 1962, which became and still remains a key teaching and research specialization and a distinguishing element in a Faculty that was one of the first in Australia to take a lead in the training of students from Southeast Asian and the Indian sub-continent through the Colombo Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • EOI A3 20090430.Indd
    Built Pedagogy ‘outstanding work of architecture, the design, collaboration, procurement and construction of which evolves from working closely with everyone who will use the building into the future’re’ ‘enabling completed and in-process work of staff and student to be highly visible’ ‘formally and informally engage others in the activities of the faculty through exhibition, conversation and creative collaboration’ ‘the building becomes a principal tool for teaching architecture, urban design, landscape and building’ Didactic expression of building elements | North acoustic facade to Princes Highway | Art + Design | Monash Atrium cafe flows into garden | Manchester Civil Justice Centre Manchester Civil Justice Cemtre “For those of us who teach architecture as well as make it, the space in which we do it carries an extra burden of critique.” Stuart Harrison | New Education Spaces Denton Corker Marshall BUILT PEDAGOGY | | Faculty of Art + Design | Monash University 1 The Academic Environment needs to create interactive and transformable collaborative research venues that allow seamless integration of research and practice along with quiet individual research creating a workplace that will attract the best staff. “Links between undergraduate education, professional practise and faculty research are often oversimplified; opportunities to enrich and strengthen undergraduate education through exposure to the research process are missed.” Ashraf M Salama Melbourne Museum | Researchers and curators visible in attractive, light filled workspaces Unlike traditional museums the research centre is clearly visible to the public above the foyer “Rethinking the conventions of design practice is … an optimistic and essential project, undertaken with the knowledge that our efforts make a difference in the physical environment. … we need to create new organisational structures, new patterns and forms of collaboration.
    [Show full text]
  • EDUCATION / Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology Bachelor Of
    BATES SMART CURRICULUM VITAE EDUCATION SYNOPSIS / Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology Steve is highly experienced and has worked Bachelor of Architecture, 1987 internationally on a broad range of projects. Steve commenced his career in Melbourne PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE working with Denton Corker Marshall on Steve joined Bates Smart in 2014 and several major projects, including; 101 Collins became a Studio Director in 2015. Street, Melbourne Exhibition Centre and Prior to Joining Bates Smart the Melbourne Museum. Following this / Aedas Interiors, Hong Kong Steve relocated to Warsaw, Poland where he joined Aedas as a Director. In 2011 / Aedas CE, Warsaw, Poland he relocated again, this time to Aedas’s / ttsp HWP Polska, Warsaw Poland Hong Kong office where he was given the / Denton Corker Marshall, Warsaw, Poland task of creating a new residential interior STEVE JONES / Denton Corker Marshall, Beijing, China design team. BArch In 2014 Steve returned to Melbourne and Studio Director / Denton Corker Marshall, Melbourne joined Bates Smart, working on a number of significant mixed-use projects. Steve’s exposure to a wide range of cultures helps him to understand the varying needs of clients, consultants and contractors and how to apply methods which allow the entire team to work together harmoniously. His key strength is an ability to communicate effectively with clients to fully understand their needs. BATES SMART CURRICULUM VITAE PROJECT EXPERIENCE HOSPITALITY COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL / Queensbridge Tower, Southbank, Prior to Joining Bates Smart / Capitol Grand, South Yarra Melbourne (design competition) / Sterlinga Business Center, Lodz, Poland / Illoura House, Melbourne Prior to Joining Bates Smart / Łużycka Office Park, Gdynia, Poland / Classic, East Melbourne / Venetian Macao Alterations and Additions / Philip Morris Polska, Administration and / No.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishermans Bend Planning Review Panel Presentation
    2 March 2018 Draft Planning Scheme Amendment GC81 FISHERMANS BEND PLANNING REVIEW PANEL PRESENTATION Presenters Vanessa Bird AIA Vic Chapter President Kim Irons Chapter Councillor Rosemary Burne Chapter Councillor Ruth White Executive Director AIA Vic Chapter Expert Witnesses Ian McDougall LFRAIA Founding Director ARM Architecture Gold Medallist Peter Elliott AM LFRAIA Director Peter Elliott Architects Gold Medallist Shelley Penn LFRAIA AIA Past National President Australian Institute of Architects Vic Chapter Fishermans Bend Draft Framework Presentation 1 Background The Australian Institute of Architects (Institute) is the peak body for the architectural profession in Australia. It is an independent, national member organisation with around 12,000 members across Australia and overseas. More than 3,000 of these are based in Victoria. The Institute exists to advance the interests of members, their professional standards and contemporary practice, and expand and advocate the value of architects and architecture to the sustainable growth of our communities, economy and culture. We welcome the opportunity to respond to the Fisherman’s Bend Planning review panel. Fishermans Bend is a city-shaping and city defining project that will span the next four decades. We are keen to continue to play an important role in delivering a Melbourne that is both able to support expected population growth of approx. 100,000 people a year, while maintaining its reputation of the most liveable city in world. Our Institute was established in 1856. For 162 years our members have been, and continue to be, responsible for delivering the face of our marvelous city as we know it and celebrate it today.
    [Show full text]
  • DENTON CORKER MARSHALL Denton Corker Marshall Pty Ltd
    EVALUATION CRITERIA 24 - DENTON CORKER MARSHALL Denton Corker Marshall Pty Ltd The Design Team Denton Corker Marshall McGregor Coxall Arup Denton Corker Marshall John Denton Adrian McGregor Peter Bowtell One of Australia’s most highly-regarded and B Arch Dip Town+Regional Planning Life Fellow B LArch Cert Hort AILA Member PIA Member B Eng (Hons) Civil Eng. FIEAust accomplished architecture and urban design AIA Fellow PIA Member RIBA Reg. Architect AIH Registered Landscape Architect Principal of Arup and Buildings Practice Leader practices, Denton Corker Marshall specialises in Victoria Adjunct Prof. Architecture Monash Founding principal with 26+ years’ international Australasia with 30+ years’ experience. Committed cultural and civic projects, including museums, University AIA Gold Medallist experience in urban design, landscape architecture to the difference good design and innovation galleries, interpretive centres and embassies. The Founding Partner with 40+ years’ experience. and the environment. Gold Coast-based for 5 can make to built environment. Highly skilled at practice prides itself on instilling collaboration, Internationally recognised leadership in design years, has thorough knowledge of its culture, bringing together creative multidisciplinary teams innovation and excellence in its projects and will of major public and cultural buildings. High- climate, geology and environments. His expertise to deliver state of the art solutions. Design team be providing lead consultancy services including level government advisor on achieving better covers development feasibility, mediation and leader on Melbourne Museum and Melbourne architecture, interior architecture and urban design. architecture and urban design as former Victorian politics, culture and ecology, and a drive to create Exhibition Centre, major projects in Australia and Government Architect and COAG Advisory Panel.
    [Show full text]
  • Timber.Fitout.CM.Melbourne.Museum
    Grids and Grooves: The use of timber in Melbourne Museum Building Name Melbourne Museum Location Nicholson St, Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria Victorian Government Office of Major Projects on behalf of Client/Developer Museums Victoria Project Architect John Denton, Denton Corker Marshall (DCM) Design architect: John Denton, Denton Corker Marshall (DCM) Interior Designer Denton Corker Marshall (DCM) Project Manager: John Weston, Office of Major Projects Landscape Architect Denton Corker Marshall (DCM) Structural and Civil Ove Arup and Partners Engineer Mechanical, Hydraulic, Communications and Lincolne Scott Australia Electrical Engineer Lighting Consultant Vision Lighting Acoustic Consultant Watson Moss Growcott Quantity Surveyor Rider Hunt Programming Consultant Flagstaff Consulting Group Certification Peter Luzinat and Associates Builder Baulderstone Hornibrook 2001: Sir Zelman Cowen Award for Public Buildings Awards 2001: Victorian Architecture Medal 2001: William Wardell Award (Named award for Institutional) Victorian Ash (Eucalyptus regnans / obliqua / delegatensis) Orientation Galleria Floor (also referred to as Tasmanian Oak) Golden Sassafras (Atherosperma moschatum) veneer from Orientation Galleria Wall quarter cut clear logs Theatre wall & theatre pod Golden Sassafras (Atherosperma moschatum) veneer from curved wall and foyers, quarter cut clear logs Aboriginal Cultural Centre Eucalyptus delegatensis (or Alpine Ash): natural feature grade ramp & balustrade crown-cut logs The Architect’s Statement: The enveloping grid framework is a significant element of the design. Its formal qualities allow the complex and varied elements with the “campus” to read as individual components; separate elements, or example, the research centre, the Imax theatre, or the Aboriginal centre, have greater individuality than would be possible or appropriate without the ordering frame. It is a building that is also a collection of buildings, where the landscape interpenetrates the forms and where garden and open activity space interact.
    [Show full text]
  • 85 Spring Street Melbourne Planning Permit Application 2014/000435
    85 Spring Street Melbourne Planning Permit Application 2014/000435 Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure 1 Summary An application has been made to redevelop the site and the air space above Parliament Station entrance (known as 85 and 87-91 Spring Street respectively) with a multi-storey (46-storeys) residential tower with ground floor retail uses. A permit is required for demolition and buildings and works. Key issues for consideration includes construction of works that do not extend to the road boundary of the site, to construct any part of a building which exceeds a height of 40 metres within 10 metres of a road frontage, and to construct or carry out works that would cast a shadow between 11.00am and 2.00pm on 22 March and 22 September over public space, public parks and gardens and major pedestrian routes including streets and lanes. The Department’s Urban Design Unit, the Office of the Victorian Government Architect, Public Transport Victoria and VicTrack are supportive of the permit application subject to conditions. The City of Melbourne does not support the application. Key issues associated with the proposal is its reliance on the air rights transaction of 87-91 Spring Street (Parliament Station entrance) from VicTrack, securing a light and air easement over the adjoining Anzac House at 4-6 Collins Street and the interface/ development equity to adjoining sites. On balance, the proposal, subject to titling issues being resolved, is considered to respond to its site context and should be supported with conditions including improved setbacks to adjoining sites, detailed resolution of the podium to Spring Street and limiting overshadowing of Treasury Gardens.
    [Show full text]
  • Permit Appeal Number P15781 Hotel Windsor
    Permit Appeal Number P15781 Hotel Windsor (H0764) 103-137 Spring Street and 1-17 Bourke Street, Melbourne Heritage Council Permits Committee Hearing – Friday, 27 August 2010 and Friday, 10 September 2010 Members – Ms Marita Foley (Chair), Mr Robert Sands, Ms Helen Martin Decision of the Heritage Council After considering the appeal in relation to conditions 1(a) and 1(b) of permit P14689 and conducting a hearing, the Heritage Council determines, pursuant to Section 76(4)(c) of the Heritage Act 1995, to vary the conditions to read as follows: Condition 1(a) – Reduce the height of the Corner Building to RL55.76, being the parapet height of the existing Annexe building where it abuts the northern tower of the Hotel Windsor. Condition 1(b) – Reduce the height of the rooftop additions (known as the ‘Stick’) to 5.65 metres above the height of the Corner Building, or other level as approved by the Executive Director in writing. Ms Marita Foley Mr Robert Sands Ms Helen Martin (Chair) Decision Date – 8 November 2010 1 APPEARANCES Executive Director, Heritage Victoria Mr Christopher Townshend SC, instructed by Department of Planning and Community Development Legal, appeared for the Executive Director. Mr Townshend called Mr Jim Gard’ner, Executive Director of Heritage Victoria, and Mr Matt Ainsaar, Town Planner and Land Economist from Urban Enterprise, to give expert evidence. Appellant Mr Stuart Morris QC, instructed by Norton Rose, appeared for the Halim Group (operator and occupier of the Hotel Windsor) and Hotel Windsor Holdings Pty Ltd (registered proprietor of the Hotel Windsor). Mr Morris called the following people to give expert evidence: Mr Ian White, Architect, of Denton Corker Marshall Pty Ltd Mr Peter Lovell, Heritage Consultant, of Lovell Chen Architects and Heritage Consultants Mr Glenn Coupar, Development Manager of the Halim Group Mr David Perry, Chief Executive Officer and General Manager, of the Hotel Windsor City of Melbourne Mr Matthew Townsend, Barrister, appeared for the City of Melbourne.
    [Show full text]
  • Shifting Strategies: Australian Architects and the Future
    Discussion Shifting strategies: The rapid urbanization of Australian architects and China is opening up significant the future of Chinese cities opportunities for Australian Words by Paul Violett and Silvia Micheli architectural practices – both large multinationals with global offices as well as smaller firms working primarily from Australia. They are demonstrating a valuable ability to respond to the dynamism of the Chinese market and to offer high-quality designs that are sensitive to history and place. The World Bank forecasts that, by 2030, in the country.4 In China, most projects seventy percent of the Chinese population by Australian firms that go beyond the will live in cities. This estimate confirms schematic design phase need to be that the fast urbanization that has completed in collaboration with a Local characterized the country’s development Design Institute (LDI), and project sources over the last few decades is expected vary from traditional tender processes to continue – in 1978, only 18 percent of to competitions and recommendations Chinese citizens lived in cities, but by 2015, from existing relationships. Compared that number had climbed to 56 percent.1 to a decade ago, Australian offices are now Booming Chinese urbanism has offered operating in China well beyond the major numerous and significant working coastal centres of Shanghai, Shenzhen and opportunities to Australian architectural Beijing. Progressively, they have penetrated practices, whose presence in China has mainland China, with a large number of increased
    [Show full text]