2025 Architecture Bulletin – Architecture In Action
2025 AUSTRALIAN ARCHITECTURE CONFERENCE: ARCHITECTURE IN ACTION
TREASURES OF TUSCULUM
Architecture Bulletin
VOL 82, NO. 1 2025
Official journal of the NSW Chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects since 1944.
The Australian Institute of Architects acknowledges First Nations peoples as the Traditional Custodians of the lands, waters, and skies of the continent now called Australia. We express our gratitude to their Elders and Knowledge Holders whose wisdom, actions and knowledge have kept culture alive. We recognise First Nations peoples as the first architects and builders. We appreciate their continuing work on Country from pre-invasion times to contemporary First Nations architects, and respect their rights to continue to care for Country.
26 Fatou Kiné Dieye: Engineering value loops
58 The history of the Institute of Architects in NSW
04 Elizabeth Carpenter
05 Acknowledgements
EDITORIAL
07 Matilda Gollan
David Welsh
ARCHITECTURE IN ACTION
10 Jing Liu, SO-IL: Between precision of softness and the beauty of ambiguity
Interview by Kawai Leung
13 Vinu Daniel: Early influences and the future of architecture
Interview by Mark Raggatt
16 Dieter Leyssen: Collective intelligence and urban sociology
Interview by Felicity Stewart
20 Andreia Teixeira: Innovating
Sydney’s Skyline
Interview by Jessica Van-Young
24 Opening the doors of architecture: A conversation with Huia Reriti, FNZIA
Interview by Jamileh Jahangiri
Words by Ben Berwick
28 Rethinking housing solutions: A new strategic approach to address the crisis
Words by David McCrae
33 Abbie Galvin: The NSW Housing Pattern Book
Words by Kieran McInerney
36 Neill McClements: The Elizabeth Line
Interview by David Welsh
42 Emma Williamson and HY William Chan: Shaping perspectives
Interview by Mark Raggatt
44 Beyond recognition: Sally Hsu on sustaining passion and purpose in architecture
Words by Sally Hsu
46 Framing change with Monica Edwards
Words by Monica Edwards
TREASURES OF TUSCULUM
52 Exhibition foreword
Words by Louise Cox
54 Curatorial essay: Welcome to Treasures of Tusculum
Words by Danica Micallef
Words by Jennifer Preston
63 Tusculum by John Verge
Words by Robert Gasparini
68 A good innings: The architects versus builders cricket history
Words by Jennifer Preston
71 Guzman’s gift and Wilson’s Vision: Old colonial architecture in NSW and Tasmania
Words by Hector Abrahams
74 Notes on five portraits (what’s in a face?)
Words by Hugo Chan
78 Drawing types, techniques and tools
Words by Noel Thompson
82
88
Arthur White Lantern Slides
Words by Martyn Jolly
Tocal and the CB Alexander College
Words by Linda Babic
90 The end of Florence Taylor’s career as an architect
Words by Bronwyn Hanna
92 Institute journals
Words by Glenn Harper
This edition of The Architecture Bulletin arrives with a particular sense of anticipation, a special edition coinciding with the upcoming Australian Architecture Conference. As President of the NSW Chapter, I am once again privileged to connect with you through these pages, reflecting on the dynamic forces shaping our profession and the built environment in New South Wales.
The past months have continued to underscore the vital role architects play in navigating complex challenges. From the pressing need for equitable housing solutions and the imperative of climate resilience to the changing potential of AI and technology and ever-evolving landscape of practice and materiality, The Architecture Bulletin has long served as a platform to dissect such critical themes, alongside many others. These are not isolated topics, but rather interconnected threads that weave through the fabric of our work and our responsibilities as custodians of the built environment.
This year’s Australian Architecture Conference, aptly themed “Architecture in Action,” promises to delve specifically and deeply into these crucial conversations. The Steering Committee’s vision – that “Architecture plays a critical role in shaping identities, building communities and meeting the urgent demands of both the present and our collective futures” – resonates deeply with the ethos of our profession. The conference will bring together a compelling array of Australian and international speakers, each offering their unique perspectives and experiences on how design can be a catalyst for positive change, contribute to planetary regeneration, and pave the way for a sustainable and equitable future for all.
This special issue of the will serve as an extension of the conference itself, offering insights through interviews and short essays with, and by, the featured speakers.
As a profession, we have a responsibility to engage in meaningful dialogue, to listen to diverse perspectives, and to champion design that is not only aesthetically compelling but also socially responsible and environmentally conscious. As we navigate the complexities of the 21st century, the architect’s ability to envision and realise a better future remains more vital than ever. The second section of the Bulletin provides an insight into the hidden world of “The Treasures of Tusculum”.
As Danica Micallef, the Records and Collections Officer of the Institute and Curator of the exhibition so aptly writes in her essay, “We look to the past to contextualise the present, and to hopefully influence the future.” As such this exhibition is an important reminder of who we are as a member organisation and how we have impacted our society in which we live and work over the past 150-plus years. An interesting reflection on the exhibition and in reading the articles written in support, is that there are no “new” issues, rather the same issues experienced in a slightly different context. A reminder with regards to the insidiousness of discrimination and the importance of the equal representation of the diversity of our members, brought to life through the essay by Browyn Hanna on Florence Mary Taylor. This exhibition is an eclectic collection of archival material that brings to life the personality of the Institute. The Institute is our members, and this exhibition is a demonstration of the impact of the sustained and informed contribution by our members. We will always only be as good as those who contribute. Therefore, I hope that by looking back into the past, our members will be inspired to continue to advocate for our profession. We currently have just under 10% of our members across Australia actively involved with commitments such as juries, committees, providing commentary and mentoring (a thank you to all) – we hope that both the Conference and the related Fringe Events curated by the NSW Chapter will encourage more members to activity participate.
The exhibition is open for a week from 29 April until 4 May, therefore I would encourage all to take a moment to step into the cool and calm rooms of Tusculum to slow down and reflect on the past. ■
Elizabeth Carpenter FRAIA
NSW Chapter President
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE
Matilda Gollan (Co-chair)
David Welsh (Co-chair)
Ben Berwick
Cate Cowlishaw
Jason Goh
Caine King
Kieran McInerney
David McCrae
Mark Raggatt
Jessica Van-Young
Kawai Yeung
Paulo Macchia
CREATIVE DIRECTION
Annie Luo
EDITORIAL TEAM
Linda Cheng
Meg Boyle
James Kennedy
PUBLISHER
Australian Institute of Architects NSW Chapter 3 Manning Street Potts Point, Sydney NSW 2011
COVER IMAGE
Toy Storey Residence, Wallmakers, Photo: Syam Sreesylam
PRINTER
Printgraphics
REPLY
Send feedback to bulletin@architecture.com.au. We also invite members to contribute articles and reviews. We reserve the right to edit responses and contributions.
The views and opinions expressed in articles and letters published in Architecture Bulletin are the personal views and opinions of the authors of these writings and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Institute and its staff. Material contained in this publication is general comment and is not intended as advice on any particular matter. No reader should act or fail to act on the basis of any material herein. Readers should consult professional advisers. The Australian Institute of Architects NSW Chapter, its staff, editors, editorial committee and authors expressly disclaim all liability to any persons in respect of acts or omissions by any such person in reliance on any of the contents of this publication.
WARRANTY
Persons and/or organisations and their servants and agents or assigns upon lodging with the publisher for publication or authorising or approving the publication of any advertising material indemnify the publisher, the editor, its servants and agents against all liability for, and costs of, any claims or proceedings whatsoever arising from such publication. Persons and/or organisations and their servants and agents and assigns warrant that the advertising material lodged, authorised or approved for publication complies with all relevant laws and regulations and that its publication will not give rise to any rights or liabilities against the publisher, the editor, or its servants and agents under common and/ or statute law and without limiting the generality of the foregoing further warrant that nothing in the material is misleading or deceptive or otherwise in breach of the Trade Practices Act 1974.
Ben Berwick RAIA is the director and founder of Prevalent.
Cate Cowlishaw FRAIA is regional managing principal of HDR’s Australian architecture practice.
Jamileh Jahangiri RAIA is a Sydney-based architect and academic and founder of Studio Orsi.
Jason Goh RAIA is an associate architect at Tzannes.
Annie Luo is a multidisciplinary designer, with a focus on visual identity, digital design and print media.
Caine King RAIA is founding director and principal architect of CKDS Architecture.
Paulo Macchia FRAIA is a director in the Government Architect NSW executive team.
Kieran McInerney RAIA is an architect and practice director based in Sydney.
Jessica Van-Young RAIA Grad works at a medium-sized commercial practice.
Kawai Yeung FRAIA is a co-founder and director of Kaunitz Yeung Architecture.
Mark Raggatt RAIA is a Sydneybased director of ARM Architecture.
David McCrae RAIA is co-founder and principal of M+M Architects.
Danica Micallef is the Records and Collections Officer at the Australian Institute of Architects.
Linda Cheng is Project Lead for the 2025 Australian Architecture Conference.
James Kennedy is the Head of Communications at the Australian Institute of Archtiects.
Meg Boyle is the Digital Strategy and Engagement Manager at the Australian Institute of Architects.
Bronwyn Hanna (PhD, M.ICOMOS) is a Sydney-based historian and heritage professional.
Linda Babic RAIA is a Newcastle-based architect and founder of Heritas.
Martyn Jolly is an associate professor at ANU with a specialisation in photography and media arts.
Noel Thomson FRAIA is an architect and the founder of Noel Thomson Architecture.
Robert Gasparini RAIA is a senior associate at Design 5 Architects.
Chris Redman is a conservator at Powerhouse.
Glenn Harper is an architect and urban designer and an independent researcher.
Hector Abrahams FRAIA is an architect and historian from Hector Abrahams Architects.
Jennifer Preston FRAIA is an architect and interior designer and founder of JPA&D.
Hugo Chan RAIA is the Director and Chartered Architect of StudioHC.
Jing Liu is a New Yorkbased architect and co-founder of SO-IL.
Vinu Daniel is an architect and founder of Wallmakers in India.
Neill McClements is a partner at Grimshaw in London.
Andreia Teixeira is an Associate Principal at SHoP.
Dieter Leyssen is an architect, urban sociologist, and partner at international Brusselsbased practice 51N4E.
Fatou Kiné Dieye is an architect, urban planner, and researcher in Africa.
Laura Harding Assoc. RAIA is a Sydney-based architect specialising in urban, multi-residential, and public space projects.
Damian Madigan FRAIA is an architect and creator of the Bluefield concept.
Huia Reriti is an architect and president of Te Kāhui Whaihanga New Zealand Institute of Architects.
HY William Chan RAIA is an architect and emeritus councillor innovating at the intersection of city making and policy making.
Emma Williamson FRAIA is the Government Architect of Western Australia.
Sally Hsu RAIA is an architect and Associate Director at Bates Smart.
Monica Edwards FRAIA is the 2024 recipient of the Paula Whitman Prize for Gender Equality and Senior Assoicate at SJB.
Abbie Galvin LFRAIA is the NSW Government Architect and former principal at BVN.
For more than 80 years, the NSW Architecture Bulletin has chronicled the ideas, projects, and personalities shaping architecture in New South Wales and beyond. In that spirit, we are proud to present a very special two-part Conference issue, timed to coincide with the 2025 Australian Architecture Conference. This edition reflects the vibrancy and diversity of contemporary architectural discourse while also taking a thoughtful look back at the legacy that continues to inform our built environment.
PART ONE: ARCHITECTURE IN ACTION
The first part of this Conference issue features exclusive conversations with 12 keynote speakers drawn together by the 2025 Conference Steering Committee from both Australia and overseas. These conversations delve into the pressing issues, challenges, and inspirations shaping our profession today, seen through the particular lens of each speakers’ experiences. From climateresponsive design and Indigenous perspectives to technological innovation and urban resilience, the interviews provide an insight into the priorities and approaches of the practitioners and thinkers presenting at the Conference.
PART TWO: TREASURES OF TUSCULUM
Running in parallel with the Conference is Treasures of Tusculum, a special free exhibition hosted at Tusculum, the elegant Colonial Regency villa in Potts Point designed by John Verge. This landmark exhibition, open to the public from April to 4 May, offers a unique window into the stories of the people and places that have helped shape the architectural character of NSW. Part Two of this issue acts as the official catalogue for the exhibition, including richly illustrated essays on key items and figures showcased throughout the rooms of Tusculum. From original drawings and rare archival photographs to personal artefacts
and ephemera, the exhibition is as much a tribute to individual visionaries as it is a celebration of collective memory.
The accompanying essays unpack the significance of each object and its broader context in the state’s architectural evolution. These stories breathe life into buildings, organisations, and communities, connecting our present to the past through a tactile sense of place and purpose. Whether you’re attending the exhibition or experiencing it through the pages of this issue, Treasures of Tusculum promises to be a deeply engaging experience.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND COLLABORATION
This special edition of the Bulletin would not have been possible without the tireless efforts and collaborative spirit of both the NSW Chapter Editorial and Communications Committee, and the Heritage Committee, whose research, interviews, and writing form the foundation of this issue. Their passion for architectural history, storytelling, and professional discourse shines through in every section. We also extend sincere thanks to the dedicated RAIA Institute staff who provided essential support to bring this edition to life.
Whether you are paging through from your seat at a keynote session, enjoying a fringe event or exploring the exhibition at Tusculum, we invite you to enjoy this special Conference issue of the NSW Architecture Bulletin – a celebration of dialogue, heritage, and community in architecture. ■
Matilda Gollan RAIA Editorial Committee Co-chair
David Welsh RAIA Editorial Committee Co-chair
Building your professional protection
01. ARCHITECTURE IN ACTION
Architecture plays a critical role in shaping identities, building communities and meeting the urgent demands of both the present and our collective futures.
The 2025 Australian Architecture Conference brings together speakers from around Australia and abroad to share stories of Architecture in Action, stories that demonstrate the capacity of design to instigate positive change, regenerate the planet and chart a sustainable and equitable future for humanity.
2025 Conference Steering Committee:
Aaron Peters FRAIA
Adam Haddow FRAIA
Adrian Fernandez RAIA
Felicity Stewart FRAIA
Nicole Mesquita-Mendes RAIA
Sally Hsu RAIA
Sharaan Muruvan RAIA
Tania Papasotiriou RAIA
conference.architecture.com.au
Sydney Opera House Concert Hall Renewal
Photographer:
Chris Bennett
JING LIU: BETWEEN PRECISION OF SOFTNESS AND THE BEAUTY OF AMBIGUITY
Interview by Kawai Yeung
Since co-founding SO–IL with Florian Idenburg in 2008, Jing Liu has led a body of work that is spatially inventive, materially nuanced, and profoundly reflective. From the playful Pole Dance installation for MoMA PS1 to the Kukje Gallery in Seoul, the Manetti Shrem Museum of Art, and Site Verrier in France, the practice’s projects span scales and geographies, but share a commitment to experimentation, collaboration, and precision.
Congratulations on the remarkable practice you and Florian have built since 2008. Let’s go back in time – your journey began in Tokyo in 2001, and then in 2008 you co-founded SO–IL. What inspired you both to start the practice, especially amid the global financial crisis?
I think we inspired each other, both personally and professionally. We’d each wanted to start our own practice – to be an author and experiment on our own terms. But when we reconnected in New York – after first meeting at SANAA in Tokyo – it felt like the right moment, although we came from different directions. Florian was seeking something unfamiliar to his Dutch background and ended up in Japan. I was looking for something new – in America, but through Japan and Europe.
Despite the financial crisis, we weren’t discouraged. Architecture, to us, is a marathon. If it wasn’t that crisis, it would be the next one.
We’re both optimistic – and we felt that spirit was needed in the profession. In New York, the architecture community is small and supportive. We just thought let’s not quit because times are tough. Let’s keep laughing, creating, and keep making our built environment better.
That optimism really shines through in early works like Pole Dance – so playful and joyous. How did those formative projects shape your trajectory?
We had a lot of similarities in the way we think and approach things. We often joke that we “grew up in broad daylight.” When we won the MoMA PS1 Young Architects Program with Pole Dance, we’d just opened our office. There was no time to formulate our approach or prepare our spiel – we were figuring it out as we went.
What emerged naturally was this spirit of experimentation and playfulness. Projects like
Pole Dance or the Manetti Shrem Museum have an openness and ambiguity that invite joy and generosity. And over time, those qualities have become central to our design.
That spirit of experimentation – and your distinct aesthetic – often comes through in your material choices and elastic forms. There’s tactility and craft, but also intelligence and restraint. I know model making is a key part of your process. How does it shape your explorations?
It’s in our name – Solid Objectives, right? We’ve always been committed to translating ideas into physical reality. In the 1990s, when we were in school, so much avant-garde and experimental architecture remained on paper. But we were interested in what kind of condition produces what kind of architecture, and what kind of material realities they produce. Architecture being scrutinised, experiment on, and pushed – that’s something we were committed to from the beginning.
For every project we try to be very precise and also try to just pick it apart – all the rules that govern the outcome. From supply chains, procurement processes to the building codes or financial models behind it – we try to understand what kind of architecture they produce – to understand comprehensively and find improvement within it.
If you believe in architecture as a physical thing, then you have to get comfortable with the physical object from the beginning. That’s why we push physical model-making, even in early design phases. You have to physically wrestle with the problem to understand it deeply.
That’s something we learned at SANAA – make 20 similar models, and spend time cutting, sanding, polishing, and studying them. You start to see how small differences become meaningful. That’s why we use a lot of physical models for the early design studies. We also stay very much involved in the fabrication process, including the material sourcing of important materials. We also stay closely involved on site, even when the projects are really far away. We try to get our hands dirty, so to say.
You’ve also taught extensively – and architectural education has changed a lot with increasing digitisation. Has teaching informed your practice?
Digital tools were already a big part of our education in the ‘90s and early 2000s. We embrace digital tools and scripting in our practice – they help with iteration and information management. But I do worry that digital representation can create a false sense of control or authorship – because of the ease of rapidly producing seemingly completed imageries and drawings, or complex diagrams.
Often, I tell students: just because you have drawn a cosmological diagram of all stakeholders doesn’t mean that you know them. Have you actually gone there, talked to them and discussed the issues? Representation isn’t comprehension. So, I caution against slipping into laziness or becoming more afraid of dealing with the real thing.
Many of your projects also incorporate art installations or collaborations with artists. How have those influenced your architectural work?
Art installations allow us to loosen up. Architecture comes with a lot of liabilities and constraints; installations let us run a bit loose and test ideas in a freer space. We’ve worked with dancers, choreographers, artists, scientists. These collaborations often seed ideas that evolve into our larger projects.
For example, we recently worked again with the artist-scientist Mariana Popescu using large-format 3D knitted textile to make the concrete formwork for the upcoming Venice Biennale. Our first collaboration was Common Thread in Belgium – a tunnel we knitted together. It’s in the former monastery that was open to the public for the first time. It freed us from the confines of an extruded plan with posts, beams and shear walls. The space was warped and flipped – so when you were inside, it ejected you out, and then you could loop around the entire object to come back in.
These kinds of complex, mathematical spatial manipulations usually only exist in computers – the abstract realm; but with the right technology, we realised them in real life. It’s exciting to think how those ideas might influence future bigger projects.
→ Kawai Yeung FRAIA is a co-founder and director of Kaunitz Yeung Architecture.
→ Jing Liu is a New York-based architect and co-founder of forward-thinking practice SO – IL.
/
LIU:
PRECISION OF SOFTNESS AND THE BEAUTY OF AMBIGUITY
Even with Pole Dance, the idea of a structure that moves and shifts found its way into the plan of the Manetti Shrem Museum. The openness and fluidity, as if it’s dancing – those concepts persist.
Your work now spans the US, Mexico, Europe, Asia. How do you navigate different cultural and regulatory contexts while maintaining the ethos of your practice?
Most of the places we work are somewhat familiar to us – we collaborate with local partners and understand the context enough to know where we can push. If you’re very unfamiliar with the context, it’s much harder. You need a very strong local partner in order to co-create, and you also need to become more familiar with that context.
We’re excited to see your work on the Melbourne Arts Precinct, Laak Boorndap, in collaboration with Hassell. What’s been the most compelling part of working in the Australian context?
This is our first Australian project, so it’s hard to generalise. But what’s compelling about Laak Boorndap is that it’s a transformation – a super interesting design topic. The original precinct was built in the 1970s, during a very different era of architecture and urbanism, void of discussion about the environment, or what this land used to be.
So, we’re looking at a site through time – what it was, how it has grown as part of the city, what it might become. The original buildings were very much machines: concrete, pumps, mechanical systems that are clunky – a latemodern vision of a cultural symbol powered by whatever technological might people had of the time. We’re asking how to soften that machine, make it more intelligent, but also how to reclaim older deeper histories.
So that means reconnecting back to the river that was canalised. The site used to be marshland with water flowing between the water and the land. We’ve tried to bring softness and the water back in here – creating intuitive reminders that this was once a riverbank, not a canal bank, and a place of flowers, plants, animals – not just human.
Art comes out of nature, so I’m hoping the design communicates that – that people feel we’re connected to the past, the future, the art, the birds, and the rivers, as one continuous whole.
That’s a beautiful way to frame it. Thank you, Jing – we’re looking forward to your keynote. ■
→ Left 114 Vanderbilt Avenue by SO–IL.
Photo by Iwan Baan.
→ Right Amant by SO-IL.
Photo by Naho Kubota.
JING
BETWEEN
Interview by Kawai Leung
Interview by Mark Raggatt
VINU DANIEL: EARLY INFLUENCES AND THE FUTURE OF ARCHITECTURE
Was there a person, place, or experience that focused your design philosophy?
I was highly influenced by the thoughts of Gandhi and design strategies of architect Laurie Baker. Gandhi’s advice about the ideal house being made of materials found within a five-mile radius inspired me in the beginning of my career and remains one of our core ideologies. Meeting Laurie Baker was a turningpoint, completely transforming my outlook on architecture. Two years at the Auroville Earth Institute, for the UN Development Programme post-Tsunami construction was another pivotal experience. There were people, places and experiences, that helped me find my own design philosophy, and a strong commitment to the field.
Your practice doesn’t look like a typical architectural office, can you tell us about the way you work and how you go about delivering projects for your clients?
Our practice functions beyond the confines of the typical office setup. We’ve found that our unique approach and process deliver optimum results, when the design team is actively involved on site. Designing from an office has a lot of limitations, especially in the kind of work we are involved in, as all our projects are designed with respect to its natural context, and its site characteristics. This is also appealing to the clients, as having someone from the design team closely monitoring the entire process adds immense value and reassurance.
ARCHITECTURE AS STORYTELLING
Many of your projects seem to have a strong narrative or a sense of place. How important is storytelling in your design process?
A strong narrative or a sense of place, are aspects that emerge when the design responds to the unique characteristics of the site, rather than imposing on it. We do not believe in creating spaces that take away from the site, its natural characteristics. Rather the design should be able to elevate the inherent qualities of the site and maintain its natural identity. This approach helps us iterate the design better and in turn creates a narrative that is not only compelling but relevant to the essence of the place. Storytelling becomes an organic outcome of our design process rather than a predetermined goal.
What role do local stories, traditions, and environmental histories play in your architectural choices?
Local traditions and history influence finer design details; however, our primary focus remains on the site’s physical attributes like topography, climate and other environmental factors. While we find incorporating local character can enhance the project’s identity, we carefully integrate these only when they can contribute to the value of the project, functionality, or its sustainability.
/ VINU DANIEL: EARLY INFLUENCES AND THE FUTURE OF ARCHITECTURE
Interview by Mark Raggatt
SUSTAINABILITY AND INNOVATION
Your buildings acknowledge and navigate their environments, letting in the air, leaving earth exposed, and trees in place. What is the natural world teaching you about architecture and cities?
→ Vinu Daniel founded Wallmakers in 2007. The practice aim is to build sustainable spaces that are responsive to specific site contexts and conditions, while maintaining a balance between innovative, utilitarian designs.
→ Vinu Daniel will be presenting the Utzon Lecture at the 2025 Australian Architecture Conference in partnership with the University of New South Wales.
Its most evident lesson may be that architecture is meaningless if not working for a greater cause. The constant drive to build holds no value if we fail to consider the aftermath. Ideologies can only remain abstract, if we do not embody it in our work. For us, it is of the utmost importance to reflect our commitment to our core ideologies of prioritising more sustainable choices, in our work.
Wallmakers is known for techniques deploying waste materials. Could you tell us about your concept of making beauty in this disaster we have created for ourselves?
I believe beauty is not just about the aesthetics, but also about the resourcefulness of the process. To me, beauty is an aspect that emerges when we can reduce our dependency on natural resources, or materials, minimising our embodied energy by incorporating the materials that are already available, like discarded tyres, or discarded plastic toys, into something meaningful and visually striking; when we give new life to what would otherwise be environmental burdens. The aesthetical aspect, or the beauty of a project is the statement it makes in terms of resilience, creativity and ingenuity of the process. And there’s always a way to do this if we are willing to look beyond the obvious choice.
Do you see the future of urban construction integrating more of the techniques pioneered by Wallmakers?
It would be nice to see this happen. However, considering that globally, we are not at a place where responsible choices in construction are prioritised, it seems like a challenge.
Many architects today aim for sustainability, but your approach is radical in its rejection of conventional materials. Do you see your work as an act of resistance against mainstream construction practices?
Resistance is more a result of necessity than rebellion. I’m not keen on following conventional paths just because they’re easier or more familiar. There’s a lot to be explored, a lot to be experimented with. It does not make sense
to limit ourselves to the ordinary, especially with the potential of the less explored: exploring and experimenting with the less conventional isn’t just a creative choice, it’s a response to the urgent need for more sustainable and innovative solutions.
How do you balance structural innovation with local craftsmanship in your projects?
We often work on complex structural systems, due to the nature of the unconventional materials and forms that we incorporate. Local craftsmanship is essential in ensuring that the design remains culturally and contextually relevant. Both aspects help in establishing a balance, which not only helps improve the identity of the project but also adds value to its purpose.
Is there a particular material or technique you haven’t worked with yet but would love to explore?
It’s difficult to mention any in particular, especially since we are experimenting with new materials and techniques. We’re always eager to explore and push boundaries.
CLIMATE, POLITICS AND THE FUTURE OF ARCHITECTURE
Is climate responsive architecture a material and technological problem or a political one also?
It is certainly a material and technological challenge. There’s a lot that goes into finding the right solution to mitigate or manage the effects of climate. However, it is also quite political. A lot of these measures can be influenced by local regulations, and policies. Truly achieving climate responsive architecture is only possible with innovative design measures and a political commitment to support the same.
What is your opinion on the ethics of luxury architecture in a time of ecological crisis?
I do not think luxury architecture can be defined easily. If it implies the excessive use of resources, overbuilding, or unnecessary extravagance, then it would be hard to justify, especially in a time of an ecological crisis. Everything we build has consequences, and even if it that luxury was achieved through sustainable materials, it raises questions about relevancy and necessity. True luxury would be less about exploiting resources, and more about building spaces that extend beyond requirements, and create a positive impact on people and the planet. ■
→ Mark Raggatt
RAIA is a Sydney-based director of ARM Architecture.
→ Top 3-minute Pavilion, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, Wallmakers. Photo by Oshin Mariam Varughese.
→ Bottom Gulmohar Residential Complex, Ahmedabad, India, Wallmakers.
Photo by Fernando Alda Calvo.
DIETER LEYSSEN: COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE AND URBAN SOCIOLOGY
Interview by Felicity Stewart
I understand 51N4E is a self-steering collective, what does this mean, and could you please tell us more about how 51N4E was formed?
Dieter Leyssen: 51N4E has always put the emphasis on collective intelligence when making architecture, even when it was still small and long before I became part of it. The choice of name, 51N4E, or the coordinates of Brussels the place where it emerged, already holds that promise. Not the names of the founders but a place, a city. Now we are around 70 people big, and it remains to inject collective intelligence in our projects in a rather horizontal way. In that sense, all 70 of us are steering the direction of our practice. Of course, with the growth and diversity of projects we’re involved in, this requires more organisation and infrastructure. Over the past ten years, we have experimented a lot with the space we work in and share, but also in developing shared tools to run projects and teams in autonomy yet in a shared culture. This gave rise to a company structure of different studios which are smaller companies that share a common infrastructure across projects. In 2020, just before the pandemic, we internally launched ‘51N4E becomes many’ and now this is gradually becoming reality. But it’s a constant work-in-progress.
What is the scale of your practice and what is unique about the way you work?
I think what’s quite unique at 51N4E is the attention and care for our projects and the dialogue from which they emerge. We structure our design process generally through workshops with our clients, project stakeholders, and partner offices where everyone enters the
discussion and contributes their knowledge. Of course, a lot of work is done in the office, but it’s at these workshops that projects are made. Perhaps that’s why our projects are all quite distinct. People say we don’t have a signature style. All of our projects have different clients, users, conditions, informing the design. Also, internally a similar attention for moments of interaction is present. For instance, every year, for the last five years, we have met to discuss our year plan. What are the types of projects we want? What investments will we make for the group? Or another format, the agora, which is where we discuss more sensitive topics related to our practice. For instance, we recently discussed the language of sustainability and the risk of greenwashing unsustainable practices in our field.
How would you characterise the main issues facing architects and urban designers in Brussels as a city?
The main issue we are dealing with is undeniable climate change. Global warming and its effects in plain sight requires a reorientation of architectural and urban planning practices. And this is happening at a rather fast pace – new construction materials and recycling practices are emerging, increased knowledge on the lifecycle of materials and infrastructures and operational carbon footprint of buildings. Of course, it goes too slow and too little, but at the same time it’s also an exciting time to be an architect or urban designer. Our education did not teach us this, so we need to permanently educate ourselves and find complementarity in other fields.
In Brussels specifically, the emphasis lies strongly on the re-use of former office stock in order to avoid the embedded carbon footprint of new buildings. With the arrival of European Institutions in the second half of the past century, a lot of offices were built that, gradually, are becoming empty because of a shift to a more efficient use of space. The Brussels Bouwmeester has been advocating a re-use for housing, where there is a need, and facilities leading to a wave of renovations of old structures in the European Quarter and North Quarter – the two most important business districts in the city. In doing so, these will hopefully become less monofunctional and connect parts of the city, while also saving carbon.
How does operating at an urban scale shape your approach to design, and what opportunities does it unlock beyond conventional architecture?
I am trained as an architect and always had a strong interest in the urban scale even as a child. But after my first five years in practice, I noticed that I didn’t have the proper tools to understand and work with. In general, I saw that architecture often lacks the understanding of social and economic realities of a site. After my training in urban sociology, and by getting introduced to the writings of Iris Marion Young, Rahul Mehrotra and Fran Tonkiss, this understanding grew. I think the opportunity of the urban scale lies in the relations a project or intervention can have with its context, spatially but also beyond the spatial. Sometimes a question does not
need an architectural response, and I think that’s still hard to accept within architecture.
What projects are you currently focused on? What excites you about them?
Last year we opened a series of projects in Brussels and it’s exciting to see them come to life. There is a project for a farm in the outskirts of the city, where different organisations working on sustainable food production share space and facilities. We also opened a new recycling facility, combined with a skate park, alongside the canal. The wooden structure is partly made of a former horse stable and creates a big roof over the two uses. Then there’s the ZIN project, the former World Trade Centre of Brussels that we turned into a hybrid of offices, housing, and hotel facilities. And lastly, the renovation and reprogramming of the former railway museum inside the Brussels North station. Named TRACK, it’s a place we share as 51N4E with eight associations from the district for exhibitions, events and gatherings. To share an architectural and urban practice with organisations working on education, art, food and digital skills, inspires me every day.
What do you believe has been the most transformative project by 51N4E to date?
If it’s OK, I will skip this question. I find it very difficult to name only one.
→ Image
Ferme du Chaudron by 51N4E.
Photo: Sepideh Farvardin.
/ DIETER LEYSSEN: COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE AND URBAN SOCIOLOGY
Interview by Felicity Stewart
→ Felicity Stewart FRAIA is a Sydney-based director of Stewart Architecture.
→ Dieter Leyssen is an architect, urban sociologist, and partner at international Brussels-based practice
51N4E, where he co-founded studio Acte in 2019 focusing on projects in civic design, adaptive infrastructure and performative landscapes.
→ 51N4E’s participation in the 2025 Australian Architecture Conference is supported by Curtin University, the University of Western Australia and University of Notre Dame Australia.
The Australian Architecture Conference theme in 2025 is Architecture in Action. Do you see yourself as an activist within your profession? Not really, I think I am still working very much inside and with the system. I also think our institutional system in Europe has a lot of value, even though it is sometimes frustrating and slow, and undeniably built on historical and contemporary injustices and cruelties. But it provides structure on how to live and work together, and lots of possibilities when you use it in a creative way. On the other hand, I very much like the notion of action, of changing the status quo. This can be done through stepping out, or from within. At 51N4E we work together
with public authorities, with developers, with associations, with inhabitants and users, which requires an open and pragmatic approach when you want to change things. Take our infrastructure projects for instance, ideally, we would prefer them to have as little space for cars as possible, maximum biodiverse open space and water. But the reality is that car use is dominant, which forces us to make compromises, to look for the best possible, instead of the best. This requires a constant balancing of where you draw the red line. And, if being open for that question in architecture means being an activist in the profession, perhaps I am an activist in the end. ■
ZIN, World Trade Centre, Brussles, Belgium, 51N4E. Photo: Maxime Delvaux
Interview by Jessica Van-Young
ANDREIA TEIXEIRA: INNOVATING SYDNEY’S SKYLINE
We’re super excited to see Atlassian Central taking shape. The project is located at a key intersection in Sydney, bridging transit technology, ecology and education. Given its placement surrounded by heritage items –Central Station and the Parcel Shed – how did you navigate the balance between respecting the historical context and putting forward a future oriented architectural language?
That was a really interesting part of the project for us! The site and its context – near Central Station, and the heritage building and walls at the ground – were unique conditions that we first experienced when we toured the site with BVN and client group back in 2019, when we started the competition.
I would say the planning envelope was another super interesting aspect of the project as it promoted a clear separation between the heritage building and the tower – creating a unique blend of old and new architecture. This aligns with our high-rise design principles, considering both urban and building scales to engage with context, enhance the public realm, and contribute to the cityscape. Ultimately, it’s about people’s experience –both at ground level and inside the tower.
On Atlassian Central, we leveraged the planning envelope to preserve as much of the heritage-listed Parcel Building (formerly YHA) as possible, allowing us to celebrate the site’s existing character and history. This required an innovative and complex structural approach to minimise the tower’s footprint on the heritage building by transferring the tower’s perimeter column loads into the core and megacolumns. The result is the striking effect of a
contemporary tower seemingly floating above the heritage-activated ground. It’s absolutely amazing to walk around the site and see that effect already taking shape after so many years! The tower design offers an incredible opportunity to bring Atlassian and Dexus’s vision for a sustainable, future-focused workplace to life. As one of the tallest commercial hybrid timber buildings in the world, it sets new benchmarks in carbon-sequestering mass timber construction. The design is infused with human-centric elements, featuring energyefficient innovations like natural ventilation and expansive planted terraces that connect people to nature – all enhanced by Sydney’s temperate climate. What truly sets the project apart is its perfect blend of qualities – the program activation, the repurposing of a historic building, and a hybrid timber structure that reduces embodied carbon by 50% compared to standard construction. With an innovative climate strategy, including natural ventilation in a high-rise tower – a globally unique solution – the project also incorporates sustainable design elements like a highperformance facade for climate control and photovoltaics. The rooftop, with its stunning outdoor spaces, celebrates Sydney’s climate and outdoors culture. The tower’s architectural expression powerfully broadcasts the project’s sustainability and innovation in Sydney’s skyline.
And the slab doesn’t actually touch the heritage item Parcel Shed, does it?
There’s a breathing space – an urban room – between the heritage building and the first floor of the tower, preserving Sydney’s historic context while allowing the contemporary tower to float above, giving both structures a distinct presence. Atlassian Central’s urban design celebrates the historic shed and features large-scale public art by Brook Andrew, incorporating First Nations artwork that activates the public domain. In collaboration with Dexus and Atlassian, the design team identified the opportunity for this unique sculpture in the tower core wall above the shed, creating a landmark attraction in the Tech Precinct that invites the public to be part of this transformative journey.
So, it’s more than just a corporate office. It incorporates YHA, the youth hostel accommodation downstairs as well.
Yes. This project has several layers of activation. The first five floors are dedicated to the YHA program, activating the lower part of the building, while the office floors above provide a dynamic mix. Both Atlassian and YHA will engage the ground level with their lobby spaces.
I would say that the north-facing public lobby is a key feature – with Soo Sunny Park’s art piece framed in the double-height space of the shed. It will really create an amazing arrival experience, celebrating the site’s history, providing a sense of place for everyone.
Public lobbies are central to Sydney’s design excellence program, with projects like the Atlassian Tower and 55 Pitt Street Tower showcasing this vision, alongside other great examples in the city. These lobbies anchor the towers at street level, transforming them into vibrant civic spaces that serve the public – this approach isn’t yet a global standard and is rare even in cities like New York. They activate the ground level, incorporating First Nations art, celebrate natural materials, preserve heritage, and integrate with the environment – setting a new benchmark for urban design that reflects Sydney’s climate and culture.
This next question is on generative architecture and the energy performance of the building. Australia’s harsh sunlight and high summer temperatures have historically shaped vernacular architecture, often leading to structures with overhangs or “hats” to mitigate sun exposure. How have these environmental factors influenced the tower’s stacked habitat design?
They were a major inspiration in shaping our habitat design and building envelope. The concept behind the habitat design was to create a human-scale workplace environment featuring a hybrid timber structure and expansive, triple-height landscaped atriums facing central station and the public realm. These atriums are naturally ventilated and easily accessible from every office within the fourstorey habitat. Embracing Sydney’s climate, we worked closely with climate engineers to develop a climate-comfort strategy that maximises natural ventilation. We implemented a layered approach with different typologies, including fully naturally ventilated spaces in the landscaped parks and semi-conditioned spaces adjacent to them. These are all connected by an internal facade with automated sliding doors, physically and visually linking the office floors to the landscape areas. Additionally, innovative mechanically ventilated areas adjacent to the semi-conditioned spaces complete the climate comfort strategy.
The external facade design plays a crucial role in achieving this. It was carefully shaped and calibrated to meet multiple performance goals, incorporating vertical serration geometry with stacked sloped glass panels and horizontal shelves. This approach not only mitigates daylight but also creates an ideal opportunity for integrating photovoltaics on the horizontal shelves. Around the landscaped areas, the facade features automated openings that enable natural ventilation, enhancing the project’s innovation, sustainability, and overall wellbeing.
At SHoP, we’re deeply inspired by designing with a focus on local context and performance. We believe the most impactful sustainable practices emerge from a holistic approach that balances a deep connection to place and environmental responsibility with human wellbeing.
For too long, many commercial high rises have overlooked performance, climate, and culture, resulting in generic curtain walls across diverse cities – despite their vastly different
/ ANDREIA TEIXEIRA: INNOVATING SYDNEY’S SKYLINE
Interview by Jessica Van-Young
→ Jessica Van-Young RAIA is a Sydney-based designer at H&E Architects
→ Andreia Teixeira is an Associate Principal at SHoP and has played a key role in several of the firm’s most important commercial, cultural, and mixeduse projects.
→ Opposite, top Aerial view of Atlassian Central, Sydney Australia, SHoP Architects and BVN
→ Opposite, bottom Podium view
climates and contexts. These designs often rely heavily on internal systems, increasing air conditioning demand, which compromises both efficiency and comfort, and most importantly – space quality and workplace experience.
Yeah, sort of an afterthought.
You’re right – but it’s important to acknowledge that we’re heading toward a brighter future. We feel incredibly privileged to have worked on groundbreaking projects with extraordinary clients across the globe, empowering us to push boundaries and create contextually rich, innovative design solutions.
From the Uber and YouTube Headquarters in the US to Atlassian and 55 Pitt Street in Sydney, each project has been a catalyst for innovation, sustainability, and the creation of high-quality spaces deeply connected to their surroundings and built to last.
On the Atlassian Central project, the shared vision of Atlassian and Dexus allowed the architectural team to fully embrace these design principles. We were fortunate to collaborate with great partners like BVN, toptier structural and climate comfort engineers, and many other consultants. The collective dedication to the project vision ensured that its evolution remained closely aligned with the architectural principles set forth.
SHoP Architects has a clear focus on innovation, particularly with regards to facade design. For Atlassian Central, how did technology drive the design process?
At SHoP, we use in-house digital tools to foster innovation, collaboration, and communication throughout the design process. Primarily 3D model-based, our approach spans from ideation to manufacturing in some projects. These tools help generate concepts, accelerate iterations, integrate information, clarify components, and address fabrication challenges with contractors. We also employ AR/VR platforms to present concepts to clients. Our goal is to streamline the architectural process by providing realtime insights that speed up decision making.
Atlassian Central tower has a highly three-dimensional design, extending from the building envelope and cantilevers to intricate structural elements, including a hybrid timber
structure and complex interfaces – all requiring a high level of understanding and resolution. The facade geometry, seamlessly wrapping around the exoskeleton and cantilevers with automated windows and photovoltaics, became a focal point for our computational expertise. Tools like Grasshopper, in-house scripts, and CATIA, led by our team, were pivotal in shaping and refining the design. These technologies not only accelerated our design solutions but also enabled an exceptional level of detail, essential for aligning final design solutions with subcontractors.
I can’t emphasise enough how transformative these tools were during the global pandemic, when much of the design development occurred remotely. We leveraged these technologies to refine and optimise the design, quickly share detailed models, and communicate seamlessly with the client, consultants, local partners, and early subcontractors – all while navigating multiple time zones.
Equally important, strong partnerships are key to the success of any complex project. On Atlassian Central, collaborating with BUILT (contractor), the client group, and the design team has been an incredibly rewarding experience. Together, we’ve tackled challenges head-on, propelling the project forward at every turn. Thanks to this open-minded, collaborative spirit, we’ve overcome challenges together and brought this design vision to life. ■
OPENING THE DOORS OF ARCHITECTURE: A
CONVERSATION HUIA RERITI FNZIA
Words by Jamileh Jahangiri
When Huia Reriti stepped into the presidency of Te Kāhui Whaihanga New Zealand Institute of Architects (NZIA) in 2024, he did so with a quiet conviction: to shift the perception of architecture in Aotearoa and broaden the conversation around who it’s for and who it involves. As the first Māori person to lead the institute, his presidency signals not only a symbolic milestone but also a cultural and strategic recalibration for the profession.
In the lead-up to the 2025 Australian Architecture Conference, where Reriti will speak as part of the program, I spoke with him about housing, cultural frameworks, and how we might begin reimagining architecture as more public, more connected, and more grounded.
“Only 3% of buildings in New Zealand use an architect,” Reriti says early in our conversation. “That’s a powerful number. And it shows how far we still have to go in engaging the wider public.”
FROM ELITE PRACTICE TO PUBLIC DIALOGUE
Reriti speaks candidly about the need to reposition architecture: not as a rarefied practice of the elite, but as a visible, generous and accessible profession. An example of this is Open Christchurch (a collaboration with Te Putahi Centre for Architecture and City Making), a local iteration of the UK’s Open House London model, organised by Dr Jessica Halliday, Director of Te Pūtahi Centre for Architecture
and City Making. The event invites the public into significant buildings and architectural conversations, aiming to foster architectural literacy and connection across the city. “We want people to come inside, to literally walk into the places we shape that never had the opportunity to experience before and have a conversation. It’s about demystifying what we do,” Reriti explains. This ethos of openness also plays out in the Institute’s local awards, which now regularly include clients, consultants, and the general public. The aim, he says, is simple: “To show people our world and invite them in.”
It’s a recalibration of the architect’s role and one that directly addresses a major tension Reriti sees in the broader profession. “A lot of people don’t really understand what an architect does anymore. They think the builder is the go-to person. But if you look at history, the architect used to be the master builder.” He sees part of his work as rebuilding this trust and visibility –not just within the profession but with the public, government and media. “Right now, in NZ
media, we’re being called time wasters. People are losing faith. So, we need to be strategic, speak science, back up what we say with research, and stop talking only about beauty or ideals.”
For Reriti, it’s about practical research with clear outcomes. “When we do research and design, we must ask: what’s it for? What’s it going to enable?” This grounded approach extends to housing. When asked if there’s a way for architects to engage in public housing while still retaining design integrity meaningfully, he’s honest: “That’s a hard question. And it needs high-level research and serious investment, but one thing is clear, it should be beyond ideals.” He’s clear that the profession needs to come down the ladder. “We need to think about architecture that isn’t just about award-winning moments, but about doing the work, alongside government, developers, and communities.”
A VALUES-BASED APPROACH TO DESIGN
One of the most significant shifts under Reriti’s leadership is the embedding of Te Ao Māori into the NZIA’s institutional and design culture. At the centre of this is Te Kawenata o Rata, a covenant that formalises a long-standing partnership between the NZIA and Ngā Aho – a kaupapa Māori network of design professionals committed to culturally and environmentally sustainable design.
“It’s not about having a separate stream for Māori architecture,” he explains. “It’s about having one voice – shared, respectful, value-driven.”
As part of the kawenata, Ngā Aho now holds a seat on the NZIA Board, ensuring Indigenous design values are present in the Institute’s leadership and decisions. But Reriti is careful not to oversimplify the path forward.
“It’s not about taking someone else’s values and trying to be them. It’s about finding the value base we all need to follow. I think it’s about living the values of your culture and applying what makes sense to you without disrespecting where it comes from.”
He’s looking forward to asking similar questions when he visits Australia. “I want to hear from the Aboriginal architectural community – how do you put your treaty voices into the design process and outcome? And how do we all learn together, not just from one another, but as one?”
ARCHITECTURE AS CULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE
Sustainability is central to Reriti’s thinking, but again, it’s framed through a cultural lens. He speaks proudly of the NZIA awarding the Gold Medal to Hugh Tennent and Ewan Brown, whose project Ngā Mokopuna in Wellington is currently being certified for the Living Building Challenge, one of the most ambitious environmental standards globally.
“It’s exciting because it shows that kaupapa Māori values and deep environmental responsibility aren’t at odds. They actually align. It’s about doing the right thing, with integrity.”
He sees the role of the Institute as one of amplifying, supporting, and training architects to meet these challenges, not just through CPD points or seminars, but through a more courageous kind of professional development: one that invites values, culture and research into the core of design thinking.
Across the Tasman, into the conversation
As our conversation draws to a close, I ask Reriti what he hopes to bring to the 2025 Australian Architecture Conference in May. “I genuinely enjoy sharing my culture with others,” he responds. “But I also want to learn. I want to ask questions, not just give answers.” He sees the conference as a platform to challenge how we practice, how we engage with the community, and how we understand place. “To my Australian colleagues, I’d ask, how are you creating works that reflect people and place? That truly do that?” What emerges through the conversation is not just a philosophy of design but a mode of practice: one grounded in dialogue, equity, and the slow, iterative work of building relationships. It’s not about importing ideas but about opening doors – to buildings, to stories, and to each other. ■
Jamileh Jahangiri
→ Huia Reriti is a trailblazing leader and architect from New Zealand. He is known for championing culturally responsive design and advancing equity within the architectural profession. As president of Te Kāhui Whaihanga New Zealand Institute of Architects, he has been a vocal advocate for indigenous architecture and the integration of Māori perspectives into design practice.
→
RAIA is a Sydney-based architect and academic and founder of Studio Orsi.
FATOU KINÉ DIEYE:
ENGINEERING VALUE LOOPS
Words by Ben Berwick
“If you’re not designing systems, you’re just decorating problems”
Cities are often depicted as engines of prosperity, yet across Africa, a paradox exists: urbanisation accelerates, but economic resilience stalls. Cities rise while supply chains fracture; raw resources are exported as finished goods are imported. Confronting this disconnect stands Fatou Kiné Dieye, a Rwanda-based consultant whose career defies easy categorisation. Trained as an architect and urban planner, she has spent over a decade designing not just buildings, but the policy frameworks and supply chain mechanics necessary to build Sub-Saharan Africa’s next generation of sustainable, inclusive cities.
From leading a Swiss Cooperation’s construction industry transformation program across Africa’s Great Lakes region, to directing affordable housing strategies for the City of Kigali, her work bridges the gap between global sustainability rhetoric and ground-level pragmatism. Perhaps surprisingly, for Australia, her insights are not just provocative – they’re a survival manual.
When Fatou chose to forgo a traditional architecture internship to dissect the lifecycle of a pink shirt at Gap Inc., her peers may have seen it as a detour. Yet this unorthodox pivot – tracing the lifecycle of a shirt from design to global retail – would become the intellectual scaffolding of her work in Rwanda, where she now confronts one of the defining paradoxes of our age: how to build cities that function as economic accelerators, not liabilities. “Buildings aren’t just
structures; they’re the sum of policies, supply chains, and economic logic,” she says. This radical redefinition of architecture, forged in the heart of Africa’s hypergrowth urbanisation, is both a technical adjustment and a philosophical reckoning. For Australia, a nation clinging to the myth of perpetual resource wealth while its cities buckle under speculative excess, her work is an impetus: architecture must evolve from a discipline of aesthetics to one of systemic orchestration.
Rwanda’s urban population grew faster than any nation’s between 1998 and 2018, yet its GDP flatlined – a dissonance Fatou attributes to a disconnect between urban growth and industrial capacity. “Asia industrialised alongside urbanisation. Here, urbanisation outpaces industry. We’re building cities without engines,” she explains. By 2060, Africa will construct three times the floor area of China and India combined, but without localised material ecosystems, this growth risks becoming a debt-fuelled illusion. One of her responses, the Rwamagana District Eco-Industrial Park, rejects the Global North’s cargo cult sustainability. While foreign advisors pushed imported solutions like bamboo and recycled plastics, Fatou prioritised stabilised soil blocks and phased recycling. “Bamboo sounds green until you realise there’s no supply chain here yet – no factories, no skilled labour. Sustainability isn’t aspirational; it’s applied”.
The park operates on strategic incrementalism; recycling scales only when waste streams and policy align, avoiding the hypocrisy of token greenwashing.
Australia’s economy suffers a parallel pathology. We mine iron ore but import steel. Rwanda digs clay but imports cement. Both nations are trapped in a system that exports raw resources while importing finished goods – a pattern Fatou critiques as a failure to convert wealth into value. This dynamic, akin to a quarry mentality, leaves both countries hostage to volatile global markets. Rwanda’s reliance on foreign cement mirrors Australia’s dependence on Chinese steel: a surrender of agency disguised as pragmatism. “It’s not a technical problem. It’s a failure to imagine systems rooted in what we have.”
Fatou’s battle with seismic code and regulation exemplifies architecture’s untapped frontier: policy as a design tool. Rwanda’s original building regulations, copied from Europe, mandated unreasonably robust structures – a standard that rendered affordable housing impossible. “Policy isn’t neutral. A wall thickness dictates who gets housed and who doesn’t.”
Revised rules balance safety with economic reality, proving that technical standards are inherently ideological. In Australia, similar dynamics plague sustainability efforts. British-derived codes mandate half-metre-thick earthen walls in
deserts – a standard designed for English rain, not Australian aridity. Copy-pasting regulations isn’t just lazy; it’s intellectual colonialism. The unexamined adoption of Eurocentric norms, whether seismic codes or sustainability metrics, perpetuates exclusion. “When you design for a fictional global standard, you design for nobody.”
For Fatou, transforming cities into engines of equity requires architects to abandon siloed design and embrace policymaking as a core competency. In Rwanda, she brokers between donors fixated on abstract ideals and officials wedded to outdated methods, reframing debates about sustainability through a lens of economic self-interest. “External partners often push solutions untethered to local realities. I show them stabilised soil employs more people, costs less, and works,” she says. This approach transcends geography. In Australia, where reliance on imported steel and volatile global markets mirrors Rwanda’s cement dependency, her model demands systemic shifts: tax incentives for retrofits, zoning laws that penalise demolition, and procurement policies privileging local supply chains. “Architects must stop apologising for pragmatism,” she argues. “Circularity isn’t a buzzword – it’s survival.”
Fatou’s most urgent lesson lies beneath the surface. “In Rwanda, hills are Swiss cheese – unmapped pit latrines, erratic water tables. Build without understanding that, and
→ Image Mpazi Rehousing Project, Kigali, Rwanda
→ Ben Berwick RAIA is the director and founder of Prevalent.
→ Fatou Kiné Dieye is a consultant specialising in the design of buildings, policy frameworks and the corresponding supply chain mechanics necessary for building Sub-Saharan Africa’s next generation of green and inclusive cities.
→ Fatou Kiné Dieye’s participation in the 2025 Australian Architecture Conference is supported by the University of Melbourne.
/ FATOU KINÉ DIEYE: ENGINEERING VALUE LOOPS
Words by Ben Berwick
→ Image
Concept Master Plan for an Eco-Industrial Park for Building
Materials by Fatou Dieye & Kiaron
Aiken for Skat Consulting Rwanda Ltd., 2024
cities collapse,” she warns. This subterranean crisis reflects Australia’s, where floods and fires expose decaying stormwater systems and brittle energy grids. Her ideal project – a GIS platform mapping Kigali’s subsurface networks – would transform vulnerability into strategy. “If politicians saw sewers layered with property titles, they’d design differently.” For Australian architects, this subterranean imperative is existential. Climate collapse demands designs that integrate flood corridors, fire buffers, and aquifer recharge zones – systems invisible to the untrained eye. “Architecture’s obsession with the visible is a historic blind spot. The future is underground.”
Fatou’s work rejects architecture’s complicity in the quarry mentality – the extraction and export of raw resources, whether minerals or human capital. “Our role isn’t to chase aesthetics, but to engineer value loops –cities that produce more than they consume.”
In Rwanda, this means cities rooted in clay and labour, not foreign debt. In Australia, it demands dismantling the myth of endless mineral wealth to prioritise self-sufficient supply chains. The profession’s survival hinges on a paradigm shift. Architects must become fluent in policy, logistics, and subterranean engineering – not to disrupt, but to orchestrate. “A building is the end of a process,” Fatou concludes. “If you don’t understand the process, you’ve already failed.”
For Australia, clinging to resource complacency, and Africa, racing against urbanisation’s clock, the mandate is clear: architects must redefine their role as system builders. Start with what you have, not what you wish you had. Design the engine, not just the car. ■
EPD’s are now available for over 300 locally-made brick and masonry products from 8 of our manufacturing sites across Australia.
more at
RETHINKING HOUSING SOLUTIONS: A NEW STRATEGIC APPROACH TO ADDRESS THE CRISIS
Words by Laura Harding and Damian Madigan as told to David McCrae
In 2025, the global housing crisis continues to loom large, with media outlets endlessly discussing the pressing need for more homes. However, despite the constant talk, a certain level of “housing fatigue” has emerged in the public’s perception. The ongoing conversations often seem repetitive, offering few tangible solutions or fresh perspectives.
At the very core of this shift is the desire to address the housing crisis by moving beyond large-scale, one-off projects and toward scalable, repeatable, and economical solutions that can be implemented across various metropolitan areas. Architects are now exploring how to develop real-world applications that have a measurable, lasting impact – rather than focusing exclusively on high-profile projects that capture attention for their size or ambition.
REDEFINING HOUSING SOLUTIONS
The conversation about housing in 2025 is about reimagining what is possible. One key example is South Australia’s innovative “Bluefield Housing” model. This new form of co-located housing represents a breakthrough in land use, combining design research with policy to create housing solutions that are both scalable and repeatable. By breaking down planning barriers, Bluefield Housing offers a glimpse
into how architecture can contribute to a more sustainable and affordable housing future. As architects continue to grapple with the challenge of creating housing that meets demand while upholding high standards of quality, the discussion about what constitutes “quality” in housing becomes increasingly important. In this context, “quality” can no longer be narrowly defined by luxury or high-end aesthetics. Rather, it must be about delivering homes that meet the practical needs of residents while being affordable, well-designed, and sustainable.
THE ROLE OF ARCHITECTS IN HOUSING
One of the most pressing concerns within the architectural community is the limited role architects play in the broader housing policy conversation. Often, architects are brought in as consultants only after economic and
policy decisions have been made, leaving little room for their expertise to shape the project’s direction. This not only limits their impact but also diminishes the potential for more sustainable, user-centred housing developments. Architects must be integrated into the process from the very beginning, influencing both policy and design decisions.
This point is underscored by the current debates around the Architects Act and its potential integration into the proposed new Building Bill. There is a growing fear that the profession’s role in shaping quality housing policy may be further marginalized. If architects are sidelined in favour of economic and policydriven decisions, we risk compromising the quality of housing, which ultimately affects the lives of those who rely on these homes.
BALANCING SPEED WITH QUALITY
In response to the housing crisis, many governments and policymakers are prioritising speed and cost-efficiency in construction. The Productivity Commission’s report, for instance, emphasises the need for more housing quickly, but often at the expense of quality. This creates a disconnect between the urgency of housing production and the importance of high-quality design.
Quality, however, should not be seen as an obstacle. On the contrary, it should be viewed as an essential component of longterm housing success. High-quality design fosters community buy-in, ensuring that housing projects are not only functional but also enduring and beneficial to residents. Architects must find ways to balance the demand for rapid construction with their commitment to delivering well-designed, sustainable homes.
The key to achieving this balance lies in embracing innovative construction methods and materials. New technologies, modular construction, and pre-fabrication offer promising solutions for delivering large numbers of homes quickly without compromising design integrity. In doing so, architects can help bridge the gap between the need for speed and the desire for high-quality housing.
THE IMPORTANCE OF COLLABORATION
Tackling the housing crisis is a monumental task that cannot be solved by architects alone. Collaboration across disciplines is essential to creating effective, scalable housing solutions. Architects must work alongside construction
partners, urban planners, policymakers, and local communities to develop housing that addresses the needs of all stakeholders.
Moreover, government involvement is crucial in streamlining the approval processes for housing projects. Local councils, such as those in North Sydney, are often overwhelmed by the sheer volume of development applications, leading to delays in housing approvals. To overcome these bottlenecks, it is necessary to advocate for better funding, resources, and regulatory support to expedite the approval and construction processes.
EXPLORING SCALABLE, INCREMENTAL HOUSING
While large-scale housing developments often dominate the conversation, it is essential to explore alternative models that offer incremental solutions. One such model focuses on low-scale projects, such as alterations and additions for multiple dwellings on single residential allotments. These projects offer a more community-centred approach to housing, providing smaller-scale developments that have minimal adverse impacts on existing neighbourhoods. Incremental housing offers a potential pathway for suburban areas that are often overlooked in favor of more ambitious, highprofile projects. By focusing on smaller, more manageable developments, architects can create housing solutions that are both practical and sustainable. However, further research and quantifiable feedback are needed to assess whether these smaller projects can serve as a viable alternative to larger developments.
ADDRESSING THE ECONOMICS OF HOUSING DESIGN
The tension between economics and design is one of the most significant challenges facing architects working in the housing sector. The need for faster, cheaper housing often clashes with the desire for high-quality, thoughtful design. In response, architects must find creative solutions that allow for high-quality housing within tight budgets and timeframes. One potential solution is to embrace alternative construction methods and materials that reduce costs while maintaining design integrity. By rethinking building techniques and exploring new technologies, architects can make high-quality housing more affordable and accessible to a broader range of people.
→ David McCrae RAIA is co-founder and principal of M+M Architects.
→ Laura Harding RAIA is a Sydney-based architect specialising in urban, multiresidential, and public space projects. A widely published architectural critic, she combines design expertise with critical dialogue on equitable and resilient housing.
→ Damian Madigan FRAIA is a registered architect and creator of the Bluefield concept, which integrates established suburbs into the housing supply.
/ RETHINKING HOUSING
SOLUTIONS: A NEW STRATEGIC APPROACH TO ADDRESS THE CRISIS
HOUSING QUALITY IN A REAL ESTATEDRIVEN CULTURE
A major issue in the public discourse surrounding housing is the prevailing notion that quality is synonymous with luxury. In the world of real estate, quality is often defined by expensive finishes, high-end materials, and large square footage. However, this narrow definition overlooks the fundamental aspects of good housing design –functionality, sustainability, and affordability.
Architects must challenge this perception and expand the conversation about what constitutes “quality” in housing. Quality should not be confined to luxury; it should encompass all the factors that make a home liveable and accessible. This includes affordable construction costs, energy-efficient designs, and layouts that meet the needs of diverse populations.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR HOUSING DESIGN
Looking ahead, the future of housing design lies in developing innovative, adaptable models that can accommodate the changing needs of communities. New models, such as colocated housing and Bluefield developments, offer exciting possibilities for creating sustainable, high-quality communities that can grow and evolve over time.
Additionally, the role of public spaces within housing developments cannot be overstated. High-density housing should
not come at the expense of communal areas and green spaces. Providing residents with access to parks, gardens, and other public spaces enhances their quality of life and fosters a sense of community. Local governments should prioritize the inclusion of these spaces in housing developments to reduce resistance to higher-density living.
CONCLUSION: ARCHITECTS AT THE FOREFRONT OF HOUSING SOLUTIONS
As we move into 2025 and beyond, the goal is to bring architects back to the forefront of the housing conversation. Too often, architects have been sidelined in favour of policymakers, developers, and economists. Yet architects bring unique expertise and insights that are critical to the creation of sustainable, user-centred housing.
This shift requires a more inclusive, broad discussion, one that encourages collaboration between all stakeholders— architects, urban planners, policymakers, and communities. Only by working together can we create housing solutions that are not only functional and affordable but also inspiring and sustainable. The future of housing lies in reimagining what is possible, and architects have a crucial role to play in shaping that future.
Bluefield Housing as an extension of the Missing Middle
ABBIE GALVIN: THE NSW HOUSING PATTERN BOOK
Interview by Kieran McInerney
It might have been Jennifer Taylor who said that in the 1970’s, Australia had the largest percentage of architect design homes in the world. There were lots of providers, even the Women’s Weekly had a plan of the week, it was just in the general culture. So I was wondering; Is your ambition that big for the NSW Housing Pattern book?
When you look at the impact of pattern books in Australia and around the world, they go well beyond, the Beachcomber, Pettit and Sevitt, the ones that you saw in the Women’s Weekly, and ones provided by the RAIA.
If you go back further to the 1800s books were being brought over by new settlers and this was where pattern books really began. But they were not the kind of pattern that we imagine now.
The 70s project homes were plans without much deviation, whereas I think the earlier Pattern books were more of an inspiration.
You could follow a pattern word for word, wall for wall. Or see it as an inspiration for a villa in the country. The pattern books were so varied they’re amazing. The Museums of History NSW has got a terrific collection, as has the State Library.
The colonial patterns go from cow sheds and workers cottages to castles and churches. So, it was everything you needed for the development of a new good society.
Much of it was about that everyone should have access to good design.
One of the first pattern books that came to Australia was Edward Gyfford’s “Designs for elegant cottages and small villas”.
It was about how you provide quality design to many people, with an emphasis on buildings that supported people’s health and well-being in a much more fundamental sense than we think about now.
By the early 1900s, we were developing our own patterns, and which were often trade catalogue focused. Manufacturers would develop a design and add their own products to it, elements more suitable to our climate, the balconies and the balustrades and etcetera.
There were patterns for terraces?
There were, absolutely. There were first, second, third and fourth rate terraces depending on how wide they were, what the frontage to the street was, how tall they were. Fourth rate was quite often a single storey worker’s cottage. Then in the 1950s there were architect-designed project homes, and project home villages.
Like for instance Carlingford.
Yeah, exactly, and Petitt and Sevitt. And then the project home industry said, “well we can do this on our own. We don’t need architects. We think we’ve got this design thing sorted.” And so off they went. So we still have pattern books.
Do you think the new pattern books could have a similar effect upon the general culture?
Yeah, they could. One of the real opportunities with the pattern book is to put design first and foremost when we’re thinking about designing a home. But we are now focusing on attached dwellings, not detached dwellings.
ABBIE GALVIN: THE NSW HOUSING PATTERN BOOK
London Housing Corporation used to have patterns for apartment buildings. We’ve got some great drawings from their archives, but we don’t see that now in our market.
All this is working to try and make the process of delivering low and mid-rise housing easier.
Because that whole missing middle of housing is missing for a number of reasons.
It has been difficult to find areas where it’s permissible and so the government has made a series of changes to change that level of permissibility.
The other thing is that low and midrise housing can often be at the margins of development feasibility. And if you’re ready to take the risk to move into Class 2, then you’re probably going to jump and get a much greater development profit at taller towers.
Is this the delivery question, getting builders interested?
A builder who might think, “I’ve got the capacity to build a four-storey apartment building, but it’s going to be a nightmare with neighbours and approvals. However, if I have a pre-approval, it’s a lot more interesting to me”. We have also focussed on the lot characteristics of both low and mid-rise so that semis and terraces can be looked at on an individual lot. And the same with midrise. We’ve analysed all the TOD areas that are enabling mid-rise housing but we’re not concentrating on big, amalgamated lots.
A large lot can be difficult and too complex for a pattern development. The specific place focused skill of an architect is needed to solve those problems. But we can target an individual lot narrow lot.
On a larger lot a developer will know that the pattern for four or six storey apartment buildings is designed and pre-approved.
This can inform master plans before they commence rather than trying to sort of retrofit.
And finance will become easier too if you’ve got pre-approval?
Yeah, we have advisors providing buildability advice, financial feasibility, cost estimates etc. Then a developer can see that there’s five patterns to consider, to refine and develop.
For instance, a small apartment building pattern could be adapted to suit a Community Housing provider. So, there is flexibility or adaptability within the planning, but there’s probably also things you can’t change.
Yep, there are. There’s a clear list of the things that can be adjusted. A palette of materials you can change; the pattern can be widened at a certain point or you might be able to change bathroom and kitchen layouts. If your site is long you might be able to add a bedroom on the back. Your garage might become a bedroom… there’s all these elements that you can add. And there’s the non-negotiables you can’t change, particularly in regard to the overall form and appearance of the building. The architects have been asked what is fundamental to this design. They’ve also developed details of those key elements. Its not just planning and the amenity, but architecture with its own character.
What about sloping sites?
Yeah, sloping sites is a good one. The architects have been asked to look at what level of slope can be handled in their patterns. Some can cope with more change than others just by nature of the design.
Great.
It sounds easy, Kieran.
I know it’s not.
At the moment we are beginning to look at all the various applications. It’s a really challenging project but an exciting one.
And it’s also an exciting one for architects and architecture in general. Absolutely. In a lot of these instances, people wouldn’t be using architects’ designs.
What about crazy trapezoidal sites ?
There’s always gonna be a point at which a pattern will break and is not the pattern anymore. If you have a pattern on a trapezoid site but it means that you’re not maximising the site, then that’s a decision you have to make. It’s like, am I happy to take this pattern? I could stretch it a little bit, but I’m not going to make it a trapezoid. It could be a beautiful garden instead.
I see that you are chairing a panel at the
conference. (Breaking ground; Architects and government uniting for housing solutions.)
Yes, its focus is what agency we have as architects to try and have an impact on housing.
I’m keen to have a deliverer on the panel and an economist because we need to see ourselves as part of a whole suite of specialists helping to solve some of these problems. Innovation is a big part of that. We have struggled for a long time to get the volumes and the interests, for example for prefabrication, which seems to make complete sense but it’s not something that we’ve been able to get off the ground in Australia.
When I think about patterns, I think of the Case Study House programme in California but also three storey walk ups in Marrickville built by two Greek cousins with a wheelbarrow and a ute. Mm hmm. Yeah. And that’s what we’re aiming for with mid-rise apartments on infill sites. Sites from 15 to 21 metres wide. Fairly narrow. And as I said, they’re not relying on site amalgamation.
There are all those examples from the 50s, the sort of the cream and red brick walkups. But there’s also those wonderful examples from the 1930s in Rose Bay, Wollstonecraft and Dulwich Hill and many of them just sit within suburban streets. And many wonderful examples with good landscaping. We’re putting a landscape guide with all the patterns as well.
Do you have a favourite historical pattern, which charms you the most?
Some of the early cottages are gorgeous, but I think the most beautiful one was Lyons Terrace which was opposite Hyde Park in Sydney. It was based on English patterns with elements from Australian trade manufacturers.
With a row of 10 or 20 terraces it becomes a group as well as an individual thing. A magnificent big building that you’re a part of.
That’s right, they make a streetscape in their own right, the beautiful continuity of them. I think the other Australian pattern books that are very sweet, are the Hudson’s homes.
The Hudson ready cut homes? Yeah, and our own house, which is quite basic, we think is a Hudson’s home and we love it.
Well, great. Thanks, Abbie. Lovely to chat, Kieran. See you. ■
→ Kieran McInerney RAIA is an architect and practice director based in Sydney.
→ Abbie Galvin LFRAIA is the NSW Government Architect and former principal at BVN.
Interview by David Welsh
NEILL MCCLEMENTS: THE ELIZABETH LINE
I’m excited to hear more of the story behind Grimshaw’s work on London’s Elizabeth Line, which I think is particularly relevant with the recent opening of the Sydney Metro which we’re all very much in love with at the moment, which again Grimshaw have been involved with through the design and delivery of Martin Place Station
Yeah, it looks like a real triumph. I’m looking forward to visiting it when I’m when I’m in town. I’ve seen the photographs, and it looks fantastic, but I haven’t had a chance to ride the train, so that should be fun.
Back to the Elizabeth Line; it was a huge undertaking, with seven different architecture practices working across the various stations.
The project itself was quite unique. A unique challenge for the city in transport terms – in that London, traditionally large trains travelling big distances used to stop on the outskirts of the city and we had this kind of ring of termini around the city where you would get out and then go into the London Underground to travel around the city.
With the Elizabeth Line, it’s a slightly different model that utilises large 240-metrelong trains. They go into twin tunnels and travel right under the city but continue on with a metro-style service and frequency. This is quite new for London. It’s been quite transformative because it’s bringing large numbers of people – around 1.5 million people – within a 45-minute commute of the CBD. On top of the number of people, it’s also shortened travel times across the city. So,
it’s opened up connections that didn’t exist before. Some say it’s shrunk the city by doing so, so that that’s a bit of background to just the project.
Architecturally, a point of interest is the level of cross-industry collaboration that was required. Any infrastructure project is always collaborative in terms of its heavy focus on engineering and with large contracting teams. Just looking at it purely from an architectural collaboration; however, it was a really unique experience for me, where 10 new stations were built within central London, each with a separate architect, all of them with high quality, wellknown architectural practices, with our team which was leading the line-wide design. Developing a strategy with all of the architectural teams in terms of what is a linewide coherent experience for passengers was something we had to work out together.
I’m really interested in that design duality – where you need to develop an idea of commonality to understand the line overall, while also introducing an identity to each individual station. The Tube has a great history of doing that – for example Tottenham Court Road, with its wonderful Paolozzi mosaics.
How did you balance that –commonality of line while dealing with different architects looking to find an identity for each individual stop? It’s an interesting conundrum. It was very much a conundrum. Especially in the first few months on the
project where we’re all meeting each other and working out how to work together. It was a real challenge to get some clarity. But once achieved that clarity, there was a positive story – seeing the architecture practices working together in a in a way that led to a great outcome for the city.
Looking back to what we’re seeing in the new Sydney Metro stations – in trying to establish an identity for each station – the use of public art was one of the key mechanisms utilised to do this, particularly First Nations artists. Did public art play a part in the way the Elizabeth Line unfolded?
Yes it did. Often an art program is funded as part of a budget within the project. But it for the Elizabeth Line, a lot of the art was actually funded by private entities located around the areas that the stations were built. Each station teamed up with a local art gallery, which was quite interesting. Each art gallery then teamed up with a local artist they were affiliated with, which led to art installations across a range of mediums in different locations along the passenger journey.
Quick question which may lead to a long answer – what were three of the biggest challenges the project faced?
The first one we’ve talked about: how to develop a clear strategy and vision for the architecture with many voices – understanding what each station was about and what the architects were trying to achieve and from there distilling down to a strong, line-wide vision for the project.
There’s an identity strategy which I can talk about. Because of the scale of the stations, a clear picture emerged whereby, you’ve got these different teams, each responsible for ensuring the stations are really integrated sensitively within the historic fabric of London – which makes absolute sense – a bespoke response at street level, but as you move below ground, the engineering gets really much more similar, particularly within the five tunnel stations in the middle of the line where the engineering below ground is almost identical. But as the passenger gets closer to the train, the line-wide identity increases – then once you’re on the train, it’s a very consistent experience.
The second design challenge for us was how to humanise the experience for passengers deep underground. How to create a space that’s pleasant to use, easy to navigate, and makes for a calm experience. Creating something that people enjoy in their morning commute as opposed to every-day dread. At the forefront was the understanding that the Underground experience can be tough, it can be stressful, and we wanted to design around that. The platforms are twice the length of a typical underground platform – that could be really oppressive. We needed to develop whole layers to create a civilised environment ensuring the stations don’t become cluttered over time as the design evolves, design ideas to keep the stations clean, calm, and pleasant to move through. The challenge was dealing with this unique scale.
→ David Welsh RAIA is a director and founder of Welsh+Major and the Architecture Bulletin editorial committee co-chair.
→ Neill McClements is a partner at Grimshaw with over 25 years of experience spanning rail, metro, and high-profile infrastructure projects, including the prize-winning Elizabeth Line in London. Neill’s insights on complex network planning offer a unique perspective on innovative infrastructure design.
→ Left Curved ceilings and white walls unify the station.
Photo: Nick Hufton
→ Far right Clear partitions separate waiting passengers from arriving trains.
Photo: Nick Hufton
/ NEILL MCCLEMENTS: THE ELIZABETH LINE
Interview by David Welsh
The ergonomics of transport spaces is something that is seldom talked about, so it’s great to hear how it has been considered in such detail. It’s something I haven’t heard an architect speak about before. With projects such as this, often the engineering dominates, so trying to get some sort of humanity back into them is something I think is quite wonderful to learn about.
We did a whole series of mock ups and prototypes including a full-scale tunnel in a contractor’s warehouse in the outskirts of London. And that was so important, to bring a lot of the project team to site, just to communicate the scale because people didn’t realise this. Often people don’t understand drawings and they think it’s a normal London Underground tunnel. But to be able to show people the scale and the approach that we’re trying to achieve – the things in the architecture that I mentioned, about the lighting, acoustics and decluttering and so on – was so important.
Crucial to getting buy-in to the project, we produced a series of client prototypes. Just getting lots of feedback into the design. From the operator and specialist
input from contractors early in the process. So, when the project went out to tender we could say to the contractors this is what we want, this is the level of quality.
This is a really key piece of the story, actually – because it’s so big that you have to have different contractors at each station, that could have been badly coordinated – but by putting that effort in to get mock ups and prototypes for all the contractors to see when tendering and putting their price in, it really helped smooth the whole process.
The third challenge was maintaining effective communication, which is so important when working at this scale. When you think that there was a total of around 80,000 people who worked on the project over 13 years, and to keep that original design intent communicated through the process, while also adapting and refining it, working through processes of engagement and feedback and so on, is a challenge.
That shows the resilience of all involved right there.
Very much so, yeah. ■
Photo by Nick Hufton
Quietly audacious.
Amidst the natural setting of Victoria’s Dandenong Ranges, a new visitor centre for the Puffing Billy heritage railway threads its way through the landscape with a distinctively dark exterior.
TERROIR has designed the Puffing Billy Railway Visitor Centre to be ruggedly cloaked in COLORBOND® steel roofing and cladding. Using the dark shade of Monument® Matt finish, it achieves new levels of functionality while speaking poetically to both landscape and locomotive history.
Be inspired by this and other award-winning steel designs by visiting SteelSelect.com/SteelProfile
STEEL PROFILE®, COLORBOND®, BlueScope, the BlueScope brand mark and ® colour names are registered trade marks of BlueScope Steel Limited.
LEARN MORE
EMMA WILLIAMSON AND HY WILLIAM CHAN: SHAPING PERSPECTIVES
Interview by Mark Raggatt
The relationship between our cities and our communities is inextricably linked – do we judge our communities by the cities we build, or do we judge our cities by the communities that shape them? In Australia, people seem to prefer suburban living, often choosing houses larger than they need. We have one of the lowest household populations in the world, with fewer than two people per home on average. This preference for low-density, sprawling suburbs suggests a kind of urban illiteracy – we continue to build outward as if it’s a sustainable approach. And yet, this pattern is also a reflection of democracy. Should we realign this desire, encouraging a different urban model, or is there still room for this suburban ideal within the future of our cities?
HY William Chan (HYWC): Without delving into the Australian dream and housing in general, I think the vision we worked on with residents and citizens as part of the 2050 strategy really revolves around safeguarding the public interest – protecting and defending what might be lost. Whether it’s a park that could be sold off and privatised under a change of government, or our trees and access to fresh air, especially in the wake of future pandemics and bushfires. At the end of 2019, before the pandemic, people were already wearing masks in the CBD due to the fires. We need to start thinking about
different scenarios because more extreme ones are unfolding. That’s when we can take a proactive stance. The reactive approach, like needing to respond yesterday, is too late. We must invest in cities and ensure that governments have foresight, working with visionaries to protect our future. That doesn’t mean things can’t evolve. I’ve personally seen how the Lord Mayor has evolved over the past two decades, recognising her role as an independent who serves the community, but also acknowledging that the community itself evolves.
Emma Williamson (EW): Fundamentally, we need to define what we mean by good design. I’d argue it’s not just about aesthetics. Good design considers context, function, sustainability, and amenity – only then does it arrive at aesthetics. In Western Australia, these principles are embedded in planning policy. I reference them often: there are ten principles, and aesthetics is the last. One of architects’ greatest skills is their comfort with complexity. Good architects expand the scope of a problem as much as possible before synthesising and simplifying. That’s not a natural approach for many professionals, but it’s central to design thinking. This ability to navigate complexity also makes architects natural facilitators – bringing together multiple, often conflicting voices. If stakeholders disagree, that’s okay. Our role is to reconcile competing perspectives and uses. Architects appreciate complexity and make it look simple. That’s a powerful skill, applicable beyond buildings – to stakeholder engagement, agreement making, and decision making. Yet from the beginning of architectural education, we absorb the notion that only ‘good designers’ matter. Everyone else is seen as secondary. In reality, great design relies on a broader set of skills. The conditions for great buildings are often created by those working behind the scenes. No project can be realised without a compelling case for its value. Throughout a project, different stakeholders –whether in roads, tourism, or urban planning – each have their own criteria for value, which evolve over time. What mattered at the start may shift midway or at the end. Architects must recognise this and adapt. If we can’t articulate the value of good design, we won’t get the opportunity to deliver it. That value might be social, economic, or environmental – but it’s not about an architect winning an award. To secure a project, we must communicate value through the lens of others.
Mark Raggatt (MR): We seem to be in a period of reassessing our values and what we hope to achieve in our cities. Architects are, in many ways, well placed to illustrate alternatives. Yet, too often, architects seem to defer to what is commercially successful or aligned with existing power structures, rather than pushing toward the future. Do you see architects embracing this role as visionaries for alternative futures? And how can we ensure that these narratives – particularly those that
challenge the status quo – gain real traction in shaping our cities?
EW: It depends on whether architects see their role as responding to contemporary issues through buildings or through broader social engagement. Architects have valuable skills – advocacy, communication, problem-solving – that can be applied beyond buildings. When those skills are used to engage with society rather than just create objects, architects expand their impact. There’s a culture where only those with decades of experience have a voice. We need to amplify younger voices and support them because the profession benefits from their perspectives and will allow us to better engage with contemporary issues. I think, for me, it’s really about broadening the way we see architecture. While it includes the creation of objects, it also considers architecture as a service applying the skills of an architect in other ways. We need to create opportunities for younger people to have a voice that is impactful so the decisions we make are fit for future generations.
I think there’s a case to be made for two modes of working. That traditional model will still suit some people, and it will remain part of architectural practice. There are many competencies required, and it is complex. At the same time, if we don’t explore ways to make the profession more agile and break it into smaller, more agile components, we risk losing relevance. The system that takes 20 or 30 years to develop competency is not evolving at the same rate as everything else. And in some ways, that negates what we have to offer early on. Similarly, we consider gender equity in practice. If people in positions of power operate with a deficit mindset – where sharing power feels like a personal loss – they’ll resist change. But if they shift to an abundance mindset, they recognise that sharing power strengthens them. They gain the voices of many, they stay relevant, and they test their ideas against a future they can’t fully predict.
HYWC: I was recently in Barcelona for a United Cities and Local Governments retreat, where a session focused on feminism and equality in governance and city planning. I shared Sydney’s policy on shifting not only built outcomes but also professional culture toward inclusion and diversity. The city recognises that having more female architects involved in projects leads to better urban environments.
/ EMMA WILLIAMSON AND HY WILLIAM CHAN: SHAPING PERSPECTIVES
Interview by Mark
Raggatt
Consequently, Sydney has adopted a policy requiring design excellence competition teams to consist of 40% male, 40% female, and 20% of any gender. This initiative has faced criticism, with detractors arguing that it adds red tape and increases development costs. However, the importance of inclusive city making outweighs these concerns. Who gets to have a say in shaping our cities matters. This policy is a powerful example of how political action can reshape a profession. But I’m most interested in the long-term impact – in 10 or 20 years, I hope Sydney will evaluate and measure how these reforms have influenced urban life. We must assess how design decisions affect people’s everyday experiences.
MR: How do you see the role of designers in government, particularly at the intersection of practice, industry, and government itself? What is their agency in shaping an expanding service?
HYWC: Architecture is fundamentally about shaping how people experience the world. It’s not just about aesthetics – it’s about agency. Architects have the ability, and I’d argue the responsibility, to frame the public discourse around how cities evolve. The built environment is political, whether we acknowledge it or not. Every decision, from zoning laws to public housing design, reflects societal values. The challenge is that architects often operate within insular conversations, when in reality our expertise should be central to shaping mainstream debates on issues like housing affordability, climate resilience and urban equity. Working locally is especially powerful because of our skill set in transforming the built environment. It’s something people can experience and live in – it’s physical, tangible. They can touch it, smell it, and interact with it. It’s not just a report, a concept, or a policy that ends up sitting on a shelf in government.
EW: Roles vary across jurisdictions. While there are overlaps, differences arise due to political contexts and population scales. For me, the role of the government architect – and architects working within planning frameworks – is about articulating consequences. Using methods beyond typical planning toolkits, architects can visually
communicate the impacts of decisions. For example, through diagrams, they can illustrate different scenarios: if we take one path, these are the consequences; if we take another, these are the alternatives. It’s less about labelling decisions as good or bad and more about fostering conversations that empower people to engage with good design. The role is collaborative and inquisitive – engaging with government systems and using architectural expertise to open up discussions. A traditional planning approach often operates in binary terms: are the requirements met, yes or no? In Western Australia, qualitative planning policies related to design introduce a level of ambiguity, which can be challenging for those trained in rigid planning frameworks. My job involves building confidence in navigating that complexity. Familiarity fosters confidence. You could call it education, but that implies a master-learner dynamic. In reality, people don’t want to risk being wrong – they want to feel secure in their understanding, and that takes time. This gap presents an opportunity: we need more people who can articulate the value of good design – and the cost of bad design. Good design anticipates future needs, ensuring that buildings remain fit for purpose. Communicating this value is critical. Too often, architects are seen as merely advocating for aesthetics. We need to frame our arguments in broader terms – economic, social, and environmental – so that they resonate beyond our profession.
MR: What is the cost of bad design?
EW: The greatest cost is the future we leave for our children and grandchildren. Architecture is resource intensive. If we don’t act responsibly, the consequences are far-reaching – environmental degradation, communities underserved by infrastructure, and financial costs due to poorly conceived projects that require retrofitting. Another cost is the erosion of the architect’s role. If bad design prevails, society loses trust in architects’ ability to address the pressing challenges of our time.
MR: How do you see the future unfolding for cities?
HYWC: Cities need long-term visions that transcend political terms. Firms and practitioners engaged in social design are
working as true partners with communities, elevating and empowering people to participate in shaping their environments. This is what local leadership should be about – understanding how people live, how natural environments interact with cities, and how jobs, innovation, and economic opportunities shape urban life. Architects influence these factors, whether or not that influence is always explicitly recognised. Cities and their leaders are the first responders to the climate emergency. We are on the frontlines of climate action.
While global negotiations set the agenda, it’s local governments that deliver on those commitments. Sydney, like many cities, has been at the forefront of policies that integrate sustainable urbanism, whether through net-zero buildings, circular economy initiatives or nature-based solutions. The challenge is scaling these interventions while navigating the political and economic realities of governance. Political leadership is critical because climate solutions require long-term thinking, which isn’t always aligned with election cycles. During my tenure as city councillor, I’ve worked to embed sustainability into policy frameworks so that it becomes the default rather than an add-on. At the UN COP Climate Conferences, I’ve seen how cities, when unified, can push national governments toward bolder yet localised commitments. The key is for architects and urbanists to be part of these political and multilateral conversations – not just as technical experts but as decision makers who can translate policy into tangible outcomes. The key is setting a community-driven agenda that survives changes in government. If we can embed design excellence and liveability into policies that are understood as essential values rather than regulations, we stand a better chance of shaping cities that work for everyone. ■
→ Mark Raggatt RAIA is a Sydney-based director of ARM Architecture.
→ Associate Professor HY William Chan
RAIA is an architect and emeritus councillor innovating at the intersection of city making and policy making. William is the youngest-ever politician elected to the governing team in Sydney City Hall’s 180-year history.
→ Emma Williamson FRAIA is the Government Architect of Western Australia, and provides independent, expert advice on significant projects and strategic planning to State Government, the Premier and Minister for Planning.
BEYOND RECOGNITION: SALLY HSU ON SUSTAINING PASSION AND PURPOSE IN ARCHITECTURE
Words by Sally Hsu, as told to Ben Berwick
On a grey Saturday morning, as I sit in a local Sydney cafe, Cyclone Alfred unleashes its force on Brisbane. The storm serves as a stark reminder of the unpredictability of nature and the urgent need to focus on climate resilience.
In many ways, it mirrors the challenges and disruptions we encounter in our professional lives – moments of turbulence that test our resilience and adaptability. Yet, just as every storm eventually gives way to calm, this article seeks to channel optimism and possibility within our profession and lay the foundation for what promises to be an engaging and inspiring breakfast salon at this year’s Australian Architecture Conference, featuring a panel of past winners of the national Emerging Architect Prize.
This discussion will be more than a celebration of achievements; it will be a chance to reflect on diverse architectural career pathways. By gathering as a community, we can explore the motivations, challenges, and personal victories that sustain a long-term career in this demanding yet rewarding field. The event will celebrate the accomplishments of those who have made their mark while probing deeper into the intrinsic motivations that keep architects passionate and engaged in their work.
As the NSW EmAGN (Emerging Architects and Graduates Network) committee co-chair, I have had the privilege to invite past winners Jennifer McMaster, Daniel Moore, and Ben Peake to join me for a thought-provoking dialogue. Our discussion will focus on architects’
multifaceted journeys and the factors that enrich and sustain this profession in the long run. The aim is to move beyond public recognition and accolades. What does it mean to truly succeed in architecture? Is it awards and prestige or something more personal, intangible, and profound?
When I first shared the working title of this article with friends, one of them joked, “Just ChatGPT it; it would be faster.” Though tempting, I resisted. What I hope to convey transcends algorithms or pre-programmed responses. These reflections are born from lived experiences and the nuanced, deeply personal journeys no AI could ever replicate. In architecture, as in life, countless variables shape our decisions, goals, and pathways. No self-help book will answer your problem, and no biography will have the career roadmap you need to follow. But if you are in the same room when these not-so-public conversations happen, it might spark your next musing, allowing an introspection moment to let you decide what to do next.
Serving on the EmAGN NSW committee has been a profound experience, offering me a chance to connect with individuals from all walks of life in architecture. EmAGN focuses on those within 15 years of graduating, and the
committee’s mission centres around supporting this diverse demographic. These 15 years may see you discover the architect you want to be, start a family, encounter career hurdles, spark that thought to start your practice or many more things we didn’t think life could take us to see. Architecture constantly pushes us to evaluate who we are as professionals and the kind of life we want to lead. If you’re still practising a decade after graduation, many of your university peers likely are not. Through all my recent conversations with Jen, Ben and Daniel, I know they have carved out a career that suits their lifestyle and matches their passion. Aligning one’s work with personal values, passions, and definitions of success is no small feat. Success looks very different to all. Jen knew very early on in her career that a small practice would be where she does her best work, while Dan, through the Hearing Architecture podcast, can amplify the voices of Australian architects and professionals to the world stage. For some, success might mean designing iconic buildings that reshape skylines. For others, it could be about public advocacy to save a piece of history, like Ben’s involvement with the Save the Sirius campaign.
One of the hardest yet simplest truths to confront is that for many, success and sustainability in our profession can simply boil down to financial remuneration and workplace flexibility. These practical concerns are as valid as the loftiest aspirations and acknowledging them is critical to a fulfilling career. Often, these priorities shift as our lives evolve.
The panel discussion at the conference will delve into these questions. It will highlight the experiences of those who have navigated the complexities of architecture and emerged as recognised professionals and individuals who have found enduring purpose in their work. This conversation will be about more than architecture; it will be about life, choices, and the profound ways our work shapes and is shaped by the world around us. ■
→ Ben Berwick RAIA is the director and founder of Prevalent.
→ Sally Hsu is an associate director at Bates Smart; beyond her professional role, she is the 2025 EmAGN NSW Committee co-chair, also serving on the curatorial steering committee for the Australian Architecture Conference 2025 in Sydney.
FRAMING CHANGE WITH MONICA EDWARDS
Words by Monica Edwards, as told to Ben Berwick
Observations on change: Change is the only constant. The words of Heraclitus remind us of the universality of change. It is inevitable and constantly evolving. Change is top down and bottom up. Wherever you sit on the spectrum of up or down, powerful or powerless, you need to act. When we act, we become actionists – we claim that power which seeks direction. Yet power is meaningless if you don’t know who you are.
It is everyone’s duty to understand themselves better – alert to the way others see you, inspired by the way you wish to be seen, committed to moderate ego, and secure in the unchanging you. When we truly grasp this, change is authentic.
Change can happen to us, or we can drive meaningful change.
Regardless of how change arrives –and it will – we are open to receiving it if we are prepared. Preparedness requires both collective and personal action. It is about trust – how we work collaboratively so that everyone can thrive. And it’s centred on humility – finding a purpose that transcends the self. When we trust together, confident in our contribution to the group, we embrace meaningful change.
QUESTIONS OF CHANGE
How do we know what needs to change? If this question beckons curiosity, you most likely dwell in the advantage of privilege. This is neither a good nor a bad thing – it’s just where you sit. If you have privilege, use it well –share it. Make space for those with less privilege to sit beside you. Ask others what needs to change? Most importantly, evaluate the frame with which you view your context.
How do we see what we can’t see?
We receive information differently –some will be swayed by quantitative evidence; others by anecdote, resonating in the qualitative richness of material. All versions tell a story of who and what we value.
How we experience the world is as unique as our DNA. It is influenced by personal
elements – how we look, how we identify, our physical abilities, our senses, our health, our neurodiversity, our movement, our orientations. Then it is impacted by how others perceive and react to us and the roles we play. This is societal and cultural, and often the foundation of social injustice. Injustice can be singular or multifaceted, understood or unnoticed.
Kimberlé Crenshaw, an American civil rights advocate and scholar of critical race theory, coined the term intersectionality in 1989. Crenshaw’s work highlighted how legal and social frameworks fail to address the specific experiences of Black women in the United States, a consequence of the combined effects of racism and sexism. Crenshaw used the metaphor of an intersection as a way of understanding how different aspects of a person’s identity overlap to create multiple systems of oppression: legally in the courts; structurally via socio-economic status and access to education; political injustice, with women of colour sidelined in feminist and racial discourse; representationally in the media, policy and leadership; and heightened gendered and state sanctioned violence. Crenshaw argued that by the broadening the frame with which we perceive an issue – by naming the problem – populations that ordinarily fall through the cracks of our awareness will surface.
Anecdotally, we know intersectional patterns within the architectural profession
advantage some and make it harder for others. So how do we frame these issues to improve visibility? And once seen, how can we make proactive, productive steps towards change?
HYPOTHESIS ON CHANGE
The end game is to see people exactly as they are. Open to how they present, making space for them as they change and grow, over the day and into the future. To do this, we need to leave our assumptions at the door and learn to see what we can’t see.
If information is received in different ways, then our industry needs quantifiable data to bring to life the anecdotes we hear – at an industry scale, a practice scale, and a personal scale.
INTERSECTIONAL DATA
In 2023, Gill Matthewson presented research based on the 2021 Australian census, revealing a significant cultural and gendered pay gap in the architectural profession. At its extreme, the pay gap between a North-West European man and a North African or Middle Eastern woman was 32%. Measuring this is just the beginning. We need detailed reporting at practice level to understand how structural frameworks within each business affect diverse representation across the profession. Practices can take several actions:
/ FRAMING CHANGE WITH MONICA EDWARDS
→ Ben Berwick RAIA is the director and founder of Prevalent.
→ Monica Edwards is a senior associate at SJB delivering civic and education projects. A founding member of the NSW Gender Equity Taskforce and instrumental in Champions of Change Architecture Group, Monica was the 2024 recipient of the Paula Whitman Leadership in Gender Equity Prize.
1. Commit to change: Show a genuine commitment to change through everyday actions, open dialogue, and active allyship.
2. Map available data: Collect data on gender, age, cultural background, ability, and education. Analyse how these factors influence roles, access to career defining projects, mentorship, sponsorship, and pay. Identify patterns of bias and how they intersect.
3. Examine perceptions: Investigate how perceptions of introversion versus extroversion, rule-abiding versus rulequestioning, appearance, squeaky wheels, and socio-economic assumptions affect career progression. What do these perceptions reveal about practice values? Are there unwritten rules? If so, name them – build transparency
4. Survey the unseen: With permission, gather data on invisible factors like neurodiversity, health, invisible ability or sensitivities. Are individuals vulnerable to discrimination?
5. Observe and test: Observe how intersections play out on a personal level. Are individuals in a position to thrive, or are systemic barriers limiting their potential?
Actionism: If change is coming, how will you act and rise to the challenge? Let me frame this for you:
— Demand excellence: We must all expect a high standard from our practices and profession. When we voice our positions and challenge the status quo, we help create change.
— Support data collection: Collect data, even if you’re concerned about backlash. Fear of backlash signals that change is needed.
— Speak up: If you notice issues, speak up. Unintended consequences are only visible to a few – if you see them, work towards mitigating the risks.
— Be on the front line: When change is needed, don’t wait. Be the one leading the change. Change is never passive, it requires action. So, step up and make a difference.
THE PATH FORWARD
Change is inevitable, but its direction is not. The responsibility lies with each of us to ensure that change moves towards a just and fair path. When we recognise the power that we have as individuals and as collectives, when we understand the intersections that shape our experiences, we can rewrite the narrative. Change is not something that will happen in the future – it’s happening right now. Play a part in framing that change. ■
BUILD BETTER
With steel and aluminium building products from Lysaght.
Refined.
Aesthetically pleasing solutions to suit every design.
Functional.
Versatile, durable and cost efficient products and solutions for every project.
Compliant.
Sustainable.
A company-wide commitment to sustainable growth, safe workplaces, climate action, responsible products and community support.
Trusted.
Partnering with you in simplifying the process and inspiring your creativity from concept to completion.
LYSAGHT® products are tested to meet all relevant Australian Standards and NCC provisions. Scan the QR code for more information on Lysaght’s product range and services at lysaght.com
02. TREASURES OF TUSCULUM
Treasures of Tusculum showcases highlights from the NSW Chapter archive, revealing the rich architectural and social history of Tusculum and the Institute. This exhibition celebrates the stories of members, milestones, and the enduring legacy of the building, offering a glimpse into how the past continues to inform architectural practice and culture today.
Words by Louise Cox
EXHIBITION FOREWARD
The NSW Chapter, have been assessing and amassing our archives from the original minute books of 1898 to the prints of the Max Dupain photographs given to the Chapter in 1990.
We have been at Tusculum since 1988 when we moved across the Harbour from North Sydney, still many of our members have never been here to Potts Point. We hope that during the 2025 Australian Architecture Conference you will visit us at 3 Manning Street, Potts Point and enjoy the exhibition, Treasures of Tusculum, and the contemporary building designed by our members Harry Levine and Neil Durbach in 1988 (as the result of a competition to design these premises on the freehold land) and explore Tusculum itself.
The NSW Institute of Architects was established in 1871 and incorporated in 1891. The first president was George Allen Mansfield (1871-1878), Professor Leslie Wilkinson (1933-1934) was the 25th and last president of the NSW Institute of Architects. The New South Wales Chapter of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects was formed in 1934, with Professor Leslie Wilkinson the first NSW chapter president and there have been 45 chapter presidents since.
The chapter’s collection holds a variety of interesting items that give an insight into the profession of architecture in NSW and its development. These include early minute books, ornately framed oil on canvas portraits
of some of the early members and Presidents, documentation relating to the history of Tusculum and photos of the before and after of the renovations. A variety of architectural drawings and prints, an extensive collection of books (many which have been donated by significant architects such as Harry Seidler, Cox Architecture, Stephenson and Turner, Neville Gruzman and George Sydney Jones), a collection of glass lantern slides from Arthur White, depicting Australia in the 1950s and 1960s and a trophy that was awarded to the winner of the Architects and Builders Cricket matches held between 1904 and 1931. Somewhere there is a trophy for the NSW Chapter Yacht Race, that used to be held annually on Sydney Harbour, I took part twice, in the 1980’s, once in my friend’s boat and the next year on the judge’s boat. I have enjoyed being a Chapter Committee member since 1966, especially in Heritage.
One of the significant donations within the collection is a large number of photographs from Max Dupain. As the first female president of the New South Wales Chapter between (1988–90), I was in the fortunate position to be able to accept this significant body of work into the Chapter’s collection. The photographs are mostly architectural and illustrate some
of the best work by the profession at the time, whilst a large part has now been donated by the Chapter to the NSW State Library where it can be well cared for and made more widely accessible to the general public. The Chapter still holds a collection of significant architectural images, usually displayed in Tusculum, in the Council Room.
The Chapter’s Presidential Chain of Office and the Presidential Boards record the past presidents and there are many well-known names among them who not only produced some excellent architecture but also worked to advance the profession Peter Johnson and David Jackson both chapter presidents, became national presidents and Commonwealth Association of Architects (CAA) presidents and started my interest in global architectural politics. Geoffrey Lumsdaine was a NSW chapter president, national president and chairman of the NSW Chapter of the Institute of Arbitrators Australia. These three architects helped me in lots of ways and Max Collard, chapter president and national president, taught practice matters at university and also came to Canberra for my inauguration as national president in 1994, when he was 90 years old. Professor Leslie Wilkinson, the first professor of architecture at the University of Sydney, was also at the first meeting and inauguration of the International Union of Architects (UIA), representing Australia in Lausanne, Switzerland on 28 June 1948; we were one of the first 22 countries that came together over 75 years ago to form the global body of architects, today there are 120 Member Sections in UIA.
The NSW Chapter Heritage Committee maintains and is continually updating a register of significant buildings. There are index cards on the older listings and digital forms on the more recent listings which provide information for the buildings on the list and are available to members for research purposes, for preparing and supporting listings for local governments and the NSW Heritage Register, to make sure that we can enlist the public to support us in maintaining our heritage and working with the National Trust, Australia ICOMOS, Docomomo Australia and other bodies to ensure that our children have a strong, lively inheritance that they can enjoy in the future. Heritage is sustainable and the one way to recognise how the past helps the future, as nothing is new in this world, it has all been done before, we just need to have the knowledge to use ancient systems in new ways to procure better buildings for all.
The NSW Chapter Heritage Committee maintains biographies of many architects, and these are also available to members for research purposes. Our members past and present have enriched our lives with their skills and will continue to do so into the future, it just takes some time. We need to embrace our communities and ask their advice and go further together so that we can all share the rewards of a better living environment.
We all hope that everyone enjoys the exhibition and discovers something about their profession and the Institute that they did not previously know. What is your passion? ■
→ Louise Cox AO FRAIA is a distinguished architect and leading advocate for architectural standards. The first woman to serve as National President of the Australian Institute of Architects, she later led the International Union of Architects. Internationally recognised, she continues to champion architecture, heritage, and global standards, shaping the profession worldwide. She sits on both the NSW and National Institute Heritage Committees.
CURATORIAL ESSAY: WELCOME TO TREASURES OF TUSCULUM
Words by Danica Micallef (they/them)
Welcome to Treasures of Tusculum! This landmark exhibition marks the start of a new chapter in the Institute of how we record and preserve our history. Here, we welcome you into the archives to show and tell you the stories within. In conceiving, curating and coordinating this exhibition, my goal was to demonstrate the value of the Institute’s archival collection, not only as a record of the Institute itself, but as an educational resource, as a benefit to our members and community. We wanted to highlight what the stories in the archive can tell us about the Institute, architecture in NSW, and even us now.
The primary ethos of Treasures of Tusculum is people. The people who have been a part of the Institute, who they are, and their practice, lives and ideas. By exploring these stories, we wish to highlight the ways they have left their mark on the Institute, and more broadly, on architecture in NSW. We explored this through the donations that make up our archival collection, and the historic records that document the proceedings of the Institute since its inception.
The housing of the NSW chapter in Tusclum, was a significant moment in the Institute’s history, with this regency villa pinned as the flagship of the RAIAs property portfolio.
Exploring the history of the building, from colonial residence designed by John Verge to its restoration, use as a function space and finally it’s use now as Chapter home, was necessary
to place the exhibition, which is displayed in its Library, Dining and Drawing rooms into context. As is understanding the development of the Institute, from multiple disparate organisations to one nationalised Institute of Architects, and the people who were key figures during this time, such as Edmund Blacket, J. Horbury Hunt, George Sydney Jones and William R. Laurie.
The bulk of the material held by the archive represents the period from the Institute’s inception as the New South Wales Institute of Architects in 1871, until around the 1980s. This broad period of a little over a hundred years sees a rapid maturation of architecture in NSW, from the early days of the professional body, through the evolution of a local architectural style, and a boom of building development
in the mid-century/post war period. The rise of major architects such as Peddle, Sulman, Seidler, Murcutt and Gruzman, whose buildings shaped the urban landscape of NSW throughout the 20th century and were heavily involved in the Institute, is reflected in the collection through the items they bequeathed.
However, the archive, being representative of the late 19th through to mid twentieth centuries, does demonstrate a domination by white men, with few women, and even less people of colour of any gender. It is tempting to imagine that this was simply the way the architectural industry looked at the time, with the application of Florence Parsons, a highly skilled draftswoman, to the Institute in 1907 being enough to cause a “fracas”, many of the male members reported to show their extreme distaste for admitting a woman to their ranks. However, women architects were prevalent, with nearly half the first cohort of the Architecture School at the University of Sydney being made up of women. Further, records show that once women were accepted into the institute in the 1920s, they joined in droves, with 20% of the institute’s membership being female. Despite this, for a long time the profession sadly had a habit of glossing over the impact or even existence of its female membership. It is important to recognise that history is often biased. Who gets to tell the stories of the past? What do they highlight and what do they leave out? Invariably it has been the achievements and stories of women and people of colour who get left to disappear from histories pages.
We recognise the failings of our archive in recording the history of women and people of colour in the Institute. We also recognise the restrictions of our collection. With limited resources, much of what has been donated to us over the years had to be passed on to those who could provide more consistent object care and greater access. With the goal of this
exhibition to display the collection as it is, we stand in the position of working with what we have got. We tried to amplify the stories and achievements of minority groups as much as we were able. Reflecting on the past honestly can prompt questions about the present and incite change for the future. This new chapter of the archive aims to recognise the failings of our archival practices in the past and resolve to better record our history as it unfolds, ensuring that we record our history honestly, inclusively, and intersectionally.
Part of the Institute’s commitment to supporting our members is through providing the resources needed for our members to succeed in their careers. Our archival and library collections form an educational resource that delves into the history of the Institute and the wider profession in Australia. The Institute works to build a future that advances architecture for all. While looking to the future, it is important to remain cognizant of the past, and crucially to question its authors. They say those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it. Perhaps as well, those who do not remember the past are bereft of the visual beauty in old design trends, the quality of the built materials that allowed these structures to last. We look to the past to contextualise the present, and to hopefully influence the future.
I would like to extend my thanks to everyone who has helped bring this exhibition to life. Thank you to the NSW Heritage Committee, whose passion and enthusiasm were a driving force behind this, and who did a huge amount of research. Thank you to Kate Concannon, Cameron Bruhn and the team at the Institute for giving me the opportunity to put this together. Finally, a personal thank you to friends and colleagues who shared their knowledge and contacts with me, and who listened to me talk about this exhibition in extreme detail, ad infinitum, I am very grateful to you all. ■
→ Danica Micallef (they/them) joined the institute in 2024 as Education Project Coordinator and soon after was appointed Heritage and Archives Officer for the Institute. Treasures of Tusculum marks their first exhibition, and an opportunity to combine their project management experience with their knowledge of archives, curating, digitisation and conservation.
Their research interests revolve around Australian colonial history, and the mid-twentieth century, with a focus on every-day people. They are passionate about collection care and providing greater access to historic collections.
Prior to joining the institute, Danica was Digitisation Coordinator at the Powerhouse, and has worked on digitising the collections of the Australian War Memorial, State Library of NSW and University of Sydney Rare Books.
Credits
Danica Micallef: Project Manager, Curatorial, Registration and Documentation, Conservation, Digitisation, Exhibition Design and Install
Jennifer Preston: Curatorial and Research, Exhibition Install
Linda Babic: Research, Exhibition Install
Hugo Chan: Research, Exhibition Install
Robert Gasparini: Research, Exhibition Design and Install
Noel Thompson: Research
David Welsh: Exhibition Design and Install, Bulletin Coordination
Chris Redman: Conservation
Sydney Technical College Architectural Club (1936 —1939)
Atelier was a periodical published by the Sydney Technical College Architectural club. Notably, as an alumnus of the school, B. J. Waterhouse was a patron of the club and publication.
Their Work
Written and illustrated by RAIA Fellow Morton Herman, this beautiful book was part of Neville Gruzmans personal library. It contains a section on John Verge and several of his Regency Villas in Potts Point, including Tusculum.
Institute of Architects of NSW Minute Book (1911-1920)
A leather and cloth bound volume with gold emboss lettering containing the handwritten pen and ink minutes from 1911 to 1920. A reference is made to James Peddle’s sojourn around America, and a letter of introduction provided for him by the Institute.
The Institute of Architects of New South Wales Memorandum of Articles of Association Insititute of Architects of NSW (1920)
This early copy of the Articles of Association for the Institute of New South Wales details how someone might become a member of the Institute, the expulsion or suspension of members, arrears and defaults on subscriptions, the election of the President, office bearers and councillors, Income, property and the use of the common seal.
Atelier
The Early Australian Architects and
Morton Herman (1954)
Correspondance Book
Insititute of Architects of NSW (1920)
A leather bound volume with hand written addresses for Institute Members, c. 1920-1922
One of four photographs capturing the recently completed CB Alexander Presbyterian Agricultural College in the lower Hunter Valley, north of Newcastle. (Philip Cox and Ian McKay, Architects in Association from 1962, and later to be known as Tocal Agricultural College). Copyright held by Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales and Courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW).
photographs
One of four photographs capturing the recently completed CB Alexander Presbyterian Agricultural College in the lower Hunter Valley, north of Newcastle. (Philip Cox and Ian McKay, Architects in Association from 1962, and later to be known as Tocal Agricultural College). Copyright held by Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales and Courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW).
Interior of Agricultural College, Tocal Max Dupain (1965)
Spire of Tocal Presbyterian Agricultural College chapel Max Dupain (1965)
Tocal, N.S.W. Max Dupain (1965)
One of four
capturing the recently completed CB Alexander Presbyterian Agricultural College in the lower Hunter Valley, north of Newcastle. (Philip Cox and Ian McKay, Architects in Association from 1962, and later to be known as Tocal Agricultural College). Copyright held by Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales and Courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW).
THE HISTORY OF THE INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS IN NSW
Words by Jennifer Preston
The New South Wales Chapter is the oldest continually operating organisation of Architects in Australia. This essay draws on many records and items from the Chapter’s collection including the original early notes on the history of the institute by George Sydney Jones which were later added to by B. J. Waterhouse and remain in the Institute’s collection.
The idea for a New South Wales Institute of Architects was first suggested to Thomas Rowe by Benjamin Backhouse. In 1870 Rowe sent a letter to about thirty architects practising in Sydney at the time, inviting them to a meeting in order to establish an Institute of Architects. The proposal was unanimously agreed.
Early meetings determined rules for the organisation and established its first title as “The New South Wales Society for the Promotion of Architecture and Fine Art” with George Allen Mansfield becoming its first president in 1871.
Not long after the group’s founding, another separate group was founded by others called the New South Wales Academy of Arts. This resulted in the group of Architects dropping “Fine Art” from their name and becoming the Institute of Architects of New South Wales. They applied for a Royal Charter which was granted and “Royal” was added to the name.
There were however differences of opinion on what the group was for with many seeing it as a gentleman’s club. Horbury Hunt believed that it should cover professional conduct both
inside the club and out in the working world. He repeatedly questioned the professional behaviour of other members around issues such as submitting designs to competitions that could never be built for the stated budget.
Members also delivered papers on architecture related topics many of which were published in the daily newspapers. Hunt delivered a paper entitled “Moral Relations of Architect and Client”. The paper was not well received, nor was it published. Hunt continued to press for professional morals amongst architects, but his efforts got nowhere and he resigned stating that he found “the conduct of your leading men to be in practice contrary to the spirit of any Institute”.1
After Hunt’s resignation the organisation stagnated and the morals of the profession did not improve. Corruption and bribery were common, judges for architectural competitions were often unscrupulous, rejecting entries from those they did not personally like and business partners vanished taking the money with them.
The Institute did almost nothing for ten
years, then in May 1883 a meeting was held to revitalise the institute and by July 1884 its work was enough to pay for a secretary. The institute became active and increasingly recognised within the community, but many architects declined to join because they disagreed with the rules. A separate society was formed by John Sulman and called the Palladian club but having worked through their issues with the rules of the Institute, in June 1887 the two groups combined.
Horbury Hunt then rejoined the Institute and again criticised architects and fellow members including John Sulman. At the next election for President Sulman withdrew because of the death of his wife and Hunt became President. His intention was to clean up the profession and he lectured the members on morals repeatedly. He loudly and openly criticized other architects, public taste, greedy clients and the building industry. The arguments were often published in the newspapers of the day, so the squabbles were very public. As a result, Sulman and eighteen other architects left the institute, and its reputation suffered.
Whilst incorporation of the Institute had been discussed previously, Hunt was the one who made it happen, giving the group its own legal identity, separate from its members. Hunt wrote the Articles of Association, designed the seal, decided on the motto, paid for the dyes and printing and on 30th April 1890 the papers were registered. After his death, George Sydney Jones noted that “The institute owes much to the liberality of the late John Horbury Hunt.”2
In 1893 an alliance was formed between the Institute of Architects of New South Wales and the Royal Institute of British Architects. This enabled the New South Wales Institute to deal with British Architects who thought they could get away with bad behaviour so far from home. Hunt tried to pass the leadership of the Institute to G. A. Mansfield without success. An economic depression was looming, and membership of the Institute had dropped dramatically, with many fees outstanding. In 1895 Hunt stepped down and the presidency was taken over by Thomas Rowe. Membership dropped further to the point here in early 1897
Left
The Institute of Architects of NSW, unknown date.
Object photo: Danica Micallef
Words by
Dr Jennifer Preston
disbanding the institute was considered but under a new president John Barlow and a new council, things began to improve, and the Institute of Architects of New South Wales began to take the lead in the formation of a national organisation.
In 1901 tangible moves towards a national organisation occurred with a “Conference of Australian Architects” held in Sydney from December 31, 1901, to January 5. There were four papers presented on the topic of “Proposed Federation of Australian Architects” including by John Barlow, who was the president of the Institute of NSW at that time. The papers appear in the Proceedings of the Conference, a copy of which is held in the NSW Chapter’s collection.
The early years of the twentieth century saw significant changes to architecture generally and to the NSW Institute. New materials such as concrete and reinforced steel, expanded the potential of architectural design and expanded the role of the engineer, sometimes at the expense of the architect. New technology changed design requirements and required new building types and Town Planning opened architects up to the possibilities of designing more than just an individual building. Many of the new technologies, materials and ideas either came directly from or were influenced by developments overseas.
In 1904 members of the Institute and others were sent a letter by the publishers William
Brooks & Co. inviting subscriptions to the Institutes first publication, Art and Architecture, of which George Sydney Jones, John Barlow and Arthur Pritchard were the editors. In 1912 the journal was renamed The Salon, and included work from Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia and was another tangible step in developing a national organisation.
So far, architecture and the Institute had been exclusively a male domain but in March 1907 at a time when members needed to be voted in to join, the council received an application for associate membership from Miss Florence Mary Parsons who had been nominated by Burcham Clamp. After some discussion the application was approved to be voted on by the members. The application was defeated at the ballot, seemingly by those who did not want a woman as a member. Clamp was furious and pointed out that the ballot was illegal because many had voted who were not entitled to. The council sided with Clamp and two clear sides formed threatening to create chaos at the next general meeting. Perhaps in an attempt to avoid confrontation, Florence withdrew her nomination. Thirteen years later, under her married name of Taylor, she became the first female member of the institute.
In November 1921 New South Wales parliament finally passed the First Architects Act, something which the Institute had been campaigning for over many years. Whilst it
/ THE HISTORY OF THE INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS IN NSW
Right
Institute of Architects of NSW, Visitors Book, Official Opening of New Rooms 17.10.1922
Object photo: Danica Micallef
was a weaker version that the Institute had hoped, it had two significant effects. The first was that there was a massive increase in the numbers of people joining the institute, swelling its membership to around seventy five percent of architects in Sydney. In doing so it made the Institute a more powerful and influential organisation. The second effect was that those who did not join the institute set up a separate organisation, the New South Wales Architects Association, due to the efforts of Alfred Hook. The two organisations remained separate until discussions between Hook and the then President of the Institute Sir Charles Rosenthal led to the amalgamation of the two organisations in December 1924.
Many Institute members including George Sydney Jones, John Barlow and Charles Rosenthal had argued and worked towards a National Institute of Architects for many years and in 1929 the institute became a national organisation, The Royal Australian Institute of Architects. The NSW Chapter continued to develop many initiatives within the National framework. Some of these remained specific to the Chapter and others were adopted more broadly.
The official journal of the Australian Institute of Architects’ NSW Chapter “Architecture Bulletin” was first published in 1944 and has been published continuously since although issue frequency and quality has ebbed and flowed over time.3
A list of 60 buildings considered to be outstanding pieces of architecture in NSW was established in 1949 and this became the basis for the NSW Chapter’s Register of Significant Buildings.4 This list now includes over 3500 listings and is currently maintained by the NSW Chapter heritage committee. Whilst the earliest listings were documented on index cards with little information, the more recent listings generally contain a lot more information on the building and often its architect. In addition, there are biographies of many architects that have been researched and written and are accessible to members on request.
The NSW Chapter is the oldest continually operating organisation of Architects in Australia. Its archive contains objects and documents that provide the evidence for this often tumultuous history. ■
Notes
1 J. M. Freeland, The Making of a Profession, 1971, p57.
2 G. Sydney Jones, A Short History of the Institute with Notes on the President and other Personalities Past and Present. 1923. [Hand written manuscript]
4 Jennifer Preston, “The NSW Register of Significant Buildings”, The Bulletin, Vol 75 No3, January 2019 p31
→ Dr Jennifer Preston FRAIA is a registered architect and Chair of the Institute of Architects NSW Heritage Committee. She is the director of JPA&D, a practise that works across Architecture, Interiors and Heritage. Jennifer holds a PhD from the University of Queensland and has taught at UTS and QUT. She has published book chapters, essays and articles in print and digital media and has presented numerous papers on topics related to architectural history and heritage. Jennifer has been working with the NSW Chapter and its Heritage Committee since 2018 utilizing the historic material the chapter holds to answer questions from Institute Members, Local Councils and the public.
Built in 1974, just four years after Murcutt began his own practice, Marie Short House is a seminal design, responding to the landscape on which it is built. Utilising reclaimed timber, Murcutt created a home capable of changing with its occupiers and the environment as needed. Copyright held by Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales and Courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW).
Glenn Murcutt is arguably Australia’s most prominent contemporary architect and the only Australian recipient of the Prizker Prize, the profession’s highest international accolade. Raymond Kenyon is a Melbourne based architect and artist. He studied architecture at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) and since 1998, has been Co-Director of A5 Architects alongside Aldo Mattessi.
One of four photographs capturing the recently completed CB Alexander Presbyterian Agricultural College in the lower Hunter Valley, north of Newcastle. (Philip Cox and Ian McKay, Architects in Association from 1962, and later to be known as Tocal Agricultural College). Copyright held by Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales and Courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW).
James Peddle reflects on the year he spent in America and the many points of difference between the two countries, and how this can impact the built environment.
Glenn Murcutt, Marie Short House
Max Dupain (C. 1980s)
Courtyard of Agricultural College, Tocal Max Dupain (1965)
Peddle in America
James Peddle (1913)
The Architect at Home
Raymond Kenyon (2005)
TUSCULUM BY JOHN VERGE
Words by Robert Gasparini
Since 1987, the New South Wales Chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects has been headquartered at Tusculum, an 1830s villa in Potts Point designed by John Verge. Remarkable in many ways, the former home is associated with notable Sydney architects and for its historic and architectural development.
Astonishingly, before Dr. Morton Herman’s research in the 1950s and the conservation efforts of architects, including Clive Lucas, the body of John Verge’s work was forgotten for over a century. Tusculum, a rare though altered survivor, is among the most valued pre-Victorian era buildings in the country, together with other Verge-designs, including Elizabeth Bay House, Tempe House, Lyndhurst, and others.
Born into a bricklaying and stonemason family in 1782 in Christchurch, Hampshire, Verge grew up with a basic education and adopted the family trade. Verge spent his formative years as a tradesman, working for speculative builders in the northeastern suburbs of London. At this time, Georgian architecture reached its final expression in the Regency style in England in 1810-1820, with exponents including architects Sir John Soane and John Nash.
Gradually, he crossed the shadowy thresholds that divided the tradesman bricklayer from the builder and the builder from the architect. In Regency London a
skilled bricklayer or carpenter changed his role as often as the circumstances required.1
With a failing marriage, Verge made the sudden decision to emigrate to New South Wales with ambitions to farm. His cargo included seventyseven merino sheep, sixty tons of salt, which he planned to sell for a profit, and various agricultural implements.2 3 Despite a land grant of 2,560 acres on the banks of the William River near Dungog, farming proved unsustainable, leading Verge to return to Sydney to practice his trade. As Sydney grew in importance and population, Verge’s clientele soon included the Colony’s most important citizens, the “who’s who” of Sydney’s 1830s elite. Remarkably, Verge’s architectural career in Sydney would only span seven years, but in that time, he would have designed over 75 buildings, of which Tusculum would be one of the earliest. Commissioned by the wealthy merchant Alexander Brodie Spark, the site was on a grant atop Woolloomooloo Hill, which was subject to covenants on “villa conditions.”
BY JOHN VERGE
Words by Robert Gasparini
The building must face toward the city, be “reasonably ornamental,” and be approved by the Governor. Verge designed the house with the front entrance to the newly formed Macleay Street and a second entrance to Woolloomooloo Bay and the Governor’s Domain to the east. It consisted of an encircling colonnade of Doric columns (not the current Ionic columns) and an open verandah on the first floor. Spark likely named the villa Tusculum after the town in Alban Hills, near Rome.
The home was fit for occupation in 1836, and Spark leased it to the first Bishop of Australia, William Grant Broughton, who lived in the house until 1851. As such, Tusculum had the prestige of being the most important domestic building in the Colony of NSW, second only to that of Government House. In 1836, Broughton wrote, “at present I am trying to get rid of my house, in the hope of finding one nearer to the scene of action.”4 However, he grew more fond of the home, writing in 1847, “as a house, it has little to recommend it: and except on account of the situation I never liked it. But having now lived in it for 11 years and seen the trees grow up which were of my own planting, I am become like them rooted to the soil, and loath to remove.”5
In 1851, Tusculum was purchased by William Long, an emancipist and wine and spirit merchant. Long made a series of substantial changes, and while the architect is unknown, it was likely John F. Hilly, who was active in the area at that time6. Hilly replaced Verge’s verandah with a two-storey cast-iron Ionic colonnade and elaborately detailed cornices in the Victorian Italianate style. He also repaved the verandahs in marble and added a large kitchen wing (since demolished) to the south.
By the 1880s, the porch was enclosed, and a porte-cochere was added. In 1904, the house
was acquired by Lewis Edward Isaacs, who sold it two years later to Orwell and Alfred Phillips. During this period, architect John Burcham Clamp enlarged the stair hall and built a new staircase. Phillips also commissioned Clamp to design a billiards room and nursery wing, balancing the kitchen wing added by Long.
In 1928, Tusculum was converted into a hospital under the direction of architects H.E. Ross and Rowe. This involved extensive internal and external changes, including filling in verandahs, dividing rooms, and reconstructing the kitchen wing. Further alterations were made by Spain and Cosh Architects in 1933, which included adding new rooms on the eastern verandah.
Following threats of demolition in the 1950s and 1960s, and two failed proposals for apartments, a permanent conservation order was placed on Tusculum in 1979. Despite this, the building fell into disrepair over the subsequent years and was occupied by squatters. In April 1985, after multiple notices from the State Government, Tusculum became the first building to be compulsorily acquired under the extraordinary powers of the NSW Heritage Act 1977. At this time, the house was in appalling condition, as Clamp’s billiards room burnt out, the porte-cochere had been demolished, and the building was suffering from damp, decay, termites and vandalism.
In 1984, the NSW Chapter of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects (RAIA) approached the NSW Heritage Council to use Tusculum for its headquarters. In exchange for a 99-year lease, the RAIA took responsibility for restoring the villa and ongoing maintenance with Clive Lucas and Partners hired to undertake the restoration. As part of the agreement with the government, the rear section of Tusculum was sold as freehold, with permission for the development of a new building.
By December 1984, a national competition was held for a new building adjacent to the Tusculum villa for Chapter administration, which needed to accommodate a 160-seat auditorium, provision for other tenancies and a carpark. Of the 83 schemes received, the jury7 unanimously awarded the first prize to Harry Levine and Neil Durbach with Paul Berkemeier. The second prize was awarded to Ken Maher, Everard Kloots, and Peter Ireland, and third to Edward Alexander and Richard Fiala. Commending the winning scheme, the jury noted “the façade was alive yet restrained and complemented Tusculum’s / TUSCULUM
Right
Photo of Tusculum Dining Room Before Resotration, Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners. Object photo: Danica Micallef
façade through a non-competitive contrast” and that the “physical relationship with Tusculum was sensitively resolved” By many accounts, Verge is celebrated as the best of Georgian architects, amongst them, Francis Greenway and Mortimer Lewis. This was the era before Victorian architects, including Blacket, Hunt, Wardell, and Barnet, would propel architecture in Australia into the second half of the nineteenth century and booming gold rushes. Verge also had his faults: Mortan Herman describes Verge as “an extremely poor planner”,8 going on to say, “Though he could conceive in the grand manner the principal parts of a building, he seemed to tire and falter when trying to coordinate all the parts into a whole.” He points to other works, including plans in 1832 for a house for James Busby, Rockwell, also in Potts Point, as “full of waste space”. Clive Lucas, in the book The Golden Decade of Australian Architecture, the work of John Verge, also states that Verge’s planning “based on modern standards, is, in many cases, poor”. However, he would go on to defend Verge as “Verge was not a modern architect and useless space, with blind windows and doors and so did not worry him...A plan is after all, something only appreciated on paper, it was the spatial handling of the building which was pre-eminent”. And pre-eminent Verge’s buildings are. Verge may have been weak at planning, but his skill in architectural massing, proportion, detail and classical tradition cannot be disputed. Morton Herman describes his stair hall at Elizabeth Bay House as being “one of the finest and perhaps the best, of such things in Australian Colonial architecture.” And Clive stated, “With the possible exception of Greenway, he was the most talented architect to practise in any of the Australian colonies before 1850.”
A Georgian architect, he advertised his retirement from architecture on 13 October 1837, just a few days after news of Queen Victoria’s accession to the throne had reached Australia. Verge retired to the Macleay Valley near Kempsey, naming his land grant “Austral Eden”. In the question of whether Tusculum is a Verge house, Clive Lucas states his experience with the restoration of Tusculum:
Verge’s considerable reputation motivated the whole exercise, but truthfully, it is much more complex than that. All restorations are complex if one understands the subtlety of alteration which all buildings are subject to, and Tusculum has had more than most.
Verge has not been restored. He could not be, and what you see now is a successful transformation of a modest 1830s villa by a skilled member of our profession in the middle years of the 19th century. I suspect that architect is John Frederick Hilly (18101883), the most notable Italianate architect of his day.
Since its completion in 1988, Tusculum has been the centre for activities of the RAIA NSW Chapter. The front and rear buildings function as a cohesive complex, fulfilling the design brief and respectfully integrating Verge’s Regency villa and Hilly’s mid-Victorian Italianate mansion. Completed in the Bicentennial year of 1988, Tusculum represents avant-garde conservation, emerging from the tumultuous period of the 1970s and embodying an approach to architecture that respects the past while looking forward. Tusculum also stands as a legacy to the architects who have shaped it, some of the most decorated and highly respected individuals in our profession. It is fitting that the home of NSW Architecture will continue to have custodianship over this rich and culturally significant building for many years to come. ■
Notes
1 Ian Evans, The Golden Decade of Australian Architecture, the work of John Verge
2 Ian Evans, The Golden Decade of Australian Architecture, the work of John Verge
3 Philip Goad, The Encyclopedia of Australian Architecture, p.732
4 Jyoti Sumerville. Tusculum. Thesis B.Arch U.Syd. 1978letter to Rev. Edward Coleridge
5 Thesis of J.F. Hilly by Ken Maher at UNSW in 1969
6 Consisting of Jennifer Taylor, Clive Lucas, Garry Forward, Glenn Murcutt and Andrzej Ceprynski-Ciekawy
7 Mortan Herman, “The Early Australian Architects and their Work”
8 Ian Evans, The Golden Decade of Australian Architecture, the work of John Verge
→ Robert Gasparini
RAIA is a senior associate at Design 5 Architects and a member of the NSW Heritage Committee. Robert assisted in researching and installing Treasures of Tusculum.
Top Portrait of John Verge, James Wilson, Unknown date.
Bottom
Photo of Tusculum Dining Room After Resotration, Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners. Object photo: Danica Micallef
of the Public
and Recreation
A Map of the parks in Sydney in 1902. This is a visual aid to the talk given by J. H. Maiden and was part of the James Peddle collection.
[ 2024 / 694 / 26 ] [ 2024 / 694 / 9 ] [ 2024 /
Part of a collection of material donated by James Peddle, this talk given by J. H. Maiden discusses the management of Parks in Sydney, and addresses questions of who should be responsible for the creation and management of recreational land. It highlights the links between architectural principles and public spaces.
] [ 2024 /
]
Map
Parks
Reserves within the City of Sydney and Environs Journal of Royal Society of NSW, Vol 36, 1902, Plate 1 (1902)
The Parks of Sydney; Some of the Problems of Control and Management J. H. Maiden (1902)
Portrait of John Verge James Wilson (Unknown date)
Portrait of John Verge, one of the best known architects who practiced in New South Wales in the early nineteenth Century, and the architect of Tusculum.
Tusculum House & Grounds Estate Sale and Auction Poster Hardie and Gorman Pty Ltd. (1928)
The property subdivision in 1928, including lots 1 and 3 to 6, surrounding Tusculum in 1928. The sale and subdivision marks the end of Tusculum’s use as a private residence and major conversions of the house into a hospital by architects H.E. Ross and Rowe.
755
754
An early photograph of some of the founding members of the Institute of Architects of New South Wales. We believe this photograph features John Horbury Hunt and George Sydney Jones.
Self-portrait of Edmund Thomas Blacket, a pioneer of architectural revivalist styles in Sydney, notably the Victorian Academic Gothic. His work as the Diocesan Architect for the Church of England likely landed him the title ‘The Chrisopher Wren of Sydney.’
As Australia’s first professionally qualified, practicing female architect, Florence Taylor built an extensive multi-faceted career which spanned the areas of advocacy, writing, editing, business and town planning.
Waterhouse was a highly active member of the Institute of Architects in NSW, and seven times vice-president. Mary Edwards was a traditionalist artist and painter whose work has histoircally been well revied and compared to her contemporaries such as Margaret Preston.
Photograph of Institute of Architects of NSW Photographer unknown (Unknown date)
Self portrait of colonial architect Edmund Thomas Blacket 1817-83 Edmund Thomas Blacket (Unknown date)
Portrait of Bertrand James Waterhouse Mary Edwards (1940)
Framed photograph of Florence Taylor George Taylor (c.1940)
A GOOD INNINGS: THE ARCHITECTS VERSUS BUILDERS CRICKET TROPHY
Words by Jennifer Preston
The silver-plated cricket trophy is perhaps the shiniest and most unexpected object in the Chapter’s collection. It was manufactured by Atkins Brothers of Sheffield England around 1912, but why is it in the Chapter’s collection? The trophy was awarded to the winners of cricket matches played between the Institute of Architects of New South Wales and the NSW Master Builders Association between 1904 and 1931.
The first gathering of Architects and Builders in NSW that involved a cricket match was held in 1887 at the Sir Joseph Banks Grounds at Botany. It must have been a large event because special trams were arranged to take most of the attendees to the grounds early in the morning.
James Barnet, the Colonial Architect, said on the day that he hoped many more similar meetings would be held. Yet, the idea of architects and builders socialising together must have raised concerns about collusion because Thomas Rowe, who spoke on behalf of the Institute of Architects of New South Wales, felt it necessary to note in his speech that “the builders and the architects would not feel in any way compromised by the gathering together.” 1
There were several cricket matches held between the two professions over the next few years and it quickly became an annual event. The matches were often held at the Sydney Cricket Ground and were reported in the daily newspapers and specialist professional publications such as The Construction and Local
Government Journal
In the 1904 match several champion cricketers, who had recently played in inter-state and international matches, were excluded from the Architects’ team. 2 Although the matches were held annually from 1904 and the winners, scores and participants recorded, it was not until 1914 that the awarding of the “handsome silver trophy” to the winning team began. The trophy was purchased with funds donated by expresidents and presidents of both organisations and was competed for annually with the past winners back to 1904 being added to the trophy.
In 1909 Rupert Villiers Minnetta is noted as one of the ‘’first grade men” who “made the game interesting.” 3 Minnetta frequently played on the architect’s team from 1906. He was a talented cricketer, playing six first-class cricket matches for New South Wales between 1909 and 1915. He was also a significant architect. He became a partner at Spain and Cosh after having completed his articles with them. The partnership of Spain, Cosh and Minett
designed Sydney’s first skyscraper, The Culwulla Chambers, constructed in 1912 and still exists on Castlereagh Street in Sydney.
Perhaps in an attempt to ‘level the playing field’, the rules of the matches seemed to vary, particularly in the early years. In 1914 no batsman was allowed to make more than 20 runs, and no bowler was permitted to take more than three wickets.4
The matches paused from 1916 due to the first world war, resuming in 1921. 5
By 1922 a smoking concert in the evening and presentation of the cup 6 had been added to the day and the opportunity was used to raise funds for the children of Arthur Prichard after his death. Arthur Prichard had been a former President of the Institute.
There were many significant architects who appear in the lists of players published in the newspapers of the time. They include past presidents of the Institute Cyril Blacket, John Franics Hennessy, George Sydney Jones, Sir Charles Rosenthal and Ernest Alfred Scott.
There is also Byera Hadley who left money in trust to establish the Byera Hadley Travelling Scholarship Fund that continues to operate today. Bertrand James Waterhouse who designed many significant houses including May Gibb’s Nutcote appears in the lists, as does John Burcham Clamp who encouraged the joining of
the then state-based Institutes of Architects into a national organisation and strongly supported the admission of Florence Parsons (Later Florence Taylor) as the first female associate of the Institute.
The last match was held in 1931, it was won by the architects and the trophy is still in the collection of the NSW Chapter. It is unclear why the matches came to an end, but it may have been related to the Institute becoming a national organisation around this time. The final score?
Builders 13 wins to Architects 7 with one draw and one match abandoned due to weather. ■
2 Australian Star (Sydney, NSW : 1887 - 1909), Thursday 24 March 1904, page 2
3 Star (Sydney, NSW : 1909 - 1910), Thursday 25 March 1909, page 13
4 Sun (Sydney, NSW : 1910 - 1954), Wednesday 1 April 1914, page 7
5 Construction and Local Government Journal (Sydney, NSW : 1913 - 1930), Monday 14 March 1921, page 6
6 Construction and Local Government Journal (Sydney, NSW : 1913 - 1930), Wednesday 15 February 1922, page
→ Dr Jennifer Preston FRAIA is a registered architect and Chair of the Institute of Architects NSW Heritage Committee. She is the director of JPA&D, a practise that works across Architecture, Interiors and Heritage. Jennifer holds a PhD from the University of Queensland and has taught at UTS and QUT. She has published book chapters, essays and articles in print and digital media and has presented numerous papers on topics related to architectural history and heritage. Jennifer has been working with the NSW Chapter and its Heritage Committee since 2018 utilizing the historic material the chapter holds to answer questions from Institute Members, Local Councils and the public.
Left Architects Versus Builders Cricket Trophy, Atkins Brothers of Sheffield, England, c. 1912 Object photo: Danica Micallef
Part of Neville Gruzman’s personal library, copy no. 911 of William Hardy Wilson Old Colonial Architecture of New South Wales and Tasmania, was the first researched publication on historic architecture in Australia and was also the first constructed list of historic buildings in New South Wales.
This leatherbound book contains the minutes of the period 1920-1922. In March 1921 B.J. Waterhouse was elected Vice-President of the Institute.
The Rowan Anderson Silver Medal, A municipal building, ground floor plan William Rae Laurie (1923)
Hand drawn and water coloured presentation drawing, Ground Floor Plan of A Municipal Building by Architect Willian Rae Laurie, completed while he was studying at The University of Sydney.
Old Colonial Architecture in New South Wales and Tasmania William Hardy Wilson (1924)
Council Minute Book Institute of Architects of NSW (1920-1922)
Arthur White lantern slides Arthur White (c. 1960-1979)
Arthur White was an Australian architect working as a public servant in New South Wales and was a member of the Australian Institute of Architects. In 2016, a collection of lantern slides of his photographs were left to the Institute.
GUZMAN’S GIFT AND WILSON’S VISION:
OLD COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE IN NSW AND TASMANIA
Words by Hector Abrahams
After the passing of Neville Guzman AO (1925- 2005), the estate of this eminent architect and former president of the RAIA NSW Chapter gifted his architectural library, or part of it, to the Chapter. He collected books continuously from the time he entered university at Sydney in 1946. It may be that he acquired as a student Sadler’s A Short History of Japanese Architecture published by Angus and Robertson in Sydney in 1946. Its author Arthur Lindsay Sadler (1882-1970) held the Chair of Oriental Studies at the University.
Guzman’s gift comprises 211 mostly contemporaneously published works on a broad range. A definite focus was on Japanese Architecture. There are some standard modernism works such as Gideon, many on the culture and planning of cities, and even more Australian architecture and art. Although he owned the published letters of Frank Lloyd Wright, the only international architectural monographs known are one about Eric Mendelson and a much later one about Renzo Piano.
There are four historical surveys of European architecture published in the nineteenth century.
Finally, he gave one historical rare book: copy no. 911 of William Hardy Wilson Old Colonial Architecture of New South Wales and Tasmania, published in Sydney in 1924.
Old Colonial Architecture in New South Wales and Tasmania, William Hardy Wilson, 1924. Object photo: Danica Micallef
/
GUZMAN’S GIFT AND WILSON’S VISION: OLD COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE IN NSW AND TASMANIA BY HECTOR ABRAHAMS
Words by Hector Abrahams
→ Hector Abrahams
FRAIA is a heritage architect and member of the National Trust. He recently curated an exhibition about William Hardy Wilsons Old Colonial Architecture for
This beautiful folio was the first researched publication on historic architecture in Australia. For about ten years Wilson sought out, measured, photographed and drew the early architecture of his homeland. He devised a distinctive drawing style to express their appeal to him as an architect, artist, and writer. His style employs photographic perspective, with a strong sense of visual texture and little colour. The buildings are presented as complete, aged and well kept. Each of them is placed in a partly real, partly imagined landscape.
There are many reasons for the familiarity and appeal of these famous images. The book was designed to enable individual prints to be removed and so they turn up everywhere. They were commonly found in the houses of his clients. The prints were publicly exhibited in South Kensington Museum London as well as Sydney. They were published in magazines and reviewed in the eminent Architects Journal
In his introductory essay the architect muses in way that immediately inspired artists, students, photographers and architects to follow him into the landscape and record by drawing and later photograph these same and other places. For instance, Max Dupain published a photographic reprise of the subject in 1951.
The book attracted private collectors from the first, and immediately entered public collections in Australia and England.
In the century since its publication, the majority of the 120 known copies are in public collections mostly USA but also Europe, New Zealand and all parts of Australia.
His measured drawings and illustrations formed the main part of one of the first cultural gifts to the Nation, by purchase from the commonwealth for the new National Library of Australia.
Old Colonial Architecture was owned by eminent politicians, artists, architects and cultural commentators. It has been reproduced in replica vacations in the 1960s and 1970s and continued to be the subject of exhibitions almost one per decade since 1924.
As a student in articles, the future architect Donald Keith Turner (1895-1964) accompanied Wilson on the research trips for the drawings. Not so surprisingly, a full set of prints from the book were framed on the walls of the King George V Hospital for Mothers and Babies at Camperdown by Stephenson and Turner, opened in1941.
The book is the also first constructed list of historic buildings in New South Wales. The idea of such a list was next taken up by the Institute of architects Heritage or historic buildings committee in the late 1930s when they produced their first list of the historic buildings of the Cumberland plain. This was followed by the National Trust in about 1947.
Like his peers and many, Wilson sought an unselfconscious architecture rooted in landscape. He saw them so much as historic buildings or artefacts, as we sometimes err to do, for to him they were lovely things existing in a landscape inhabited in a civil, a peaceable way, beautiful in their own terms.
Although Wilson developed and expressed dreadful social prejudices later in his writings, he maintained a lifelong practice of drawing expressing an unfading idealism of the environment.
No.911 is one of the few large folios of drawings in our archives. Through the generosity of Neville Guzman, it offers all members the chance to be refreshed by large scale drawings of buildings published to the highest standards
The exhibition in celebration of the centenary of the publication of the work is on at the University of Sydney Fisher Library Rare Books exhibition room until the end of semester one 2025. ■
Right
“Plate XI: The entrance to ‘Newington’ on the Parramatta River, NSW.
Object photo: Danica Micallef”
the University of Sydney’s Rare Books Library.
Institute of Architecture of New South Wales Council Minute Book (1905-1911)
This leather bound, hand-written minute book contains the entry noting Florence Taylor (nee Parsons) application for membership. The commotion caused by this is not noted in the minutes, rather, her application is quietly accepted. However, a few weeks later, the application is withdrawn and the proceedings of the previous meeting is declared “illegal”
Protégé and contemporary of Edmund Blacket, John Horbury Hunt’s architectural work has been noted for its innovation in its time in the use of materials including timber and brickwork. Norman St Clair Carter was a portrait painter and stainedglass artist from Melbourne, noted as being a portraitist of Australia’s early prime ministers.
of Darlinghurst Allotments being part of the Tusculum Estate in 1849. The subdivision plan, dated 1849, is significant because it shows the property with direct access to Maclay Street at the time. William Long, who purchased the property in 1856, must have retained some of the land depicted here in the south, including much of the area around the former stables and the frontage on Albert Street.
Portrait of John Horbury Hunt Norman Carter (Unknown date)
Plan of Darlinghurst Allotments being part of the Tusculum Estate Unknown creator (1849)
Plan
Plan of two first class stores in O’Connell Street
For John Frazer Esq. Front Elevation
George Allen Mansfield (1872)
This front elevation was drawn by George Allen Mansfield, the founder and first president of the Institute of Architects of NSW. It is one of the oldest items in the collection.
NOTES ON FIVE PORTRAITS (WHAT’S IN A FACE?)
Words by Hugo Chan
Five portraits in the RAIA’s archives showcase five moments in history, presenting a brief glimpse into the individuals who have created the Institute that continues to represent our profession today.
Before the ubiquitous selfie allowed us the perfectly presented self-portrait, there was portraiture. Potraiture was, and continutes to be, much more than the mere representation of a person’s likenes. For example, Giuseppe Arcimboldo’s (b.1526-d.1593) fanciful fruit and vegetable portrait of Emperor Rudolf II in Vertumnus of 1591 was part scherzo, part propaganda, likening the emperor to a god and using the collection of fruit, vegetables and flowers to exhibit pros-parity and power. Competing in a viciously male dominated field, Artemisia Gentileschi’s (b.1593-d.1656)
Self-Portrait as the Allegory of Painting (1638) shows herself in the throes of work, demonstrating profound skill in capturing a body mid-movement, expressing depth, dimension and drama. More recently, Vincent Namatjira’s Australia in Colour (2024) courted controversy intentionally unflattering depiction of Australian mining magnate Gina Rinehart. Thus, in the same manner by which a landscape painting might capture the sublime of nature or the genius loci of place, so too can a portrait potentially reveal to a viewer, as King Duncan so eloquently puts it, an opportunity to “… find the mind’s construction in the face.”
In the archives of the RAIA are five
portraits of individuals, showcasing five moments in the history of our profession. Chronologically, the oldest portrait would be that of Edmund Thomas Blacket (b.1817-d.1883).
Known as the “Christopher Wren of Sydney,” and incidentally, a cousin of Wren, seven times removed, Blacket is perhaps best known for his revival of the Victorian Academic Gothic in Sydney. Unlike his towering structures and grotesques which stare austerely down as we pass St. Philip’s Church or the University of Sydney Quadrangle, Blacket’s pencil selfportrait presents to the viewer as a quick study – it is a clean, simple and humble work, a starkly unadorned image in contrast to the ornate structures he drafted in his time as Diocesan Architect for the Church of England and later as Colonial Architect of New South Wales.
Blacket’s protégé and contemporary, John Hobury Hunt (b.1838-d.1904) also features as a pencil sketch, having been re-presented by Norman Carter (b.1875 – d.1963) from a photograph. Starting under Blacket in the Colonial Architect’s Office, Hunt would form his own practice in 1869 – an innovator marked by unique complexity in form through the use of natural materials in timber and brickwork. Beyond practice, Hunt helped found the Society
for the Promotion of Architecture and Fine Art (1871), forerunner of the Institute of Architects of NSW. Known for his incendiary remarks, Hunt sits contemplatively, notebook open on his thoughts, ready for another accusation such as his 1872 lecture, in which he declared that the architecture profession was “… subject to such severe vituperation and unjust reflections as to professional incapacity and moral defects.” His relationship is therefore unsurprisingly tumultuous with the society; resigning in 1873, rejoining in 1887 and serving as president in 1885-1889. Thus, despite Hunt’s famous temper and eccentricities, there can be little doubt that the contemplations we see through his portrait were foundations which helped form the future of what is now our Australian Institute of Architects.
Striking an austere pose, Betrand James Waterhouse (b.1876-d.1965), holds a yellow pencil in a nod to his profession, poised and ready. ready to amend a drawing for his next project in Cremorne or Neutral Bay, where he was principally active alongside partner J.W.H Lake. The conventional half-torso representation in muted tones, similar to so many institutional portraits, also reflects Waterhouse’s involvement with the Institute, having served in various positions be-tween the 1920s-1940s on National Council and in NSW Chapter. Perhaps what is most striking about this portrait, however, is how Oscar Wilde’s remark that “Every portrait that is painted with feeling is a portrait of the artist, not of the sit-ter…” rings particularly true. Mary Edwards (b.1894 – d.1988), the artist, is per-haps most remembered not only as a traditionalist in painting, but of taking fellow artist William Dobell and the Art Gallery of NSW to Court, claiming, in 1943, that the Archibald winning painting by Dobell was a distorted caricature and not truly a portrait, setting the Australian scene for a clash of ideals between tradition and modernity.
The colloquialism, “mad as a hatter,” could only ever refer to Florence Taylor (b.18791969) as flattery rather than insult when we consider the extensive multi-faceted career she built – supporting causes, writing for and editing architectural journals, running a business and improving the city through planning, all accomplished in her storied career whilst becoming Australia’s first professional-ly qualified, practising female architect. Taylor is in her prime in this 1940 portrait, a pragmatic working dress with floral embellishments and
iconic and ever-present chapeau. Her pincenez is immediately accessible from her right shoulder ready to critique the problems of suburbia, which in 1964 she charitably called “The way modernity expects a mother (without a car of her own) to go to a shopping centre and carry home all the meat, vegetables, groceries for the family’s needs is, to my way of thinking, positively inhumane.” Whilst the milliners of Sydney owe a great debt to Taylor’s eccentric tastes, architecture in Sydney, equally owes much to her for shaping the cityscape we continue to experience.
The final portrait and the Institute’s most recent addition is one of Glenn Murcutt (b. 1936), who requires little introduction. Known for his works which “touch the earth lightly,” Australia’s only Pritzker Prize winning architect to date has been painted by fellow architect Raymond Kenyon (b.1954) in an abstract surrounding. The background is bifurcated in monochrome, but look more closely, and the richness of simplicity in black and white becomes increasingly apparent. Derived from a back window in welded steel in Murcutt’s Mosman home, the backdrop is a fitting nod perhaps both to Murcutt’s Miesian inspirations and the delicate interplays of light and shadow unique to Country on which we prac-tice.
The five portraits explored here are merely the soupçon of the vast histories held by the archives of the Institute. They present a brief glimpse in this case, not into buildings, but into the people behind them, not into policies, but the individuals who fought for them and not of architecture, but of the people who created the institute which continues to represent our profession today. Ultimately, the essence of a portrait lies in what story we might discover, what narrative of a person and what history is embedded behind the visage. All of this naturally, leaves us wondering what one might glean of the architect versus their work absent from the lens of representation, but are themselves the subject of an interrogation. These unassuming portraits thus perhaps leaves us wondering not merely “What’s in a face?” but perhaps offers a chance to reflect on the architecture profession more broadly, asking us, “What do we stand for?” ■
→
Hugo Chan RAIA is an architect, researcher and educator who works as a chartered architect and design director of StudioHC.
Top
The Architect at Home, Raymond Kenyon, 2005
Middle Self portrait of colonial architect Edmund Thomas Blacket 1817-83, Edmund Blacket, unknown date.
Bottom Portrait of Bertrand James Waterhouse, Mary Edwards, 1940. Object photos: Danica Micallef
Architects Versus Builders Cricket Trophy Atkins Brothers of Sheffield, England (c. 1912)
The silver-plated cricket trophy was manufactured by Atkins Brothers of Sheffield England around 1912. It was awarded to the winners of cricket matches played between the Institute of Architects of New South Wales and the NSW Master Builders Association between 1904 and 1931.
/ 979 ]
This is a framed photo of Tusculum’s east façade, taken in 1919 by Harold Cazneaux during Orwell Phillips’s occupancy. It shows the porte-cochère, added in 1884 (demolished before the 1883 restoration) and the stone gateposts and iron gates built for the new entrance from Manning Street.
Oil on Canvas Portrait of the architect and past president of the Institute of Architects of NSW, George Sydney
2024 / 986 ]
photo of Tusculum from back Unknown photographer (1860s)
This photograph of the west elevation of Tusculum was taken in the 1860s, during the occupancy of William Alexander Long. The photograph is one of the earliest depictions of Tusculum that shows it close to its current form. The house would have had uninterrupted views to Woolloomooloo Bay and the Governor’s Domain.
Portrait of George Sydney Jones Norman Carter (1921)
Jones (1864-1927) painted by Norman St. Clair Carter
Framed
Framed photo of Tusculum Harold Cazneaux (1906-1928)
A Short History of The Institute, with notes on the President and Other Personalities past and present George Sydney Jones, additions by B. J. Waterhouse (1923)
A handwritten, ink on paper narrative of the early history of the Institute of Architects of NSW with type written notes covering the contribution to the institute of George Sydney Jones.
This scrapbook of newspaper cuttings documenting the development of NSW’s built environment in the mid-1920s. Page 15 contains a piece written for the Sydney Morning Herald in November 1925 about Edmund Blacket, praising his considerable architectural achievements and humility.
Presentation hand drawn perspective of internal stair and elevated platform by unknown creator. This drawing is rendered on ‘butter paper’.
Drawing prepared for shop premises by Architect Hedley Carr has been hand drawn and reproduced as a ‘Blueprint’.
Book of Newspaper Cuttings Unknown Creator (1925-1926)
Proposed shop premises at Forest Road, Hurstville for Messers Dorman and Colvin Hedley Carr (1956)
Architectural
Hand drawn architectural drawing of interior Unknown Creator (1954)
DRAWING TYPES, TECHNIQUES AND TOOLS
Words by Noel Thomson
Early hand drawn and water-colour drawings are exquisite works of art in their own right. They are also beautiful in their intricacy, often detailing minute design elements such as fittings and decorations. The earliest drawings in Australia date from the 1850s and relate to buildings by the colonial government and the the colonial architects’ division.
Drawings in the late 19th and early 20th century were produced with pencil from the finest to the coarsest, and provide the freedom for all kinds of work, sketching, technical drawings and detailing. The pencils varied from 2H for layout work, F for drawings and 2B for sketches and renders.
In the 20th century Rotring launched the mechanical pencil that allowed a variation of colours and by 1960 the Rotring Rapidograph became the technical ink pen of its age and greatly simplified technical drawing. However, by the late 20th century the advent of computeraided design (CAD) revolutionised how designs and drawings were produced.
In the early 20th century the instruments that formed part of the architect’s tools, were drawing board or drafting table, T-square and set triangles (30, 45 & 60 degrees), scale rule, protractor, compasses, pencil and drawing pens of different types. By the mid-20th century the parallel motion drawing board, as well as
more complex drawing machines improved on the basic T-square and so did the adjustable set squares. Compasses (pencil + point legs and beam), circle/oval/shape templates, lettering stencils, curved shapes all added to the improvements of instruments for producing better quality and faster technical drawings.
Drawings boards varied in sizes from 18” x 33” (inches) to 28” x 48” (inches) and could be either freestanding or attached to a table. They were earlier made from cherry wood which was a hard, stable and straight grained timber to provide a good drafting surface and by 20th century the timber base was lined with a vinyl layer that produced a high-quality surface which was easily cleaned and maintained.
ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING
TYPES, TECHNIQUES
Architectural drawings are produced for a specific purpose, and are generally drawn to scale so that relative sizes are correctly
represented. In architectural practice ISO A1 (841mm × 594mm) is the common size for producing technical drawings, but also A2 & A3 sizes are commonly used. In the early 20th century, scale of one-eighth of an inch to one foot (1:96) and later the metric equivalent of 1 to 100, are typically used for plans and elevations with detail sections being produced at 1 to 20 or 1 to 10 scale.
Presentation drawings: are intended to promote and explain merits of the design and early techniques were by producing pencil drawings and perspectives. Upon printing these could then be water-coloured to emphasise certain elements.
Working drawings: are a comprehensive set of drawings that detail the complexity of the project that is used in construction by the builder. This can include pencil on butter paper of vellum/film and then by the mid-20th century the popularity of ink on tracing paper became the preference as changes could be made to the drawing without redrawing and that the drawings could be printed for multiple copies.
Developments in the mid-20th century included the parallel line drawing board following the development of the reliable technical drawing pens, that along with lettering stencils made for faster drafting. By the late20th century CAD produced presentation (3D images) and technical working drawings which allowed for many versions to be drawn and saved and filed electronically.
DRAWING MATERIALS AND PRINTING
Early architectural drawing material was tracing cloth where pencil was used and later when ink became fashionable, and to make the ink flow well, powdered chalk was rubbed over the surface. Butter paper was also used in the early-20th century where it allowed for the use of pencil in a quick manner to produce design presentation schemes and sometime working drawings. Tracing paper became the favoured architectural drawing material by the early- to mid-20th century as it was stable and was made by treating ordinary paper with chemicals, so the wood fibers are broken down making it become somewhat transparent. This also allowed for the ink technical drawing pens to be used and for corrections to occur with minimal damage to the surface. Also being utilised in the mid- to late-20th century for producing technical drawings was modern vellum (film) paper which is made of plant cellulose fibres
and gets its name from its similar usage to actual animal vellum, which is high quality and very stable.
Prints of architectural drawings are still sometimes called blueprints, after one of the early processes which produced a white line on blue paper and where it was the reproduction of a working drawing. Blueprints are contact prints, where the blueprint paper and the working drawing are in contact with each other while exposed to sunlight and then washed in clean water. The process was superseded by the dyeline print system which after sending the working drawing in contact with the dyeline paper through the dyeline machine which contained ammonia, thus producing black lines on white paper. The standard modern processes are the ink-jet printer, laser printer and photocopier, of which the ink-jet and laser printers are commonly used for largeformat printing. ■
→ Noel Thomson FRAIA is an architect based in Wagga Wagga and the founder of Noel Thomson Architecture. He is a member of the NSW Heritage Committee. Noel assisted in researching Treasures of Tusculum
Object
Left above
Proposed shop premises at Forest Road, Hurstville for Messers Dorman and Colvin, Hedley Carr, 1956.
photo: Danica Micallef
Left
Southcott House, Springfield South Australia, John Doyle for Neville Gruzman, 1964
Object Photo: Danica Micallef
Institute of Architects of NSW Visitors Book
Insititute of Architects of NSW (1885-1936)
This visitors book is the oldest written record in the NSW collection, beginning its use in 1885. It was used to mark attendance at meetings. Several key members signatures can be found within, including John Horbury Hunt. [ 2024 / 1050 / 1] [ 2024 / 1051 ] [ 2024 / 1053 ] [ 2024 / 1052 ]
Proceedings of the Conference of Australian Architects, Sydney Federal Institute Conferences Sydney and Melbourne (1901)
The published proceedings of the first national conference of architects held in Sydney in 1900-1901. Tangible moves towards a national architects organisation occurred with a “Conference of Australian Architects” held in Sydney, four papers on the topic of “Proposed Federation of Australian Architects” were delivered by John Barlow, E. Davies, C. W. Chambers and Charles Rosenthal.
Institute of Architects of NSW Subscription Book Insititute of Architects of NSW (Unknown date)
A leatherbound volume with gold emboss lettering and marbelled end papers made by John Scott & Co Bookbinders of Sydney, containing a list of members.
Southcott House, Springfield S.A. John Doyle, for Neville Gruzman (1964)
Presentation Drawing of Southcott House Springfield, South Australia by John Doyle Design Architect for Norman Gruzman Architect is a hand drawn coloured rendering on paper.
ARTHUR WHITE LANTERN SLIDES
Words by Martyn Jolly
Arthur White must have been a methodical man. The medium-format colour transparencies he shot around Australia from the mid-1950s to the mid-1960s came to the Australian Institute of Architects archive pre-loaded into magazines for an automatic slide projector. Each Rollei Magazin 77 holding 30 slides measuring 7x7 centimetres in their mounts in its own drawer-box.
White has boldly labelled his with a number from one to xx, and written on the drawer a relevant title, such as Motor Show 111. The slides are ordered and ready for projection, they could be easily withdrawn from their boxes with a little cloth tab, place in a Rollei slide projector, and projected onto a screen. In Arthur White’s case, the tabs seem to have been well used. Some slides in the collection such as 2024/862/3/21/30, which is a photograph of the words ‘THE END’ hand painted with a flourish, confirm that these images were made to be performed. Performed for who? Friends, family, colleagues? And what did White say as he projected them?
Such performances are part of centurieslong practice. In the nineteenth century hand painted magic lantern slides of European cathedrals and other scenes transported Australian viewers to the great sites of Europe. When photographic slides, sometimes hand coloured, were adopted in the latter part of that century great buildings remained a major
subject matter, and the idea of travel – the slide lecture transporting its audience to other places – remained central to the practice. Colleges and universities also adopted glass slides as visual teaching aids, and they continued to be used well into the middle of the twentieth century. The development of colour transparency film meant that slides could be made directly made in the camera, amenable to both projection and colour printing in magazines, brochures and posters. In 1959 under the heading “CALLING ALL COLOUR SLIDE ENTHUSIASTS” the popular Australian travel and tourism magazine Walkabout solicited transparencies from its readers in order to celebrate its transition into a colour magazine. Eventually, the cheaper, smaller 35mm slide overtook the kind of medium format slide White made, and the short thirty-slide magazine he used was extended and curved into a circle by Kodak, for their famous carousel projector. Nowadays, of course, we are more likely to just google and right click the jpegs we need for talks and articles, and when
Right 024/862/3/24/02, Arthur White, c. 1960s.
Object photo: Danica Micallef
Left Below 2024/862/4/27/04, Arthur White, c. 1960s.
Object photo: Danica Micallef
are lucky enough to travel post the things we photograph on Instagram as we go.
The tight connection between camera and projector embodied in the slide magazines in which White’s archive came to the Institute was not uncommon in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Advertisements by the German Rollei company who made White’s projector, offered cameras and projectors in combination. (See Pacific Islands Monthly, February 1961, 66) If White was a Walkabout reader, maybe he saw an ad from 1959, which described Rollei as ‘the professional camera that every amateur wants to own. When you use a Rollei you define your status as a knowledgeable and discriminating amateur – for whom nothing but the very best is good enough.” (Walkabout, November 1959, 63).
And White was knowledgeable and discriminating. He had a Diploma in Architecture
from the Sydney Technical College, registered as an architect in 1940, and was a member of the Australian Institute of Architects. He may have worked for the Department of Lands, based in Orange, and most of the slides seem to have been taken on holiday – but these aren’t your average holiday snap. White has extensively documented the transformations in the built environment of the day: feats of engineering, factories, churches, public buildings, motels, small town streetscapes, bowling alleys, cinemas, supermarkets, blocks of flats, neon signs, car showrooms, bandstands, fire stations. His interests range from dusty and spindly vernacular buildings, weathered to grey ghosts, he photographed in outback Queensland, such as 2024/862/3/19/07, to the neon lights of Sydney (2024/862/4/27/04).
White had an interest in displays. He photographed the elaborate floats in street parades and cinema marquees. In 1962 he photographed the elaborate fruit displays at the Royal Easter Show (2024/862/6/47/23), where he also used almost a whole roll of film on the stand for Metters, Australia’s own oven manufacturer. Their slogan: Metters For Moderns! (2024/862/7/49/05) He was also interested in Australia’s engineering triumphs – dams, bridges and the Snowy Hydro scheme –and took every opportunity to get in a plane for aerial views of Australian progress, such as the lake and radial roads of Canberra taking shape.
But White put on his slide shows, with their enthusiastic endorsement of Australia’s future, during a period in which there were profound changes in our attitude to built heritage. Walkabout subscribed to the project of modernising Australia, and even endorsed some of the modern houses and office buildings designed by contemporary architects,commenting, “every now and then, there is something that looks like serious architecture, that is, the sort of building that grows from a successful partnership of an owner and an architect, sharing an intention to build something more than just economic shelter”. (Australian Architecture Walkabout 1 April 1965, 28.)
But the same time, they were also concerned with reinforcing the norms of Australian history, and promoted, along with modernisation, its complement — heritage. A 1958 article written by the new state-based National Trust argued that Australia’s heritage was as “significant to Australia as her feudal manors and abbey
/ ARTHUR WHITE LANTERN SLIDES
Words by Martyn Jolly
ruins are to Britain. […] Unfortunately, a great many of our historic buildings have fallen under the wrecker’s hammer, but there is a growing appreciation of the importance of saving what we still can. Much of the credit for getting people to think in this way belongs to the National Trust movement.” (Preserving Our National Heritage: The National Trusts of Australia, Walkabout October 1958, 18.)
Besides the work of the National Trust movement, contemporary architects themselves also became part of the turn to heritage. In 1966, the professor of architecture at the University of New South Wales, JW Freeland, wrote The Australian Pub illustrated with over a hundred black and white photographs. In his acknowledgments he thanked his university for funding “the extensive travelling involved in seeing the pubs for myself”. In 1969 Freeland joined the contemporary architect Philip Cox on Rude Timber Buildings in Australia, with 134 photographs by Wesley Stacey.
Books like these, enthusiastically reviewed in Walkabout, inextricably linked an appreciation of Australia’s architectural heritage with travel and tourism. White’s trips from the regional city of Orange where he lived, to Sydney, Queensland, Victoria, Canberra, and Tasmania conform to this mode. Although he’s on holiday – there is an occasional photograph of family member smiling happily into the camera –
his photographs remain compositionally very ‘architectural’. Architectural photographers like Wolfgang Sievers or Max Dupain used large format black and white film in cameras with movements that allowed them to correct perspective and maintain orthogonal verticals. Increasingly during the sixties, younger architectural photographers like Mark Strizic or Wesley Stacey were using handheld medium format cameras like White’s – without movements, but with the capacity to add increased dynamism into their compositions. Stuck with the square format of his slide, White resolutely shot straight ahead, so his buildings’ verticals stay vertical. For instance, in the shot of the Marlin Lounge 2024/862/5/34/16 he sacrifices the bright blue holiday sky above the Marlin Lounge in favour of the sandy macadam of the road taking up half the picture in the foreground, but the pub stays on the square. Only sometimes, such as a when he is crouched down to capture the cars whizzing around the corner into Sydney’s College Street in 2024/862/3/24/02 does he jerk his camera up, so St Mary’s Cathedral collapses in on itself? We will never know what was talked about when White showed his colour slides. But we do know he has created an extraordinarily useful slide archive. Even though he is no longer here to narrate them, they still tell a story of a formative period in architectural history. ■
→ Martyn Jolly is an associate professor at ANU with a specialisation in photography and media arts.
2024/862/7/49/05,
Far left
2024/862/3/19/07, Arthur
Object
Left
Arthur White, c. 1960s.
Object photo: Danica Micallef
White, c. 1960s.
photo: Danica Micallef
A leatherbound volume with gold emboss lettering containing the minutes of the Annual, General and Business meetings of the Institute from 1898 to 1916. The first minutes in the book were written by the president of the time John Barlow but there are many well known architects names including Cyril Blackett, Harry Kent and George Sydney Jones.
This letter inviting subscriptions to the first Journal of the Institute of Architects published by William Brooks and Co.
Neville Gruzman had a profound impact on architecture in Sydney. In 1985
was awarded the Order of Australia for services to Architecture.
Institute of Architects of NSW General Minute book Insititute of Architects of NSW (1898-1916)
Letter regarding the Journal of the Institute of Architects of NSW William Brooks & Co. Limited (1904)
Neville Gruzman Receiving his Order of Australia Unknown photographer (1985)
Gruzman
RAIA New premises, diazo print Niel Durbach (1986)
Working Drawing for RAIA Chapter, New Premises Manning Street, Potts Point by Architects Levine and Durbach in association with Allen Jack Cottier is a Diazo print of original pencil and ink drawing.
TOCAL AND THE CB ALEXANDER COLLEGE
Words by Linda Babic
Tocal College represents one of the most significant and awarded projects in the early careers of Philip Cox and Ian McKay, Architects in Association from 1962. Situated amongst the vast and rural landscape of the Paterson Valley, the college is an exemplary work of the Sydney School style of architecture, adopting the philosophies of the School to an institutional scale, recognised for its contribution to the development of the style.
Tocal College was first established as the CB Alexander Presbyterian Agricultural College, designed in 1963 for the Presbyterian Church of Australia. The College was opened by Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies upon completion in 1965, eventually to be known as Tocal College, the name of the original nineteenth century homestead on the estate.
The remarkably intact complex is formed by a two storey Georgian homestead, and collection of stone, brick and timber outbuildings, the earliest structures dating to the 1830s, which were built by convicts.1 Amongst the complex is Blacket Barn, a finely detailed timber structure designed by architect Edmund Blacket in late 1868, which was originally used for storing hay, machinery and housing cattle. Honouring the will of the estate’s previous owner, Charles Boyd Alexander, the church’s agent, Edward Alan Hunt, proposed the development of a tertiary agricultural college on the land. The project was the first major commission for Cox and McKay, propelling both their reputation as architects,
and attraction to an Australian vernacular style. Their work at Tocal established their design philosophy for environmental sensitivity and reverence to the Australian landscape, founded on the functional tradition of rural architecture. Through their adherence to the Sydney School style, Cox and McKay deflected the International modernist trends that were typically applied to institutional projects at the time. Tocal College adapts the local ideology of the Sydney School, which had previously prevailed as a domestic style, to a larger scale, with use of robust and enduring materials, and effortless interplay with the pastural landscape.2 Cox and McKay’s visionary design reflects an innovative and influential approach to institutional architecture.
The architects have cited the influence of traditional Japanese architecture in the composition and detail of Tocal College, portrayed through the fine craftsmanship, extendable planning and considered integration with the rural, agricultural setting. The college is
Words by Linda Babic
→ Linda Babic RAIA is a Newcastle-based architect and founder of Heritas, a firm which specialises in heritage conservation. She is a member of the NSW Heritage Committee. Linda assisted in researching and installing Treasures of Tusculum
arranged around a quadrangle, loosely formed with one side left open to frame the historical homestead complex and softly approach the encompassing pastoral landscape. The collective of buildings are logically planned, linked by verandahs that sweep around smaller external courts, and are anchored by the great hall (Hunt Hall) and a small yet monumental chapel. Cox and McKay’s plan for the college further included a dining room, classrooms, sporting facilities, bedroom wings, agricultural outbuildings and machinery sheds.
At the centre of the complex, the chapel protrudes against the pastoral landscape with a dramatic spire, marking the college. The low, domestically scaled structures are revolved around the verticality of the chapel spire, which is set upon a low brick base. The spire is supported by an internal pillar, formed by a singular tree trunk, framed by a complexity of exposed trusses of local tallowwood. Hunt Hall, named for Edward Hunt, takes architectural cues from Blacket’s Barn at the original homestead complex. The exposed structural timbers and intricate arrangement of large roof trusses, poles and brackets shaped from tree roots, and narrowly spaced battens translate the rural, farm style of Blacket’s Barn, dually evoking an ecclesiastical quality.
Encapsulating Cox and McKay’s vision for a robust and vernacular architectural language, the structures are formed with a considered and restrained palette of local materials, informed
by local rural tradition. The principle elements of the college are completed with mottled pink brickwork, concrete, dark stained timber, brick pavers and unglazed terracotta Marseilles roof tiles. Verandahs are made with solid tree trunk columns, evoking a traditional farm building. The simple material palette empowers the impressive craftsmanship and building detail of the structures.
During construction and at its completion the college was photographed by acclaimed Australian photographer, Max Dupain. The Australian Institute of Architects archive retains a collection of these images, along with a number of presentation and construction drawings by Cox and McKay.
Cox and McKay’s design for Tocal College has garnered significant architectural recognition, winning the RAIA Sir John Sulman Medal and the RAIA Blacket Award in 1965. The College was also nominated as the Building of the Decade for the 1960s in the 60th Anniversary issue of the Architecture Bulletin (NSW Chapter, RAIA, November/ December 2004), and later received the Australian Institute of Architects (AIA) National Enduring Architecture prize at the 2014 National Architecture Awards. In addition to these, Tocal College was listed on the NSW State Heritage Register in April 2013, testament to the value and prominence of its design. This is validated by its entry in the Docomomo world survey, its inclusion in Apperley’s Identifying Australian Architecture, Freeland’s Architecture in Australia, and in writings by architecture critic Jennifer Taylor.
By embracing the vernacular characteristics of the region, Cox and McKay sought to create a truly Australian architecture, and the College remains a legacy embracing the principles of a robust vernacular style that continues to celebrate the culture and landscape of rural Australia. ■
2 Eric J Martin, (2015), ‘Tocal’, Australia ICOMOS.
Right Inside Tocal Spire, Max Dupain, 1965. Copyright held by Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales and Courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW). Object Photo: Danica Micallef
/ TOCAL AND THE CB ALEXANDER COLLEGE
of Booloominbah at University of New England Unknown photographer (Unknown date)
Booloominbah was one of the most magnificant Australian country houses of its time, and was designed by John Hurbury Hunt for Frederick Robert White in 1884. The country house was built in the Federation Arts and Crafts style, and shows influence of Gothic Revival and Queen Anne. It is now part of the University of New England.
2024 / 1085 / 3 ]
Art and Architecture, Vol. 3, No. 6, Nov-Dec 1906
William Brooks & Co. Limited, Editors: George Sydney Jones, John Barlow and Arthur F. Pritchard (1906)
Art and Architecture Volume 3 is one of the early issues of the first Journal of the Institute of Architects of NSW.
2024 / 1091 / 3]
Working drawing of Brick Residence for Mr and Mrs L.
Architect
Photographs
Brick Residence for Mr. and Mrs. L. Pogson, 12 Moore Street Balgowlah. Working drawing Joan McCutcheon (1967)
Pogson at 12 Moore Street, Balgowlah by
Joan McCutcheon is hand drawn with ink on tracing paper.
Florence Parson Application I.A. NSW Insititute of Architects of NSW (1907)
Florence Taylor (nee Parsons) application for membership to Institute of Architects of NSW in 1907.
THE END OF FLORENCE TAYLOR’S CAREER AS AN ARCHITECT
Words by Bronwyn Hanna
Florence Mary Taylor was Australia’s first professionally qualified woman architect and woman engineer. She was also interested in city planning and produced many ambitious schemes to transform Sydney, although these were largely ignored in her lifetime. She is best known as the editor and publisher of Building magazine, founded with her husband George Taylor soon after their marriage in 1907, and which she continued to run after his death in 1928 until her retirement in 1961. This prolific journal was aimed at building tradesmen more than professional architects and engineers, and now provides an invaluable record of the construction of the 20th centurybuilt environment in Sydney.
Later described as ‘the great lady of Sydney town’ and ‘the most remarkable woman in the empire’, Florence Taylor was honoured with an OBE (Order of the British Empire) in 1939, a ‘citizens’ appreciation luncheon’ in 1955 and a CBE (Commander of the British Empire) in 1961. She died a wealthy woman in 1969 in Potts Point, at the age of 89. (Freestone and Hanna, 2007, Florence Taylor’s Hats, Halstead Press).
There seemed little prospect of this brilliant career in 1899 when, at the age of 19, Florence Parsons found herself a ‘penniless orphan’ with two younger sisters to support. The three sisters were apparently rescued by Frederick Stowe, a friend of their father’s, who invited them to move into his family home with his
wife and children, and gave Florence a clerical job in his architecture-engineering business in Parramatta. It was watching draftsmen earning double her wages that inspired Taylor to embark on a professional career of her own. The following year, in 1900, Florence enrolled in the architecture course at Sydney Technical College and was articled to Edward Skelton Garton in Sydney. Over the next seven years, she completed qualifications in both architecture and engineering, while working in increasingly prestigious architectural offices, reaching the position of chief draughtsman under Burcham Clamp in 1907. In her spare time, she also designed numerous harbourside homes for Alfred Saunders, developer and
owner of the Pyrmont sandstone quarries. (Freestone and Hanna, 2007, Florence Taylor’s Hats, Halstead Press).
Florence’s career as an architectural designer came to an abrupt end in 1907 when she applied for associate membership of the Institute of Architects of NSW (now part of the Australian Institute of Architects). She first told the story in 1931:
About 1907 Mrs Taylor was proposed for the Institute of Architects by Messrs Blackett, Nangle and Burcham Clamp. Although the meetings of the Institute frequently lapsed for want of quorum, there was a full house on this occasion, and, almost to a man, it blackballed the pioneer. The proceedings were afterwards declared informal, as it was discovered that many of the votes had come from unfinancial members. (Sunday Sun, 6 September 1931)
Nearly forty years later the story was told more definitively in two differing accounts: in 1968 by Taylor’s authorised biographer, Kerwin Maegraith, and in 1971 in a commissioned history of the NSW chapter of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects by architectural historian Max Freeland. Both authors agreed that Florence’s application to become an associate member of the institute was approved in principle in the minutes of the institute’s Council meeting of 14 February and advertised in the institute’s journal, Art & Architecture (January-February 1907, p36). Freeland mentioned that the Council was ‘surprised’ to receive this nomination because ‘an application from a woman was unprecedented.’ Both writers described a groundswell of opposition to the notion of accepting Florence’s nomination, culminating in a fiery meeting on 21 February 1907 (Maegraith, 1968, Florence Taylor, final draft manuscript biography held in the State Library of NSW; Freeland, 1971, The Making of the Profession, p77).
Freeland wrote that Taylor’s nomination ‘struck trouble. Those who were opposed to the idea of a woman architect came well organised and the nomination was rejected’ (1971, p77). Maegraith went into more dramatic detail, suggesting that the meeting met Burcham Clamp’s ‘eloquent speech’ for accepting Florence with a barrage of ‘hate’ and ‘unanimously’ threw out the application
in the face of Clamp’s furious declaration, ‘Why, she can design a place while an ordinary draughtsman is sharpening his pencil!’
Both writers agreed that Clamp’s protest the conduct and outcome of the 21 March meeting was discussed at another institute meeting called on 25 March. Freeland wrote:
At the meeting Clamp claimed that the ballot held for Miss Parsons was illegal because associates had voted on behalf of absent Fellows who alone had a vote, several unfinancial members had been allowed to vote, and the president had erred by permitting addresses on the candidates to be given prior to the vote being taken. The council agreed to support him.
The minutes of the institute meeting of 25 March indeed show that the meeting of 21 March was declared ‘out of order and invalid’. Apart from this resolution, all other records of the 21 March meeting were expunged from the record. (AINSW Council Minutes, 25/3/1907, pp76-78).
Freeland continued the story:
the issue was to be debated at the April general meeting, when a large number of members turned up. Two camps had
Left
Framed photograph of Florence Taylor, George Taylor, c. 1940. Object photo: Danica Micallef
/ THE END OF FLORENCE TAYLOR’S CAREER AS AN ARCHITECT
Words by Bronwyn Hanna
→ Bronwyn Hanna PhD, M.ICOMOS is a Sydney-based historian and heritage professional. Her PhD thesis researched Australia’s early women architects. Alongsde Robert Freestone, she authored “Florence Taylor’s Hat’s”, a biography of Florence Taylor.
formed and feeling was high. But before it could erupt a letter was read from Miss Parsons withdrawing her nomination and saying she would sit for the special entrance examination instead. In the event she did not do so until thirteen years later...14
The institute does not have Florence’s letter of withdrawal and Freeland doesn’t identify the source of this information.
In Maegraith’s account, there was no subsequent meeting in April 1907 and no letter from Florence. He wrote that Florence lodged her fees in the expectation of being accepted as an associate member, but instead received a letter from the institute ‘acknowledging’ that she had withdrawn her application. Maegraith was undoubtedly voicing Florence’s later-life response to the ‘fracas’ when he concluded:
What utter nonsense... such rubbish was typical of them. But that only fixed the will of Florence Parsons to beat them...In her they did not realise then that they faced their Wellington, not the Joan of Arc, the martyr to the cause who would be slaughtered at the
stake, as they imagined. In their ill-based protestations and ungentlemanly outburst of disapproval and contempt for the young female they met their Waterloo. (Maegraith, ‘Florence Taylor,’ Chapter 1, pp 22-23)
The official institute records, and both writers, underplayed this iconic moment of institutionalized gender discrimination. The minutes recorded the details so sparsely that a casual reader might fail to realise that a dispute had taken place at all. Freeland defended the institute from any accusation of gender discrimination by suggesting that Florence had withdrawn her application of her own volition, suggesting that if she passed an exam, she would be admitted like anyone else. He even concluded that the incident was ‘a small matter’ compared to other historical conflicts. Maegraith concluded more militantly that the institute was ‘girl-hostile but suggested that the incident only strengthened Florence’s determination to succeed. He didn’t mention that this event signaled a traumatic end to the design career of Australia’s first professionallyqualified woman architect. ■
Florence Parson Application
Institute of Architects of NSW, 1907
Object photo: Danica Micallef
Right
During the 1950s and 1960s, Tusculum fell into disrepair and was occupied by squatters. In 1985, the NSW Government compulsorily acquired it under the NSW Heritage Act. In exchange for a 99-year lease, the RAIA, hired Clive Lucas and Partners Pty Ltd to carry out the restoration completed in 1987.
Watercolour on paper. The perspective drawings of this building is hand drawn in pencil on paper that has been water coloured to enliven and create a presence for this ‘modern’ building, a common presentation practise used by architects in the early to mid-20th Century.
This photographs show the Drawing Room of Tusculum before it’s restoration. The building showed significant disrepair and damage after several decades of neglect.
Tusculum Villa Restoration Plans. Ground Floor
Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners (1986)
Presentation Drawing of Graziers Co-Operative Shearing Co. Ltd. New Premises
William Rae Laurie (Unknown date)
Photo of Tusculum Dining Room Before Restoration Unknown photographer (1985)
Photograph of Graziers Co-Operative Shearing Co. Ltd. New Premises William Rae Laurie (Unknown date)
Photograph of the newly constructed Graziers Co-Operative Shearing Co Ltd premises at 46 Young Street, Sydney. This photograph captures the newly constructed building, juxtaposed with the presentation drawing, highlights the translation of architectural vision into built form.
INSTITUTE JOURNALS
Words by Glenn Harper
On display at the exhibition Treasures of Tusculum is a copy of a prospectus-come-letter which sought subscription for a professional journal. Appearing soon after the federation of the colonies and posted to all NSW members of the Institute, including many affiliated professionals, this letter sought support for a journal about Australian architecture.
Prepared and posted by the publisher, William Brooks and Co. of 17 Castlereagh Street, Sydney, the letter verified the birth of The Journal of the Institute of Architects, a professional journal that has been continually published in Australia since January 1904.
Also on display is the 1906 November/ December issue of the professional journal Art and Architecture, Being the Journal of the Institute of Architects of New South Wales. Broadening the readership, and while maintaining its commercially viability, the journal was revised two years after its first issue. Even the name and paper stock were altered. In this change, which incidentally positioned the Institute proceedings at the rear of the journal in tiny print, featured a cover in brown card with an image of a rambling cottage framed by two stylised trees. Gone was the Art Nouveau styling of the cover to the earlier journal and in its place was a cover that advocated the arts and crafts. The journal now explored the importance of Australian architectural design and town planning with articles on the virtues of a
well-designed building. At the same time the editor recognised that the reader was indeed a patron of the arts and articles on various Australian artists, and their exhibitions appeared; it was content that was included in the journal well into the 1970s.
Since its inception, the professional journal of the Australian Institute of Architects has undergone various name changes with adjustments in its content and graphic style. In 1912 the journal was renamed The Salon, and in 1917 the journal was reissued as Architecture. The latter modification, which correlated to the emergence of the chapters, included articles that encouraged the profession to consider a national (and revivalist) Australian architectural style within a functional city. In this instance articles on “slum clearance” were used to endorse a well-planned Australian city. By the inter-war period, however, the content became less national in focus and while there was no name change to the journal, articles on international modernism were being featured. These were written by Australian architects who had
recently undertaken an overseas travelling scholarship.
Recognising a need to provide more detailed information, the chapters of Victoria and NSW began self-publishing their own broadsheets by the 1940s. Like the professional journal these had a small print run and over the years these also underwent changes in title, content and graphic style.
During the post-WW2 period, the Institute’s journal underwent another change. Renamed Architecture in Australia and more streamlined in appearance, it remained national in focus. Although the discussion emphaised the objecttype the journal continued to promote modern Australian architecture.
When Colin Brewer became the editor in 1962 the journal was substantially modified. Columnising the body text and introducing full-page photographic images with full-bleed edges, the cover to each issue was made visually distinct. With some covers overlaid with bold shapes and colours, the professional journal now referenced John Entenza’s journal, Arts and Architecture, a mass-style American publication much admired by Brewer. While not only reflecting improvements in commercial printing, which kept the subscription rate affordable, this revision was heavily laden with advertisement. Such an investment in a distinct and international looking journal, along with more advertisement, still met the editorial direction established by the Institute.
By 1975 the journal underwent further changes. Renamed Architecture Australia, the journal incorporated image-rich articles that had the same visual weight as the advertisements. With the previous journals having prioritised copy, these later renditions simply entertained the reader by focusing on the image at the expense of coherent discourse.
When studying the above noted exhibition items, that is, the 1904 prospectus-come-letter, and the 1906 November/December issue of Art and Architecture, it is worth reflecting on how a professional journal was used to become a vehicle whereby Australian architecture can best be examined. While the journal has always been a commercial venture, the current outsourced publication has produced a glossy and image-rich journal with articles that describe rather than speculate. This is far from a federation period (and later post-WW2) journal that offered worthwhile insights into the culture of Australian architecture. ■
Left above
Letter regarding the Journal of the Institute of Architects of NSW, 1904. Object photo: Danica Micallef
Left Art and Architecture, Vol. 3, No. 6, Nov-Dec 1906. Object photo: Danica Micallef
→ Glenn Harper is an architect and heritage consultant based in Sydney, and has been awarded a PhD.
This photograph was taken of the Drawing Room after it’s restoration.
Day
Florence Taylor ran an extremely successful publishing company, of which Building was its flagship publication. She wrote a regular column which focused on woman in architecture. Throughout her career, she maintained a commitment to the advancement of women. Copyright held by Master Builders Association and courtesy of National Library of Australia.
St Mark’s Church at Darling Point was designed by Edmund Blacket and built between 1848 and 1880 in the Early Gothic Revival style. This photograph by Dupain shows the interior of the church, highlighting the sandstone columns and archways. Copyright held by Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales and Courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW).
Presidential Chain of Office NSW Chapter Harvey C. Smith Pty Ltd (c.1930)
The presidential chain of office of the New South Wales chapter contains the names of all the past presidents. The medallion was made by Harvey C. Smith and dates from around 1930 when the institute became a national organisation.
Photo of Tusculum Dining Room After Restoration Unknown photographer (1987)
“Every
Affairs”, printed in Building, Lighting, Engineering Florence M. Taylor (1954)
St Mark Church, Darling Point Max Dupain (Unknown date)
