http://www.couriermail.com.au/realestate/news/architects-fault-campbell-newmans-tower-of-power/story-fndbosu3-1226598493698
The Courier
Mail report
illustrated the latest concept proposal for the new Queensland Government
office tower at 1 William Street in Brisbane. The building is astonishing, even
in the context of a central business district that has prided itself on its
ever-increasing height. Brisbane is the world’s largest local government
district, such is its random sprawl, but the core of the city self-consciously
stretches unusually high in stark contrast with its spread. Its form matches
the worst of modernism’s vision of what a city might be: a symbol of power,
authority, identity and success. The new metallic cylindrical - or is it
elliptical? - tower with its truncated wedge-formed top cut like a salami, has
a flashy Dubai smartness about it: the hype of the grandest, the most extreme,
the most excessive; the most slick. Why? What is the plan for this region of
the city? What is the controlling vision? Is this area to become super-high,
high density to compete with the remainder of the development behind it? Surely
we are not back to the ‘build it high and higher’ idea just for the sake of,
well, height - the height of madness that might declare, as a child’s game
does, ‘me and my might’: I am the greatest, the highest of them all?
Treasury Casino Building, Brisbane
The tower is the
idea of the new, recently elected LNP (Liberal National Party) State
Government. Is this proposal the classic ‘Taj Mahal’ syndrome where uncertain
politicians seek grandeur, pomp and status for themselves in built form? Sadly,
this cliché question belittles one of the world's great and most beautiful
buildings. The point to be asked about this development proposal is: why is it
needed? Why is it needed in this location? One should never just place a scheme
in any position without considering the region it stands in: its context - the
impact of the new on the existing, and vice versa. What has happened here?
In this
particular location that is surrounded by government buildings both new and old
- recent refurbishments and heritage buildings - it is astonishing that such a
brash scheme could be developed as a stand-alone item, perhaps without careful
consideration of its surroundings. Has this occurred? What is the master plan
for this southeastern corner of the city? Is there one? There was once an idea
that this eastern portion of George Street and its neighbourhood would be the
government precinct of the city. This idea gave some ambition for and control
of this zone that could become the starting point, a conceptual reference, for
future developments; but what is the latest idea for this place? Is it just to
have a very tall, slickly smart, flash tower? One hopes that the grand tunnel
visions of this premier have not become externalised into a vertical solid
rather than remain as horizontal hollows that have become such economical
disasters for investors. Engineering possibilities, no matter how grand, might
be possible, but are they desirable? Are they affordable? Will this tower be an
urban planning disaster for the city? Will it set a terrible precedent for more
of the same, uncontrolled boasting?
Parliament House, Brisbane
I must admit to
having had some interest in this portion of Brisbane. I have prepared a master
plan for the area around the Executive Building; I have prepared a scheme to
refurbish the Executive Building (that was promptly shelved); I have prepared a
scheme to redevelop the nearby heritage courtyard (both schemes were similarly
ignored). I designed the entrance to the refurbished Science Centre (that was
redecorated by the client); and I have refurbished the buildings opposite the
Executive Building, joining the old health building to its neighbour so as to
create one new office complex with a new public identity. What soon becomes
clear is that this region has problems that need to be attended to with
thoughtful ideas and subtle, sensitive planning on a fine scale. It needs
links; connections; more permeability; more places for people; more small,
intimate public spaces. While there are numerous open areas around 80 George
Street, these are more thoroughfares than places to stop to enjoy, or to pause
in for a break.
The site that
the tower is on has been the location of many schemes for a new government
office block. For many years it has been used as a government car park for
government vehicles and a few selected private cars. One’s use of this car park
site over time has highlighted issues with its functionality. The site is
unique in that it is located beside the major city riverside freeway, between
two major on/off freeway ramps that provide entry into the city and exit from
it. The other free edge is William Street, a busy city access/egress corridor.
Pedestrian and vehicular access to the site is very restricted. Although it is
at the river’s edge, well, nearby, it enjoys nothing of the possible benefits
of this location. Rather it opens out to a grim under-freeway space that has a
narrow fenced track through more car parking that leads to the ferry pontoon.
It is the least inviting of any ferry access point in Brisbane.
There is no joy
here. Above this concrete strip, the site opens up to the roar and pollution of
the freeway, revealing a prospect that might be of interest only to a manic
traffic engineer or a car spotter. Has this site been chosen just because it is
there? One wonders what has happened to the concept of John Morton's vision for
a low-rise CBD. This talented architect proved that densities equal to any
high-rise development could be achieved with a low-rise building. It was a
strategy nicely repeated in the new William Street development, the Neville
Bonner Building that took its clues from John Morton’s concept as well as the
old 1960’s city library building further along the river. This sensitive
approach by Donovan and Hill, along with the clever stepped planning of such a
large complex, enriched the possibilities for this precinct and showed it some
respect. This project established an example for its future growth.
Neville Bonner Building, Brisbane
John Morton did
achieve his aims in his award winning building that bridges Margaret Street and
stretches over two city blocks surrounded by open green spaces: 80 George
Street. It is the building that sits between the Executive Building and
Parliament House that appropriately accommodated Project Services, the Works
Department of the Government that has been much reduced in size by the new
government. I worked in the building for years. It was pleasant but not without
some problems that could easily have been addressed. One can only surmise, but
perhaps John Morton was forced to modify his ideal in its implementation.
Government bodies are notoriously difficult to deal with. There are always more
experts than can ever be useful. John Morton came to Australia as a young
architect from England. He and his English colleague Morris Hurst had a
significant impact on the local scene. They worked together for years at Lund
Hutton Newell. They signed their drawings ‘JMMH.’ There are not too many
architects who have had such success. John Morton won three civic centre
competitions nearly within as many years. His energy and enthusiasm for
architecture was such that the folk who worked for him showed their great
respect for him by copying his remarkable script lettering. John Morton was
committed to everything he took on. He enthused people and gained their
enduring respect - even that of his clients.
80 George Street, Brisbane
What is the
vision for Brisbane? If everyone is just going to put the tallest of ideas
anywhere just be cause it can be done these days, what hope is there for civic
quality? What vision is there for this river city? Is the freeway going to
stay? Will it be built over? Under? What is going to happen to the river? The
graphic promotional video for this new tower that came with The Courier Mail
report was introduced with dramatic ethereal music - Star Wars came to
mind - that culminated in a crescendo of collaged details that faded into the
night. One interior image showed clever graphic reflections layering and
smudging ordinary city views in an apparent attempt to make things more
‘interesting.’ This is a problem. If the graphics have to play games to make
the eye dance with happy intrigue, and music is needed to heighten the
experience, to make it convincing, what is really going on with this scheme?
What is it really about if it has to use tricks - enhancements? Is this
scheming so awkward that it needs clever distractions that are irrelevant to
its true experience as form and place?
It is critical
to have ideas for a city and its parts prior to placing one of the potentially
tallest parts anywhere within its existing fabric, especially in such a
restricted, boxed-in corner recess of our CBD. Infrastructure needs to be
considered and explicit. Words may blurb on about access, linkages, public
space and the like, but where are these? How do they work? The talk of the
casino moving into this area out of its historic Treasury Building
refurbishment that apparently limits its needed expansion, is just another
concern. What has been agreed? What has been spoken about? What will become of
the heritage Treasury, one of Brisbane’s best? What will become of the
Executive Building - that wonderful example of early high-rise building in
Brisbane? What will become of 80 George? With a government that wants money,
(it has sacked, or wants to sack, about 14,000 public servants since coming
into power), future development plans are critical so that the city might come
together with some integrity rather than as a series of ad hoc, grand serial
gestures to suit political wills and budgets that look after and promote only
themselves. The other concern is: what has the LNP promised its
business/developer supporters? Anything?
I have used this
area for years: the John Morton building; the car park; the nearby government
buildings; even the QUT. I have repeatedly travelled to and from this corner of
the city on a daily basis. It is remote. The site for this tower is one of the
remotest sites in the city, certainly in this zone. It is a twenty-minute
up-hill walk to Central Station; less as a rush. The planned train station at
the Park Royal site on the under-river city rail link will help bring transport
closer if it goes ahead, but the site remains remote. The site lies on the
inner- city limits, framed by the freeway, on/off ramps and busy William Street
that serves as a main road to and from the city. It is a traffic island.
Why drag more
and more people into this corner? How does one get folk there? How does one get
folk back out? Will it thrive as an urban place? I have made a few proposals
that might make a difference but these are ignored. Political thoughts get
distracted easily and architects find it difficult to consult and discuss, to
co-operate. Everyone wants to be the lone genius, keeping all others at bay so
that the opportunity is never watered down or confused as anything but MY work.
Who knows when the masterpiece might consolidate, appear? I recall a colleague
who gave his children only quality paper to draw on in the off chance that
something good might randomly appear. Are architects like this too? How many
clients have become the innocent playthings for architectural ambition and
chance?
Treasury Hotel, a part of the casino complex
If Brisbane is
to become the most liveable city that the ex-Mayor Premier liked to promote is
as - just what the jargon really means is unknown; one has to guess - then the
city needs much more care and attention that any grand gesture can give,
because this grand gesture looks like it is giving the rest of the place ‘the
finger’ while turning its back on it. Brisbane needs to be considered primarily
as a place for people. The river needs to be loved, not seen as a highway for
ferries and a place in which to build freeways for vehicles. It needs to be
refurbished rigourously; brought back to life. Streets, lanes, corners, small
spaces, large spaces all need to be thought of as places for people to enjoy.
The in-between needs shaping, not just the big gestures. Brisbane had its Isles
Lane, a quaintly intimate busy little thoroughfare with tiny shops and clutter;
but it went: what now? Its streets are clogged with traffic. The ex-Mayor’s
40kph limit only reinforces the traffic/people problems rather than solving
them. It is like a dressing on a wound that will not heal. The mall is
supposedly a people place but its spine is the thoroughfare for emergency and
service vehicles. The mall space is shaped by and framed by the old Queen
Street frontages, alignments that have no necessity now when street remembers
street, not people. Nothing sings for people other than performers on the stage
used for promotions. Brisbane needs better than tall; better than tunnel. Is it
our convict heritage that creates Brisbane’s harsh authoritarian brashness? -
see http://voussoirs.blogspot.com.au/2012/04/conviction.html
If it is to be a
vibrant place for people - what else should a city be? - then grand visions of
power need modification so that places for friendly welcome and relaxed
enjoyment can be made and extended as filaments throughout the city: the CBD
and the suburbs. Just placing a few narrow strips of bitumen and calling these
bikeways does not make a good city; or a good bikeway. It will not make the
place more ‘liveable,’ even though the mathematics might give good outcomes for
measured lengths of bitumen for bikes that can be bragged about. It is simply a
farce!! - see http://voussoirs.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/subtropical-urban-design-forum.html
and http://voussoirs.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/town-planning-concerns.html
and http://voussoirs.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/most-livable-citiy.html
and http://voussoirs.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/notes-on-development-application.html Care and love are needed. Can politicians
provide this? It is difficult enough to ask this of anyone, but with little men
pushing their authority boldly as a sergeant major might, one wonders if this
proposed tower might merely be the expression of desired personal power; a mark
of self-importance for those fundamentally unsure of themselves - for history;
for me; of my government? Grand designs carry their own intrigue: see http://voussoirs.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/grand-design.html ; but more is needed if a city
is to blossom: more co-operation; more effort; more commitment; more shared
involvement; more listening; more humility. We all know that pure power, and
the impure, perverts. We should also know the problems with tall buildings too.
I thought we had learned this. We once accepted that there was value in low
rise, high density working and living, but it seems that perhaps this more gentle thinking
will not give the grand gesture that seems to be sought. Will politicians ever
listen? It seems not when power is involved. We need to do better than this tin
tower; Brisbane deserves better; it needs better.
Let’s start with
a plan for the whole city. No, not a Town Plan that stitches up the legal
aspects of development, but a plan that can frame a rich and fertile future
that does not have the drama and trauma that modernism brought to the world. We
need words, guidelines, concepts and rules that can achieve the outcomes they
promise. We can start on the small places and pieces in various locations and
slowly bring these together to make the big in which each detail can be
carefully considered and formed for fine feeling. We must never forget how
quality and value reside in the tiny things, the small and apparently
insignificant parts of our built environment, no matter how impressive the big
things might be. It is just too easy to build the large and crass: the screams
of the brash and bold grab more attention than the whispers of the quiet and
meek.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/realestate/news/architects-fault-campbell-newmans-tower-of-power/story-fndbosu3-1226598493698
P.S.
Just two days after this report in The Courier Mail, ABC News carried this alarming headline: 'Tallest building in the southern hemisphere approved.' The only concern that anyone appears to have had with this proposal was whether it might cast a shadow over the Shrine of Remembrance. Alas. Is no one asking about other shadows; other impacts? Sadly it seems that everything will be fine if the trustees of the shrine are happy.
With this building that has apparently taken its inspiration from the Australian flag, perhaps the only comment that can be made should come from Australia's folk hero, Ned Kelly: "Such is life" - but must it be so? : see: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-18/melbourne27s-tallest-building-plan-gets-green-light/4578666
The cynic might ask: what will Queensland's premier think of this? Fancy being outdone by Victoria!
P.S.
21 May 2013
The tower is approved.
But this is not all: Brisbane is to get another tower complex - see:
and
When will we ever learn?
Why do the little men in power always seek grand monuments?
Why will politicians never listen?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.