The Magic of Australia: Marion Mahony Griffin Lecture Live From Canberra

Greetings from the Shine Dome in Canberra, where  Caroline Pidcock, Architect and Chair of the Living Future Institute Australia, is presenting the centennial Marion Mahony Griffin Lecture. You can contribute to the conversation and submit questions to be answered during the Q&A session via the Livechat facility. The webcast is provided by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

Caroline Pidcock is an architect with genuine interest and experience in sustainable built environments. This has been developed and enhanced through her involvement in a wide range of professional, academic and other commitments. This includes current roles as Chair of the Living Future Institute Australia and Carriageworks, and past roles as lecturer/tutor at a number of Universities.

"The Magic of Australia" in the title of  Caroline talk is a reference to Marion's book The Magic of America, the surviving drafts of which were placed on the web by the Art Institute of Chicago in 2007. This work ranges over issues of democracy and spiritualism, as well as architecture and land use planning. Similarly tonight's talk ranges over issues of democracy, education, the Internet and equity in Australia.

I asked  Caroline about the role of the NBN in the built environment. She replied that the NBN would allow use of the existing buildings in regional Australia, rather than confining development to the cities.

The annual Marion Mahony Griffin Lecture, instituted in 2009, has attracted capacity audiences. The Lectures have focussed on particular facets of Marion’s personality, architectural career in the USA, Australia and India, creative works as architect, illustrator and graphic artist, passionate life interests and her marriage and partnership with Walter Burley Griffin. Recently, Griffin scholars have been publishing much more and new material about Marion and her achievements. Her life with Walter and her role in producing the winning plan for the National Capital are bound to be of keen popular interest in Canberra’s 2013 Centenary celebrations.

The Marion Mahony Griffin Lecture is a Centenary of Canberra project, proudly presented by the Walter Burley Griffin Society Inc., the ACT Government and the Australian Government Your Community Heritage Grant.

A Symposium The Griffins’ Canberra: 100 years, will be held here, Friday 16 August 2013, 12.45pm – 4.30pm, The Shine Dome, Australian Academy of Science, Gordon Street, Canberra

Canberra Not a Finnish Vision

Greetings from the National Archives of Australia in Canberra where Dr Robert Bell AM, Senior Curator of Decorative Arts and Design, National Gallery of Australia is speaking on "A capital through Finnish eyes". He is discussing the entry in the 1912 competition for the design for the City of Canberra by Finnish architect Eliel Saarinen, who lost to the design by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony.

Saarinen placed a railway station at the heart of his design for Canberra. This would have been handy for recent proposals for high speed rail. The text of Saarinen's submission is available from Cornell University (from Australian Archives, ACT, Series A762):

To facilitate an undisturbed growth we must first place the different parts of the town in groups, so that each can grow without encumbering the other. We must moreover set down the plan for the nearest surroundings of the town and choose suitable places for its future suburbs, each with a character of its own.
We have, -
(a) the official town with the Houses of Parliament, the Ministerial Buildings, and all houses which are to surround them.
(b) the university quarter;
(c) the military quarter;
(d) the commercial quarter;
(e) the industrial quarter with its population of workmen;
(f) the quarter for hospitals etc....

Finnish Design for Canberra

Dr Robert Bell AM, Senior Curator of Decorative Arts and Design, National Gallery of Australia will speak on "A capital through Finnisheyes", at the National Archives of Australia in Canberra, 5:30pm, 7 August 2013. He will discuss the entry in the 1912 competition for the design for the City of Canberra by Finnish architect Eliel Saarinen, who lost to the design by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony.

Tribute to Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony in Sydney

The Incinerator Art Space is featuring "The Unity of Art and Life - A Tribute to Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin" in Sydney, 20 March to 7 April  2013. The exhibition the centenary of the arrival of the Griffins in Sydney,  after winning the competition to design the city of Canberra. The exhibition is in the Willoughby Incinerator, one of the few remaining public buildings in Australia designed by Walter Burley Griffin and now a cultural center.

The Unity of Art and Life - A Tribute to Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin
20 Mar 2013-7 Mar 2013

Leading Sydney designers and architects present new work in a tribute exhibition to mark the centenary of the Griffins’ arrival in Australia in 1913.
A show at the Burley Griffin designed Incinerator Art Space in Willoughby, “The exhibition is a tribute to the Griffins rather than a show about them,” says curator Dr Mark Stiles. “A number of other exhibitions on during the year, especially in Canberra, will cover the Griffins' lives and work in detail. 

“In contrast The Unity of Life and Art will respond to the Griffins' ideals by presenting work made in the same spirit,” he says. “The Griffins brought the principles of the Arts and Crafts movement with them when they came to Australia - truth to materials, respect for handicraft, honesty in purpose and simplicity in design - and it is these principles that the exhibition also seeks to honour.
“As well as architecture and town planning the Griffins' work covered landscape architecture, furniture and lighting design, and draftsmanship and illustration. The Unity of Life and Art will cover a range of creative practice nearly as diverse as the Griffins' own.”
For further information regarding the show, contact Mark Stiles on markstiles49@gmail.com or 9660 1158

The Dream of a Century: the Griffins in Australia’s Capital

The free exhibition Dream of a Century: the Griffins in Australia’s Capital  is at the National Library of Australia in Canberra until 10 June 2013. This has original works by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony, tracing their work leading up to the winning of the design competition for the plan of the city of Canberra and afterwards in Australia and India. Most striking are the architectural renderings on silk. Also the furniture and stained glass windows designed by Walter Burley Griffin, including Griffin's drafting table, is a must see for Griffin enthusiasts. Last week was the centenary of Canberra and this is one of a number of displays on to commemorate the event. The display of other entries for the design of Canberra, as well as more of Walter  and Marion 's work is on display at the nearby Archives Australia office in "Design 29 and the making of Australia’s national capital". The NLA display does not suffer from some of the problems of the Archives: the captions on each work are easy to read (a book of large captions is also available) and there are no augmented reality gimmicks. However, the low light level need to preserve the delicate works makes the architectural renderings very hard to see. The Library might have provided reproductions of the works alongside to show them as they would have been originally

Designs for Canberra on Display at National Archives in Canberra

After  Professor Vernon's talk "Recording a Vision", I toured the exhibition "Design 29 and the making of Australia’s national capital" at the National Archives in Canberra. This shows Griffin's original winning entry for the design of the city of Canberra, along with other finalists.

The renderings by Marion Mahony Griffin of Canberra are works of art in themselves, as well as being significant to Canberra's history and landscape architecture. This is a rare opportunity to see them in context. Unfortunately there are problems with the way the exhibition has been presented.

The information signs are on brushed shiny metal and angled so that the spotlight reflect off the surface, making the all but unreadable. Also tablet computers have been provided to see a virtual overlay of the old drawings.

Holding up a tablet computer is uncomfortable and clumsy. Having people bending backwards, trying to peer over their glasses at the computer screens is insulting to the work of the artists. Smaller screen devices (5 inch) would have worked better, or a fixed touch screen (as used elsewhere in the archives exhibitions). But with that slight quibble this is an excellent exhibition.

Recording a Vision of Canberra

Greetings from the National Archives in Canberra, where  Associate Professor Christopher Vernon,, University of Western Australia, is speaking on "Recording a Vision" about  Marion Mahony Griffin's Renderings of Canberra. Distinguished guest is Romaldo Giurgola, architect of the Australian Parliament House.

Professor  Vernon talked on "Night Train to Lucknow: Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin: creating a modern architecture for India 1935-1937" in 2010. Noted Griffin scholar, he started this time by mentioning how to pronounce "Mahony" (no "e").  He also mentioned He traced Marion's style of rendering to Birch Burdette Long, and the influence of Japanese drawing. Frank Lloyd Wright emphasized showing architectural rendering of buildings in the natural surroundings, influencing Marion's style and also Marion influencing Wright. Professor  Vernon showed a perspective view of a real estate development rendered by Marion in 1909 for Wright's practice, showing a "land axis" aligned with a distant mountain, reminiscent of the design for Canberra.

Professor Vernon mentioned in passing influences on Rio de Janeiro's layout of Canberra, but did not elaborate (he has a paper on Canberra and Brasília).

Marion developed a Unified Unit Plan, layout with a perspective, plan and cross-section of a building. Professor Vernon pointed out that rendering styles change over time and looked at how Marion's style developed.

An ongoing debate is how much of the design work for Canberra did Marion do. Professor Vernon, after presenting considerable documentary evidence made his case that "Marion did not just draw the pretty pictures for Canberra". He also argued that Frank Lloyd Wright was trying to get to work on the plans for Canberra, but there is little evidence for this. He suggested that there is scope for more research work using the archives in Canberra. One questions is why there are few photographs of the Griffin's in Canberra. Professor Vernon called for a memorial garden to be built in Canberra to commemorate the Griffin's contribution. He showed the Mitchell/Giurgola Associates entry for the Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Competition (1975), but pointed out no memorial was ever built. 

The National Archives have released a revised edition of the book "A Vision Splendid

How the Griffins Imagined Australia's Capital" in conjunction with the display "Design 29 and the making of Australia’s national capital" with the Griffin's original winning entry for the design of Canberra.

Griffins Canberra 100 Years Events

The Walter Burley Griffin Society will hold the Marion Mahony Griffin Lecture 2013 15 August, the "Griffins’ Canberra: 100 years symposium" 16 August, and Griffins’ Canberra bus tour 17 August in Canberra. These are to celebrate one hundred years since the arrival of Walter Burley Griffin in Australia in August 1913, to implement their winning design for the city of Canberra.

Recording a Vision: Marion Mahony Griffin's Renderings of Canberra

Associate Professor Christopher Vernon, University of Western Australia, will speak on "Recording a Vision" about  Marion Mahony Griffin's Renderings of Canberra, at the National Archives in Canberra, 1 Mar 2013:

Speakers Corner- Design 29: Recording a Vision

About this event

Hear the 'bigger picture' story of the Griffin plans for Canberra. Griffin scholar Christopher Vernon shows how Marion Mahony Griffin's graphic technique evolved, and sheds new light on the talented assistants who helped produce her exquisite renderings of the national capital. For example - who were Roy, Gertrude and George, and how did they help the Griffins express their vision for Canberra?

Turnbull Advocates A More Compact Liveable Canberra

Presenting the 2012 Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture at the National Gallery of Australia in Canberra last night, Ms Lucy Turnbull, called for more densely populated Australian cities. Turnbull is familiar with planning issues, having been the Deputy Chair of the COAG Capital city strategic planning expert advisory panel, Lord Mayor of Sydney and is currently an independent member of the Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority. She praised the work of Canberra's planners is providing a coherent view of the city, which follows on from Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony's design for the city.

Turnbull singled out the Affordable Housing work of CIC Australia for praise. She noted that Australia's ageing population will require a new mix of housing stock and more single person houses will be needed. The role of the urban environment to support the innovation sector of the economy was also mentioned.

After the talk I asked Ms Turnbull and Professor Alastair Swayn (ACT Government Architect) if sufficient account was being taken of the effect of high speed broadband on city design. Also I pointed to the innovation precinct forming between the ANU and Civic in Canberra. They mentioned the effect which teleworking is having on cities.

Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture 2012

Ms Lucy Turnbull OA LLB MBA, an independent member of the Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority, will present the Australian Institute of Architects 2012 Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture in Canberra, 10 October 2012.

Australian cities before and after Walter Burley Griffin

DATE: Wednesday 10 October
TIME: 5.45 arrival for a 6pm Start
COST: FREE PUBLIC LECTURE 

Register

The annual WBGML has been delivered in Canberra since 1961. Over that time it has been given by a number of distinguished individuals from many fields of expertise, including Gough Whitlam, Professor Manning Clarke and Romaldo Giurgola. This year it is our pleasure to host Lucy Turnbull and Alastair Swayn to present the 2012 Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture.

Lucy Turnbull's title for the paper will be 'Australian cities before and after Walter Burley Griffin'. 

Lucy is a former Australian politician and former Lord Mayor of Sydney, is a prominent Australian business leader and company director. Turnbull was the first female Lord Mayor of Sydney, between 2003 and 2004 and was Deputy Lord Mayor, between 1999 and 2003. She was the first woman to hold both offices. As Lord Mayor, in 2003 Turnbull awarded laurete Aung San Suu Kyi the keys to the city of Sydney. 

With a background in commercial law and investment banking, Turnbull is a Director of Turnbull & Partners Pty. Ltd, a private investment company. Lucy has a longstanding interest in cities and their planning, governance and management. as well as the importance of technological innovation to the national economy. She is an independent member of the Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority which is charged First Government Architect for the Australian Capital Territory with the urban renewal and revitaltisation of several precincts in Sydney, including Redfern-Waterloo. 

On 26 January 2011, Turnbull was appointed an Officer in the Order of Australia for her distinguished service to the community, particularly through philanthropic contributions to, and fundraising support for, a range of medical, social welfare, educational, youth and cultural organisations, to local government, and to busines. 

DATE: Wednesday 31 October 
TIME: 5.45 arrival for a 6pm Start ... 
COST: Free Public Lecture
Register

World Heritage Listing for Canberra

In the fourth Marion Mahony Griffin Lecture last night, Professor Sheridan Burke, President of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) International Scientific Committee on Twentieth Century Heritage, detailed the process for listing the city of Canberra on the World Heritage register. The presentation was entitled "Celebrating the Griffins: contribution to Canberra as a modern planned capital city", at the National Museum of Australia in Canberra.

Professor Burke described Griffin's plan for Canberra as one of the great city plans of an idealist age, but asked what now. Canberra was designed for a a population of 25,000 and the city is now than more than 300,000.

Professor Burke recounted wife and fellow architect Marion's frustration with her husband Walter's delay in starting work on a submission for the design of Canberra. Once designed by Walter, the work had to be rendered by Marion and then transported from Chicago to Melbourne. The design was produced in 9 weeks, just in time to reach the judges in Australia and win the competition.

While designing the initial plan for Canberra, the implementation passed through and was modified by many hands, some in the Griffin's day and much to their frustration.

Griffin assumed he would be appointed to oversee the implementation of his plan for Canberra. However this took until 1913 and there was bureaucratic and political opposition. A revised plan was prepared in 1918 but Griffin resigned due to opposition in 1921.

John Suilman oversaw the second phase of Canberra's development, with detached suburbs, rather than denser terrace housing. As Sheridan explained, this made the provision of services difficult and remains an issue today.

The ANU was developed in 1946 next to Canberra's commercial centre ("Civic").

William Holford was the third architect to oversea Canberra, influenced by the design of Brazilla. Canberra main thoroughfares which had been intended for dense development and public transport were converted to parkways.

Canberra's new parliament house was located on, or in, Capital Hill, rather than down by the lake.

Professor Burke pointed out that with self government, Canberra now has two planning agencies: one of the ACT Government and one federal. The federal government released a "Griffin Legacy" plan, with building down to the lake shore from Civic. This plan did not envision high rise development. Sheridan suggested master-planning for Civic, similar to that at ANU (which has had several years of intensive building).

A national Heritage Listing Proposal for Canberra has been submitted to the Australian Government. A later step would be listing on the World Heritage list. Meetings of the committee are now streamed live on-line.

What Professor Burke did not make clear was what would be the benefits and costs of a listing. The Australian Institute of Architects May 2012 talk in Canberra featured designs for the Chinese city of Changchun, modelled on Canberra, but now growing rapidly upwards. Would World Heritage listing prevent such development happening in Canberra?

Sheridan pointed out that the processes for the heritage status of the Sydney Opera House and complex but work well in practice and so should be feasible for Canberra. It occurred to me that this might actually make resolving the ACT Government versus Federal planning issues less problematic by providing a better framework.

Sheridan expressed concern about a loss of staff resources to prepare a credible Would World Heritage proposal for Canberra and argued for the resources to do this. However, this seemed, perhaps appropriately, echo the difficulties which Griffin had in Canberra with public servants and politicians worrying about short term costs. I suggest that a grand vision therefore needs to be supported by a cost benefit analysis. The cost of the listing would be compared with the benefits ad preferably showing a net benefit.

One aspect of Canberra which is not sufficiently recognized is its role as a center for public administration. While the Parliament has prominence, the work of the public service implementing the machinery of democracy does not. Perhaps this aspect needs to be emphasized in any World Heritage listing.

Castlecrag section of the Landmarks

The presentation was preceded by a guided tour of the Castlecrag section of the Landmarks exhibition in the gallery, by curator Dr Daniel Oakmanwith. This features items from the Sydney suburb designed by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin. The exhibition features a concrete tile-making machine used at Castlecrag, with a modular building system, patented by Griffin. The museum 3D laser scanned a number of the interlocking blocks and reproduced these in rubber for children to use as giant building blocks. I suggested to Dr Oakmanwith that a miniature set of the blocks would be a popular item in the gift shop. Also it would also be interesting to have engineers research the features of the knitlock system, to see if with modern materials and techniques it could be used for building in less developed countries.

Radio Documentary on Walter Burley Griffin

ABC Radio National will broadcast "The idealists: creating Castlecrag", by Nicole Steinke, 1pm 8 July 2012. This will then be available for download:

Architects and visionaries Walter Burley Griffin and Mahony Griffin never gave up. They came to Australia to create an ideal capital city for our young nation, but were thrown off the project, beaten by the bureaucracy.

Instead of heading home to Chicago, they turned their vast energy towards creating an ideal community on the shores of Sydney Harbour. That community was Castlecrag. During the 1920s and '30s it attracted an extraordinary group of people who pushed the boundaries in the arts, politics, the environment and spirituality.

Already available is "Canberra's original design competition" (By Amanda Smith, ABC Radio, 27 June 2012):

By Design looks back at the process of selecting the plan for Canberra, won by Walter Burley Griffin. We look at the contenders as well as the winner.

Guests

Professor James Weirick, Professor of Landscape Architecture, University of NSW, Sydney
President, Walter Burley Griffin Society

Professor Sheridan Burke, Adjunct Professor, University of Canberra
President, International Council on Monuments and sites (ICOMOS), International Scientific Committee on Twentieth Century Heritage

David Headon, Advisor, Centenary of Canberra, Chief Minister’s Department, ACT Government
Cultural historian ...

Lessons for Planning Canberra from Great Cities

Greetings from the Australian National University in Canberra, where Professor James Weirick (UNSW) is speaking on The Art of City Design: Canberra and the planned capital’s movement. This followed last week's talk on "China’s Canberra: The past and future of Changchun". Professor Weirick started by pointing out it is almost 100 years since the design by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony was announced as the the winner for Canberra's plan.

Griffin's first action on being appointed was to select an eminent international panel of architects to select the design for the Australian Parliament House. But the competition was suspended on the outbreak of World War One. Later Griffin wanted Victor Laloux, architect of the Gare d'Orsay, to design the parliament building.
Professor Weirick argued Laloux's railway station design was revolutionary, as it integrated the platforms into the main building, instead of being out the back. This was possible as these were clean electric underground trains. The building is now the Musée d'Orsay (with an excellent cafe in old clock tower).

Professor Weirick pointed out the original plan for Canberra had a similar underground railway, which would have brought trains into the city centre.

Professor Weirick then pointed to the "Burnham Plan" of 1909, a "Plan of Chicago" by Daniel Burnham and Edward H. Bennett. This clearly influenced Griffin's Canberra plan, with roads radiating out from a symbolic centre, with a land axis perpendicular to the shore of a body of water.

Burnham also produced a 1901 plan for Washington and San Francisco. The latter plan had the main axis ending with a casino and aligned with a prominent mountain, as Griffin later did with Canberra. Notably more of the Canberra plan was built than those of Burnham. Also Burnham proposed a large statue on the mountain overlooking the city, fortunately Griffin proposed noting so ostentatious.

The plans of Paris, Washington and San Francisco all have an echo in Canberra, just as the Chinese city of Changchun (长春) resembles Canberra. But as QINGHUA GUO pointed out in "Changchun: unfinished capital planning of Manzhouguo 1932–42" (2004), the plan is a Chinese grid with a Beaux-Arts overlay. The same could be said of other plans of the time, Canberra is distinguished not so much for its design, but it is one of the few cities built on a greenfield site and thus expressing the Beaux-Arts plan to the maximum.

Professor Weirick then returned to the role of transportation in planning, pointing out that the World's Columbian Exposition of 1893 was integrated into the Chicago's public transport system, with heavy steam railway and an electric railway (the "Intramural Railway").

Professor Weirick damed the National Capital Authority with faint praise by saying the analysis of Griffin's original transport plan for Canberra was the most useful part of "The Griffin Legacy". He pointed out that if implemented, Canberra would have an integrated public transport system (at last week it was noted that Changchun got a tram in the 1940s and now has light rail and a high speed train station).

Professor Weirick moved on to the "The Vienna Plan of 1860", with its ring road. Otto Wagner designed the stations for the metro, including Karlsplatz Stadtbahn Station. Professor Weirick ended with Helsinki Central railway station, by Eliel Saarinen, who Griffin wanted to involve in the planning of Canberra. Professor Weirick joked that Saarinen design for Canberra, which came second, perhaps should have won (there are similarities to Griffin's design, but no lake).

This was a refreshing and relevant tour of designs realized and unbuilt, for great cities of the world. Professor Weirick combined a discussion of the design aesthetic elements of the planning and the practicalities of modern planning, as it was in the early 20th century. Canberra is to day grappling with the issues of where the city should go: out or up, where to put the public transport and how to resolve public good and private land ownership. The cities of the past which inspired Canberra still have much to tell us today.

Remodeling Canberra on a Chinese City

The Australian National University in Canberra was the venue for a talk by architects, planners and historians on "China’s Canberra: The past and future of Changchun". They pointed out that the Chinese city of Changchun (长春) was modeled on Canberra's original plan and suggest that Canberra's future can be based on the redevelopment now taking place in Changchun.

Cox Architects have provided master planning advice for the city and designed the "Changchun International Financial Center" (长春国际金融中心), a 300,000 m² development on the major axis at South Gate (3518 Renmin Street). The plan is to have one 80 story tower on one side, lower buildings and preservation of the access on the main axis.

Obviously Canberra will not need the density of Changchun, but Rodney Moss, Director of Cox Architecture and Professor of Architecture at the University of Canberra, argues that the post WW2 suburban development of Canberra is not good city planning. He argues for high rise development of the existing Canberra town centers and that concentrating high rise will improve the look of the city.

One interesting feature Professor Moss showed was that some of the high rise buildings proposed for Canberra have three floors of staircases, to allow people to see their neighbors. This looks a like three story walk-up flats, stacked on top of each other to make a tower. The idea that instead of getting out of a lift in a high rise building in a dim corridor and rushing to their apartment, the residents would alight into a large area with a balcony, staircase and a view out a large window. They would therefore be encouraged to spent part of their time in the communal area and meet their neighbors.

It occurred to me that use of the communal area in a high rise building could be encouraged by placing the mailboxes there. Normally mailboxes for residents are placed in the foyer of a high rise building. If instead they were on every third floor, the residents would be encouraged to alight from the lift on that floor, collect their mail and the walk the open stairway up, or down, to their floor. In this way they would be more likely to see their neighbors. Also this would significantly speed up the lifts as people would be alighting on every third floor, not every floor. Peer pressure would tend to encourage this behavior, even when mail is not being collected, with all those for a particular staircase getting off together.

Professor Moss pointed out that Canberra is the second fasted growing city in Australia and it will have to be made 50% more dense in the next 20 years, if it is to remain within its borders. He argues that the Changchun model can be applied, increasing the density of the existing centers and preserving the open space.

Professor Richard Rigby, Executive Director of the ANU China Institute pointed out that Changchun was planned under Japanese occupation, with a design based on Canberra. Also of interest is "Changchun: unfinished capital planning of Manzhouguo 1932–42" by QINGHUA GUO (2004), which describes the plan as "... A Chinese north–south axis and grid plan was overlaid on the Beaux-Arts plan. ...".

Dr Michael Jasper, Assistant Professor - Architecture and Design in the University of Canberra's Faculty of Arts & Design displayed plans of Canberra which are in Changchun from the period of the 1930s and the Changchun 1932 Plan, showing Griffin's influence.

Changchun as a Model for Canberra The parallels between Changchun and Canberra are extensive. Changchun had a tram added in the 1940s down the main axis (Changchun Tram) and now has model light rail (Changchun Light Rail Transit). Canberra was similarly planned for a tram down the main road, and currently considering a tram or bus-way. Changchun has a very high speed railway station, which is also being proposed for Canberra.

Changchun was planning to build satellite cities around the old core, much as Canberra. Cox Architects proposed to build up the old city more densely and rejuvenate the old open space around the city, rather than build on it. They also proposed connecting the old open space to the new areas and making the the waterways more accessible to the population. The main idea was to plan the open space in more detail, so it would be of more use. Also the land use policy should allow residential development be allowed mixed in with commercial use in the city center. In essence Cox have prepared a plan for Canberra of the future.

These proposals for Changchun provide a good model for Canberra. There can be high rise in the town centers and lower height around them. As the planners point out, new buildings can have reconfigurable walls so that they can meet future needs. As I put to a Canberra planning meeting, in my view planning to triple Canberra's population to one million would make it a more sustainable and livable city.

One development which planners have failed to take account of is the effect of the Internet on where and how people live and work. This is something which architects and planners need to investigate further.

2011 Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture

Greetings from the Finkel Theatre at the Australian National Unviersity in Canberra, where Sue Holliday will present the 2011 Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture. Before she began we were reminded there is CAPITheticAL, a competition on planning Canberra (some wags are planning to resubmit Griffin's original plan, arguing it was never implemented properly).

Professor Holliday began by asking what the symbolic role of a capital city was, as distinct from government administration and politics. She argues that the public has to feel pride in their capital city. Modernity has a role in making a capital, Professor Holliday argued.

There are no series plans to move the Capital back to Melbourne. With the public service cutbacks announced this week, there may be some scaling back, but not to the less than 30,000 people the Griffins planned for.

Professor Holliday asked the audience if they would want to live anywhere else, given the good amenity. But the younger generation would see little to hold them in Canberra, until they wanted to raise a family. This seemed a little unfair, as while Canberra could not compete with Sydney for nightlife, it would be livelier than the average Australian city of 360,000 people.

Professor Holliday pointed out that recent ACT Government planning makes no mention of Canberra's role as the national capital. She speculated this might be because there is a separate set of federal planners for the city. Having two groups of planners planning the one city has caused difficulties since self government.

Report Administration of Canberra's Memorials

The Australian Parliament Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories tabled its report Etched in Stone? on the administration of National Memorials in Canberra, 23 November 2011. My submission "Keep the Vision of Parliament Clear", is included in the report as submission number 14.

It is useful that deliberative democracy was recommended by the committee. Unfortunately the report recommends an overly prescriptive process, which duplicates the town planning process which is already in place for Canberra, just for one type of land use (a memorial) Instead the committee could have recommended applying the planning processes which are supposed to be used in Canberra for any land use and then just add the extra processes needed for deciding on national monuments.

Contents

• Preliminary pages: Contents, Foreword, Committee Membership, Terms of Reference, List of Abbreviations and List of Recommendations
• Chapters
  1. Introduction
  2. Problems with the Ordinance
  3. Reforming the Process
  4. The New Model
  5. Transitional Arrangements for Current Proposal
• Appendices
  1. The Inquiry
  2. National Memorials Ordinance 1928
  3. Submissions
  4. Hearings and Witnesses

List of recommendations

National Memorials Ordinance 1928
Recommendation 1
The JSCNCET recommends to the Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government that, rather than attempting to amend the National Memorials Ordinance 1928, the Ordinance be repealed and replaced with a new Commemorative Works Act, as proposed in Chapter 4 of this report.

Reforming the process
Recommendation 2
The JSCNCET recommends to the Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government that, while new systems are put in place, residents of the Australian Capital Territory be immediately appointed to the Canberra National Memorials Committee,
as required under the National Memorials Ordinance 1928; and that these persons have acknowledged expertise in heritage matters, with one to be a member of the ACT Heritage Council nominated by the ACT Chief
Minister.

Recommendation 3
The JSCNCET recommends that, as part of the decision-making process for National Memorials, each proposal for a National Memorial be required to undergo heritage assessment, prior to final approval, including the creation of site specific Conservation Management Plans
and Heritage Impact Statements.

Recommendation 4
The JSCNCET recommends that the National Capital Authority’s Commitment to Community Engagement be applied to the decision-making process for National Memorials, with the NCA to report publicly on the
public consultation process undertaken with regard to each National Memorial proposal.

Recommendation 5
The JSCNCET recommends that proponents of memorials provide resources and funds to conduct public consultation processes as part of the assessment and approval process for new National Memorials.

Recommendation 6
The JSCNCET, recommends that the National Capital Authority review its Commitment to Community Engagement to reflect the principles of deliberative democracy, and that it design and report upon public
consultation processes for each National Memorial in accordance with these principles.

Recommendation 7
The JSCNCET recommends that the proposed Memorials Master Plan incorporate provisions for establishing a wider range of subjects for commemoration with a view to funding them through a combination of private and government subscription.

Recommendation 8
The JSCNCET recommends to the Australian Government that the Government consider the ongoing funding of a national commemoration program, with a particular focus on memorials that are unlikely to be built without government support.

The New Model
Recommendation 9
The JSCNCET recommends that the National Memorials Ordinance 1928 be repealed and replaced with an Australian Commemorative Works Act, based on the United States model. This Act would provide for a two-pass assessment process for National Memorials, the first pass focused on commemorative intent, the second pass on character and location; and that:

• At the first pass, a motion be introduced to Parliament to approve the commemorative intent of a proposed National Memorial.
• Following the introduction of the motion, the proposal be referred to the JSCNCET for consideration and report, based on the following approvals:
  • the memorial proposal be referred to the National Memorials Advisory Committee—a Committee made up of history and heritage experts, with one ACT Government representative, chaired by the National Capital Authority—to ensure that it complied with the Criteria for Commemorative Works in the National Capital
  • the National Capital Authority assess the proponent’s budget for the design, construction and maintenance of the proposed National Memorial, and capacity to finance the proposal.
• Once approved by the National Memorials Advisory Committee, and with financial arrangements certified by the National Capital Authority, the JSCNCET would report upon the proposal. The motion would proceed at the pleasure of Parliament, and if passed, the commemorative intent of the proposed National Memorial would be approved.
• Following passage of the motion establishing the commemorative intent of the proposed National Memorial, responsibility for identifying a location for the memorial and initiating a process for its design would pass to the National Capital Authority. This would require memorial proponents to develop a design completion brief and run a public design competition (if necessary); and undertake, in conjunction with the National Capital Authority, the following tasks:
• Identify possible locations
  • Conduct mandatory public consultations
  • Seek independent expert advice
  • Seek planning advice from relevant authorities and, if required, advice from relevant government agencies
  • Have assessments made under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
  • Develop draft conservation management plans and/or heritage impact statements for proposed sites, if required
  • Develop the budget and business plan for construction, maintenance and associated infrastructure costs.
• At the second pass, assessing design and location, the proposal would be referred to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories for consideration and approval on behalf of the Parliament. If required, the Committee would be able to invite submissions from the public and undertake public hearings.
• Second pass approval by the JSCNCET would provide the final approval for the proposed National Memorial.
• Commemorative works, as defined by the Act, could be initiated by the Commonwealth or ACT Governments.

Recommendation 10
The JSCNCET further recommends that the proposed Commemorative
Works Act:

• Define a ‘commemorative work’, encompassing both National Memorials and National Monuments as currently defined.
• Establish a National Memorials Advisory Committee, consisting of recognised experts in a range of disciplines, including history, heritage, architecture and planning; representatives of veterans, the services and relevant Commonwealth Departments; representatives of organisations with a strong focus on Australian history and culture at a national level; one representative of the ACT Government, appointed on the recommendation of the ACT Chief Minister; and chaired by a representative of the National Capital Authority. Membership to vary depending on the nature of the proposed National Memorial.
• Include the Criteria for Commemorative Works in the National Capital as a schedule to the Act.
• Include a Memorials Master Plan, including a map of existing memorials and potential sites for new memorials in accordance with the Criteria, as a schedule to the Act.
• Require the National Capital Authority to maintain a register (published on a specific National Memorials website) of all National Memorial proposals, including their current status, and all relevant decisions and approvals, along with all supporting documentation, including:
  • Independent expert advice
  • Public submission
  • Reports of public consultations
• Define responsibilities of proponents in meeting design, construction and maintenance costs, including providing ten per cent of the overall costs towards ongoing maintenance of the new National Memorial.
• Prohibit the appearance of donor names or names of relatives on or near National Memorials and National Monuments, except where the specific object of the commemoration—its commemorative intent— is individuals, families of groups that have been found to be worthy subjects of commemoration.
• Exclude minor commemorative works, such as plaques or individual trees outside the Parliamentary Zone, from its operation.

Transitional Arrangements for Current Proposals
Recommendation 11

The JSCNCET recommends to the Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government that the current approved National Memorial proposals stand for the life of their current site reservations, but that these site reservations not be extended beyond their current terms.

From: Etched in Stone? report on the administration of National Memorials in Canberra, Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories, Australian Parliament, 23 November 2011.

2011 Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture

Sue Holliday will present the 2011 Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture, 5:45pm, 30 November 2011 at the Australian National Unviersity in Canberra:

The annual WBGML has been delivered in Canberra since 1961. Over that time it has been given by a number of distinguished individuals from many fields of expertise, including Gough Whitlam, Professor Manning Clarke and Romaldo Giurgola. Click here to view a complete list of WBGML guest speakers.

This year it is our pleasure to host economist, planner and urban strategist Sue Holliday to present the 2011 Walter Burley Griffin Memorial Lecture.

Sue is passionate about city planning. She studied economics and then did a masters degree in planning at University College, London.

Sue came to Australia in 1978, and worked in the State government planning system for 25 years. She was the Director General of Planning in the State department from 1997 to 2003.

During her career, Sue was involved in the most interesting and important urban renewal and metropolitan development projects in NSW including the Sydney Olympics 2000, the Walsh Bay renewal project and the Ultimo Pyrmont redevelopment. Her early awareness of the importance of sustainable buildings led her Department to seed fund the establishment the Australian Green Building Council in 2001. She was an inaugural Board member of that Council.

Sue runs her own strategic urban consultancy now, called Strategies for Change. She is President of the Building Professionals Board in NSW, and Chair of the Built Environment Industry Innovation Council. She is a Director of Good Environmental Choice Australia, an eco label organisation, and is a member of the COAG Expert Panel on Cities. She is the Immediate Past President of the Planning Institute of Australia, and has recently been appointed Professor (of planning in practice) at UNSW.

Canberra: the Sustainable Garden City

Simon Corbell MLA, Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development, talked on "Creating a Sustainable Garden City at the University of Canberra, this evening. The Minister made a good case, arguing for a 21st century version of the English Garden City: urban more than suburban.

The Minister proposed accommodating more people at the existing Canberra town centers. He estimated that 65,000 extra households would be needed by 2030. This is an approach I agree with, having suggested at the Canberra 2030 planning process, that the population of Canberra be tripled to 1 Million, by building up the density around the existing city and town centers.

The Minister was on less firm ground claiming that this new vision for Canberra would be in line with the thinking of Canberra's original planners: Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin. They did envision trams along the main street of Canberra (Northborne Avenue), but they were not asked to plan a city on the scale Canberra is, let alone what it is now envisioned.

The Minister pointed out that increasing fuel cost had disproportionate effects the poor, if they do not have access to public transport. He gave the example of planning bus stops, where the target was at least one within 500 m of each home. This was measured using the direct distance, not the distance a person would have to walk, which could be much further. It occurs to me that it would not be difficult to use Google Maps to estimate the current average actual walking distance from home to bus stop.

The Minister pointed out that open space in Canberra is of environmental benefit, reducing the temperature fluctuations and providing for water purification, at locations such as the David Street Wetlands.

The Minister pointed out that the city should reserve space for a Very Fast Train (VFT) station. He seemed to suggest this should be retained near the current Canberra station. He also mentioned food security, which did not seem very relevant to Canberra, as this is mostly located in an area which did not traditionally grow food and will become less viable due to global warming.

At question time the Minister was asked if the increase of density of population around Civic and Kingston was contributing to the economic viability of these retail centres. The Minister replied that the decline in retailing was due to global economic factors, rather than land planning. He pointed to City West, next to ANU, as a planning success. The latest building will hold 600 students and has a bus interchange built into it. He pointed this was one of the busiest public transport route in Australia.

The next question was about options for investing in the greenness of infrastructure. The Minister pointed out that the Government's energy policy included trigeneration of power at a precinct level. One place nominated for this is the Canberra Hospital. He also pointed out that the public housing on Northborne Avenue needs redevelopment and this could include energy generation.

Asked about how the treasury would see planning changes, the Minister pointed out that planning is a political issue. He pointed out that a proposal for a bus-way from Civic to Belconnen did not receive wide public support, whereas a rail line did, even though the bus-way was technically superior. My suggestion to the minister would be to adopt Sydney's successful strategy of branding its high capacity bus service as if it was rail: "metrobus".

I asked the Minister if the sustainable garden city could cope with changes brought to the way people work, shop and learn, brought about by the Internet, given we may have only a few years advanced notice, or no notice at all. He responded that more liveable higher density centres will cope better as people will still want to get together for social reasons, even if they do not need to go to the office to work. He also pointed out that Canberra's suburban centres had adapted uses over the years, with hairdressers and butcher's shops being replaced with other functions. That was a good answer, but it is not clear how the city will respond if most retail business moves to the Internet in the next few years. There are some easy adaptations possible, such as shopping centres becoming distribution centres.

Marion Mahony Griffin Book Talk

Professor David Van Zanten will speak about his book "Marion Mahony Reconsidered", in Canberra, 27 October 2011.

Professor David Van Zanten will speak about his new book 'Marion Mahony Reconsidered'.

At Paperchain Bookstore

34 Franklin Street
Manuka ACT 2603

Telephone 6295 6723 or email info@paperchainbookstore.com.au

Thursday October 27, 5.45 for 6.00pm
RSVP Wednesday October 26

Marion Mahony Griffin (1871-­1961) was an American architect and artist, one of the first licensed female architects in the world, designer for Frank Lloyd Wright’s Chicago studio, and an original member of the Prairie School of architecture. Largely heralded for her exquisite presentation drawings for both Wright and her husband, Walter Burley Griffin, Marion was an adventurous designer in her own right, whose independent and highly original work attracted attention at a moment when architectural drawing and graphic illustration were becoming integral to the design process.

This book examines new research into Marion’s life and paints a vivid portrait of a woman’s place among the lives and productions of some of the most noted American architects. The essays included take us on an ambitious journey from her origins in the Chicago suburbs, through her years as Wright’s right-hand woman and her bohemian life with her husband in Australia ­ whose new capital city, Canberra, she helped to plan, ­ up until her golden years in the middle of the twentieth century. Filled with richly detailed analyses of her works and including and populated by an international cast of characters, 'Marion Mahony Reconsidered' greatly expands our knowledge of this talented, complex, and enigmatic modern architect. ...

David Van Zanten, the Mary Jane Crowe Professor in Art and Art History at Northwestern University, USA, has edited the publication. WB Griffin Society members Professor James Weirick of UNSW and Associate Professor Anna Rubbo of University of Sydney are two of the four authors.

Please reply to the venue, Paperchain Bookstore at the addresses above, to make a reservation for this event, which is being organised by the Canberra Chapter of the WB Griffin Society. ...