- Article by Online Editor
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
A sports club, three school buildings, two community centres and a university dormitory the seven projects in the current issue of _Architectural Review Australia_ in some sense confront the challenge of constructing community through the construction of architecture. Of those seven, five received some form of either local, state or federal government funding. Not an unusual characteristic for a community building, you might say but for the fact that over the last few decades, reigning political wisdom has dictated a position of extreme wariness, if not outright hostility, towards publically funding anything let alone something as squishy as a community development project. In the era of the Public Private Partnership, even railway stations and freeways, the kind of hard infrastructure normally deemed essential to the smooth functioning of our cities, seem to come with their own projected profit and loss statements.
Political sentiment, however, appears to be shifting. In the face of a slew of crises and disasters the Global Financial Crisis, the Black Saturday bushfires, the Queensland floods government has found itself back in the business of community building. The fact that it took trauma of such magnitude to elicit government engagement will be considered by some as damning evidence of the short sightedness contemporary political culture encourages. As Hannah Lewi, Philip Goad and others point out in their essay ‘Catalysing Communities’, however, this behaviour is hardly unique to our times Australia has a long history of responding to crisis through construction. And while it might be reactive, it is a tendency that has left a largely positive legacy for our built environments.
Two of the projects featured in this issue, McBride Charles Ryans Penleigh and Essendon Grammar Junior School for boys, and Arkhefields Parkhurst Primary School, are the product of an explicit desire on the part of the federal government to re-engage with notions of nation building in these instances, through the mechanism of the Building the Education Revolution (BER) scheme. While most of the other works we feature are reflective of what are perhaps the more traditional civic agendas of local government, they are all worthy projects. Whether the product of the BER or local government funding, it would be disingenuous to claim a group of this scale as representative of the work being produced in the recent flurry of public building activity around the country. For the small communities these projects serve, however, I dont think its too presumptuous to say they, too, will leave a positive legacy.
*Architectural Review Australia #121: ‘Community Building’ is out now.*
[“Click here to subscribe to the print edition”:https://niche.com.au/our-brands/architectural-review-australia/], or visit our [“zinio page”:http://au.zinio.com/search/index.jsp?pageRequested=1&showTitles=limit&newsstandSearch=true&predict=true&flag=home&s=architectural+review&button.x=0&button.y=0] for a digital copy of the magazine, viewable on iPad, Mac and PC.
‘Stripped’ by Greg Natale produces the same carbon footprint in its entire lifetime that you create in just 40 hours. ‘Stripped’ pays tribute to the work of minimalist architects Claudio Silvestrin and John Pawson.