This week the Government discovered the art of “feeding the media chooks”. In the original etymology of the phrase, it referred to a skill perfected by the consummate Joh Bjelke-Petersen while Premier of Queensland between 1968-1987. He was a master a creating a distraction to draw media attention away from an uncomfortable issue or attacks from his Opposition. The chook-food was a metaphor for the distraction. The media were the chooks.
In this week’s case, the media lapped it up – chooks at their very best. They had a field day reporting on a “worthy political debate”: the highly dubious “spat” between the Treasurer Dominic Perrottet and the Planning Minister Rob Stokes over heritage, architecture and White Bay Power Station.
This “spat” occupied pages of newsprint and hours of radio debate. The chooks were fed.
At the same time however, Minister Stokes announced the extension and revised terms of reference for the design review panel. A panel set up to provide “independent expert” advice, this time on State Significant development and infrastructure projects and precincts. The scope of projects that can be reviewed are broad, ranging from State Significant Sites to development proposals adjoining green-grid corridors.
On a serious note, there is a creeping trend of architects forcing their way into planning assessment – and all of it is funded by Developers and new home purchasers and commercial business owners.
The Urban Taskforce is concerned about this latest addition to the determination of projects which could be seen as a make work scheme for architects – architects reviewing the work of other architects.
The cost, complexity and delay associated with the NSW Planning System is acknowledged as the worst in the country. Expanding the role of architects will simply make this worse and could hold us back from economic recovery.
For all developments being reviewed, developers and builders are required to use a suitably qualified architect. In many cases, they are also required to pay for architectural design competitions. In the most sensitive areas (like the CBD of Sydney) international design competitions are mandated.
On top of this, the Government now proposes further review from this panel – the Design Review Panel. This is a “make-work scheme” for architects and the community are paying for it.
And it is clear from the comments in the SMH today from Hannah Tribe that they have no idea on the scope of their brief. See quote below:
“Newly-appointed panellist, architect Hannah Tribe, said she hoped the panels would result in better outcomes for Sydney than Packer's casino at Barangaroo.
‘‘It is one of the missed opportunities of our generation,'' she said. ‘‘It is a monument to gambling,'' said Ms Tribe.
The role of the Design Review Panel is to make comment on design. They are not planners. They are not law makers (parliamentarians). The naive contribution from Hannah Tribe demonstrates succinctly why you need to limit the over-reach of architects. The role of the Design Review Panel is not to review the use of any building. The use is a matter for the planners to determine along with the relevant licencing body. It has absolutely nothing to do with the built form.
If architects could manage to stick to offering architectural advice on the built form and its interaction with the surrounding environment – we would all be much better off. Otherwise – run for an elected office (and withdraw from the Design Review Panel). The role of the Design Review Panel is not to make value judgements on the use of that building – a nuance that Ms Tribe has comprehensively failed to comprehend. Such judgements are the domain of our political representatives, the planning authorities and relevant licencing bodies. The bottom line is we don’t need a developer funded architect; plus a design competition (more architects); plus a design review panel (even more architects) – all making modest amendments, debating contestable opinion and comments on a built form. It is too much.
The Government architects should focus their attention on public open spaces, government buildings and perhaps designing some schools that are actually fit for purpose 5 years after they are completed. In the meantime, give Dominic Perrottet the responsibility for overseeing this lot!
Read Urban Taskforce CEO Tom Forrest quoted in the SMH here and Sourceable here on the Design Review Panel.
View the Urban Taskforce media release on the State Significant Design Review Panel here.
View full details of the Government’s Design Review Panel including the Terms of Reference here.
|
