Margot Giblin
Jim Ovens, project manager, later confirmed to Tasmanian Times that this funding has already been secured. It is from Atlantic Philanthropies, a large contributor to biomedical research.
Hobart City Council
Development and Environmental Services Committee Meeting
Monday 16 April 2007
5pm
Aldermen
Chair: Deputy Lord Mayor Eva Ruzicka, Helen Burnet, Lord Mayor Rob Valentine as ex officio member of committee and John Freeman, co-opted.
Leave of Absence: Darlene Haigh
THE first item on the agenda was an application by the University of Tasmania proposing partial demolition, alterations and a new building on the site it owns at 9,11,13,15 and 17 Liverpool St and 55 Campbell St Hobart.
This address will put the new Menzies Centre at the fountain roundabout entrance to the city of Hobart. It will be enormous.
The proposed recommendation from Council officers was refusal with reasons which included the requirement that ‘new development should reflect the scale and form of the existing fabric’.
The applicant was represented first by Jim Ovens, Project Manager for the University of Tasmania and then by Adrian Stannick, the leading architect on this project. Mr Stannick delivered a smooth commentary with his power point presentation saying that ‘an incredibly unique response’ was required to meet the client’s needs.
These needs are for a co-location project in which the University’s School of Medicine will be on the same site as a major biomedical research facility, the Menzies Centre, whose researchers will also be lecturers.
The benefits of such a partnership were accepted by the aldermen present, as was the advantage of being within reasonable distance of the Royal Hobart Hospital. The applicant seemed sure that even when the hospital moves from its present site it will still be close to the CBD.
The energy efficiency and green design components of the proposal were queried and addressed — high performance glazing, a centralized plant, efficient lighting and use of recycled material where possible were listed.
Technologically, Valentine was assured, no similar research facility will beat it. The jewel in the top floor will be the wet area lab — unique in the extent of its continuous laboratory area.
Which brought both applicant and aldermen to the tricky bit.
The size of the building.
The look of the building.
The site of the building, in the light of the above.
Aldermen queried and the applicant responded.
Does it have to be so big?
Yes — to house the two functions of research and teaching.
Does it have to be so big all the way up?
Yes, because the lab is on the top and the reason it’s on the top is that the centralized plant supporting it is roof–top.
Would a set back, of say, 9 metres from the Liverpool, Collins corner be possible?
We’re engaging with the corner deliberately to add to the fabric of the city on a bigger scale.
Heritage values of the area and of particular adjoining properties were discussed and here the argument ranged over what the real heritage values were and whether a new building should attempt to recreate that ambience.
Freeman was supportive of the applicant’s vision for urban renewal, rejecting the idea of attempting to fake heritage.
He was appreciative of the architectural allusions to micro biology and cellular construction. The abstract notion of attempting to echo the shape of the mountain range above Hobart, with acknowledgment of both the winding forms of the city’s rivulets and the texture of its many stone walls didn’t survive the power point presentation quite so well for him or for other aldermen.
Freeman, in supporting the project, also referred to the attraction of overseas funding for it.
Jim Ovens, project manager, later confirmed to Tasmanian Times that this funding has already been secured. It is from Atlantic Philanthropies, a large contributor to biomedical research. The funding is tied to the research centre being a leading edge facility but more importantly, for Council, it is tied to a time-frame. If the planning process were significantly delayed Mr Ovens told TT this funding could be at risk.
At the end of debate on this item however it looked as if the client’s desire for a ‘land-mark building’ and the architects’ responding ‘large gesture’ have a way to go.
The outcome for the proposal at this stage is that it will go to full Council meeting next week, recommended for approval with conditions.
These conditions relate primarily to the bulk of the building and to its look — the finished surface. The off-white, grey and black of the present ‘morphing skin’ of the building will be discussed further.
Despite his disappointment that the proposal did not get universal acceptance at DESC Mr Ovens asserted that the university is committed to continuing to work with Council to reach a mutually satisfactory outcome.
This part of the DESC meeting over Freeman made it clear that he thought it the most important part, absenting himself from the rest of the agenda.
Amongst other things this left the remaining committee members free to amicably discuss exactly what was meant by ‘low cost housing’ in relation to a petition asking Council to be more pro-active in supporting provision of it.
Valentine was concerned about definitions, public perceptions, Council constraints and responsibilities and sensitive, inclusive and accurate wording. Burnet remained determined as things seemed to get fuzzier. Then with the expert guidance of Mr Noye, council officer, they suddenly crystallized into a straight forward motion calling for a report to be prepared on possible incentives to attract developers to provide low cost housing.
As Mr Noye succinctly pointed out there was no need to include the concept of providing a roof over the head of every citizen of Hobart as the rich don’t have this problem. Specifically referring to those who need help was all that was required.
Done.
All motions arising out of this DESC meeting will go to the next full (open) Council meeting on Monday 23 April at 5pm, upstairs at the Town Hall, Macquarie St.
