Balancing act keeps London on his toes

In the 18 months since his appointment as the state’s government architect, Professor Geoffrey London has played a major role in the commissioning of a number of public building projects – some of them attracting considerable controversy among Perth’s architects and the wider community.

Perhaps that is to be expected in such a role, created to give the state a focal point for what is often an emotive field.

But some feel the role has attracted controversy for the wrong reasons.

Architect Jean-Mic Perrine said the government architect’s responsibilities included taking a leading role in any debate over the city’s architectural future and direction.

“The city should be rocking; we need more intensity from people like him who have a passion, and can debate openly,” he said.

The fact that Professor London works three days a week for the Department of Housing and Works is a key issue, with the remainder spent as a professor of architecture at University of Western Australia, where he has taught since 1992, a highly influential position in the state’s architectural scene.

Professor London agrees the role could be filled with a full-time presence but he told WA Business News the dual roles had been a good mix for him as he could retain a degree of independence from government.

“My public role is very demanding on my time…but I do value my involvement with UWA,” Professor London said.

CMP director and architect John Colliere said Professor London was a good choice for the role, but questioned what power a part-timer really had to change briefs or where funding was directed to.

“It’s a hell of a role for someone to do in three days and he’s done an awful lot of work already,” Mr Colliere said.

Fellow CMP director and architect, Lloyd Pickwell, said as the government architect, Professor London was the only architect who could influence decision making at the upper levels of government.

Mr Pickwell said this was a big opportunity that should not be wasted in a city like Perth.

“It’s a new city, but it clearly has elements of heritage value which should be accentuated and looked after,” he said.

Professor London said he made it his role to champion good design.

He said he had worked hard to communicate his beliefs in public forums.

There was considerable sympathy among architects for Professor London’s position.

Woods Bagot director Ross Donaldson said Professor London had achieved a lot.

“I think for many reasons he has helped raised the profile and the discussion around the need for better design,” he said.

“How long it takes for the rewards to be realised is up to the designers. He’s required those seeking the work to demonstrate their ability and intention to take the quality of design forward.”

While some in the design professions question the government architect’s responsibilities, others are more passionate about who they feel design contracts should be awarded to, in particular WA firms, first and foremost.

There are some in the architectural community who have questioned the winning bids for some of WA’s most significant projects.

Understandably, Professor Lon-don has a different view.

He said his task was to make sure the state’s public buildings were of a quality design.

Furthermore, he adds, he was only one on a panel formed to make such decisions.

Donaldson + Warn principal and architect Geoff Warn, whose firm is involved in the Treasury Building development, said Professor London should not have to sit and fight endless battles, but instead should be free to encourage opportunity.

“International designers can create a spark of something different, and their contribution can help to raise the benchmark...If they [local firms] are good enough, they’ll get it,” Mr Warn said.