The image here shows the kitchen module of the house, a sticking point during the approval process. When building approval was first sought, a permit was denied by the Department of the Interior on the grounds that the design ‘did not look like a house’. The Department’s resident architect was particularly troubled by the location of the kitchen: an internal module with no windows, but lit from above by a skylight. Kitchens must have external windows, it’s written in the tablets. Country Women’s Association guidelines, on which Departmental policy was based, stipulated that kitchens must have external windows to allow wives to have a pleasant outlook while preparing meals and washing the dishes. Depending on one’s outlook, that’s either quaint, hilarious or infuriating. Nonetheless, approval was ultimately given and the house went ahead as per plan.

The conservatism of the Department of the Interior during the 1960s made life very difficult for architects trying to do something a bit different, or that didn’t match the narrow template laid down by government. It forced some of them out of Canberra and curtailed the careers of others.

The Andrews House is in original condition and still occupied by the client 40 years after construction. The house is next door to Enrico Taglietti’s Paterson House, arguably his most important residential work. An interesting side note: the commission for 7 Juad Place was originally offered to Laurie Virr, but the Patersons changed their mind and went with Enrico Taglietti. The end result is two fine, original mid-century organic houses next to each other in a bushland setting.

Read the profile.

That house was designed and built by the Canberra architect Laurie Virr, who has had a fascinating career in engineering and architecture in the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia spanning five decades. In between all of that, he trained with Herb Elliott at Portsea under Percy Cerutty and had a serious tilt at the 1960 Olympic team.

While Laurie has based himself in Canberra and produced important work here, he has largely worked interstate during the past thirty years. He has remained outside the system and gone unrecognised (in this country at least) by the mainstream—that is, the Australian Institute of Architects. Laurie’s idiom has mostly been the single residential dwelling, with an ongoing exploration of solar housing, geometric designs and planning for small spaces. It seems to me that, together with Enrico Taglietti, he has been one of the most original and important practitioners of the late twentieth century organic style of architecture working in Canberra.

I’ve now prepared a short biography of Laurie Virr which gives a brief outline of his career and work. I’m also working on a profile of Laurie’s other important Canberra work—his first house, the Andrews House, in Aranda, which remains as fresh and interesting today as it was when it was built in 1969.

Read the biography of Laurie Virr >

Penelope Seidler and Peter Hirst (Seidler and Associates) have written to the Parliamentary Public Works Committee seeking more information about the protection of the building’s heritage values, voicing their concern about how the proposed security measures and changes to the ground level will affect the external appearance of the building. Seidler and Associates were initially advised by Stocklands that they would cooperate to ensure that the integrity and heritage values of the building were not compromised.

We have made various suggestions on preliminary designs for this work but have not seen any drawings for some time.

Why is it important? The post-war international Edmund Barton building is one of Seidler’s most important public buildings and arguably his best non-tower office block. The contrast between rectilinear and curved forms was an important and recurring theme throughout Seidler’s career and is fundamental to the idea of this building. The open ground floor accommodates quadrant shaped glass lobbies for the three entries, while the circular cores form the corner of the building and conceal the vertical services.

To viewers in the offices above, the quadrant shaped conference hall expresses its theatre seating and acoustic form and the cafeteria shows its long span shell-shaped roof elements. This theme of visual tension and contrast between the rectilinear and curved elements is reinforced by the courtyard paving pattern and in the two sculptures by Norman Carlberg, one in each courtyard. A fountain had the same effect, but it was filled in some years ago and replaced by landscaping. Underpinning this is the clearly expressed resolution of the two major parts of the structural system: 22.5m I-shaped spandrel beams and 15.8m T-beams of the spanning floor systems.

The building is also a rare example of Seidler’s work in Canberra, being the most significant of the two intact Seidler office buildings here. A quick overview of Seidler’s Canberra work:

• 12 Yapunyah Street O’Connor (1956): demolished
• Garran Group Housing (1968): demolished in the late 1990s
• 11 Northcote Crescent, Deakin (1951-52): extended twice, no heritage protection
• Canberra South Bowling Club (1959): extensively modified
• Campbell Group Housing (1964): intact, but no heritage protection
• Ethos House (1970): intact
• Macgregor townhouses (1980): intact
• Lakeview townhouses in Yarralumla (1982): intact
• The Edmund Barton building (1973): intact—for now

I think that statements being made by the AFP about the nature of the modifications (reported in the Sydney Morning Herald) are of concern.

Mr Keelty told the committee security measures would include a ‘transparent perimeter barrier’ to control pedestrian access to internal courtyards and bollards to stop unauthorised vehicles from approaching the building. Federal police executives said heritage values would be enhanced by reintroducing some of Mr Seidler’s original concepts by making the internal courtyards more welcoming for staff.

The idea that it was Seidler’s intention to close off the courtyards so as to make them more accessible for staff simply doesn’t ring true. These courtyards were designed as spaces for staff and pedestrians, with the fountain (long since filled in), works of public art, a cafeteria and a theatrette. The building bears all the hallmarks of a Seidler building—maximizing public open space at the ground floor. The sculptures and the buildings in the courtyard are positioned to control the open areas and make them more intelligible to the pedestrian as well as office workers who look down into the courtyards from the windows above. Closing this courtyard off to the public contradicts this aim and will not enhance the heritage values of the building.

A related concern, but thus far not mentioned, is future public access to the works of art. Closing the area off for security reasons and restricting access will deprive the city of two important works of public art by Norman Carlberg, the internationally acclaimed American sculptor who worked in the modular constructivist style and studied under Joseph Albers at Yale in the late 1950s. Black Widow is the free standing black painted steel form standing 4.8m high in the west courtyard. Concrete Form is the 7.3m high precast concrete sculpture in the east courtyard. These two important works were installed in 1975.

While unrestricted access to public art can be a grey area when such works are located inside commercial buildings and schools, for example, I would be interested to see some kind of statement about how these sculptures will remain accessible to the public once and if these alterations are made.

View Larger Map

Modern Times at the Powerhouse looks at the impact of modernism on all aspects of Australian culture—from art, design and architecture to advertising, photography, film and fashion. The exhibition also explores those parts of the city where modernism profoundly reshaped Australian life—its skyscrapers, milk bars and swimming pools. To extend the reach of the exhibition, the Powerhouse set up a group on Flickr where members can post their personal interpretations of modernism—whether architectural, spaces, furniture, interiors, fashion or design. While the Flickr pool invites participation from a wider audience, it also leaves open the possibility for something location-based, which would extend the reach and potential use of the idea even further.

Enter Dan Hill, at Cityofsound. Dan pondered the possibilities offered by the built environment:

…imagine temporary plaques outside the MLC, Rose Seidler, NGV etc., which give a little note about the building and state they’re part of an exhibition around Modernism in Australia…these simple analogue interventions would be interesting, discreet and more widely accessible. It kind of threads the exhibition through the cities rather than keeping it in glass cases.

On the other hand, Dan suggested, why not build a Google Map indicating places of interest to the theme? The content could potentially be delivered in a variety of ways—to phones from the exhibition or its website, or from transmitters embedded in signage at selected sites. Besides, it could become a neat content-based collaborative project able to be made into something good without a huge amount of work, since the collaborators were all starting from a position of having the material at hand.

And that’s how the Google Map Modernism in Australia started. Within a few days, Dan, Rory, Marcus and I tagged buildings, houses and other examples of built modernism around Australia—mostly in Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne, but with some additions in Adelaide, Brisbane and Hobart. It is, of course, an ongoing project, with significant areas of the map still to be populated with content. Go ahead and check it out. If anyone is interested in becoming a collaborator on this project please get in touch with Dan at Cityofsound or email me here.

UPDATE: Dan, Marcus and now Seb Chan at the Powerhouse Museum have now posted about this.

While the house has been published in the United States and Europe, it is virtually unknown in Canberra. It is not listed on the Register of Significant Twentieth Century Architecture or the ACT Heritage Register. For whatever reason, it appears to have fallen outside the ‘official’ systems of architecture awards and heritage processes. It is probably not the only one.

The house is based on the idea of a hemicycle and a grid system, where the units have been shifted at 30 and 60 degrees. The arcuated form is anchored at either end by polygonal terminals, with a hexagonal central tower forming a mezzanine bedroom over the main living space. Such geometric designs from the mid-twentieth century are rare in Canberra—the only other sophisticated example being the house at 10 Gawler Crescent, Deakin, designed by Alex Jelinek in 1956.

The house is also an outstanding example of efficient small planning and solar design. It is a modest 123.32 square metres and is perfectly attuned to its environment, requiring little or no heating and cooling. In an age where so-called ‘sustainable architecture’ can mean 300 square metre dwellings aggressively dominating the streetscape, this house provides a somewhat humbling contrast.

Anyway, this fascinating house deserves to be more widely appreciated, certainly in its home town. I hope you enjoy reading the house profile.