Debuilt property

View Original

How Buildings Learn — Mark Upton

Mark holds a Bachelor of Business in Property from RMIT, commenced his career in valuations and held positions with Chesterton International and Richard Ellis (now CBRE) before working in the City London during the late 1990’s.

Returning from the UK, Mark undertook primarily residential development projects of varying scale & complexity from single residences to multi-unit projects mainly in Melbourne’s inner and south eastern suburbs. An opportunity then arose to join McDonald’s Australia where his role was site acquisition and securing of town planning consent across three states.

Presently with Coles Group Property Developments, Mark is a Fellow of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors and a member of the Australian Property Institute.


Is there a keen observer of property who has not wandered the streets of Melbourne’s once proud retail strip centres and thought “What has happened?” or more so “What is next?

 Post pandemic (vaccine notwithstanding) perhaps the same can also now be asked of other asset classes. What for example is to become of secondary or “sub-prime” office buildings in need of refit or where lifts can accommodate numbers insufficient to allow for social distancing? The concept of “Highest & Best Use” must surely continue to impact inner suburban light industrial areas as modern manufacturing & distribution premises are constructed in outer lying Growth Areas with superior transport linkages.

The answers may lie in Stewart Brand’s 1994 book entitled “How Buildings Learn”.

 Subtitled “What happens after they’re built” the book takes early drawings or photographs of structures from when first conceived or constructed and then contrasts these with later photographs of exactly the same buildings and/or streetscapes, often over considerable time periods. By so doing so the reader comes to understand a chronology of built form.

 “ ….. Monumental ….” grain silos once owned by Quaker Oats in Akron, Ohio are now the “Quaker Hilton” a downtown hotel. A proud Georgian house constructed in 1926 for a notable Long Island, New York local became a restaurant before falling into disrepair and a candidate for demolition in 1985 only to then be repurposed by a fast food chain in 1991. To quote Brand;

“Large houses are exceptionally skilled at being comfortable, being loved and being adaptable. Like old factories and warehouses they are always prime candidates for preservation’s best political-economic design device - “adaptive use”.

Brand’s overall thrust is that architecture is not permanent and buildings can (and indeed do) adapt, provided they are allowed to do so and not constantly demolished and consolidated for wholesale redevelopment. There may well be periods of neglect as precincts become undesirable or undervalued, but then these very same structures are, for a variety of reasons, reinvigourated bringing the undefinable cachet and inner suburban character found in certain parts of say Fitzroy, Carlton, Collingwood and Richmond.

Be it gentrification due to sheer proximity to the core of a metropolis, Government sponsored changes to transport infrastructure or public policy enshrined in Planning Schemes, if allowed to do so buildings can, and do, adapt and evolve.  

There is much to be learnt from this in the current circumstance; innovation will inevitably occur as structures, just like humans, adapt to meet needs.

Who has not visited a former warehouse, perhaps now an office or high-end residence, and marvelled at the irregular exposed brickwork and saw-tooth roof? Similarly a former workingman’s cottage now sees the what was once a sitting room “repurposed” as a master bedroom with ensuite, the whole original structure standing in contrast the strikingly modern (and often expansive) glazed extension to the rear?

Over time, buildings may be added to, another level here; a different window there; fenestration added or removed, signage incorporated. However certain buildings remain to some extent intact, albeit repurposed, therefore adding to the “patina” and character of a location.

It is a simple fact that a good many buildings are “recycled”, possibly several times, as the original purpose of the structure alters in response to its environment and other (possibly social) circumstances. This may be as simple as a further level being added to a residential building to accommodate a larger family; or it may be more fundamental and visionary.

An example is the former Phillip Morris cigarette manufacturing facility in the industrial precinct of Moorabbin being transformed to include a micro-brewery, a child care facility, office space and retail. Much of the original structure (durable and quality built; something of a local landmark) is being retained and will be re-purposed as “Morris Moor”, contributing to a new and evolving fabric / character of the neighbourhood. 

There should be some optimism that, allowed to do so (possibly by fate, a “hold out”, or similar quirk), structures that are retained evolve in an altogether beneficial (and often aesthetically pleasing) manner. This is in contrast to a constant (and seductive) cycle of demolition, consolidation, redevelopment and progressively smaller subdivision.

The examples above demonstrate that those buildings which, for a variety of reasons, are allowed to remain will find a use; be it one that conforms to a prescriptive Town Planning regimen or one that Planning Authorities ultimately come to appreciate the wisdom of permitting.

If, as Brand proposes, buildings do indeed “learn”, then it seems there is presently an opportunity to be grasped as pandemic recovery stimulus initiatives, government policy, a chronic lack of affordable housing and historic low interest rates enable the development community to become less “…. artists of space…. ” and perhaps more “…. artists of time ….”.