Winter - Australian Institute of Architects

18THE ARCHITECT 2012 ISSUE 002Over time a partial loss of the claritypromised in the original HiltonGarden Plan has occurred through thedevelopment of disjointed access anda lack of access in some locations toand through the reserve enclosure,segregation, barriers and egocentric useswith the reserve “tablet”.Master PlanningA public school occupies the easternportion of the reserve tablet, while Cityof Fremantle developments in the mainoccupy the western portion. Recognitionthat much of the latter was in need ofrevitalisation formed the basis of thecommissioned master planning.Planning set out to achieve a communityvision of a sustainable future for thereserve through its shared coordinateddevelopment. We proposed that the lossof clarity of the originally planned openand accessible reserve was detrimentalto community wellbeing as was thepresence of built ‘barriers’ within thereserve.The adopted Master Plan set aframework that consolidated facilitiesand developments on the reserve inline with the potential of the originalplanning which suggested a consistent,open and accessible environment throughand within it. The re-establishmentof the reserve’s east-west access axisand the removal of significant internalbarriers enabled connections and shareddevelopment.Planning set out to achieve a CommunityCentre that included appropriate existingdevelopment retained and integratedwith new. The site’s heritage includes ahall with its own history of adaption andre-location with an origin in the townof Northam, a time in the suburb ofMelville, and now Hilton.The conservation and refurbishment ofthis and other existing features connectsthe community in time and adds to thecontinuum of occupation.Master planning was a social planningexercise with the intention toreinvigorate community use throughthe provision of a connected and sharedoccupation.Architectural ResolutionThe existing infrastructure of theCommunity Centre was made upprimarily of Progress Hall and the PCYCGymnasium. These have distinctlydifferent inherent building technologies.Architectural resolution of therefurbishment and integration of theseand the provision of new works differedaccordingly.In keeping with budget provisions,low cost technology was adopted. Theimplementation of the Master Planto date has included building and civilworks:• Re-establishment of access throughand across the reserve• Conservation and refurbishment of thehall• Refurbishment and extension ofgymnasium and related activity spaces• Provision of a common connectingfoyer and administration• Provision of a multipurpose artsworkshop• Provision of new and upgraded toiletfacilities.• Site planting and accessReview by Jonathan LakeThe new Community Centre in Hilton byBernard Seeber Architects (BSPL) is awork of significant achievement.I accepted an invitation to review therecently completed Community Centreby Bernard Seeber Architects withoutprior experience of the project. This wasprimarily because of their establishedrecord for consistent, thoughtful andintelligent architecture. I was alsointrigued to see what had been createdbecause of the reputation of Hilton asa tough suburb with more that its fairshare of social issues.What role would architecture play in suchan environment?Hilton as a suburb shows the influence ofEbenezer Howard’s Garden City principlesalbeit with the surrounding garden beltinverted to a central garden ‘tablet’.Originally it was intended for this greenspace to be maintained, with allowancefor the development of a communityprimary school. Over time this greenspace was slowly consumed by the needsof the suburb with the invasion of aCommunity Hall, Police and CitizensYouth Centre Gynasium (PCYC), grouphousing and public health facilities alongwith associated car parking. The outcomehas been loss of openness and usablecommunity open space. Compoundingthe overcrowding of this space was thelack of interaction between the facilitieson site which manifested itself in theform of cyclone fencing separating thevarious facilities. By the time BSPL wereengaged to review the overall site therewas considerable distrust between thevarious stakeholders and limited if anycommunity interaction.Central to the Architect’s ideas for thesite was to re-establish continuous openaccess across all boundaries, removingthe segregation that existed betweenbuildings. Because of the fragmentedand piecemeal development of the