Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

VICTORIAN STATE GOVT. ARCHITECT - DESIGN REVIEW PANELS

edited April 2010 in architecture
luke asks - what are the changes?
http://www.butterpaper.com/vanilla/comments.php?DiscussionID=1500&page=1

salon gossip says VSGA/XWASGA is setting up marxican design review panels.
wot has been the legacy for WA?
wot zombie bbs will b the reviewers?
wot will b reviewed?
«1

Comments

  • edited 7:15AM
    The NSW AIA President (together with a junior member) mounted a sustained attack on the NSW Government Architect during yesterday's National Conference. Their questions were effectively why should the GA Office exist? And why should WE miss out on the public projects?

    It would be easy to dismiss those questions as being bound to commercial interests feeling the financial squeeze - particularly given the NSW AIA President's training in the NSW GA's office. However, the real question stands: what is the legitimacy of the Government Architect (in any state)?

    Seems it can only be compromised if there exists a mutually benefiting relationship between a servant of the government and a commerical entity. In other words, if the public purse is at the mercy of the commercial kind on display yesterday - there could be no stronger argument for an independent GA to be in place.

    For this same reason, I reject a design review panel made up of representatives of a commerical interest group (ie the Australian Insititute of Architects) influencing the future appointment of projects. It reeks of collusion.
  • edited April 2010
    old skool GA like NSW is public servant running a public office - with civil duty 2 taxpayers.
    clear cut.

    new skool GAs. questions.
    lobbyist 4 Hey Hi Hey?,
    or lobbyist 4 segment of Hey Hi Hey?
    old skool "xternal" lobbyist eg, x poli, x union, x bureaukrat paid 4 by interest group?
    or new skool citizen taxpayer funded Hey Hi Hey trojan horse?
    Hey Hi Hey is 2 close to VSGA and VSGA is 2 close to Hey Hi Hey?
    Prominent Hey Hi Hey members advise in selection of GA? over or underhadvised?
    where does VSGA pointing to Hahwards as crytearia 4 de-sign xcellence go?
    http://www.butterpaper.com/vanilla/comments.php?DiscussionID=1503&page=2#Item_13
  • edited 7:15AM
    Design Review Panels reeks of a bunch of old BB academics trying to run their lame University Crit Sessions out in the real world. Anyone for an election.
  • edited 7:15AM
    ^^
    Your saying the A i A are cheap HD?,,,,,,,,,compared to real businesses with $ in the kitty.
  • edited 7:15AM
    lousy tippers too.....
  • edited April 2010
    @info^^^^^
    design review panels in the WA model reach further.
    form part of state planning authority through local councils?
    taste cops if WA is 2 go by? heritage advisors r difficult? - now enjoy a panel stacked full of bbs/bblackies-full of themselves?
    xWASGA 2 leave marxico with a legacy of more ineffective bureaucracy? or effective - depends which way u look @ the world. word is 9timesoutof10 conformity when it cums 2 govt.?
  • edited April 2010
    NSWGAO is interesting. This department would be good to contrast with the performance of an x Cop run marxican special unit.
    http://www.govarch.commerce.nsw.gov.au/history.asp?PT=15&PD=19

    End of BER delivery will b time to compare NSWGAO and role played in delivery of Fed Educ. Stimulus projects with Marxican and Boganvillian methods. y fix something that ain't broke necessarily.
    Its not like Marxico has proved anything yet. 5 years of SGA and wots evident is a large # of gyms in every country town that r sited "interestingly", seem radically uninsulated + arrestingly composed and a lot of blue grey colourbond wos sold - though there is a nice fit out to fed square that SGA#1 gave 2 his office?
  • edited April 2010
    add new school @ marysville that seems not 2 b entirely bushfire rated construction.
    but all new dwellings r to b? could b wrong but one standard 4 govt. - anutha 4 the citizens? keen to read a VSGA letter of opinion to Parliament but understand its not as important as windsor redevelopment.
  • edited 7:15AM
    My google alert went off..........,wonder if the NSW Pres is reading it yet.

    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/labor-backed-windsor-sham-20100427-tq34.html
  • edited 7:15AM
    Anythign with Windsor in the name gotta be a dud
  • edited 7:15AM
    gotta love opinion polls...
    http://www.theage.com.au/polls/victoria/should-madden-go/20100427-tpo5.html
  • edited April 2010
    nice story. y don't they run a poll on whether he should be minister 4 respect 2.

    hackountant plays chess or chequers?
    left r mad enuff 2 wear their own dirt 2 kill the BO reeking dudded body if it takes the head out?
    moves in 2 new territory after friday if the staff don't front?

    any boning up being done on contingency plan if u suspend a state govt?
  • edited April 2010
    NSW GAO looks like its a pretty straightforward department employing 200+ people engaged in a wide variety of useful activities excluding luxury hotels.
    The marxican SGA office employs .......8......?, who believe architects and their clients should be above process and outside the democratic system because design is good. Do I have that right?

    - This guys memoirs will be gold.
  • edited April 2010
    wearing a Ewe Que parachute under the suit so he can write them?

    do u have that right?
    mag rack rag says windsah had gone out for comment.
    heaps of glowing endorsements.
    http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/CA256F310024B628/0/BDDA91E3AB1FA216CA2576EA0001F1B0/$File/Hotel+Windsor+Advisory+Committee+Report.pdf
  • edited 7:15AM
    Turf War hey.?
  • edited May 2010
    Is g[*****]e prepared to be arrested? That would be a first for a SGA.

    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/madden-dodges-windsor-questions-20100429-twls.html
  • edited April 2010
    from the bottom of the rack. i get it for the articles.
    standing committee on finance and admin - mar 12
    http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/council/scfpa/PC/DMCAP 120310 CORRECTED.pdf

    witness says that an application under the minister follows the same procedure
    as a council run process? 3 steps.
    1. Comment and advisory reviews.
    2. Planners Report and advice of decision.
    3. Councilors decision.
    =
    1. Advisory panel and notification of affected parties - receipt of comments.
    2. Ministry of Planning and Community Development Report and advice to the Minister.
    3. Ministers Decision.

    At step 3, Minister or Councilors can overturn Planning Advice. does happen. not there necessarily to rubber stamp bureaucracy. but rare. and bound to be examined by medihah.

    Far as I can tell Windsor never completed step 2.
    @ Step 2, Step 1 endorsements were about to be advised against by MoP&CP?
    Leaked hemail is an "absurd construction" - you can't advertise (step1) again after step 2.
    - should have proceeded to VCAT?
    Even minister stuff goes to VCAT 4 appeal.

    Hemail is exploding cigar at poker game ? everyone looked around.
  • edited 7:15AM
    turf war.
  • edited May 2010
    dunno. whatever u read on the internet is shite. i made all that up.
    u better just read it 4 yourself.

    g[*****]e does step 1. far as influence should extend? dunno. very unclear VSGA role.
    just as councilors should not interfere or have undue contact with planners in step 1 and 2,
    neither should the minister - that is clear. hands off until step 3. 1 + 2 are process.

    M. Guy MLC makes point in hearing that govt. has pinged councils 4 this.
  • edited April 2010
    Tufr War.
  • edited 7:15AM
    ^^^
    i also made that up.
  • edited 7:15AM
    so what you're saying hd is that the rules are made up as they go...?
    a fine pair of taylored jeans and flanno...?
  • edited 7:15AM
    I'm evading the question.
  • edited April 2010
    so you know nutting ?
  • edited April 2010
    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/madden-dodges-windsor-questions-20100429-twls.html
     
  • edited 7:15AM
    no comment.
  • edited May 2010
    m[*****]n is correct. he made a decision.

    arr millhah mite have asked the m of p & c d when did they make one.
  • edited 7:15AM
    TUrf War.
  • edited April 2010
    ^could be. or pot hole.

    may b m o p & c d wanted to do it properly.
    = rewrite the planning scheme.
    someone else had a creative idea 2 take the hi way not the bi way.
Sign In or Register to comment.