Q: Housing? A: Infill.

The exam is beyond ridiculous. Jobbing architects know that the process is as important than the product. Sometimes more so. And nowhere is this more evident than in the missing middle: inserting infill housing into existing suburbs runs the full gauntlet: difficult sites, unrealistic clients, negative Councils, activist NIMBYs, and reluctant banks. It’s a hard slog, mostly well rewarded, occasionally not..

Recent reports by the NSW Productivity Commission and Investment Victoria have shown that the optimum place for new housing is in old suburbs, and recent columns have shown that older typologies, are the new concepts. It’s back to the future, twice over. Firstly, there are always underutilised sites within existing suburbs that provide ideal opportunities for increased density, of better quality, without a loss of local amenity. These may be brownfield or greyfield, private or public, large or small. But all have the possibility for better housing..

The missing middle is term we are hearing a lot in this housing crisis. Originally coined to describe a lack of housing development in middle ring suburbs, it proves helpful in ways other than planning. It can describe middle density housing, missing in the ‘low-rise vs high-rise’ debate. It could also describe a middle way compromise on housing policy, between federal Labor and the Greens that is so far MIA..

There’s lots of talk right now about what to build for the 600,000+ houses that Australia needs right now, and much of that focusses on sustainability. So, last week I weighed in with the proposition that the most sustainable precedent we have is right under our noses: it’s 3 to 4 storey walk-up flats. Some scoffed. Some laughed. But I ask you to look beyond the stark outline, the textured red and orange brickwork and the wiggly wrought iron to see the inherent possibilities in a past modest form for a future sustainable typology..

What is the brief for the most sustainable residential development? What is the most fully rounded solution to best address the triple bottom line of environmental, social, and financial considerations? The surprising answer can be found in nine criteria that are all running in one direction..

The ternary suggests there is always a third alternative in our binary world. One issue is housing where the binary is homes or high rises, but neither is sustainable. Detached homes are low in density, far from services, requiring energy hungry cars on underutilised streets that are ground killers. By contrast, high rise units increase the density, and hence proximity of residents to services, but have massive energy demands for lifts, AC and exhausts. A third way is low + close..

They say those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it. When it comes to social and affordable housing, it seems the Albanese government – with its Housing Australia Future Fund – is content to disregard the lessons of the past. Traditionally, public housing has been provided by the states and built with federal taxes. When poverty increases – after wars and crises – most countries increase public housing, but not in Australia..

Housing is most often seen as a product, not a process. As hard as it is to design good houses, the process to get affordable housing built is way more difficult. For 70 years the easy option has been to keep building further out, at the fringes of the city. But we’ve reached the outer limits: the look-alike McMansions are too far from Melbourne’s city centre, new suburbs lack infrastructure…

Australia loves suburbia. We are the most suburbanised OECD nation: more than 40 per cent of the population in two extended cities, 70 per cent in 10. But as I’ve written before, we’re ruining that suburban dream by building houses twice as big on blocks half the size, devoid of gardens and trees, further from city centres and amenities, and with fewer residents in each home. So what might we do about it?

on currency, architects, housing, nimbys, bookends -

Some good news from the Reserve Bank of Australia - that’s not a thing you hear a lot. King Charles will not replace Queen Elizabeth II on the fiver; instead, indigenous motifs will be incorporated. Back to the future from ‘66 when the introductory $1 note had the Queen on one side, indigenous graphics on the other…

I grew up in suburban Melbourne and Sydney in the 1960s. I was lucky. You could walk or cycle to schools and shops; lots of places to explore; modest bungalows on large blocks with backyards for play, and sport with local children; birthday parties under Hills Hoist tents; the beach was close by bus or tram. It’s a world away from contemporary suburbia: far from the city centre and water, without public transport…