The Tusculum covered the most recent release of the Barangaroo precinct and opened a forum of discussion amongst the Architectural community, the two topics that were reoccurring where the inefficient involvement of the government and the proposed bulk of the proposed design. The articles below discuss these issues within the media:
Government involvement overseeing the development of Barangaroo has been criticised for not achieving a satisfactory outcome when grappling with an architectural development of this magnitude:
‘In architecture there is a crucial distinction to be drawn between process and product. Unlike law, where process is product, or medicine, where a bad process will lead almost inevitably to a bad outcome, architecture can have the shoddiest of processes and still produce brilliance.
Conversely, you can have every box ticked, every rule obeyed, every committee minuted and still produce unutterable crud. Architecture is a by-hook-and-by-crook kind of game, where the end must justify the means. Or not.’
‘This (current site) undeveloped section of Sydney's harbour foreshore is a 22 hectare concrete slab that used to be a car park. It juts out towards the water from the edge of the CBD.
Those that do stop to talk to The World Today aren't sure of the scale or details of the development proposals. But they all say they want part of the site left open to the public.’
Great contrvercy lies in the comparison between the existing plans, the perception of the public being over developed and the requirements of the city. What has not been evidenced in the debate is the data that the floor areas has been generated from and the effects that a development of this bulk might have on the city beyond the appearance.