Government architects have a critical role in promoting quality design
The core purpose of government architect offices is to encourage the delivery of high-quality buildings and public spaces and embed expectations of design quality in projects of state significance. They do this through:
- advocating for good design within government and across the private sector
- formal review of designs of state significant buildings and infrastructure projects. e.g. such as the Design Review Panel in Victoria, and
- maintaining a voice for good design as projects progress down the delivery path, i.e. through business case development and subsequent procurement processes.
Recent research by SGS found that the Office of the Victorian Government Architect (OVGA) provides value to its clients and projects through a range of means. These include values generated in:
- providing an objective, independent and expert view on project design
- supporting project progression
- supporting good decision-making across multiple levels of government
- building cooperation and partnership in complex and long-running delivery processes, and
- building the skills of individuals and institutions through knowledge-sharing.
Most importantly, government architects ensure that as large projects progress, the design aspiration is not lost or sacrificed in favour of cost-management or merely through the design apathy of the broader project team.
OVGA client surveys indicate that over the past two years, the OVGA has ‘greatly progressed’ or ‘greatly improved the design quality’ of projects with construction costs of approximately $30 billion.
Recent OVGA clients strongly endorse the OVGA’s contributions to project outcomes. The majority of recent clients (>80%) believed that the OVGA’s services either:
- ‘Moderately’ or ‘greatly’ improved design quality
- ‘Moderately’ or ‘greatly’ progressed the project.
Governments could avoid accelerating poor outcomes in the built environment by investing in project design quality reviews throughout the various stages of the project development cycle. These reviews don't need to take a long time. In fact, government architect offices often conduct design reviews expeditiously to ensure design quality is promoted.
Why is this not standard practice? Governments undertake gateway reviews of project development even when economic stimulus requires speed, so why not include design reviews as part of this process?