Building Mixity
BUILDING MIXITY, Cremorne2015
Maud Cassaignau, Markus Jung, with Matthew Xue
Monash University Publishing, 2018
ISBN: 978-1-925523-51-5
Review DOI
At first instance, one would think that reconstructing existing neighborhoods is not very sexy. Often, it is impossible to enforce transformation of the existing. The current constraints determine the impossibility to make big changes, while in the search for economic, ecological and social sustainability dramatic transformation could be necessary. One of the best ways to start local debate about potential change is the use of design approaches. (urban) Design has the capability to visualize the future that not yet exists, hence increasing the interest of stakeholders, residents and industries in the possibilities that might arise.
The book Building Mixity reports on a multiyear design-led planning process that has taken place in Cremorne, a few kilometers southeast of the Melbourne CBD. This area, built in between busy roads, rail lines and the Yarra River, is a somewhat forgotten area. This has its charm but implies also that attention for new developments or neglected problems is less. As the book illustrates in a very nice way the use of visualizations, design propositions, mapping and interaction with local residents all bring about the unexpected qualities of the neighborhood. Revitalization and acupuncturistic interventions of different types not only improve the richness of the neighborhood they also illustrate that the density of these neighborhoods can be dramatically increased, meanwhile keeping the historic character of the area intact.
The pledge for a mix of additions in itself increases the MIXITY of the neighborhood. MIXITY is, according to the authors necessary to improve the usability, intensity, attractivity and durability of such areas which appear in every city around the world. In this book, the authors not so much point at the necessity of taking up the challenges inherently apparent in these areas. Yes, it is more difficult to revitalize these areas then most of the greenfield areas outside the city, and yes, there are a bunch of current rules and regulations that ask, at least, for a bit of bending, and yes, in these areas we have to deal with residents that live and work there for a very long time, and all have their opinions. If we add to this a little bit of industrial pollution, higher land values and unchangeable habits it is clear that transformation is not the easiest way. However, if we consider the alternative, a greenfield location far away from the city center, far away from where jobs are and eating away ecological values, landscape, water retention capacity and space where crops could be grown, and suddenly the alternative is, in monetary terms, not so strange anymore. To start with, it requires the prolonged interest of academia to investigate the problems and potentials in these areas, and the endurance to overcome all the barriers and difficulties during the planning process. As the authors mention rightly, academia is free to nominate these neighborhoods as interesting objects of study, and subsequently illustrate the benefits that can be realized when a design-led approach is applied to such an area. Cremorne is a very good example, and the book presents the opportunities very well, of such an area.
One of the biggest problems of Cremorne is the connectivity with CBD, Richmond and other neighboring areas. This problem is not significantly discussed in the book. How the large infrastructural barriers can be overcome, in order to allow people from Cremorne to walk or cycle into their neighboring areas, and vice versa. A design-led approach would evenly so be extremely welcome to explore the pathways to minimize barrier experiences and improve the ease of moving from inside out and outside in.
The project ran for several years and was finalized in 2013. Since then the authors needed to find a little spare time to write this book. This is a pity, as the outcomes could in some ways be more actual and would have been more actual if the authors were given the time (the budget to write) to speed up the publication process. The insights are so useful and valuable that it feels almost cruel not to have shared them sooner, so other cities and neighborhoods could benefit from it in an earlier stage of their development.
The scope of the project is 2025, and this is a somewhat curious time-horizon. It looks a mere 10 years ahead while the transformational ambition demands a look in the farther future. The process of transformation, especially in these complex urban environments requires a long breath to come to fruition. And it is evident that future of Cremorne lies beyond 2025. It offers students and also the authors a probably more interesting challenge if the time horizon would be extended to 2050 or later, as in that timeframe cities would have become completely independent of fossil-based energy, and the impacts of climate change, such as for these areas essential impacts as the urban heat island, would be really felt.
Secondly, the outcomes of this research-by-design study could have been extremely valuable to be used in the planning of Docklands or can be very helpful when further developing Fishermens Bend. This is of has not happening and it should be recommended to the City of Melbourne to take the Building Mixity study under their arms and proclaim the findings mandatory to use in Fishermens Bend. The cross-over of emerging knowledge on Cremorne with the questions of livability and sustainability in Fishermens Bend should be further intensified and lead to well understood spatial elements and interventions that would make Fishermens Bend a success. What is true for Fishermens Bend in Melbourne is also valid for the range of similar inner urban areas in a range of cities around the world.
Finally, the research described in the book is largely dependent on a sequence of design charrettes with students at Monash University. This makes one curious, as these fresh minds probably came up with such innovations that the tutors would not dare presenting them to decision-makers, or, as such, present them in their book. This is an omission as it would do justice to the students, but it would also inspire the reader to take notice of the brainwaves of young professionals. Now, some of their outputs have been located in the appendix, and it would be so much more interesting to see more of these designs, and also to reach out to local councilors to provide them with innovative solutions.
The book Building Mixity is a very readable book that every city maker should read. Not only for the beautiful graphic design, the exquisite images and visual material but also to understand the current context where cities are in and ways to get out of these impasses so renowned growth of inner city can happen in a circular way. It positions inner city precincts as potential sites where the transformation to compact and resilient urban environments takes place. Therefore, this book is of strategic importance and a must for everyone working in urban redevelopment.
