High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
Federation Square and the Public Realm
Is this the new heart of Melbourne?
Federation Square presented the city with the opportunity to achieve the civic space for which Melbournehad been longing for the last 150 years. Without doubt, Federation Square, as a whole has become alandmark for the city. However, if this urban space was developed to satisfy a public interest, has itachieved this aim? In my many visits to understand this place and its day-to-day activities, I noticedsomething curious, except for those who work there, very few people are going about in their dailybusiness. I am interested in the role of Federation Square in regards to the claim that it has becomeMelbourne's new civic heart
1
, a “community space”, the link between the city and the river and with theissue of who has, as expressed by Henri Lefebvre, “the right to the city
”
2
.
The new Federation Square, the size of a city block, occupies a pivotal part of the City of Melbourne. Ithouses the indigenous galleries at the Ian Potter Centre of the National Gallery of Victoria (NGV), theAustralian Centre for the Moving Image (ACMI), the Melbourne Visitors Centre, SBS Television Studios andthe BMW Edge amphitheatre.
Claims
Opinions on the success or otherwise of Federation Square vary widely; while Professor Miles Lewisdescribes it as a “great missed opportunity” and “something of an embarrassment”, Peter Seamer (CEOFederation Square) has compared it to the “St Mark's Square or Piccadilly Circus” stating that, “it is thecentre of Melbourne”.
3
According to Peter McMahon, the Chairman of the Board of Federation Square Management, thisdevelopment has achieved the Melbournian’s dream of linking the centre of the city with the river. For him,Federation Square is the unmistakably centre of Melbourne
4
. Surveys indicate that interstate andinternational tourist make up a significant number of the visitors. Federation Square is promoted as adestination, a safe and welcoming place with security operating 24 hours a day. The Victoria Premier SteveBracks affirmed during the opening of the National Gallery of Victoria and the Centre for the Moving Imagethat, "This space will change the shape of Melbourne forever, making us truly a riverside city”. “This is theheart of community space for many years to come."
5
The descriptions of Federation Square as accessible to the river, a civic centre and a public squareresonate with the idea of the enhancement of the public realm. The choice of Federation Square’s tenantssuch as SBS (the multi-lingual and multicultural television network) and the indigenous galleries of theNational Gallery of Victoria, have strong connotations concerning diversity, multiculturalism and tolerance
6
.However, a short stroll around Federation Square proves that this space does not shelter the activities orthe people that these buildings symbolise. In fact, aborigines gather in Swanston Street, a block away fromFederation Square. People from different ethnic groups, including Anglo Australians, visit the site asspectators rather than to participate in the activities that makes them identifiable as a cultural group.Challenges to the smooth operation of Federation Square find their opportunity at night. This situationcontradicts the day image of this urban space. Security guards describe the place at night as a haven forthieves, graffiti, drug use and homeless (
Fears a daytime gem developing a dark side at night
.
The Age07/06/03). According to Peter Seamer, the majority of the incidents relate to skateboarders
7
. This situationreveals at least two aspects of Federation Square that make it quite different from other public spacesaround the city. Firstly, there is management control and an issue of security in the form of physicalsurveillance of the space. Secondly, safety problems may be exacerbated by the design of the complex. Ifwe accept that there is a degree of crime accentuated by what we could call design issues, it becomesmore important to explore these aspects. In relation to its location, its functions, and the relationship withthe rest of the city, the situation of Federation Square is unique. Southgate, also placed along the riverbank,provides a robust interface with the river; Federation Square on the other hand turns its back.
People
Roland Barthes (1988)
8
asserts that “every city possesses a centre”, a necessary empty heart thatorganises the city and represents “the community image of the centre”. In the centre, we encounter the“social truth, to participate in the proud plentitude of reality”
9
. He gives the city the quality of “eroticism orsociality”. At its centre, the gathering point of any city is located, with all its eroticism, social activities and,what he calls, the “subversive forces”. All these qualities, summed up by the concept of “play”, make thecity centre different from the suburbs.Federation Square since October 2002 has seen the openingcelebration of many of the buildings that form the complex.The lavish celebrations, involving “1200 black-tie guests”, andoyster bar at gala parties,
10
had not included the largestproportion of the Melbournians organising their own events.The use of the Federation Square’s open space as part of theanti-war rally route, prompted many to declare that FederationSquare had been legitimised by the city and their citizens,therefore making it an integral part in the urban city fabric,social and otherwise. However, the general patterns ofMelbourne political demonstrations commenced at the StateLibrary, followed by marches ending at Parliament House orthe Treasury Gardens. Only once in seven events wasFederation Square part of the official itinerary as adestination. According to Barthes’ principles, this experiencewould not rate Federation Square as the centre of the city inthe sense of a “subversive space”, the gathering point of thecity or its “eroticism”.David Spratt, organiser for the Victoria Peace Network,commented on the use of Federation Square for the peacerally on February 14, 2003.
11
Before the rally, a permit had tobe obtained from Federation Square’s management; thisincludes the use of the stage, public liability and a paymentfor the use of the sound and screen systems. David Sprattalso regarded the rally as an opportunity for the “christening”of the Federation Square. From his perspective, christening aimed to claim the space for the people.Simultaneously, in his view, this activity provided the Federation Square management with the opportunityto promote the space as a people’s square.The State Library is the de facto city civic centre for political demonstrations. It is central, a landmark and apublic node, connected and integrated to the city fabric; it is a social and urban space, in spite of havingnone of the attractions, glitter and spectacle offered by Federation Square. Its central building, the library, isperhaps one of the most tangible symbols of participation and shared knowledge.
Figure 2: State Library during an anti-war rally. Source: Takver’s soapbox, http://www.takver.comFigure 1: Federation Square
There are no screens directing the view of the visitor as in the case of Federation Square. Visual interestdetermined by the façade of the library acts as the backdrop for the city movement, allowing enough spaceand mental freedom for the day to day participation in the extended “family of eyes”
12
. Perhaps, by default,the empty core allows enough space for being as opposed to just seeing. As it is so integral to the cityfabric, there is a natural quality to the space making it more than a destination - it is a humble part of mostcity day-to-day routes. This is a place so well used by the citizens that, it does not need to target “visitors”.Federation Square on the other hand screams for attention and its architecture cannot be ignored - as Itook photos, I photographed other “visitors” taking photos. There is a level of comfort and ownership of thespace by the employees occupying the buildings, many visibly wearing their security access cards. So cosyis this place to this group that a work related interview was taking place in the open of the BMW Edge – noshabby aborigines or testing teenagers in sight.Jason Fenton and TA (stands for “terrible aborigine” or “true Australian”) - two aborigines living in the cityand with his group occupying the seats outside St. Paul’s Cathedral - referred to Federation Square as aplace for rich people, a place from which they are chased out by the police and security guards. They knowthat this project involved an international competition and that it houses an aboriginal museum and atelevision channel. They have never visited the museum and they showed no interest to do so. Jasonoffered to show me the city, to tell me everything about it, all except for Federation Square. When askedwhere they lived, the answer was clear “here, we live here, all over the city” and about why they are notallowed in Federation Square? “Because we are dirty people, and we drink - where does it say that youcannot drink in here?” said TA. TA added, “we are creative people, we like painting and singing, we wouldlike to have a place for us, art rooms and studios and a bit of luxury too”.
Form
Activities, vistas and style are the focus of this complex. The fragmented volumes and forms set the visitorin an equally fragmented wondering. Professor Kim Dovey illustrates this fragmentation by saying, "I don'tthink you'll be able to say, I'll meet you at Federation Square. You'd have to say which part"
13
.Not much can be said in relation to the claim that it opened the city to the river, as the river is not treated asfocal to this development. In places such as BMW Edge, many layers of glass and steel separate theinterior from the water. Open space connections are achieved in an architectural dramatic meanderingthrough different sizes of what could be better described as stone crevices. These connections can beeither exciting or disorientating for the visitor. As I looked up to Federation Square from its western side, itsterraces and steps, I wonder whether the name “Federation Hill” would not be more appropriate.The architecturally innovative indigenous gallery, which opens an opportunity for historical knowledge andacknowledgment of the past, felt rather dull after my conversation with the current aborigines and theirpresent lives – they probably don’t need to experience the architectural drama.During the anti-war rally, Federation Square presented many issues; it is not designed to hold more than10,000 people. With a crowd of 250,000, the communication systems (sound and screens) provedinsufficient to cover the whole complex and the bordering streets. Different floor levels, a textured floor andcorners presented considerable safety issues. The broken open spaces inside the complex presentedfunctional problems that complicated the assembly task. The crowd, instead of evenly spilling into the city,were fragmented in pockets, some virtually disappearing down to the riverbank.The location of the stage and some of the screens are not visible from the streets. This made the locationand focus of the gathering unsuitably inconspicuous. However, on the positive side, the imagery andspectacle typically produced by Federation Square to promote the space, was in this case, smartly used tosupport the “subversive forces”. Newspapers and television found the combination of this slick new urbanspace with the anti-war rallies irresistible. Perhaps for the sheer number of the crowd but also for thechosen location of the rally, this event was extensively covered and the report was continuously repeatedon television.
Add a Comment