HERITAGE COUNCIL DETERMINATION

Determination Date Thursday 1 December 2016

Place Name Saunders House

Location 90-92 Gatehouse Street, Parkville

HO number HO4, City of Melbourne (Parkville Precinct)

Place Category Heritage Place

At a meeting on 1 December 2016 The Heritage determined that the above place is not of cultural heritage significance at a State level, and does not warrant inclusion in the Victorian Heritage Register. The Heritage Council resolved to refer the Executive Director's recommendation and submissions to the City of Melbourne Council for consideration to amendment to the planning scheme in accordance with s42(1)(d)(i) of the Heritage Act 1995.

The Heritage Council endorses the attached report.

Professor Stuart Macintyre AOChair, Heritage Council of Victoria

ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE ANDEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE HERITAGE COUNCIL

Name: Saunders House, ParkvilleHermes Number: 125101

Page | 2

NAME SAUNDERS HOUSELOCATION 90-92 GATEHOUSE STREET, PARKVILLEHERITAGE OVERLAY NO: CITY OF MELBOURNE, included in HO4 (Parkville Precinct) but not

individually listedCATEGORY: HERITAGE PLACEFILE NUMBER: FOL/16/21205HERMES NUMBER: 125101

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE HERITAGE COUNCIL: That the Saunders House NOT be included as a Heritage Place in the Victorian Heritage Register

under the Heritage Act 1995 [Section 32 (1)(a)]. The Heritage Council may wish to consider exercising its powers under s.42(1)(d)(i) of the Heritage

Act 1995 and refer this recommendation to the City of Melbourne for consideration for an amendment to the planning scheme by an individual listing of this place in the local Heritage Overlay.

The Heritage Council may wish to consider exercising its powers under s.42(1)(d)(ii) of the Heritage Act 1995 and determine that it is more appropriate for steps to be taken under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 or by any other means to protect or conserve the place.

TIM SMITHExecutive DirectorRecommendation Date: 16 September 2016

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RESPONSE SUMMARYNomination and recommendationThe Saunders House was nominated in 2010. It is the view of the Executive Director that this place should not be included in the Victorian Heritage Register for the reasons outlined in this report. The information presented and the attached documents demonstrate that although the Saunders House technically satisfies Criterion D at the state level, as a pivotal example of Brutalism in a Victorian setting, such is the extent of alteration to the interior (which, in its original state, was an integral aspect of its overall Brutalist expression) that exclusion condition XD1 must be invoked, thus negating the application of Criterion D.

Potential local level significanceIt is the view of the Executive Director that the information presented in this report and the attached documents demonstrate that Saunders House is of potential individual local significance, rather than state level significance. The Heritage Council may wish to consider:

exercising its powers under s.42 (1)(d)(i) of the Heritage Act 1995 and refer this recommendation to the City of Melbourne for consideration for an amendment to the planning scheme by an individual listing of this place in the local Heritage Overlay.

exercising its powers under s.42 (1)(d)(ii) of the Heritage Act 1995 and determine that it is more appropriate for steps to be taken under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 or by any other means to protect or conserve the place.

RECOMMENDATION REASONSREASONS FOR NOT RECOMMENDING INCLUSION IN THE VICTORIAN HERITAGE REGISTER [s.34A(2)]

Following is the Executive Director's assessment of the place against the tests set out in The Victorian Heritage Register Criteria and Thresholds Guidelines (2014).

CRITERION A

Importance to the course, or pattern, of Victoria’s cultural history.

STEP 1: A BASIC TEST FOR SATISFYING CRITERION A

The place/object has a CLEAR ASSOCIATION with an event, phase, period, process, function, movement, custom or way of life in Victoria’s cultural history.

PlusThe association of the place/object to the event, phase, etc IS EVIDENT in the physical fabric of the

place/object and/or in documentary resources or oral history.Plus

The EVENT, PHASE, etc is of HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE, having made a strong or influential contribution to Victoria.

Executive Director’s Response

The Saunders House is associated with a late phase of residential infill that took place in the inner suburbs during the early post-war era. It is suggested to have been erected on one of the last vacant blocks of land remaining in this part of Parkville. This late phase of residential infill is a relatively minor one in the broader context of post-war residential settlement and cannot be said to have made a strong or lasting contribution to Victoria.

Criterion A is not likely to be satisfied.

CRITERION B

Possession of uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of Victoria’s cultural history.

STEP 1: A BASIC TEST FOR SATISFYING CRITERION B

The place/object has a clear ASSOCIATION with an event, phase, period, process, function, movement, custom or way of life of importance in Victoria’s cultural history.

PlusThe association of the place/object to the event, phase, etc IS EVIDENT in the physical fabric of the

place/object and/or in documentary resources or oral history.Plus

The place/object is RARE OR UNCOMMON, being one of a small number of places/objects remaining that demonstrates the important event, phase etc.

ORThe place/object is RARE OR UNCOMMON, containing unusual features of note that were not widely

replicatedOR

The existence of the class of place/object that demonstrates the important event, phase etc is ENDANGERED to the point of rarity due to threats and pressures on such places/objects.

Executive Director’s Response

The Saunders House does not possess uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of Victoria’s cultural history. There are a many places (both residential and non-residential) that remain to demonstrate the emergence and early development of the Brutalist style in Victoria during the 1960s, and more still that demonstrate the ongoing application of the fully matured style in the 1970s.

Criterion B is not likely to be satisfied.

CRITERION C

Potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Victoria’s cultural history.

STEP 1: A BASIC TEST FOR SATISFYING CRITERION C

The: visible physical fabric; &/or

documentary evidence; &/or oral history,

relating to the place/object indicates a likelihood that the place/object contains PHYSICAL EVIDENCE of historical interest that is NOT CURRENTLY VISIBLE OR UNDERSTOOD.

PlusFrom what we know of the place/object, the physical evidence is likely to be of an INTEGRITY and/or

CONDITION that it COULD YIELD INFORMATION through detailed investigation.

Executive Director’s Response

Although the original interior finishes of the Saunders House (ie, concrete slab ceilings, face brickwork) may still exist behind the subsequent overlay of plasterboard, no evidence has been found to indicate that they are likely to retain a high degree of integrity. In any case, the original character of the interior is already known, adequately recorded, and more readily interpreted through archival photographs.

Criterion C is not likely to be satisfied.

CRITERION D

Importance in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of cultural places and objects.

STEP 1: A BASIC TEST FOR SATISFYING CRITERION D

The place/object is one of a CLASS of places/objects that has a clear ASSOCIATION with an event, phase, period, process, function, movement, important person(s), custom or way of life in Victoria’s history.

PlusThe EVENT, PHASE, etc is of HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE, having made a strong or influential contribution to

Victoria.Plus

The principal characteristics of the class are EVIDENT in the physical fabric of the place/object.

Executive Director’s Response

The Saunders House has a clear association with the emergence and early development of the Brutalist movement in Victoria. This movement, which gained momentum in the later 1960s and became widespread during the 1970s, made a strong and influential contribution to Victoria. The principal characteristics of the Brutalist style are evident in the external fabric of the place.

Criterion D is likely to be satisfied.

STEP 2: A BASIC TEST FOR DETERMINING STATE LEVEL SIGNIFICANCE FOR CRITERION D

The place/object is a NOTABLE EXAMPLE of the class in Victoria (refer to Reference Tool D).

Executive Director’s Response

Using the definitions of ‘notable example’ contained within Reference Tool D, the Saunders House can be considered a notable example of its class in that it is a pivotal example. Acknowledged (by Philip Goad and others) as the first confident expression of the emerging Brutalist idiom in Victoria, the house demonstrably ‘encapsulates a key evolutionary stage in the development of the class’.

On this basis, Criterion D is likely to be satisfied at the State level.

STEP 3: EXCLUSION GUIDELINES FOR CRITERION D

XD1 Demonstrates few characteristics of the class

The place/object does not exhibit the principal characteristics that define the class, either having never possessed them or having lost them through subsequent development, activity or disturbance.

Executive Director’s Response

Exclusion guideline XD1 is applicable. The original interior of the Saunders House, with its concrete slab ceilings, face brick walls, exposed trusses and rough timber joinery, was an absolutely integral part of the Brutalist sensibility of the place. With virtually all of the original wall and ceiling finishes now concealed by plasterboard, the overpainting of original timber, and the removal of original joinery and built-in furniture, the place is deemed to have lost too much of the ‘principal characteristics’ of the Brutalist class through ‘subsequent development, activity or disturbance’.

Invoking this exclusion condition, Criterion D is not likely to be satisfied at the State level.

CRITERION E

Importance in exhibiting particular aesthetic characteristics.

STEP 1: A BASIC TEST FOR SATISFYING CRITERION E

The PHYSICAL FABRIC of the place/object clearly exhibits particular aesthetic characteristics.

Executive Director’s Response

Externally, the Saunders House exhibits aesthetic characteristics associated with Brutalist architecture, including the frank articulation of materials and the sculptural expression, with jagged roofline.

Criterion E is likely to be satisfied.

STEP 2: A BASIC TEST FOR DETERMINING STATE LEVEL SIGNIFICANCE FOR CRITERION E

The aesthetic characteristics are APPRECIATED OR VALUED by the wider community or an appropriately-related discipline as evidenced, for example, by:

critical recognition of the aesthetic characteristics of the place/object within a relevant art, design, architectural or related discipline as an outstanding example within Victoria; or

wide public acknowledgement of exceptional merit in Victoria in medium such as songs, poetry, literature, painting, sculpture, publications, print media etc.

Executive Director’s Response

While the Saunders House has achieved a degree of critical recognition over the past three decades (through scholarly discussion in books, articles and theses), this relates more to its status as an early example of Brutalist tendencies in Victoria, rather than to its aesthetic qualities per se. At the time of its completion in 1962, the house generated relatively little publicity, with only a brief write up in Cross Section, the Melbourne University student broadsheet of which Saunders himself was a former editor.

Criterion E is not likely to be satisfied at the State level.

CRITERION F

Importance in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement at a particular period.

STEP 1: A BASIC TEST FOR SATISFYING CRITERION F

The place/object contains PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that clearly demonstrates creative or technical ACHIEVEMENT for the time in which it was created.

PlusThe physical evidence demonstrates a HIGH DEGREE OF INTEGRITY.

Executive Director’s Response

The Saunders House does not demonstrate a high degree of creative achievement. The suggestion that the house was the first residential building in Melbourne designed to pay homage to the form and expression of traditional terrace houses cannot be sustained, inasmuch as research has identified an earlier example (a block of townhouses in Kew, designed by Neil Clerehan) dating from 1957.

Similarly, the house does not demonstrate technical achievement. Its construction techniques, such as concrete blockwork, slab floors, timber trusses and slate roof, were entirely conventional at the time.

Criterion F is not likely to be satisfied.

CRITERION G

Strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group for social, cultural or spiritual reasons. This includes the significance of a place to indigenous people as part of their continuing and developing cultural traditions.

STEP 1: A BASIC TEST FOR SATISFYING CRITERION G

Evidence exists of a DIRECT ASSOCIATION between the place/object and a PARTICULAR COMMUNITY OR CULTURAL GROUP.

(For the purpose of these guidelines, ‘COMMUNITY or CULTURAL GROUP’ is defined as a sizable group of persons who share a common and long-standing interest or identity).

PlusThe ASSOCIATION between the place/object and the community or cultural group is STRONG OR SPECIAL, as evidenced by the regular or long-term use of/engagement with the place/object or the enduring ceremonial,

ritual, commemorative, spiritual or celebratory use of the place/object.

Executive Director’s Response

The Saunders House does not have strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group.

Criterion G is not likely to be satisfied.

CRITERION H

Special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in Victoria’s history.

STEP 1: A BASIC TEST FOR SATISFYING CRITERION H

The place/object has a DIRECT ASSOCIATION with a person or group of persons who have made a strong or influential CONTRIBUTION to the course of Victoria’s history.

PlusThe ASSOCIATION of the place/object to the person(s) IS EVIDENT in the physical fabric of the place/object

and/or in documentary resources and/or oral history.Plus

The ASSOCIATION: directly relates to ACHIEVEMENTS of the person(s) at, or relating to, the place/object; or

relates to an enduring and/or close INTERACTION between the person(s) and the place/object.

Executive Director’s Response

David Saunders is not considered to have made a strong or influential contribution to Victoria’s history. Although highly regarded as an academic, author, architectural historian and early champion of heritage conservation, Saunders is not a household name outside of the limited circle of the architectural profession. While he admittedly rose to exalted academic positions at universities in New South Wales and Adelaide, his earlier stint at the University of Melbourne, from the mid-1950s to the late 1960s, was as one of numerous full-time lecturers. His contribution to post-war architectural education in Victoria cannot be elevated above that of such peers as Brian Lewis, Ray Berg or Doug Alexandra.

Although fully qualified and registered as an architect, Saunders did not maintain a private practice (unlike many of his academic peers, such as Doug Alexandra, Ray Berg and Fritz Janeba). His own house in Parkville appears to be the only known example of his architectural output that was built (his only other known

project, for a block of flats in Clifton Hall designed in 1967 in association with Gerd & Renate Block, remained unrealised). As such, Saunders made only a very limited contribution to Victoria’s built environment.

Criterion H is not likely to be satisfied.

RELEVANT INFORMATIONLOCAL GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY City of Melbourne

HERITAGE LISTING INFORMATION

Heritage Overlay: Yes HO4 (Parkville Precinct)

Heritage Overlay Controls: External Paint: Yes

Internal Alteration: No

Tree: No

HISTORY

CONTEXTUAL HISTORY

The emergence of Brutalist Architecture

From the mid-1950s, Australian architects would have been aware of the burgeoning Brutalist movement via reports in overseas journals, and from their own travels. One of the first local acknowledgements of the movement dates from July 1961, when Neil Clerehan wrote about it in his Small Homes Service column. Opening with the observation that “houses are becoming rougher, more brutal in form and finish”, Clerehan reflected on the seeds of the movement in England, in the late work of Le Corbusier, and in that of American architects such as Paul Rudolph (whose own concrete block house, then only recently completed in Miami, was illustrated). Clerehan ended his report with the comment that “if we can accept simple, straightforward houses, the new ideas in architecture may find favour here”.

Robin Boyd subsequently referenced the trend in his 1963 booklet, The New Architecture, describing the New Brutalism (as it was then known) as “an open revolt against facile prettiness and all forms of decorative sham”. Notably, he observed that “there is not much Brutalism in Australia”. Two years later, when he discussed Brutalism in more detail in his book, The Puzzle of Architecture, he noted British manifestations (characterised by a preference for face brickwork “that could look equally rugged if the joints were treated with vigour and the pointing iron war spared”) but did not identify any specific Australian counterparts.

While Brutalist influences appear in some of Boyd’s own work of the early 1960s, it was not until the end of that decade that they became more overt. Most notably, Menzies College at Latrobe University (1967-68), which was later described as “one of the few large buildings Australia produced which represents the 1960s kind of Brutalism”. The author of those words was none other than David Saunders himself who, with some authority, could further reflect that “many buildings acquired the surface trappings of Brutalism without allowing the frugality to pervade them. In that way, rough concrete became a decoration in an otherwise soft-life environment”. During the 1960s, many buildings in Victoria “acquired the surface trappings of Brutalism”, but very few “allowed the frugality to pervade them”, at least until the end of the decade.

David Saunders

David Arthur Lewis Saunders (1928-1986) was born in Warragul, where his father, a Methodist clergyman, was then based. Reverend Saunders later served congregations in Kilmore, Preston, Bendigo and Bentleigh before settling in Williamstown around 1951. As was then typical, David Saunders began his architectural studies at Melbourne Technical College (now RMIT), then transferred to the University of Melbourne and

received his BArch in September 1951. By the end of that year, he was already registered as an architect in Victoria. During and just after his university studies, Saunders had gained experience with several city architectural offices, notably Bates, Smart & McCutcheon, who commissioned him to write a monograph of the firm’s founder, published in 1953 as Joseph Reed, Architect. It was the first of many published works.

Also while studying, Saunders met fellow architecture undergraduate Doreen Densham (1928-2004); they became engaged in February 1951 and wed in January 1952. The following month, the couple departed aboard the Orcades to undertake post-graduate study in England, returning to Melbourne in November 1953. Saunders then resumed study at the University of Melbourne, with a Diploma of Town & Regional Planning conferred in March 1954. He subsequently joined the teaching staff of the Faculty of Architecture, and took the position of managing editor of the popular student broadsheet, Cross Section. From March 1955, Saunders also had a stint as an assistant curator at the National Gallery of Victoria.

Opting for a career in academia rather than as a practising architect, Saunders began lecturing in architectural history in 1956 and was appointed a senior lecturer in 1960. During this period, he furthered his own education by completing a thesis on the subject of terrace housing, for which a Master of Architecture degree was conferred on 19 December 1959. A few weeks before, it was announced that Saunders was one of six recipients of the Nuffield Dominion Travelling Scholarship for 1960. Intending to study high-density housing in England, Saunders departed in December with his wife Doreen and their three young daughters. They returned to Australia (via Bombay) in December 1960.

Focusing on teaching, Saunders appears to have undertaken virtually no architectural work in Melbourne under his own name. In 1961, he and his wife collaborated on the design of their own house in Parkville (although the extent of their respective contributions remains unclear). His only other known project was a block of apartments in Gold Street, Clifton Hill, commissioned by the Presbyterian Church in 1966. Designed by Saunders in association with German émigré architects Gerd & Renate Block, the flats were never built.

In 1968, Saunders left the University of Melbourne to take up a position as senior lecturer at the Power Institute of Fine Arts at the University of Sydney. The following year, he received a Fulbright Scholarship to study at Yale University in the USA. In 1977, he was appointed a Professor of Architecture at the University of Adelaide where (as noted in one obituary) he was known as “a tireless lecturer whose lectures displayed grace, judgment and infectious enthusiasm”. He held that position until his early death, from cancer, on 23 September 1986. His widow Doreen resided in Adelaide until her own death in 28 March 2004.

During this career, Saunders was not only well-known as an academic but also as an author and champion of architectural history, heritage and conservation. Along with many articles on the topic, he wrote, co-wrote or edited books including Melbourne: A Portrait (1960), Historic Buildings of Victoria (1966), Ancher, Mortlock, Murray, Woolley: Sydney Architects (1976), A Manual of Architectural History Research (1977) and A Manual of Architectural History Sources in Australia (1981). He was active in the National Trust of Australia and, from 1978, was president of Australia ICOMOS, during which time he promoted its adoption of the Burra Charter (1981). A conference that he organised in 1984 lead to the creation, the next year, of the Society of Architectural Historians of Australian & New Zealand (SAHANZ), for which we served as founding president. Since 1998, his memory has been perpetuated in SAHANZ’s annual David Saunders Grant.

HISTORY OF PLACE

A New Residence for Saunders family, 1952 to 1959

Until his marriage, Saunders resided with his parents; when he became a registered architect in December 1951, he gave his private address as 34 Electra Street, Williamstown, which was the manse beside the Methodist church where his father ministered. As Saunders and his wife left for London only weeks after they wed in early 1952, the impetus to establish their home in Melbourne was postponed. Returning in late 1953, the couple lived in the Astor flats at 643 Punt Road, South Yarra, then moved to an inter-war bungalow at 11 Cairns Grove, Bentleigh, thence to a larger house at 17 Hillside Crescent, Blackburn. These successive moves were prompted by their growing family: by 1958, they already had three daughters, with a fourth to

come. The desire for a purpose-built family residence loomed large. As Saunders later reflected, “naturally, being architects, we wanted to build our own home, rather than buy an old one”.

On 30 October 1958, David and Doreen Saunders acquired the title to a block of land at the corner of Gatehouse and Morrah Streets in Parkville. Located along a streetscape of predominantly late-Victorian terrace houses, it was then one of the last remaining vacant sites in the area. Clearly, the site’s proximity to the University of Melbourne was an important factor in its selection, and Saunders’s own interest in the terrace houses was another. In any case, further realisation of the project was delayed when, in late 1959, the Saunders family moved to England for twelve months. While he had told the press of his hope to live in one of the new high-rise apartment blocks then proliferating in London, the family ultimately took up residence in a flat in a row of terrace houses opposite Regent’s Park.

Conception to Completion, 1960 to 1963

When the family returned to Australia in late 1960, the new Parkville house became a priority. Of the design process, Saunders reflected that “one leading intention was to provide for the six of us as much feeling of spaciousness as possible”. This was achieved with ingenuity, in the face of council restrictions (“challenged by appeal, without success”) that required the house to be only 18 feet (5.5 metres) wide. Hence, a tightly-planned interior with multi-use spaces, including a master bedroom adaptable as a study/sewing room with beds folded up. Noting further that “we did not want it to look out of place”, the external form developed to “achieve the same urban character of the surrounding terrace homes”. In this regard, Saunders was clearly guided by his own knowledge of the typology in Melbourne (the subject of his master’s thesis).

Working drawings were completed by 25 August 1961, when the MCC issued a building permit (BA35056) for what was described as “new dwelling” worth £9,000. On 6 December, a second permit (H4920) was issued for a fence, valued at £50. Construction proceeded forthwith. A noted aspect of the project, informed by Saunders’ passion for Melbourne’s architectural history, was the sourcing of salvaged materials from demolition sites and wreckers’ yard, including handmade Hawthorn bricks and a cast-iron palisade fence. The builder was Raimond Daniels (1918-1975), a Russian émigré whose firm, styled as R Daniels Pty Ltd, was formed in 1959. At the time of the Saunders job, Daniels had recently completed architect David Godsell’s own much-published house in Beaumaris. He later went on to undertake work for such architects as Vito Cassisi, John Bish and the office of Marsh, Bennie & Barry.

In 1962, Saunders’ house received a peer-review from visiting British architect and academic Dr Reyner Banham, who had defined the term ‘the New Brutalism’ in an article published in London’s Architectural Review in 1955. Travelling to Sydney in May 1962 to chair the 11th Australian Architectural Convention, Banham then made a brief detour to Melbourne to address a conference held by architecture students from the University of Melbourne. At that time, Banham visited Saunders’s house and recognised its debt to contemporary British architecture with the observation, “But this is not an Australian house…”

The Saunders family remained living in the house until 1968, when they moved to Sydney.

Popular, critical and scholarly acknowledgement, 1965 to date

The Saunders House was first published in February 1963, when two photographs and a brief discussion appeared in student broadsheet Cross Section (which Saunders himself had edited until 1961). It has since generated further popular, critical and scholarly acknowledgement through to the present day.

In March 1965, the house was included in the itinerary for a self-guided tour of Melbourne architecture, published in Building Ideas magazine to coincide with the 14th Australian Architectural Convention held in Melbourne that year. In February 1967, the house was profiled in the Australian Women’s Weekly as “House of the Week”, with a two-page spread quoting its designer/owner and illustrated by sketch plans and colour photographs. In June, the house received more extensive coverage in the RAIA national journal, Architecture in Australia, which included a critique by fellow architect/academic Neville Quarry. At some point in the

1960s, the house was also photographed by the amateur architectural photographer Peter Wille, whose slide collection (Including two images of the Saunders House) is now held by the State Library of Victoria.

The architectural significance of the Saunders House was acknowledged within its designer’s own lifetime. One of his last published works was a chapter on terrace houses that he wrote for the anthology, The History and Design of the Australian House (1985), edited by Robert Irving and Richard Apperley. Another chapter, contributed by Sydney academic Jennifer Taylor, discussed the so-called Sydney School of post-war residential architecture and drew attention to Saunders’ Parkville house as being “similar in spirit”. Taylor described the house as “related, without stylistic copying, to the row of nineteenth century terraces in which it stands”, and drew attention to its innovative open planning and its expression of structure and materials. The following year, Taylor elaborated on this connection between Saunders’ house and the Sydney School in her own book, Australian Architecture since 1960.

Philip Goad first drew attention to the importance of the Saunders House as early as 1992, in an article that appeared in the special issue of Transition devoted to the work of Robin Boyd. Goad’s piece, which focused on Boyd’s changing approach to residential design, identified a sub-typology referred to as “the collected shed roof house” and cited Saunders’ former residence as “an early and local [Australian] example… with differentiated skillion roofs and frank exposure of brick seconds, slate and off-form concrete floors”. Goad subsequently discussed the Saunders House at greater length in his PhD thesis (also 1992), and, later still, it was included in his book, A Guide to Melbourne Architecture (1999). As recently as 2015, Goad re-iterated the importance of the house in an article charting the emergence of the Brutalist movement in Australian architecture, entitled “Bringing it all home: Robin Boyd and Australia’s embrace of Brutalism, 1955-1971”.

In October 2008, the Saunders House was included in the Survey of Post-War Built Heritage in Victoria: Stage One, commissioned by Heritage Victoria and undertaken by Heritage Alliance, as a desktop study of places considered to be potentially of cultural significance at the state level. The following year, in August 2009, the house was classified by the National Trust of Australia (Victoria) as a building of state significance.

Alterations and additions

On 28 March 1988, a building permit was issued for “alterations to existing house” worth $5,000. Although copies of the drawings for these works could not be readily obtained, a recent internal inspection of the house confirms that the alterations were largely restricted to the interior, and included the concealment of original face brick walls and concrete slab ceilings with plasterboard linings, painting of timber panelling, alteration to the staircase, new kitchen and bathroom fitouts, the replacement of some windows with glass blocks, and the insertion of a third window to the kitchen wall.

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

Architect name: David SaundersArchitectural style name: Post War Period 1945-1965Builder name: Raimond DanielsConstruction started date: 1961

VICTORIAN HISTORICAL THEMES

06 Building towns, cities and the garden state6.3 Shaping the suburbs6.7 Making homes for Victorians

09 Shaping cultural and creative life9.3 Achieving design and artistic distinction

PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION

Occupying a corner site in a streetscape predominantly comprised of nineteenth century terrace dwellings, the Saunders House is a two-storey detached house on an elongated and relatively narrow rectangular plan. Internal zoning, with the principal habitable spaces at either end linked by a service and circulation core, is expressed externally, with a flat roof to the centre core flanked by a symmetrical par of slate-clad skillions, without eaves. External walls are of concrete blockwork. Echoing traditional terrace house form, the two end elevations (north and south) have projecting wing walls that incorporate a balcony at the upper level, roofed by the skillion, with simple white-painted metal balustrades.

The Morrah Street elevation, effectively the principal façade of the house, is near-symmetrical. A slightly off-centre entry porch has a wide yellow-painted front door, flanked by narrow sidelights with glass block infill, and a projecting concrete slab roof. Above, just below the eaves line of the flat roof, is a continuous window bay, with another projecting slab hood. This elevation is other starkly expressed, with only small windows at both levels, including one window (to the right side of the first floor) with a projecting window box. Front and rear elevations have full-height windows and glazed doors, except the lower level of the Gatehouse Street façade, which has a row of three rectangular windows, all with iron grilles.

Although the overall plan form of the house remains more or less as it was when built, the interior has otherwise been much altered. The exposed concrete slab ceilings and face brick walls have been concealed by plasterboard sheeting and the timber floors lined with carpet and linoleum. The staircase, originally with open timber treads, has been enclosed and carpeted, and its balustrade and adjacent wall of vertical timber boarding have been painted white. Other original timber elements, such as the built-in timber furniture in the living room, and the pelmets to kitchen and living room, have been entirely removed.

Upstairs, the timber trusses to the bedrooms remain exposed, but have been painted white. The foil insulation, originally left visible, is now variously concealed by strawboard and plasterboard linings. The rear bedroom, which was originally partitioned to create sleeping alcoves for Saunders’ four daughters, has been gutted and re-configured to create to two discrete rooms, with separate hall access. The original louvred windows to the clerestory have been replaced with conventional sashes. The current bathroom and kitchen fitouts also appear to date from the 1988 renovations.

OBJECTS AND INTERIORS

The interior has been extensively remodelled, with most of the original finishes no longer evident. Almost all of the original face brick walls and concrete slab ceilings has been concealed by plasterboard linings, the original timber panelling has been overpainted, and the original joinery and built-in furniture removed. The 1988 renovation altered the staircase, installed a new kitchen and bathroom fitouts, replaced some windows with glass blocks, and inserted a third window to the kitchen wall.

LANDSCAPES, TREES & GARDENS

The setting includes a number of elements that remain from Saunders’ original scheme. These include a cast iron palisade fence along the Gatehouse Street frontage and a wall of recycled brick that extends along the side (Morrah Street) and rear (laneway) boundaries. At the rear, these walls enclose a brick-paved courtyard with a low dwarf wall that defines a raised garden bed. A Japanese-style barbecue, designed by Saunders and mentioned in one early account, is no longer evident. None of the plantings appear to be significant.

ARCHAEOLOGY

N/A

INTEGRITY/INTACTNESS

Externally, the Saunders House appears substantially intact. When the current presentation of the house is compared to photographs from the 1960s, it is obvious that few major changes have been made. These

include glass block infill to the dining room window and front door sidelights, the insertion of a third window to the kitchen (facing Gatehouse Street), the replacement of louvred clerestory windows with single pane sashes, the infill of one clerestory bay, and the installation of roof-mounted air-conditioning plant.

The interior has been extensively remodelled, with most of the original finishes no longer evident. Today, only the laundry retains its original face brick internal walls. An adjacent cupboard provides a rare glimpse of the original interior character, as it retains not only the face brickwork but also some exposed concrete and part of the staircase structure with its original varnished timber finish.

While the changes to the exterior are relatively minor, sympathetic and reversible, the remodelling of the interior is considered to be a change that is major, intrusive and not readily reversible. From the outside, the original design can be ascertained, but the altered interior has significantly compromised the interpretation of the house as a thorough example of Brutalism that “allowed the frugality to pervade”, as David Saunders himself once put it. [August 2016].

CONDITION

When viewed from the exterior, the place is in good condition. Some minor cracking is evident to the external blockwork. [August 2016]

COMPARISONS (ON VHR)

1. Other early 1960s houses on the VHR

There are currently fourteen places on the VHR that were designed/built during the 1960s. The majority of these are non-residential places; they include three office buildings, a factory, a non-denominational chapel, and a swimming centre. Only six are private residential buildings. Of these, only two date from the first third of the decade (ie, from 1960-63). These two houses will be briefly discussed below, with comment on how they compare to the contemporaneous Saunders House of 1961-62.

Delbridge House, Eaglemont (VHR H1871)

Dating from 1960-61, the Delbridge House at 55 Carlsberg Road, Eaglemont, was designed and built by three brothers, builders Ian, Max and Malcolm Delbridge, as a residence for their parents, Harold and Florence. Boldly conceived as a series of cantilevered concrete floor slabs with glazed infill between, the house was designed with the input of engineer Emery Balint, head of Civil Engineering at RMIT. While the exterior of the house was characterised by sheer modernist minimalism, the interior incorporated a highly idiosyncratic range of fittings and finishes, mostly devised by Max Delbridge, including a cantilevered staircase, glass-bead light fittings and patterned wood-block feature wall.

Delbridge House has been subject to relatively little alteration and consequently remains notably intact, including the highly idiosyncratic interior treatment.

Delbridge House, Eaglemont Grimwade House, Rye

Grimwade House, Rye (VHR H2209)

Designed by McGlashan & Everist, the Grimwade House was built in 1961-62 as a holiday/retirement dwelling for businessman Geoffrey Holt Grimwade and his family. Located on a large bush block overlooking the beach at Rye, the house was conceived as a series of flat-roofed pavilions linked by courtyard and covered walkways. Its planning and palette of materials, which include vertical weathered timber boards and uncoursed rubble stonework, show the influence of Japanese architecture. The house, which won the Victorian Architecture Medal for 1963, raised the public profile of the emerging partnership of McGlashan & Everist, who went on to receive other high-profile commissions, notably Heide 2 in Bulleen, for John & Sunday Reed (1968), which similarly won the Victorian Architectural Medal.

Grimwade House remains notably intact, both externally and internally.

Comparison to the Saunders House

After 1960, residential architecture in Melbourne became more inclusive as local architects departed from the pure modernism that had defined the so-called Melbourne Regional School of the 1950s and began to embrace more diverse influences from Europe, the USA and Asia. Even though broad sub-themes are apparent, individual architect-designed houses tended to be more individualistic, even idiosyncratic, than their counterparts of the 1950s. The Saunders Houses illustrates a particular sub-theme of 1960s residential architecture that is not manifested in either the Dellbridge House or the Grimwade House.

There is one fundamental difference between the Saunders House and these two contemporaneous houses already on the VHR. Delbridge House and Grimwade House are characterised by notably intact interiors. By contrast, the inside of the Saunders House has been remodelled to the point that its original Brutalist-flavoured finishes can no longer be readily interpreted.

2. Buildings on the VHR showing Brutalist influence

There are currently four building on the VHR that illustrate the development of the Brutalist idiom in Victoria during the 1960s. All of these are non-residential buildings, and all were completed after 1963.

Total House, Melbourne (H2329)

Designed by architects Bogle & Banfield and erected in 1962-64, Total House combined a multi-storey carpark with a rooftop office block, conceived as a discrete rectilinear volume. With its trabeated expression of massive concrete piers and beams, it shows the influence of the particularly distinctive and highly sculptural Brutalist style developed in Japan in the mid-twentieth century. The Brutalist influence in this building is limited to its exterior form and expression. The office interiors, which are not discussed in the Statement of Significance, were evidently more conventional in fitout.

Former Hoyts Cinema Centre, Melbourne (H2335)

Designed by Sydney architect Peter Muller and erected in 1966-69, the Cinema Centre in Bourke Street reflects Muller’s trademark use of a Frank Lloyd Wright idiom in its expression as a massive tapering volume with rooftop fleche. While Wrightian influences dominate the design of the building, the impact of the emerging Brutalist aesthetic is evident in the characteristic off-form finish to the concrete exterior. As with Total House, the building was included on the VHR on the strength of its external articulation. The interiors of public spaces in the building (cinema foyers, etc), which were originally designed in a similarly Wrightian mode, had already been gutted by the time that the building was added to the VHR.

Harold Holt Swim Centre, Glen Iris (H0069)

Designed by Kevin Borland and Daryl Jackson and completed in 1969, the Harold Holt Swim Centre is one of the first confident expressions of the mature Brutalist style in Melbourne. This was not only shown by its materials (eg off-form concrete, concrete block) and its form (eg jagged roofline and splayed corners), but also in its clear articulation of functional components (eg expressed stairs, ramps and exposed service ducts). Thus (and in contrast to the two earlier examples just cited), the Brutalist aesthetic was articulated not only externally, but also internally.

Plumbers & Gasfitters Union Building, Carlton (H2307)

Designed by Graham Gunn and completed from 1969-71, this three-storey building is also one of the first truly confident expressions of the mature Brutalist style in Melbourne. This is demonstrated by its off-form reinforced concrete construction, jagged roofline, cranked glazing (with tinted glass) and highly sculptural expression of functional components such as stairwells and window bays.

Comparison to the Saunders House

These four buildings provide an interesting overview of the development of Brutalism in Victoria during the 1960s. The two earlier examples notably illustrate how, in the earlier part of the decade, Brutalist tendencies manifested themselves in parallel with other stylistic influences (in this case, Japanese and Wrightian, respectively). By contrast, the two later examples are indicative of the maturing Brutalist style that would define the 1970s. They also show how Brutalism could be ably expressed throughout an entire building, both externally and internally.

While these four buildings illustrate a cross-section of different Brutalist influences, none of them is demonstrative of the specific sub-style of British origin, the so-called ‘New Brutalism’, that characterises David Saunders’ own house. As Philip Goad has recently codified in an exhaustive article, many diverging threads of Brutalism were evident in Australian architecture in the 1960s.

COMPARISONS (NOT IN VHR)

1. Houses in Melbourne showing Brutalist influence

Although Brutalism in architecture is most commonly associated with the use of off-form concrete and raw concrete block, the British architects who pioneered the aesthetic in the 1950s adopted a palette of materials that more typically comprised face brickwork (at that time, more readily available than concrete block), rough timber and slate. In Australia, the Brutalist tendency in residential architecture initially followed this British lead, although local architects used both face brick, and concrete block (sometimes together) as well as timber, slate and, occasionally, raw concrete.

While concrete blockwork was hardly a new material in the 1960s, it had been perceived as a lower-grade material, suitable only for utilitarian structures, or dwellings for those with limited means. By the end of the 1950s, local architects began using concrete block as a deliberate aesthetic choice. New products became available here, such as American-style “Vibrapac” masonry units, which rehabilitated the material’s reputation. In January 1961, an article in the Australian Home Beautiful reported the growing popularity of concrete block, referred to as “once the ugly duckling of building materials”.

Currently, there are no houses on the VHR illustrative of Brutalism, either in an emerging or mature form. The following is a discussion of key houses (pre-1972) that, to varying degrees, demonstrate that aesthetic.

Richardson House, Essendon (1963) Not in VHR

Designed by Graham Gunn in 1963, this house was designed for maximum privacy, with narrow slot-like windows to the street and an internal courtyard within. The emerging influence of Brutalism is evident in its frank expression of materials including concrete blockwork, exposed timber beams and quarry tiling

throughout. However, (and as with non-residential examples discussed previously), this influence is mixed with other influences from Japan and the USA. The house was awarded the Victorian Architectural Medal for 1966. Currently included in the heritage overlay schedule to the City of Moonee Valley Planning Scheme, the house retains a high level of physical integrity. Although the exterior has been slightly altered by the apparent partial demolition of the entry porch, the stark interior remains notably unchanged. Photographs taken prior to its last sale, in 2003, show that the concrete block walls, quarry tile floors and original timber joinery remain evident, and that at least one bathroom still has its original fitout.

Barden House, Eltham (c.1965) Not in VHR

Known for environmentally-conscious dwellings in mud-brick, stone and timber, self-taught designer Alistair Knox partly embraced the Brutalist aesthetic in a house in Sweeney’s Lane, Eltham, designed in the mid-1960s for Neil Barden. Similar in many respects to the dwellings for which he is known, it stands out for its use of split and smooth-faced concrete bricks, some of which was exposed internally. The interior was otherwise characterised by exposed timber beams and rough timber joinery to the kitchen. When published in 1965, the house was described as “a design of rugged appeal”. As the exact address of this house has not been confirmed, its current status is unknown. Believed to have been located on or near the corner of Yarra Braes Road, the house may have already been demolished.

Quarry House, Kew (1966) Not in VHR

The house that architect/academic Neville Quarry designed for himself at 23 Duke Street, Kew, embraced English Brutalism in its rough clinker brickwork (both inside and out), hybrid roofline combining a steep skillion with a low hip, and raw interior including ceilings lined with untreated plywood. After leaving Melbourne in 1970, Quarry sold the house to fellow architect and university lecturer Blanche Merz, who lived there for many years (possibly until her death in 2008). When the property was sold that year, it was virtually unaltered, inside and out. Photographs from the estate agent’s listing show that the interior retained its face brickwork, plywood linings, open timber staircase, and kitchen and bathroom fitouts. Regrettably, the house was demolished by its new owners, and a replacement dwelling erected.

Brine House, South Melbourne (1967) Not in VHR

Around the same time, husband-and-wife architects John & Judith Brine built a house for themselves, at 78 St Vincent’s Place, South Melbourne, in a similar spirit of ‘New Brutalism’. According to one contemporary article, it was mostly designed by Judith, who stated that she wanted a house like an ideal man: “practical, rugged and relatively unadorned”. A tightly-planned two-storey house of face brick construction (expressed inside and out), its jagged roofline incorporating clerestory windows. The concrete slab floor of the upper level was expressed below, with the beams and rolled steel joists left exposed. Reflecting an interesting trend also evident in Neville Quarry’s own house, when the Brines sold the house in 1968, it was purchased by another architect: Clive Fredman, who lived there for several years. Although the house was located in a local heritage overlay precinct, its demolition was permitted in the early 2000s.

North House, Ivanhoe (1967) Not in VHR

Designed by Neville Quarry for engineer Peter North, the house at 5 Streeton Crescent, Ivanhoe was less overtly rugged than his own house, but still showed the influence of English Brutalism in its use of exposed concrete brick with jagged gabled/skillion roofline, clad in slate. However, as no contemporary interior photographs have been located, it is unclear if this raw aesthetic was carried right through, as with his own dwelling in Kew. The house still stands, and, as seen from the street, appears to be externally intact.

Lewis House, Hawthorn (1968) Not in VHR

In 1968, Nigel Lewis designed a house for his mother at 8 Glen Street, Hawthorn, while he was still an undergraduate student at RMIT. By his own admission, Lewis was interested in the developing Brutalist aesthetic; he was familiar with the Brines’ new house in South Melbourne, and also recalls being taken on a student site visit to the Harold Holt Swim Centre, then under construction. His mother’s house reflected

these influences in its use of exposed concrete blockwork, internally and externally. The house still stands and appears to remain substantially intact, both internally and externally.

Mason House, Brighton (1971) Not in VHR

Designed by Bernard Joyce for graphic designer Les Mason, the house at 1 Chavasse Street, Brighton, is a two-storey house on an H-shaped courtyard plan, with a jagged skillion roofline. Built of concrete blockwork (exposed inside and out), it was one of the first houses in Melbourne to confidently express the mature Brutalist idiom, and received an RAIA/Age citation for House of the Week. In more recent times, the house has been rendered externally, which has severely compromised its interpretation as an early Brutalist house.

Fletcher House, Brighton (1972) Not in VHR

The Fletcher House at 3 Roslyn Street, Brighton, was designed by Edgard Pirrotta, then a final year student, working for Meldrum & Partners. Bruce Fletcher, a solicitor whose father was a former client of Robin Boyd, requested a house that would be stimulating to live in; Pirrotta proposed a linear house with splayed corners and a jagged profile of steep skillions and raked walls; intended to be built of off-form concrete, it was ultimately realised in concrete block. Much published, the house won the RAIA Bronze Medal for 1972. In 2007, the house was recommended for a local heritage listing (which was ultimately not applied) and, the following year, was recommended for addition to the VHR in a desktop survey by Heritage Alliance. Although sympathetically updated, the house remains in a substantially intact condition, including the retention of the exposed concrete blockwork internally.

Comparison to the Saunders House

The Quarry House (c.1966) and the Brine House (c.1967) represent the most pertinent comparators to the Saunders House (1961-62). All three were notably early local experiments in Victoria in the Brutalist

aesthetic (and more specifically its English incarnation), as applied to residential architecture. Not coincidentally, all three were architect’s own homes; moreover, the designers of the two earlier ones were both university lecturers at the time, who later left Melbourne to take up academic posts elsewhere (Judith Brine ultimately followed suit, taking up teaching positions in Adelaide and Canberra). However, as the Quarry and Brine houses are now no longer extant, the Saunders House (which, in any case, predated both) remains as the sole survivor. Quarry’s North House at Ivanhoe (1967) is visually similar to Saunders’ own house, but is later in date.

While other houses discussed above (ie, by Alistair Knox, Graeme Gunn and Nigel Lewis) may show the emerging influence of a Brutalist aesthetic via the use of exposed concrete blockwork, this was tempered with other influences. Gunn’s work, for example, evokes Japanese influences and the work of Louis Kahn, while Lewis (by this own admission) deliberately eschewed the fashionable angular geometry in favour of a more conventionally planar approach, inspired by pre-war Bauhaus modernism.

Ultimately, it was not until around 1970 that residential architecture in Melbourne began to wholly and confidently express the Brutalist aesthetic, beginning with Bernard Joyce’s Mason House in Brighton (since much altered), followed by Edgard Pirrotta’s award-winning and influential Fletcher House, and numerous similar dwellings (many also designed by Pirrotta) well into the decade.

If a house demonstrative of the Brutalist style is to be included on the VHR, the most obvious candidate would be the award-winning Fletcher House in Brighton, which effectively marked the start of the local fad for concrete block houses with canted glazing and jagged rooflines. Although less overtly Brutalist, the earlier Richardson House in Essendon, by Graeme Gunn, would be another worthy candidate for inclusion, as it is notable in its own right as an award-winning specimen by a noted architect, which combines the emerging influence of Brutalism with other interesting architectural themes. Unlike the Saunders House, much of its original stark interior has been preserved, and remains readily interpreted.

2. Houses in Melbourne evoking the terrace type

It has been stated that Saunders’ own house in Parkville was the first residential building in Melbourne to pay homage to the form and expression of the city’s traditional terrace house type. While this was admittedly an unusual design approach in the 1960s, and certainly only became more common in the 1970s and beyond, an example has been identified that pre-dates Saunders’ own house by four years, thus negating the argument that his dwelling was the first manifestation of this.

Molony Townhouses, Kew (1957) Not in VHR

In 1957, Neil Clerehan designed a development of four townhouses at 8-10 Younger Court, Kew, for businessmen J H Molony. Simply expressed in cream brick with a low pitched roof, the complex comprised four dwellings, each of which was spread over two levels and separated by projecting party walls to create a series of narrow front porches. When the townhouses were belatedly published in Australian House & Garden in May 1961, it was explicitly stated that the Clerehan had ‘based his design on the old terrace houses so popular in Melbourne’s early days’.

KEY REFERENCES USED TO PREPARE ASSESSMENT

Photographs, Peter Wille Collection State Library of Victoria.Cross Section, Feb 1963.‘Tour 2’, Building Ideas, March 1965, p 22.

‘A surprising terrace house, Australian Women’s Weekly, 1 February 1967, pp 34-35‘House, corner of Morrah and Gatehouse Streets, Parkville’, Architecture in Australia, June 1967, pp 446-49P Goad, Melbourne Architecture. Balmain 1998, p 188.P Goad. ‘The Modern House in Melbourne 1945-1975’, PhD Thesis, University of Melbourne, 1992P Goad, ‘Bringing it all home: Robin Boyd and Australia’s Embrace of Brutalism, 1955-71’, Fabrications,

Vol 25, No 2 (June 2015), pp 176-213.