Geoff Crosby, principal at CROSBY architects, recently helped design a 10 star home, which won the 10 star challenge by the Building Designer Association of Victoria (BDAV).

Crosby has a strong interest in sustainability and has been involved with sustainable architect since the age of 17.

A&D spoke to him about the 10 star challenge, the role of an architect and why good design is a messy business.

You recently won a BDAV award for the 10 star challenge, in association with Lifehouse Design. How challenging was it designing the project?

Technically it is pretty straightforward to get to about 9.8 stars. It’s a matter of correct window placement and size, thermal mass and lots of insulation wrapping it all up.

The next bit takes a lot of work. It is really refining the design in terms of zoning, shading, etc, but once you are there you can go back and review what you did to get to 9.8. Each mistake teaches you something. The problem is that what it’s teaching you is how the rating system works, not really what makes a good home or even necessarily a sustainable building.

The real challenge was to design a useful building that could have meaning and be adaptable over time.

How financially feasible is it for the project to be replicated around Australia?

This is a big continent and the idea of replication nationally is antithetical to the principals of sustainability. What we need is the aspirations to be national, not the outcomes.

It would be impossible to compete within the same paradigms that exist in the mass housing market today. Mass market housing operates within a system of minimal supervision and a “let them do what they know” mentality. We have to change the question. Maybe there are other models out there to use. Possibly we have to remove the wet trades and deliver components to site rather than “sticks and sheets”. I think the real design exercise will be the “how”, not the “what”.

How has the role of the architect changed with a bigger focus on sustainability?

It is slowly getting easier to convince people and engage them in the discussion. The role of the architect has always been to solve problems and create visions, and we are still doing that. Having said that, [it has] been pretty disappointing with the Victorian government reducing the buy-back rate on PV’s by more than half and changing the planning scheme to make it much harder to get wind farms up.

When did sustainability become important for you in design?

The first buildings I designed, at about 17, were underground or small dwellings or domes. It was the mid 70s and I was studying under people like Hugh O’Neill and the sculptor and musician Elwyn Dennis at Melbourne Uni. We had camps at Elwyn’s property in the Grampians where we worked on a ferro-concrete domed structure. I think from the very beginning I was aware of the impact of building on the earth.

In 1993 I established Green City Homes with a builder. This evolved out of our participation in a tender to design and construct the Australian Conservation Foundation Green Home at Roxburgh Park. Over 100 tender documents were requested and we were one of only three that met both the tender requirements and the Green Home Guidelines.

Although we were not selected to build the green home we went on to work with Alan Pears (who developed the Green Home Guidelines), to develop plans for a range of houses that would meet the guidelines and also meet market cost expectations. Sustainability is the only game in town. We have all got to be onto it now – I cannot see any other option.

The Flip Flop House design was named the winner of the inaugural 10 Star Challenge organised by the Building Designers Association of Victoria (BDAV). Designed by Crosby Architects in association with Lifehouse Design.

You’ve said “Good design is a messy business, and if it isn’t, it should be suspect”. What makes good design such a messy business?

I worked for Guilford Bell when I was a student. He had me getting vent pipes symmetrically aligned within a roof space. I learnt a lot from him but I also saw how detrimental obsessional architecture could be.

I think that buildings can obviously enhance the way we live or they can be detrimental. The detrimental ones can be at fault through lack of thought, but they can also be over designed. We make mistakes and we believe in things that turn out to be wrong or inappropriate to the situation. Design is a relational occupation so of course it will be messy. I also said that I do not think design starts or finishes. Maybe the authors change but buildings keep evolving to new situations. If they are too tight and sewn up it’s hard for them to adapt.

What was the first project you ever designed which you were paid for?

I designed a Motel in Williamstown in Melbourne in 1988 before I graduated. Luckily it never got built. It was a two-storey courtyard building and you drove in under the entry. It was influenced by an apartment building in St Kilda Road from the 1940s that I knew. It had windows the shape of windscreen wipers in the lounge wall above the entry – very pomo and pretty ugly really.

The next building did get built and was in a remote part of Victoria. I stayed on-site in a caravan for two weeks while designing the building and I think it was successful because of that. I quickly developed a philosophy around design and its context, which I have stood by ever since.

What has had the biggest influence on you personally and architecturally?

The obvious answer to this is children. As I sit here I know I have limited time. I need to be at a parent teacher interview for my five year-old at 2:30. Kids affect how you work and why you work, and that has been true for me with three boys. Since I have had kids I have been much more interested in community engagement and participation. My partner, the artist Nicola Loder, has also been a huge influence. She is such a rigorous thinker and has always kept me on my toes, so to speak. Not always the most comfortable of positions, but worth it every time.

Being in a rock band for five years is another big one. I guess interacting with people in groups has always been influential. My tendency is to work alone so the dynamics of group engagement has made me think a lot about the role of the architect and how it can be used to instigate and invigorate change without dictating what that change should be. A lot of my work these days is not just about getting buildings built but feeding visions and growing expectations.