Essentially we are problem solvers, who like to create innovative spaces and places, bringing delight and commodity to the people that use them.

- Michael Peck AM, former CEO of the Australian Institute of Architects

I became an architect in 1961. I initially wasn’t very sure about my career choice, but I was committed to finishing the five-year university course. My trepidation soon turned to excitement during my first year, which was eye-opening and really made me appreciate the true art involved in architecture – I found it rejuvenating.

The first year of the course successfully opened us to the creative aspects of architecture and prepared us for the rigorous technical and scientific aspects of making  buildings  that are, not only delightful but also strong and reliable. Drawing and design eventually crystalised into architecture for me.

In those days, at Melbourne University the lecturers were mainly from Europe, and were followers of the Modernist movement. They took us back to our childhood, and really challenged our perceptions and our designing thought processes. This drew us in, so by the time the other side of architecture kicked in, I was already hooked.

I stand by the statement that architecture is a form of art.

Some have argued it is the master of the Arts – except it doesn’t involve music (although many architects use music as a conduit or source of inspiration).

In terms of visual arts, architecture can be boiled down to a scientific notion of defining a space. It involves the process of innovation and artistic creativity in designing structures and defining space for human shelter and activity.

We focused on buildings for communities.

My partner Graham Whitford and I practiced architecture for 30 years before I moved on to become the CEO of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects. We focused on buildings for communities, such as community centres, schools and pre-school centres. This also led to a lot of other commercial work, which even took our skills to Papua New Guinea and Hong Kong.

Getting communities involved in the design process was exciting and resulted in a better product overall, and it led to the client reusing us for succeeding projects. Unfortunately the introduction of compulsory competitive tendering brought and end to those strong and productive client/architect relationships.

Building with mud in Eltham.

I think that the most unique project Graham and I collaborated on was the Eltham Community Centre created in the late 1970s. At one time it was claimed to be the largest mud brick building in the Southern Hemisphere. The story of mud brick building in Eltham, particularly of owner-built houses, has been well documented. As a child, my family had land in Eltham and I often helped in the making of mud bricks for family friends.

At the time that we were commissioned Alistair Knox was the Shire President, so it is not surprising that we were asked to design a mud brick Community Centre with a raked auditorium – an unusual and difficult challenge given the nature of mud brick construction.

Building an auditorium for cinema and stage performances was a challenge because it required a large volume of space and we were using a material with very little lateral strength. In traditional mud brick buildings the lack of lateral strength is overcome by constructing walls with a wide base that taper towards the top. We had to come up with a way of building tall, relatively thin walls, made of mud brick. The solution was to frame in the building in very heavy timbers with infill panels of mud brick. The Shire Engineer was a great participant arranging for the council to make the mud bricks from the soil on the site. Panels were built and tested at Deakin University to determine the panel sizes that would resist the lateral wind loads to be expected on the site.

The building is sited on land sloping toward the Diamond Creek valley, so we designed the foyer to divide and wrap around the auditorium spaces and provide, through totally glazed walls, views to the parks and creek below. It was very special to visit the centre eight years ago and to see how well the community had looked after it. It had been so well preserved, it was incredible. There was nothing built like it at the time, or after for that matter. I feel that it is an interesting contribution to the architectural history of Victoria, particularly the era of mud brick construction in the Eltham environment.

It really only happened because we had a client who was fully-committed to the building and had equity in the outcome – the Shire wanted to make the best possible building to be enjoyed by future generations.

There are far too many constraints being placed upon architects.

The majority of buildings being created in Victoria today come from a very different procurement system. We have many capable and creative architects who often design outstanding buildings, not because of the procurement system, but in spite of it.

Too often architects are relegated from the primary designer, controlling the delivery of the completed building, to that of a  design subcontractor. There are far too many constraints being placed upon architects, this is stifling creativity and innovation, and not allowing them to follow their design through to creation.

People outside of the industry might imagine that a dream project for an architect would be one in which a benevolent client provides limitless space and resource with a very general brief.

My most satisfying projects, however, involved the challenge of creating built form on an interesting site with special requirements and strict needs. It is much better to be challenged with a human requirement – this is what creates dynamic design. Architecture is really about responding to and wrestling with those challenges.