30
Vision Magazine
How did cultural input and consultation inform
the project?
In 2004 DCS engaged Peter Yu, a Yawru man and
elder from Broome and June Oscar a Bunuba elder
from Fitzroy Crossing. They traveled across the
Kimberley interviewing families about an appropriate
judicial response for Aboriginal families in the
region. That resulted in two reports: one on what
the prison should look like and one on how it should
function. That effectively formed the skeleton of our
brief. It was very much based around the idea of
prisoners leaving better equipped to deal with life
than when they come in. They live in houses, cook
their own meals, are responsible for budgeting, learn
life skills, trades and literacy skills.
Given security is such a fundamental, how do
you design in a way that incorporates the hope of
rehabilitation yet reduces the risk of prisoners reoffending?
There’s no disguising the fact that we’re designing
a prison here – one for men and the other for
women. There are all the components of prisons
– a gatehouse and a maximum security perimeter.
We had to provide for three levels of prisoner
classification from low to medium and high security
and the facility needs t o respond to that range
of need. The minimum security prisoner on work
release may leave the facility under supervision
and return at night. That means you need layers
of security built into the whole perimeter. It’s a
maximum security facility but within the perimeter,
you can provide a management regime that allows
greater freedom of movement within the facility.
The result is better internal spaces and there are far
fewer compounds and fences that exist within the
traditional cell-block prison. That really relaxes a lot
of the normal security needs.
What issues did the remote location present?
Construction in such a ferocious climate is
difficult enough. With the approach of the wet
season the humidity becomes unbearable and
so the tradesperson’s job is very difficult. Our
documentation really tried to relieve the stress
on ground crews and to get the roofs on early to
allow work in the shade rather than exposure to the
elements. There’s also very little local fabrication
opportunity so aluminium and steelwork have to be
fabricated and trucked 2,000 kms. from Perth. This
meant modularizing structural systems, lengths of
steel, frameworks and so the spans, openings and
constructability are vitally important.
The design is so culturally specific and informed to a
degree that must be a first for an Australian prison?
In many ways it’s a world first. There are examples
of prisons facilities containing areas designed for
specific physical needs of indigenous prisoners in
New Zealand, Canada and the US and one or two
in Europe, but as far as we know, it’s a first to be
designed from the ground up.
Glass is rarely considered in the context of such
places. Generally we think concrete, razor-wire
and steel. Glass plays a transformative role in the
perception and experience of place here. It’s much
more than a peep window into a cell.
The use of glass and open-planning is intrinsic to
the architecture. The gatehouse is typically the
most institutional of prison buildings and yet here
it’s quite welcoming. Ours is quite low-scale and
when you look through the building it’s largely
glazed and you can see through the building.
Moving through that you can quickly orientate
where you are by seeing through these glass layers.
In the middle of the gatehouse there’s the secure
line formed by a ballistic grade of laminated glass
that actually serves as a maximum security barrier.
You’re unaware of that level of security because of
its transparency. It feels as if you’re entering a very
transparent building that allows you to see beyond
the gatehouse into the landscape and likewise you
see through the building.