Certain building structures stand out not just for their functionality or beauty but for their ability to stir controversy and divide public opinion.

Architecturally divisive buildings are not merely places to work, live or relax, they often boast iconic structures offering experiences that challenge perceptions, provoke emotions, and leave a lasting impression on those who inhabit them, those that travel past them and those that work in them. 

These buildings, often labelled as controversial, frequently provoke intense responses, whether positive or negative. What characteristics contribute to their polarising nature?

Architectural Design: Pushing Boundaries and Challenging Perceptions

One of the primary reasons why certain buildings become divisive is their architectural design. These structures often eschew traditional aesthetics in favour of bold, unconventional forms that provoke strong reactions through collaborations with renowned architects, designers, and artists who often contribute to the allure of these divisive properties.

While these buildings may be celebrated as architectural masterpieces by some, others may view them as eyesores that disrupt the visual harmony of their surroundings. 

The University of Technology's Dr Chau Chak Wing Building, crafted by the esteemed Canadian architect and Pritzker Laureate Frank Gehry, has garnered mixed reactions. While some appreciate its intricate design and innovative construction methods, not everyone sees it as an elegant enhancement to the landscape.

Dubbed the "Brown paper bag building," this structure challenges conventional architectural expectations, sparking both admiration and criticism despite Gehry’s involvement.

Similarly, the W Hotel, a dramatic structured with curved lines otherwise known as The Ribbon, embraces avant-garde architecture with futuristic designs and unconventional angles.

A leading international design practice with studios in Australia, China, Southeast Asia, the United Kingdom and the United State designed the building, but while these two diverse buildings are celebrated for their innovation by some, they are seen as disruptive eyesores by others.

What however sets them apart is their ability to spark conversations and evoke emotions, making them more than just places to live or learn, but destinations in their own right.

Obstruction of Views: Balancing Innovation with Preservation

Another common source of contention with certain buildings is their impact on the surrounding landscape, particularly when they obstruct cherished views.

Whether it's a towering skyscraper blocking the skyline or a massive structure overshadowing a historic landmark, the loss of a beloved view can evoke feelings of resentment and frustration among those who feel that their sense of place and identity is being compromised.

As such, disputes over building heights, zoning regulations and urban development often arise in communities where preserving scenic vistas is a priority.

In South Perth, the luxury Lumiere high-rise mixed-use development faced an arduous journey, spanning nearly five years, two Supreme Court challenges, and multiple design revisions before finally securing building approval, only breaking ground in.

The process was marked by numerous objections regarding the development's height, traffic density, and other issues raised in community forums, local councils, and industry panels. Despite these challenges, the development recently launched to enthusiastic acclaim alongside ongoing community opposition.

Controversial Costs: Balancing Investment with Public Perception

The cost of constructing divisive buildings can also contribute to their controversial nature, especially when public funds are involved. Projects with significant budgets can face scrutiny over fiscal responsibility and the prioritisation of resources. 

When taxpayers perceive that their money is being spent extravagantly on a single building project, resentment and scepticism can abound, particularly if the perceived benefits do not outweigh the costs.

Controversies surrounding cost overruns, mismanagement of funds, and the prioritisation of flashy architectural projects over essential infrastructure can exacerbate tensions and fuel opposition.

The extravagant $2 billion Crown casino complex, towering over Sydney's Bangaroo foreshore, sparked furious debate over its impact on the picturesque views of beloved Sydney landmarks.

However, the primary opposition to the building stemmed from the controversy surrounding The Crown Resorts group's mismanagement of funds during a royal commission, which aimed to safeguard public interests.

Though the dust is settling over the new Blackstone Inc. ownership of the Crown resorts group, the hotel tower serves as a constant reminder of the misgivings surrounding the building.

Once hated, now loved through adaptive conversion

Ultimately, the debate over these buildings reflects broader societal tensions surrounding issues of aesthetics, heritage preservation, and the allocation and distribution of resources in an ever-changing urban landscape.

Many initially divisive buildings can however grow on people and often a strategic adaptive conversion of a building can successfully turn a once divisive building into an iconic institution that brings the community together. 

The Brutalist Roundhouse council building in Newcastle, NSW, underwent a remarkable transformation, evolving into the city's inaugural five-star hotel. This conversion demonstrates how formerly divisive buildings can evolve into cherished community establishments.

Similarly, the Sirius building in Millers point, once housing commission destined for the wrecking ball, was saved from demolition and is now a protected heritage site converted into sought after luxury apartments, reflecting the delicate balance between innovation and preservation. 

Divisive buildings redefine luxury not just through their amenities but through their ability to provoke discussions, challenge perceptions, and evolve over time. While some may view divisive buildings as symbols of progress and innovation, others see them as symbols of excess, disruption, or misplaced priorities. 

Experimental architectural designs can evoke strong emotions because they challenge people's perceptions of what a building should look like, with some embracing its innovation and others rejecting the departure from the norm.

Regardless of public sentiment towards these properties, they all possess the potential for property tax depreciation as income-generating assets, whether a newly constructed hotel, adaptively repurposed apartment building, or commercial premises.

As Australia’s leading supplier of residential and commercial tax depreciation schedules, BMT can answer all your residential and commercial property depreciation questions.

To discuss how government accelerated depreciation incentives can benefit your business call BMT 1300 728 726 or Request a Quote.

The information in this article is general in nature and shouldn’t be taken as a quote or a guaranteed outcome.  

Related Reading:

Lucrative deductions inside childcare centres - BMT

Sustainable investments: Navigating the future of commercial office space  | Commo.

For more information contact 1300 728 726 or request a quote.