West (side) and north (rear) elevations, public housing, Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

View northeast over single story apartment, Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

South (front) elevation, public housing, Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

Detail of roofing and wall, Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

View along western boundary; paperbark trees between private and public housing, Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

East elevation, overlooking driveway, private housing, Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

North (rear) elevation, public housing, Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

North (rear) elevation and driveway, public housing, Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

Houses near Cotton Tree Housing Estate, Maroochydore

This pilot project at Cotton Tree, Maroochydore, on two adjacent, linear parcels of land has one of the properties privately owned while the other is owned by the public housing authority. Both owners commissioned Lindsay and Kerry Clare to design housing for their separate needs which enabled the two projects to be governed by a single planning and design strategy. This entailed the realignment of the dividing boundary to form two approximately square blocks which made possible the retention of an important stand of mature paperbark trees and gave each block a more useful street frontage. The scheme provides seven two-bedroom units and one single-bedroom unit as the private component, with six single-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units forming the public housing. The dwellings are deployed as an interlaced mat of freestanding blocks, car courts, courtyard gardens, patios and decks. The key distinction between the public and private parts of the scheme is the pooling of the car parking spaces in the public housing to create a shared courtyard. The housing climbs to three storeys on its southern edge and falls to a single storey on the north-western corner. This enables all units and the principal private outdoor spaces to have a northern orientation. The interiors of both the public and private units are skilfully arranged to take full advantage of views, light and breeze.

'Living together on one's own': Cohousing for older people - an example from Denmark and The Netherlands

‘Living together on one’s own’ is the seemingly contradictory expression of the National Association of Housing Communities for Elderly People (LVGO) in The Netherlands which in fact captures the essence of cohousing. Cohousing is a novel kind of neighbourhood, housing a novel form of intentional community, which began to take shape in Denmark in the early to mid-1960s and, independently, in The Netherlands a few years later. The inventors of cohousing wanted to live in a much more communal or community-oriented neighbourhood than was usual, but they wanted to do so without sacrificing the privacy of individual families or households and their dwellings. Could they have their cake and eat it too? It would seem so. What is cohousing for older people (op-cohousing)? Op-cohousing is essentially no different, except for the differences in outlook or expectations, experience, interests and abilities that a particular, exclusively older, group of people have brought to this housing type. I discuss and analyse several communities in both countries.

Endorsement of CIDI psychosis screening items in the Australian Survey of Mental Health and Well being

This paper presents preliminary analysis of the endorsement of the CIDI Psychosis Screening items in a large Australian community sample. CIDI interviews were completed on a representative sample of 10,641 individuals living in private dwellings in Australia. The items examined constructs related to thought control/interference (G1), ideas of reference (G2), and special powers (G3). If endorsed, each item had a follow-up probe (G1A telepathy; G2A things arranged with special meaning; G3A -- group acceptability). The final item (G4) asked if the respondent had been told that they had schizophrenia. This paper presents the frequency of endorsement, and examines the impact of age and sex on these items. Endorsement of the items was G1 =5.86°/,,, G1A=0.70%, G2=4.84%, G2A=l.31%, G3=3.41%, G3A=2.65%, and G4=0.65%. If screen-positives are defined as two or more 'hits', then 0.41% of the sample met this criterion. Younger participants were significantly more likely to be screen-positive. Items G1, G1A, G2 and G2A were endorsed more frequently by younger participants while there were no significant age effects identified in items G3 or G4. There was a nonsignificant trend for females to endorse item G1 more frequently than males (p = 0.07), but there were no signficant gender differences on the other items. Many individuals who were 'screen-negative' for psychosis endorsed CIDI items related to thought controls, ideas of reference and special powers, suggesting that there may be a 'continuum' of experiences in the population. The impact of age on the distribution of these measures suggests either differential biological vulnerability to these experiences and/or differential cultural factors influencing endorsement of the items. The implications of these findings on our understanding of the symptoms of psychosis will be discussed. The survey was funded by the Commonwealth Dept. of Health and Family Services. The Stanley Foundation supported this project.

A Review of the Environmental and Health Effects of Termiticides under Australian Conditions

There exists a major cost issue as regards termite damage to wooden structures. A factor in this cost has been the increasing trend towards slab-on-ground construction. Current literature has been reviewed in relation to concerns about the possible public/environmental health consequences of the repeated use of termiticides in large quantities. The previous, current and projected future use patterns of termiticides are reviewed in the context of techniques appropriate for termite control and treatment priorities. The phasing out of organochlorine termiticides in Australia was undertaken to minimise impact of these substances on the environment and to a lesser extent on public health. These persistent chemicals were replaced by substances with high activity but relatively low persistence in the soil. There has also been an increase in the use of alternative methods (e.g. physical barriers) for the control of termites. The transition away from organochlorine termiticides has led to a realisation that significant information gaps exist with regard to replacement chemicals and other technologies. Although relatively persistent, the organochlorine chemicals have a limited lifespan in soils. Their concentrations are gradually attenuated by processes such as transport away from the point of application and biodegradation. Wooden structures originally treated with these substances will, with the passing of time, be at risk of termite infestation. The only available option is re-treatment with chemicals currently registered for termite control. Thus, there are likely to be substantial future increases associated with the cost of re-treatment and repairs of older slab-on-ground dwellings. More information is required on Australian termite biology, taxonomy and ecology. The risks of termite infestation need to be evaluated, both locally and nationally so that susceptible or high risk areas, structures and building types can be identified and preventive measures taken in terms of design and construction. Building regulations and designs need to be able to reduce or eliminate high-risk housing; and eliminate or reduce conditions that are attractive to termites and/or facilitate termite infestation.