Canberra might have resembled an Italian city: Parliament, like a Venetian palazzo, rising on Kurrajong Hill, its golden domes reflected in the waters of a lake. A cathedral grandissimone dominating the town. Pale stone and Tuscan terracotta roofs as red as Siena. Romanesque arches. Campaniles and colonnades. Bustling piazzas with fountains and cafés. A university like Bologna’s antipodean cousin. Neo-Byzantine domes in ample profusion, Canberra cum Gondor.

This was British architect Ernest Gimson’s unrealised plan for Canberra.

“A city brimming with Mediterranean warmth, Arts and Crafts charm and Neo-Byzantine grandeur, yet with a distinctly Australian character,” says Daniel Coughlin, who has created what may be the first historically informed, photorealistic reconstruction of Gimson’s lost vision for the Australian capital, and published it on his Curious Compendium of Architectural What-Ifs – a speculative architecture and urban history YouTube channel, featured by Newsweek.

“What immediately fascinated me was the jaw-dropping contrast between Gimson’s proposal and the Canberra that exists today,” Coughlin said. “More than anything, I was struck by the beauty of his vision, as well as how humane and sustainable it would be.”

In 1911, a decade after federation, the Commonwealth government invited designers and architects from around the world to submit their proposals for the national capital. Gimson’s was one of the 46 shortlisted designs – but did not reach the final round of three. Today, we live in Walter Burley and Marion Mahony Griffin’s city.

A British architect and designer associated with the Arts and Crafts movement, Gimson was championed by William Morris, while architectural historian Nikolaus Pevsner described him as “the greatest of the English artist-craftsmen”.

Coughlin based his recreation of Gimson’s Canberra on the architectural plan, architect Alfred Hoare Powell’s watercolours, and a written description in the Australian archives, and used AI and editing tools to turn the surviving material into images and a video.

Coughlin suggests that cost may have counted against Gimson’s proposal: building an entire capital through traditional craft techniques, finely detailed masonry, and bespoke joinery would have been expensive and slow.

But on balance, Coughlin thinks Gimson’s Canberra could have been better to live in.

“What appeals to me isn’t simply that Gimson’s buildings were prettier,” Coughlin said. “His proposal offered a fundamentally different experience: a compact, mixed-use and tram-served city where homes were close to shops, institutions and workplaces. Its piazzas, markets, arcades and waterfront would have encouraged walking, social interaction, and a much livelier public realm. The city would also be less prone to bushfires and more sustainable in many ways.”

Coughlin argues the compact footprint of Gimson’s city would have placed less pressure on the surrounding bush; required shorter roads and utility networks; supported a more comprehensive tram system, and used significantly less water.

“It’s far more eco, ironically, compared to the green city of today,” Coughlin said.

“That said, my video isn’t a takedown of modern Canberra or the winning plan. The city is wonderfully green, has low crime, excellent museums, a high standard of living and many other huge advantages. And plenty of Canberrans may well prefer the space and privacy of a roomy suburban house to living in a denser city-centre apartment.

“In any case, the winning scheme by Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin was never fully realised, so it would be unfair to blame Canberra’s shortcomings on them.

“But the lack of urban buzz, the uninspiring architecture, the enormous distances, heavy car dependence and the greater demands that low-density sprawl places on water, infrastructure and the surrounding landscape are real drawbacks. 

“Gimson’s scheme is more than a beautiful lost architectural fantasy. Many of the things it prioritised in 1911, from its walkability, density and mixed uses to public transport, local materials and welcoming public spaces, are precisely the qualities planners are trying to put back into cities today.”

Perhaps Canberra should simply be knocked down and rebuilt on Gimson’s principles. The Greens could have density and sustainability; the construction industry, decades of work; and the rest of us an Italianate capital that would be “the nation’s jewel and a major tourist destination”. Portmeirion down under. How about it, ACT Government?