I N V E S T I G a T I O N S O N R O B S O N S Q U A

megamega formform asas publicpublic projectproject

i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o n R o b s o n S q u a r e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o n R o b s o n S q u a r e o megaform as public project investigations on Robson Square

Thaly Drouin-Crespin Laura Fiset Kevin Murray

Recipients of the Power Corporation of Canada Award 2014

3 megaform as public project

infrastructure landscape collectivity Kevin Murray Laura Fiset Thaly Drouin-Crespin

DEFINING MEGAFORM CASE STUDY 30 36 42

07 08 14 22 26 28 MEGAFORM SUB-THEMES 48 52 56 58 megaform as megaform as modern socio-political architectural manifestation phenomenon in Canada intro to Robson Square contextual time line contemporary reading interview : J.K.M. Cheng bibliography acknowledgments

investigations on Robson Square

4 megaform as public project

infrastructure landscape collectivity Kevin Murray Laura Fiset Thaly Drouin-Crespin

DEFINING MEGAFORM CASE STUDY 30 36 42

investigations on Robson Square

5 6 megaform as public project

The project of the 2014 Power Corporation of Canada Award offers a close reading of Robson Square (Vancouver, BC), a multi-functional civic complex designed by Arthur Erickson with the collaboration of the landscape architect Cornelia Hahn Oberlander in the years 1973-1983. The project represents the creation of a social infrastructure in the city core of Vancouver as well as the apex of the megaform in Canada. The megaform is understood in this investigation as both an architectural phenomenon and the physical outcome of the Canadian socio-political context of the time. The case study reveals an architecture that crystallized Canadian thinking in this period and will be used as a mechanism to explore a larger culture of social democracy.

The megaform emerged within the architectural discourse and practice of the early 1960’s as an innovation in city making. The architecture of the megaform (or megastructure as it is sometimes referred) attempted to integrate and establish urban conditions while giving shape to a collective vision of society. The megaform was adopted in Canada as an architectural approach to public projects during the 1960s-1980s and was used as a tool in the creation of social infrastructure such as mass education, social housing and government administrative buildings.

Utilizing extensive archival material and contemporary readings of Robson Square, the following study attempts to evaluate the megaform idea in the design of public architecture in the city.

(opposite) Metro Education: Montreal Megastructure, Harry Parnass and Michel Lincourt’s Urb/Education design thesis (1970)

7 megaform as modern architectural phenomena

“The essence of the Core is that it is a rendezvous[...].It is in this meeting place for pedestrians that the human scale and values may be re-established within the public domain.” 1

CIAM 8 Conference,1951

Megastructure Thinking: Master Plan for Havendale, Residential areas & Spine (1962), Van Ginkle Associates fonds, CCA Collection.

8 Within modern architectural discourse, the megaform emerged as a societal response of architecture to urban conditions. Shifting the role of the architect to the realm of urban design, the megaform served as a societal apparatus in shaping the collective dimension of the city. Cutting across building programs, public and private developments, speculative and built projects, the megaform distinguished itself from other similarly scaled projects as it proposed to host, connect with and reformat a complex, heterogeneous urban condition.

The architectural phenomenon of the megaform is discussed here through the historical context of modern discourse and the various publications that formalized this type of architecture.

the core In reaction to the modernist urban planning schemes, the anxiety of a space-end- less city was under address and tackled by the members of CIAM (Congrès Inter- national d’Architecture Moderne). By 1951, at their 8th congress, the conference title announced itself as an attempt to condense rapidly shifting notions of identity and place in the city. The Heart of the City announced a new focus for urban architecture: the core. Neither exclusively architecture or urban design, the core would condense many of the functions and programs of the city into thick, dense nodes.

As urban environments increasingly dispersed across vast territories, the anxiety for a return to a center would expand to include multiple cores. This shift in architectural thinking conceived the role of the architect beyond the fascination and control of the isolated object. Moving towards a new form of urban architecture, the focus becomes more an architectural fabric or network of spaces for the city. The congress would distill the meaning of the core as that of a rendez-vous, a public meeting place. The core would ultimately serve a civic function and reframe the historic centre as akin to the Greek agora.

In the years following CIAM 8, ideas of this scale of collective form were discussed most notably by Team X as well as Fumihiko Maki, Reyner Banham and Kenneth Frampton.

9 “The megastructure is a large frame in which all the functions of a city or part of city are housed. It has been made possible by present day technology. In a sense, it is a man- made feature of the landscape. It is like the great hill on which Italian towns were built.” 2

Fumihiko Maki, 1964

“[Megaform] refers to the form-giving potential of certain kinds of horizontal urban fabric capable of effecting some kind of topographic transformation in the megalopoli- tan landscape.” 3

Kenneth Frampton, 1999

Publications on the megaform, clockwise from top left: CIAM’s The Heart of the City (1952), Maki’s Investigations in Collective Form (1964), Banham’s Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Past (1976) & Frampton’s Megaform as Urban Landscape (1999)

10 Summary of Needs of The Core Extracts from statements prepared during the 8th Congress of CIAM (1951)

1 That there should be only one main Core in 6 That varying (mobile) elements can make each city. an important contribution to animation at the Core, and that the architectural setting should 2 That the Core is an artifact - be planned to allow for the inclusion of such a man-made thing. elements. 3 That the Core should be a place 7 That in planning the Core the architects secure from traffic - where the pedestrian can should employ contemporary means of move about freely. expression and - whenever possible - should 4 That cars should arrive and park on the work in co-operation with painters and periphery of the Core, but not cross it. sculptors. 5 That uncontrolled commercial advertising - such as appears in the Cores of many cities today - should be organized and controlled.

collective form In the early 1960’s, the architect and academic Fumihiko Maki conceptualized the phenomenon of the megaform in his Investigations in Collective Form (1964). Maki introduced architectural terms to denote structures of variable density and relatedness. He distinguished 3 types of collective form: compositional form as fixed relation between different preformed buildings, megastructural form as large frame, housing all the urban functions, and group form as additive collection of similar units. More specifically in megastructure, Maki suggests the concept might hold promise as environmental engineering, multi-functional structures, and infrastructure as public investment. This last point alludes to the ambition of the megastructure to act as a socio-political apparatus, a key platform in forming a collective realm. Maki emphasises that the skeleton of megastructures could guide and stimulate architecture around them.

Maki’s types of collective forms in Investigations in Collective Form

11 Banham’s critical survey in Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Past (1976) megastructure explores mega-projects from the Japanese Metabolists to the Dutch Structuralists to the avant-garde designs of Archigram and Cedric Price. In addition to showcasing the cross-continental manifestation of this architectural form, Banham highlights the thematic and programmatic trends of the megaform, including educational institutions. The chapter on academia showcases many examples of Canadian university campus designs. Another chapter devoted to the Megacity of Montreal make evident Canada’s role within this international architectural discourse.

From Banham’s historiographical and critical review, three qualities emerge that might be said to cut across megastructure experiments. First, the megastructure accommodates a multiplicity of programs and uses, capable of hosting both formal and informal. Furthermore, the scale of the megastructure exceeds the purpose of any one clear building type, making architecture enter the realm of urban design. Finally, the transformation of the megastructure, through extension/contraction/ Potteries Thinkbelt sketch, Cedric Price fonds, CCA aggregation/openness, represents the flexibility and adaptability of this architec- Collection ture.

12 Megaform as landscape terrain: Robson Square model as seen on a drawing set cover (1974), Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

urban landscape In his writings in Megaform as Urban Landscape (1999), Kenneth Frampton revis- its the concept of megaform as a question of landform. Distinguishing itself from megastructure, the megaform is a horizontal development of an urban landscape. Frampton explores the megaform idea as a large scale architectural platform and elaborates the role of these forms of architecture in their continuity of urban fabric. He also articulates the explicit shift from object to city form as a mechanism of the megaform.

From its earliest conceptualization, the megaform has held both a conceptual and pragmatic relationship to governmental intervention. The megaform was capable of embodying the scale of governmental ambitions including its provision of physical and social infrastructure.

The direction of our research focuses on the strong relationships formed between society and architecture at the time, directly related to the close link between the political apparatus and architecture. Specifically, public projects are looked at, em- bracing the megaform as a translation of Canadian social democracy. Indeed, the archetype of megaform became a means of delivering the services of the social infrastructure to its citizens through post-secondary education, social housing, public healthcare and government administrative facilities. Notes :

1 Tyrwhitt, Jaqueline, José Luis Sert, and Ernesto N. Rogers, 2. Fumihiko Maki, Investigations in Collective Form, St. 3. Frampton, Kenneth. Megaform as Urban Landscape. Ann eds. The Heart of the City: CIAM 8. London: Humphries, Louis, Mo: School of Architecture, Washington University, Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan, A. Alfred Taubman 1952: 163. 1963: 8. College of Architecture Urban Planning, 1999:16.

13 megaform as socio-political manifestation in Canada

‘’The country’s long standing self image of itself as a settler dominion, an Empire of the north, a British colony that marched progressively and valiantly to its particular version of nationhood, was dealt with a series of decisive blows in this critical decade. Canada as it has been known ceased, for all practi- cal purposes, to exist in the 1960s.’’1

Bryan D.Palmer , 2009

Social Infrastructure: Education, Simon Fraser University (1965)

14 The ensemble of Canadian socio-political events of the 1960s-1980s represents driving forces in the development of megaform civic projects.

World War II acted as a shock wave on Canadian society, inherently creating major shifts in the settler dominion and questioning thereby its image and identity. Great demographic transformations catalyzed change in these critical decades such as an increasing number of women at work, reorganization of the family structure, declining birth rates, increasing immigration, etc. The Canadian population, which had been predominantly rural before the Second World War became intensely urban, affecting strongly the pace and way of living. Prominent political figures of that era such as Lester B. Pearson and Pierre Elliott Trudeau were able to embrace the possibilities found in this period of major changes and to catalyze it into a national effort based on equality and fairness. The political apparatus in place was pushed by an optimism that translated into creating inclusive social infrastructures. The public work projects would express and become integral to the notion of Canadian identity.

A range of governmental measures and policies established a national effort of re- structuring Canada towards an egalitarian and just society. Lester B. Pearson’s great achievements such as the introduction of universal health care, student loans and the Canada Pension Plan came to define Canadian society. These had an impact that came to characterize the architecture produced in the 1960s and the following decades. Thus, the transformation of cities was accompanied by the materialization of common wealth into institutional buildings, university campuses, social housing, public works and massive infrastructures.

A series of architectural projects in the context of the 1960s-1980s showcase the development of the megaform in Canada by explicitly illustrating the cultural, social and political forces at play. The following key projects represent the Canadi- an-specific evolution of the megaform as it edified national expression, institutional development and political ambition.

15 Expo 67 in Montreal was a chance for modern Canada to open up to the world and a search for national define its position as a progressive nation. The Expo ground served as an opportunity for international architects to experiment fragments of utopian theories and identity avant-garde thinking. For Canadian architects, it became a platform to showcase the spirit and identity of the country. The world event lead to the development of megaform projects in Montreal, on and off the grounds of the exhibition. Projects such as the Place Bonaventure by Arcop, Habitat 67 by Moshe Safdie or the Québec Pavillion by architects Papineau, Gérin-Lajoie, Le Blanc et Durand, captured the optimism and national values of the time.

In his 1976 book Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Past, Reyner Banham dedicates a whole chapter to Montreal where he discusses the city’s underground network developed during the Expo as being a megaform. He argues that its particular mechanism of creating an urban condition, built through both public (the metro) and private (the commercial development), provides resilience to the megaform concept.

The Expo Stadium designed by Victor Pruss is a megaform project that illustrates an attempt to shape the collective through formal articulation. Pruss explains, ‘’as the exhibition was staged on a very special urban context, we thought it important for the visitors to be aware of Montreal and its surroundings while watching the shows’’2. Thus, he decided to organize the structure by breaking up the mass of the stadium seating into spaced-apart modular units that would offer views out to the river and city beyond. In doing so, the architect was reflecting Canada as an inclusive and open society. The building conveyed notions of Canadian identity by Section of Expo Stadium (1965-67), Victor Pruss fonds, CCA framing the landscape and acting as a mediator of environment. Collection

16 “The social provenance gives Cana- dian Architecture of all epochs its particular quality. Architecture is a most social art requiring a consen- sus of agreement to generate the funds needed to build. Our architecture is as distinctly Canadian as our cultural landscape and as elu- sive to define.“3

Raymond Moriyama, 1983

Photograph of Expo Stadium (1965-67), Victor Pruss fonds, CCA Collection

17 The emergence of new post-secondary institutions in the 1960’s was in part a result education as social of cultural aspirations for a more open and accessible education. Representing a new form of social infrastructure, a series of university campuses were designed infrastructure across Canada. The campus designs adopted the megaform language as a way to create socially driven conditions of urbanity within these complexes. Arthur Erick- son’s designs for Simon Fraser University (1965) and University of Lethbridge (1967) articulate a megaform gesture in the landscape. Discussed here are two other Cana- dian examples that exemplify this concept of megaform in campuses while dealing differently with it; Scarborough and UQÀM.

The Université du Québec À Montréal was created in 1969 by the government of “A university can never be a city, but Quebec as an outcome of the Quiet Revolution and the rise of the middle-class the urban analogy was well used to in Quebec. The second French-speaking University in Montreal was born from val- yield new concepts and isolate the ues of democratization of knowledge and accessibility to high education pushed architecture of a new lifestyle. Here by extensive reforms by the provincial governance of Jean Lesage. The new cam- architects can exercise urban design pus completed in 1978 by Dimitri Dimakopoulos and partners is a megaform that aspirations which they have not yet integrates itself within existing city fabric. The campus, located downtown at the been able to realize elsewhere.” 4 intersection of two metro lines extends to the underground network, thus empha- sizing its rooting in the city. The campus’ inner circulation was organized in layers Melvin Charney, 1967 to deal with the duality of encouraging public access while keeping the academic exclusiveness. UQÀM’s megaform is one that shapes the collective and becomes a meaningful part of the city.

Following the massive expansion of university enrollment, Scarborough College, completed in 1965 by architect John Andrews, was created as a satellite campus of the University of Toronto. The design of the campus translated a new vision of education, integrating new age communications and mass media. The architecture of Scarborough college articulates a faith and optimism in technology from the scale of the classroom to the scale of the territory. Inverse to UQÀM, the megaform an- chors itself on a ridge outside of the urban context, dealing with vastness of landscape, creating a new environment and a community of its own.

The images opposite offer a cross-reading of UQÀM and Scarborough’s edge conditions. The first edge condition being very urban contrasts strongly with the second one being deposited in a natural and pristine environment. The juxtaposition of the images reveals similarities found in aesthetics of the megaform such as a rough (opposite) Megaform context and edge condition, finish, linearity, rhythm and brutalist language. Scarborough College (1965) & UQAM (1978)

18 19 The peak of megaform thinking in the 1960s-1980s coincides with a period in Ca- architecture & political nadian history where a close relationship between politics and architecture signifi- ambition cantly influenced public works across the country. Both the quest for a national identity and the establishment of public institutions pushed the rise of publicly funded projects. The socially-oriented stance of political leadership was translated in the design of new civic buildings giving rise to a distinctive public expression in the Canadian built environment.

The relationship between the prime minister and the design community, most notably the one between Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Arthur Erickson, suggests an appreciation for visionary design in shaping the public realm. Erickson’s contribution to Canadian public works at the time is undeniable. As the favorite architect of Trudeau, he notoriously received commissions for the Museum of Anthropology and the Canadian Chancellery in Washington. Even if those events were frivolous controversies of the time, they demonstrate the strong engagement of politicians towards Canadian society through architectural outcome.

Winning Shot: Arthur Erickson’s Museum of Anthropology (1976)

20 “These [Erickson’s public works] were tied to the new, culturally em- bracing, nature-conscious, world- aware Canadianism that emerged in the mid-1950s with the resis- tance to the Suez Canal and the celebration of lester Pearson’s Nobel Prize and that reached its rhetor- ical high point during the Liberal hegemony of Pearson and Pierre Elliott Trudeau. This was an ethical perspective rather than a political agenda.” 5

Nicolas Olsberg, 2011

Prime-Minister Trudeau and Arthur Erickson, in David Stouck’s Arthur Erickson: An Architect’s Life Notes :

1. Palmer, Bryan D, Canada’s 1960s the Ironies of Identity 3. Moriyama, Raymond, in “Foreword”, Modern Canadian Press, 2013. in a Rebellious Era, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, Architecture. Edmonton: Hurtig Publishers, 1983: 9. 5. Nicholas Olsberg, “Canada’s Greatest Architect”in 2009: 7. 4. Charney, Melvin, “Recent Directions in Canadian Architecture and the Canadian Fabric, Vancouver: UBC 2. Victor Pruss, Essays in architecture or what it is like to be Architecture” (1967) in On Architecture: Melvin Charney: A Press, 2011: 433. an architect, Montréal, 1996, p. 15.2. Critical Anthology, Montreal: McGill-Queens University 21 22 investigations on Robson Square

Robson Square is a multi-functional civic complex in Vancouver, BC designed by Arthur Erickson with the collaboration of the landscape architect Cornelia Hahn Oberlander in the years 1973-1983. The project represents an urban infrastructure in the city core and a seminal example of the megaform in Canada.

Intended to become a vital core within the city , extensive urban studies of downtown Vancouver lead to the development of the three-block project. The urban project was to house the relocated law courts, provincial government offices as well as other cultural and public functions. A megaform building was adopted as the solution to a multi-programmatic civic centre bringing together law, government and art. As the new heart for the city, Robson Square was designed as an open social framework for the public where the entire 3 blocks --51,61 and 71-- became a public urban landscape.

As a pinnacle of the era of megaform projects in Canada, Robson Square achieved architectural innovation in city making by defining a civic space in the downtown core. A monumental complex of such a scale was created as a symbolically open and inclusive environment for the Vancouver public. An equally impressive design achievement of this urban megaform lies in the revamping of traditional arche- types of civic program. A new approach in the architectural organization of the law courts and government offices made for a more transparent and open building structure for a public institution. Robson Square’s megaform invites public circulation across the entire three-block complex.

For the larger research project on public megaforms, Robson Square is chosen as a case study that exemplifies megaform thinking in a large scale, urban civic project. The complex reveals an architecture that materializes Canadian values and serves as a cultural platform for social democracy. A contemporary reading of Robson Square reinforces the project’s persistence over time as a public place for the city (opposite) Archival research: plan drawing and textual re- cords, Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection of Vancouver.

23 Three megaform sub-themes serve as the lenses through which to analyze Robson Square. The thematics of infrastructure, landscape and collectivity offer a multi- scale and multi-dimensional reading of the megaform as public project. The past and present success of Robson Square will be discussed to evaluate its legacy as urban scheme, symbolic civic gesture and social platform.

The concepts were chosen collectively by the three Power Corporation Award Re- cipients and then tackled through comprehensive individual investigations. The following passages are synthesized versions of larger essays, completed by each of the Recipients. Compiled here to provide a cohesive exhibition, the thematics serve to elucidate the case study of Robson Square, both architecturally and socially, as a public project.

Vision for the Core: Vancouver downtown peninsula with proposed ring road in Erickson’s Downtown Core Develop- ment Study (1966), Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

24 “One may illustrate this discussion by comparing the Centre Pompidou in Paris, which is surely a megastructure, to Arthur Erickson’s Robson Square development in Vancouver which is ultimately a megaform. This is largely due to the way in which its continuously stepped layered form serves to modulate and unify the existing fabric of downtown Vancouver. This particular example also happens to have been enriched by an exceptionally fertile collaboration between its architect, Arthur Erickson, and the landscape architect, Cornelia Oberlander.” 1

Kenneth Frampton, 1999

Megaform thinking : sketch of three-block project, Arthur Erickson fond, CCA Collection

Notes :

1. Frampton, Kenneth. Megaform as Urban Landscape. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan, A. Alfred Taubman College of Architecture Urban Planning, 1999:16.

25 INTRODUCTION TO ROBSON SQUARE

owner British Columbia Buildings Corporation The Canadian Art Council comission minister responsible The Honourable Alex Fraser Erickson for a project to revitalize the Inauguration of Robson Square with president J.R. Pitcher downtown Vancouver. Blocks 61 and 71 opening their doors. projet chairman Dr. Gordon Shrum project manager Louis van Blankenstein P. Eng. 1966 1978 Official opening of the new Vancouver architects Arthur Erickson Architects Newly elected Barrett gov’t revise the Art Gallery located in Block 51’s old landscape architect Cornelia Oberlander initial tower proposal and ask Erickson courthouse. engineers Bogue, Babicki & Associates (structural) for a new design. Reid, Crowther & Partners LTD. (mechanical) 1972 1983 W.T. Haggen & Co Ltd. (electrical) construction managers Concordia Managements Co. Ltd. Smithe St. Robson St. 71 61 51 Hornby St.

mound W Georgia St. stramps Nelson St. steps stramps main steps sunken plaza steps stramps

Howe St. BLOCK 71 BLOCK 61 BLOCK 51 schematic circulation plan Courthouse Provincial Gov’t Offices Vancouver Art Gallery 676 381 sq.ft. 456 726 sq.ft. 54 158 sq.ft. 7 storeys above grade 3 storeys above grade 1 storey above grade 3 storeys below grade 3 storeys below grade 3 storeys below grade

PUBLIC AMENITIES THEN Cinema Theatre NOW UBC Classrooms Exhibition Space Street vendors schematic section Conference Rooms Food Fair / Restaurants pedestrian circulation automobile circulation

26 INTRODUCTION TO ROBSON SQUARE

mound W Georgia St. stramps Nelson St. steps stramps main steps sunken plaza steps stramps

PUBLIC AMENITIES THEN Cinema Theatre NOW UBC Classrooms Exhibition Space Street vendors schematic section Conference Rooms Food Fair / Restaurants pedestrian circulation automobile circulation

27 The People and Investigations in Megastructure Urban Structures Megastructure: Urban Futures Megaform as The Liberal Monument Their Supports Collective Form Bibliography for the Future of the Recent Past urban landscape Alexander D'Hooghe Nicolas Habraken Fumihiko Maki Raplh Wilcoxon Justus Dahinden Reyner Banham Kenneth Frampton megaform publicationson

1964: Vancouver 1969: Protest of 1978: Official 1983: Official 1994: Vancouver’s 2009: Vancouver 2011: VIVA Planning Dept. plans to Vancouver’s citizens inauguration of inauguration of the Canucks lose a game Public Space Vancouver link the courthouse block against a freeway plan Robson Square. Vancouver during the Stanley Cup Network organizes a competition with the Province owned to run through the finals, causing a riot on competition to define for public south block by briging downtown neighbor- Art Gallery Robson St. public spaces: installations on moved into Robson over Robson St. hoods. Robson Square is Robson Street. Square’s old pointed as a target. courthouse. 1966: Vancouver’s 1973: New NDP Prime 1979: The portion of 1987: First New Year’s 2001: UBC opens a 2010: Vancouver hosts Community Arts Council Minister Dave Barrett Robson St. intersecting celebrations by the City downtown campus, the Winter ask Erickson-Massey demands new design for the square is closed to are held in Robson occupying space under Architects to develop a Robson Square. Erickson traffic resulting in chaotic Square. They will be held Robson Square. Olympic Games. Robson Square is the plan for a new courthouse, redesigns his earlier tower intersection at Howe St. officially until 2003, but main site for celebra- civic parcgovernment as horizontal skyscraper. people still gather there Robson Square events tions. skyscraper on Block by tradition at midnight. 61-71.

Diefenbaker Pearson Trudeau Clark Trudeau Mulroney Chrétien Martin Harper gov’t 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Immigration Act socio-political events Civil MariageCivil Act MedicalCare Act Quebec Referendum Quebec Referendum Expoin 67 Montreal Canadian Canadian Health Act Official Language Act Canadian Bill Rights of Expo ‘86 in Vancouver Canadian Pension Plan October inCrisis Montreal Office Religiousof Freedom Criminal Law Amendment Act Canada Student Loan Program SocialUnion Framework Agreement CentennialCanadianof Confederation Calgary hosts ‘88 Winter Olympic Games Canada-Unites States FreeTrade Agreement Montreal hosts Olympic‘76 Summer Games Vancouverhosts ‘10 Winter OlympicGames

28 The People and Investigations in Megastructure Urban Structures Megastructure: Urban Futures Megaform as The Liberal Monument Their Supports Collective Form Bibliography for the Future of the Recent Past urban landscape Alexander D'Hooghe Nicolas Habraken Fumihiko Maki Raplh Wilcoxon Justus Dahinden Reyner Banham Kenneth Frampton megaform publicationson

29 infrastructure Kevin Murray

“Whether it is planned or spontaneous, whatever the cause and content... the Core should give both an impression of freedom of movement and also a release from loneli- ness or boredom; an atmosphere of general relaxation, of participation in a spontaneous and impartial per- formance, a touch of the warmth of human kindness, a possibility of new encounters and – at the same time – a recovery of civic consciousness. It is in this meeting place for pedestrians that the human scale and values may be re-established within the public domain.”1

CIAM 8 Conference, 1951

Proposed 3 Block Project. A Plan for Vancouver’s Downtown Core (1966), Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

30 search for the core Amidst post-World War II reconstruction and the phenomenon of suburban sprawl, the 1951 Congres International d’Architecture Moderne (CIAM) announced a new focus for architecture: the core.2 Part urban design and part architecture, the project for a core constituted a departure within modernist urban planning and from any ambition to plan a city in its entirety. Its strategy instead was geared to a fragment, a civic kernel, an embryo of urbanity.3 Anticipating many key ambitions that megaform projects would explore in the coming decades, the core proposed to condense many of the functions and programs of the city into thick, dense nodes. In an era of transformation and centrifugal dispersion, the core proposed to provide the historical and new city with a built platform for a civic culture. The heart of the CIAM congress distilled the meaning of the core as that of a rendez-vous, a public meeting place. The core would ultimately serve a civic function and reframe the historic centre as a contemporary evocation of the democratic political space of the Greek agora. The literal and symbolic public space of the city becomes an attempt to collect all types of people to congregate, inhabit and exchange ideas: “Such civic centers would consolidate [democratic] governments; for the lack of them and the dependence of the people on controlled means of information makes them more easily governable by the rule of the few…They are necessary for the city as a whole and even for the nation, and they should be publicly financed.”..4

The link between civic space and democracy is presented by CIAM as extending the core as all the way back to the ancient Greek space of the Agora. “Such civic centers would modern democratic consolidate [democratic] governments; for the lack of them and the dependence of the people on controlled means of information makes them more easily governable infrastructure by the rule of the few. The creation of these centers is a government job (Federal, State or Municipal). These elements cannot be established on a business basis. They are necessary for the city as a whole and even for the nation, and they should be publicly financed.” Participation would be the goal, the opportunity for all types of people to inhabit, congregate and exchange ideas.”5 Robson Square emerges in this discoursive and urban context and can be situated as a late modernist attempt to re-invent the historic city fabric as an essential public form for the city.

31 “I think there is a danger in this city – the one-big-building-thing – it’s taken too literally where it is in fact a metaphor and it doesn’t have to be everything-connected- to-everything, all geometries tied to all other geometries. This is system-building which results in a system which is one-big-thing. I have the strongest feeling that dislocation of the elements is a better technique on the whole for making a collective than sticking them together. We agree generally the business of systems of linkages but they needn’t be physical.” 6

Peter Smithson, 1977

(top) Street Deck or Pedestrian Podium: Competition for Berlin Hapstadt, Robert and Allison Smithson, (1958)

(middle) Street level pedestrian mall on Granville St.. Below grade transit corridor. A Plan for Vancouver’s Downtown Core (1966), Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

(bottom) Robson Square Law Court Overpass. Photograph looking south down to Smithe St. (2014)

32 automobiles & sprawl In the late 1950’s Vancouver was actually dismantling its urban transport: its two inter-urban train lines and the streetcar system were shut down in September 1958. The late 1960’s and early 1970’s was a period of intense civic engagement and public interest for civic participation manifested in citizen movements including the Chinatown revolt which helped turn public opinion against a freeway plan that would have cut through Vancouver’s historical core in 1967.7 Key amongst Rob- son’s ambitions and shared by post World War II CIAM and Team 10 interlocutors, is a plan for Vancouver’s the positioning of mobility infrastructure as definitive for contemporary architecture and urban life. Downtown Core 1966 The Erickson/Massey Plan for Vancouver’s Downtown Core projected urban strat- & egies for the entire peninsula, focusing on both mitigating and reforming urban effects hastened by automobile use and infrastructure. Though never fully real- the Nine Block Plan ized, the early proposal included automobile parking restricted to the interior core 1973 of buildings and a ring road that was to encircle the entire downtown peninsula, preserving the interior blocks for a pedestrian oriented core. 8 Transit, parking and service vehicle corridors were placed below grade while pedestrians were to inhabit at-grade malls. The project ultimately aims to exclude automobile access, eventually bridging a major thoroughfare with a pedestrian overpass and burrowing a pedestrian underpass when all attempts to close Robson St. to vehicles and create a public square at grade were unsuccessful.

With an ambition to assert its difference and inoculate itself from the privatized and disorganizing flows of the city, Robson Square in part turns away from the street. The project establishes itself in contrast to the adjacent towers as a kind of island, a late cousin of its North American cousin, Central Park in New York. Though Robson segregates pedestrians from cars with a definitive perimeter condition, the edges of the three blocks open at key moments to acknowledge and allow interaction with pedestrian and vehicular flows. The sites manifold public surfaces, continuous with publicly accessible sidewalks and streets, draw pedestrians from adjacent streets with terraced open spaces and public programming. The given civic programming mandate and disposition of the activities or programming on the site formed the second defining parameter for the site, introducing the depositing of program into thickened pockets varying between 4-8 stories. The result is both an extensive public surface terrain, traversing indoor and outdoor conditions across the length of the projects three block footprint, and a spatial and programmatic layering. Despite the projects attempt towards a sectional thickening or mat approach, the considerable below-grade program is compromised by the absence of a subterranean rapid transit station that was never installed.

33 “It is obvious that the movement patterns by vehicle and by foot, which determine the movement corridors of the city form the basic skeleton into which the buildings fit. The traffic patterns were the fundamental problem of our study. ”9

Arthur Erickson, 1973

(top) Spatial Segregation of mobilty types: A Plan for Van- couver’s Downtown Core (1966), Arthur Erickson fonds,

(left) Robson Square as Core: Analytic diagram of the cities functions depicting Robson Square at the highest point of the peninsula, not as a crossroad, but as a core in itself. The 9 Block Area Development Guidelines (1973) Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

34 Robson Square as In Investigations in Collective Form (1964), Fumihiko Maki presents a morpholog- public infrastructure ical conception of architecture and urban form as groupings of variable density and relatedness. Maki illustrates one of the basic ideas of group form in historic villages or markets that develop incrementally, maintaining a collective coherence or shared identity while allowing for localized growth.10 To phrase the problematic specifically for the case of the evolving character of Robson Square, how can a public architectural monument assert an urban identity while maintaining openness to transformation, new uses and affiliations?

Utilizing Maki’s concepts of Compositional and Group form, a conceptual frame emerges that positions Robson Square as an expression of the the paradox internal to the ambition of megaform, the conflicted desire to affirm a sense of place while serving as a catalyst for change. On the one hand, Robson Square is a composi- tion- the sites restricted program, surface plazas and connective architectural tissue establish relatively fixed positions between elements and the sites public anchor buildings. Within an overarching political commitment to a social democracy project, the sites public programs are stabilized by legal and bureaucratic institutions while its architecture of variegated public surfaces facilitate public sites for collective occupation.

In terms of its most basic, generative elements, Robson Square is an assemblage of three blocks, identical in dimension and mobility infrastructure to the adjacent city blocks. The grid of North American cities like Vancouver have proven definitive of urban form and a resilient determinate of public vitality. Plan and sectional continuity with the mobility and cultural flows of the street allow sites to react to forces exterior to it and evolve over time. The continuity of public surfaces and programmatic connections to the city, with its unpredictable social, economic, and political dynamics, interact with Robson’s permanent architectural infrastructure to frame an indeterminate collective platform. In the 1973 Erickson articulates the projects hybrid identity where he oscillates between declaring the project an Urban Core and Democratic Meeting Place, City Square, Civic and Provincial Spine, Linear park, Public Open Space, Active Civic Open space, Low-scale public precinct. 11 Rob- son Square might be less defined as a unity of Megastructure or Megaform, than a group form, an assemblage of fragments whose contour only emerges through the conversation between of its parts over time.

Notes : 1. Tyrwhitt, Jaqueline, José Luis Sert, and Ernesto N. Rogers, 6. Wigley, Mark. Network Fever. In Grey Room 04, Summer 9. The 9 Block Area Development Guidelines (1973) eds. The Heart of the City: CIAM 8. London: Humphries, 2001, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2001. pp. Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection 1952. 82–122. 10. Fumihiko Maki. Investigations in Collective Form. St. 2. Ibid, 163. 7. Vancouver Ltd., Donald Gutstein. Toronto: James Lorim- Louis, Mo: School of Architecture, Washington University, 3. Ibid, 165. er & Company Publishers, 1975: 154. 1963. 4. Alexander D’Hooghe. The Liberal Monument. New York:. 8. A Plan for Vancouver’s Downtown Core (1966) 11. The 9 Block Area Development Guidelines (1973) Princeton Architectural Press. 2010: 24. Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection 5. The Heart of the City, 165. 35 landscape Laura Fiset

“Nature is actually omnipresent in the city: in the city’s climate, topog- raphy and vegetation, that we are in fact surrounded by impalpable or invisible landscapes of spaces and colour and light and sound and movement and temperature, in the city no less than in the country. What is more, there is a constant action and reaction between ourselves and this environment. ... We are beginning to learn that the world surrounding us affects every aspect of our being, that far from being spectators of the world we are participants in it.” 1

J.B. Jackson, 1960

Landscape as symbolic surface: plan showing landscape design and designated sites for public art work, Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

36 Challenging the notion of landscape as a static image of a national identity, the term landscape encompasses a larger and more abstract meaning in the context of Robson Square. Reevaluating the ideology of landscape, the discussion of the term will divert away from a kitschy depiction of the Canadian environment to reveal the landscape-like architecture of the megaform.

The concept of the landscape is interpreted here as a question of monumentality and milieu. Reflecting larger socio-political aspirations, the project for a civic core articulates a new form of monumentality, shifting from symbolic form to symbolic milieu. The urban landscape created by Robson Spare represents a megaform solution for a civic complex and a public environment in the heart of the city.

landscape as Robson Square began as a quest to define a civic core in downtown Vancouver. In the development of the heart of the city, the project for a new monument sought to monument define a symbolic expression of government and a place of the public realm.

Arthur Erickson played a major role in drawing out a national aesthetic in Canada during the 1960s-1980s. The influence of landscape in Erickson’s buildings translates beyond a literal image to an approach of contextual mediation. Erickson’s buildings serve as fitting expressions and platforms for the public, making him, as Nicholas Olsberg claims,” the chosen architectural prophet of a new democracy.”2

A radical change in the design of the civic core following the election of a different provincial political party speaks of a shift in the desired public image of civic buildings. The original design for the complex consisted of a 55-storey tower-in-the-park scheme. In 1973, the imposing symbolic image of the tower was rejected by the newly elected New Democratic Party in favour of a more open and public megaform. Portraying an image of the NDP and their leader Dave Barrett, the civic project was to serve as a monument to a more transparent and inclusive government.

Political apparatus : newspaper clipping from Vancouver Sun (July, 1979), Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

37 The drastic change of schemes is characteristic of a historic discourse on civic ar- “[The megastructure] had enjoyed chitecture. In 1951, issues of monumentality and questions on the symbolic man- dominance because it offered to ifestation of society were raised at CIAM 8. The human scale and the spontaneity make sense of an architecturally of urban life were advocated as the foundations for a new civic expression. Even in incomprehensible condition in the the Canadian scene, Melvin Charney proposes a shifting role of the architect in the world’s cities, to resolve the con- design of civic monuments from symbolic form to space of public appropriation.3 flicts between design and spontaneity, the large and the small, the permanent and the transient.”4

Reyner Banham, 1976

“As [Erickson] negotiates the boundaries of a neutral ground- the decisive lines between humans and nature, the universal and the specific, the public and the intimate, the reasoned and the instinctive, remote cultures and near ones, past examples and present needs- he draws out the richness of tension and the eloquence of equilibrium that lie between them all.” 5

Nicolas Olsberg, 2011

Symbolic Form: model of tower scheme in Erickson’s Downtown Core Development Study (1966), Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

38 landscape as In constant negotiation with its surroundings, the architecture of the megaform characteristically deals with context and landscape. Robson Square reveals a par- milieu ticular interrelation of architecture and landscape in creating an urban milieu. Landscape becomes an architectural strategy of the megaform in designing built environments.

Arthur Erickson’s portfolio of works exhibits a creative contextual sensibility. In particular, his large public projects embody a landscape-like architecture that responds to, extends or introduces questions of context. These considerations of surrounding and immediate site were distinctive in Erickson’s scenographic designs.

In comparing the megaform of Simon Fraser and Robson Square, two different ap- proaches can be observed in Erickson’s treatment of context: framing the landscape and creating the landscape. In Simon Fraser, a university campus outside Vancouver built in 1965, the figure of the megaform beautifully situates itself within the natural backdrop and frames the impressive vistas beyond. Reversely, Robson Square deals with context by becoming the site of an urban landscape within the city. The landscape-like architecture defines environmental conditions of an artificial terrain, Symbolic Milieu: contemporary photograph at Block 61, providing a continuous public surface through exterior to interior. In his contextual (2014) approach, Erickson not only deals with the surrounding context but expressly proposes a new one, that of a public milieu in the heart of the city.

39 “The basic landscape concept for the Provincial Government complex reintroduces nature into the city as a readily accessible public as- set, thereby creating a green space in the city that can be enjoyed by everyone throughout the year.” 6

Cornelia Hahn Oberlander, 1978

Sectional design of Landscape: print drawing, Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

In the staggering diversity of architectural typology and functions, landscape design serves as a unifying strategy for the entire three-block complex. In the creation of a milieu, an integration of natural elements of a park-like setting with the architecture of the megaform represents a more literal but still significant application of the concept of landscape.

Cornelia Hahn Oberlander was brought onto the Robson Square project in 1974 and played a central role in the development of a terraced urban park. The landscape design strategy consists of an interesting relationship between the fixed structural components and the dynamic play of natural elements throughout the seasons. This relationship was studied in plan as well as in section in considering the experiential qualities of landscape design. Oberlander pursued extensive studies on new forms of plant growing medium and innovative irrigation systems. A variety of planting types were applied throughout the complex, including walkway plant- ings, box planters and flying planters. The horizontal bands of box planters provide a visual continuity of the lateral facades. A similar landscape treatment is carried through the interior of the law courts, where box planters align along the edges of floors over the atrium space. Reflecting pools and waterfalls also contribute to the “natural” setting of the linear park.

40 Oberlander’s landscape design extended the architectural gesture and provided a much desired urban park setting in the city centre. The overlaid and integrated concept of landscape with the architecture of the megaform has played an essential role in defining the character and image of Robson Square.

Symbolic public platform: photograph of mound, skating rink plaza where dancing is taking place in the summer time, and outdoor restaurants, (1978?), Cornelia Hahn Ober- lander fonds, CCA Collection

In the context of megaform, landscape involves a more abstract understanding of the term as it relates to a particular architectural strategy. The challenge of landscape presents an opportunity for megaform architecture to design meaningful built environments in both natural and urban settings.

Beyond the kitschy image of Canada, landscape represents an abstract architectural approach for designing collective environments. Very much apparent in the example of Robson Square, the urban megaform becomes a powerful civic gesture and social platform in the city.

Notes : 5. Nicholas Olsberg, “Canada’s Greatest Architect”in 1. J.B. Jackson, ‘Landscape’ Vol 10, Fall 1960, p.1-2 3. reference to Melvin Charney’s Corrid’Art project in Architecture and the Canadian Fabric, Vancouver: UBC 2. Nicholas Olsberg, “Canada’s Greatest Architect”in Montreal (1976), Melvin Charney fonds, CCA Collection Press, 2011: 445. Architecture and the Canadian Fabric, Vancouver: UBC 4. Banham, Reyner, Megastructure: Urban Futures of the 6. Cornelia Hahn Oberlander, project profile document, Press, 2011: 440. Recent Past. London: Harper and Row, 1976: 10. Cornela Hahn Oberlander fonds, CCA Collection 41 collectivity Thaly Drouin-Crespin

‘‘It was astonishing that Erickson could persuade the New Democrats to let him stretch that horizontal notion into a great man made to- pography of park and walkways that would extend from one shore of the peninsula to the other. Only the wonderful innocence of the new government could have toler- ated the amazing ambition of the project, its defiance to economic logic, its extraordinary sense of innovation, and its spiraling costs.‘’1

Nicolas Olsberg, 2011

Public Invitation: newspaper clipping for Robson Square opening (1978), Arthur Erickson fonds, CCA Collection

42 The notion of collectivity is intrinsic to Robson Square as the three blocks megaform unveils a variety of public programs. The initial intentions that were voiced, either coming from Arthur Erickson, the citizens of Vancouver or the political forces reveal a strong intention of inclusion, reflective of the national politics of the time. The success of the different mechanisms that participated in shaping the collective can be evaluated through the reception of the project, both internationally and locally, and through the public appropriation of the complex since its completion.

As visibility was brought to Canada in the 1960s urging the nation to define itself, notions of fairness and inclusion were adopted as national values, translated into what Nicholas Olsberg framed as ‘’a national architecture not by way of identifiable local references but through adopting as national the forward-looking universal.’’2 Arthur Erickson’s contribution through the realization of public works is one that undeniably depicts the concepts of inclusive democracy and openness found in the optimistic 1960s to1980s. public inclusion Beside the initial involvement of Barrett’s NDP government in the design of Robson Square, different agents were participating to the discussion on what should be the space as the project was taking shape. Erickson strongly believed that the public input should be part of the design process. In a letter addressed to the Deputy Min- ister of Public Works in April 1973, he wrote ‘‘citizens’ involvement in the past has been negatively oriented, as protest actions. It is important to redirect public con- cern in a positive way, but this requires a great deal of study and effort by everyone concerned. We suggest rather than large confrontations, meetings at the smaller group level, with continuing discussion over an extended period of time. The greatest value of citizen participation lies in its potential for public education, to increase awareness of the urban environment, as well as a research tool for planners and designers, to uncover hidden issues and values.’’3

Found in Erickson’s archives at the CCA are many evidences that testify the impor- tance of the community’s voice in his design for Robson Square. Among them are voting sheets from meetings inquiring on the design of the project and letters from citizens asking for different components such as a reflecting pool or a cinema. Also, the Robson Square project was exhibited in July 1973 at the Vancouver Public Li- brary after which Arthur Erickson received multiple comments from the citizens. It is important to mention that the Ministry of Public Works was strongly involved in voicing the people’s opinion on the design and the program of the project. The

43 would correspond with Erickson and forward commentaries from the citizens to him. This practice was certainly in sync with the vision of the Barrett government newly in place, and at the broader scale, with the national vision of Pierre Elliott Trudeau of creating a Canadian community based on fairness and democracy.

The notion of sharing can be found in Arthur Erickson’s writings when he expresses strong opinions on concepts of responsibility, looking at community versus individ- uality. He was firmly opinionated when talking about the urge of regaining values of sharing in the way we live today. The architect also evoked concepts of plurality and awareness of the unique in his text Sharing - The Choice is Ours. As for example, he makes the point that “We are learning to respect the fact that a solution for one time and one place is not the solution for another.‘‘4

The architectural articulation of Robson Square, using a variety of spatial mechanism, translates Erickson’s ideals of creating a new type of community based on notion of sharing and urbanity. Robson Square’s expression is one of publicness. The fact that some office space floors in Block 61 are located below grade to favour the public space on the roof clearly indicates the priority given to the most universal space of the building. The series of pedestrian spaces that rise from Robson Street to the end of the third block have a fundamental role in making the site inviting and appropriable. Erickson also translated aspects of publicness and openness inside the complex through smoothly connecting spaces. Even though there is in Robson Square a gradient of accessibility found in the different programs, from the very public art gallery to the semi-public courthouse, the architecture expresses continuity between the three blocks that convey to the whole complex its image of inclusiveness.

By intertwining fairly different programs which are the new courthouse, government offices and a cultural centre with a public space, Erickson creates a new environment of its own. The proximity of the different functions of the civic complex becomes an opportunity to encourage exchanges and give a new pulse to the city. From Erickson’s point of view, “Law, government and art would each benefit from proximity with the other, sharing a public image, public patronage and their own employees’ interactions.”5 The new core, by its mixed-use programmatic articulation, becomes a platform for mass society to interact. Erickson, who had an aversion for North American planning practices that would segregate uses, approached the project having in mind to ‘‘humanize an otherwise narrow function by expanding an utilitarian program to a larger cultural reference.’’6

44 ‘’ Thus community needs (to) have The suggestion of fairness was also translated through the execution of particular priority over individual require- details. For instance, the ‘stramp’ --a zigzagging hybrid of ramp and stairs-- was de- ments and this represents an im- veloped by Erickson’s team as a device to allow front door rights for the disabled. portant shift in priorities— one that The integrated path becomes a natural extension of the street up to the roof gar- den, allowing for a natural movement of the public. By inviting citizens to walk up, could not have been realized with- but also to stop or sit, the stramp is understood here as a civilizing mechanism that out the altruistic encouragement allow for appropriation and illustrates plurality and inclusion. The stramp also plays of a government which wished to an important role by conveying an image through its uniqueness. It becomes the set an example of priorities differ- symbolic image of Robson Square, thereby developing itself as part of the commu- ent than had determined building nity’s identity. This ensemble of strategies used by Erickson in Robson Square and form in the past.’’ 7 his symbolic use of transparency in the courthouse building demonstrate his clear understanding of the key role that would play a new civic core in shaping the col- Arthur Erickson lective aspect of the city, basing its mechanism on fostering a strong and egalitarian

Voting sheet from meetings of Erickson with citizens of Van- couver. Arthur Erickson Fonds, CCA Collection.

45 Transparency of government: Public interior street through Law Courts on Block 71, (2014)

From its opening, Robson Square was celebrated by the international critique, reception & appropriation winning for instance the 1979 ASLA President’s Award of excellence with the jury highlighting the integration of architecture and landscape architecture. The new civic core faced early criticism at local scale, but Susan Herrington pointed out that ‘‘Despite these criticisms, during the late 1970s and 1980s Robson Square proved to be extremely popular. There was ice-skating in winter and roller-skating in summer, as well as major programming events that enlivened the sunken plaza. These events ranged from contemporary dance performances, to sports events, to the World’s Largest Tea Party that was held to celebrate the marriage of Prince Charles and Lady Diana. Some of these programs drew between 45 000 and 50 000 people to Robson Square, with the lower levels of Block 61 serving as the stage, and the stramps and street-level areas acting as the grandstand for spectators.’’7 Through the years, Robson Square became a defining element of the city, staging a variety of outcomes of public appropriation, such as the Occupy Vancouver movement, the 2010 Olympics celebration, the Canucks’ riots, the New Year’s celebration, etc.

Different proposals through time have been developed by providing new programs and by increasing the site’s exposure to stimulate public interest. In 1999, Erickson made a proposal to improve the public space in Robson Square. His series of inter- ventions consisted of the implementation of new retail spaces, the removal of the bronze domes, the addition of new escalators for easier access from the street and the expansion of the Vancouver Art Gallery. The proposal never materialized but it demonstrates how committed was Arthur Erickson in activating the public realm.

46 The concept of fostering a community is inherent to the megaform phenomena when looking at the initial intention of sharing common space as well as the typology’s allowance for appropriation. Pushed by strong political intentions, citizen voice and Erickson’s ideals, Robson Square as a megaform becomes a platform for social interaction. It sets up a space that is inclusive by the articulation of a variety of architectural mechanism that convey notions of openness and Canadian democracy. Arthur Erickson’s strong opinions on shared space and collectivity are embedded in his innovative and optimistic architecture in the Robson Square project. His design sought to create concrete changes in the way people live together. The variety of

Public Celebration: Robson Square during the Winter Olym- spatial appropriations, whether they are pacific celebrations or insurgencies, reveal pics, (2010) the success of Robson Square in being a sensible space that shapes collective.

Notes : 3. Arthur Erickson, Sharing-The Choice is ours, p.2. 7. Susan Herrington, Cornelia Oberlander, Making the Cornelia Oberlander Fonds, CCA Collection. modern landscape, p.136 1. Nicholas Olsberg ‘’ Canada’s greatest architect’’, Liscombe, 4. Erickson, Arthur. The Architecture of Arthur Erickson. 6. Arthur Erickson, Sharing-The Choice is ours, p.16. R. W. Architecture and the Canadian Fabric. Vancouver: UBC New York: Douglas & McIntyre, 1988: 115. Cornelia Oberlander Fonds, CCA Collection. Press, 2011. 5. Arthur Erickson, Thoughts on architecture: a personal 2. Correspondence between Arthur Erickson and George view, transcript from Colloque Hotel-dieu de Lyon 20 octo- Giles,1973. Arthur Erickson Fonds, CCA Collection. bre 1999. Arthur Erickson vertical file, CCA Collection. 47 These investigations provide a contextual reading of a public megaform project in Canada. Robson Square today is still as a vital node in the city of Vancouver. Since contemporary its opening in 1978, the civic complex has hosted many significant events and has reading sustained its role as public milieu.

In 2010, the Winter Olympics held in Vancouver brought the spotlight on Robson Square, as it was identified as the main celebratory space. A proposal was made for a wooden canopy that would cover the sunken plazas of Blocks 51 and 61. Dubbed ‘the clamshell’, the project was abandoned after a debate where architects and planners allied to defend the preservation of the original character of Robson Square as imagined by Erickson.

Lately, multiple discussions were held on the maintenance of Robson Square. Ac- cording to Cornelia Oberlander, the multiple changes that have occured do not follow the initial spirit crystallized by Erickson at the time. Cheryl Cooper, who founded the Arthur Erickson Conservancy in 2003, expressed her disappointment regarding the loss of public amenities in Robson Square and the recent addition of glass barriers: “These glass barriers are so contrary to the design and the spirit of Robson Square,”said Cooper. “[They] break every Erickson design rule. They make the space less accessible, less public.’’1

Change in functions over time throughout the three-block complex are continually shifting, yet still maintaining, the center of publicness on the site. In the past three years, the closure of Robson Street in summer to vehicular traffic has created a new vibrant plaza surface on the street between blocks 51 and 61. Vancouver’s public space program, VIVA Vancouver, closed the street to allow urban appropriation and organized a design competition for street furniture that activate the public realm. The intensive centre of gravity for the public now happens off of the popular thoroughfare of Robson Street, leaving the stramps, mound and sunken plaza for a less hectic retreat. Such events demonstrate that Robson Square is still relevant in its capacity to foster community and generate appropriation of space. In the Summer 2014 edition of Canadian Spacing magazine, Liz Vossen wrote ‘‘Lo- cated along the city’s most commercialized thoroughfare, Robson Square is argu- ably the most public place in all of Vancouver: it is where street performers strive to draw a crowd; where artists line up their work for sale along the sidewalk; where activists gather their troops for rallies; and where, on a warm day, you’ll find people of all walks of life out and about.’’2 (opposite) Robson Square today: Stramps (2014)

48 49 50 “It is hoped that this kind of com- Robson Square was targeted here as a case study because it is a current object mitment to a sensitive and human of debate mainly due to the displacement of the Vancouver Art Gallery. The gal- condition will add impetus to sim- lery announced it’s moving in 2007 and a competition was launched for the new ilar efforts by all levels of society, building. As Arthur Erickson had developed an idea in 1999 to increase the gallery’s exhibition space, Cornelia Oberlander and Bing Thom opposed themselves industry and government, for in to the moving of the Gallery when it was announced. Bing Thom said to the Van- this way our cities in themselves will couver Sun in 2010 : “The whole idea of moving the Vancouver Art Gallery needs become more exciting and creative to be looked at again. The Olympics proved that Robson Square may be the most area in which to live.” 4 valuable, most exciting real estate in Canada. Arthur believed his expansion plan would work. I do too.”3 Despite mobilizations from architects and planners against Cornelia Oberlander, 1979 the project, the Georgia and Cambie site was announced in 2013 to be receiving the VAG within a building to be designed by Swiss architects Herzog and de Meuron. The Art Gallery being the most public building part of the Robson Square complex, its removal might be harmful for public activation. The question of altering the original program is delicate since the Block 51 gallery‘s contribution to the whole was to play a key role as a cultural beacon and act as an incentive platform for public gathering.

Looking at the larger picture, what we could interpret as recent contemporary ‘megaforms’, such as the Bibliotheque Nationale building in Montreal by Patkau could also be compared to the 1960s megaform to evaluate its nature and outcome. The megaform concept in today’s Canadian built environment should be considered for its value in shaping the public realm and initiating a broader discussion on Canadian identity and common values.

(opposite) Robson Square today: Vancouver Art Gallery and Robson Street with temporary street furniture, closed to vehicular traffic for the summer (2014)

Robson Square today: Benches by reflecting pool on block 61(2014) Notes :

1. Smedman, Lisa. “Heritage Advocate Targets Robson 2. Vossen, Liz. “Robson Redux.” Spacing, Summer 2014, 4. Cornelia Hahn Oberlander, Draft text with corrections Square: Arthur Erickson Creation Subjected to ‘incremental 28-34. explaining the role of the landscape architect in Robson Intrusions’” Vancouver Courier, June 5, 2009, News sec. 3.Cernetig, Miro. “Robson Square Requires Revamp; It’s Square, Cornelia Hahn Oberlander fonds, CCA Collection Leaky, but It’s Vancouver’s Civic Centre.” Vancouver Sun, March 8, 2010, West coast News sec. 51 On living in Cities, Robson Square, and Urban Design in Vancouver

An interview with James K.W. Cheng, August, 2014

On Robson Square: “Arthur’s idea was to create a heart in the center of the city. He is an urbanist and an anti-urbansit. An urbanist in the sense that he values density. He felt that we didn’t need more concrete jungles or towers.”

James K.M. Cheng, 2014

Rendering of Vancouver House. Vancouver B.C. West- bank Development with James K.M. Cheng and Bjarke Ingels, 2013

52 Can we start by talking about some of the was never taught in the studios. in the shop and he would run his hands over early influences on the development of your it. He was a humanist. Arthur also had a hu- conception of architecture and cities? Who Eventually in order to renew my visa I would man touch but was a bit more slick. and what places particularly effected your have to leave the country and also to avoid education and professional trajectory? the risk of being drafted into the Vietnam While Robson Square appears in some ways War, I left for Canada. I spoke with the cur- to be a singular project adapted to a partic- Before graduating from the University of rent editor of Architectural Record and she ular site, it does have some general prece- Washington in 1970, I spent some time work- recommended Arthur. She also showed me dents in the megaform and new public core ing in the offices of Fred Passeti, Victor Stein- a copy of the time magazine with Arthur on movements of the era. Do you remember beck. the cover. Eventually I worked in his office what sort of work or precedents you were from 1973-1976 before completing my Mas- looking at in the office at the time? Were At the time there was the intention of demol- ters of Architecture at Harvard. there any projects that had a particular influ- ishing Pike Place Market, a gritty but beloved ence on Robson Square? market and gathering place in the historical The shift in the role of an Architect as a de- core of the city. Fred was involved in a move- signer of machines or monuments to some- The work of Kevin Roche and his project for ment to maintain the market and introduced one attuned to the values and dynamics of Oakland Museum that was in construction at me to the concept of the activist-architect. social pushed some architects in the 1960’s the time was very significant. Arthur’s idea I soaked it in my initial response of “why do and 1970’s to extend their professional con- was to create a heart in the center of the city. you want to preserve a run-down building” cerns and participate as a citizen in urban He is an urbanist and an anti-urbansit. An I developed an understanding of the social, development. urbanist in the sense that he values density. economic, cultural value. This opened up my He felt that we didn’t need more concrete mind to urban design. We started questioning our Bauhaus ed- jungles or towers. He said “I can show you ucation and the notion of rchitecture as a guys a another way other then for Chicago After graduating I moved to San Francisco to machine for living, as an answer to societal or New York.” get experience with Henry Bull at Bull Field transformation. By the 1970’s, people were Wolkmin Stockwell. We were also involved in starting to question technology and th Of course there is the now famous sketches a waterfront campaign that included lobby- eplace of human beings. The architectural by Arthur in 1956 depicting the skyline of ing the government to get rid of the express- profession was actually falling behind public Vancouver transformed by swooping towers. way. I was a good drawer so I was involved pressures Early on after winning Simon Fraser, Arthur in depicting what the scene could look like also got a commission to analyze the Seattle if the expressway was removed. Eventually Bernard Rudofsky`s Architecture without Expressway and developed proposals for in- it took a force of nature to take it down (1989 Architects suggested you don’t need an ar- habiting the site. This is also one of his early earthquake). chitect. Ricardo. He proposed combining experiments with megaform. vernacular architecture with formalistic ar- I also was working on the drawings for a chitecture. It was pinned up on the wall at Among the innovations of the architecture book on Schinkel’s Berlin. Ink on Linen, all Passeti’s office. He was into the craft. Work- as landform is the handling of the central pe- corners needed to be 90 degrees sharp, he ing for Passeti, he would ask us to build our destrian transitions between the Courthouse checked it with a magnifying glass. Architec- own desks and then would assign us our and Street. Your team nicknamed this new ture is more than a stand-alone object. This initial work accordingly. A handrail would element the “stramp”. Can you tell me a bit was never taught in the studios. actually be made in the shop and he would about its conception and intent? run his hands over it. He was a humanist.

53 “stramp”. Can you tell me a bit about its con- meant to be at grade. However there was consciousness in the city. In the 1970’s, ception and intent? a major telephone trunk line for most of Vancouver started its first major urban Vancouver running beneath the street that design project, the South False Creek. It It was one of the last problems we worked would be impossible to reroute. No one also involved a Town Square called “Leg in on. We had the parti all worked out. The of- would insure us. We tried for months. the Boot Square” but was more focused on fice had 4 Designers working on solutions for residential development. At the time we the transition and built 10-20 models explor- Arthur was also into sustainability long were influenced by Pattern Language, and ing various ways to integrate the stairs with before the term sustainability existed. We Berkeley school. We learnt a lot but a lot ramps. We were all struggling and an Italian worked with a daylight pioneer named Bill of it failed, didn’t work very well. Often the architect (Roberto?) in the office put togeth- Lamb and convinced the government that thinking at the time was to copy Paris. The er a little model and we all looked at it knew they only need 50 foot candles per desk ver- Paris doughnut, usually 6-8 stories, with that this was our eureka moment. We nick- sus 15o foot candles. We were 10-15 years usually autombiles parked in the courtyard. named it the Stramp: Stairs+Ramp= Stramp. ahead of the time. Arthur was very visionary. Later we would learn that Gus Desrosier had Generally the typology was a tower on done earlier version of two or three steps for One noticeable aspect of the Robson’s form a piece of land with a no mans land in- a project in Winnipeg. is that the edges of the three blocks are built between. When I was in Boston or lets say up and do not work very hard to interact even in Bathe, England, the townhouses had We had to deal with the transition. Formal- with the street at grade. Circulation and a very nice relationship to the street. When ly we needed a way. There was no choice. activity on the site is channeled primarily we first started there was a moratorium It was the right solution for the project. It across interior routes. on towers. We proved to the city, if we use makes the whole space. But it doesn’t work a tower, along with a lower perimter of well. It’s actually going sideways. A wheel- Once again, the Central Park concept. The 4 storeys, we could achieve density with chair doesn’t go sideways; you have to con- inclusion of the hanging gardens or “flying senstivity and access to light. Also a closer stantly adjust. Also there are also no curbs, planters” is meant to soften this edge, dis- relationship to the street. so you can fall off the edge of the ramp. solve it in a sense. If you look obliquely at it, you see the flying planters, the city defines We used the perimeter block but inserted a Robson Square has held together remarkably the edge. tower, but kept the perimeter block down to well over time. Some tenants have changed 4 storey’s to keep light in, almost related to but it has resisted significant architectural You have developed a reputation for being the street. modifications. Perhaps this is a good and one of the pioneers of point towers and site bad thing for urban design. Currently the “3 sensitive architecture in Vancouver. Can you Also in Vancouver the city street is only 66 block-Project” is set to have the Vancouver tell us about the emergence of this strategy feet wide. In the wintertime, a tower with a Art Gallery move out of the old Courthouse. and its development into a typology? Now large footprint or 6 storey low rise prevents Can you comment on the evolving identity encoded in the City Plan. Are you comfort- the other side of the street would always be of the project? able with this kind of formulation of architec- in shadow. Also with minimum of sunlight tural and urban design? and incredible landscape people want floor The original design envisioned Robson to ceiling glass. Why would you choose to do closed. The sunken space that runs beneath Its never one person. It’s like a collective punch windows? Robson-and doesn’t work very well- was consciousness in the city. In the 1970’s, meant to be at grade. However there was Vancouver started its first major urban a major telephone trunk line for most of design project, the South False Creek. Town

54 Vancouver Goes BIG: Can you tell us about You are creating a Landmark then? All people subconsciously want good the new development that you are involved things, the best. I am going to give you in Vancouver House? The contribution of Its between two off-ramps, a leftover space. this incredible architectural monument. Bjark Ingles in the project has caught the at- of what was considered unbuildable area. A Gesesumptkunstwork as the projects tention of Vancouverites and appears a break But we reach the full potential after we sat- marketing campaign puts it. ---- from the tower predecessors. How did this isfy the horizontal distance. That’s we he’s project and collaboration emerge? the big star. My clients would say I was nuts. They would. He knows how to market. And The relationship between me and long time the developer knows. A lot of people under- developer partner Westbank was getting estimate how clever Bjarke is. comfortable. I went to a lecture of Bjarke Ingles; I thought he was one of the smartest And the exhibition currently on about the architects I’ve ever met. We were struggling project? with the form a bit. Also at the time the city’s head of planning was looking to work with In some sense it is sales tool. Its a challeng- Bjarke. He was able to make a brilliant move ing site, deemed unbuildable. Its hard to that shifted away from teh setbacks of the convince people in Vancouver to live in these expressway and also bring his starpower to leftover spaces but thats what is happening. the drive of the project. This a new urban de- A typical price per sqaure footage in Vancou- sign for Vancouver. ver is $800- for this project its closer to $1400 square footage. Perhaps the project has picked up on the vanity of people.

James K.W. Cheng is an architect and urbanist resided in Vancouver B.C. Born in Hong Kong in 1947, James moved to Seattle in 1966 to study architecture at the University of Wash- ington and eventually at Harvard in 1976. After working in a few offices on the Western United States he would eventually join the office of Arthur Erickson between 1973-76. During this time he worked on a number of project including Robson Square. Since 1978 he has managed his own office focusing on large-scale condominium towers, evolving a Modern language carefully attuned to local social, cultural and environmental concerns.

Office of James KM Cheng Architects (2014)

55 bibliography

Aldo Rossi Fonds, CCA Collection. Fonds 142 (AP142) archives File 4: Centro direzionale di Torino (AP142.S1.D4) Arthur Erickson Fonds, CCA Collection. Fonds 22 (AP022) File 89 : Provincial Law Courts Complex, Robson Square (AP022.S2.SS2.D89) Cedric Price Fonds, CCA Collection. Fonds 144 (AP144) File 56: Potteries Thinkbelt (AP144.S2.D56) Cornelia Hahn Oberlander Fonds, CCA Collection. Fonds 75 (AP075) File 3: Robson Square Provincial Government Complex (AP075.S1.D003) Melvin Charney archive, CCA Collection. Les maisons de la rue Sherbrooke project, DR1994:0017, DR1984:1571, DR1987:0335, DR1987:0336, DR1987:0337, DR1987:0338, DR1987:0339, DR1984:1569, DR1990:0067 Van Ginkel Associates Fonds, CCA Collection. Fonds 027 (AP027) File 73: Laboratory Community and New Williamstown (AP027.S1.D73) Victor Prus Fonds, CCA Collection. Fonds 163 (AP163) File 40: Expo’67 Stadium (AP163.S2.SS1.D40)

Baird, George, Space of Appearance, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1995. publications Banham, Reyner. Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent past. New York: Harper and Row, 1976. Berlowitz, Lance. Dream City, Vancouver and the Global imagination. Cernetig, Miro. “Robson Square Requires Revamp; It’s Leaky, but It’s Vancouver’s Civic Centre.” Vancouver Sun, March 8, 2010, West coast News sec. Comte, Barbara Shapiro. Arthur Erickson : Selected Projects 1971-1985 : An Exhibition Organized by the Center for Inter-American Relations, New York, an Affiliate of the Americas Society / Curator, Barbara E. Sha- piro. New York: Center for Inter-American Relations, an Affiliate of the Americas Society, 1985. D’Hooghe, Alexander. The Liberal Monument Urban Design and the Late Modern Project. New York: Princ- eton Architectural Press, 2010. Erickson, Arthur. The Architecture of Arthur Erickson. New York: Douglas & McIntyre, 1988.

Ede, Carol Moore. Canadian Architecture, 1960/70. Toronto: Burns and MacEachern, 1971. Frampton, Kenneth. Five North American Architects: An Anthology. Zurich: Lars Müller Publishers, 2012. Frampton, Kenneth. Megaform as Urban Landscape. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan, A. Alfred Taubman College of Architecture Urban Planning, 1999. Fraser, Linda, and Michelangelo Sabatino, eds. Arthur Erickson: Layered Landscapes. Halifax: Dalhousie Ar- chitectural Press, 2013. Gerecke, Kent. The Canadian City. Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1991.

56 Fumihiko Maki. Investigations in Collective Form. St. Louis, Mo: School of Architecture, Washington Univer- bibliography sity, 1963. Harcourt, Michael, and Sean Rossiter. City Making in Paradise: Nine Decisions That Saved Vancouver. Van- couver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2007. Herrington, Susan. Cornelia Hahn Oberlander: Making the Modern Landscape. Charlottesville ; London: University of Virginia Press, 2014.

Liscombe, R. W. Architecture and the Canadian Fabric. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2011. Liscombe, R. W. The New Spirit: Modern Architecture in Vancouver, 1938-1963. Montréal: Canadian Centre for Architecture, 1997. Lortie, Andre. The 60s: Montreal Thinks Big. Montréal: Canadian Centre for Architecture , 2004. Martin, Louis, ed. On Architecture: Melvin Charney : A Critical Anthology. Montreal ; Kingston ; London ; Ithaca: McGill-Queens University Press, 2013. Olsberg, R. Nicholas, and Arthur Erickson. Arthur Erickson: Critical Works. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2006. Parnass, Harry & Michel Lincourt, Urb/Education Design, Brussels: Paul Mignot, 1970. Palmer, Bryan D. Canada’s 1960s the Ironies of Identity in a Rebellious Era. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009. Rochon, Lisa. Up North: Where Canada’s Architecture Meets the Land. Toronto: Key Porter Books, 2005. Saul, John Ralston. A Fair Country: Telling Truths about Canada. Toronto: Viking Canada, 2008. Stouck, David. Arthur Erickson: An Architect’s Life. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2013. Smedman, Lisa. “Heritage Advocate Targets Robson Square: Arthur Erickson Creation Subjected to ‘incremental Intrusions’” Vancouver Courier, June 5, 2009, News sec. Tyrwhitt, Jaqueline, José Luis Sert, and Ernesto N. Rogers, eds. The Heart of the City: CIAM 8. London: Hum- phries, 1952. Vossen, Liz. “Robson Redux.” Spacing, Summer 2014, 28-34. Victor Pruss, Essays in architecture or what it is like to be an architect, Montréal, 1996. Wigley, Mark. Network Fever. In Grey Room 04, Summer 2001, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2001. pp. 82–122.

Whiteson, Leon. Modern Canadian Architecture. Edmonton: Hurtig Publishers, 1983.

images sources All CCA Collection images were taken by the Power Corporation Recipients during their research residency in the summer of 2014.

p. 14, 19, 20, 39, 46, 49, 50, 51 & 55: Photograph taken by Recipients (Summer 2014) p. 21: Stouck, David. Arthur Erickson: An Architect’s Life. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2013: 342. p. 47: Tim Shields, Flickr - photoshop edited (Feb 20, 2010) p. 52: Vancouver House.ca (Aug 22, 2014)

57 acknowledgments

This research project was possible because of the generous support of the Power Corporation of Canada. We would like to thank Phyllis Lambert for the fruitful exchange of ideas towards the end of our project. We would also like to acknowledge the support of the CCA directors, archivists, curators and library team for their expertise. Special thanks to Brigitte Shim and James K.M. Cheng for bringing helpful insights to our project.

power corporation 2014 recipients

Thaly Drouin-Crespin is currently starting her last year of Master of Architecture at Carleton Thaly Drouin-Crespin University. She has a Bachelor in Environmental Design from the UQÀM School of Design in Montréal. As part of her education, she participated in a Summer School in Berlin in 2011 as well as a semester abroad in Helsinki for the 2014 winter. Her interests lie in socially committed and responsible architecture, alternative discourses and political dimensions of space.

Laura Fiset is currently completing her Master of Architecture at the Daniels Faculty of Archi- Laura Fiset tecture, Landscape and Design at the University of Toronto. She has a Bachelor of Architecture from Carleton University. She will be completing her thesis in Fall 2014 with George Baird as advisor on the topic of mobility hubs and artifacts of urban infrastructure in the city.

Kevin Murray is an architectural and urban designer who brings a critical and inter-disci- Kevin Murray plinary focus to the practice and theory of design. Trained in Cultural Theory/Philosophy at Trent University and Environmental Design/Installation at Ontario College of Art and Design, he is currently completing his Master of Architecture thesis in Toronto on the architecture of choreographing movement in public space.

58 acknowledgments

power corporation 2014 recipients

59 With the generous support of the Power Corporation of Canada