EVER AFTER 77

Ever After: Speculations on Public Space in Iceland

THOMAS FORGET University of North Carolina at Charlotte

INTRODUCTION ing the first phase of the competition, and it informed both the premise and the details of our competition Iceland lies on the periphery of the civilized world. entry. When our proposal was shortlisted as a finalist Its architecture and urbanism appear normative, but in the competition, we examined the nature of build- buildings and spatial networks operate differently ing in Iceland more closely and attempted to devise there. Nature is a physical force that exerts limita- strategies that were suitable, both culturally and tions and a cultural authority that regulates social technically, to Reykjavík and Iceland. engagement. Over the past decade, overinvestment in name brand works of architecture and urban plan- The second part of the paper summarizes the objec- ning has upended the nation’s modest but sophis- tives and the findings of a recent urban design re- ticated traditions of building. Global economic and search workshop on the Reykjavík Capital Area. April cultural aspirations superseded local influences, such Arkitekter, a progressive design firm based in Oslo, as the landscape and a specific, regionally influenced Norway, conducted the workshop in conjunction with interpretation of Modernism. Then, in the wake of the Iceland Academy of the Arts between August 22 and banking crisis of 2008, the economy collapsed and September 2, 2011. The project belongs to a larger sent the practices of architecture and urban planning initiative called SCIBE (Scarcity and Creativity in the reeling. Conventional design work became scarce, Built Environment), which is funded by HERA (Hu- and as communities confronted needs normally ad- manities in the European Research Area). SCIBE dressed through construction, new methodologies of conducts research in four cities (London, Reykjavík, spatial engagement emerged as challenges to nor- Oslo, and Vienna) on how an insufficiency of re- mative practices of space making. This paper inves- sources may motivate architectural and urban acts. tigates the stark contrast between the design culture Due to the timing of the workshop in Reykjavík, the that preceded (and perhaps contributed to) the crisis conference presentation of this paper in October, and the innovative strategies that are rising from its 2011, will include materials from April Arkitekter that ashes. were unavailable in September, 2011, when these proceedings were published. The first part of the paper is a critical reflection on my participation, in 2007, in an urban design competi- As a conclusion to the paper, I will outline plans for tion for the redevelopment of central Reykjavík. With a travel studio that will bring architecture students my design partner, Jonathan F. Bell, I responded to from the United States to Iceland for a collabora- a competition brief that envisioned Reykjavík as an tive design-build project in a remote area of island. international metropolis on par with the greatest Eu- Inspired both by the pre-crisis competition and by ropean capitals. Coincidently, I had visited Iceland the post-crisis community involvement fostered by shortly before the competition was announced. My SCIBE, the design studio seeks to engage issues of preview of the nation’s architecture, urban planning, community, identity, and construction in a pedagogi- and infrastructure was an invaluable advantage dur- cal context. 78 LOCAL IDENTITIES GLOBAL CHALLENGES

CITY OF SEAMS development, these references were considered as a way to mediate the potential incongruity between The commissioners of the competition to redevelop the new and the old capital. the Vatnsmýri area of Reykjavík (currently occupied by a domestic airport) sought detailed strategies to City of Seams translates the power of the geological create “a contemporary and robust urban fabric with rift at Þingvellir into an urban context. Urban seams the flexibility required for research, technology, and are the inherent discontinuities and juxtapositions knowledge based enterprises mixed with significant found in every city. Like Þingvellir, they have the po- housing, services, and residential forms.”1 The com- tential to accommodate public spaces and to gener- petition brief included unusually specific parameters ate collective meaning. In the nineteenth century, and information that provided entrants with a thor- Haussmannian planners sought to erase urban seams ough understanding of the urban and regional condi- through the homogenization of the street facade. In tions of Reykjavík. The specificity of the brief was a the twentieth century, Modern planners scarred the sign of the seriousness of its aspirations. It included city through a disregard of context and an exaggera- the results of community workshops on the objec- tion of seams. Our project seeks a middle ground. It tives of the project, as well as technical information rejects both the seamlessness of boulevard urban- on various stakeholders in the project. Unlike some ism and the severity of urban renewal. City of Seams “ideas” competitions, the Vatnsmýri competition was indulges the heterogeneity of urban life, both socially based on extensive research and on a firm belief that and formally. Social precedents include high density, Reykjavík would soon emerge as an innovative hub mixed-use urban fabrics, from the medieval cores of in a new global economy. Throughout the process, European cities to contemporary developments that the scale of the project seemed unrealistic to me. grow around transportation hubs. Formal precedents Especially since I had recently analyzed built envi- include both vernacular and pre-historic housing ty- ronments throughout Iceland, it was difficult for me pologies, such as cave dwellings and turf houses, as to imagine the realization of such an ambitious plan. well as awkward and abrupt edges that are typically Nonetheless, we followed the parameters of the brief perceived as problems, when in fact they offer us and developed a design proposal that would have solutions. Infrastructural networks, such as the geo- dwarfed the existing city of Reykjavík and trans- thermal energy pipelines that hover atop the Icelan- formed the area of the capital into an unrecognizable dic landscape, also inspire the seam strategy. megaregion. Programmatically, seams allow us to embed infra- The conceptual inspiration for the project, which we structure into densely populated environments; call City of Seams, is Þingvellir, the first significant they also shelter us from weather conditions, such work of architecture in Iceland. Stretching along the as the harsh winds that infiltrate Reykjavík during Reykjanes Ridge (the American-Eurasian Continen- the winter. Experientially, seams provide material tal Rift), Þingvellir is a geological seam that accom- richness, adventure, and unpredictability. modated the world’s first parliament in 800 A.D. The transformation of the raw site into a work of archi- The signature objective of City of Seams is to create tecture was an act of occupation, not construction. a new entrance into the capital of Iceland. Inspired The site was recognized as a special moment in the by (but not indebted to) nineteenth-century train landscape, where tribes from across the island could stations, Tengiberg (Connection Rock) is a proposed meet and devise the rules of their society. At Lög- transportation hub that punctuates a dramatic new berg (Law Rock), issues were debated and rulings arrival sequence into Reykjavík. It is conceived as were pronounced above a vast plain, in front of a the primary seam of the capital – a Þingvellir that giant shear in the landscape. At Þingvellir, the early cuts through the middle of Reykjavík. Around the citizens of Iceland beheld the eternal power of the globe, sprawl is erasing the physical integrity of ur- earth and the ephemeral strength of their commu- ban boundaries, and in the capital region of Reyk- nity. Architecture and urbanism today are rarely that javík it is becoming increasingly difficult to discern dramatic or effective. Þingvellir offered us a model precisely where the city begins. Tengiberg serves of space making that was rooted not only in the his- as a gateway for both air travelers and regional tory of the nation, but also in the culture of the land. travelers arriving by car or public transportation, Given the enormous scale of the proposed urban re- and it ensures that visitors, as well as Icelanders, EVER AFTER 79

immediately sense the physical integrity, as well tity, albeit a modest one. Ráðhúsið is a relatively as the international significance, of Reykjavík. At subtle public building, despite its Modern forms, the same time, the hub does not announce itself as which stand apart from the surrounding fabric of the focal point or a clearly definable monument. Like city, and its intrusion into Tjörnin, an artificial lake the rift in the landscape at Þingvellir, and unlike that is an iconic landmark in the city. Its elegant the nineteenth-century train stations that inspire it, concrete composition is reminiscent of the apologet- Tengiberg is a linear organization of spaces that op- ic Modernism of Tadao Ando. To complement these erates as a vibrant, multi-functional public space, understated forms, Ráðhúsið is permeable and per- permeable from all directions, both vertically and missive. It thereby dismantles one of the stalwarts horizontally. Tengiberg blurs the distinction be- of Western civic architecture — the impervious fron- tween architecture, urbanism, and infrastructure. tal facade. Multiple entries, from various directions, Travelers and local residents cross paths and share transform the building into a spatial hub and allow spaces, and surrounding areas filter through Tengi- it to operate as more than just a final destination. berg via a series of lateral connections. The frontal, Non-public spaces are relegated primarily to upper façade-driven paradigm of urban architecture is levels, allowing the ground floor to fully welcome abandoned to accommodate both the heterogene- the public. Interior galleries and cafes offer resting ity of the surrounding fabric and the complexity of points, as Ráðhúsið inhales and exhales the flux of programs that inhabit and lie adjacent to the hub. the city. The building achieves civic meaning through Tengiberg acknowledges that twenty-first century how it is used, creating a stimulating public space gateways are far more complex than the “front by circumventing conventional grandeur and sym- door” model of entry in the nineteenth-century. bolism. Unlike the great powers of Europe, old and new, Iceland does not rely on its built environment A contemporary source of inspiration for the seam to exert cultural symbolism and political power. The premise is a general condition of governmental ar- built environment is functional and meaningful, but chitecture, both in Iceland and in Reykjavík, which it lacks grandeur and self-importance. The spirit of adheres to the spirit of Þingvellir. Reykjavík suc- the nation lies elsewhere, in the land itself. ceeded Þingvellir as the site of parliament in 1845, when Iceland was a colony of Denmark. In 1881, The undisputed highlight of Ráðhúsið is an enor- a soundly Northern European parliament building mous topographical relief map of Iceland. It intro- (designed by Ferdinand Meldahl, a Dane) arose on duces visitors to the true seat of power there – the the edge of the city’s main public square. Althing- land. The map reveals not only the striking geog- ishúsið (Parliament House) fulfills almost every ex- raphy of the country, but also the manner in which pectation of the typology. Despite its modest scale, civilization has adapted to it: roads follow erosion it is solid, symmetrical, and imposing – an architec- patterns; cities cling to opportune moments along tural object that commands respect. If the colonial inhospitable coastlines; thermal power plants take government had the capacity to understand the advantage of particularly active geological mo- emphasis of occupation over construction at ments. Built environments are always a function of Þingvellir, it certainly did not have the motivation their natural context, but the phenomenon occurs to rekindle it in Althingishúsið. The informal spirit in Iceland in an unusually visceral and pervasive of Þingvellir, however, persisted in a curious way manner. The placement of this map in an important through the inaction of the municipal government public space underscores the extent to which geog- in the capital. The City of Reykjavík (founded in raphy defines cultural identity. Nature is the venue 1786) operated without a formal seat of govern- of everyday life. Herein lies the essential difference ment (meaning a work of architecture) for over two between Iceland and its European peers, who as- centuries, until the opening of Ráð∂húsið in 1992 sociate culture with urban development and view (designed by Studio Granda). It is inconceivable nature as an escape from civilization. The map in that another European capital could have operated Ráðhúsið can be read as a territorial reinterpreta- for so long without an architectural headquarters tion of the Nolli Map of Rome. While both maps re- through which to exert its symbolic and political cord the ordering of culture within an environment, authority. Reykjavík, like Þingvellir, is different. they do so at vastly different scales. The map of Iceland bypasses the scale of the city because in- When Ráðhúsið opened, the municipal government frastructure and planning are more culturally rel- of Reykjavík finally assumed an architectural iden- evant than architecture and urban design. 80 LOCAL IDENTITIES GLOBAL CHALLENGES

In City of Seams, we attempted to incorporate the ment by investigating how conditions of scarcity meaning of the land into the urban redevelopment might affect the creativity of the different actors involved in the production of architecture and of the capital. Throughout the project, public spac- urban design, and how designled actions might es occupy awkward edges and informal juxtaposi- improve the built environment in the future.3 tions, while transportation networks follow and cre- ate sectional differences in the ground. Small ges- The design research workshop recently conducted tures complement the larger moves. For example, in Reykjavík exemplifies that mission. Here, I will subtle sectional modulations and material changes summarize its primary objectives as well as the throughout the street network demarcate pedes- methods of the workshop program. Urban ecology trian areas and tram stops. An attention to detail- is a driving force of the workshop. How can a re- ing allowed us to further mediate the vast scale of consideration of urban land use ease pressures on the project, which (as already mentioned) did not resource flow, both regionally and globally? How seem appropriate to the context. can designers and stakeholders identify ecological potentials in apparent scarcity? Iceland’s inherent The scale of the vision, in the end, was unrealis- relationship to nature is particularly suited to such tic. As soon as the winner of the competition was a discussion. The workshop addresses this question announced, the economy of Iceland collapsed. Af- through the development of speculative scenarios. ter its three manor banks failed, the blur of the One objective is to spur discussions that will help boom years came into focus: sprawl, fragmented stakeholders to mediate between idealistic aspira- communities, stretched resources, devaluation of tions and realizable solutions. natural ecologies. The redevelopment project was meant to correct these errors of the boom years, Four scenarios frame the workshop. Each one pairs but in the wake of the crisis, big projects were both a specific site at the periphery of the capital area unfeasible and unpopular. Conventional modes of with a specific issue: localized harvesting; flexible urban manipulation were unable to rescue the built “co-living” and hybrid dwellings; water manage- environment. Instead, smaller scale solutions have ment based on storage; “slow” traffic networks. The arisen, and they may prove to be more effective selection of half-developed peripheral sites is impor- than the regional and environmental symbolism of tant, as it is seen as a way to generate discussions City of Seams or the other urban visions of the on matters of urban density and sprawl generated competition that sought to solve problems of by previous conditions of abundance. By focusing sprawl through massive and ultimately unsustain- on areas that are specially affected by problems of able development. In 1937, W.H. Auden predicted resource allocation and flows, the workshop seeks this state of affairs when he wrote, “Europe is ab- to address issues of regional fragmentation and the sent … I can’t quite picture your arrival. What was value of open space in various configurations of ur- your impression of Reykjavík harbour? Is there any ban development. Each scenario initiates a dialogue attempt to make the visitor feel that he is arriving across scales: plot, neighborhood, district, and capi- at a capital city? Not much.”2 Reykjavík has always tal area. A unifying theme of the four scenarios, in envisioned itself as something other than a conven- addition to sustainability and scale, is human health. tional capital, so it is no wonder that global urban It is remarkable to note that, despites its compre- visions fall short of understanding it. For example, hensiveness and length, the Vatnsmýri competition in retrospect, Tengiberg’s emphasis on the articu- brief fails to draw attention to this primary issue. lation of “arrival” fulfills a goal of the competition Workshops like this one remind us of the core con- brief but also robs Reykjavík of its enigmatic power. cerns of living in cities. How can urban development actually improve our health? RESILIENT URBAN STRATEGIES The methodology of the workshop includes both The efforts of SCIBE provide an alternative model analytical and design operations. In the first week, of urban development, one that values local initia- research groups develop analytical mapping strate- tive over global intervention. The organization de- gies related to their theme and site. Furthermore, scribes itself in this way: students are introduced to actors that have driven unconventional practices or that are now innovating SCIBE explores the relationship between scarcity the field under new economical conditions: the bik- and creativity in the context of the built environ- EVER AFTER 81

ers’ representative; the woman who teaches peo- cation of the community in an especially remote ple how to grow their own food; the anarchist who area of the nation limits the extent to which mate- squats; the farmer who operates on the outskirts. rials and equipment may (or perhaps should) con- Texts identify design methods and articulate a clear tribute to the process, and the intent is to allow the role for analysis in the design process. In the second community to construct the project itself through week, research groups develop proposals for devel- simple but rich tectonic and material processes. opment for the given sites based on the preceding analysis. The charrette-style process frees par- While not fully embracing the urban ecological con- ticipants from the trajectories of normative design cerns of the SCIBE workshop, the Bjarnarfjördur projects, and the development of critical and inno- pool project is a realizable community-based project vative methodologies that escape normative modes that addresses many of the same issues, albeit at an of education is a primary objective of the workshop. even more modest scale. Iceland offers us a unique environment in which to develop an understanding EVER AFTER of our place on the planet and architecture’s ability to engage the technology as well as the symbolism The next step for me is to incorporate the lessons of the ground. It is an existential environment in of the SCIBE workshop in Reykjavík into a design- which we may discover attitudes about design that build studio. The valley of Bjarnarfjördur in North- may migrate to unexpected locations. In this sense, ern Iceland is seeking an architectural design and a it holds the promise of a different kind of globalism construction strategy for a community thermal pool – the exportation of small-scale initiatives that chal- complex. The typology of the thermal pool is es- lenge our assumptions about how architecture and sential to Icelandic identity and culture. Every com- urban planning affect our lives and our planet. munity in Iceland has a public thermal pool that acts a social hub. In the case of Bjarnarfjördur, a ENDNOTES stunning pool is present, but it lacks basic support structures, such as restrooms, changing areas, and 1 Vatnsmýri, Reykjavík: A Call for Ideas (2007 competition brief), p. 2. service areas. At the beginning of the semester, 2 W.H. Auden and Louise MacNiece, Letters from students will travel to Bjarnarfjördur and hold com- Iceland (New York: Random House, 1969), pp. 26 - munity workshops that develop design ideas and 27. evaluate potential construction processes. The lo- 3 See, http://www.scibe.eu/

Figure 1. Þingvellir 82 LOCAL IDENTITIES GLOBAL CHALLENGES

Figure 2. Þingvellir collage for City of Seams

Figure 3. geothermal pipe network Figure 4. Ráð∂húsið

Figure 5. map detail in Ráð∂húsið Figure 6. Figure 6: map in Ráð∂húsið