UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Advocacy in architecture : a case study of the Urban Design Center, Vancouver, B.C. 1970-1976 Tamaki, Marlene Gail 1991-12-31

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1991_A7_4 T35.pdf [ 10.96MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0098622.json
JSON-LD: 1.0098622+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0098622.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0098622+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0098622+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0098622+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0098622 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0098622.txt
Citation
1.0098622.ris

Full Text

ADVOCACY I N A R C H I T E C T U R E A Case Study of the URBAN D E S I G N C E N T R E Vancouver, B . C . 1970-1976 By MARLENE G A I L  TAMAKI  • A . , U n i v e r s i t y o f S a s k a t c h e w a n , R e g i n a C a m p u s , 197 B . A r c h , THe U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1983  A THESIS  SUBMITTTED  IN PARTIAL  THE REQUIREMENTS MASTER  OF ADVANCED  F U L F I L L M E N T OF  FOR T H E D E G R E E O F  STUDIES  IN ARCHITECTURE  in THE  F A C U L T Y OF GRADUATE (School  We  accept to  of  this  the  Architecture)  thesis  required  THE UNIVERSITY  STUDIES  as  conforming  standard  OF B R I T I S H  October © Marlene G a i l  COLUMBIA  1991 Tamaki,  1991  In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department  or  by  his or  her  representatives.  It  is  understood that  copying or  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Bepartment of  AtoAcTfeZTTOg^  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date  DE-6 (2/88)  ABSTRACT  The  shift  toward  architecture 70's  in  and  North  Community provided  was  The  Community  groups  professional, as  a  study  with  Desgin  team  on  the  in  order  in  the  model.  The Urban  is  used  on  the the  a  work  the  Center  of  of  the  Centers  services  by  community  of  and  to  participation.  model  within  social  1960's  Design  user  notions  study.  and  technical  issues  determine  Design  case  and  the  basic  to  with  provided and  in  Community  emphasis  current  Centers  specific  These  Center  student  examines  a  illustrated  an  the  advocacy  occurred  planning  Design  as  that  Centers.  architectural,  income  This  planning  America  Design  low  together  participatory,  the the  which could  the work  community. Community  principles Vancouver,  at  work  1970-76  i i i  Table  of  Contents Page i i i i i v vi  Abstract Table of Contents L i s t of Appendices L i s t of Figures Acknowledgements  vxx  INTRODUCTION Purpose Methodology Study Organization  1  Chapter  3  THE  One: SETTING Modern Age I d e a l i s m Some C o n c e r n s w i t h t h e M o d e r n The R i s e o f t h e Professional  Age  A D V O C A C Y A R C H I T E C T U R E AND P L A N N I N G A m e r i c a a n d t h e Movement o f t h e 60's M e t r o p o l i t a n i z a t i o n and S u b u r b a n i z a t i o n Freeways, and Urban Renewal  Chapter  Two  22  COMMUNITY D E S I G N C E N T R E S American Roots Community P a r t i c i p a t i o n Funding Objectives An example - Community D e s i g n C e n t e r , San Francisco C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Community D e s i g n C e n t e r and other storefront professional services.  Chapter  Three  VANCOUVER, B . C . - THE 1 9 6 0 ' S Background Suburbia The Downtown C o r e Urban Renewal Freeways New p o l i t i c s f o r V a n c o u v e r  39  IV  Chapter  Four  THE  Chapter  URBAN D E S I G N C E N T R E - T H E B E G I N N I N G The Vancouver Inner C i t y S e r v i c e P r o j e c t Urban Design Centre Inception Operating Philosophies Proposed Structure Objectives Founding P r i n c i p l e s Funding and P e r s o n n e l The L a t t e r Y e a r s  Five  56  (VISP)  76  C L I E N T S AND P R O J E C T S Skeena T e r r a c e R e c r e a t i o n F a c i l i t y The Gastown H e a l t h C l i n i c The Richmond P l a y l o t T h e Home Show C l i n i c T h e L a y m a n ' s Home I m p r o v e m e n t G u i d e Daycare and O t h e r Research P a r a p l e g i c G r o u p Homes Adanac Neighbourhood P l a n n i n g Orchard Park  Chapter  Six  CONCLUSIONS Basic Principles T h e P r i n c i p l e s a n d t h e V a n c o u v e r UDC Legacies A Natural Cycle The R o l e of the Professional The R o l e of the University P e r s o n a l Rewards Lifespan THE  1990'S  106  V  L i s t of Appendices A l l Appendices are taken from the City of Vancouver Archives, Add.MSS 989, Urban Design Center, unless otherwise stated. Page One:  L i s t of San Francisco Community Design Center Projects 1969 from H. Schubart f i l e s  134  Two:  Transportation Studies  137  Produced for the Urbanarium Three:  Vancouver's Urban Design Centre Chronology  145  Four:  L i s t of UDC Projects  147  Five:  L i s t of UDC Participants  158  Six:  Skeena Project Report by Tony Green  164  Seven:  AIBC press release: Saturday Morning Service  166  Eight:  Ray-Cam:  167  Nine:  Design Game - Handicapped Home  Patterns & Concept Design  172  vi  L i s t of Figures FIGURES:  A l l figures are from the City of Vancouver Archives, Add.MSS 989, Urban Design Center, otherwise stated.  unless Page  Fig.l  Comparison The  Failure  7 of  Modern  Architecture,  B r o l i n 1976, p.9 Fig.2  Diagrams of Vancouver Inner  City  & Old  41  suburbs  Hardwick 1974, p.12 & 13 Fig.3  Sketch Scheme Strathcona Urban Renewal Vancouver  46  Unlimited  Gutstein, 1975 Fig.4  Floor Plan, Main f l o o r 58 1895 Venables, now the Vancouver East Cultural Center F i r s t location of the UDC with the Vancouver Inner-City Service Project  Fig.5  T u t o r i a l J Description  65  Fig.6  1111 Commercial Drive UDC o f f i c e layout and future proposal  70  Fig.7  Skeena Terrace Project Organizational Diagram  80  Fig.8  Playlot drawings  84  Fig.9&10  Home Show C l i n i c photos  87  Fig.11  Layman's Home Improvement Guide Sample Pages  91  Fig.l2&13  Daycare drawings  94  Fig.14&15 Adanac Sample patterns Fig.16  Orchard Park  99 102  Fig.l7&18 Ray-Cam Schematic Design  116  Fig.19  Pine Street C l i n i c Floor Plan  118  Fig.20  Recycling the Profession 1965-1971  126  v i i  I w i s h t o e x p r e s s my g r a t i t u d e a n d t h a n k s t o a l l t h o s e who h e l p e d w i t h t h i s s t u d y p a r t i c u l a r i l y t h e p e o p l e who were i n t e r v i e w e d and g r a c i o u s l y took the time t o t a l k about t h i s p e r i o d i n the h i s t o r y of Vancouver. I would l i k e t o t h a n k my m e n t o r , P r o f . R o n W a l k e y , a n d P r o f . D i n o R a p a n o s who g u i d e d me t h r o u g h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f the study. A n d , of c o u r s e , s p e c i a l thanks t o Mabel and Tom T a m a k i , D a n a r a a n d D a y l a n H e a l y a n d G r a e m e a n d B a r b a r a B r i s t o l f o r t h e i r support and p a t i e n c e . A v e r y s p e c i a l r e m e m b e r e n c e t o W o l f g a n g G e r s o n who e n c o u r a g e d a n d c o n t i n u a l l y r e m i n d e d me o f t h e b e a u t y s t u d y , a r c h i t e c t u r e , music and l i f e .  in  1  INTRODUCTION  Purpose  During  the  1960's  participatory, of  the  a  model  the  community  and  planning study  Centre,  work  issues to  Design  the  within  a  a  movement  throughout  professional,  the  discover  as  was  architecture.  together  Centres  1970-76,  social  Centres  which  could  there  and  Design by  is  Community  70's  advocacy  Community  provided  this  and  current  with  basic  the case  The  North the  community.  the  specific  on  toward  America  student  and  architectural  The  purpose  principles  Vancouver  work  of  Urban  of the  Design  study.  Methodology  The  information  sources: 1960's  a and  science;  Design Centre  70's,  interviews  of in  study books  and of  the with  City  is  gathered  and  articles  planning,  examination  founding  Center in  this  review  an  Schubart,  in  of  member the of  files  personal the of  Vancouver  participants  written  architecture  the of  from three  San the  files  in  of  Francisco  about  the  and,  the  political Mr.  Henry  Community  Vancouver Urban  Archives;  listed  and  primary  a  Design series  bibliography.  2  Study  The  Organization  study  consists  context, ideas social of  describing  and  particular sets  Four  at  the  of  Centres the  context  its  describes  nine  Six  conclusions  founded,  of  the  trend  in  the  Design  on t h e p r i n c i p l e s  and  development  States  with  a  experience.  Chapter  at  time  of  with  Chapter  the  Centre,  history.  projects  the  planning  advocacy  the  United  Vancouver  successes,  and  toward  Two d e s c r i b e s  specific  is  One s e t s  architectural  Urban  representative  and examines  Chapter  San F r a n c i s c o  the Vancouver  describing  draws  and  Chapter  Design  look  chapters.  Modernist  architecture.  operation  six  consequences  Community  Three  of  of  Chapter the  UDC.  on which  limitation  the  Five  Chapter  t h e UDC w a s  and demise.  3  Chapter  THE  One  SETTING  Modern Age  Idealism  The study and p r a c t i c e of a r c h i t e c t u r e i n v o l v e s a d e d i c a t i o n t o many t h i n g s : and  the p u r s u i t of the understanding of h i s t o r y  knowledge;  development art.  The  physical  the  desire  of humankind; s p e c i a l medium  environment.  dedications, existence,  work and from  past  to  enhance  the  evolution  and  and the love of form, beauty  and  f o r the  the  The  a r c h i t e c t has  architect  finds  that  been  i n these  study touches on a l l f a c e t s of human to  future,  from  the  deep i n d i v i d u a l  w i t h i n t o the ever expanding group without, from spaces and places  of day t o day l i f e ,  an i n h e r e n t help  t o those of the world.  There i s  b e l i e f and hope t h a t the work done can and must  shape  human  development  and,  therefore,  perhaps,  destiny.  These hopes can been c l e a r l y seen i n the 20th century and  visions  of  architecture'. part  of  the  what The  century,  is  great Le  known modern  Corbusier,  popularly architects Mies  van  as of der  ideals 'modern  the  early  Rohe  and  4  Walter of  Gropius,  the  'idealist  shared the  the  same  the  The  new  based  and  along the  Revolution  based This was  on new  to  that  age  the  that  could  be  was  also  Le who  architecture  Serrez  Moderne,  the  illustrates  illustrate social  visions  to  and  physical, alleviated. that  ushered  embraced  written  Congres the  the  new by  in  of  and  group  modern  and  it  economic  confidence 'Modern  in Age'  construction.  production.  the  the  repetition.  the and  labour  technologies  productive,  Internationaux  thrust  the  and  This  was  Industrial  from  social  move  orders,  rational  more  and  The  architectural design  Declaration,  formed  humanitarian  alternative  dramatically  faster  new m o d e r n t e c h n o l o g i e s  Modern  necessarily  as  standardization  the  in  not  technology.  society's  finally  reflected  They  higher  craftsman  mechanization, was  to  and  production  technology  architecture.  propose  was  alternative  of  centre  such  at  order.  machine  methods  to  the  (though  ideals  obligation  social  modern  vision  social  changed  thought  problems  an  L o u i s Kahn were in  Utopian  architecture  on  intensive  of  vision),  existing  humanity  Van Eyck,  tradition'  idea  liberalism to  Aldo  of  The  1928  architects  d'Architecture architecture:  'The most e f f i c i e n t method of p r o d u c t i o n i s t h a t which arises from r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n and standardization...The inescapable consequence of the development of the machine has led to i n d u s t r i a l methods of production d i f f e r e n t and o f t e n opposed t o those of the craftsmen. It is urgently necessary for architecture, henceforth to rely on the present realities of industrial technology, even though such an a t t i t u d e must perforce  5  lead past To  the  to products epoches'.  fundamentally  architects,  revolution  in  determinism.  the  modern  architecture A.  0.  Dean  and,  different  building  hence,  a  from those  of  represented  a  new  architectural  writes:  'Both [Frank Lloyd] Wright and Le C o r b u s i e r , while agreeing on little else, were convinced that a r e v o l u t i o n i n a r c h i t e c t u r e , which deracinated the past and the accepted culture, would spearhead a Utopian social order. T h e new, r a t i o n a l , e n l i g h t e n e d building environment would also be reflected in a reform of h u m a n n a t u r e . ' . . . ' W e i d e n t i f i e d t h e new w i t h t h e good, and hailed the New Man, the New Woman, the New Politics, t h e New H i s t o r y , t h e New S c i e n c e ; in short t h e New W o r l d . H i s t o r y we t h o u g h t b e g a n a n d e n d e d w i t h ourselves a n d we e x p e c t e d t h e new t o l a s t f o r e v e r , as if the will to change itself would remain forever' [quoting Mumford].  New  was  the  building. and  ideal,  New w o u l d  political  recreation  Some  health  available  concerns  with  Rationalization replication  The  might,  from  differences. of  a  raw  cities  clean every  Modern  basic  was  part  for to  mass would  planning,  conditions space,  for  new  social  schools,  and  citizen.  Age  of  example finished  produced be  new  with  standardization  clay  The  prototype,  -  necessitated  that  bowls,  the  the  individuality craftsman  techniques,  produce  to  and  that  new  the  brought  a  glazing, items,  produced  level  minimization  craftsman make  a  produced  few  dozen  each  exact by  of  many  of the  items. similar  with  slight  reproductions hands,  and  6  assembled  by  many  departmentalized rapidity set  of  and  In  who  systems  applied that  to  was  belief  This the  form, to  affected  built  his  time  was  standardized,  repeated  craftsman  creating  be  and  became his  with  great  merely  skill,  another  but  not  egalitarian for  the  eliminate  the  like  demonstrating functional rejection  truth  use of  traditions, evolutionary  of  providence  the  character  and  process  the  differences the  and  other sought  that of  and  wood  such  eliminates  the  world,  and new  it  benefit  early like  economical, along  part  of  unnecessary was  thought,  from  standardized  the and  by  concrete  produce.^  with  manifestations be  in  Dutch  craftsman  would  structure,  to  demonstrated  the  'honest',  the  differences.  Stijl,  of  the  decisively  differences  materials  was  building In  be  these is  De  man-made  with  architecture  of  of  stone  ornament  from  building,  of  surroundings,  human  to  materials  The p e o p l e s past  to  personal  brick,  or  humankind  materials  world.  could  physical  cultural  approach  looked  the  new  style  the  and b e h a v i o u r  example,  who  international  in  freeing  the  Standardization  throughout  lives  negated  thus  Modernists,  an  changes  embraced  brought.  consistent  architects  materials  modernists  technology  through  work,  their  process  The  sold  people's  form,  parts.  the  the  that  that  modern  Production  product.  architecture,  and  to  and  accuracy.  hands,  finished  others.  of  that By and the past  the  natural  or  obsolete  could harmony  shed and  universal  7  I  Yale University Art Gallery. The old art gallery is at the right and an addition, by Louis Kahn in 1953, at the left.  Old and new in Sanaa, Yemen  Old and new in Venice, Italy.  The  Failure  of  Modern  Figure 1 Comparison Architecture,  B r o l i n 1976, p.9  8  technologies. order, aims  devoid  were  function often  and  and  of  of  but  the  of  was  power  with  structure.  even  being  With  mass  the a  The of  the  concentration small  group  workers  at  machines,  knowledgeable production,  lost  production),  According change  of  the  to  control  to  be  of  their  form, concept  variety, stark,  in  the  • productxon  led  and  coldly  at  the  top  bottom  of  served  of  whole  making  the  of  The  kind  was  neither  tools  or  and ft  pace  and  pyramidal  as  efficient  producing the  knowledge  and  modern  a  required nor  place  its  Scope  of  and m a t e r i a l s  over  alxenatxon.  of  of  information,  artisans  activities to  wealth,  than  product  Hatch i n  form  rather  discretion end  of  the  this  The worker  of  to  organizational  and c r e a t i v i t y  as  notions  visual  tending  The  machine/technology  true  detail,  world  comparison^.  necessary,  well  of  new  Professional  production  operators  in  the  while  the  continuity.^  sophisticated  traditional,  consequence  and  beyond  results  richness  and b a n a l  the  looking  the  represented  and h i s t o r i c a l  somewhat  the the  repetitious  architecture  stylistic,  truth,  lacked  comfort  A  of  lofty,  aesthetic,  Rise  Modern  (the of  or  product. was  not  desxred. means  of  work,  as  sale.  of  Social  the He  Architecture,  economic says:  structure  this of  9  S o c i e t y i s fragmented i n t o 'interests', an u n a v o i d a b l e e f f e c t of a c o m p e t i t i v e market i n l a b o u r . Community i s a l m o s t unknown; s o c i e t y i s r e d u c e d t o an aggregation of fearful and mutually suspicious individuals...Further, docile specialization at work has measurable negative effects on p a r t i c i p a t i o n in f a m i l y and community l i f e . T h e n u m b e r o f r o l e s we a r e c o m f o r t a b l e p l a y i n g s h r i n k s , a n d w i t h i t t h e memory o f w h a t w e r e f o r m e r l y i m p o r t a n t human n e e d s . This  feeling  activity,  of  alienation  comes  also  the  but  jurisdictions. were  required  quickly.  necessitated  The  greater  on  realm  individuals  and of  of  the  countries. the  lay  increasingly  led  to  As  a  the  became  deal to  This  or  to  of  sole  that  the  of  goods  and  contributing  to  and  distances  and  larger  markets  governments. from  cities,  beyond  and t o  systems of  the  added  the  the  states abilities  work, expert.  plans  were  outside  to  systems  specialist.  these  was  systems  Statistics, used,  the  distancing  decisions  and  and t r a i n i n g  the  those  to  of  greater  knowledge,  master  dominance  size  the  developments  expert,  with  in  professional.  technical the  change  community moved  move  the  a  transportation  and  to  complex  involvement  from  environment.  of  in  neighbourhoods  seemed  from  economies  the  information,  analysis, no  of  jurisdiction  professional  citizen  also  complex  make  the  scientific little  and  exclusivity  great  required  It  move  interacting  development  person  The  to  in  organization  Decisions  only  change  Improvements  communication more  in  not  allowing  professions. the  average  effecting  the  10  The of  professions the  t h e i r experts,  community, but  case of  Architecture  formulated w e l l as was  and  not only served  a l s o determined and  Planning,  for dwellings^  l a r g e l y excluded  and  i t s needs.^  laws and  f o r l a r g e s t r u c t u r e s and  In  the  p r a c t i s e s were  global organizations  neighbourhoods.  from t h i s  the needs  process  The  as  as  l a y person  i t was  believed  t h a t the r e q u i r e d e x p e r t i s e went beyond t h a t of the  ordinary  citizen.  duty  of  to  the  the  Creating  the  environment moved from the  i n d i v i d u a l as a n a t u r a l p a r t of everyday l i v i n g ,  realm  of  the  effecting  professional.  large  r e g u l a t e and  areas  over  Wide  many y e a r s ,  lessor  priority  master  plan  losing  touch w i t h  serve.^ and  virtue  the  were  plans,  conceived  the  of  picture'.  professionals  people t h e i r Modernist  the  to  expertise  a l l of  ability  of  the was  risk  of  meant  to  whose  society,  this  Utopian not  only  from housing t o monuments,  well-meaning serve  having  With  ran  architects  included  d i d not the  l o c a l communities  'larger  a l l f a c e t s of l i f e ,  egalitarianism,  By  mind,  early  professionalism,  formation  of  the  grand plans  the r i c h , and by  than  frame  The  visions  master  d i r e c t development of the p h y s i c a l environment,  w i t h immediate consequences t o the a  sweeping  arrogance  of  their  t o encourage another k i n d a l l to  participate in  of the  of one's environment.  early  spearheaded by  1950's,  a  reaction  to  the  a group formed i n 1954,  early  Team 10,  modernists, had  begun.  Although very much modern a r c h i t e c t s , Team 10 q u e s t i o n e d  the  11  social  program of  humanity  by  requirements aspects  of  the  early  Modernists  providing with  less  the  thought  quantifiable,  emphasis  architecture.  that  on t h e  Brolin  of  Team  serve  biological  behavioral  writes  to  and  social  10:  'Although the postwar generation respected the achievements of its predecessors in supplanting h i s t o r i c a l s t y l e s and i n r e v o l u t i o n i z i n g the technology of architecture, it was felt that the u n i f o r m i t y and anonymity of e a r l y modernism had been the cause of its social f a i l u r e . . . T h e mistake of the early modernists had been t o advocate essentially one p r o g r a m f o r a l l people i n a l l situations; the t e c h n i c a l question had b e e n more i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e s o c i a l one i n d e t e r m i n i n g a r c h i t e c t u r a l and p l a n n i n g solutions.' ^ 1  The  question  determine  an  then  became,  how d o e s  architecture  or  a policy  to  the  i n d i v i d u a l needs  of  to  the  movement  a more  towards  the  specific  architect that  is  and  more  communities?  socially  planner  suitable This  led  responsible  architecture.  ADVOCACY A R C H I T E C T U R E  and  PLANNING  'The catchword 'advocacy' has come to symbolize the involvement of the t y p i c a l l y middle c l a s s professional in the urban c r i s e s . The s e r i o u s problems of urban blight and decay in the nation's slums beckon the architect. P e r s o n a l commitment t o b e t t e r i n g t h e sociop h y s i c a l environment, f e e l i n g s of g u i l t for the sorry s t a t e o f urban a f f a i r s and p a t e r n a l i s m f o r the ensnared population are a l l p o t e n t i a l motivating forces.' M.B. Young  professionals  advocacy  role,  minority  groups.  youth  hostels,  from a l l  fighting Legal social  B a k e r , AIA disciplines  for aid  Journal,  the  rights  offices,  service  became  centers  free and  of  1970 active  the  medical  1 3  in  poor,  an and  clinics,  Community  Design  12  Centers  proliferated  i n almost  every  major  city  i n North  America.  America and the Movement of the 60's  The  social  protests that  most  large  part  of  American the  determination.  exploded  metropolises,  'Movement'  to  Of t h i s Goodman  i n the i n n e r during force  cities  of  the 1960's were change  to  self  (1971) says:  'The growth of what i s p o p u l a r l y c a l l e d 'The Movement' is to a large extent a reaction a g a i n s t the bureaucratic and centralized control of these i n s t i t u t i o n s - a c o n t r o l which i s maintained by soc a l l e d 'progressive' c i t y - p l a n n i n g techniques. These techniques have i n fact been more conducive to m a i n t a i n i n g p r o f i t - m a k i n g environments and a u t o c r a t i c governments than t o c r e a t i n g the more immediate and p e r s o n a l l y s a t i s f y i n g l i k e c o n d i t i o n which many people are s e e k i n g . In my view we can't wait f o r those who now r u l e t o meet demands f o r t h i s change - they simply have t o o much t o l o s e by doing so. What people can do i s begin t h i s process of change themselves. It i s a process which should both examine the cause of our p r e s e n t c o n d i t i o n and pose new ways f o r b u i l d i n g more humane p l a c e s t o l i v e . '  The Movement took p l a c e i n a context when s e v e r a l g r a s s r o o t s and  militant  the c i v i l rise  a c t i v i t i e s were c a u s i n g a g e n e r a l upheaval i n  society including  of women's l i b e r a t i o n ,  'the c i v i l  r i g h t s movement, t h e  the anti-war  movement,  student  p r o t e s t s , t o g e t h e r with more m i l i t a n t labour demands and t h e c h a l l e n g e o f a l t e r n a t i v e c u l t u r e s which were d e s t r o y i n g t h e myth  of  a  conflict-free,  post-industrial  society,  and  13  shaking  the  basic  mechanisms  spectacular  events  ghettos.^  Discrimination  to  these  housing asked  riots  issues, for  living urban  with  conditions development  Industrialization  of  of  in  (dominant)  and  cities,  the  and  mass  migration to  millions  of  blacks  education,  this  labour,  most black  background  and  of  and  rioters  recreational protested  were  the  the  forces  of  reaction?  In  networks, of  for  these markets,  were  destroyed  cities.  This  or  capital, large  centres,  centers  means  financial  concentrated.^^ periphery of  reconstructed  urban-rural  and poor coming t o  the  and  metropolitan  management,  the  the  standardized  consumption,  and a g r i c u l t u r e at be  of  necessitated  required  organizations  to  the  Representatives  What  The  4  unemployment  concentration  communication  tended  the  1  and S u b u r b a n i z a t i o n  means  centres  were  reform,  to  production.  economies  in  brutality,  better  production,  regional  riots  poverty  ghetto.  led  populations  rationalized  and  as  control.'  massive  spark.  the  that  production  worker  social  government  Metropolitanization  means  the  things  local  the  police  being  such  facilities,  were  of  of and  Small, these  resulting  in  migration led  to  cities.  14  At  the  same  time,  suburbanization  is  process  Suburbanization and  spatial  sprawl  metropolitan  the  the  groups.  and this  the  and  upper  process  of  of  minorities,  activities  having  of a  involved  the  centres,  higher  social  white  income  suburbanization and  within  selection  predominantly  poor  place.  decentralization  periphery  population  This  segregation  on  taking  selective  Usually,  suburban middle  of  population  neighbourhoods  new  status,  of  areas.^'  residential with  the  was  led  unemployed  in  to  the  the  inner  c i t i e s . ^  The  suburbs  were  residences, yard. a  The  home  same  outdoor within than  anywhere  and  service  the  inner  suburbs. (and moved  city  people  who  to  lot  of  site do  large  could  afford be  of  what  to  the  and  the  suburbs  reciprocal  time  with  more  and  to  for  trade  move  centers  of  easily  attracted  the  The  owning  freedom,  want  whose  by  back  delights  maximum  shopping  and  neighbours  also  allowed  between  more  the  they  family  around  merchants  suburbs.  exacerbated  and  suburbs  to  imagery'  front  compatible  influencing  these  a  centered  privacy; the  would  single  independence;  with  could  of  with  living  These  areas  heritage)  'environmental inner  was  activities  Those  out  greater  else.-^  city  racial  sense  Home  walls  a  suburban  a  time  composed  on  socializing  living. its  house  of  land:  easier  the  a  appeal  and  family; at  with  primarily  from  in  social  the class  neighbourhood,  differences and  the  distrust  in  poorer and  15  prejudices barriers. city  that  often  seen  Suburbanizatxon  u  neighbourhoods  issues  were  i n the  and  l e d t o two  citizen  as  racial  the  of  class  deteriorating  factors  Movement  and  that  the  were  60's.  inner  critical  These  were  by  major  urban renewal and the freeways.  Freeways,  The  and Urban Renewal  suburbanization  technological  changes  highway systems. freely  to  the  process in  The city  to  usually  by  automobile.  transportation  seen  transportation,  work  allowed t h i s easy  always  and  Team Ten  motion  and  and  a  able  the  t o move  transportation  greater  the e a r l y  mobility,  systems and networks  primarily  t o be  improved  access over  of the new Modern environment. the  facilitated  suburbanites had  systems  had  was  distance, Modernists  particularly  as a v e r y important p a r t  In the 1968 Team Ten Primer,  freeway i s not only a f u n c t i o n a l element, i t becomes the  unifying  image  i n the  city  and  with  this  role  a  certain  grandeur i s expected: 'Today our most obvious failure i s the lack of c o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t y and i d e n t i t y i n b i g c i t i e s , and the answer i s s u r e l y a c l e a r , l a r g e s c a l e , road system-the 'Urban Motorway' l i f t e d from an a m e l i o r a t i v e function to a unifying function. In order t o perform t h i s u n i f y i n g f u n c t i o n a l l roads must be i n t e g r a t e d i n t o a system, but the backbone of t h i s system must be the motorways, i n the b u i l t up areas themselves, where t h e i r v e r y s i z e i n r e l a t i o n s h i p t o o t h e r development makes them capable of doing the v i s u a l and symbolic  16 u n i f y i n g j o b a t t h e same t i m e as t h e y a c t u a l l y make t h e whole t h i n g work. ^ 1  C i t y e n g i n e e r s and p l a n n e r s c e r t a i n l y must have a g r e e d , and t h e l a r g e , many-laned  freeway systems c o n n e c t i n g t h e suburbs  t o urban c o r e s were p l a n n e d .  This necessitated  e x p r o p r i a t i n g swathes of l a n d t h r o u g h e x i s t i n g poor i n n e r c i t y neighbourhoods.  These neighbourhoods f e l t p o w e r l e s s t o  s t o p t h i s c o n s t r u c t i o n i n t h e i r communities.  An even more d e s t r u c t i v e t r e n d of urban development, however, was a f f e c t i n g t h e s e neighbourhoods:  Urban  urban r e n e w a l .  Renewal  S i n c e t h e development of c i t i e s , t h e p l i g h t of t h e urban poor has been a c o n c e r n t o government humanitarian reasons.  f o r more t h a n  Goodman i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s w i t h a e n t r y  from t h e a n n u a l r e p o r t of a l e a d i n g p h i l a n t h r o p i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of 1856, c a l l i n g f o r improved h o u s i n g c o n d i t i o n s o r e l s e t h e poor would 'overrun t h e c i t y as t h i e v e s and beggars - endanger p u b l i c peace and t h e s e c u r i t y o f p r o p e r t y and l i f e - t a x t h e community f o r t h e i r s u p p o r t and e n t a i l upon i t an i n h e r i t a n c e of v i c e and p a u p e r i s m . ' 'Slumism', a word c o i n e d by Hubert H. Humphrey w h i l e t a l k i n g t o a c o n f e r e n c e of mayors i n 1966 and d e f i n e d a s :  17  ' . . . i t i s poverty; i t is illiteracy; i t is disease; it is discrimination; i t is frustration; i t is bitterness...It is a virus that spreads, that races like a malignancy through our cities, breeding disorder, disillusionment, and hate. We s i m p l y must d e c l a r e war on t h i s e v i l . . . ' was  a  disease.  medical that  metaphor,  had t o  with  Urban  the  be  Renewal^  viewed  cut  out  Modernist new  rebuilding  slum areas  new  and usually  the  very  personal  poor  more  suburbs  would  renewed  areas  the come to  or  by  modern  Urban  Renewal  meant  and c o n s t r u c t i n g It  either  by  scattered  back  to  having  who w e r e  that  improved to  living  blighted,  and urbane  brand  was h o p e d  relocation  formerly  an elegant  cancer  new  'urbanites'  was  a  analysis;  real  make  as  keeping  housing.  the  slum  the  in  by l e v e l l i n g  away  following  This  order.  move  of  cured.  expensive  would  Then  be  social  economics,  housing.  to  'blight'  architects  environment, of  the  policies,  other in  the  b u t now  civilization  in  housing  than  i t  apart  by  9R the  central  Urban  city.  Renewal  produced  and  breaking  down  destruction, slum  succeeded in  analyzed American schemes.  by  the  even with more  in  Cities  t h e most  than  in in  more  communities  and s o c i a l noble  the tenants.  Jacobs,,  (1961),  tore  physical  successful Jane  destroying  meantime,  intricate  landlords  necessarily  3  intents,  Death  who s o u n d l y  the and  denounced  This  benefited  N o r was u r b a n  'unslumming The  networks.  renewal  slums',  Life  of  Urban  the  as Great  Renewal  18  Citizens the  felt  power  ignored,  that  information  comes w i t h  and  bureaucratic  under  that  the  form  the  true  than  of  no  consequences  amongst  Movement  was  ordinary  people  was  took  and  during root.  diversity,  influence  architects,  lost  touch  neighbourhoods  with  losing  The  Renewal  in  rather  were  society.  it  except  destroying  and  Urban  of  economists,  had  were  and  imperialism'  communication  spectrum of these  time  by  the  began As  that  the  Citizen  schemes, began  and  vigorous  to  work  grassroots  advocacy  and  design  offices,  and  Urban  Design  believing  Renewal directly  although and  in  offices,  the  they  they  also  to  lobby  to  of  the  local  (CDC's  and  or  UDC's)  freeway  provided  to  organize  behalf  of  the  professional  neighbourhood  Community Development  Centres,  and  neighbourhoods  helped  other  urban existing  mainly  on  really  in  the  programs  professionals,  Similar  architecture  destruction  Urban  opposition,  residents.  advocacy  practitioners, to  expertise,  neighbourhood local  this  threat.  technical  Without  protest.  opposed  construction,  for  work,  threatened  Young  neighbourhoods  under  by  of  and  neighbourhoods  sparked  organization  planners  their  a wide  in  power  professionals  of  strengthening  the  helpless.  politicians,  room  The  and  'intellectual -  was  edict.  credibility  It  the  engineers,  there  to  wealth,  experts  administrators, seemed  dictated  planning  Design were  set  Centers up  in  19  most major c i t i e s of the North America. 1. 2.  Jencks, Charles, Modern Movements in Anchor Books, Garden City, New York, p.31 Conrads, U., Architecture,  Programs  and  Manifestos  on  Architecture,  20th  Century  MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1964  3.  Dean, Andrea 0., The Architect Architecture/July 1989  4.  B r o l i n , Brent, The Failure of Modern Architecture, Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1976 p.54  5.  i b i d , p.57  6.  Smithson, A., Team 10 Primer, MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, 1968. An interesting description by Van Eyck: 'The slum spirit,  is  gone  Behold  the  and  slum  Society,  edging  into  Van  the  Again we have only to take a look at one of the new towns or a recent housing development to recognize to what extent the s p i r i t has gone into hiding. Architects l e f t no cracks and crevices t h i s time. They expelled a l l sense of place. Fearful as they are of the wrong occasion, the unpremeditated even, the spontaneous act, unscheduled gaiety of violence, unpredictable danger around the corner. They made a f l a t surface of everything so that no microbes can survive the c i v i c vacuum cleaner; turned a building into an additive sequence of pretty surfaces (I f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to f i n d words for those I saw i n the United States) with nothing but emptiness on both sides. To think that such architects are given to t a l k i n g devotedly about space whilst that are actually emasculating i t into a void. 7.  Hatch, R., The Scope of Social Architecture, Van Nostrand Reinhold Com New York, 1984, p.4-7  8.  Ibid. p.7 Hatch makes i t clear what i s meant here i s not 'the personal psychological sense of estrangement or anomie, but to describe a society - a congeries of i n s t i t u t i o n s , ways of l i v e l i h o o d and means of l i f e - i n which human beings seem to be i n the grip of events, unable t o comprehend or control forces they have themselves put i n motion.  20 9.  I l l i c h , I., Ideas in Progress, Disabling Burns & MacEachern Ltd., Don M i l l s , 1977  10.  For example building code bylaws.  11.  Goodman, R., Chpt.l, With a L i t t l e Help From the Experts, After the Planners, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1971  12.  B r o l i n , 1976,  13.  Barker, Michael, Advocacy and the Architect, article i n the AIA JOURNAL, JULY 1970. Barker was then Director of the American Institute of Architects' Urban Programs.  14.  C a s t e l l s , M., Chapt. 6, The Post-Industrial City and the Community Revolution: The Revolts of American Inner C i t i e s i n the 1960s, The City and the Grassroots, A  Professions,  op. c i t .  Cross-Cultural  Theory  of  Urban  Social  Movements,  University of C a l i f o r n i a Press, Berkeley, 1983. Prof. C a s t e l l s teaches City and Regional Planning at the University of C a l i f o r n i a . 15.  C a s t e l l s s t a t i s t i c s show that there were 329 important r i o t s between 1964 and 1968 that took place i n 257 American c i t i e s , and beyond the media's attention, the FBI estimated another 269 'race related disturbances' 1970-71. i b i d . p.50  16.  C a s t e l l s , M., The Wild City, i n The Urban Scene: Myths and R e a l i t i e s , edited by J . Feagin, Random House, New York, 1973.  17.  Ibid., p. 44-46  18.  C a s t e l l s 1983, op. c i t . , p.66  19.  Kurtz, S., Exurban Communities, Pub., New York, 1973  20.  C a s t e l l s 1973, op. c i t . , p.44  21.  Team Ten Primer, op. c i t . , p.48:  22.  Goodman 1971, op. c i t . , p.26 from 'Association for Improving the Condition of the Poor', Annual Report 1856.  23.  Ibid, p.28  24.  With the establishment of the The Federal Slum Clearance and Urban Renewal Program by Housing Act of 1 9 4 9 , the United States, o f f i c i a l l y recognized that the  Wasteland,  Praeger  c l e a r a n c e and redevelopment o f b l i g h t e d areas was a national objective. Through t h i s a c t funding was made a v a i l a b l e t o governments and p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e t o c a r r y out renewal p r o j e c t s throughout t h e United States. These renewal p r o j e c t s t y p i c a l l y e n t a i l e d c o m p i l a t i o n of accurate base i n f o r m a t i o n (survey), community master p l a n s , and e x e c u t i o n o f these p l a n s . T h i s r e q u i r e d funding and l e g i s l a t i v e power t o demolish, e x p r o p r i a t e land, r e l o c a t e c i t i z e n s and demolish b u i l d i n g s . - Campbell, J . , " F i n a n c i a l Aspects of Urban Renewal i n the United S t a t e s " , .Renewal of Town and Village 2: Ten Special Reports from Five Continents, Martinus N i j h o f f , The Hague f o r t h e Congress of I n t e r n a t i o n a l Union of L o c a l A u t h o r i t i e s , 1965 I b i d , p.62  22  Chapter  Two  COMMUNITY DESIGN CENTERS  American Roots  Although the 1960's and early 1970's marked the peak period for  community  with  the  p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n planning  Community  Design  Centre's,  and the  architecture tradition  of  s o c i a l l y active architects and planners had i t s roots i n the early trade union organization i n the United States.  During  the  first  quarter  of  this  century,  numbers of factory workers organized These  unions,  while  primarily  the  increasing  into powerful unions.  interested  in  the  working  conditions of the members, began to r e a l i z e that the well-being  of the worker and  his family was  as  total  important.  Housing Committees became part of the Unions' s o c i a l program structure. ^  In  the  programs  1930's, Works  Administration^ necessitated  by  President Progress  Roosevelt  Administration  essentially the  post  initiated  war  'make work recovery  and 7  the  Public  project problems  two Works  funding and  the  23  economic  Depression.  unemployed  architects  Committees States,  of  the  the  American  of  develop  early  1945  east was  and  one  later  The  community  of  the  New  the  Chelsea  York  first  Community  was to  Design  labour  from p r o f e s s i o n a l  development  community  ARCH,  who  was  work,  residents  resulted  the  the  with  the  interdisciplinary  teams  social  their  and  physical  approach  not  the  in  and  needs  One  with  a  of  became in  involving  of  developed  was  to  bureaucrat.  establishing socially  Plan-*  through the  same  This  architects  later  in  Development  neighbourhood  located  volunteer  only  and  and  instrumental  work  workers.  Schubart which  alliance  United  Chemists  worker,  Centers.  the  Henry  an  participation  within  and  the  of  the  a  active  architects.^  46,  of  emphasis  were  in  many  Housing  Organization  formed  formed  for  The  unions  comprehensive  of  work  Engineers,  they  beginnings  and  side  Labour  perspective  of  planners  of  powerful  Industrial  implement  schemes.  tradition  In  and  from the  These  of  Together  J  planning  most  created  technicians.  Architects,  Technicians .  work  two  Federation  projects  and  Congress  Federation  to  These  a  and  development,  but  office  methods was  as  that the  located  planners,  educators  young of  Many  plan also  upper  volunteer  p a r t i c i p a t i o n of  development  the  run with  founder  Harlem.  an  office  and  these  in  of  the that the  architects the long  was  f i r s t CDC, hours  of  neighbourhood reflected  not  community.**  24  This  was  time.  not  It  the  usual  method  in  1949,  that  was  started  Urban  pay  condemning  for  buildings loss  to  suitable  the  needs  whole and  of  the  This  mega  b i l l  to  property  then  encouraged  this  that  cities  to  and t e a r  down  the  land  at  redevelop  thus  resell  who w o u l d  at  large  tracts  a  of  projects.  poor  Urban inner  and  the  correcting  and  available architects community.  that to  advocacy of  was poor  and  the  citizen  clearly  neighbourhood. had  destroyed  and  cry  for  problems  expensive. communities who  not  met  the  It  had  not  and  social  professionals  required  planners  had  displaced  unrest  (riots  self-determination  participation  these  participation  expertise  city  Political  demonstrations), Greater  Renewal  housing^,  neighbourhoods.  Citizen  the  gave monies  could  developers  promised  increased.  the  for  passed  private  The c i t i e s  1960's,  the  citizens  bill  redevelopment  Participation  early  produced  This  slums.  for  Congress  "blighted"  estate  up t h e  Community  By  it.  real  cleaning land,  on  Renewal.  used  was to  with  seen  be  by  critical  urban and  Through  expertise  and offered  was  provided  their  skills  to  renewal.  organizational CDC's,  both  technical  by  was young  to  the  25  The  first  of these  CDC  offices,  The Architects Renewal  Committee i n Harlem (ARCH), began i n 1964. I t provided free a r c h i t e c t u r a l , planning, l e g a l , and organizational services that  the Harlem  Richard  community  could  Hatch, ARCH's f i r s t  not otherwise  director  afford.  saw i t s purpose not  only as an educational and planning service, but also as: '...creating the "preconditions f o r architecture". Form-making should be based on a democratic design process i n which the architect does not impose h i s white aesthetic on the black people, who are so t i r e d of oppression i n a l l i t s forms. I f architecture r e a l l y concerns the t o t a l environment, then a r c h i t e c t s ought to be helping to provide people with an opportunity to control that t o t a l environment and fashion i t to express t h e i r l i k e s t y l e , t h e i r aesthetic, t h e i r needs, desires, and aspirations. One of the f i r s t  projects involved 20 students  going to  Harlem and developing a working philosophy to deal with the communities problems.  The resulting 4 publications included  information on tenant r i g h t s , government programs, planning activities,  and  housing  i n the  community.  Although  originally  a white organization, within 4 years, ARCH was  completely  run and staffed by blacks.  The s t a f f included  a r c h i t e c t s , draughtsman, a planner, a lawyer and a community organizer  and several volunteers  i n the various  fields.  This was quite t y p i c a l of the d i v e r s i t y of the CDC teams. In 1968, ARCH helped the Citizen's Association for the East Harlem Triangle, successfully stop development of a small triangular  piece  of  land  Harlem's Model City area. their  own plans  slated  f o r urban  renewal i n  They received funds to develop  f o r the area.  ARCH's p o l i t i c a l  role as  26  advocate  took  on more  importance  as  i t s constituency  enlarged from Harlem to a l l of the black poor people.  The  CDC idea spread  centers  throughout  community  and o f f i c e s  sprang up i n major urban  the United  States.  Each  p a r t i c i p a t i o n and i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y  professionals to cover a wide range of needs. a  different  institutions,  mix  of  usually  involvement  of  the University,  stressed teams of  Each one had  the  educational  the professional  organizations such as the American I n s t i t u t e of A r c h i t e c t s , the community organization such as Citizen's groups, and of volunteers  from  organization  and  a l l over. modus  Each  one had a p a r t i c u l a r  suited to the  operandi  particular  needs of t h e i r community.  Of  these  CDC's, Vernon Williams,  Director of CDC i n  the  Community Services Department of the American I n s t i t u t e of A r c h i t e c t s , Washington, D.C. wrote i n  1971:  'Now, for the f i r s t time, the community had a voice, a professional voice which spoke to the technical needs of a p a r t i c u l a r community; a voice that l i s t e n e d and interpreted, and one that did not t r y to d i c t a t e to them. Armed with t h i s newly found weapon, communities could speak a u t h o r i t a t i v e l y hand i n t e l l i g e n t l y to the technical hodgepodge of the l o c a l planning authority. They could begin to define the mystical 'quality of l i f e ' as they saw i t . They could begin t o determine t h e i r own f u t u r e ' . 9  From the beginnings with ARCH i n 1964, rapidly. up  the CDC program grew  By 1971 a national organization of CDC's was set  to c i r c u l a t e  information  on projects,  methods and  27  developments had  grown  Canada.  in  other  to  over  part 70  of  the  centers  country. in  the  The  CDC  United  movement  States  and  1 0  Funding  Funding  for  majority  of  the  the the  United  by  the  (0E0)  monies  Other  of  Architects  Poverty  of  helped create the  staff,  was  Urban  enacting  and  approved  by  a  cities, possible  calling  poor' of  Project,  .  the  American  foundations. fees.  Johnson's insisted  War  on,  Development a  Project Project  plans Area  a  This Under  (HUD),  Model  legislation  on  as  participation.  by  for Some  participation.  administered  the  Act  President  community  and  Economic  made  modest  community for  of  was  the  pay  citizen participation'.  with  This  The through  i n most A m e r i c a n  of  to  Cities  Housing  program  paid  'widespread developed  of  Office  was  and from p r i v a t e  such as  Model  years  chapters  were a b l e  mechanisms  the  government  (AIA),  receiving,  Department  although  local  programs  initiatives  condition  by  clients  government  early  sources.  Opportunity  participation  funded  Occasionally,  the  projects.  Economic  were  Institute  various  had o f f i c e s  local  feasible  offices  during  which to  from  government's  government's  'maximum  came  funding  States  Opportunity granting  CDC's  and  Cities  called had t o  for be  Committee,  28  representing  a 1  project  In  area.  Canada,  funding  fair  section  of  the  residents  in  the  9  ^  the  situation  body  Corporation  cross  being  was  the  similar, Canada  the  primary  Mortgage  government  and  Housing  (CMHC).  Objectives  The  CDC's  found  community, for  the  that  illustrate were  of  citizens  professions.  They  themselves advocate, and  The well  to  with  the  for  AIA's  the  roles  educator,  and  architectural  CDC g u i d e l i n e s ' " *  range  perform a l l  of  several  or  and  direction  any  within of  organizer  and  written of  CDC  the  planning in  1971,  activities.  of:  To act as a representative of the neighbourhood in obtaining action and or funds from l o c a l , state or federal government agencies under the many programs a v a i l a b l e ; b u t unknown t o t h e c o m m u n i t y . To s e r v e dialogues  as a with  spokesman f o r t h e these agencies.  neighbourhood  To p r o v i d e a r c h i t e c t u r a l o r p l a n n i n g s e r v i c e s to the community, both to individuals neighbourhood organizations. To f u r n i s h j o b t r a i n i n g t o d e c i d e t o e n t e r one o f t h e as to students already schools.  in  its  of value and the  y o u n g p e o p l e who may later design professions as well enrolled in professional  To i n f o r m p r o f e s s i o n a l s i n the problems of lower income neighbourhoods. Demonstrate to the residents of the these neighbourhoods the value of architecture and planning.  29  To indicate the active concern of the members of the design professions with s o c i a l problems and promote better communications between diverse elements of our society. Within t h i s general framework, each CDC  worked out i t s own  mandate, goals and operating procedures. education credit  and  student worker component, either  towards  research  A l l CDC's had an  a  work;  professional a l l had  degree  support  or  from  as  post  the  direct graduate  professional  association, through both volunteer work and funding; a l l CDC's were committed to community p a r t i c i p a t i o n . offered professional service to those who  could not  and They  afford  it.  An  example  -  Community  Design  Center,  San  Francisco,  Projects  An example of how  these objectives were put into  practise  can be seen by examining work done by the Community Design Center i n San Francisco, C a l i f o r n i a . ^  The Community Design Center i n San Francisco was by  the  University  of  California  Extension,  Education i n Environmental Design, i n 1967. stated  in their  first  Newsletter^^, was  Francisco's low income neighbourhood services  in  problems  of  design,  established Continuing  I t s purpose, as to  provide  San  with free professional planning  and  community  30  development.  It  opportunities problems  to  broaden  while  community.  also  offered  their  providing  Henry  experience  these  Schubart  to  professionals, of  needed  was  a  critical  services  founding  urban  to  member  the  of  this  CDC.  The  CDC was  and  funded  maintained  architects Street,  and  bulk  from  a  by  to of  the  AIA,  University as  policies  had  the  opened  special  of  California  of  with  the  an  public  issues  of  in  and  volunteers addition,  San  Francisco,  Planners,  was  community  and  Board  responsible and  in  community.  by  Advisory  two  Haight  office  In  of  up  215  that  c a r r i e d out  Institute made  at  second  communities  Grant  including  was  a  needs  w o r k was  various  American  broad  staff,  professions.  the  on  Demonstration  The main o f f i c e  design  liaison  0E0  full-time  Center's  from  Federal  it  service  several  acted  small  1969,  representatives the  a  and a p l a n n e r .  Chinatown The  under  the that for  professional  concern.  A  review  of  illustrates  The  and  volunteer  outside youth  San  kind  Francisco  of  varied  design,  projects the  the  projects  furniture  smallest  of  typical  Design  refurbishing using  list  the  Centers'^. design  a  to  work in  from  as  of  neighbourhood  labour  and  projects by  mural  donated  these  small  housing  such a  the  done  size  multi-unit  CDC  projects.  painting drop-in  park  and  center,  supplies,  and  31  furniture design and construction involved the Center  from  concept  were  to  completed  completion. to  the  neighbourhood  The  Schematic  client  larger Design  group  to go  design stage,  after  projects to  enable  funding  the  for  seed  c a p i t a l and land costs.  Several projects involved community  planning  recommendations.  proposals and  Technical advice  was often required for housing projects, both i n renovation and new construction as well as for the amenity planning and building.  In some cases older housing  built  no  with  provision  projects had  for recreational  been  facilities,  and  these now had to be r e t r o f i t t e d .  The  CDC  provided  technical  communities' working Model  Cities  assistance  with the Model C i t i e s  program  was  aimed  at  to  'coalition  Program.  The  coordinating e x i s t i n g  programs and focussing them on s p e c i f i c neighbourhoods. program operated over a period of 6 years with the year was  to be  implementation  devoted and  to planning and  continued planning.  the next  The first  five  to  A l l plans had  to  have community p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the development stages  and  17  ratification provided  at application for c a p i t a l the  expertise  to  funds.'  facilitate  The  CDC  community  participation. The  CDC  also provided predesign and  programming  For instance, f o r the Chinatown Housing  services.  Committee, the  CDC  conducted a survey of existing conditions, both demographic  32  and  physical.  With  recommendations  of  Housing  had b a s e l i n e  and  Council  social  planning  Community CDC. code the  an  effect  of  for  demystify  of  the  the  Chinatown  future  physical  activities  financial  a booklet  was  requirements and  and  code  often  the  outlining  and  meant  homeowner,  of  building  produced  legislated  tenants  the  the  safety  an  which  extra  was  not  clear.  offered  education  through  Department  of  Extension,  San  This  allowed  projects  and  provided  a  It  can  a  wide  be  the  Francisco  get  range  conditions concept  CDC  students  seen  of  that  the  and  graduate  by  the  a  by  credit  San  for  at  feasibility  in  from  the  California, of  real  same  course  the  CDC.  community  time.  It  also  involved  with  the CDC.  from  government  schematic  of  Director  the  Francisco  problems  level  Professor  participate  activities,  housing  a  University  and  labour  issues,  included  taught  to  academic  of  and  included  Architecture,  source  political  This  the  needs,  and  applications.  part  recently  to  Professional  and  to  These  cost  future  information  also  procedures,  requirements.  often  CDC f o r  was  effort  government  information,  and f u n d i n g  education  In  housing  the  this  CDC w a s general  research  policy, to  design studies  neighbourhood  pre-design,  programming  architectural and  into  services.  recommendations,  33  technical  assistance  nature,  training  information for  the  publications  projects  The  impetus good  see  community  the  were  and  planning  participation,  lay  community,  and  graduate.  design/build.  and  training In  For a  some  list  of  context  of  Appendix One.  of  this  to  society,  to  those  available,  a  door  into  the  environment.  architectural  for  for  projects  profession  people  an  professional  small  1969  general  both  programs  design  instances,  of  work,  while  was  to  who c o u l d  was  opened  process  This  was  within  bring  the  the  services  not  afford  for  inclusion  of  planning  their  of  fundamental  to  them.  the  of  With  funding  lower  work  the  income  physical  done  by  the  CDC's.  Characteristics advocacy  The  Community D e s i g n Law  professional community street,  a  as  C e n t r e model  Offices  served  providing  had  Community  an  broad services  community  Design  Center  and  other  services.  service  they  professional such  the  professional  Community  They  of  and  followed  Medical  operations and  usually  easily base to  advocacy  were had  accessible, of  those  s i m i l a r models Clinics.  located a  groups.  within on  the the  welcoming  presence.  They  provided  could In  These  storefront  clients. who  of  the  not case  afford of  them  Community  34  Law  office,  Design could  afford  also  they  often for  active  employed.  their  in  politically  funding The  and  program  were  were  only.  projects  was  charged  three  government  agents  test  The Community  services  if  the  client  it.  a l l  poor,  over  means  Centers  Although the  a  to  CDC's  implement  peripherally  They  programs  specifically  with  as  work on b e h a l f  neutral.  dealt  implementation  advocacy  social  they  had  no  and  acted  with  and  effected  of  power as  physical  developmental the  physical  environment.  In  these  played work  advocacy  a  part  at  such  centers,  in  the  and  was  of  that  internship  requirement  later as  years  of  for  and  a  tutorial the  was  at  Community these  and  lesser  faculty  did  to  profession.  by  in be  education  also  Graduates  could  obtain  articling,  practical  apprenticeship Students  worked d u r i n g the  involvement  study  work t o  the  Law. done  varied.  University  in  volunteer  the  Cases in  Centers  work.  or  were  Medicine allowed  for  Most  the  summer  Architecture in  or  credit  often  this  level.  education  advocacy  the  extent  often  graduate  clinics the  University  and c l a s s  a  of  provided.  program often  analysis  to  and  part  the  volunteers.  used  services  offices  experience  professional  also  offices.  was The  an  integral  medical  part  clinics  of  the  did  work  much  of  work  35  on  preventative  information  care.  classes,  technical  and  development  proceedings  to  the  especially  law  and  in  not  want  Architects arranged if  a  had  for  a  liability  storefront  offices  Funding  CDC t o  from  the  Most  often  some  cases  a  with  for  this  they  hospital  program,  Later  services.  insurance  legal general  updates  on  The  with for  legal law  CDC a s  the  with  firms  profession  a  adequate  of  and  the  The A I A group  only  professional  staff.  As  low-income  was  watched,  liability.  the  with  mostly  closely  watched,  the  groups, but  did  the not  closed.  and  were  medical  professional  from the  set  up  storefront and  w o r k came  professional  as  clinics  The CDC's  Development  The  and  practising  part  storefront  attrition  provided  was  concern  was  held  neighbourhood.  non-profit  were  and p r o v i d e d a t r a i n i n g  these  funding  be  itself.  Community  the  practising  government  the  CDC's  architecture.  dealt  Offices  information  architect,  insurance,  any  the  profession  similar  licensed  competition  in  Law  paraprofessionals  liability  cause  and  procedural  Relationship  did  Cornmunity  were  associations. societies.  affiliated lab within  funded  primarily  In  directly the  through  with  University Housing  and  programs.  operations a  Community  shift and  in  Urban  suffered attitude Design  from  government  towards Centers  social suffered  36  the most due i n part to the evolution and formalization of participation cities.  within  the planning and development  of  the  The Centers that survived looked to other methods  of funding, usually turning to entrepreneurial pursuits.  1.  Goldberg, A.J., AFL-CIO Labour Book, Co. Inc., Toronto, 1956  2.  from  3.  Reid, K., Some Words by Way Points, Vol.17:5, May 1936  4.  This information came from an interview with Mr. Henry Schubart. Mr. Schubart was greatly influenced by the architects and planners, such as Catherine Bauer, who worked on those projects of the 1930's. He continued t h i s community p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n New York i n the 40's and l a t e r i n San Francisco, where Schubart became one of the founding members of the Community Design Center i n Berkeley. In 1968, he and h i s family moved to Salt Spring Island i n B r i t i s h Columbia where he l i v e s today. He and Dino Rapanos met when Rapanos was formulating the proposal f o r the Urban Design Centre.  5.  The Chelsea Development Plan was i n i t i a t e d by the Regional Planning Association of New York as part of urban renewal i n i t i a t i v e s .  6.  Information from interview with H. Schubart, November 1988.  7.  Goodman, R., After the Planners, New York, 1971, p.62:  Pencil  Points,  United,  McGraw H i l l  Vol.17:1, pp38-42, January, 1936 of  Clarification,  Pencil  Simon and Schuster,  'While the 1949 urban renewal l e g i s l a t i o n authorized contruction of 810,000 public-housing units of a s i x year period, by 1967, 18 years l a t e r , only one half had been built...400,000 homes, mostly those of lowerincome people were demolished i n urban-renewal areas. In these areas only 107,000 housing units were b u i l t , with the r e s u l t that f o r every four homes destroyed, only one was b u i l t . Yet even of those b u i l t only 11,000 or less than three percent of those destroyed, were public housing f o r the poor.'  37 8.  Cheney, R. H., ARCH:  Black  Advocates,  Advocacy  Planning, Progressive Architecture, September, 1968, p. 107  9.  The CDC Story, Design Quarterly 1971, p.8. e d i t i o n was dedicated to the Community Development/Design Movement.  10.  CDC News, Community Services Department, The American I n s t i t u t e of Architects, Washington, D.C, A p r i l , 1971  11.  The entire  Mondale, Walter F., then Senior Senator from Minnesota, A Congressional View of Community Participation Planning Process, Design Quarterly, 1971, p. 6  12.  A Model  13.  Guide Lines for Community Design Centers, The American I n s t i t u t e of Architects Task Force on Equal Opportunities, A p r i l 1969  14.  The San Francisco Community Design Center founded by H. Schubart, was prominent i n the American CDC Conference that Rapanos attended i n Berkley i n 1969. This conference provided contact f o r the UDC and UBC with the North American network of CDC's.  15.  Cities  Guide,  A HUD Handbook,  November  in the 1967,  US  Department of Housing and Urban Development government publication, Washington, D.C.  L7.C. Extension  Community  Design  Center  Newsletter,  Bailey, Director of the CDC and editor, 1969  John  16.  L i s t taken from o f f i c e records provided by H. Schubart.  17.  Lindbloom. C , The Citizen's Guide to Urban Renewal, Chandler-Davis Publishers, West Trenton, N.J., 1968  38  Vancouver be  39  Chapter  Three  VANCOUVER,  B . C . - THE  1960's  Background  Vancouver and  of  social  to  and  coverage  the  War  American held;  middle  trends  alienation media  the  of  in  the  the  growing  day,  head  eventually battle the  led  of  decade  the  ready  social  time to  the  to  in the  a  cities  of  and the  protest  urban  core  system,  to  the  and the  protest Canada. were  were  the  There  was  was of  as  brought 1967  and  government.  The  1  fought  and  the  seen  this  civic  of  by  marches  was  Debate  Seattle  Council  similar  to  issues  what  citizenry  City  fueled  universities.  in  political  feelings  borders  Vancouver,  change the  a  the  Freeway  through  Vancouver  implement  shielded,  In  Great  Vancouver  Movement,  with  brief  the  authority  American  in  the  The  revolutionary  politics.  freeways  sensitized By  were  especially  with  States.  Rights  dissatisfaction  unrepresentative a  and  following  with  crossed  dodgers  was  United  Civil  Vietnam  drafter  of  the  disenchantment  political  topic  to  of  1960's  San  earlier  in  Francisco,  freeway  issues.  administration citizenry  were  rose  in  40  protest.  What  were  the  conditions  that  led  to  these  a c t i v i t i e s of 1967?  Suburbia  Vancouver city . areas  i s well described The  to  as  a  downtown peninsula,  the  east,  False  'core-ring' urban model the  Creek,  industrial  Kitsilano,  and  port  Strathcona,  Fairview and Mount Pleasant comprise the inner c i t y core of about  2 miles  marked the around  radius.  growth of  the  inner  neighbourhoods  The the  'Old  city.  of  West  first  Hastings, Renfrew, Fraserview. West Point Grey.  of  the  suburban' areas  These and  quarter  included  North  the  century  in a  ring  residential  Vancouver,  Grandview  Shaughnessey, Kerrisdale and  The communities across Burrard Inlet were  connected to the mainland i n 1938 by the construction of the Lion's Gate Bridge. adapted The examine  At t h i s time, Vancouver City  Bartholemew  consolidation  Plan  of  which was traffic  the  onto  first major  Council study  to  arterial  routes.  Around these older, suburban areas was suburban centers centered  development, that  were  region  many  absorbed  (See  Figure  of into 2).  which the  a peripheral ring of were  pre-existing  growing  Burnaby,  Vancouver-  Richmond,  New  41  The Inner City  Old  Suburbs  Figure 2 Diagrams of Vancouver  Inner  City  & Old  suburbs  Hardwick 1974, p.12 & 13  42  Westminster,  Delta  communities fasted  for  rate  income,  urban  increases, and  the  possibilities^. 400,000  The  that  of  had  the  It  than  core  area  suburban,  the  United  was  post  shortages, and  bedroom  States,  war,  the  due  to  more  disposable  suburban  servicing  population  doubled to  core  820,000  main,  highrise  utilized  of  Vancouver  by  I960.  was  5  the  national  growth,  that  effects  of  the  areas  the  from  not  to  the  United  same  States.  and w h o l e s a l i n g outward to  some  activities  the  office  area  buildings of  the  degree, As  the  of  the  the  original  ring,  business  shifted and  same  peripheral  from m a n u f a c t u r i n g t o  commercial  of  westward  and to  older,  six-  downtown  were  abandoned.  until  manufacturing  in  buildings  or  suffered  although  moved  changed  warehouse  suburban  the  witnessed,  The  new  wasn't  1956  manufacturing  management.  under  housing  downtown  been  downtown  storey  By  downtown  larger,  in  expansion  deterioration,  traditional original  As  the  Core  original  problems  became  automobile  w h i c h more  Downtown  The  Surrey  Vancouver.  of  population  and  mid the  suburban  and and  1950's, old  began  development.  warehousing the  core  during  to  development  to  slow really  The  modern of  a  feel  movement  facilities  shopping  down  in  centers  of the of the such  43  as Oakridge, Park Royal and Brentwood, within a few miles of the c i t y center, 'were the f i n a l signal of the change from a buyer's  to  seller's  market  in  foodstuffs  and  general  merchandise, and were i n part evidence of recognition of the coming of age of Vancouver's suburban structure'**.  By 1960,  the core no longer had the t r a d i t i o n a l c e n t r a l i t y attributes that the r e t a i l e r was looking f o r . P o l i t i c a l (big business) i n t e r e s t i n r e v i t a l i z a t i o n of the downtown rose and several proposals  were  put  forth.  intervention of the City  Among  i n land  these  assembly  proposals for public  were and  private urban renewal and a r a d i c a l freeway system.  Urban Renewal  By the late  1940's,  although the urban decay problems i n  Canada were not as severe, the Urban Renewal p o l i c i e s at work i n the United States were also developing i n Canada'.  When the Urban Renewal wave h i t Vancouver^, the Strathcona Neighbourhood  was  a natural  choice  and  with the  a i d of  Federal funds, the City of Vancouver embarked on a 20 year Urban  Renewal  Plan.  Comprehensive  redevelopment  for  Strathcona was planned, with the expropriation and clearance of a l l homes to be replaced with a combination of public housing  (high r i s e s  and row  housing), private  development  and new i n d u s t r i a l uses, and a major freeway system.  44  Strathcona, of the  located to the east of the downtown core, i s one  oldest r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhoods.  were Anglo Saxon, but by mixed  neighbourhood^.  cycles  of  the  1930  i t was  Throughout  Early  residents  c l e a r l y an e t h n i c a l l y  the  downtown, Strathcona  growth and  remained  decline  residential,  although the repair and quality of buildings was  often quite  poor.  In 1958,  the City stopped allowing any redevelopment or home  improvement permits to make way replaced by public housing.  for demotion of homes to be  Of t h i s Hardwick says:  'The renewal p o l i c i e s were based upon a view of the neighbourhood that u t i l i z e d physical planning c r i t e r i a ; i n no way was the resident population consulted. In f a c t , the planners wrote i n t h e i r report that the people would a l l be happy to be given new, clean accommodation. I t was assumed that no one i n his r i g h t mind would oppose urban renewal as i t was seen i n 1957. ' 1 0  The  f i r s t two  phases of the Strathcona  were completed between 1958 levelling  6 blocks  project, McLean home, and  homes.  an extension  In  an extension  cleared  28  1,730  Scheme included  unit public housing  school.  acres,  spite of considerable  began i n 1965.  The  to i t , a Senior Citizens  to Strathcona  Urban Renewal Project II was  displacing  1968.  of homes for a 159  Park,  16,000 people and  and  Urban Renewal Scheme  mostly  It displaced single  family  citizen  opposition,  1963  approved and  c l e a r i n g of  land  The second phase cleared 10 acres of homes, people."  The  376  unit  Raymur  Place  45  Housing two  was  Project Urban  Renewal  the  Strathcona  not  consulted  opposition the  high  Despite  stop  1968,  the  Property 'ensure  a  a  the  of  being  the  These  leaders  made  was  from  who  nor  the  were  did  their  destroying  viability  expropriation of the  first  opposition  Renewal  when  area  was  their  opposition their  the  of  homes  earmarked  live  in  interests became  lobby  group  Urban  and  Renewal  and  or  St.  Gore  residents  By  the  whose the  an  freeway  Strathcona  into  and  was  Carrall  neighbourhood.  (SPOTA)  proposal  Cassiar  among  organized  who  SPOTA  the  of  renewal  t h r o u g h C h i n a t o w n on  people  and  and f i n a l  connection  Association  1  part  that  third  had  organization  were  threatening  felt  residents  and  Chinatown  Urban  and  of  protected' ^.  third  the  renewed  Owners  informed  plans  bulldozing  that  strong  the  land.  development.  involving  the  brought  discriminatory,  opposition,  sparked  this  council.  also  Georgia viaduct  This to  was  density  planned, the  these  was  some o f  and  community It  $6000  for  schemes  influence  Chinatown.  on  residents when  existing  for  built  December, Strathcona  purpose  area  would  community  Scheme.  This  be  to  fully  will  influential successfully  was  be  community stopped action  the also  13 sparked  the  SPOTA was  first  serious  instrumental  in  look  at  developing  Local actual  Area  Planning- -  renewal  1  .  programs  Image versus reality: above, an architect's sketch of what a 'renewed' Strathcona would look like. Below, a photograph of what it turned out to be. The federal governmentfinallyhalted its funding for demolition-style urban renewal in 1969.  Sketch  Scheme  Figure 3 S t r a t h c o n a Urban Renewal Vancouver Unlimited Gutstein, 1975  47  rather  than  demolition  and  replacement  to  regenerate  the  population  and  area.  Freeways  The  use  of  suburban over  the  automobile  development  half  a  Vancouver.  and  million  Public  transportation  increased increased.  vehicles  transit  demand.  The  the  p r e f e r r e d method  in  part  of  the  century  were  -  1959, A  the  Study  seven  Sutton-Brown Plan  on  highway  submitted  in  'transportation efficiently separate  system  taking.  continued link to  the  the  the  The  discussions  high  concerning  North  s t i l l Shore  with  a  a  continue to  the  to  express  was  this  of  day.  the  City  opened  crossing  early  Transit  report  concluded  of  at  suburban  asphalt.  of  that  be  solved  an  entirely  freeways'^, Council  was  in  and  1959  First The  the  answer.  final  called  Vancouver  the  Rapid  only  facilities  Downtown t o  large  with  construction  third  with  automobile  the  Council,  Bridge  up the  be  were  greater  and from  could  that  Narrows  of  to  II,  City  by  speed  direction  Second  and  south  of  seen  in  keep  event  Part  to  practically  not  Freeways  deficiencies  and  illustrating  -  there  registered  any  planning. 1959-59  1959,  flexibility  it  freeways  the  By  could  made  In  as  idea  Narrows was  to  communities  48  In  1963  Phil  Gaglardi,  Transportation, third  of  the  Vancouver the  announced cost  Metro  freeway  Area,  in  Business  growth.  Pressure  province  highways had  the  and  the  same  year,  report,  An  District  and  would  pay  one  in  the  of  spurring  Larry  Smith  from  Economic  District  to to  freeways  encourage  construct  and  for  the  Phase  One  through  the  revitalization  the  on  Seattle,  Analysis  Redevelopment  recommended  mounted  Highways  bridges  effect  consultants  Report^,  Central  the  of  estate  their  Business  Preliminary  new  In  real  Washington,  that  which  plans.  Associates,  Central  of  Minister  downtown  &  freeway  link.  The  number  steadily  of  supported  these the  policy  technical and  was  In and  the  for  by  of  was  Douglas  political  Transportation  planned  Georgia  not  was  in  of  on  the  the  form  The  technical  question  the  (BPQ&D),  done  consultants. a  Each  5  Transportation  being  as  was  1  freeways  illustrates  studies * ).  and e x p e r t i s e ,  'freeway'  1966,  and  recommending  Two w h i c h  freeways.  formation  automobile  August  Vancouver  reports  need  studies  Appendix  presented  fundamental private  and  (see  requirements  studies  issue  reports  increased  extent  and  of  the  the  report planning  basis of  reports  whole  issue, dominance  of  freeway and  the  of  the  questioned.  firm  of  Parsons,  commissioned Study^',  Viaduct  to  Brinkerhoff, prepare yet  essentially  replacement  with  to the  Quade  another integrate proposed  49  freeway  system  Crossing Vancouver  and to connect t h i s  at Brockton  Point.  Transportation  Council  during  a  In October was  Study,  public  with a Burrard  meeting.  Inlet  of 1967, t h i s  submitted Its  to  City  recommendations  including a freeway l i n k through Chinatown and Gastown were adopted by Council. C i t y Council's acceptance of the BPQ&D study f i n a l l y brought the issue to a head and sparked The Great Freeway Debate of 1967. the  The freeway l i n k through Chinatown and Gastown meant division  and destruction  neighbourhoods.  Local  and  people  merchants,  Architectural  historic  Vancouver  Strathcona and Chinatown  residents  Institute  from  of both  a l l over  of B r i t i s h  the c i t y ,  Columbia  the  (AIBC), and  faculty and students from the University of B r i t i s h Columbia (UBC) joined forces to speak against the study, the planned freeway, which  i t s alignment,  the planning  consultation  with  and the undemocratic  of Vancouver  citizens  groups  was  being  had been  process by done. done  No  before  reaching the freeway decision. The AIBC spoke out p u b l i c l y against the BPQ&D study and the City Council for r a t i f y i n g i t s conclusions. the  entire  transportation  planning system.  philosophy The AIBC  and  They c r i t i c i z e d  methods  official  of the  statement as  reported i n the Vancouver Sun, Nov. 10, 1967 included: 'Studies f o r transportation on the Lower Mainland published over the l a s t 10 years do not form a basis for decisions currently being made. The terms of  50  r e f e r e n c e e s t a b l i s h e d have been t o o l i m i t e d w i t h t h e r e s u l t that the b a s i s for meaningful debate with regard t o the G e o r g i a V i a d u c t , the d e t r i m e n t a l e f f e c t on Chinatown, and the e f f e c t of the Main and Venables is not possible. And  in  an  Iredale,  earlier at  that  report, time  Vancouver  executive  Sun,  Chairman  28  Oct  67,  M r . Rand  of  the  AIBC,  stated: 'Authorative planning by civic officials is accepted in a democratic community. The terms reference of the entire highway planning should broadened i n scope.  not of be  9  Not  only  was  the  participatory  process,  implementation about  study  brought but  without  future  also  into  question,  the  incremental  ratification  ramifications.  and  It  or  was  non-  approach  even  clear  the  of  information according  to  Hardwick: ' t h a t the e n g i n e e r s and p l a n n e r s had o b t a i n e d a small decision from Council, which they would use as a precedent for other minor decisions; cumulatively, this would have resulted in a freeway without any community o r p o l i t i c a l i n p u t . T h i s was such a clear case of non-partisan/expert elitist authoritarianism t h a t t h e p u b l i c became a l a r m e d . ' 2  The  University  University  also  students  played led  by  an a  active young  role  in  architect  this and  Debate. lecturer,  91 B u d Wood"' decision folly  which  ,  held  was  of  holding City  •  a  made,  freeway.  mock  funeral  more of  march the  further  the  Council  majority  a protest  held  another  than  27  these  were  publicizing  They for  night  the  draped  and  organizations the  the  Chinatown  submitted  in  In  information  Freeway  Council  underlining  neighbourhood.  public  against  after  the  black,  November,  meeting  briefs.  alignment  at The  through  51  Gastown joint  and  Chinatown.  protest  of  successful. motion  adopt  December, the  Transportation  meeting  profession City  It  professors  was  and  of  at  became  was  Council  recommendations  Study.  University  third  community,  By  to  A  this  was  rescinded  its  BPQ&D  time  directly  This  university  had the  held.  Vancouver  that  involved  several in  city  politics.  New p o l i t i c s  In  the  fall  of  business  to  discuss  Electors  City  Council. its  Other  failed  to  get  the  in  Non  Many  joined Dept.  of  served  the  the  passed.  form 2 2  of  people  In  the  the  TEAM,  was  next  4  Council.  of  system  The  1968,  elected years TEAM  to  when pushed  planning Vancouver, ward  a  actively  December  Geography  faculty,  Association  of  the  formed  group,  with  over  of  this  formed  on C i t y  process  of  Partisan  TEAM.  UBC f a c u l t y  zenith,  in  Out  was  Movement.  participation  representation  Council  from  i n c l u d i n g many  future.  freeway  Hardwick  people,  traditional  City  the  at  V a n c o u v e r T o m o r r o w G r o u p was  city's the  on  to  the  and p r o f e s s i o n a l  Action  TEAM was for  1967,  to  stronghold  Walter  of  Vancouver  the  challenge  opposed  for  which  with they  52  The p o l i t i c a l climate i n the c i t y at t h i s time was  expressed  by W. Leithead i n and a r t i c l e written i n the Vancouver 25 Oct  Sun,  67  'Vancouver's major d i f f i c u l t i e s of the future are not of a s c i e n t i f i c or technological nature, rather they have largely to do with s o c i a l philosophy and the w i l l to organize for the general welfare. A wider and deeper dialogue i s necessary to break the moral, p o l i t i c a l and economic bottlenecks to a better l i f e f o r everyone.' 2 3  In 1968,  the Social Planning  e f f o r t to divide the c i t y s o c i a l services.  I t was  Department was  into l o c a l areas  created i n an and  coordinate  during t h i s time of p o l i t i c a l  and  s o c i a l change within Vancouver that the URBAN DESIGN CENTRE began.  1.  To be discussed further i n t h i s chapter.  2.  Hardwick, Walter, Vancouver - Canadian Cities, CollierMacmillan Canada Ltd., Don M i l l s , Ontario, 1974  3.  Pendakur, Setty, Cities, Citizens, & Freeways, UBC School of Community and Regional Planning Study, UBC, 1972, p. 4 Bartholemew Plan: A Plan  for  Vancouver,  the  City  1929.  Harland Bartholemew and Associates, of Vancouver, City of Vancouver,  This plan recommended consolidated planning of Vancouver and outlying regions which happened i n 1929 with the d i s t r i c t s of Vancouver, Point Grey and South Vancouver amalgamated as the City of Vancouver. This plan involved streets, t r a n s i t s , and zoning. The Plan was followed i n establishing the physical development pattern for the City, and became the reference point for future considerations. Bartholemew updated i t i n 1947 to accommodate the increased use of the car. 4.  Hardwick 1974,  op.  cit.  53 5.  Morley, Alan, Vancouver From Milltown to Metropolis, M i t c h e l l Press Ltd., Vancouver, 1974 Third E d i t i o n Chpt.19  6.  Hardwick 1974, op. c i t . Chpt. 3  7.  CMHC Urban Renewal P o l i c i e s developed i n the l a t e 1940's and 50's were also influenced by similar work i n Great B r i t i a n .  8.  Urban Renewal and the freeway construction i n Vancouver was i n i t i a t e d more to r e v i t a l i z e the Downtown than to repair blighted areas as i n the United States.  9.  From The Strathcona Story, a pamphlet produced i n 1976 by the Strathcona Property Owners and Tenants Association (SPOTA) describes t h i s e t h n i c i t y as: 'The early residents of Strathcona were Angle-Saxon. However, the area soon became inhabited by large numbers of I t a l i a n s and Jews, as well as Scandinavians, Ukrainians, Russians and Yugoslavs.' 'Compared to the Europeans, the Chinese were latecomers to Strathcona. There were some Chinese and Japanese l i v i n g i n the area i n the 1930's, however i t was not u n t i l a f t e r the repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Act i n 1947 that Strathcona became increasingly Chinese. The area served as a gateway for post-war Chinese immigrants. Housing prices were low and the area was adjacent to Chinatown.'  10.  Hardwick 1974, op. c i t . Chpt. 4  11.  Gutstein, D.,  12.  The  13.  A Review  14.  Technical Committee for Metropolitan Highway Planning 1958-59, A Study on Highway Planning for the Metropolitan Area of the Lower Mainland of B.C., Part II, "Freeways with Rapid Transit", March, page 1,  Vancouver  Ltd.,  'The Strathcona Urban Renewal Fight,' James Lorimer & Company, Toronto, 1975  Strathcona  Story,  of Local  Department, 1977,  Area  p.2  (ibid) Planning,  Pendakur, op. c i t . , 1972, 15.  Vancouver Planning  p.4  Larry Smith and Associates, Real Estate Consultants, Seattle, Washington, An Economic Analysis for Central  Business Report,  District  Redevelopment  Vancouver, B.C.,  Phase  One,  July 1963, page 81  Preliminary  54 Pendakur, op. c i t . , 1972,  p.25  16.  This work culminated i n the Great Freeway Debate that was instrumental i n changing the d i r e c t i o n of transportation planning.  17.  Pendakur, op. c i t . , 1972,  18.  Architects  19.  Freeway  20.  Hardwick 1974,  21.  Excerpts from interview with Mr. Wood, now Professor of Architecture with the School of Architecture, UBC. Interview was held i n November of 1989.  p.34  Protest, news a r t i c l e i n The Vancouver Sun, published by P a c i f i c Press, 10 NOV 1967 Consultant  Hit  In Architect's  Statement,  a r t i c l e i n the Vancouver Sun, published by P a c i f i c Press, 10 OCT 1967 op. c i t . , Chpt. 4  QUESTION: What led to the march i n Chinatown against the Freeway? ANSWER: From each of us you're going to get an i n d i v i d u a l and perhaps an idiosyncratic version of that time. I was a young practising architect i n the early 60's and thought I could change the profession. So I did a l o t of shouting and to some degree i n anger because the profession was being very conservative and s t i l t e d i n i t s point of view i n i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to the society at large or the environment at large. Each was just after t h e i r own pound of f l e s h . And so at that time I was trying to be active i n the profession. I developed the f i r s t the professional committee on housing, continued education and that kind of s t u f f . We had just bought the building on Pender Street. I had worked professionally quite closely with the Planning Department. I phoned one of the main planners and said, "Where's the freeway now?". The freeway had been kicking around for ten years and kept moving further east and north. He said, "Funny you should ask because i t ' s right outside your window." I said, "You guys can't be serious." " I t looks r e a l t h i s time". I was very depressed and I remember coming back to school and s i t t i n g around bemoaning t h i s to my colleagues about the great stupidity that was about to happen. And they said, "Why don't we do something about i t ? " "Well, what?" "We c a l l the students together and you just t e l l them what's happening and the implications of it". So late one dark f a l l afternoon we c a l l e d the whole student body together i n one of the big theatres  55 downstairs and I just t o l d them what I knew. Everyone got wound up and that night, and they went out. We began talking to people that we knew i n the academic community, Walter Hardwick, Setty Pendakur, Paul Tennant, and so i t became a very strong academic thrust against which culminated actually i n the organization TEAM. 22.  Roy, P a t r i c i a , Vancouver, James Lorimer & Co. Pub. & the National Museum of Man, Toronto 1980.  23.  'Consult the Community', Leithead Urges Council, news a r t i c l e i n the Vancouver Sun, published by P a c i f i c Press, 25 OCT 1967  56  Chapter Four  THE URBAN DESIGN CENTRE - THE BEGINNING  The Vancouver Inner City Service Project (VISP)  The Vancouver Inner City Service Project, (VISP) Advocacy  and  Rehabilitation  summer of 1967  Program,  by clergymen  was  Inner-City  started  as  a  summer  the  from d i f f e r e n t f a i t h s with the  o f f i c i a l backing and funding of the United Church. primarily  in  student  action  project  I t began involving  students from the f a c u l t i e s of s o c i a l work, law,  medicine,  nursing, and education, with one f i f t h of the students from theology.  The  objectives of t h i s project were to provide  students i n the service professions, with i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y learning experiences within a low income community, and at the  same time,  provide  could not afford. public  awareness  problems'.  services the community  This would also, i t was of  the  inner  city  and  needed  and  hoped, increase general  VISP included projects such as School  poverty Canadiana,  57  an  English  language  and  orientation  program,  Legal  Aid  Services, Crises Intervention and Suicide Prevention Center, Connolly House Hostel, Feed-In, Now  Bus, Think Indian, Co-op  Housing Project.  VISP became one of the co-applicants along with the AIBC and UBC  School  of  Architecture for the  funding  from  Canada  Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) for the Urban Design Centre  in  Vancouver.  component was  VISP  essential  felt  that  the  urban  design  as much of the community work at  t h i s time, involved the urban renewal process, neighbourhood physical  planning  Center  used the  source  of  and  VISP as  client  continually  housing  until  the  contacts VISP  issues.  The  Urban  Design  administrative framework  during closed  the in  initial Sept,  years, 1972,  as  and and a  information, community and professional resource.  URBAN DESIGN CENTER - Inception  In  1969,  Dino  Architecture UBC,  Rapanos,  lecturer  became very  at  interested  the  School  i n the  of  Community  Design/Development Centre(CDC) movement i n the a r c h i t e c t u r a l profession the United States. in  San  inspired  Francisco to  on  initiate  He attended a conference held  Community a  similar  Design  Centers  program  in  and  was  Vancouver.  58  Figure 4 Floor Plan, Main f l o o r 1895 Venables now the Vancouver East C u l t u r a l Center F i r s t l o c a t i o n of the UDC with the Vancouver Inner-City Service Project  59  Rapanos,  registered  spring  of  1969,  Architecture  urban  capacity  of  the  planning was  an  the  False  Yuen,  Creek  in of  and  Design been  Center. assured  research had a  the  same  early  fall  funding taken  of  in  School  of an  member first  by of  Design  building  projects  of  1970.  $50,000  from the  By November, from  proposal  CMHC.  of  submitted  to  in  the as  and  project  involved  the  community  continued of  the  work Urban  had not  the  yet  support  of  VISP,  the  and office  space  underway  by  received  for  he  graduating  VISP  Center  a  started  which  and  following CMHC  and  of a  a  student,  UDC h a d  The  He,  VISP  Architecture  and  the  architectural  with  a  VISP,  of  AIBC,  Director  CMHC,  School on  project  D i r e c t o r and A s s i s t a n t , as  the  upon g r a d u a t i n g ,  Urban  the  based  interested  first  in  Architecture  redevelopment  the  funding the  a  This  Although the  grants,  UDC  becoming  Yuen,  degree  renewal.  of  He  AIBC  UBC  established  member.  became  full  urban  organize  community  at  masters  well  the  the  Committee  1970.  issues.  VISP  the  board  participation the  to  with  at  School  Housing  to  summer  a  and  the  motion  executive  during in  in  Ron  at  the  component  student,  lecturing  community  on  wheels  architect  completing  faculty  professional  an  was  and  changing  as  in the  two-year  sections funding.  are  60  Operating  In  the  of  Philosophies  funding  1970,  Centre  points  people,  in  community  those  in  Philosophy  are  between  order  to  defines  in the  are  as  for  in  the  of  to  that  be  the  or  process.  in  the  architect  community  in  made  disenfranchised,  planner  and  must  The p r o p o s a l  to  spring Design  Centre), must  be  community  problems  participation must  Urban  there  planners  second,  the  Design  that  solutions  in  the  Community  expertise  the  developed  first,  relevant; and  community,  participation  a  community  presently  order  as  discover  professional  who  to  made:  self-development  process,  that  Operating referred  communication  of  proposals  under (still  three  application  the the  that  efforts renewal  available poor; be have  the  to  third, effective active  states:  '...the C.D.C. staff - professionals and s t u d e n t s - are r e a l l y w o r k i n g n o t so much on c o m m u n i c a t i n g t h e i r own set of ideas to the populace in order to gain acceptance, b u t on w o r k i n g f o r and w i t h t h e p o p u l a c e i n low income and low income areas. They exist to d i s c o v e r a l t e r n a t i v e solutions to the problems that the community people themselves define as relevant r e l e v a n t enough t o r e q u e s t the p r o f e s s i o n a l assistance i f the C.D.C.' 2  Included then  as  an  executive  elaboration  was  vice-president  the of  quote  from W . L . S l a y t o n ,  the AIA:  'Community D e s i g n C e n t r e s p e r f o r m an i m p o r t a n t service in bringing professional expertise to c i t i z e n s i n t h e i r efforts towards self-development and p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the renewal process. The democratization of this decision-making process i n m u n i c i p a l governments (ie., the ultimate agents of community planning and development) is a significant change presaging the e x p a n d i n g r o l e o f t h e community as a c l i e n t . '  61  A  multi-disciplinary  framework,  community,  was  proposed  experience  and  knowledge  planning  problems.  Proposed  Structure  To  put  this  operated  three  architectural  towards  who  the  out  in  the  School  would  basic  order  to  win  of  and  provide  academic  courses  The  academic could  come  VISP  or  work  could  These  its  Directors  of  carry  or  and  would  as  volunteers.  work  low  income  focus  of  operation.  made  up  of  in  on  In  professionals  in  also  must  carry  would  be  work  would at  the  summer  service,  These  students  either  throughout  neighbourhoods  and  through  planning.  together  the  architectural  study,  Regional  be  be  University  based  students  on a p a i d b a s i s  groups  The  and  architect  second of  be  Community and on,  source  architectural  would  centre  The  tutorials  of  CDC w o u l d  planning  the  trust. a  variety  registered  clinic  staff.  would  placement  School  of  group  by  and  architectural  First  that  as  faculty  from outside  three  leaders find  third  field  work  Architecture  workers  CDC.  towards  a  the  people.  community  student  urban  represented  advocacy  bring  practise,  of  work  professional  to  the  into  groups  profession  order  to  philosophy  by  volunteers  in  of  the  with  which  addition,  Student summer.  the  the a  nominated  active  UDC w o u l d Board in  of  equal  62  numbers  from  selection as  of  setting  with  professional  the  oath  science  they  have  by  been  University  for  analysis,  and  seen  Students work their  to  working  be  first be  with  they  opportunity changes society.  that  on  able  to  would  and  areas  to  tearing  to  Centre,  the  the  as  whose  well  not  participate take  and  the  afford  place  in  the where  study,  effecting  and and  that  apart.  opportunity  decisions  their  The  practical  society  were  research  making  art  problems  community  in  the  allowed  and  they  The  otherwise  and  its  operative.^  current  have  fulfil  improve  academic  cities  services,  to  parties.  environment  that  lives  all  aims,  become  in  would  to  able  the  provide  practise.  to  oversee  thereby  of  hand e x p e r i e n c e  technical  are  be  professionals  people  could  the  beneficial  previously  professionals  those  of  would  'uphold professional  professional  provided  work  UDC w o u l d b e  young  and  the  VISP  direction.  unable  to  with  and  and  architecture  would  training  were  AIBC  profession  of  environment'  that  and  architectural  and  the  personnel  policy  Involvement The  UBC,  would  to in be  information would  have  about  the  environment  and  63  Objectives  The with  main CMHC^  objectives for  the  as  stated  actual  work t o  in be  the  operating  performed  agreement  were:  To examine e n v i r o n m e n t a l needs of specific areas of the urban community which are ripe for rehabilitation; to co-operate with residents of these areas in this process of examination, and t o act as agents, advocates, and b r o k e r s f o r p r o p o s a l s developed by the r e s i d e n t s for presentation to various l e v e l s of government and i t s officials; to propose strategies f o r implementation of plans and t o s u p e r v i s e delivery; to give assistance i n the establishment and operation of neighbourhood development corporations. To establish a workshop in which architectural students and f a c u l t y can co-operate w i t h professionals i n t h e community, and w i t h community r e s i d e n t s with a v i e w t o b r i d g i n g t h e gap w h i c h e x i s t s between academic endeavour, the r e a l i t i e s of p r a c t i c e , and the needs of the community. To provide an advisory service to low-income families to assist these families, on r e q u e s t , with problems regarding housing, gardens, renovations, a d d i t i o n s , maintenance, etc. P a r t i c u l a r emphasis will be g i v e n t o problems r e q u i r i n g s u b m i s s i o n t o the Z o n i n g Board of Appeal.  The  kinds  things  of  projects  envisioned  at  the  time  were  such  as:  investigating and urban development acting as government  agents  analyzing  between  present  community  and  groups  providing technical planning architectural a n d ombudsman a s s i s t a n c e t o c o m m u n i t y g r o u p s rendering assistance for establishing founded and neighbourhood-operated corporation for housing, food co-ops, examples.  potential  and  city  services  neighbourhood development day-care as  64  Funding  and  Personnel  The  application  two  year  1970.  to  funding  At  that  Assistant  f r o m CMHC  time  plus  augmented  by  CMHC w a s  it  summer  student  initiatives  Program  to  2  staff,  staff,  consisting  overall  continuity  work  and  course  6  Urban  Design  (See  were  The  UDC s h a r e d  Service  a  drew  association  students  and  prevalent  and  the  5  the  varied.  well,  UDC The  of  the  term over  the  headed  description).  supervision  of  Architecture  tutorials  a Tutorial  the  students'  School  Local  provided  As  design  and  workers.  architects, as  was  employment  1972,  8 L.I.P.  and  of  Ron  by The  Yuen  who  assistant.  space in  with  the  with case  helped  to  the  against  the  into  the  clientele  VISP  clients  parachuting  for  direct  their  prejudice  and  of  This  (OFY) of  fall  Director  student  spring  the  Center  teaching  Project  organizations  years,  the  office  the  a  in  overhead.  under  projects,  Figure  under  h i r e d as  By  commitment  first  was  student  the  for  Youth  graduate  these  students  This  to  volunteer  Rapanos  for  students  of  of  offered Dino  6  and  UDC r e c e i v e d  opened  salaries  grants  (LIP).  and the  officially  administration  Opportunities  grown  and  received  programs,  had  successful,  Vancouver  of  work  Inner  for  community  from contacts to work elite  a c o m m u n i t y was  with  sensitize of  the  City  VISP.  both  the  UDC^.  The  professional  and  counteracted  by  the  65 Academic Year 1972/73 Page 9  School of Architecture The University of B r i t i s h Columbia  TUTORIAL J (ARCH 420, 421, 440, 441) - D. Rapanos and R. Yuen  Spring & Fall  URBAN DESIGN CENTRE Objective: To provide an opportunity for students to work on environmental problems that are current and with the people who are directly affected. Description •• "Architects and planners must become more deeply and passionately involved with the real issues that are tearing our c i t i e s and our society apart, and, in order to do so, they must learn first-hand what these problems are like and how to work with the people whose lives they are affecting and who should be making basic decisions about the changes that are to take place." The UDC w i l l examine environmental needs of specific areas of the urban community which are ripe for rehabilitation. It w i l l cooperate with residents of these areas in this process to act as agents and advocates for proposals developed by the residents and the UDC for presentation to various levels of government and i t s o f f i c i a l s . It w i l l propose strategies for implementation of plans and supervise delivery. The UDC w i l l offer i t s services to individuals or service organizations who are unable to pay professional consultants but whose work i s considered desirable within the community. The UDC w i l l act as an advisory service to low-income families to assist, on request, with problems regarding housing, gardens, renonvations, additions, maintenance, etc. Particular emphasis w i l l be given to problems requiring submission to the Zoning Board of Appeal. Method: The UDC i s a f i e l d service and w i l l desire to locate within the community i t wishes to serve. Since the problems i t w i l l attempt to deal with are of a cross-disciplinary scope an intimate connection with the Inner-City Service Project has been established, with their many resource people (social workers, lawyers, doctors, theologians, etc.) prepared to work with the UDC. The problems to be dealt with w i l l be decided on the basis of the requests for assistance as weighed by representatives of the UDC, Inner-City, the School of Architecture and the AIBC. Prerequisites: A desire to be effective in changing the physical environment with the people d i r e c t l y concsrned. Limitations: Limited to 6 students. Students with some particular a b i l i t y , knowledge or experience useful to the UDC w i l l be given preference.  Tutorial  J  Figure 5 Description  66  continued  presence  identity  and  the  permanent  location,  participation. reputation  of  As  grew  and  work  and  so  the  was  did  staff,  operating  done,  the  the  of  'storefront'  philosophy  course,  requests  for  the  of  UDC's  community  based  services.  By  1972,  the  resignation had  moved  VISP  of  out  had  closed  Max B e c k , on  the  down,  project  its  own  as  independent  society,  the  connection  profession  was  Participants, intact  for  School  of  After  was  replaced  until  December  It  was  the  by  of  Director  time,  Tony  of  that  having  closed  work down,  the  UDC  society.  the  the  on  who  had  Yuen  this  this  down  been  Jim  as  the  Board. were  Director  with  the  UDC  with  the  UDC  remained  time,  both  originators  stepped  of  remained  from  sat  an and  Board  credit  people  UDC  As  University  course  the  and  fall  and  students,  several  and  AIBC  Green  At  director,  LeMaistre  took  of  that  Green.  late  reexamine  nature  the  Green  from  staff,  and  Ron Yuen  1973.  during the  seriously  out'.  the  to  Several  and  to  through  operation,  beginning.  Centre,  this  of  'burn  the  as  tutorial  years  since  over  although  Architecture  experiencing and  mainly  term.  due  independent  done  another  two  an  possibly  its  no  spring  volunteers  goals  projects was  early  and had  fairly longer  and  future been  Board,  began  directions.  completed  well-defined. provided  1972-3  a  and The  clientele  to By the  VISP, base.  67  UDC  had  to  define  its  were  discussed,  such  with  government  in  political working city**  for  was  UDC w a s that and  action  not  was  the  involved  the  continue formed  a  was  come  with  projects  satisfy to  held  been  a  funding  for,  was  it the  the  need  was  these  through  clientele  squeezed scale  access  to  had  CMHC,  UDC f r o m  an  that  the  design  felt  with to  class  projects  the  basic  shelter.  the  In  projects  The  UDC  it  of  would  had  been  technical  participate  outcome  meetings  and  for  of  and  Up u n t i l  applied  the  the  in  a  existed.  tutorial  contracts  in  middle  begun;  to  that  Some  community f o r  government  being  Some  also  months.  always  preoccupation.  s t i l l  felt  questioned. a  radical  process  grassroots.  the  for  others  dealing  even  they  Several  the  awarded  not  within  through  was  of  small  were  as  through  and  was  communities  This  during  University  type  of  need  funding.  funded  programs  The  that  from  enable  way.  for  while  directions involvement  argued  R a p a n o s who m a i n t a i n e d t h a t  must  to  Some  reform,  p a r t i c i p a t i o n or  self-examination  search  been  danger  and more  decision-making  services  who  meaningful  were  the  homeowners  services  This  of  Several  research  land  many  it  UDC  as  important.  poor  of  end,  more  as  questions the  such  providing  there  as  directions.  policy-making.  reform  most  own  the  continual  study  workshops  now  the  Centre  employment to  some  initiative  extent  teaching. for,  and  studies  British  had  by  the  Additional this  and  Columbia  became  a  reports  had  Housing  and  68  Management Commission (BCHMC). be  More emphasis would have to  placed on securing of private contracts as government  funding was beginning  to dry up and many of the o r i g i n a l  funding programs were stopped.  By  the end of the 15 months  undertaken over  30 projects.  of operation  the UDC had  In a report to CMHC, Yuen  states that: 'the course of action of the UDC during the past year has been one of developing new methods of involving people i n the planning process i n order that c i t i z e n s w i l l gain confidence i n t h e i r own a b i l i t i e s to act and act e f f e c t i v e l y to change t h e i r environment. This has been a f u l l time and long term commitment' . 9  The  UDC had provided  stable professional involvement i n  community issues which was not naturally occurring due for the  most  part  to the i n a b i l i t y  of these  often  organized c l i e n t groups to afford these services.  loosely At t h i s  point i t was f e l t that the UDC should develop i t s research and publication a c t i v i t i e s and take on a proactive role i n i d e n t i f y i n g developing trends and t h e i r potential problems. The UDC applied for additional funding from CMHC for 3 more years.  The Latter Years  At  the end of 1973, Jim LeMaistre,  graduate  a planning  who had taken a course c r e d i t through  student  the UDC i n  69  the f a l l  of 1971, stayed on after graduation, taking over  the helm. at  The Urban Design Center had moved from the church  the corner of Venables St. and V i c t o r i a Ave.-^, t o 1111  Commercial St. H  i n the summer of 1972 where i t remained  u n t i l October of 1976 when the o f f i c e closed. continued  to have  an active  Urban  Design  membership and Board of Directors. loosely  set up as a workers  Directors consisting of s t a f f . of  sources,  including  Initiatives  Program  projects towards The  throughout planning  School  coop,  with  the Board of  1975, last  and community  core  funding,  contracts .  core  but was not renewed.  The  years  were more oriented  organization than  design.  of Architecture no longer offered students the  reasons:  experience  Local  CMHC  A  opportunity for design t u t o r i a l c r e d i t through two  Society  Funding came from a variety  and general  these  Centre  By 1974, the UDC was  CMHC extended  funding continued through  The Center  the usefulness  was brought  into  the CDC for  of the UDC as an academic question  and funds  would no  longer be allocated for a teaching assistant i n the UDC and student  interest  had shifted  to another  programs  which  offered c r e d i t for work i n a t r a d i t i o n a l architect's o f f i c e .  During t h i s time the UDC advertised i t s services as planning and  development  analysis,  architectural  programming and  design, and s o c i a l research and f a c i l i t i e s .  Under planning  and  planning,  development analysis, UDC offered s i t e  land  70  S r K E  ALLOIMBTT:  ^111 • Phase I I  TT_  UDC o f f i c e  Figure 6 1111 C o m m e r c i a l D r i v e l a y o u t and f u t u r e proposal  71  use  and  economic  development  studies;  preliminary funding  approval,  the  had  'architectural'  democratic  ±  much  addition  community  care  they  analysis,  not  to for  space  housing time  the  disciplines  and  dominate.  within  be  up  and  By t h i s  many o f  an  the  User  appropriate  potential  residents,  proposal  Childcare worker  finish  this  at  work.  the  was  users  workers  or  trends  in  The  many for  a  not  several  Federation.  In  the  UDC, Chuck Another  were  recent has  was  to  daycare study,  research work  and  evolved  was  were  of  major  given  for  years,  never  produced  however,  a  approached  to  introduction  of  been the  a  of  which  reports  Reif  change  This  Manual  although  as  allow this  that  provision  setting  organizations. Care  the  grants  UDC p r o v i d e d  Day  projects  surfacing  for  did  of  that  construction  costs  three  kinds  One was  associations  produced,  former  with.  design. to  staff,  facilities  These or  in  affected  Minimal  service  the  also  parent  programming  actually  did  as  change  involved  day  facilities.  for  the  issue.  non-profit  a  analysis,  other  'working  involve  whether  funding  needed  into  to  to  UDC b e c a m e  design  component  services  participation)  booklets.  include  neighbourhood  J  government the  -  to  become  process  possible  visitors'  In  had  user  neighbourhood  person  broadened  participation  as  lay  on  environment  included  studies, been  and  and  architectural,  (based  work  research  feasibility  transportation  under  drawings  planning;  staff  analysis,  72  the  1972  co-op  Housing  housing  receive New  for  as  a  change  was  Grants  as  grants  available  part  allowance  Many  of  the  directions evolve  this  to  housing  the  time  did  time,  job  at  closed  group.  were  stopped to a  for  tenants, third  Improvement These  and  did  consultation  came  up  upgrading  minimal  from  in  1976,  continue  the  of not  fees.  individuals  the  CDC's group  When t h e  in  the  doors.  It  States.  two could  x  It  5  societies  force  behind  decided  Surrey P l a n n i n g Department  Improvement  had  entrepreneurial  assisting  driving  UDC  operation.  self-supporting,  resource  its  set  incentives.  technical  projects  could  The  Neighbourhood  Director Jim LeMaistre, the  potential  and  money.  some o f  projects.  Neighbourhood UDC  grant  into  become  at  design  consider  as  and  societies  residents  Monies  design  of  Renewal  income  non-profit  T h e UDC h e l p e d  resource  the  Urban  low  funding  business  housing  to  for  fully  a  design  the  small  for  core  and  the  act,  consisting  residence.  make  When  of  this  projects.  introduction of  existing  applying  housing  planning  the  established  Under  Development^  acting  the  which  programs.  funding  Living  Act  Program^  grants  (See  Appendix  to  could achieve  the  take  group  a  full-  administering  the  for  area,  the  for  UDC  the  Three  Chronology).  The  Urban  service  Design  project,  Centre to  a  evolved  separate  from  program,  part to  a  of  a  society,  social to  a  73  workers  co-op.  government contracts  Although  grants, for  at  specific  originally  its  close  work.  funded  solely  the  UDC  was  During  the  course  by  receiving of  its  e x i s t e n c e i t brought t o g e t h e r t h r e e c r i t i c a l elements of the urban environmental and  the  UDC  design  there  s i t u a t i o n , the Community, the U n i v e r s i t y  Profession.  as  tutorials,  Over 21 many  volunteers.  students more  Members  were of  participated  in  employed  worked  the  or  community,  the  the  U n i v e r s i t y and the p r o f e s s i o n v o l u n t e e r e d time e i t h e r a t the Center of  1.  itself  or on the Board  participants).  The UDC  (See Appendix F i v e f o r a  completed over 160 p r o j e c t s .  VISP's i n t e n t was t o a s s i s t the new p a t t e r n s of welfare-income support and s e r v i c e d e l i v e r y t h a t were forming w i t h an emphasis on r e h a b i l i t a t i o n . Its basic o u t l i n e was: aimed a t r o o t causes of dependency; based out of Gastown and S k i d Road; c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h l o c a l c i t i z e n ' s groups and other area s o c i a l agencies and workers; i n v o l v e d w i t h p r o f e s s i o n a l s o u t s i d e the area of S o c i a l Work ( d o c t o r s , lawyers, a r c h i t e c t s ) ; h e a v i l y based on r e s e a r c h and e d u c a t i o n . The i s s u e s were b a s i c w e l f a r e payment r e c i p i e n t i n f o r m a t i o n , job p o t e n t i a l , h e a l t h c a r e . The i n t e n t was t o break the c o n s t a n t c y c l e of dependency on w e l f a r e , and VISP i n v o l v e d t o emphasis comprehensive, p r e v e n t a t i v e work. Jan. 26, 1970, d e s c r i p t i o n pamphlet from V o l . 1 , F i l e 11, Add.MSS 989, C i t y of Vancouver A r c h i v e s  2.  list  Urban Design  Centre,  Proposal for a Model Community Design Centre, A p r i l 22, 1970, submitted t o the Honourable Robert Andras, M i n i s t e r without P o r t f o l i o Responsible f o r Housing, Government of Canada. T h i s p r o p o s a l was based i n p a r t on the Guidelines for Community Design Centres, The American I n s t i t u t e of  74 Architects Task Force on Equal Opportunities, A p r i l 1969. C i t y of Vancouver Archives, Urban Design F i l e 9. 3.  A Bulletin Architects  Centre, Vol.1,  published by the American Institute of Concerning Advocacy Planning and Community  Design Centres. No date. Probably 1969. City of Vancouver Archives, Urban Design Centre, F i l e 2.  Vol.1  4.  from A r t i c l e 9 of the Bylaws of the A r c h i t e c t u r a l I n s t i t u t e of B r i t i s h Columbia. This A r t i c l e i s the professional oath for architects.  5.  This application was prepared by Max Beck and Dino Rapanos. The description of the UDC's purposes and work was adapted from the Guidelines f o r Community Design Centers distributed by the American CDC network that Rapanos was part of from the conference i n 1969. Vancouver City Archives, Vol.1 F i l e 6, Contract with CMHC f o r funding  6.  The UDC was i n close proximity to and much influenced by the Legal Aid group headed at that time by Mike Harcourt.  7.  The actual work done by the UDC i s discussed i n Chapter 4, and Appendix Four.  8.  Supporting the movement to the Ward System i n C i v i c elections.  9.  Ron Yuen i n an Application for Funding Under Part V "Housing  Research  and Community Planning"  to CMHC, Jan  1972, City of Vancouver Archives, Urban Design Vol.1, No.6  Centre,  10.  now the Vancouver East Cultural Centre.  11.  now the La Quena Restaurant, a restaurant whose p r o f i t s go t o Central American r e l i e f e f f o r t s and i s run by volunteers.  12.  In the Nov.1973-April 1974 statement submitted to CMHC, 32% of the funding came from CMHC, 40% from LIP, 28% from contracts, membership fees, and publication sales.  13.  14.  UDC Pamphlet by Jim LeMaistre,  Vol.  Urban Design  1 No. 9, Vancouver City Archives  Centre,  New L i v i n g Development Company Limited, was formed by some members of the UDC and other persons 'to a t t a i n a  p h y s i c a l a n d s o c i a l e n v i r o n m e n t more c o n d u c i v e t o their d e s i r e s and needs on a n o n - p r o f i t b a s i s ' as q u o t e d f r o m t h e company a p p l i c a t i o n t o t h e p r o v i n c i a l g o v e r n m e n t . T h i s c o m p a n y was f o r m e d p r i m a r i l y t o d e v e l o p low-income housing. T h e UDC w a s o f f i c i a l l y a m e m b e r o f t h e N L D . NLD s e r v e d a s a r e s o u r c e f o r s e v e r a l co-operative housing projects, i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h UDC s t a f f .  Comerio,  Mary,  Entrepreneurship, Research  1984  Community Design:  Journal Vol. 1  of  Idealism  and  A r c h i t e c t u r a l and  Planning  C o m e r i o ' s a r t i c l e , Inside Chinatown's Tiny Apartments, i n t h e A I A J o u r n a l , A p r i l 1983 d e s c r i b e s a n e x a m p l e o f e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l a c t i v i t y with the A s i a n Neighbourhood D e s i g n CDC w h i c h h a s d e v e l o p e d f u r n i t u r e f o r t h e small S i n g l e Room O c c u p a n c y d w e l l i n g s i n C h i n a t o w n . This that  p r o g r a m was p a r t o f t h e encouraged renovation.  Urban  renewal  movement  76  Chapter  THE  Five  URBAN D E S I G N  During the  the  six  projects  CENTER -  years  were  of  very  C L I E N T S AND P R O J E C T S  operation,  similar  Community  Design  groups  societies,  but  research,  self-help  or  included studies,  building  community design UDC  projects.  often  also  general  individual  and  UDC p r o g r a m w e r e meetings  overseers  and  also  provided  well  Yuen  included  performed  a  clientele  the  San  usually  the  as  Work  feasibility and  park  jobs  were  community p l a n n i n g role  Francisco  individuals.  design, of  and  community  publications,  majority  larger  of  were  renovation  the  client  and small  jobs,  the  organizer,  representative.  of  work  small  for  also  UDC's  those  Clients  The  In  format or  responsible  weekly  and  planning.  facilitator,  The  Centre.  to  the  its kept held  usually  group  to  the  a  development. informed of at  the  made  continuity  supervised  within  the  project A l l  each  office. the  as  initial  work.  to  and  assign make  participants project's  Yuen  students  student  UDC w a s  an them  in  the  progress  by  and Green a c t e d  as  client left  the  contacts,  and  Centre.  As  77  For  a  complete  projects are of  a  see  listing Appendix  representative  work  of  undertaken  the  Four.  The  sampling by  the  The  to  Urban  Design  Centre's  eight  projects  following  indicate  UDC a n d w i l l  the  be  scope  discussed  and  type  in  more  detail. 1.  SKEENA  TERRACE  project  2.  4.  mixed  T H E GASTOWN  HEALTH  CLINIC  client  group  a mixed  RICHMOND  PLAYLOT  organized  client  HOME  SHOW to  LAYMAN'S  was  a  -  FACILITY client  result  offered 5.  involving  anticipated  with 3.  RECREATION  -  an  group,  early  and  the  building -  an  small  office  project  renovation,  for  a  well  group  CLINIC  -  one  time,  outreach  service  individuals  HOME IMPROVEMENT  publication  project  for  GUIDE the  -  public  individual  education tenant  or  homeowner 6.  DAYCARE  AND  OTHER  RESEARCH  -  UDC  developed  expertise 7.  PARAPLEGIC evolved  GROUP  over  4  8.  ADANAC P L A N N I N G  9.  ORCHARD project  PARK  HOMES  -  long  term  project  that  years -  long last  t e r m community large  planning  community  planning  78  1.  Skeena T e r r a c e R e c r e a t i o n F a c i l i t y  One o f t h e f i r s t Facility,  was d e s c r i b e d  Profession* complex assist  projects,  i n late  Housing P r o j e c t  by Rapanos,  Terrace  Recreation  i n h i s .Report t o the  1971, as b e i n g one o f t h e UDC's most  and d i f f i c u l t . the c l i e n t  t h e Skeena  In this  project,  group, r e s i d e n t s  t h e UDC was t o  o f t h e Skeena  Terrace  r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e Skeena T e r r a c e  Project  Committee, i n o b t a i n i n g a m u l t i - p u r p o s e , r e c r e a t i o n f o r t h e community. the  user  group,  The p r o j e c t r e q u i r e d i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f identification  o f needs,  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f a c l i e n t group; and  discussions  funds .  with  various  The UDC was c a l l e d  professional  facility  architectural  and, i n f a c t ,  development o f a program; governments  in initially  services  f o r land  and  t o provide  free  t o t h e Skeena  Terrace  Committee.  I n a n o t e about t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h i s p r o j e c t  Tony Green  illustrates  the s p i r i t  and e n t h u s i a s m o f t h o s e  e a r l y days: 'September 29 - NOTES * M a r i e Booth has seven c h i l d r e n . Her husband, S i d , i s unemployed. One o f h e r boys i s e p i l e p t i c and h y p e r n e r v o u s ; he c a n ' t go t o s c h o o l l i k e o t h e r k i d s . M a r i e l i v e s i n Skeena T e r r a c e , i n a m a i s o n e t t e w i t h t h r e e bedrooms. She i s p r e s i d e n t o f t h e Skeena T e r r a c e Tenant's A s s o c i a t i o n . She i s a r t i c u l a t e , i n t e l l i g e n t , overburdened, handsome, probably with different s u r r o u n d i n g she would meet t h e m i d d l e c l a s s i d e a l o f " r e s p e c t a b l e " , even " r e s p e c t e d " . She i s t r y i n g t o do something f o r h e r s e l f and o t h e r s l i k e h e r - a s m a l l b i t o f t h e urban poor o f Vancouver. We're g o i n g t o h e l p h e r . *  79  The  role  of  UDC f o u n d  'free,  itself  architectural  according to  services'  expanded.  The  Rapanos:  'not only helping to define the a r c h i t e c t u r a l problem on t h e basis of citizen participation, b u t was soon involved i n helping to maintain the identity of the c i t i z e n group, p r o v i d i n g backup i n f o r m a t i o n f o r p u b l i c presentations, exploring methods of financing and t r y i n g to h o l d the committee t o g e t h e r , and r e p r e s e n t i n g community w i s h e s . ' 5  This  project  lasted  configurations  of  schematic  building  Committee  decided  to  a  modify  the  because  of  the  user  project  was  experience to  for  put  its  not  representation.  vagaries offer done  of  from with  the the  orchestrate  City UDC.  as  community  an  important  'The  effort  into  It in  which It  many  locations,  and  the  Skeena  the  School  Board  the  school  for  civic  they say of  had in  a  the  however,  and  the did  end the not  illustrated  the  participation  what  it  was  revealed  the  need  for  community  how  any  ground  into  the  accepted of  difficult in  the  valuable  students  include  and  established  It  the  final  and  provide  practice.  initiated  the  authorities  of  groups  failed  self-help  T h e UDC d i s c o v e r e d  community  politics  to  UDC f e l t  did,  involved.  rules  addition  through  when  from  hands  philosophies of  offer  the  project  nature  of  by  the  volatile  resolved  the  have  reports,  in  going  facility.  resolved  a l l  an  project,  This  was  gymnasium  did  placed  departments.'*'  It  accept  the  Rapanos  involvement  like  to  months,  requirements,  design.  recreation  end  product.  program  proposed  Neighbourhood  At  several  the it  design,  an  work  was  to thus  80  a c t i o n  THE  g  ^  PPCVINQAL•MUNICIf*UAFf/°<eS €-  PC8T- ANCRA'S  ecHMC,  CMHO CcNSUUT  ©ECU PS - TD WcVUDB  ESCH  A9='p|.  eeuL>w ecus.  CHURCH QROufS SCHCCC i PF&-SCHCCU  ' THE Aifwc7pmes w e  «j«Tvi=e5 or •  STTA  EUNRtSE  "WIS IS WHAT W0 TEU-  £=7  THE  i^QSYCNfe IN THE  e  j  <SO/S5NMi^TS •'  FEOBSMUREAM AfTvNRS  VCUTH  p  eraxtp HAS A  NUMBER CF €MALU  •SITE ^PPcisiTles •ActNiTies« s e r v i c e s J • FlHANClMSi/0Pl5B»«TCNS • >*WAIMl'ST1W/VA= STRUCTUB&  (•flSRDWi. AT CME BK5, M^TWGr Cft MEETIMGS OF • o DE3SN (AgCHI lfcLTMieAL-) Bqep "FINANCE BRIEF " ADMINI STTRiCTNE STPUCTUES BWS=  BUDGrETlNGi- C A F T T A U  SRDUF5  Atf C W C E S  THINK- or €  we CAN  URBAN DEaSM OEKTRE  TtiBM : 1  AU/  QRCUPS WILL KWCUl WHAT a c e r OF ceasicws ARE BSW<S MACE . A CIRCULATlNe FACT/ctfNICN SWEET.••  ^ TT-  TED  Skeena T e r r a c e Organizational  m  CfEN  Figure 7 Project Diagram  81  identifying  the  need  participation. of a  the  (See  Skeena  report  for  Figure  Terrace  by Tony  The  development  of  Downtown  Community  of  UDC d e s i g n  UDC's  to  in  were  assigned  meetings the  of  the  to  the  requirements located  asked  to  Based  on  prepared  the a  estimate discussion  project  out  in  and  diagram copy  of  initial  the  order plans  ensued.  participated  building  and  the  to  prepare  were  taken  Conflicts  of  to  the  sponsor  groups  were  objectives  and  a  building  was  UDC w a s  and  cost  studies.  interviews,  the  students  asked  community,  was  students a l l  committee.  architectural of  in  formed  establish  typical  application  Two  and  the  Association  a clinic.  was  for  Director,  Concurrently,  Society's  plan  of  which  to  the  Clergy  individuals  Society.  the  sketch  in  a  fairly  Yuen,  and  (DCHS)  information  professionals contractors  the  is  Downtown  development  order  by  carry  for  Clinic  and i l l u s t r a t e s  the  Various  of  being  by  Society  in  (DCHS)  philosophies. 1970  project.  Health  Society  projects  in  the  interviewed  community  organizational  and Appendix S i x  Gastown  Health  late  participate  a  of  Clinic  the  operating  approached  for  methods  Green).  The Gastown H e a l t h  of  7  Project  2.  early  developing  the  advice  engineers, the to  cost the  several  architects estimate.  Society  requirements  of  and  and  and The much  objectives  82  surfaced and  and  work  the  done  overall by  the  resolution  of  a  retrospective  20  at this  year  the  many  UDC o n  project  UDC  issues.  this  and of  program  became  redefined. the  A description  interview  project, the  was  with  of  this  Monty  illustrates  work of  focal  well  The  plan  point  for  project  Wood, the  in  student tone  of  the UDC.  ' T h e Downtown E a s t s i d e c l i n i c i s a c t u a l l y what I d i d f o r my t h e s i s p r o j e c t f o r D i n o [ R a p a n o s ] a n d R o n [Yuen]. We s p e n t t h e w h o l e t e r m d e s i g n i n g , involving, a n d p a r t i c i p a t i n g w i t h , Mae G u t t e r i d g e , t h e Carrall S t r e e t H e a l t h U n i t , a p l a n n e r , some p e o p l e f r o m F i r s t U n i t e d C h u r c h , a n d some n u n s f r o m S t . P a u l ' s (because we w e r e g o i n g t o m o v e i n t o t h e S e a m e n ' s M i s s i o n ) . We h a d a c o r n e r , a s i t e , a r o o m a n d i t was b a s i c a l l y just t o s s i n g u p some p a r t i t i o n s a n d a s i n k . There wasn't a c t u a l l y a l o t of design to i t . I t h o u g h t t h e r e was a t r e m e n d o u s amount o f d e s i g n . I w o r k e d my l i t t l e buns o f f o n t h a t o n e a n d a c t u a l l y a t t h e e n d o f t e r m we a c t u a l l y had a d e s i g n . Dino even i n t r o d u c e d us to various places. He m a r c h e d u s i n t o DW T h o m p s o n [ e n g i n e e r i n g f i r m ] t o a s k a b o u t p l u m b i n g r u n s a n d how t o do t h a t . T h e y s a i d , " T h i s i s how y o u d o i t . 1/8"/foot, etc." B e c a u s e t h e r u n was s o l o n g , w h a t w e r e we g o i n g t o d o a b o u t a n e x p o s e d p i p e r u n n i n g t h e l e n g t h o f t h i s l a r g e gymnasium h a l l . A t the end of t e r m I w r o t e a r e p o r t s t a t i n g w h a t t h e d e s i g n was a n d t h a t i t was a g r e e d u p o n b y t h e s e v a r i o u s parties. . . . Y o u r e a l l y f o u n d t h a t y o u wound up i n t h e m i d d l e o f a w a r , n o t a w a r , b u t y o u became s o r t o f the b a t t l e f i e l d for every other group. T h i s i s what is great about i t , p l a n s - o n - p a p e r i s a c t u a l l y a v e h i c l e t h r o u g h w h i c h the v a r i o u s f a c t i o n s were a b l e to negotiate. A n d s o , f o r i n s t a n c e , w h e n we l a i d i t out i n s u c h a w a y , we f e l t t h a t t h e d o c t o r s h o u l d d o t h u s and so and h i s s a n c t u a r y s h o u l d form t h i s way. Now we have a stream of people coming i n . Mae G u t t e r i d g e , the way s h e s e t s h e r p l a c e u p , s h e w a n t s t o s e e people t u r n i n g t h e knob on t h e d o o r b e f o r e t h e y w a l k i n . Now t h a t ' s Mae G u t t e r i d g e , v e r y h a n d s o n , v e r y ' I ' m - i n c h a r g e - a r o u n d - h e r e ' , Mae G u t t e r i d g e . On t h e o t h e r h a n d we w e r e o f a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t p e r s u a s i o n , a d i f f e r e n t dynamic. We t h o u g h t t h a t we s h o u l d g e t t h e m t h r o u g h the door before they get i n s p e c t e d . T h e r e were t h o s e s o r t o f t h i n g s t h a t had t o be r e s o l v e d . We d i d through  do the Ron and  plan and then I got a I went out and b u i l t i t .  little grant Ron Yuen and  83 an OFY [ O p p o r t u n i t i e s For Youth] grant, we went out and with the help from some CYC [Company of Young Canadians] people. We a c t u a l l y h i r e d about 8 guys o f f the road and I ran a c o n s t r u c t i o n crew. We b u i l t t h i s thing. I t was great and i t worked. And then Mae G u t t e r i d g e came i n , got a c h a i n saw and c u t some holes i n the door and the w a l l s so she c o u l d see people t u r n i n g the door knob. Oh w e l l , i t worked. That was f o r me a f i r s t p i e c e of prime f u l f i l l m e n t a f t e r t h r e e y e a r s of t a l k i n g . From t h e r e i n s t e a d of being j u s t the Downtown Medical C l i n i c , i t turned i n t o DERA. I t was set up as a n o n - p r o f i t s o c i e t y . The s o c i e t y was run under F i r s t U n i t e d Church and j o i n t l y boarded by Mae G u t t e r i d g e and the A n g l i c a n Church. At some p o i n t the Health Department made sure t h a t the S a l v a t i o n Army were kept a t bay. They d i d n ' t get t h e i r f o o t i n the door on t h a t t h i n g , because 3 and 4 p a r t i e s was g e t t i n g too messy. Then Mae G u t t e r i d g e decided t h a t i t wasn't enough of her own space so she moved out. Then i t turned i n t o the DERA. I t d i d have a c o n t i n u i t y and i t ' s s t i l l a l i v e today. This  project,  typically,  involved  a mixed  client  i n v o l v e d a great d e a l of time at the b e g i n n i n g . simply  a r c h i t e c t u r a l design,  but a l s o became an  group  and  I t was  not  organizing  t o o l , f u n d - r a i s i n g , and e v e n t u a l l y an employment scheme.  3.  The Richmond P l a y l o t  The  Richmond  Playlot  representative the  UDC.  Yuen  organization, to  of  help  project,  a  2  month  the many p l a y l o t p r o j e c t s was  approached  by  project,  is  undertaken  by  a  neighbourhood  the Dutch and Laurelwood C r e a t i v e  design  a p l a y l o t and  park  f o r the  Park  Group,  neighbourhood.  Other groups became i n v o l v e d and the c i t i z e n ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n group  became  the  Neighbourhood  Council.  A  first  year  84  Playlot  Figure 8 drawings  85  student,  John Lewis,  obvious  from  working was  with  both  that  knew w h a t his  a  assigned  Tutorial  the  they  this that  of  had  done  expertise,  participatory design,  of  the  design  process.  The r e s u l t i n g  a  scheme  that  a  together,  had  some  was  good  exciting  and  that  it  is  experience  go  away  of  residents  student  homework  up.  to  and  The  him to  draw i t  insisted  the  their  and expected  project  neighbourhood  frightening.  clients  wanted  technical  group  and  to  Report**  passionate  exhilarating  realized  the  his  was  quickly  on  parks,  and,  with  The UDC, committed  the  community be  drawings  synthesis  suggestions  of  were all  for  'a our  part plan raps  constructions g  and  s t i l l  The  p l a y g r o u n d was  stage  being  were  room  the  well  proceeded  4.  left  to  as  Services  exceptions. and  Improvement  be  ultimate  built and  by  by  then  the  design  the a  Parks  in  the  community,  larger Board  park. and  field'  .  the  first  The  plans  the  project  planned.  for  occasional  the  playlot  received  Home Show  Clinic  for  Clinic  the  individual  renovation, One the  were  not  was  the  booth  other  was  the  Guide.  homeowner,  aside  emphasized,  with  at  the  Feb.  publication  of  1971  from two  the  notable  Home  Show  Layman's Home  86  The  Home Show C l i n i c  AIBC  to  was  offer  free  and  siting,  planning  requirements.  annual  weekend  the  and  retailers  The  showing its  games  a  UDC s t a f f  be  a  very  of  the  UDC,  the in  larger  clients bear their  Figures  towards  level  were  neighbourhood  house  code  and  Home Show, a n  at  and  UDC a n d  basic  financing,  exhibitors  services  with  consisted  area  9&  directed  distributors  a patronage  the  from of  of  from  services  own  home,  the  and the  would  public  kinds  only  of  It  proved  point  of  of  the  advice  interested  but  also  in  the at  interest Show  (over  given  were  in  Home  response  to  The  people  awaken  by  view  offered.  involving  UDC e v a l u a t i o n to  manned  participation  that  of  yourself  was  the  area  a n d some  'express booth  public felt  environment,  issues.  a  The  and  not  display  and AIBC members.  their  People  a  environment  both  The  of  and  10).  ideals  of  served)  immediate  the  as  Manufacturers,  endeavour  according  out.  products  Vancouver,  issues.  booth  this  of  such  rented  Vancouver C i t y  and s t u d e n t s ,  growth  personal  Clinic  the  participants,  creative  was  booth  instructive  working  between  homeowners.  consultation  (See  both  of  primary  of  matters  booth  the  Clinic  photos  area  A  venture  renovation,  builder.  class  Show  issues,  house  and  are  middle  Home  on  exhibition  homeowner  mostly  joint  advice  by-law  at  a  in some  seems  113 to  changing larger  F i g u r e 9&10 Home Show C l i n i c p h o t o s  89  The to  UDC s t r e s s e d convey  the  this  public  message  led  participate people  participation  on  to a  publishing directly  The  involved  project.  They  trepidation  with  both  aesthetics  found the  and  many  the  issues  were  discussed  highschool  Home  free  Saturday  deal  free  Show  with  basis.  course  of  required.  by  of  city  there  a  what  see  certain if  ways  Several to or  sign social  to  publicity  and  become  from  certain it  seen  as  Some  the  it  expert  people  who  larger  could  of  and what  neighbourhoods  lectures  this  amount  does  from  something.  to  important.  was  came  way  formulating  and  favourable  primarily  for  to  political  by  be  in just  planning and  some  given  to  students.  This  to  was  look  dropped  the  a  'where  collecting,  questions  like  know  direct  profession,  architect  having  tried  showed  important.  p l a n n i n g was  that  didn't  teachers  its  received  towards  The  that  about  was  didn't in  and  The i n t e r e s t that  level but  realized  operations  booth.  engaged  information  AIBC/UDC  costs.  not  but  its  recognition  interest  T h e UDC w a s  organization,  a  the  community  expressed  up'.  in  in  Clinic  morning  advisory  architectural, This  action It  resulted  is  service to  s t i l l  take part  in  the  (See  and of  the to  the  instituting  Appendix  usually helps  AIBC  Seven)  housing, client select  AIBC  service  problems decide  an  program  a  on  on  architect today.  a  what i f  90  From the the  work done  UDC c o u l d  involved  at  be  the  most  community  effective  groups  renovations.  The  for  building  self-help  Home Show C l i n i c , working  rather  Home Show  revealed,  information  5.  T h e L a y m a n ' s Home I m p r o v e m e n t  The  nature  Clinic book  led  for  people ideas of  the  the  do-it-yourself for  and l i t t l e  help  or  no  publications  time,  information  on  requirements  the and  contractors,  and  directed  technical put  Home  to  community  in  upgrading  well-being  of  neighbourhoods.  was  that  renovation and  made  work  the  information and  accessible  home to  by  of  or  and  Many  a  hand the  lots  of many  at  x  the  provided  renovation,  collective  and  aesthetic  procedures should  law  securing The  action  philosophy  individual  Show  of  CDC's ^  information.  improvement  the  produce  Guide^  house  The  The  Similar to  other  physical  need  Home  money,  financing  structural  interested  LHIG  the  little  Improvement  procedures, basic  at  renovation.  out  great  (LHIG)  expertise.  principles  a  house  homeowner.  and e v e n t u a l l y  a  that  result.  given  only  that  individual  the  Guide  house  had  being  Layman's  the  not  consider  felt  projects  however,  for  consultations  UDC t o  asking  the  was  the  was  on  than  Layman's Home Improvement Guide w a s t h e  of  it  or  Guide groups social  behind  the  pertinent  to  be  homeowner.  demystified It  moved  WES & EDW WM& ff\ZfAf{Zb B T THE Uf^BAW DCJIGW CEMT^E :  18?J  VEMBLE3  1?72 VANCOUVER  Layman's  Home  Figure 11 Improvement Guide Sample Pages  92  the  UDC f r o m  be  a  approached),  started  in  LHIG,  the  50  The  Better  cents  building  per  Improvements products  III,  This  one  was  interest  its  was  in  now  The  Part  had  pamphlet  These  proposed  it  was  in  various  Permits  are  projects to  produce  comprehensive  their  been  trying  were  very  list  of  to  and  publish  such  some Hall,  Cost  of  renovation. financing. It  sparked  booklets.  City  documents  about  to  Union  efforts  and  structure,  UDC.  similar  Credit  of a  When a p p r o a c h e d  VanCity  UDC o n  the  clients,  The  explained  for  sold  and C i t y  analysis of  was  UDC  II,  part  for  CMHC,  Codes  Section  both It  to  The  support  the  refused,  but  expressing  that  an  information  .  booklets  completed.  available  Borrowing  services.  the  also X J  a  III,  complimented they  community  and  I,  of  larger  publishes  publishing.  to was  1974.  CMHC,  Consumer A f f a i r s ,  that  Cost  the  the  was  project  until  from  comprehensive  materials  processes  LHIG's  and  for  process  a very  of  and  Section  permit  and  Section  books  (waiting  This  and c o n t i n u e d funding  Bureau,  suppliers. the  advisor-^.  the  section  consultant  reactive  1972  of  Business  explained  Hall  part  of  work on t h e  for  as  active  to  spring  formed  continued  was  position  As  proposed  on a  comprehensive.  Choosing follow-up  to  set  a to  up b o t h  neighbourhoods.  House, the a  A but  fourth this  distribution feedback  Although given  of  Section was  the  system and some  not LHIG,  clinics  research  and  93  recoinmendations never  6.  were  received  Daycare  During into  early  research. to  environment, groups  various  freeway  with  the and  this  the  daycare  the  later  civic  as  Federation.  for  project  effort  right  planning  the  daycare,  and of  of  became  new  UDC.  reform,  of  action  special  a major p a r t  Change,  National  This  pre-fabricated units Several  Research the  reports  ward  needs  of  work  led  to  designs  were  Greater  Foundation,  for  and  areas system,  planning,  housing.  the  When g o v e r n m e n t  centres.  such  Development  neighbourhood  UDC d i d d e s i g n  the  included  councils.  and  of  These  Housing  issues,  the  part  Economic  went  of  become  Community  United  electoral  daycare,  research  for  evaluation  to  of  the  physical  the  planning  transportation  years  renovations  in  issue.  District,  housing,  The  the  O r g a n i z a t i o n , Neighbourhood Government,  neighbourhood  available  in  Community Congress  non-profit  of  amount  believing  opportunity  groups  Regional  included  substantial  UDC  every  and  Anti-Poverty Vancouver  years,  participate  involved  Committee,  part  research  The  took  committees  this  funding.  and o t h e r  these  individual  produced,  work done  funding  became  societies  research for  the  produced  by  in  for  such  as  Childcare the  UDC,  94  UKcVil CT&CH OJFWTIU1C9UEKCIW. W i * .  APPROXIMATE  ESTIMATE  i*J  fim*- u t r  t  up  IT*, K ».ofc -  *7  Beit. / « * r » K tr.-^f^jrtf,  n  !.+>  K»JT 6T. coocn  ' 3 0  newts  I  -ft>i*i, o r . OP PLVHOCD  -t) <.'lfl.^^<LtC.TJ-*t4-e>** .  jlATTC  c-Xtie. *!*>  x fc**/#o  *ncn5 OF ttYWftu nc m-«iMcw* + STIUJCA  * KH* ,  40* .kt-  ID  Uc * T W * A —  4.-n«.-s  ±iucneo«euooD  tNt 1 E D OlKZcU US/1 WrSl M'tBTCB  G * ir,**» *|OS'°  t,f( Cd, IJiATT KTUMTfc B t / H K ' B*t>S - e c u K -=WL>Jf-s £•(•4 rilAvE |=o -...IFrl_ IT it'l.T, TT.VV(»M> isy° *4fc«"  Jo.*"  PAIR  WAV  1371  Figure 12&13 Daycare drawings  95  96  including  a  comprehensive  Pre-Fabricated  Day-Care  of Vancouver,  by  report  contained  of  Design  the  were  design  design.  Orchard  1 3  was  This  the  the  use  and M a r y - L o u i s e  the of  primary  process  Park Proposal,  Rief  of  is  the Provision  on Temporary Sited  concerns  Committee,  i l l u s t r a t e d by  'Patterns'  Units  Charles  Concerning  paper,  as  in the City  Hart ^.  Care  This  1  produced i n work  Child  of  session  Federation,  which  patterns.  method  of  participation  described  in  The Remaking  in  of  Nov, 1974,^:  'The main t o o l to be u s e d i n the design-involvement p r o c e s s w i l l be " p a t t e r n s " and t h e r e s e a r c h b e h i n d t h e derivation of patterns. A pattern is a PROBLEMSOLUTION s t a t e m e n t a b o u t an i s o l a t e d d e s i g n component (an e n t r y w a y , a s t a i r c a s e , a patio, etc.) The p a t t e r n format includes a problem statement, a discussion of the problem, a proposed solution and a graphic illustration. The prime v a l u e of these patterns is that are visible and u n d e r s t a n d a b l e in themselves. T h e y c a n be e x a m i n e d , discussed and e v a l u a t e d by a l l parties involved in the project. A catalogue of a p p r o v e d p a t t e r n s t h e n becomes t h e b a s i s f o r a l l d e s i g n work, and the results can be checked against the objectives f o r a l l d e s i g n work, and t h e r e s u l t s c a n be checked against the o b j e c t i v e s set out i n the p a t t e r n s . This makes the design process accountable to a l l agencies and the public (Tenants and the neighbourhood). Pattern catalogues have a l r e a d y been used as guidelines to F a l s e Creek development and i n the p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n of Champlain P l a c e . Applicable p a t t e r n s f r o m t h e s e c a t a l o g u e s c a n b e c o m b i n e d w i t h new ones d e f i n e d at Orchard Park. This complete set of pattern guidelines would then be presented to the tenant groups and agency representatives for examination, r e v i s i o n and a p p r o v a l . The end of this s t a g e w o u l d mark a c o n f i r m a t i o n o f t h e work t o date, and of d i r e c t i o n s and p r i o r i t i e s t o f o l l o w p r e p a r a t i o n of comprehensive p l a n s . ' See  Appendix  Eight  RayCam Community  for  Centre  an  example  project.  of  patterns  Patterns  used  in  the  proved to  be  the  97  most  useful  mixed  way  groups.  these  to  In  patterns  drawings  for  registered  7.  document  the  case  were  the  Paraplegic  for  Group  Handicapped Group a  finding  a  friends  for  a  in  together  took  UDC  to  game.  financial organize problem.  analysis a  group  for  the  the  concept  was  passed  and  pattern  various  to  on  to  a  UDC t o o k  the  live  in  a g r o u p home.  client,  developed began  a  a in  solution  a  prototype effect to  a  had  the  been groups  original  Although for  the  sample  a  user  of  the  in  a  Design  develop  general  the  group  design, to  in  problem,  these  design  representing for  the  meantime,  a  handicapped  that  Drawing  when  assistance  on  groups  design  began  four  in  Appendix Nine  a  and  and  its  and  UDC f o r  housing.  people  and  project  herself  with  lost  UDC  This  The  with  See  The  1 7  i l l  research  home.  time,  have  continued,  design Game.  too  produced  approached the  handicapped  became  seemed  home  group  some  Community C e n t r e ,  project  Homes.  house  research  involved  This  involved  chair  suitable  conducting  client  that  wheel  RayCam  and  of  Homes  was  in  decisions  completion.  project  women  design  the  refined  Another the  of  building.  architect  the  with and  societal  98  In the part  second  to  summer, the project was  support  from  Wolfgang  Architecture, and a new  revitalized  Gerson  proposal was  of  the  due  in  School  of  made to CMHC for the  construction of a group home as a p i l o t project.  A l o t was  found, designs created and a group including two paraplegic persons were to be hired to help b u i l d t h e i r own the end, for  funding was  an  advisory  primarily project  by  for over  not given for the building, but  housing  Monty  home.  placement  Wood, continued  5 years.  service. with  He continued  the  In only  The  UDC,  Group Home  to work with  the  Handicapped Resource Centre, which was an information centre s p e c i a l i z i n g i n housing run for and by physically disabled persons.  Although a group home was  and b u i l t  through  eventually operates  the UDC,  did build  today.  The  never actually  the Handicapped Resource  several group UDC  designed  was  homes which  Centre  it  still  instrumental i n s t a r t i n g  Handicapped Resource Centre and was  one of the founders  the of  the group home movement i n Vancouver.  8.  Adanac Neighbourhood Planning  Like the  Skeena Terrace Project, the Adanac Neighbourhood  Planning  project  Originally 1971  to  involved a  approached  assist  by  the  i n planning  number  of  Hastings the  different Sunrise  Adanac  area,  groups.  Council i n the  Adanac  Planning Advisory Committee became the c l i e n t and consisted  99  /PANAC IS KPT AN [SLA^D. mmeamxo mjo/s SUEROJNCWSS . TfiB iKiEssfwncv  Atv  A D W C  EEIHS-  AfE»<  cm  HAS  CTF  tpch ITS ~JD  &*KR13SS  CN /sil- a c e s .  (^vrrCfn<|Ctel fbw fvowt out? SKS -fc> anotiTev will  mcrzaee- commwmGfim. At ite. mwctine-,a tock of ddwfisi/L of an arsg  leads t> less c p etetfny-  Trie /dare- ares hc& skxig kttmdanes -to pwicle it Lurth idevrrtj, S5me mcr& Commumaybo^ " briars' flrs i r t « { •fo in^ofe fc w'rfio fA<r> y«sfc of "fitc- risjs^'^- StmrK. canmwAj •fc-tfie nortL and nest. THUS" t ? lKTei5R«qB "WB / W C AR6^ K/fTH rtS ^•frcVICe PIPfXT, g^FS, CPVICXIS POT1B5 EgTUJeSJ r f f # C >ND "W6 -SURfJCUNPINe COMMUN IT/ fCPBIOClES .AND PEcesirWlS.  JZ-f^cE ccMMUMny  (• PKXICE  R»CIUTIBS -THAT s e ^ v e  ptRe=r /access  FCR  £AAenseM=y  -THB H A s r o j a s -  VEHICLES  w+iaj -mees.  Figure Sample  14&15 Adanac patterns  100  WINDOWS TO THE STREET WNteKS Or MAJOR We- b u m •» MUCH TIWT I T S inrcsaar, TO twe" FWcy. ir * ttcuse- » nticr veR/ euse T O THE sireET/THeN rr -  WLC-teIHFCSSEtg. At THE &MUETWB, n E NecESSMry rtn T H C FS3re?rT "To  f W "Trier srcsf.  OUTDOOR.  c^tttetB CLOSE la me S I K E S T , rvr ICrST 5 ' ABOVE fwse THE ft-"*. CF- THr? House A T L B » S T  PRIVA1E  uti-UhE , rr's na^ss«fy T O ewsufc. » w / * J D vice V E T C S V oiriBiwce-use ST £ H S ^ *R*crirW or PI-EWSWT. so, fw A tnree E U W 5 iff cu -me rrorerrry U N E , » C WIUCOAJS hoyiEw wwicMB m « cue  W D  I  pen ucusg rav IM I N S A C J W G / ^ B V H*5 A MIMIMW !AWfD OP 3 5 pr 52-4 fT AS A pouqpte, THIS CtxiLD  W  U  w  HOUSET Httcny CN1D A  reieificuws wo .OUCWED;  ee ATOnED  ITT A l ^ WW SKfllB muty c W r T W r r i N O .v«r. ITOAIlf  KfB,  rWACy  " A snwncil SCH AS A 'ZEieo  EWLD EV<j: WCRe THAW  cue  rtjets  nm,  SEUSED  10 O^jeEN WNCCW5.  MM NEW HOUSB H*5  3  A >W5D CP IIOOSBFT. MN IM I UM . IN cue  Piece 4 ExcuiwMe  GK-fOPT Of\Q*R4S6; „„, ^ 5 . , , LOCATE WRP CM ANf <> ace THE? HCU=S - — C F  LWE  SENIORS HAVE: OUTDOORS T O O  Wi  CTWK  dace)  J  Apartments  °n» otter  often  no  of  hove  much  use.  terraces arc  multiple  outdoor Balconies  +00, a n d  dwellings  space  "  tiny ,  ore  garden  indrs+in g u l s h a b l e  +hn+  ore  from  the  LINEAR  arourd.  People Terraces  and  C«  belnn  ovoid  l) h a v i n g  plants  c)havina  o  depth  0  Open  spoca«  shoulW  1 o f the  buildlno fat l e a . t  People  S o 7 . under  peop/e  near)  things  in  near seniors  hoV.nj  o  eoch  muet f e e . of  unit.  divided  The  into  areo3.  I f It  have lonJ  o  per.on be  option  <y*t  i&  happan.  variety  <?f  otfier  b•  thdf  do JifT,  p]o e s s  B u t rHiey so  to ff*  football.  "fer  should  t.ap^=n  people  con  TVa  variety  see  events.  *>«  onol  a»»i  to eacK  Cpf-y  to  would  plots  included  of  belonging  property  Individual  u-ould  th.  aye  parks  IJ  +hin^s  plot,  io  eerfge.  walk,  The  ihat  spaces  hard  c a n /ire a f  fne  di f f erent  of  different  Cover , "Too)  '•  open  are  be I  half-In, half-out  NB.  SPACE  and fti'n s o ++iat  more  loot  "stuck •  major  and  (or  j|J tut  con e  use  diversity  l o n ^  minim  o f 6 tea  s)baleOni«.  won't  Utile  hc»v»  t><  OPEN  common  «••«'• in  common  property. o f  recreaf/ontil Can  IDENTIFIABLE FRcKT EHTf^NCE fOOTtft. -HtrtVHB  U E c O TO  Dews is  T O  feNSMRE  rJJBUJ  ThCTR. OVUM  rea,  LOST  THTO T H E  4  Fporr  EZr*  aS^ET  o  rmtT ENTOCe OT  r  BVEW  PlrTtRofr f=RCM ITS NBlStlBpWS. M*te SMHS TWfT rw«y /«M> 3tt5,TET .FKCM TweW»nHEl? IS o e W W THESE, AND THAT,WHEN rSrTO'aw^ T H E uur, «or MCCE w a * rmiT CCDR3 HS(E(£.  be  pedeairian can _  be the  opacas  connected  b.  a part f>airia.  of  1  1  p)Q"fti5 ^ o r  101  of  i n addition  representatives Community Board,  to the Hastings from  Centre,  each  block,  and from  the Social  and City  project went well into  Sunrise from  The  the Parks Planning  Council, Frog  Board,  were  Hollow  the School  Departments.  The  1974 when i t was resolved by C i t y  Council accepting part of the recommendations of the UDC. The  UDC  set up a planning  centre  produced  several  and reports.  political  issue, and the UDC was amazed when the c i t i z e n s  proposals,  i n the community and I t became a  did not defend the patterns and proposals they had developed at  the beginning.  versus single  I t was an issue of low-cost  family neighbourhood.  housing  When the f i n a l  count  was i n , the neighbourhood seemed to prefer to loose some of the  low-income families  than to change the nature  of the  land use from single family.  In So Needs A Freeway, Report  to the Hastings  Sunrise  Action 1 ft  Council  the  UDC  tunnel.  on the Cassiar  proposed  an  Street  alternate  routing  June 25, 1973,  for a  connector  This was a very comprehensive study including cost  comparisons,  again wrestling with the problem of the freeway  system through Vancouver. the  Connector,  freeway  plans  This work contributed to stopping  i n the area  construction on Cassiar Connector  until  started.  1989, when the  102  Figure 16 Orchard Park  103  9.  Orchard Park  Orchard  Park  projects  16) was one of the l a s t  of the UDC.  improving  both  Park  social  illustrates  planning  The UDC was to recommend ways of  the Orchard  experiencing project  (Figure  housing  project  and physical  that  problems.  was This  the evolution of the work of the UDC  from the early days.  I t was funded by B r i t i s h  Housing  Corporation  and Management  Columbia  (BCHMC) and CMHC, and  therefore followed the more t r a d i t i o n a l form of professional consultant. tenant  The terms  participation  of reference,  and r a t i f i c a t i o n  however, of f i n a l  required proposal.  The UDC had a mobile bus, The Yellow Bus O f f i c e , which moved from area to area to encourage the tenants to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the recommendations. 1975  that  A f i n a l report was produced i n July of  essentially  redevelopment.  recommended  Examination  up-grading  of t h i s  report  rather  than  shows  that  although the idea of pattern generation was s t i l l used, i t i s much more of a planning report, with more s t a t i s t i c s and analysis, than those produced i n the early years of the UDC. The  element of generation,  itself  of the project  and execution  was somewhat  by the community  lost,  as the f i n a l  outcome was that the report was given to the BCMHC s t a f f to use had  when planning a  part  in  the improvement program. the  recommendations,  implementation plan was up to 'others'.  The community but  the  final  104  1.  Information taken from City of Vancouver, Urban Design Centre, Add.MSS 989, Vol. 17, F i l e s 1-84  2.  Rapanos, Dino, .Report to the Profession: Urban Design  Clinic,  The Vancouver  1972. As the AIBC, was a party i n  the agreement with CMHC for UDC funding, progress reports were p e r i o d i c a l l y required by the profession and the AIBC Housing Committee, from the Urban Design Centre, V o l . 1 No. 4, Vancouver City Archives 3.  Government bodies involved: Ministry of Housing & Urban A f f a i r s Canada Mortgage and Housing Vancouver Parks Board Vancouver School Board Vancouver City and Social Planning Departments Ministry of Municipal A f f a i r s Vancouver City Council  4.  Green, Tony, Sept. 29, notes, City of Vancouver Archives, Urban Design Centre, Vol. 1 No. 7  5.  Rapanos 1972 op. c i t .  6.  Ibid. p. 3  7.  Interview November 23, 1989: Mr. Wood was a student and then worker at the UDC i n 1971 through to 1974. He remained part of the UDC as a member of the Society u n t i l late 1975.  8.  Lewis, A., Richmond Park/Playlot May, 1971, Vancouver City Archives, Urban Design Centre, V o l . 1 No. 7  9.  Ibid  10.  For example, the Community Design Center published,  Repairs  Rehabilitation  & Rent, The Cost of  Housing  Improvements, University of C a l i f o r n i a Extension, Community Design Center, May 1969.  11.  Charles Rief was the main author of the Layman's Home Improvement Guide. I t was based on a book on 'How to Repair Your VW.  12.  Rief, C , The Urban Centre  13.  Letter  as a Bias  Disseminator,  Sept., 1972, personal f i l e s of Dino Rapanos from VanCity  to Chuck Rief  of the Urban  Design  Centre, Vancouver City Archives, Urban Design Centre, Vol. 10 No.7  105  14.  Vancouver City Archives, Urban Design Centre, V o l . 5  15.  These patterns were most l i k e l y based on the work being done at that time by Christopher Alexander i n Berkeley. At t h i s time his pattern language method was used to plan False Creek south.  16.  Vancouver City Archives, Urban Design Centre, V o l . 14  17.  Wood, M., The Urban Design Centre and the Paraplegic Group Home Problem, Aug. 31 1971, Vancouver C i t y  No.l,  No.1,  Childcare  Orchard  Federation.  Jan, 1973  Park  Archives, Urban Design Centre, V o l . 7 No.3  18.  Vancouver City Archives, Urban Design Centre, V o l . 9 No.7,  Adanac - Freeway  106  Chapter  Six  CONCLUSIONS  Basic  Principles  Examination  of  general ,  the  of  x  the  Community  Vancouver  objectives,  San  Design  three  individual  in  the  The  from  first,  EVERY  of  ACTIVELY  role  for  the  PARTICIPATE  THE IN  particular structure  concerning  education  other  Centers  Design  environment,  principles  HAS  in  principles  which  these  PERSON  Center  physical  and the  Community  philosophies,  basic  professional  important  Francisco  operating  identifies  Design/Development  of  Center, and  and the  in of  their  activities role  of of  the  the  role  the  professional.  two  follow,  and  THE  RESPONSIBILITY  the  most  is:  RIGHT  AND  THE EVOLUTION  OF  HIS/HER  TO  PHYSICAL  ENVIRONMENT.  In  pre-modern  based passed  on  societies,  traditions on  from  that  evolution evolved  generation  to  of  over  the  environment  generations  generation.  and  Methods  was were of  107  physical  planning  activity  involving  In  the  modern  brought  much  of  experts,  right  to  an  processes servants wishes  even  indicate  Two to  say  the  that  The the  that  technology  and  building  person of  into  the  retained  the  the  and  Elected  environment  administrative  officials to  and  the  needs  and  did  they  in  fact  But, all  segments  conditions  of  the  urban poor  democratic  civil  serve  of  system of  inhibited  were  the  effected,  and  knowledge  required  technology  the  in  of  society, seemed  p a r t i c i p a t i o n was  governments larger  encompassed lower  complicated  ability  the  development  to  make  of  the  to not  every of  regions  and c i t i e s ,  The  people  regions  over with  information  access,  physical  that  easily  representing of  the  decisions and  decisions.  more  numbers  individual  information  informed  groups  began  to  of  jurisdictions  complexity  priority.  and hard  the  large  interconnected  consolidated  a  the  6  wishes  participate  environment  being  and  while  each  duty  2  community .  development  the  everyday  small  legislative  with  of  successful.  actively  Planning  the  part  usually  planning  constituents.  needs  poor?  factors  quickly,  in  charged  their  altogether  of  government.  were  the  realm  the  were  society,  political,  of  represent  in  idealistically,  equal  of  everyone  the  of  the  building  democratic  hands  through  and  especially  As  and  more  that  greater  had  areas.  neighbourhoods  r e q u i r e d was difficult  often  for  the  108  poor .  Although the  J  to  participate  segments  of  most far  poor.  access  to  addition, planning often this and  that  the  organizing  and the  and  best  difficult  mobilizing  building  was  economic to  in  the  democratic  system  consuming,  luxuries  This  first  operating  systems  required  easily  was  user  end  be  user.  particularly  the  modern  not  allow  for  cultural  and and  lobbying.  In  In  the  technical,  of  expertise Access  in  the  education, problems  not  it  was  much  less  the  case  when, elitism  social  of the of  the  and  time  afford.  in  The  meant  to  upper  in  expensive  evidenced  often  disastrous  architecture  to  level  participation.  contact could  the  could  clearly  relationship  the  of  was  information, to  this  were  there  Participation  poor  client/architect with  a  difficult,  the  therefore  money,  accomplished  complexities  that  and  to  a l l  reality,  education.  Without  became  in  modern p o l i t i c a l ,  extensive  more  of  and  solutions.  principle method,  clout  influence,  the  levels.  know t h e  participate  of  for  disenfranchisement  opposition,  through far  voting, unheard  this the  political  p r o v i d e d a way  of  were  suffered  complexity  education  act  Without  acquired  middle  the  ideal  population  Those  often less  through  the  overruled.  democratic  the  CDC's  traditional  little the  or  poor,  this  homogeneity the  process  differences.  no  of did  Barker  writes: 'The architecture of public housing is a poignant example; here the a r c h i t e c t i s working f o r a board of commission and usually is quite removed from both  109  p h y s i c a l and c u l t u r a l l y , from the r e a l c l i e n t s — the eventual residents. Add to t h i s the growing evidence that t h o s e who t y p i c a l l y s e r v e on h o u s i n g b o a r d s and commissions rarely understand or identify with the needs of the poor f o r housing, and the results are often a case of the "blind leading the blind". Working of  the  towards built  issue. well  of  a  themselves  it  physical  community and  involved  in  user's  often  role  information reach  an  a  social  not  providing  the  decision,  nature  architects  the  architect  user's  such  a  and  one often  planning. process.  paramount or  and  between  consultative  ideas  and  ideals,  wishes.  the  but  This  could  that  they  act  upon  to  most  expertise  way  as  aligned  sociologists  technical  in  architectural  and advocacy a  impose  community  informed  and  were  the  development  boundaries  merely  ideas  an  urban  organizing  to  the  political  advocacy  overlapped,  facilitate  the  and  The  not  in  strictly  planners,  and  was  to  to  not  nature,  was  needs  meant  of  community  The  solve,  was  with  another  participation  architect's  participation  organizers.  User  problem  was  closely  discipline was  environment  Because as  with  universal  and could that  decision.  Organization  of  information,  forums  of  user  outside  groups, and  affected  workshops  clients a  by  and  organized  into  with  organization.  this  distribution  participation.  communities of  user  for  CDC's the  proposed  action Part  of  If  a  part  in  the  and  community  the  projects had  CDC w o u l d  organization  and  were  located  policies  group, this  knowledge  discussion  were  governments.  viable  of  not help  involved  110  providing  research  into  facilitating  access  information.  The  development  were  held  briefs  and  craft  citizens'.  make  involve  This the  role  that users  of  second  THOSE  The  assistance  architects  it  the  more  in  design  design of  RIGHT  states  innovation  AND  actively  participate  prepare  spirit  as  social  demystify to the  their  ordinary advocacy  developing  ways  in  the  process  leads  to  CDC's:  of  in  meetings  process.  TO F A C I L I T A T E  RESPONSIBILITY  was  their  the  roles  of  INVOLVED IN THE DESIGN PROFESSIONS  AND S O C I A L R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y  to  the  technical  'In  accessible  professional the  their  of  and  says,  and t r i e d  Hayden  group  provided  Dean  and  for  positions,  easily  major  informed  slated  forswore  'their  principle  as  poohbahs  the  kept  CDC's  and  issues  bureaucratic  workshops,  formulate  Dolores  5  architects, to  sessions,  and e s t h e t i c  and  were  of  and  programs  proposals.  egalitarianism,  engineers  government  and  educate,  and  background  communities  Study  to  information of  to  issues  neighbourhood.  the  the  all  HAVE A P R O F E S S I O N A L THE E X E R C I S E OF THE  members  evolution  of  of  society  their  to  physical  environment.  The  occupation  specialized > 7 society'.  of  knowledge The  'professional' and  . architect  is  skills  means  the  the  benefit  for  expected  to  have  the  use  of  of  the  knowledge  Ill  and  skills  and  concerning  constructed  historically, architect  of  the  financing.  In  user  and  and  project,  The  the to  of  to  of who  part  medicine  of  of  his  the  legal and  need  services Community those  who  of  of  it  the  the  design  Design could  as  the  brought it.  working  for  method  for  the  affected  by  the  architect  was  with  although  the  right  be  available  heart  of  the  Should of  of  right  physical are  to  question  only  services the  not  jurisprudence,  should  the  professional  afford  a  the  the  some c o u n t r i e s ,  to  the  the  controlled  the  environment.  in  Centre  not  such  exercise  to  and  architecture  care,  goes  the  obligation.  and i n  allowed  participate the  process,  of  health  be  In  the  can  for  meant  neighbourhood  rights  This  who it  How  working  providing  professional  counsel,  appropriate  architect,  than  CDC's,  By  profession  them.  professional? to  the  in  primary  afford  individual  clients  planned  service  responsible  the  the  basic  democratization can  in  is  professional  community.  are  aesthetically.  more  of  spaces  what  meant  of  participate  to  who  and  socially  case  recognized  right  those  the  and  of  best  wishes  those  services  part  the  the  the  for  fulfilling  also  architecture  satisfying  user  buildings  functionally  For  practise  the  and  provide  society?  how  the  those design  of  the  environment,  the  necessary.  The  professional  services  to  112  If  the  architectural  responsibility to  the  to  community,  experience  of  conviction,  then,  PROFESSIONAL THE  the  democratization  then  part  working of  WITH  of  his  within  the  TRAINING  COMMUNITY,  practitioner  IN  of  the  THE UNIVERSITY,  Architectural  several  creative  and  technical  talents.  degree,  along  illustrate  and  structure,  form  the  problems  professional a  grass  and  space  design,  study  of  society.  available  in  The  provided  in  training  time  in  their  Universities, often  funded  laboratories.  a  program  and  social/communication  the  depends  skills.  traditional a  usually careers  at  most  the  to  This  was  or  students  the  the  value  of  which  in  important  for  on  a  to  linked  and  the  user  attitude is  at and  rarely setting.  professionals  and  idealistic  communities. this  essence to  of  the  tutorial  energetic  within  Centers  be  that of  experience  work  recognizing these  also  the  concepts  success  community  classroom for  must  of  of  problems  creative  The  This  vehicle  formal  the  technical  level,  of  Within  abstract  IN  AND T H E  development  with  working within  years  WORK  the  the  in  third  and  teach  roots  CDC's  study  artistic  professional  real  involves  INCLUDE  THE PROFESSION ISSUES.  including  The  the  that:  COMMUNITY WORKING T O G E T H E R ON R E A L  learning  and  include  community.  was  social  environment  A R C H I T E C T U R E MUST  education  a  t r a i n i n g must  the  CDC's  has  The  experience, became  creating  urban  socially  113  responsible economic  architects  the  clientele  operation.  role  in  have  access  The  the  In  to  Although income  mainly  it  included  tenant,  with  understanding,  have  not  who  on  the  and  this  of  right  a l l  access  were  in  needs  groups.  'front  end'  by  expertise.  with  its  groups  and  traditional  poor  the  user  of  developing,  organizing  program requirements  and d e s i r e d  and  low free  group,  neighbourhood  co-operative  part  or  providing  and  for  must  organization.  to  Work  active  professional  and/or  cases  the  years  6  user  through  group  most  and  the  to  itself  by  an  technical  service  this  to  involvement  restrict  target  its  its  funds  special  daycare  the  environment,  this  lack  did  illustrated  fulfilling  non-profit  and  concentrated  to  to  Clients,  societies,  the  providing  UDC d i d  organizations,  of  is  throughout  exercise  information  on  unlikely  clients,  used  facilitate  services.  users'  to  at  to  focused  the  principles  methods  order  aimed  individuals due  and  certain  UDC's  projects  these  development  responsibility  means  working  AND T H E VANCOUVER UDC  UDC f o l l o w e d  projects, of  experience  classes.  THE P R I N C I P L E S  That  with  the a  housing most  part  project,  the  presenting  of  solutions.  114  The  UDC's  phases  methods  of  the  expertise  those  The with and  its  Urban  and  to  assist  provide  Centre  residents to  an  advisory the  community  impressive  practise, was  their  of  What w e r e  the  Design  the  always  its  environmental  to  for  some o f  the  problem.  contractual needs  common is  a  legacies  of  paramount.  in  agreement  renewal  areas  to  provide  a  gap,  and  to  families.  educational  itself,  for  participation  low-income  the  a l l  technical  a  participation,  towards  work,  and  in  determine  academic-community  profession,  success. Urban  of  work  to  resolution  service  to  body  clients  or  the  participation  information  fulfilled  with  bridge  user  user  project  examine  together the  the  Design  CMHC,  the  solution  by  on  providing  seven years  affected  workshop  drew  allow  the  Throughout  based  project,  to  themselves  were  It  institution  goals.  The  testament  UDC's  to  its  and achievements  of  Centre?  Legacies  The  work of  effects  on  the  Urban  the  Design  Centres  resulted  Profession,  the  British  in  a  University,  number and  of the  Community:  The  Architectural  Institute  one  of  sponsoring  the  three  of  agencies  Columbia, supported  by  being  the  Urban  115  Design  Centre.  minded  professionals  community Several some not  through  some  did  Show  later,  The  the  first  work  Board  Centre as  was  with  the  need  for  service  unique  expand  bounds  the  student.^  The  several to  Urban  under  the  I n t r o d u c t o r y Workshop u s u a l l y on  a  community  concern,  tutorials  of  the  tradition  project and  the  Urban  of  taking  the Design  These  designed Studies Centre  training  and was  years  Henry in  an  an  creativity one  of  The  Abroad  AIBC  of  the  School  within  the  in  situ  conducted  the  the  The  education  around  outside  UDC  the  include  were  AIBC  public.  situations  ateliers,  community  curriculum.  AIA  twenty  activities.  degree  a  through  Center  'urban laboratory'  the  attending  direction  professional The  the  general  of  did  service.  imagination  Design  experimental  create  the  AIBC  the  operation  methods of  by a  and  The  with  such  in  information to  developing  case  provided  s t i l l  Architecture,  Directors,  the  produce  the  profession.  the  illustrated  of  with  organizations. and  and i s  socially  although  received  Advisory  the of  well  initiated  to  continues  the  sponsor  providing free  of  at  within  the  for  involved  was  was  was  work  on  outlet  directly  professional  jointly  Morning  attempt in  served  an  which  School  Elder  become  UDC f i n a n c i a l l y  Booth,  and  Saturday offices  the state  however,  public  to  provided  volunteer  volunteer  support  Home  also  architects  did  and  It  a  within specific  Program. early  part  classroom.  The of  116  Figure 17&18 Ray-Cam Schematic Design  117  118  Pine  Figure 19 Street Clinic Floor Plan  119  Some in  of  the  UDC's  existence  the  Pine  and  evolve  the  students the  method  the  have  For  housing.  His  Downtown  Eastside.  in  with  their  formed and  the  Ron Yuen  practise  in  the  Rief  LeMaistre  has  Improvement Surrey  and  on  Program several  continues  as  Nette  Pereboom  after  becoming  study  in  a  to in  Cove  Area  for  law  use  daycare  the  CMHC  as  as  an and  low-cost has the  outgrowth  of  his  and  Tom M o o r e ,  an  association  use  the  through  the  UDC ^. X  and J i m  Neighbourhood  and  Bridgeview  housing  architect,  patterns  work,  the  presently  'gaming'  in  in  Municipality a  at  especially  P l a n n i n g programs  for  a  of  design  Beach  of of  practise  of  project,  administrate  registered  construction  grew  effect  careers  design  developed  with  planner  to  direct  which  Crescent  Local  worked  a  to  experience  Doug C a m p b e l l  first  continued  went  is  Victoria  UDC D e e p  the  projects,  work  handicapped  their  his  built  this  lasting  with  and  continued  architectural  Similarly,  s t i l l  were  the  most  by  in  work  is  playlots,  of  that  continues  housing  p a r t i c i p a t i o n methods  Charles  He  influenced  the  Some  with  was  This  UDC.  during  work  as  proposals  projects  community  social  such  changed.  of  successful  several  it  the  been  constructed,  daycare  participation  completed  work  of  however,  example,  user  was  RayCam Community C e n t r e  or  the  Perhaps,  that  of  rebuilt  example  within  UDC.  and  beginnings  for  UDC  the  much  plans  been  associations. the  as  Clinic;  since as  work t h a t  such  upgrading  have  served  today,  Street  community  design  the of  area. Delta.  advocate she  acts  in  and  continued as  legal  120  counsel  for  housing  several  societies.  handicapped attest  to  experience  Monty  group  the  architects,  home  Wood  and  continued  programs.  profound influence  had on t h e i r  co-ops to  Each  low-income  work  of  the  The Urban  professional  attitudes,  with  the  these  people  Design  Centre  practise  and  lives.  Although  not  Centre, was  a  the  service  instrumental  that  have  help  became UDC  possible, execute  the  service  of  the  helped  the  urban  The for  by  of  recreation  community  for  Layman's the and  lay  The  home  public.  but  who  do  of not  Area  to  plan plans  the  core  illustrated  and  and in  handicapped  and  Guide,  it  and  instrumental for  to  opposition  downtown  an the  with  for  education value  people  whose  lives  pay  them.  The  for  The  making  facilities  was  Planning  alternatives  facilities,  It  personpower  groups  living  Improvement  participation  changes,  UDC  daycare Home  the  more  planning.  formulate  through  group  and  for  process,  and  patterns  calling  city  Design  community  process  implement  renewal  the  Local  neighbourhood  the  idea  demand.  for  systems  criteria  were  Vancouver  Urban  within  planning  and  neighbourhoods.  consultation affected  this  propose  park  freeway  initiating  example,  own  It  connector  persons,  lobby  instance,  their  the  UDC p r o v i d e d e x p e r t i s e  process  in  for  programs. to  and  of  provided  Communities  citizens  removal  it  solely  formulating  and the  standard  helped  urban  that  in  organize a  legacy  continued.  participation to  direct  in are  Urban  121  Design  Centre  the  community  the  Terra  profit  housing  Urban  seemed  by  At  its  Centre  fulfilled  being the  its  to  the by  Project  low-income  with  a  staff  Urban of  once  such  develops f i l l  as  non-  the  successful lived  s t i l l  did  at  Design  the  VISP the  clients  need  it  projects,  up  to  its  in  its  believe  close  its  doors?  low  Inner  C e n t r e was  income  City  and the  community  in  that  time.  The Vancouver I n n e r - C i t y  having  physical  office, with  project  was  services  a voice  in  and at the  the  environment,  Project its  Board  to  a  close of  active  services,  T h e UDC e v o l v e d  Service  same.  formed  social  in  their  co-operative,  one  many  required architectural  storefront  workers  to  objectives,  and redevelopment.  Vancouver  sprang  up  and  groups,  now  Why t h e n ,  the  the  occurring to  renewal  resource  participants  need  neighbourhood  were  services  Cycle  served  Service  such  L t d . which  completed its  Its  inception,  response  other  Vancouver,  principles.  A Natural  it,  for  the UDC.  philosophies. founding  need  Consultants  in  Design  to  the  recognized  Housing  illustrated  The  exhibited  to  in  assist  changes  through  from p a r t  separate  urban of  the  Society  h a d become  Directors  that  and  a the  122  This evolution was  due to a number of factors.  o r i g i n a l c l i e n t base was  established through the VISP, by  the time VISP ceased i n September of 1972 moved to i t s own  Although the  and the UDC  storefront location, the UDC  extensive and diverse project l i s t  had  had  an  (See Appendix Four).  At  t h i s point, UDC's review of work and goals revealed a wide range of projects and expectations  requiring s k i l l s  and  expertise that included community organization, action f a c i l i t a t i n g , lobbying;  a r c h i t e c t u r a l programming,  schematic and working drawings;  and planning analysis,  research compilation and report writing.  Many projects such  as the Paraplegic Group Homes and the Adanac Planning required extended involvement over several years.  The UDC  was  forced to evolve.  The long term commitment and  the type of expertise required often went beyond the a b i l i t y of student labour i n 3 month t u t o r i a l s to provide. purposes of a r c h i t e c t u r a l education  for both faculty and  student by necessity were secondary to the UDC  projects.  Student involvement through the University lessened although students often continued school term. of the UDC  Consideration was  The  1973,  as employees a f t e r t h e i r  given to expanding the work  to include a more complete a r c h i t e c t u r a l service  by attempting to incorporate l i a b i l i t y coverage through the University of B r i t i s h Columbia.  This was  refused, and i t  seemed u n l i k e l y that students would gain experience directed  123  to  more  traditional  architectural  services  through  t h e UDC  model.  This the  change older  through final  in  staff  the  change.  the  leadership with  The  formation  political,  were  growing  conditions  problems were  of  such  becoming  the  citizens  had an  and  planning professional  Profession,  that the  under  planning .  At  f r o m CMHC,  as  too  University  the  interest  in  shortages to  distrust  elite.  It  was  of  the the  1960's.  specific and  freeway  participation; and  poverty  ignore;  of  was the  a time  simultaneously  and the  were  late  ripe;  professionals  increasing  shared  of  urban renewal  obvious  as  much a p r o d u c t  r e f o r m was  among y o u n g  was  very  housing  even  conviction  a  funding  C e n t e r was,  climate  public  unemployment  a  Design  social  arousing  Ron Yuen  secondary  core  the  co-op.  social  p l a n n i n g problems  invasions the  for  in  directions  primarily  component  of  of  and both  UDC s h i f t e d  North America,  mood  desire  available  School  ceased  to  the  UDC, r e s u l t e d the  receiving  Urban  and  with  t h a n was  when  and the  s t i l l  economic  political  time  architectural  the  throughout  along  the  involvement  a workers  of  of  Jim LeMaistre,  although  UDC b e c a m e  civic  of the  the  The  the  Green resigned  time,  CDC's  structure  official  Tony  involvement  e a r n more money  Around  and  service,  to  funding  Architecture  this  student  by  Community.  high;  and,  architectural for the The  action,  124  governments,  in  an  unrest,  supported  such  VISP  as  designed  The of  to  work  address  the  operation.  addressed. renewal  the  housing the  funding moved  The  had  other  Urban  Design  and  frustration  of  this  process of  frustration turned  community  position with  having  of  into  immediate  the  the  offering  Orchard  goals  for  desire  services  that  or  been  was  design.  community  competed  this  from  reaction  fight  itself,  At  projects  came  the  by  housing  Centre's  a  of  addressed  facility  and  urban  Issues  the  to  the the  planning. for hard  itself  more  architectural  part  the  introduced,  T h e UDC f o u n d  that  less  government  into  project. most  were  being  was  process  and  projects  neighbourhood  initially  input  year  improved.  c h i l d care  actual  the  project  third  to  Design  alleviated  Park  a  postponed;  were  energies  planning  more  had  real  was  had  Planning  p a r t i c i p a t i o n began.  traditional  example,  no  early  non-profit  as  Centre's  participation  As  Area  Urban  such  community's  programs  the  the  changed  accessibility  The  issues  of  about  had been  Local  initiatives.  civic  C e n t r e was  peak  issues  been  co-operative  to  a  situation  and  the  participation  Design  some  plans  policies;  shortages  new  time  freeway  to  issues.  original  employment  solutions  funding  reached  this  schemes  improvement and  these  the  The  by  find  The Urban  Centre By  and  to  action  and UDC.  of  completed  effort  the work in  a  and  more  firms,  for  point,  with  the  accomplished,  and  the  125  conditions and needs changing, the natural cycle would be to either f i n i s h or r a d i c a l l y change.  The nature of the Urban  Design Centre, i t s history, i s players, and i t s projects l e d to  a  natural,  specific  though  factors  not  and  painless,  influences  end.  that  What were  affected  the  the  Urban  Design Centre's close?  The r o l e of the Profession  The AIBC became p u b l i c l y involved with the protests of the l a t e 1960's against the freeway planning, and supported the formation interest  of  the  was  Urban Design  s i m i l a r to  that  Centre. of  the  This AIA  support  i n the  and  United  States, however, unlike the AIA, did not include funding and did not remain  strong.  Committee presently and s t i l l  The AIA Urban Planning and  represents the AIA's CDC's  supports over 60 CDC's.  Without  Design  concerns^  the backing of  the profession, the appeal of the Urban Design Centre  was  further l i m i t e d to a special type of aspirant whose i n t e r e s t tended  more  towards  social/political  t r a d i t i o n a l a r c h i t e c t u r a l pursuits.  issues  than  to  the  126  R E C Y C L I N G T H E PROFESSION 1965 - 1971  Figure 20 Recycling the Profession 1965-1971  127  The  role  The  of  late  the  sixties  opportunity community from  for  of of  The  were  with  the  and  original  Council,  and the  academic  and a p o l i t i c a l  the  mid  Centre's by  the  of  interest As  student  and  1974,  as  faculty  credit  for  and  for  student  of  the  Design  the  in  many  also  with  was  staff  had  of  control.  was  its  traditional  other was  been  made  tightened,  and  was  a  and major  funding.  aldermen won  some  position  of  activity.  Design  overshadowed  less It  was  more  Tutorial  withdrawn This  be  a  architectural  became  could  the  1978,  Urban  far  dropped.  change  By  these  the  in  with  Having  to  in  1960's  student  stopped.  Centre  a  of  aldermen,  and t h e o r e t i c a l  in  spending  brief  (TEAM)  impact  experience  interest  assistantship work  the  interest  working  a  dominance  retreat  overview  directed  University  teaching  seemed t o  issues  Party  achieved,  practical in  the  training  supervised  Urban  1970's,  kind  office.  the  University  had  x  NPA r e g a i n e d  the  time  prof essionals ^.  UDC, because  purposes  a  intervention  Movement  academic  battles,  By  Action  saw  of  government  Non-Partisan  whom  as  seventies  support  civic  The E l e c t o r ' s  perhaps the  early  academic  traditional  election  left  and  issues.  the  number  University  dominant, felt  that  carefully  models. support  with change  By for  that for  a the the  128  Personal  rewards  Students  became  many of  reasons.  school;  they  were  the  some  wanted  getting  at  some  career,  and  projects. those  basic  saw  Most,  less  profession.  reward.  Whatever  the  unprepared develop client not  the  skills  and  to  be  an  This  lack  project early  to  of  seen  this  at  is as  finish stone  the  at  between  very  notes,  led  the  evident.  special  and  p a r t i c i p a t i o n was  time  somehow noble  and as  of  to  that  of  were  difficult  The  of  chosen  they  expected  to  by  the  clients  did  but  usually  'architects'.  and  From  naivety  of  the the  and u n d e r p r i v i l e g e d  better  cause.  real  amount  frustration.  poor  from  on  their  staff,  the  up  situation  is  be  idealism The  people  skills.  student  away  certain  It  build  an a r c h i t e c t u r a l  discovered  UDC r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s  and  a  than  disenchanted  improve the  come  these  often  in  practise  same  to  for  routine  work  school  real  involved.  the  design  totally  with  often  work  and  Centre  regular  were  to  would  they  experience  reports  days  citizen  the  wanted  the  wanted  to  work  Design  some  some  to  'expert'  differentiate  drawing  through  reasons,  from  stepping  however,  for  referred  were  wanted  With  personal  more  a  Urban  break  wanted  as  fortunate,  the  school;  and it  some  a  skills;  'system'  school;  with  Some w a n t e d  architectural with  involved  and  the  Imagine  the  notion  of  feelings  129  of  discouragement  these  were  as  group.  This  was  kind  of  consuming, almost of  a  often  always  always not  be  go  Some the  While were  To  often  not  in  than  felt  always  certain  commitment  Rewards nature.  Skeena  If  the  they  UDC o r was  had in  a  frightening,  and  to  include is  a  this  projects  stages.  been  project.  progress  student  any  time  there  as  as  work  then  terms  that  was  had  made,  after  those feeling  personal could  not  often  did  In  addition,  had l e f t  the UDC.  i l l - p r e p a r e d both  more  beneficial,  maintain Centre,  is  a  a  clear  Often  this  and p e r s o n a l i t y of  practise  r e q u i r e d and by  the  point.  The i n t e r e s t  became  more  Student  the  organizing  planning  found  manipulative  somewhat  concrete  that  ideals.  survival  and  was  traditional the  personal  for  office. rewards  experienced.  successfully Design  and  it  Unfortunately,  the  the  when  with  being  suffer.  experience  philosophies  the  not  continued  within  the  Urban  to  is  measured  work  action  altruistic  will  students  case  frustrating,  and  further  projects  the  underfinanced.  progress  satisfaction  betrayal,  political  community  personal  that  even  clients  client  This  and  group.  the while  vision nature  vision a  few  The  and energy  complex,  involvement  of  such  of  UDC  of  as  is  the  a  and  commitment  w r a p p e d up w i t h who  UDC c l e a r l y  become is  founding  struggled  providing  of  objectives  involves  people  the  that  a  a  the  key  to  case  in  participants  for source  direction. of  semi-  130  experienced  personpower,  continuity.  Consistent  required  to  allow  function  remain  the  does  not  clarity  of  leaders  lend  itself  purpose  to  change  and  to  the  direction  and  yet  have  is the  consistent.  Lifespan  Although group, the  the  it  was  time  Funding and  a  as key  on  entrepreneurial  strong energy the more  however,  enough  to  and impetus  other  and  can  not  the  goal  three  the  education fragile  direct  an  be  be  for  all  are  stopped.  on  that  make  or  CDC's more  government the  change,  that  and  focusing  if  parties  more  CMHC,  governments  was  need then  change. involved  less  of  lifespan.  p r o v i d e d by  as  less  seem  to  conditions  evolve,  relying  proactive  finite  evolutionary  or  CDC m o d e l  required a  partners,  at  to  a  and is the  If  on  become  resolved,  an  forced.  institution, alliance  and  funding  there  as  specific  f u n d i n g was  would  diverse,  Maintaining by  It  will  to  continued  hand c i r c u m s t a n c e s  complex  evolution  .  -1  itself  natural,  this  directions  monies -  saw  changed,  changed,  other  a  Core  needs  in  foundation  had  issue.  agendas places,  Center  a reaction  such  perceived  political  Design  f o r m e d as  and  was  as  Urban  and  best.  the  commitment  profession,  the Each  the  community. had  its  to  common  professional This  own  a  was  agenda  a and  131  reason  f o r existence.  The nature  of CDC advocacy  required a great deal of time and e f f o r t .  work  When the momentum  of work generated began to overshadow the expectations and aims of the separate parts, the parts withdrew support.  At  t h i s point, a s e l f - s u s t a i n i n g e n t i t y would have to have been formed or a natural death would occur.  The  Urban  Design  environment should  Center  believed  that  planning  of the  involve each member of the society.  It  provided a vehicle to harness young idealism and enthusiasm in  the work  of combatting  urban  problems.  I t brought  together the University, the Profession and the community t o work toward common goals. minded  I t was a way f o r the s o c i a l l y  a r c h i t e c t to practise advocacy  architecture.  The  demise of the UDC cannot be seen as a f a i l u r e of the model to follow i t s p r i n c i p l e s and f u l f i l l  i t s objectives but as  an i n d i c a t i o n that the o r i g i n a l objectives were met.  The  three  basic  important today. housing  p r i n c i p l e s found i n t h i s  study are s t i l l  Problems of the urban poor e s p e c i a l l y i n  inadequacy,  of participatory planning,  professional a r c h i t e c t u r a l and planning  of making  services available  to those who are disenfranchized through the lack of those services have not been eliminated. for  the profession,  Perhaps an opportunity  the university and community  to work  together i n a way s i m i l a r to that of the Urban Design Centre of the 1970's w i l l be part of the 1990's.  132  1.  Based on the Guidelines for Community Design Centers, The American Institute of Architects Task Force on  Equal Opportunities, A p r i l 1969 and the American I n s t i t u t e of Architect's b u l l e t i n , A Bulletin Published  by the American Institute of Architects Advocacy Planning and Community Design  Concerning the Centers, circa  1969. Copies found i n the UDC f i l e s , City of Vancouver Archives. Much of the UDC's o r i g i n a l funding proposal was taken d i r e c t l y from these papers.  2.  An example of t h i s can be seen i n the t r a d i t i o n a l v i l l a g e organization and building on the i s l a n d of B a l i . The male comes of age at the b i r t h of his f i r s t c h i l d . One of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of t h i s 'coming of age' i s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the d i r e c t i o n and the continuation of the t r a d i t i o n s community. This includes design t r a d i t i o n s , v i l l a g e planning and changes to do with the modern society. This r i g h t / r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was passed on from generation to generation, along with strong t r a d i t i o n s guiding i t s process, form and function. - interview, Oct 1987, with Robi Sularto, architect i n B a l i .  3.  For example, charging for copies of studies on which decisions are based. If one i s poor, t h i s i s an obstacle.  4.  Barker 1970, op. c i t .  5.  Dean 1989, op. c i t .  6.  Hayden, D., from a lecture given at the Chinese Academy of Building Research, Beijing, China., 1980. Social  Responsibility and the American Landscape: Notes on Advocacy Architecture, Advocacy Planning, Environmental Psychology , Environmental History and Environmental Design  7.  Reeck, D a r r e l l , Ethics for the Professions, Augsburg Press, Minneapolis, 1982. See Hughes, E.C., Men and Their Work, The Free Press, Glencoe, 111., 1958, for a broader discussion of the professions.  8.  In The American Institute of Architects Policy Regarding Community Design Centers, Appendix B, taken from the The Association for Community Design, Inc., Operations and Policy Manual, 1989, states that:  133 'The AIA supports Community Design Centers and encourages members and components to do community service using Community Design Centers as a v e h i c l e . 'The AIA's formal involvement and policy on community design centers was an outgrowth of the 1969 convention resolution supporting CDC's and establishing the Task Force on Professional Responsibility to Society. One of the task force programs approved and funded by the AIA Board was the program to a s s i s t CDC's and encourage creation of new Centers. 9.  From an interview with Henry Elder,  10.  Campbell and Moore d i d a j o i n t graduating thesis, i n A p r i l of 1972, c a l l e d , Designing For Themselves, which involved two groups of high school students designing t h e i r own schools.  11.  ACD Operations  12.  Some TEAM legacies include the Granville Mall and t r a f f i c barriers i n the West End, and the False Creek south housing project i n an e f f o r t to 'scrap the o l d NPA p o l i c y of growth for growth's sake which l e d to black towers and concrete ... to development that must enhance our natural setting' -Morley, Alan, Vancouver From Milltown to Metropolis, Mitchell Press, Vancouver, 1974 p. 246  13.  Comerio, Mary, 'Community Design:  and Policy  Manual, op. c i t .  Idealism and  Entrepreneurship', Journal of Architectural Planning Research, 1984 V o l . 1  and  APPENDIX ONE COMMUNITY DESIGN CENTER PROJECTS (October, 1969 t o p r e s e n t ) CENTRAL CITY 1.  H o s p i t a l i t y House, Remodeling f o r expanded f a c i l i t i e s . D e s i g n , w o r k i n g drawings and c o n t r a c t n e g o t i a t i o n s . Completed.  CHINATOWN 1.  I n t e r n a t i o n a l Hotel. Technical assistance to United F i l i p i n o A s s o c i a t i o n f o r r e n o v a t i o n and management of hotel. Completed.  2.  Proposed s i t e s f o r m i n i - p a r k program t o submit t o R e c r e a t i o n and Park Department.  3.  A s i a n Housing Area Development. A n o n - p r o f i t h o u s i n g development c o r p o r a t i o n . AHAD has s e l e c t e d a t t o r n e y , h o u s i n g c o n s u l t a n t and a r c h i t e c t f o r t h e i r f i r s t S e c t i o n 236 p r o j e c t , r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f a 4 2 - u n i t apartment house. On-going.  4.  C h i l d Care C e n t e r . completed.  5.  F u r n i t u r e p r o t o t y p e s d e s i g n e d and b u i l t . On d i s p l a y a t Chinatown F i e l d O f f i c e . I n s t r u c t i o n handbook on how t o make f u r n i t u r e w i l l be ready f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n i n December.  6.  U t i l i z i n g the Neighborhood Summer Youth Program, s e l e c t e d f u r n i t u r e d e s i g n s were used by the Chinatown-North Beach Youth C o u n c i l t o make f u r n i t u r e f o r the C o u n c i l ' s use.  7.  Open space d e s i g n f o r P i n g Yuen P u b l i c Housing p r o j e c t . C o o r d i n a t e d a c t i v i t i e s w i t h Chinatown-North Beach Youth C o u n c i l , B e t t e r P a r k s and R e c r e a t i o n Committee i n C h i n a town, and t h e San F r a n c i s c o Housing A u t h o r i t y .  8.  Redesign of Chinese Playground f o r B e t t e r Parks R e c r e a t i o n Committee i n Chinatown.  9.  A s s i s t i n g t e n a n t s who have been d i s p l a c e d by Code E n f o r c e ment t o f i n d new h o u s i n g ; d i s s e m i n a t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n to t e n a n t s on C i t y ' s r e n t supplement program.  10.  F e a s i b i l i t y study and  cost  S.F.  estimates  and  CCDC, t o g e t h e r w i t h c l i e n t s of S e l f - H e l p f o r the E l d e r l y , are w o r k i n g w i t h f a m i l y a s s o c i a t i o n s i n Chinatown t o s e c u r e s u i t a b l e u n i t s f o r the San F r a n c i s c o Housing A u t h o r i t y ' s S e c t i o n 23 program.  -1-  134  HAIGHT-FILLMORE 1.  Housing Survey f o r H a r r i e t Project.  Tubman Community E d u c a t i o n a l  2.  Duboce P a r k . facilities.  3.  Sacred Heart C h u r c h . F e a s i b i l i t y study f o r r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of 6 apartment u n i t s f o r purchase by t e n a n t s .  Worked w i t h r e s i d e n t s  to improve park  HUNTERS POINT 1.  T r a i n i n g program f o r c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Model C i t i e s program.  MISSION DISTRICT 1.  Proposed s i t e s f o r m i n i - p a r k program f o r s u b m i s s i o n to S.F. R e c r e a t i o n and Park Department.  2.  O f f i c e renovations  3.  S t r e e t improvements f o r Utah B l o c k A s s o c i a t i o n .  4.  Model C i t i e s ' P l a n n i n g T r a i n i n g Workshops f o r the M i s s i o n C o a l i t i o n ' s P l a n n i n g Committee.  5.  K i t c h e n remodeling f o r C e n t r o L a t i n o b r e a k f a s t program.  f o r Horizons Unlimited.  SOUTH OF MARKET 1.  A s s i s t e d Ad Hoc community c o a l i t i o n i n South of Market a r e a to f i n d m i n i - p a r k s i t e s .  2.  Housing and tenant s u r v e y s for T.O.O.R.  3.  Long-range neighborhood p l a n n i n g f o r South of Market community g r o u p s .  4.  A p l a n f o r 2,000 u n i t s o f new and r e h a b i l i t a t e d and community f a c i l i t i e s f o r T . O . O . R .  i n Yerba Buena p r o j e c t  WESTERN ADDITION 1.  D e s i g n and p l a n of o f f i c e s f o r  2.  D e s i g n and p l a n of o f f i c e s  W.A.P.A.C.  f o r W.A.Y.  area  housing  WESTERN ADDITION (CONT'D) 3.  Remodeling  f o r Watoto Wausi N u r s e r y  School.  4.  P l a n n i n g Conmunlty D e v e l o p m e n t ' T r a i n i n g P r o g r a m  5.  Audrey L . Smith Day Care C e n t e r . C o n s u l t i n g w i t h c l i e n t c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s f o r new day c a r e c e n t e r .  for-W.A-P.ACC. on  GENERAL 1.  S t a f f p a r t i c i p a t i o n on The C i t i z e n ' s the Workable Program.  2.  A.I.A.  3.  F o r t Funston Re-Use  4.  F e a s i b i l i t y study f o r r e n o v a t i o n i n Golden Gate P a r k .  5.  Housing development & f e a s i b i l i t y State Married Students.  6.  Designed and c o n s t r u c t e d on F o u n d a t i o n s , Inc.  Housing Task F o r c e  for  Task F o r c e . (recreation)  for P a c i f i c Recreation, of Senior C i t i z e n ' s  study  Inc.  Center  f o r San F r a n c i s c o  d i s p l a y p a n e l s and decor f o r C o u n c i l  RESEARCH 1.  South o f Market Area P l a n n i n g B u l l e t i n .  2.  H a i g h t - A s h b u r y F i e l d Team.  3.  Census Data G a t h e r i n g .  4.  Rent S u r t a x P r o p o s a l f o r f u n d i n g low c o s t  5.  Survey o f P u b l i c Housing i n San F r a n c i s c o .  housing.  137  APPENDIX TWO  TRANSPORTATION Downtown Vancouver Urbanarium  1925 Process  Town Planning Commission established  1927 Plan  The Bartholemew Plan adopted by Vancouver City Council in 1928 First look at consolidation of traffic onto major arterial routes. Lions t Gate Bridge constructed.  onstruction 1946 Report  Bartholemew, Hasland & Associates A Preliminary Report on Transit  1947 Plan  The Bartholemew Plan revisited  1951 Report  Bland and Spence Sales Report: recommendations to establish Planning Department  1952 Report  Technical Committee for Metropolitan Highway Planning established W . A . C . Bennett Govtt. elected. Hon. Phillip A. Gaglardi becomes Highways Minister First Narrows Bridge Company states that it is prepared to build a second bridge parallel to the existing Lions Gate Bridge. Cost $12 million.  September:  1953  1954 July: November: Report  1955 June:  Committee on Burrard Inlet Crossings established with representation from Citj- of Vancouver, District of North Van., District of West Van., First Narrows Bridge Co. (owners of Lions Gate Bridge) & the Burrard Inlet Bridge & Tunnel Company (Second Narrows railroad combination bridge) Planning Department established Prov, Government announces that it is likely that the government, not the Bridge Co. will build the new bridge. Cost $20 million. Report on the Burrard Inlet Crossings Municipal: A report on Burrard Inle Crossings: Technical Committee of Committee on Burrard Inlet Crossings: recommended building of 2 new bridges by 1976 A Study on Highway Planning for Metropolitan Vancouver, March; by the Technical Committee for M H P C Premier Bennett announces that a bridge at  Downtown Vancouver Jrbanarium Second Narrows will be built before a second one at First Narrows. West Vancouverites continue to push for a new bridge at First Narrows. Fraser River Crossings Study, by Tech. Com. for Metropolitan Highway Planning, commissioned by the B.C. Minister of Public Works, the City of Vancouver, North and West Vancouver, and Burnaby.  Study  1956  Construction Design Study  1958  Province purchases Lions Gate Bridge The Oak Street Bridge Province hires Swan Wooster to design a new four lane bridge at Second Narrows. Committee for Metropolitan Highway Planning Surveys commissions: A Study on Highway Planning for the Metropolitan Area of the Lower Mainland of B.C. Deas Island Tunnel Public meeting in West Vancouver. Phil Gaglardi promises to recommend immediate start on Engineering plan for new First Narrows Crossing. A Study on Highway Planning Part 2, for the Metropolitan Freeways Committee with Rapid Transit, prepared by the Technical Committee. Recommended more lanes at First Narrows and was against a waterfront route for G B D distributor for outer route. The Second Narrows Bridge was constructed The Sutton-Brown Plan Freeways with Rapid Transit - A Study on Highway Planning, final report of seven submitted from '58-59 ttransportation deficiencies could only be solved efficiently and practically by construction an entirely separate system of high speed facilities called freeways. This was the basis for studies to 1972  Study  1959  Plans Study  Plan Report  Rapid Transit Plan Report prepared by the Foundation of Canadian Engineering Corporation Ltd. (FENCO) for special committee appointed by the Premier stated that the New First Narrows Crossing would be needed in the near future. Preference given to Brockton Point location. Ten days after F E N C O report on new First Narrows Crossing stating a $40 million cost, Bennett and Gaglardi says that the new bridge is not needed until 1968.  1960  Upper Levels Highway through the North Shore constructed.  139  rRANSPORTATION  Downtown Vancouver Qrbanarium Freeway to the United States Border 1961  Annacis Island Bridge  1962  Port Mann Bridge W.E.P. Duncan & BC Research Council is commissioned by B.C. Dept. of Highways for study, Rail Rapid Transit for Metropolitan Vancouver. Study tended to reinforce the freeway concept because it did not see rail as attracting more passenger that buses & therefore would still require freeways. Projected that there was no need until 1980. Idea was not looked at again until 1970ts. FENCO proposes that a new bridge could be built with privatefinancingfor $50 million to be recovered through a toll. Province was not interested.  December:  1963 January:  Proposal  1964  Burnaby Freeway Phil Gaglardi announces that the province will pay one third of the cost on new highways and bridge in the Vancouver Metro Area. Larry Smith & Associate, Real Estate Consultants, Seattle, Wash.: An Economic Analysis for Central Business District Redevelopment Phase One Preliminary Report, for the City of Vancouver, recommended freeways through GBD to encourage revitalization & growth. Christiani & Nielson of Canada: Burrard Inlet Tunnel Crossing: a Comprehensive Proposal, for handling traffic across the Burrard Inlet. Wilbur Smith - Standford Research Institute  lan; Plan  Report  Review of Transportation Plans commissioned by the Dept. of Highways & City of Vancouver, reinforced the need for freeways. First plan in many years to be presented to public. Public meeting in Q.E. Theatre. Redevelopment In Downtown Vancouver, Report No. 5, July 1964.  1965  January; Phillips, Barrett and Partners and Wilbur mith and Associated, Study Sea Island Access Study Plan Downtown core Plan: Project 200 favoured Burrard inlet waterfront route for freeway. Report Provincial Gov't, commissions FENCO to prepare report on best location, size, & type of crossing for First Narrows.  TRANSPORTATION Downtown Vancouver Urbanarium  1966 Report  July: Report  January 17:  1967 January 17:  140 Trans-Canada Highway route through metropolitan Vancouver and Burrard Inlet Crossing Bennett kills latest Third Crossing Scheme as too expensive, cost $109 million (after much political wrangling) Burrard Inlet Crossing Evaluation, June; Final report from F E N C O recommending 8 lane bridge at Brockton Point connecting to a G B D waterfront expressway. N.D. Lea report to the Minister of Highways evaluation of 15 alternative schemes. Review and Evaluation of Alternative Schemes for the First Narrows Crossing. Board of Administration, City of Vancouver Report to Chairman and Members of Civic Development Committee, Georgia Viaduct Replacement, A Recommendation.  Joint Technical Committee of the Intermunicipal Committee, Report on Burrard Inlet Crossing, review of F E N C O and N . D . Lea Reports considered two crossing schemes: 1. A 6 lane bridge parallel to the Lions Gate Bridge at Prospect Point 2. A 6 lane tunnel at Brockton Point: recommended the tunnel with a waterfront distributor bypass. More political wrangling between the municipal, provincial and federal governments over who should pay how much for a third crossing. Federal Government accepted financial responsibility for Burrard Inlet Crossing. Authority delegated to National Harbours Board. October: Vancouver Transportation Study, submitted to City Council during a public hearing. Recommendations adopted by City Council including a freeway link through Chinatown and Gastown. Second Public information meeting on November: Vancouver Transit Studies. More than 27 organizations submitted formal briefs. Most opposed the freeway alignment through Gastown & Chinatown. Transport conclusions accepted in principle. Vancouver Transportation Studies Public December 7: Meeting at Eric Hamber Secondary School. 800 seat hall Filled to capacity. Vancouver Tomorrow Group formed to discuss citizen participation in urban issues.  PRANSPORTATION Downtown Vancouver Jrbanarium  1966 - 1970 1968 January:  Study  February:  March; Summer: June:  June: August:  1969  141 San Francisco Freeway Revolt halts construction of Embarcadero Freeway.  City Council rescinded its motion to adopt the V T S recommendations and authorized further study, see quote from Board of Administration ????? Parsons, Brinkerhoff, Quade and Douglas, Vancouver Transportation Study, commissioned in August 1966: to integrate the planned Georgia Viaduct replacement with the proposed freeway system and to connect this up with the Burrard Inlet Crossing at Brockton Point. T E A M formed (The Electors Action Movement) ten months before the next civic election. Many of the people actively involved in opposing the freeway join T E A M and in December Walter Hardwick is elected to City Council. Vancouver Tomorrow Conference held. Vancouver Tomorrow joins with others to form Citizens Council on Civic Development. N.D. Lea for B.C. Dept. of Highways report on the Transcanada Highway Cassiar Street Link, concluded that a properly designed freeway solution which could connect to the Vancouver Freeway system was the best alternative. Phillips, Barrett, Hillier, Jones and Partners, Georgia Viaduct Replacement Preliminary Engineering Report Vancouver Part 1; The Issues (???????) N.D. Lea: An Appraisal for the City of Vancouver of Transportation Systems & Routes connecting the Brockton Point Crossing to Provincial Highways 401 & 499. Conclusions accepted in principle by Vancouver Cit)' Council. Project 200: Vancouver Waterfront Development, Grosvenor Liang National Harbours Board commissioned the consortium of Swan Wooster, G B A to act as consultant for preparing engineering designs for the third crossing. Transportation and Planning in the City Core Area, Feb., 1969 Citizens Council of Civic Development (CCDC, formerly the Vancouver Tomorrow Group); Burrard Inlet Crossing Vancouver Approaches Brief presented Vancouver City Council. Swan Wooster - G B A reports submitted to municipalities, Notes on the Burrard Inlet  RANSPORTATION Downtown Vancouver Jrbanarium  n  142 Crossing Project, City of Vancouver Approache Final Examination of Alternative Alignments, March 21 & North Shore Approaches, Final Examination of Alternatives, February Swann Wooster Eng. Co., Burrard Inlet Crossing Project: City of Vancouver Approaches, summary of the final examination of alternative alignments presented to CityCouncil.  1970  Swan Wooster Eng. Co., The Burrard Inlet Crossing - A report to the National Harbours Board  March:  N D Lea & Associated, Transit Travel in the Year 2000 in Metro Vancouver, for the BC Dept. of Highways: called for both rapid transit & development of the Freeway Network DeLeuw Cather of Canada, Greater Vancouver Area Rapid Transit Study for Greater Vancouver Regional District. Board of Trade Transportation think-in entitled "How Will Vancouver Move?".  September: October: 1971 February:  December:  1972 January:  March 15: March 17: September:  proposals for widening Point Grey Road turned down by Vancouver City Council. C C C D sponsored a citizens forum called "The Case for and against that Third Crossing of Burrard Inlet." Vancouver City Council votes 6 to 5 for Vancouver participation in the Third Crossing. Also voted not to hold plebiscite on the issue and not to hold a public meeting hearing despite formal requests by 16 community groups and organizations. Knight Street Bridge New Georgia Viaduct opened Citizens Co-ordinating Committee for Public Transit sponsored public meetings at the Q E Playhouse to discuss the issue of plebiscite on the Third Crossing. 800 seat theatre filled to capacity Public Hearing in Vancouver on Third Crossing at Eric Hamber School. 60 briefs submitted, most against Third Crossing. Special Council Meeting on the Third Crossing N D P elected and withdraws from $200 mil.Third Crossing Project W . H . McCreerj'; A Rapid Transit Crossing for Burrard Inlet S. Muilreheim (This writing is totally  TRANSPORTATION Downtown Vancouver Urbanarium  143 illegible), Feasibility Study of Ferry Mass Transit Across Burrard Inlet. T . E . Parkinson: A Preliminary Study of Light Rapid Transit in Vancouver, B.C. Wilbur Smith & Associates: Downtown Transit Concepts  1973  G V R D Transportation and Transmission of Diseases Committee: Transportation for a Livable Region: Report of the Committee  1974  Waterfront Planning Study: Stage 1,2,3,4 Warnett Kennedy, Vancouver Tomorrow A Search for Greatness Arthur Erickson Architects; Granville Waterfront Interchange: a Planning Study for • the downtown Vancouver transportation terminal BC Bureau of Transit Services: Draft memorandum on transit service planning to compliment the downtown peninsula plans of the City of Vancouver.  1976  Vancouver Engineering Department Report on Transportation G V R D Rapid Transit Projectl979-81 Report  1978 1980  G V R D Transit Staff Group: Greater Vancouver Transit System: Directions for transit in the 19801s a Conceptual Plan  1981  Marathon Realty Co., Waterfront Center, Vancouver Urban Transit Monstrosity (Your writing is the shits): Proposal for the integrated committee transit system for the lower mainland. Vancouver City Manager: An overall Planning context for ALRT development Urban Transit Authority: Advances light Rapid Transit: the system for Greater Vancouver Automated Light Rapid Transit and Regional Transportation in the GVRD 1986-1976 Seabus  1983  197? 1984  BC Place Development Plan Cambie Street Bridge  1985  Pacific Blvd completed for Expo A L R T constructed for Expo 86  1986  Fraser Bridge completed  Burrard Street Viaduct and waterfront road Alberni Street connector Cassiar Street Connector Main St. Viaduct  145 APPENDIX THREE UDC CHRONOLOGY 1967 Summer -  Vancouver Inner-City Service Project (VISP) begins - 'the summer of action'.  1969 Winter -  Dino Rapanos attends conference on Community Design Centers i n Berkeley. Decides to i n i t i a t e one i n Vancouver.  1970 Spring -  Vancouver Inner-city Service Project applies to Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) to fund a Community Design Centre.  1970 Summer -  Ron Yuen hired by the Vancouver Inner City Service Project to add a design component to the services offered.  1970 F a l l  Urban Design Centre applies for funding and sets up o f f i c e at 1895 Venables St. Ron Yuen designated as Director, and Tony Green as Assistant Director. This i s f i n a l i z e d when funding i s secured.  -  F i r s t Urban Design Centre School of Architecture t u t o r i a l offered led by Prof. Dino Rapanos with Ron Yuen as teaching assistant and Tom Moore as the f i r s t student. 1970 Dec.  -  Agreement signed for $50,000, representing 2 years UDC funding from CMHC, under Section 32 (g) of the National Housing Act 1954.  1971 Feb.  -  Urban Design Centre/AIBC C l i n i c booth at the Home Show  1971 Spring -  7 t u t o r i a l students New Living Development, non p r o f i t housing society organized.  1971 Summer -  4 students hired  1971 F a l l  4 t u t o r i a l students  -  1972 Spring -  6 t u t o r i a l students and 8 people funded by the Local I n i t i a t i v e s Program (LIP)  1972 Summer July -  8 LIP UDC becomes a non-profit society.  1972 Sept  Vancouver Inner City Service Project stops  -  146  UDC  moves  UDC  workshop  3  to  1111  students,  UDC  to  Commercial  examine  goals  1 summer w o r k e r ,  secures  interim  core  Drive. and and  future. 8  LIP  funding.  1973  Spring  -  1973  July  -  Tony G r e e n becomes D i r e c t o r . Green had been w i t h t h e UDC a s A s s i s t a n t D i r e c t o r s i n c e J a n 71 a n d r e s i g n s J a n 7 4 .  197 3 F a l l  -  Urban Design T u t o r i a l o f f e r e d with Donald G u t s t e i n as f c u l t y f o r t h e S c h o o l of Architecture. 6 students participate.  1973  Oct  -  Funding months  1973  Dec  -  Ron Yuen  1974  Jan  -  Jim LeMaistre had been w i t h  received  and  from  Tony  CMHC $ 1 5 , 3 0 0  Green  resign  from  becomes D i r e c t o r . t h e UDC s i n c e t h e  L a s t School of A r c h i t e c t u r e offered. 2 students.  UDC  for  the  6  UDC.  LeMaistre fall '71. tutorial  1974  Sept  -  C o r e f u n d i n g r e c e i v e d f r o m CMHC $ 2 4 , 0 0 0 u n d e r t h e P a r t V , S e c t i o n 36(g) Community R e s o u r c e Organization Program.  1975  Sept  -  CMHC c o r e f u n d i n g s t o p s . s u f f i c i e n t f o l l o w i n g the model.  1976  Oct  UDC  office  closes.  UDC b e c o m e s s e l f worker's co-op  147 APPENDIX FOUR UDC PROJECTS 1970 Skeena Terrace Community Centre F i r s t Project Approached by one i n d i v i d u a l . Had to organize c l i e n t group. Ran into representative problems. F i r s t project using patterns to participatory design to develop program and physical needs. Project became p o l i t i c a l as i t s o l i d i f i e d and eventually was taken over by the c i v i c government departments. UDC took on a f a c i l i t a t i n g role. Organized and led meetings, d i d some small spin-off projects, 'paint-ins', o f f i c e plans, furniture design, f u n - f a i r . I n t e r - I n s t i t u t i o n a l Policy Simulator - HPS Computer model of Vancouver. Made contact as i t was f e l t i t would effect Local Planning. No p a r t i c u l a r project came from t h i s . Inner-City Hostel 199 6th Ave. & 2196 Columbia Design Drawings 1971  Crises Centre Program for requirements f o r larger premises. Prepared program and design drawings f o r at least 2 locations but property was never secured. Spin-off of o f f i c e design. Problem with c l i e n t not taking services of UDC seriously and made continual change requests. K i t s i l a n o Info Centre K i t s Area Council Neighbourhood Services. Fix up facade to make centre more i d e n t i f i a b l e . Inner-City Services Project - new o f f i c e Offices of UDC and other VISP groups. Preparation f o r reorganization and change of VISP project to a c o l l e c t i o n of independent services. This p a r t i c i p a t e d UDC move to 1111 Commercial St.  148  RayCam R e c r e a t i o n Community C e n t r e Programming, P a r t i c i p a t o r y design leading to Schematic Design drawings. P r o j e c t e v e n t u a l l y b u i l t and i s s t i l l i n use today. Richmond P l a y l o t D e s i g n / b u i l d of outdoor play area. Participatory d e s i g n p r o c e s s w i t h o r g a n i z e d community. A c t i v i t y Centre S t r i d e Ave. Public Housing C l a r i f i e d Program and o r g a n i z a t i o n . No w o r k was r e q u i r e d f r o m U D C .  architectural  ATTACK: P r o j e c t R e a c h i n g Out A d v e n t u r e P l a y l o t s i t e p r e p a r a t i o n and p r e l i m i n a r y d e s i g n L i t t l e Mountain P l a y l o t D e s i g n / b u i l d of p l a y l o t . paid to b u i l d this. Deep  50  teens  were  -  advise  organized  on  and  C o v e - d e v e l o p m e n t was p u t o n h o l d w h i l e t h e c o m m u n i t y d e c i d e d what i t w a n t e d . A n i m a g e f i l e was developed. Tom M o o r e e v e n t u a l l y d i d some d e s i g n / b u i l d w o r k i n t h e area  Home Show B o o t h Booth t o o f f e r f r e e advice c o n c e r n i n g b u i l d i n g and planning. Very successful, o v e r 110 p e o p l e s e r v e d f o l l o w up on some. P r e c i p i t a t e d L a y m a n ' s Home Improvement G u i d e . Wilson  House  -  with  renovation  C a p i l a n o Stadium - G a l l e r y extension of stadium. UDC w a s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r e n s u r i n g c o m m u n i t y n e e d s w e r e met a n d t o a d v i s e on s p a c e m o d i f i c a t i o n s necessary; a c t e d as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e to the various o f f i c i a l funding parties. P r o j e c t not c o m p l e t e d due t o l a c k o f funds. Strathcona Kitchener Metro  Property School  Council  Playlot  Office  Vancouver Indian Renovations parade. Community  Owners  -  & Tenants  -  -  design  renovation  C e n t r e 1855 to Centre.  Law O f f i c e s  Association  -  Vine St. Spin-off  furniture  -  design  L i t t l e Mountain Housing Renovations within housing project.  -  Float  Design  and o f f i c e  renovations  of  for  layout. units  149  Parker Ave. Daycare - assess s u i t a b i l i t y of l o c a t i o n , costs to r e n o v a t e , p r e p a r a t i o n of B u i l d i n g Permit and Development P e r m i t . C l i e n t chose another l o c a t i o n . West  E n d S o c i a l P r o g r a m - UDC a t t e n d e d m e e t i n g s a n d p r o v i d e d a facilitator's role. Helped p r e p a r e a b r i e f on a h o t e l expansion i n the area. Became i n v o l v e d when a s k e d t o a s s i s t i n i m p l e m e n t i n g recommendations as a r e s u l t of the questionnaire.  Vancouver Resource Society for the Disabled - Handicapped Housing Group. H e l p e d o r g a n i z e t h e g r o u p home m o d e l for handicapped l i v i n g . Developed p a r t i c i p a t o r y design game. O r i g i n a l c l i e n t not helped, but b a s i c concepts f o r g r o u p homes d e v e l o p e d . Indian  Offices  Building,  Merritt,  B.C. -  renovation  1972 Coast  F l o a t i n g Homes A s s o c i a t i o n & F a l s e C r e e k C o m m u n i t y Marina - planning project, promote l e g i t i m a c y in liveaboards. Produced b o o k l e t of p l a n of marina and i n f o r m a t i o n about l i v e a b o a r d s f o r association.  F r a s e r v i e w K i l l a r n e y P l a y g r o u n d Hum P a r k - R e d e s i g n o f p l a y g r o u n d w i t h o r g a n i z a t i o n o f m o t h e r s who w e r e n o t s a t i s f i e d with the proposed c i t y design. Brock  Elementary School  Playlot  -  design  Manuel House R e n o v a t i o n - wanted r e n o v a t i o n . Ignored zoning considerations. T y p i c a l r e c i p i e n t o f L a y m a n ' s Home Improvement G u i d e . MPA B o a r d i n g H o u s e  Renovations  Grandview Elementary Learning Drawings p r o v i d e d .  -  several  Assistance  locations  & designs  Centre Play  Tower  New L i v i n g D e v e l o p m e n t C o m p a n y - i n c o r p o r a t e d A u g u s t 1972. Jim and Nancy L e M a i s t r e . S e t up t o do work f o r pay i n h o u s i n g d e v e l o p m e n t . Was r e f u s e d c o r e CMHC f u n d i n g . F o r m e d w i t h s t a f f o f UDC a n d a p p l i e d f o r a n d g o t some c o - o p a n d p l a n n i n g j o b s . T h i s company w o u l d have e v o l v e d i n t o t h e present h o u s i n g r e s o u r c e groups i f i t had c o n t i n u e d .  150  F a i r v i e w C o - o p L a n d Schemes - S e v e r a l n e i g h b o u r h o o d i s s u e s were d e a l t w i t h . New L i v i n g D e v e l o p m e n t C o m p a n y w a s involved i n organizing to develop housing alternatives f o r low-income p e o p l e , and to develop the neighbourhood plan in general. I n i t i a l problem d e f i n i n g and proposals. A m a j o r r e p o r t was d o n e r e s u l t i n g i n i n t e r i m c o n t r o l s on r e d e v e l o p m e n t u n t i l an e c o n o m i c f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d y c o u l d be c o m p l e t e d . Local Area Planning applied for. Rupert Park Playground - adventure playground designed n e i g h b o u r h o o d committee and c h i l d r e n from B e g b i e School.  with  V i l l a g e S t . Sacrement - f e a s i b i l i t y study f o r the F e d e r a t i o n de F r a n c o - C o l o m b i e n s f o r a ' v i l l a g e ' i n a l o c a t i o n which i s the focus for Vancouver's Francophone population. Vancouver and D i s t r i c t P u b l i c Housing Tenants A s s o c i a t i o n office renovation. P r o j e c t n o t c o m p l e t e d due t o l a c k of funds. Mount  Pleasant Info estimates.  Centre  -  Floor  plan  and rough  cost  Hastings Townsite Residents' Association - Technical report prepared for Hastings Townsite Resident's Association t o oppose an a p p l i c a t i o n by W e s t r o c I n d u s t r i e s air emissions. P e r m i t was g r a n t e d d e s p i t e r e p o r t a n d resident opposition. G r e a t e r Vancouver R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t P l a n n i n g Department a d v i s o r y and a n a l y s i s on d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n o f l o c a l government (the Ward System) and L o c a l A r e a P l a n n i n g . David Robinson L a y m a n ' s Home I m p r o v e m e n t G u i d e - T h r e e p a r t b o o k l e t for distribution. P e r m i t s , Codes and C i t y H a l l ; Cost of Improvements; Cost of Borrowing. CMHC f u n d i n g f o r printing. Excellent product. Project Contact electrical Third  - programming, p l a n , layout.  basic  furniture  and  Crossing Burrard Inlet - opposition to the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a t h i r d c r o s s i n g of B u r r a r d I n l e t and g e n e r a l freeway p l a n s . Newspaper a r t i c l e s , briefs, cost a n a l y s i s , counter proposals, p u b l i c meeting presentations. To d a t e , freeway system s t i l l not completed.  B u r r a r d Food C o - o p - S h e l v i n g d e s i g n and f l o o r Drawings to s a t i s f y Health Inspector.  plan.  Downtown C o m m u n i t y H e a l t h C l i n i c - D e t o x c e n t r e . Defining of g o a l s , programming, schematics and b u i l d i n g c o s t estimates, ending i n a f e a s i b i l i t y study. SPEC  -  C a n a d i a n S c i e n t i f i c and E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n t r o l office space p r o p o s a l and d i s p l a y mobile unit  Community Brant  Radio  -  design  of  sound  Society  room  V i l l a s Tenants A s s o c i a t i o n - i n v e s t i g a t e and s y s t e m s . Prepared report  structural  Richmond D r o p - I n C e n t r e - Richmond U n i t e d Church p r o p o s a l for decoration 'peoples purple steeple centre' UBC A c a d i a  Park  Daycare  Grandview  United  Vancouver  Inner  Manual  House  -  Church City  -  design  Youth  Service  drawings  for  Hostel Project  house  -  offices  extension  BC H y d r o - UDC p r o p o s e d a p u b l i c i n v o l v e m e n t p r o g r a m d e v e l o p s t r u c t u r e and p r o c e s s t o a l l o w f o r participation.  to  Adanac N e i g h b o u r h o o d P l a n - P l a n n i n g f o r h o u s i n g on v a c a n t land i n the area with Hastings Sunrise A c t i o n Council w i t h r e s o u r c e a s s i s t a n c e f r o m t h e U D C . A r e a was d i v i d e d i n t o two p a r t s , n o r t h and s o u t h . Developed c r i t e r i a f o r homes, i n c l u d i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s in c o n s t r u c t i o n , f i n a n c i n g and r e c r e a t i o n a l facilities w h i c h l e d t o an o v e r a l l p l a n . Produced booklet with Pattern Language format. A r e s i d e n t ' s p l a n f o r the s o u t h p a r t a n d some p r i n c i p l e s f o r A d a n a c N o r t h w e r e adapted. Block  80 D a w s o n S c h o o l S i t e - A r e a p l a n l o c a t i n g recreational facilities. Two a b a n d o n e d school b u i l d i n g s were s l a t e d f o r redevelopment. Sketches of b u i l d i n g s were done t o be u s e d by a c o n c e r n e d g r o u p o f p e o p l e i n s e a r c h f o r o t h e r c u l t u r a l and e d u c a t i o n a l groups t o use the b u i l d i n g s .  152  1973 F r a s e r v i e w I n f o C e n t r e - F o r r e p o r t on Community possibilities. Drawings f o r i n f o c e n t r e i n locations, one b e i n g t h e Bay M a l l .  Development different  F r a s e r v i e w / K i l l a r n e y Champlain Heights F e a s i b i l i t y Study f e a s i b i l i t y on l a n d b a n k i n g and l e a s i n g p r o g r a m . W h e e l c h a i r A c c e s s t o K i n g E d w a r d Gym Canadian Paraplegic Association  design  for  -  the  4 0 1 / C a s s i a r S t r e e t P e d e s t r i a n Crosswalk - T r a f f i c count and b r i e f preparation for presentation to C i t y Council to get a s a f e r c r o s s i n g f o r at the i n t e r s e c t i o n of C a s s i a r S t r e e t a n d t h e 401 H i g h w a y . Satisfactory traffic s a f e t y d e v i c e s were i n s t a l l e d . Grandview Information Centre - Reorganization space and rough e s t i m a t e s . Vancouver Co-operative Radio - urban a f f a i r s programming community r a d i o . FP18  Project Place;  OFY P r o g r a m Brant  office  research  office  Hastings-Townsite schematics.  plan.  Downtown  -  Waterfront Park  Improvement  report  -  Project  Thunderbird Island - proposal b a s e d on p a r t i c i p a t i o n .  for  on  booklet  -  structures,  produced  proposal  recreational  with  presented. facility  S o u t h i l l Childcare - l i c e n s i n g drawings. Some r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and appeal h e a r i n g s . Spin-off s t o r e f r o n t s of neighbouring b u i l d i n g s . Amore  and  - New L i v i n g D e v e l o p m e n t C o m p a n y C h a m p l a i n d e v e l o p h o u s i n g w i t h B a r r y Downs  V i l l a s Tenants A s s o c i a t i o n v e n t , a i r systems  Vernon  of  worked  M o d u l a r Home C o - o p e r a t i v e - New L i v i n g Development. P r o v i d e d o r g a n i z i n g , p l a n n i n g and a r c h i t e c t u r a l a s s i s t a n c e i n the development s t a g e s . Received a s t a r t - u p g r a n t o f $2000 f r o m CHMC.  Burnaby Church  Housing Co-op of  Christ  Helped  set  up.  Burnaby Daycare Centre  -  design  on  153  Mae G u t t e r i d g e W o r k s h o p / S t . J a m e s S e r v i c e - f e a s i b i l i t y of converting floors for a hostel. B r i a n Sakamoto, Sydney Portner. P r o j e c t c a r r i e d on f o r 3 y e a r s .  Scottlodge Vancouver  -  sundeck  Opportunities  Springridge  Program -  Co-op Association  -  office  plan  Victoria  -  Took  a  housing  resource role. A s s i s t i n g i n the formation of co-op i n s i t e p l a n n i n g and f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d y . Scheme i n v o l v e d m o v i n g s e v e r a l h o u s e s f r o m one p l o t o f P r o v i n c i a l l a n d i n Oak B a y t o a n o t h e r p l o t i n t h e F e r n w o o d neighbourhood. A secondary p r o j e c t which the coop b e g a n was a h o u s e d i s m a n t l i n g scheme w i t h t h e intention of r e c y c l i n g the m a t e r i a l s . Kits  House - feasibility; cost estimates.  A Woman's P l a c e  -  Mental Patients' for several Cool-Aide Mount  -  consult  determine  on  Association houses.  program; designs  renovations -  with  evaluation  fire  and reno  escape. drawings  renovation  Pleasant Daycare Design for daycare within (trailer).  prefabricated  units  Child  C a r e F e d e r a t i o n - e a r l y work w i t h f o r m i n g the f e d e r a t i o n o f BC a n d d e s i g n i n g e a r l y D a y C a r e facilities. Brief prepared c r i t i q u i n g proposed prefabricated design  Child  Care Design Guidebook - produced comprehensive and r e q u i r e m e n t s document as a D a y c a r e f a c i l i t y  Lonsdale West  and  Creek  Daycare Centre  Vancouver Daycare work  Squamish Indian at daycare  -  -  design  consultation  and  Band P l a y l o t centre  -  designs  Maplewood Community F a c i l i t y space.  -  budgeting  K i t s i l a n o Area prototype  design model.  schematic  for  outdoor  and d e s i g n  C h i l d Care Society - design for prefabricated building.  design  playlot  of  assistance  for  154  Pooh  Corner  Daycare  -  design  of  under  3  daycare.  1974 Cat's  Meow D a y c a r e - r e n o v a t i o n Health Inspector.  North  S h o r e N e i g h b o u r h o o d House - p r e f a b r i c a t e d b u i l d i n g d e s i g n s f o r c o n s t r u c t i n g by a h i g h s c h o o l class.  Aldergrove Grandview Trimble  Terrace  Daycare  Kitchener The  Daycare  L e F a u x House  Lynn  detailed  Daycare  -  School  -  design  of  old  drawings  Centre  -  Playground  -  -  for  M i c h a e l ' s Daycare licensing  Valley Child daycare B.C.  day  Creek  King's Variety  Gate  floorplan  Care Committee centre  A s s o c i a t i o n of consultation  China  -  Non-Status  Park Mall  Centre  -  -  Analysis design  standards  round  final  of  daycare.  drawings  design care  licensing  - schematic design D r a f t i n g c l a s s t o be  Queens Avenue U n i t e d C h u r c h Neighbourhood r e n o v a t i o n and rough c o s t e s t i m a t e s ; a r e a and equipment. St.  to  structure.  plan  V a l l e y United Church Daycare d r a w i n g s f o r new s t r u c t u r e . involved.  for  plans,  temporary  drawings  house  of  design  Daycare also playground  existing  for  Indians  -  building  a circular  preschool  for  pre-fab  155  Chimo  Terrace Recreation Project - Wall Street Neighbourhood Park. The p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n of r e c r e a t i o n facilities on two p l o t s o f n e a r b y v a c a n t l a n d a n d two s t r e e t e n d s adjacent to the p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t . T h e a r e a was t o be u s e d by t e n a n t s o f t h e Chimo T e r r a c e h o u s i n g p r o j e c t and the neighbourhood. C o n t r a c t was made between t h e Department of H o u s i n g and Chimo T e n a n t s A s s o c i a t i o n t o develop the park program and d e s i g n . UDC h e l p e d w i t h t h e c o m m u n i t y p a r t i c i p a t i o n O p p o r t u n i t i e s F o r Youth program funded the b u i l d i n g of the park.  Women's  Health  Collective  -  plan,  final  drawings  S t r a t h c o n a Community C e n t r e - f e a s i b i l i t y report, drawings, cost estimates. La  expansion  study,  F e d e r a t i o n Des F r a n c o - C o l o m b i e n s - o f f i c e a n d w o r k s h o p renovation. C l i e n t absconded w i t h funds halfway t h r o u g h and as a r e s u l t p r o j e c t d r a g g e d on f o r 2 y e a r s .  Eastend  Co-op Storetfront  -  tenant  package  C o l u m b i a J u n i o r C o l l e g e - r e p o r t and drawing i m p r o v e m e n t s on b u i l d i n g s and g r o u n d s .  for  Vancouver D i s t r i c t P u b l i c Housing Tenants A s s o c i a t i o n b r i e f s and r e p o r t w r i t i n g f o r n o n - p r o f i t s o c i e t y . Work i n c l u d e d c o n d u c t i n g a w o r k s h o p f o r Camp A l e x a n d e r Design a Housing Development. P r e l i m i n a r y programming f o r a S k i l l s Development F a c i l i t y i n c l u d i n g job t r a i n i n g on t h e development o f the development. Pine  S t r e e t C l i n i c - C l i n i c was r u n n i n g o u t o f a t r a i l e r . R e n o v a t i o n f o r permanent l o c a t i o n done. Clinic s t i l l in operation.  Grandview Woodlands Info Centre - o f f i c e at St.; p l a n s , c o n s t r u c t i o n s c h e d u l e and T r i b a l V i l l a g e Youth Hostel - F e a s i b i l i t y warehouse. Development and mortgage Produced handbook. J o b p a s s e d on t o  1126 C o m m e r c i a l materials  s t u d y on a f o r m e r applications. architect.  D a y c a r e D e s i g n S e r v i c e Book - B a s i c Daycare i n f o r m a t i o n and a r e v i e w a n d commentary on C h i l d C a r e D e s i g n . High q u a l i t y a d v i s o r y document. F a i r v i e w R e s i d e n t s A s s o c i a t i o n and Community A c t i o n S o c i e t y (FRACAS) - e c o n o m i c f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d y . A i d e d community group i n i t s planning needs. P a i d by Sussex Group f o r study.  156  C h i l l i w a c k S e n i o r s H o u s i n g P r o j e c t - New L i v i n g Development. S i t e p l a n n i n g and schematic d e s i g n of d u p l e x f o r proposal submission. Hastings West  United Church  Point  Grey  Daycare  Daycare  -  Plans  design  BC A s s o c i a t i o n o f N o n - S t a t u s assistance in selection The  -  consultation  Indians - drawings and of p r e - f a b r i c a t e d u n i t .  L e f e a u x H o u s e / L a g o o n D r i v e House for licensing.  White  Daycare  -  Rock P r e s c h o o l - outdoor p l a y a r e a , shed equipment. Drawings and rough c o s t i n g .  renovations  and  M a r p o l e D a y c a r e (Shannon Daycare S o c i e t y ) - 3 daycare schematic designs. Architect did f i n a l drawings. Mandarin Daycare report.  -  b i d d i n g and budget  B u r r a r d Indian Reserve Daycare and m a t e r i a l s list. Fairview Civic  Hodson House  Employees design.  Richmond  Daycare  Marpole/Oakridge Under  Daycare  -  Skills  Junior  -  -cost  College  Development  -  SP  Complex -  Access to Farrington Proposal turned agency.  Court down a s  -  plans  estimate. of  existing  standard  Daycare  trailer  drawings.  Community C e n t r e / D a y c a r e Sunrise  inspection  and Remedial R e a d i n g  redesign  adapting  Three Hastings investigations.  Columbia  Daycare  from  -  renovations  preliminary  plan SP new out  plan access to housing p r o j e c t . of mandate o f f u n d i n g  A d a n a c H o u s i n g C o - o p - p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g f o r 160 units. Co-op formed. T h r o u g h New L i v i n g D e v e l o p m e n t . Played r o l e of housing resource group. A r c h i t e c t took over a f t e r p r e l i m i n a r y work done. Farrington Court - property access; CMHC b e c a u s e i t d i d n o t c r e a t e improved e x i s t i n g housing  project rejected new h o u s i n g , just  by  157  1975 Coast  Foundation Permit  Society  -  renovation  H a s t i n g s S u n r i s e Community R e s o u r c e s b u i l d i n g and c o s t a n a l y s i s Strathcona $240  Community R e s o u r c e s  drawings  to  Building  Board O f f i c e  Board -  -  Feasibility  study  Study  of  -  O r c h a r d P a r k - R e p o r t on r e d e s i g n , u p g r a d i n g and g e n e r a l improvement. I n v o l v e d community m e e t i n g s . Took the f o r m o f a n e w s l e t t e r a n d f i n a l 69 p a g e p l a n n i n g report. Community work Marpole REACH  New  Foundation  Oakridge  Society  Daycare  -  -  renovation  drawings,  paid  design  Community H e a l t h C l i n i c - r e p o r t and s c h e m a t i c f o r r e n o v a t i n g two b u i l d i n g s f o r c l i n i c .  School  -  landscape  addition,  NIP  designs  application  1976 International S o c i e t y o f t h e H a n d i c a p p e d (ISOTH) site planning, site evaluation, p r e d e s i g n and p r e l i m i n a r y patterns. St.  F r a n c i s Xavier Church report of waterproofing church.  Frog  Hollow  Info  Uprising  Breads  Hastings  Sunrise  Sask.  Housing Guide  7th  and  Centre -  -  Playground  -  plan  on  Office  through Park  Capitol  Hill  Nasaika  Coop -  and  feasibility  plan  Corporation Cooperative  Kaslo  cost  Child  the -  process.  Building Booklet  Excellent  playground/park  Care -  produced  a  playground pattern  88  page  design for  the  A  document.  design  book  -  co-op  APPENDIX  URBAN D E S I G N C E N T R E B o a r d Members Staff, students & volunteers  Inception: BOARD O F P A R T I C I P A N T S David Adair Reg B i c k f o r d Nora Curry Darryl Foreman Wolfgang Gerson Roland Hennessey Margaret Mitchell Tom M o o r e  1970:  Fall  BOARD O F P A R T I C I P A N T S David Adair Reg B i c k f o r d Marie Booth John C h i s l e t t Nora Curry Darryl Foreman Wolfgang Gerson Roland Hennessey Margaret Mitchell Tom M o o r e Dino Rapanos STAFF: Ron  Yuen  STUDENTS: Tom M o o r e  1971: BOARD O F P A R T I C I P A N T S Tony Bearman Reg B i c k f o r d Marie Booth John C h i s l e t t Nora Curry Darryl Foreman Wolfgang Gerson Roland Hennessey  FIVE  Tom M o o r e Dino Rapanos Ron W a l k e y S T A F F , STUDENTS Ron Y u e n Tony Green  & VOLUNTEERS: Director - Assistant Director  Jim Booi George Brown Doug C a m p b e l l Gordon Davies Carston Jensen Donald Gutstein Brian Hart Terry Hartwig - volunteer Jim LeMaistre John Lewis D.A. Martin Tom M o o r e Bill Munsie Mo V a n N o s t r a n d Chuck R i e f - v o l u n t e e r H. Ross John Saville Gerry Stewart - volunteer M o n t y Wood  1972 BOARD O F D I R E C T O R ' S a s r e g i s t e r e d u n d e r t h e S o c i e t y ' s A c t . David Adair - Sociologist Reg B i c k f o r d - a r c h i t e c t N o r a C u r r y - Community Development Worker D a r r y l Foreman - a r c h i t e c t Wolfgang Gerson - P r o f e s s o r , School of Architecture R o i l y Hennesey - S o c i a l Worker Tom M o o r e - B u i l d e r M a r g a r e t M i t c h e l l - Community Development Worker Marie  STAFF,  Booth  STUDENTS  Ron Y u e n Tony Green  -  Skeena Tenants Association h o n o u r a r y B o a r d member  & VOLUNTEERS: Director - Assistant  Judy A l d r i t t C h a r l e s Bowm Jim Booi Marie Booth George Brown  Director  John Browner Rick Clark Wayne C l a r k e Mike Claque Blair Dalin Robert Dunbar Henry E l d e r Jim LeMaistre Nancy L e M a i s t r e Alberta Levitan P h i l Lyons Terry Lyster Ben McAfee - s t u d e n t Haroutin Mardirussian Terry Morris Mark Osborne Clayton Petrich - student P h i l i p Pratt - student Charles Rief David Robinson John Rule - student John S a v i l l e - student John T a l b o t Mike Thayer - student David Todd Dave W h e t t e r M o n t y Wood  1973 BOARD O F P A R T I C I P A N T S Mark B o s t w i c k Sandra C u r r i e Nora Curry Robert Dill D a r r y l Foreman Wolfgang Gerson Don G u t s t e i n Jim LeMaistre Alberta Levitan P h i l Lyons Margaret M i t c h e l l N e t t e Pereboom Dino Rapanos Shane Simpson Mo V a n N o s t r a n d Ron W a l k e y  161  Beginning  of  1973,  also  Tom M o o r e  and  Marie  S t u d e n t s , S t a f f , V o l u n t e e r s a n d Members Society: Ron Yuen Director Tony Green - D i r e c t o r a f t e r J u l y Anthony Bearman Mark B o s t w i c k Cher C a l l i o u Pat Canning David Easton Glynne Evans Cathy Goldney Mary L o u i s e H a r t Henry Hawthorne Gary Honegger Laurie Hurwitz Suzanne Huzel Ann J a r r e l l Donald Loucks Phil Lyons Bernard Malanych Tom M o o r e Doug N i c k e l s Mo V a n N o s t r a n d Gavin Perryman Sydney P o r t n e r Charles Rief Bud Sakamoto S i d Sawyer John S a v i l l e Shale Simpson Craig Strand David Todd Wayne W a i M o n t y Wood Henning Wulff  1974 BOARD O F D I R E C T O R S Mary L o u i s e H a r t Jim LeMaistre Sydney Portner Judith Prygiel Chuck R e i f  of  Booth the  Urban  Design  GENERAL MEMBERS, S T A F F & VOLUNTEERS Jim LeMaistre Director P.Feindel - office coordinator L a r r y Chan Sandra C u r r i e Tony Green Barb Hansen Ron Hansen Tom H a n s e n Henry Hawthorne Laurie Hurwitz Marie Louise Hart Jim LeMaistre P h i l Lyons Margaret Mitchell Tom M o o r e N e t t e Pereboom Sydney P o r t n e r Judith Prygiel Chuck R i e f Andy Rosen S. Sawyer Craig Strand J. Terjevirding Mo V a n N o s t r a n d  1975 BOARD  OF DIRECTORS Jim LeMaistre Sydney Portner Shane Simpson  OTHER A C T I V E M E M B E R S : Chuck R e i f N e t t e Pereboom M o n t y Wood 1976  -  1978  BOARD  OF DIRECTORS Jim LeMaistre Syd P o r t n e r Chuck R i e f Shane Simpson Margaret Sigurgeirson  OTHER  MEMBERS: Susan L i n k Alberta Levitan Larry Martin Nathan Edelson Sandra C u r r i e T e r r y Howorth  164  APPENDIX  SIX  REPORT o n t h e S K E E N A T E R R A C E P R O J E C T By T o n y G r e e n Late spring 1971 SOME C O N C L U D I N G  THOUGHTS:  We s h o u l d h a v e b e e n m o r e a w a r e o f t h e w e a k n e s s o f t h e S k e e n a Terrace Tenant's A s s o c i a t i o n r i g h t from the s t a r t ; we s h o u l d have i n s i s t e d they broaden t h e i r base of s u p p o r t b e f o r e g o i n g any f u r t h e r ( t h a t s h o u l d have happened b e f o r e t h e y went t o C i t y C o u n c i l ) . . As o b s e r v a t i o n by Dave A d a i r "the g r o u p seems t o be v e r y e f f e c t i v e a t l o b b y i n g w i t h v a r i o u s l e v e l s of government; they are not e f f e c t i v e at o r g a n i z i n g and becoming representative". A l o t o f t i m e was s p e n t t a l k i n g a b o u t t w o t h i n g s : involving the community i n the d e s i g n p r o c e s s ; and c r e a t i n g a v i a b l e community government. I t r e m a i n e d as r h e t o r i c , n e v e r c o m i n g c l o s e r t o r e a l i t y t h a n a few e n t h u s i a s t i c c o n v e r s a t i o n s with M a r i e [Marie Booth - P r e s i d e n t of Skeena T e r r a c e T e n a n t ' s Association]. I t h i n k i t c o u l d be u s e f u l t o d e v i s e a "community d e s i g n " game t h a t c o u l d b e c h e a p l y r e p r o d u c e d a n d e a s i l y understood. T h e e s s e n t i a l s o f s u c h a game w o u l d b e t o p r o v i d e a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g amongst t h e community t h a t t h e y a r e making t h e decisions - and t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e a r c h i t e c t as e x p l i c i t a c o m p o s i t e p i c t u r e as p o s s i b l e o f t h e needs and c r i t e r i a o f the populace. V a r i o u s o t h e r d e v i c e s were t a l k e d a b o u t , s u c h as a f i l m to c r e a t e am i m a g e o f t h e a r e a d e r i v e d f r o m t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e p e o p l e , use o f v i d e o as an i n f o r m a t i o n a l and a n a l y t i c a l t o o l , the " c h a r r e t t e " method of i n v o l v i n g p e o p l e . A t a n y t i m e , I a t l e a s t was e x p e c t i n g t o i n v o l v e t h e v a s t m a j o r i t y of the people i n the neighbourhood. T h i s now appears t o have been a f a i n t a hope, never v e r y c l o s e t o reality. M i l t o n K o t t e r , i n "Neighbourhood Government", is s a t i s f i e d t o have even a s m a l l percentage of the people involved. I suppose t h a t c o u l d be s a t i s f a c t o r y as l o n g as t h e r e i s no s t r u c t u r a l impediment t o any citizen's participation. I n o t h e r w o r d s , as l o n g as p e o p l e a r e g i v e n t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o t a k e p a r t , i t d o e s n o t seem t o m a t t e r w h e t h e r t h e y do o r n o t . Be t h a t a s i t m a y , t h e s l o w , i n d e e d , l e i s u r e l y a p p r o a c h t h e UDC t o o k t o " g e t t i n g p e o p l e i n v o l v e d " w a s b r o u g h t t o a sudden h a l t be t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f S o c i a l P l a n n i n g i n t h e guise of Maurice Egan. We w o u l d h a v e b e e n m o r e u s e f u l to  165  have u r g e d organizing  t h e S t e e r i n g Group their forces.  to  move  more  quickly  in  the "coffee p a r t y " and o t h e r i n f o r m a l meetings t h a t were h e l d s u f f e r e d from being unstructured - the conversation u s u a l l y was t o o l o o s e , d i d n ' t f i t a n y w h e r e My r e l u c t a n c e to s t r u c t u r e t h e s e t h i n g s c a m e f r o m a f e e l i n g t h a t i f we w e r e t o p r e s e n t t o o much o f a f o r m u l a t e d i d e a , i t c o u l d h a v e two negative effects. a) t h e p e o p l e w o u l d be t u r n e d o f f with o u r p r o f e s s i o n a l z e a l a n d d i c t a t o r i a l s t a n c e , o r b) the i d e a s p r e s e n t e d m i g h t be u n c r i t i c a l l y a c c e p t e d w i t h an ossified result. In r e t r o s p e c t , a more p o s i t i v e a p p r o a c h one o f p r o v i d i n g s t i m u l a t i o n , n o t n e c e s s a r i l y direction might have p r o d u c e d r e s u l t s . P e o p l e e n j o y image games ( o r so I b e l i e v e ) a n d s h o u l d be g i v e n them t o p l a y w i t h . F u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the P a t t e r n Language and i t s tenets - p a r t i c u l a r l y t h a t one s t a t e s a p r o p o s i t i o n t h e n a r g u e s its v a l i d i t y in order to establish a decision. Much more r e s e a r c h c o u l d be done on t h e s u b j e c t o f c o l l e c t i v e decision -making and the dynamic q u a l i t i e s of groups, i n o r d e r f o r t h e UDC t o h e l p g r o u p s p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e d e s i g n process. In  summary, t h e Skeena e x p e r i e n c e has: a ) p r o v i d e d some c i t i z e n s w i t h o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o a s s e r t t h e m s e l v e s and i n c r e a s e t h e i r s e l f - e s t e e m as individuals; b ) t a u g h t t h e UDC a b o u t C i t y H a l l a n d a b o u t citizens g r o u p s - i n p a r t i c u l a r , i t has p r o v i d e d us w i t h i n s i g h t s i n t o p e r s o n a l i t i e s and t h e power s t r u c t u r e ; c) c r e a t e d a p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t of a l o n g - t e r m dream in Vancouver's East End; at l e a s t the people got something out of t h e i r e f f o r t and they got i t rather q u i c k l y ( I am a s s u m i n g t h a t t h e p r o j e c t u n d e r t h e gym w i l l g o a h e a d o n t h e b a s i s o f some F e d e r a l m o n i e s being plugged in) d ) k e p t me o f f t h e s t r e e t s f o r 6 m o n t h s .  HoHo Tony Green  167 APPENDIX  EIGHT  A COMMUNITY FACILITY FOR  The  RAYMUR PLACE  Problem  Raymur P l a c e i s unpopular,even w i t h the former government: Mr. Dan Campbell, former M i n i s t e r o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s , has s a i d t h a t "Raymur P l a c e Housing i P r o j e c t i s a monument to poor p u b l i c h o u s i n g p l a n n i n g and s h o u l d never have . been b u i l t " . M r s G r a c e McCarthy, t o o , has c a l l e d p u b l i c housing to d a t e l n Vancouver a " d i s a s t e r " . We don't know the minds of the new government, y e t . The 376 u n i t s o f Raymur P l a c e house a t o t a l o f \&oO p e o p l e , I n c l u d i n g 700 c h i l d r e n and 150 p e n s i o n e r s , i n a s e t t i n g b o r d e r e d by two h e a v i l y t r a v e l l e d main a r t e r i e s , r a i l r o a d t r a c k s , and s k i d r o a d . No f a m i l y s h o u l d have t o l i v e i n t h i s environment; we a t Raymur have no c h o i c e . We do not have a c c e s s t o spaces u s u a l l y a v a i l a b l e t o f a m i l i e s i n s i n g l e homes, such as r e c r e a t i o n rooms, back y a r d s , or enough space i n the home f o r p e r s o n a l p u r s u i t s . Our f i n a n c i a l c o n d i t i o n p r e v e n t s us from t a k i n g p a r t i n the s o c i a l and r e c r e a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s a v a i l a b l e i n the c i t y . The c o s t s o f programmes ( f e e s , equipment and s u p p l i e s ) , o f b a b y s i t t i n g and o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y p r o h i b i t our p a r t i c i p a tion. We a t Raymur a r e put i n t o a n e a r l y - h o p e l e s s p o s i t i o n . We need space i n which we can c r e a t e our own s o l u t i o n s . Our p r o p o s a l i s to b u i l d s o c i a l and r e c r e a t i o n a l " l i v i n g s p a c e " f o r the f a m i l i e s and s e n i o r c i t i z e n s at Raymur which we can s h a r e w i t h our f r i e n d s and neighbours i n the s u r r o u n d i n g a r e a .  Background:  Facilities  i n the  Area  A number o f b u i l d i n g s , programmes and s e r v i c e s a l r e a d y e x i s t , are under c o n s t r u c t i o n , o r a r e planned f o r the a r e a . They s e r v e (or w i l l s e r v e ) a v a r i e t y of programmed needs f o r a v a r i e t y o f age groups, but they have l i m i t a t i o n s i n meeting our needs at Raymur. The  f a c i l i t i e s i n the a r e a a r e : Gibbs Boys' C l u b , 700 E a s t Pender S t r e e t has l i m i t e d f a c i l i t i e s and programmes aimed p r i m a r i l y a t boys aged 7 - 13. Kiwassa Neighbourhood S e r v i c e s , 800 Vernon D r i v e has l i m i t e d and o v e r l o a d e d f a c i l i t i e s and programmes p r i m a r i l y f o r younger c h i l d r e n . Pender YWCA, 375 East Pender f o c u s e s on the needs of the Chinese p o p u l a t i o n i n the a r e a , a p p a r e n t l y has an u n c e r t a i n f u t u r e . Vancouver E a s t R e c r e a t i o n n i a S c h o o l ) p r o v i d e s some children. The programmes events. The summer parks years.  Programme, 1001 C o t t o n D r i v e ( i n B r i t a n d e c e n t r a l i z e d programmes, mainly, f o r take the form o f o r g a n i z e d , s c h e d u l e d programme i s aimed at c h i l d r e n 6 t o 12  S t r a t h c o n a Neighbourhood S e r v i c e s Centre (open September 1972), 500 E a s t Pender S t r e e t . R e c r e a t i o n a l l y t h i s w i l l be a r e p l i c a o f the Vancouver E a s t R e c r e a t i o n Programme. I t w i l l , to some e x t e n t , s e r v e t h e needs o f McLean P a r k r e s i d e n t s because o f i t s c l o s e n e s s to t h a t p r o j e c t . G e n e r a l l y , however, the programmes are too s c h e d u l e d , o r g a n i z e d and f o r m a l i z e d to a p p e a l to many young p e o p l e , and most o f our elementary age c h i l d r e n at Raymur go to Seymour School. B r i t a n n i a Community S e r v i c e s C e n t r e (1973 - 74?), 1001 C o t t o n D r i v e . T h i s l a r g e complex w i l l p r o v i d e a wide range o f r e c r e a t i o n programmes and o t h e r s e r v i c e s f o r 30,000 p e o p l e i n the e a s t end o f the C i t y . The o n l y l i n k a g e between Raymur and B r i t a n n i a i s Venables S t r e e t , a major t r u c k r o u t e not conducive to w a l k i n g . No d i r e c t bus l i n k s e x i s t and the d i s t a n c e i s g e n e r a l l y too g r e a t , e s p e c i a l l y f o r mothers w i t h younger c h i l d r e n and no means o f p r i v a t e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n .  169  SPACE*/ USB im  EASEMENT^  ESSENTIAL  CHA!^CTBRlSnC5  size  1  (3AMES 6MCJJ A S EASKBtEALL, p A t ^ l N T O N l , PCDG5-  GHAIRS 4 H16J( CERUN© fOp. frMU G A M e s ; ficaz smfpoe, T D W t T H S W P ROLLef?SKADMe/ rlApP W A U S ; WINRDW 4 tCDR "TO OOCISIPE- PLAY AR5A, E ^ / IAA1KTEHM^C&; s<AF^VlSiai A N D ' VI6WIMG FROM ANOIHEK L E V k L ; PlVlSieiB INIDTMD;  •2oo  vwnttw  CCWCT; ee&y A c c e s s To H A Y BSUipMENT; ftS&lPLY A f C C T W S[A<5e> ecuMPF^oop WALLS.  "THE- UVIN© S P E C K - EVENTS.  I5CK3. | 0 $ -  sir^A5e 4 Knotty AEK5fr3JT; 50FF floop;  V5CO  MEgDN©S. PBCBPTJCMS C L A S S E S , <5^1HLPJN©^ IN A RDUeit £6flAAFB  SWSA©&~ l o o  WITH G W ^ M , rTCMS;  eiGtuomtf To / c c o M M c m r e  THINGS;  CEfTTPAL- LCUMSB/  ^ C K 5^; ML£TlNe  P L A C E (INPC^MAL)  0?Mf7 C«A|RS; SfeLf= -OpEKMBp <=N4CK fCCOS * A COUNTER. SEKVtCB, CEKTTftAL Sf^Ot5 |M THE eUlLDIN©; V\EW TO Ol\leP- AFB^S; .5efT LIGHT; s c n . W ^ M F L O C K ; A& rT2W W A L L S AS fa3E.)e>Lr3; fAANy CoPHEKS F D R smiHe/WAlGHIUe/feVfeN S L E C P I N G C O ; S U B T L E  SEFWTICN  rPOM THE SUR.FCUNDIM© SpACES; EL&VATc3C?TD G I V E A VIEW n ? R SITTING pew D W g R s o s SUCtf A S  eerim  •LCCAl^D O N  ?mda\s,; ccuu?  FCOLOZ  f^AIW T H O S C U e H F A R B .  A  SrlUFFLfefaAFtP~TA£te5;  Ate  tV^MAMB- S H O W I N G eswrn^ T H I S is mr A pivMO, Nor T O e a i a .  • HAT f^coF  uxymoN op-  hAoer UKgty  ° cVSSEsMeNT SUNK. IKJT& S l C g O F HILL "TO  APVANTASe Of= T o p o S f ^ p H V  • THR6e EiMTrvifJCes /-NP Odq^lCO^S ID FFCVlPrS-A NATURAL- ^ SHofrTCWT',TO <f » fcXTEMD T o CCI5NE5R Cfr tJASTINgB $ . BROVP STAIRS  • ^R^NIKy"  + f^MFS AT  p o e s N T  • CWEfcp A O  -t MAKJ5 IT V/SietS" QIAN(3£5S- /AAV/MUM  ME^O COMMERCIAL-  Pl/1RA£L& CDWSTRU3TICN  (  EXFmA«e-  QW4©fe ON&-  H4U= StCRfey  171 WALLS fCR ECWS; gCCK5 QUIET s i u D y LIBRARY  4  Aco  LlEftARy AND PCNATT5P;  mee  &nms&i ISOLATED • £<3XINRTaXT SpACEi; " TABLES FCR SlUCV/tlCMEWoKlY-, FCfULAR BCOK5# MAO^ZIN ReAaNe CHAIRS; scfr. WAPfA fLCDRt fyvsiq simple RCCM; SER-  RATE teMTRANC3&;HApP  FCOtA":  4oo  /  ECWNCfRCCp WALLS; VIRTUALLY No E3?WBA0JT CP fWHsHiN6fe (Kice. w&iPo  TE£NAGfc3S' ONN  WALLS 0K-; R1VATT3;LCTS Cf ELBCTKIGAL- FLUes; WINPDW TO CUTSipE.; fe^y ^ N T E N A N C e ; SOTT FLCC£; EASLy SEEN FRCM c w r e i c e ; TO^FaLy  Ml IE  PAN7FY'  RAy-CAM CO-OP FCcp STORES.  SERVICE FPOM L/4ME ftAO© ST£R& NBAR T>IB p^MlLV tfl-FUSB; TWO CWIKoLLeP ENTRANCES; Lo*ttH& P*y /<Cg3S fFCM LAME; ftXJP StORA&e 4 BE^LAY; PMTR*WGE T O StCRE OUST INSIDE EMTRANOB TO  CBMTFB; £ASy ^MTEH^NOe; SpEQAL STDRB FIXTURES M^tED> (co-Cp "ID f U R a i A s B ITS O V N ) ; P C C M TO 6POW; iMMEPKte; a z © itiRe& nwes i/f33£*t T H W caRmsr BA&EWENT f ^ a L n y too s e t t e e <30  SUFFKVEfep K A Y FCR OHlLPRgM.  NB*^: fcncHEW * T O I L E T S ; sic^e(5 rcR Tcys 4 G A M E S -  CASUAL;  CfERMEC £5/ MOTHERS OH A CO-CTBR<=giVB  & A S I S ; cN ROTTE (N 4 cWCf cfeNTRB; w e L L - ppaiECTBP; OtftecR sfTice dceeD IN; IWM.arr,fe^iLy- W=WIAmfc£> FIMlalES; t?IM-Up VWtS; uar A pROGRAMMEE" t^-cAfcfc; OPEWT23 ALL CAY. 7  172 APPENDIX  NINE  " DESIGN GAME * HANDICAPPED GROUP HOI:IE *  As s t a t e d i n t h e r e p o r t , t h e Handicapped Group Home P r o j e c t does not have a c l i e n t and we f e e l i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o d e f i n e t h e o r e t i c a l l y , a h a n d i c a p p e d p e r s o n , f o r t h e purpose o f d e s i g n i n l i e u o f such a c l i e n t . Hence t h e i d e a o f p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e s i g n f o r a h a n d i c a p p e d group home. The b a s i c i d e a o f p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e s i g n i s t o i n v o l v e h a n d i capped p e o p l e i n t h e t o t a l d e s i g n p r o c e s s o f a group home from t h e i n i t i a l s t a g e s t o f i n i s h e d d e s i g n . l i e f e e l t h i s i s t h e o n l y way an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l as w e l l as group needs may be s a t i s f i e d i n such a group home. Many d e s i g n c r i t e r i a , such as c o u n t e r h e i g h t s , e t c . , a r e w e l l documented, but t h e d e s i g n o f a group home i s a f a r more i n v o l v e d p r o c e s s than j u s t c h o o s i n g s u i t a b l e dimensions and a c c e s s o r i e s . The d e s i g n o f a group home i n v o l v e s four b a s i c areas: 1. P h y s i c a l design 2. S o c i a l design 3. F i n a n c i a l d e s i g n A. Home management To i n v o l v e h a n d i c a p p e d persons i n t h e d e s i g n o f a group home we have d e v i s e d a d e s i g n game. I t i s a medium f o r communication and i t encourages p e o p l e t o become aware o f and e x p r e s s t h e i r p e r s o n a l s p a t i a l and s o c i a l needs. I t a c t s as a p r i m e r f o r i n t e r a c t i o n between p a r t i c i p a n t s and an awareness" and e x p r e s s i o n o f a group's s p a t i a l and s o c i a l needs can be communicated. I n volvement i n t h e game w i l l promote i n - d e p t h d i s c u s s i o n o f r e l e v a n t i s s u e s p e r t a i n i n g t o the group home concept and d e c i s i o n s and c o n c l u s i o n s w i l l be made i n a r a t i o n a l manner.  A "ROUGH" OUTLINE OF EVENTS FOR  THE  SELF-DESIGN PROCESS  OR MONTY WOOD'S 'SITKHER OF  '72'  The game i s d e s c r i b e d as f o l l o w s : - t h e game 'board' i t s e l f i s a model p l a n o f a group home. - t h e rooms have no d o o r s , no windows, e t c . and may be thought as s p a t i a l components w h i c h f i t t o g e t h e r t o form t h e p h y s i c a l s p a t i a l framework of t h e home. - each s p a t i a l component (bedrooms, bathrooms, k i t c h e n , e t c . ) i n t h e phys i c a l framework c o n t a i n s v a r i o u s sub-components ( a c c e s s o r i e s , f u r n i t u r e , etc.) 1.  B o a r d handout t o each p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n d i v i d u a l - BATHROOM - i n t r o d u c t i o n t o space (awareness o f t h e i r own p e r s o n a l space) - p e r s o n a l d e s i g n s o l u t i o n s ( l a y o u t s ) - document e v e r y d e c i s i o n  2.  D i v i d e i n t o groups (5 p e o p l e ) and c o n s t r u c t i v e l y c i t i c l z e each i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l d e s i g n , i . e . p r o v i d e h e l p f u l feedback.  173  3.  Hand out a n o t h e r b o a r d o f t h e bathroom - r e d e s i g n or r e v i s e i n i t i a l p e r s o n a l design to s a t i s f a c t i o n - documentation o f reasons a n e c e s s i t y - hope f o r a range of s i z e s ( e g . 10' x 1 0 ' , 8' x 8', o r what?)  bathroom  4.  D i v i d e i n t o groups (5 p e o p l e ) - a r b i t r a r y o r s e l f - c h o s e n - p r e f e r the latter. Hand out a n o t h e r b o a r d and . . . - d e v i s e a composite p l a n o f t h e bathroom f o r f i v e p e o p l e - c o n s t a n t r e f e r r a l to r e f e r e n c e board . . . s o c i a l d i s c u s s i o n s and r e l e vant s o c i a l problems s h o u l d s u r f a c e . - documentation, documentation, documentation. - p r i n t o u t o f d e c i s i o n s made and c o n c l u s i o n s r e a c h e d ( e g . what i s an optimum s i z e bathroom f o r f i v e h a n d i c a p s ? what a c c e s s o r i e s ( s i n k s , e t c . ) s h o u l d go i n t o a bathroom? p r o x i m i t y t o o t h e r p a r t s o f the house? i s the bathroom a f u l l bathroom or a h a l f - b a t h r o o m ? e t c . )  5.  T h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l mock-up o f t h e group bathroom (two i f t h e r e are two groups). - made from c a r d b o a r d - documentation on v i d e o o f the p e o p l e u s i n g the space they have d e s i g n e d , and comments.  6.  D i s c u s s i o n of v i d e o d e s i g n i f any.  7.  Repeat Step 5 f o r  8.  D i s c u s s i o n o f v i d e o - a review - d e c i s i o n s and r e v i s i o n s - f i n a l c o n c l u s i o n s about bathrooms  9.  Document on f i n a l l a y o u t ( t w o - d i m e n s i o n a l p l a n ) a l l d e c i s i o n s and c o n c l u s i o n s . . . p h y s i c a l , s o c i a l and a l s o f i n a n c i a l ( n o t e : a r c h i t e c t w i l l act as c o n s u l t a n t when c o s t s become a f a c t o r i n d e s i g n )  a review -  d e c i s i o n s and r e v i s i o n s o f the  bathroom  the r e v i s e d d e s i g n .  * * * END OF BATHROOM * * *  10.  The KITCHEN i s the next s p a t i a l component t o be d i s c u s s e d . - b e g i n w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n p e r i o d on s o c i a l and home management i s s u e s . - determine t h i n g s l i k e who does the c o o k i n g ? how many p e o p l e w i l l do the cooking? who buys the food? ( o p e r a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e o f the k i t c h e n ) what k i n d of storage f a c i l i t i e s ? are there s p e c i a l d i e t s ? etc. ( n o t e : the d i n i n g r o o m w i l l have t o be d i s c u s s e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the k i t c h e n . . . what type o f e a t i n g f a c i l i t i e s ? e t c . ) s c r e e n i n g from k i t c h e n ? - once the o p e r a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e o f the k i t c h e n / d i n i n g r o o m has been d e termined and documented, d e c i s i o n s as to what sub-components ( a c c e s s o r i e s ) w i l l be needed t o s a t i s f y the demands of the o p e r a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e ( s t o r a g e , number o f s t o v e s , e t c . ) - s p e c i f i c a t i o n s of a c c e s s o r i e s s h o u l d be d e t e r m i n e d , i . e . h e i g h t o f c o u n t e r s s t o r a g e f a c i l i t i e s , which way the doors swing on a f r i d g e , e t c .  174  11.  Once the sub-components have been determined*, - cut out t h e components - draw the k i t c h e n @ 1" = l ' - O " from the main r e f e r e n c e b o a r d - use the same groups t h a t were e s t a b l i s h e d i n Step 4 and determine a s a t i s f a c t o r y layout f o r the k i t c h e n - remember to document a l l i d e a s and d e c i s i o n s on the b o a r d i t s e l f - c o n s t a n t r e f e r r a l back to the main r e f e r e n c e b o a r d i s a n e c e s s i t y to t h e k i t c h e n i n some c o n t e x t (the home)i s o c i a l i m p l i c a t i o n s s h o u l d a r i s e . . . s c r e e n i n g between k i t c h e n / d i n i n g r o o m , e t c .  12.  On c o m p l e t i o n o f a s a t i s f a c t o r y p l a n (group s a t s i f a c t i o n ) , t h r e e dimens i o n a l mock-ups o f the k i t c h e n a r e c o n s t r u c t e d ; , document on v i d e o the use and d i s c u s s i o n s o f the s p a c e .  13.  D i s c u s s i o n of v i d e o -  14.  Repeat Steps 12 and 13 f o r  15.  Document on f i n a l l a y o u t ( n o t e : t h i s space may be t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t the space u t i l i z e d from the r e f e r e n c e b o a r d ; t h a t ' s g r e a t ! ) - a l l d e c i s i o n s and c o n c l u s i o n s . . . p h y s i c a l , s o c i a l , f i n a n c i a l  a review -  d e c i s i o n s and r e v i s i o n s i f  put  any.  the r e v i s e d d e s i g n .  * * * END OF KITCHEN/DININGROOM  from  ***  16.  The BEDROOM i s the next s p a t i a l component to be d i s c u s s e d . - s t a r t w i t h group d i s c u s s i o n as to home management and s o c i a l d e c i s i o n s , i . e . what does one do i n a bedroom, watch T . V . , e n t e r t a i n , e t c . ? what and how w i l l i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l h a b i t s a f f e c t the r e s t of the house? r e l a t i o n s w i t h each o t h e r ? privacy? - hand out i n d i v i d u a l boards f o r . p e r s o n a l d e s i g n s o l u t i o n s a f t e r d i s c u s s i o n s as t o r e l a t i o n t o h a l l w a y s , o u t d o o r s , b a t h r o o m s , f u r n i t u r e , s t o r a g e , o p t i m a l s i z e o f a bedroom, c o s t s - c o n s t a n t r e f e r r a l back t o the main r e f e r a n c e b o a r d i s a n e c e s s i t y t o ensure m e a n i n g f u l s o c i a l and management d e c i s i o n s . - documentation o f d e c i s i o n s and c o n c l u s i o n s ( f i n a l ) . . . remember to d o c u ment p e r s o n a l s o l u t i o n s .  17.  D i s c u s s i o n on t h e LIVING ROOM - r e f e r e n c e b a c k t o the main b o a r d f o r r e l e v a n t s o c i a l d i s c u s s i o n s as to s i z e , l o c a t i o n , access to outdoors, f u r n i t u r e , a c t i v i t i e s , e t c . - r e l a t i o n s h i p s with diningroom, entrance, etc. - c u t o u t s and d e s i g n s o l u t i o n w i t h documentation  1C.  D i s c u s s i o n s on STUDY - n e e d : o f f i c e work, c o - o p b u s i n e s s , l i b r a r y , s e m i - p r i v a t e s p a c e , e x t r a bedroom, e t c . , s i z e , a c c e s s t o o u t d o o r s , l o c a t i o n e t c . DOCUMENTATION  19.  D i s c u s s i o n s on U T I L I T Y , STORAGE, & HOBBY SPACES - the n e e d : a c t i v i t i e s i n h o u s e , house i n d u s t r y ;  location,  size  175  20.  D i s c u s s i o n s on OUTDOOR SPACE. - purposes: gardening, sunning, e t c . ,  carports  21.  P r e p a r e summary s h e e t s f o r h a n d i n g out t o a l l t h e - these sheets should i n c l u d e a l l conclusions f o r s o c i a l , f i n a n c e , home management).  participants each room ( p h y s i c a l ,  22.  LOCATIONAL STUDY - d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f c r i t e r i a as to t h e l o c a t i o n of such a home p o s s i b i l i t y of apartment f l o o r - documentation  note:  23.  SYNTHESIS OF A HOME - use c l a y as a medium f o r communication: p r o v i d e a p i e c e o f plywood, ( s c a l e d t o the s i z e of a t h e o r e t i c a l l o t ; eg. 60' x 120') and mark s e t b a c k r e g u l a t i o n s on the b o a r d ; t h a t w i l l l e a v e t h e t o t a l a l l o w a b l e buildable area. - u s i n g the c l a y a r r i v e at an optimum ( s a t i s f a c t o r y ) p l a n f o r the house c o n f o r m i n g t o the c r i t e r i a a r r i v e d at through the p r e v i o u s study . . . n o t e : documentation i s i m p o r t a n t , use s l i d e s and r e c o r d each s i g n i f i cant change d u r i n g the p r o c e s s . - s c a l i n g may be a problem so p r o v i d e some s c a l i n g d e v i c e ( r u l e r , g r i d f o r projection).  24.  On c o m p l e t i o n o f a s a t i s f a c t o r y d e s i g n , t r a n s f e r t h e l a y o u t t o paper and compare to o r i g i n a l s o c i a l d e s i g n ( c r i t e r i a ) and room s i z e s . . . understand r e a s o n s f o r change and document. - n o t e rooms and t h e i r s i z e s c n t h e p l a n - n o t e d o o r s , windows> etc. - n o t e permanent f i x t u r e s - c u p b o a r d s , s i n k s , e t c .  25.  F e a s i b i l i t y Study - b r i n g i n a c o n s u l t a n t t o do a c o s t a n a l y s i s t o see i f the d e s i g n i s e c o n o m i c a l l y f e a s i b l e (economic f e a s i b i l i t y w i l l be determined by the maximum r e n t the p e o p l e can pay on a D . P . A . , mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s , l i v i n g c o s t s a c t as d e t e r m i n a n t s )  26.  I f t h e d e s i g n i s not f e a s i b l e , minor r e v i s i o n s s h o u l d be attempted as l o n g as the d e s i r e d q u a l i t y i s r e t a i n e d . I f minor r e v i s i o n s a r e not p o s s i b l e , the home s h o u l d be r e d e s i g n e d , i . e . r e p e a t S t e p s 2 3 , 24, 25.  27.  The t o t a l c o s t p e r month p e r p e r s o n s h o u l d be computed and the p o s s i b i l i t y i s t h e r e f o r comparison w i t h d a i l y c o s t s of l i v i n g i n an i n s t i t u t i o n .  28.  CONCLUSIONS - s h o u l d be w r i t t e n up f o r each of t h e f o u r areas o f d e s i g n - s u g g e s t i o n s as t o improvements t h a t might be made on the s e l f - d e s i g n methodology - s u g g e s t i o n s t h a t might be made f o r the group home concept  NOTE:  V e r y l i t t l e has been mentioned o f FINANCIAL DESIGN i n t h i s programme. F i n a n c i a l d e s i g n s h o u l d b e g i n at t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e programme and c o n t i n u e p a r a l l e l to i t . At each phase of the programme, f i n a n c i a l i n p u t would be i m p l i c i t and p o s s i b l y a c t as a d e s i g n d e t e r m i n a n t .  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 25 4
China 15 4
Canada 13 0
France 4 0
Germany 3 36
Sweden 3 0
Ukraine 2 0
Poland 1 0
Russia 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 18 40
Shenzhen 13 4
Ashburn 12 0
Wilmington 5 0
Stockholm 3 0
Vancouver 3 0
Mountain View 2 0
New York 2 4
Paris 2 0
Beijing 2 0
Saskatoon 2 0
Sunnyvale 1 0
Saint Petersburg 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0098622/manifest

Comment

Related Items