Last minute impromptu yowLAB!

Thursday April 16
Clocktower Brew Pub (575 Bank St)

Great chance to catch up and brainstorm some summer projects.

facebook_banner For those who haven’t been, yowLAB meetings are informal; part social, part networking, part brainstorming. It’s an opportunity for people with an interest in architecture, urbanism, and design to meet over a few pints.

We aim to try a different venue each meeting, generally somewhere central. This month we’ll be at the Clocktower Brew Pub in the Glebe (575 Bank St).

We also feature Canadian architecture projects in our event banners. This month, we have a call for submission for the 13th annual Come Up To My Room at the Gladstone Hotel.

Come Up To My Room Call for Submissions
Due May 15, 2015
Check here for details:

Originally posted on Urban speeches:

Uneven Growth: Tactical Urbanisms for Expanding Megacities

What can “tactical urbanism” offer cities under extreme stress from rapid population growth, intensifying industrial restructuring, inadequate social and physical infrastructures, rising levels of class polarization, insufficiently resourced public institutions, proliferating environmental disasters, and growing popular alienation, dispossession, and social unrest? The current MoMA exhibition Uneven Growth: Tactical Urbanisms for Expanding Megacities aims to explore this question through speculative interventions by teams of architects whose remit was to make design proposals for six of the world’s megacities—Hong Kong, Istanbul, Lagos, Mumbai, New York, and Rio de Janeiro. The exhibition has provoked considerable debate about our contemporary planetary urban condition and, more specifically, about the capacities of architects, urban designers, and planners to influence the latter in progressive, productive ways.

Such a debate is timely, not least because inherited paradigms of urban intervention—from the modernist-statist programs of the postwar epoch to the neoliberalizing, market-fundamentalist…

View original 5,376 more words

Originally published in Centretown Buzz and Spacing Ottawa
by Sarah Gelbard
March 12, 2015

Markers of history and memorials to the tragedies of the past are part of how we imagine ourselves, both individually and collectively. It is no accident that these monuments are so often supported by arguments for their importance to our national identity (for better or worse).

As residents of Ottawa, these monuments punctuate our daily lives in a way that the majority of the Canadians they represent never experience. Since many Canadians may never see these monuments in person, the decision to place them in the national capital is obviously intended to carry significant symbolic power and meaning. The symbolic gesture, however, is still tied to the reality of the physical site. And so, the question of which site deserves particular attention.

In Ottawa, we are also familiar with the controversies over many of the decisions and interventions of the National Capital Commission over its 50+ year history. I personally believe many of the great contributions of the NCC are frequently overshadowed by some of its questionable actions. While it is a complex issue and debate, the mandate to direct and maintain a long-term vision and plan for the physical manifestation of our capital is not an easy task.

There is an exception to this regular controversy. I think that the intentions that underlie the Parliamentary Precinct and Confederation Boulevard are intentions that most Canadians, understand, respect, and wish to protect. Because of the politically charged nature of the precinct and its symbolic meaning, its design and programming must be vigilant in maintaining the impartial, just, and nonpartisan aspirations in order to represent all Canadians.

It is this statement of values that has led to an important dispute over the approved plans for the National Memorial to Victims of Communism.

In a public statement on the issue, the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada explains: “The Long Term Vision and Plan (LTVP) for the Parliamentary Precinct and Judicial Precinct evolved through decades of consultations with leading architects, urban designers and landscape architects.” The statement continues: “We support the intention for the ‘Capital Plateau’ and believe it is rooted in enduring ideas about urban design and building a capital city.”

The approved plans for the memorial reportedly disregard the recommendations and advice of the National Capital Commission’s Advisory Committee on Planning, Design, and Realty. According to an article published by MacLean’s, the committee found the site “totally inappropriate”. The inappropriateness of the site is a question of both the surrounding context and scale of the memorial.

Located on a lot west of Parliament, between the Supreme Court of Canada, Justice building, and the Library and Archives of Canada building, the site had been earmarked for a future federal building to complete the “judicial triad”. In terms of scale, the proposed monument is nearly equal in size to the War Memorial plaza on Elgin, and almost three times the size of the Peacekeeping Memorial on Sussex. While the proposed memorial would almost certainly capitalize on the weight of its surroundings and imposing scale, a respectful public work should not unduly detract meaning and significance in return.

Read More

Our friends over at BUILTHalifax have a really interesting blog series on modern planning in Halifax.

Many Haligonians have recently been calling for the removal of the Highway to Nowhere – the Cogswell Interchange. Many know why it was built, however few probably understand the thinking that led to Harbour Drive being considered.

A few years ago the Canadian Centre for Architecture ran an exhibit called “The 60′s Montreal Thinks Big“. The exhibit looked at several large projects built in Montreal in the 1960′s, including expressways, office developments, suburban malls and slum clearance, and tie these projects to surrounding Social and Political Environments.

Using the exhibit as a model, it provides an excellent frame work for exploring several major Halifax projects of the same time period, including harbour drive (of which only the cogswell Interchange was built), the law courts, Scotia Square, and africville.

We will begin the series with the origins of 20th century planning theory, and then trace it’s development to the post war period, via the people and policies that led to the specific examples we wish to examine.

By doing this in a series format, we can tell a better narrative of the period then we can in a single post, since the background covers multiple examples.

continue reading

More on the NAC facelift. I’ll be sad to see the beautiful outdoor terrace system taken over. Seems less not more public to me as an interior space.

I could be convinced that the Elgin facade changes are warranted but everything along the North facade just robs the building of its beauty.

More on my thoughts about why we should be concerned about losing our Brutalist heritage.

Globe and Mail: Goodbye concrete shroud – hello dazzle fit for a capital


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 58 other followers