Calgary needs to connect to it's environment. We need to look at our current infrastructure. We need to think about the roads around us, the layout of the community and what impact we are making on surrounding communities. To get some insight into what’s happening with architecture in Calgary in 2006 and beyond, I spoke with Architect/Designer Mike Farrar.

MC: To the average person, Calgary might look like a wholly “undesigned” city. What kind of influences can we trace back to our European immigrant roots?

MF response: European building materials have been influencing North American since day one.  Today we see huge influence in everything from French glass to German hardware, Spanish cork to Austrian windows.  I think one of the most interesting influences of late has been the consumption of the brise soleil system, or louvers, used to control light.  Although ancient in concept, they were given new life in the 1920's by Le Corbusier. Today they are a hallmark of modernity. North America, has finally begun to utilize them on everything from large commercial/office buildings to residential buildings.

MC: That said, don’t you agree that there are a few points of hope on the horizon for Calgary? 

MF response: In general I believe that Calgary is still discovering the importance of architecture.  By and large architecture is seen as a commodity to be bought and sold.  We see this every day in the unbelievable destruction of the landscape with the suburbs being built.  They do not in any way relate to the idea of architecture.  There is no spatial or experiential understanding, no allotment for human emotions and no sympathy for the land they occupy.  You will have a hard time applying the term architecture to any built environment or object that doesn't address these very basic requirements.  So I believe Calgary is in for some hard times, architecturally.  Until people on the whole begin to demand that their environment address their emotional and experiential needs, architecture will continue to struggle here. 

That said, there are some points of hope.  The Norman Foster–designed tower planned for EnCana Corp, for example. In Toronto we have seen how in the last few years the city, with leadership and vision, has commissioned world leading architect to design objects in the city that will bring the word architecture real meaning. 

MC: How is Alberta contributing to environmental issues in architecture?

MF response: Recently, Green Building has surfaced as a new initiative in  Alberta.  Recently, Alberta Infrastructure has announced LEED (Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design) requirements for all of their buildings. This will put a great deal of pressure on the industry to create with more vision and excitement then before.

MC: Which projects get your stamp of approval in Calgary?

MF response: For strictly modern buildings I believe the Foster tower, the new City of Calgary Water Services centre by Sturgess Architecture, the Canmore Civic Center by MTA, the M-tech building on MacLeod Trail by McKinley Dang Burkart – these varied buildings all show a desire to create real experience with the tools of architecture. Something to think about is the idea of history and architecture.  A couple of years after moving here from the East coast, I heard a story about a building in Edmonton that was old for the area and was slated to be destroyed. 

Members of the community obviously complained while a city official responded that, “Edmonton isn’t old enough to have history so we don't need to save it.”  Of course this is complete ignorance but the point is interesting.  On one hand, in a city or community that has very little history, we are always looking for some “before”, something to root us, something from which we grew.  There isn't very much here, and so we feel okay with always starting anew.  There are no 1000-year-old cathedrals or 500-year-old apartment blocks to anchor our past to the landscape. 
Therefore we think of the landscape as a virgin field upon which to start fresh.  However, at the same time, architecturally, we revert to old styles that have no true connection to the area.  Victorian and Tudor are the standard styles we see being pillaged for the majority of new building here. Why? 

 Speaking of influence, what strikes me as I travel and return here is not the fact that the cathedrals are missing but rather that we have no lineage that adds a depth to the city.  Overseas there is a willingness to add a modern glass addition to a Renaissance building, creating a new, third idea of space.  Here, we would demolish that old building and start new, but now there is nothing to architecturally respond to and so we are forced to create in a vacuum, which is a thoroughly uninspiring condition.

MC: What is your outlook on the “cookie-cutter” gated communities?

MF response: It’s funny that phrase, cookie cutters.  Such a contradiction in terms really when you think that cookie cutters conjure up these images of handmade treats that provide such joy, Mom's homemade choc chip cookies and all that.

A warm, appealing, emotionally engaging experience... the polar opposite really of these suburban communities.

The true issue for me in these places is environmental, both with regards to   the environment itself and the environment they create for the residents.  The reckless consumption of the landscape is negligent to say the least. And the character of the communities... well, if you walk around the standard suburb, you will quickly realize that you are the only person walking. And you’re doing it on someone's grass.  There are no sidewalks to walk on, no benches to sit on, no trees to shade you, no corner stores to interact with people. In fact, there is no reason to leave your domicile.

A community does not exist until the interaction of the residents occurs on a consistent basis at a block-by -block scale.  The city permits and endorses the creation of large blocks of housing segregated from public functions at scales and distances that forgo any concept of the individual.  Retail 'centers' are built at the intersection of enormous numbers of houses and so the model is for  hundreds of people to converge, consume and then retreat to the safe seclusion of their home.  This atmosphere of the mass is antithetical to the individual.  There is no connection of one person to another when dealing with a scale like that. 

So what of these safe domiciles people are forced to withdraw within?  The same notion of alienation holds true.  What does it tell the psyche to see a sea of barnacles attached to the land in parasitic fashion, no differentiation between them, rolling from hill to valley.  It is a message that the users themselves are impersonal.  Without character and emotion important enough to exact an impact on the area they live.  Crushing!  The natural reaction of course is to further withdraw, to avoid and ignore, a defence mechanism to protect the idea of self.  I expect Freud would have a few things to note on the 'burbs'.  NL