At a memorial service for Vancouver philanthropist, architecture professor and urban thinker Abraham Rogatnick earlier this fall, his distaste for the planned move by the Vancouver Art Gallery (where he once served as interim director) was noted quite forcefully in a speech by architect Peter Busby. This comment was greeted with enthusiastic applause by many in attendance, but not by everyone.
The question of whether the VAG should move from its current location - an old courthouse smack dab in the middle of the city's main shopping street - is a divisive one in the city's arts, culture and urban-planning communities, with fervent support for the move in some camps and bitter opposition in others.
And as the VAG's board meets today, the question of where - or whether - the gallery should go remains unresolved, despite talk at one time of a groundbreaking shortly after the Olympics.
Board members are keeping mum and even gallery director Kathleen Bartels, who has been eager to discuss the VAG's relocation in the past (a move she has a strong desire to oversee), refused a request by The Globe and Mail to talk about it now. "There is nothing new to discuss regarding the gallery's plans for a new building," read a brief e-mail from the gallery's publicist.
But there is a growing feeling - in the community, if not at the board - that the art gallery should stay where it is.
A move to the Plaza of Nations site on Northeast False Creek is all but dead, according to people close to the issue. This plan was revealed in a surprise 2008 announcement by British Columbia Premier Gordon Campbell, who earlier had pledged $50-million for a new VAG. But, as reported in The Globe last June, there are problems with building on the site that would increase costs significantly. Cost is already an issue. When plans for a move were first announced, the economy was in better shape. It's impossible to nail down a budget for a new VAG without plans or a chosen site, but estimates have run as high as $400-million.
If the Plaza of Nations site is out, that leaves the land across from the Queen Elizabeth Theatre. Recently a parking lot, it once housed a bus depot and will be one of the city's Live Sites during the 2010 Olympics. This was the VAG's preferred location before the province stepped in with its waterfront plan. It has also been discussed as the centre of a new arts district, dubbed the cultural precinct.
But it is also one of the locations the city's planning department has earmarked for a tall building. It's making that recommendation while the city awaits official word about the VAG's plans. In the summer, council asked the VAG which site it preferred for its relocation. No decision has yet been communicated.
A tall building could encompass a new art gallery, with a tower on top of it, but some see a stand-alone building as more desirable.
Bartels has delivered impassioned pleas for a new, purpose-built, bigger building. Right now, less than 3 per cent of the gallery's permanent collection can be exhibited at any one time. She has talked about more than doubling the square footage.
Former VAG board member and chair of the master planning committee Michael Heeney isn't sure that's necessary. "What I'm hearing from people is they wonder if [the VAG has]really, really seriously looked at how they could stay where they are because it is such a fantastic location and maybe they don't need to double the size. … I don't think you need that kind of space to have a great museum."
Architect Bing Thom, who worked with Arthur Erickson on the 1983 renovation that turned the courthouse into the gallery (and Heeney's business partner), also advocates expanding on the current site. "I think location is everything in institutions." He suggests building a storage vault off-site (perhaps sharing it with other institutions) and using the current vault, along with space excavated under the facility, to create more exhibition room.
But Vancouver artist Roy Arden, whose work has been collected and exhibited by the VAG, says the gallery's location is less important than the building itself. "I think that the old facility is inadequate for various exhibitions," he says. "I guess a lot of people go and they see a nice big grand building, but it never really has lent itself well to the purposes it's supposed to serve."
Marsha Lederman