For 35 years, ERA Architects has been a strategic thought leader in understanding the ever-evolving phenomenon of heritage. As the firm evolves, so does our approach to working with heritage.
Our interdisciplinary talents, insights, and relationships to the existing built environment lead us to understand places as living through time. As people, communities, values, and societies change, it’s essential to form new avenues and ways of interpreting the places they experience and value. Through our diverse perspectives, expertise, and passions, it’s equally important to remain constant in our stewardship of the relationships between people and their environments.
To showcase how ERA’s studios approach this work in different yet complementary ways, this series of conversations between culture critic Alessandro Tersigni and the firm’s principals will showcase where we’ve been, where we’re headed, and how this array of practices both enriches and productively complicates our approach to understanding and working with heritage in the 21st century.
Alessandro Tersigni: What’s your role at ERA and what kind of work does your studio do?
Victoria Angel: I’m a principal at the firm, but my role is somewhat unique in that I’m not an architect but rather come from a cultural heritage and heritage planning background. That’s informed the composition of the team I lead at ERA’s satellite office in Ottawa, some of whom are based in Toronto. Our studio has a broad range of expertise in cultural heritage, cultural landscape practice, and conservation architecture — we even have a historian on our team. We collaborate widely across the firm, especially with ERA’s Montreal office, which we’re in the process of merging with. That’s a very exciting transition for us.
AT: How would you describe the work ERA does?
VA: I see ERA’s work as translating contemporary place-based theories and ideas into practice. We’ve tended to push the field of conservation by tackling complex problems and developing innovative strategies, approaches, and tools through those crucibles. One of the most interesting things about ERA is that we embrace the diversity of expertise and perspectives that exist across our studios. We have this incredible breadth of practice that fosters constructive debates and discussion. We challenge each other and share knowledge, and that makes us well-positioned to take on just about everything that comes our way.
AT: How do you understand heritage, and has that changed over time?
VA: One significant way that ERA understands heritage is through a cultural landscape lens. That means we view heritage as living and dynamic, resulting from sustained relationships between people and places over time. We see heritage as something both tangible and intangible at the intersection of nature and culture. When I joined ERA in 2012, those ideas were just taking off, and ERA led some challenging debates about their implications for the identification and stewardship of heritage. Since then, there’s been more acceptance of the notion of living heritage, but conservation tools still need to evolve considerably to implement these ideas in practice.
AT: At a certain point, does everything become heritage?
VA: In a way, yes. Arguably, the entirety of our built and natural environments is our shared inheritance and responsibility. Given the climate crisis and other existential threats that confront us today, we have no choice but to think about everything that’s already been built as a potential resource to be used wisely. The question is, how can relationships between people and places inform how change can and should happen? How can we understand the past in a way that recognizes everyone’s contribution to it? And how can we make the best use of what we have for social and functional purposes?
AT: What do you think those needs are? How would you like to see our understanding of places and their value change in future?
VA: I’d like to see the work ERA does, understanding, repairing, and adapting what already exists, become far more integrated within conventional planning practices. Rather than “red circling” heritage to protect it, the default should be the reuse of existing resources. I can imagine the planning system evolving considerably in that direction, where we’re talking less about heritage and designation, and more about the stewardship of what exists already. For that to work, we need to keep creating and embracing forums for discussion and debate as part of our practice.
AT: Can you share something exciting that you’re working on right now?
VA: ERA are the heritage planners for the first comprehensive rehabilitation of Centre Block and major sections of Parliament Hill, the largest conservation project ever undertaken in Canada and one of the largest underway globally. We’re helping transform the site in seamless ways to meet the requirements of Parliament and 21st-century expectations for things like security, life safety, sustainability, accessibility, and inclusion. The project requires an approach that demonstrates a respect for the past, while symbolizing the aspirations of contemporary society. A whole range of issues and values that are extremely important to all Canadians are playing out within that scope. It’s hard to beat the significance of a project like that.
Portrait photography by Mina Markovic
