Of Barns and Palaces by ACC Art Books

The Circle without blemish. The empty mountains without sound. The moon hangs in the vacant, wide constellations. Pine cones drop in the old garden. The senna trees bloom. The same clear glory glory extends for ten thousand miles. Full Moon Tu Fu 6th c.

J. M. Cava edited by Boyce Postma Van Evera Bailey Fellowship Portland, Oregon

OF BARNS AND PALACES John Yeon | Northwest Architect

Buildings

Projects

Gardens

For Enzo and Sofie—more noble than any barn, more radiant than any palace.

Architecture does not have to be outspokenly heroic. It can be subversive, ephemeral, discovered. Julie Eizenberg

ORO Editions Publishers of Architecture, Art, and Design Gordon Goff: Publisher www.oroeditions.com info@oroeditions.com Published by ORO Editions Copyright © 2020 the Architecture Foundation of Oregon (AFO). All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including electronic, mechanical, photocopying of microfilming, recording, or otherwise (except that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press) without written permission from the publisher. You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer. Library of Congress cataloging-in-publication data available. Text by: J.M. Cava Book Design by: Boyce Postma with John Maternoski Managing Editor: Jake Anderson 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 First Edition ISBN: 978-1-939621-48-1 Color Separations and Printing: ORO Group Ltd. Printed in China. ORO Editions makes a continuous effort to minimize the overall carbon footprint of its publications. As part of this goal, ORO Editions, in association with Global ReLeaf, arranges to plant trees to replace those used in the manufacturing of the paper produced for its books. Global ReLeaf is an international campaign run by American Forests, one of the world’s oldest nonprofit conservation organizations. Global ReLeaf is American Forests’ education and action program that helps individuals, organizations, agencies, and corporations improve the local and global environment by planting and caring for trees.

Modernism does not mean minimalism. Contemporary does not forsake tradition. Technology does not mean to abandon people and senses. Tord Boontje

Donors

Acknowledgments

My deepest gratitude goes out to the colleagues, mentors, and friends (several of whom are all three) whose generous contributions allowed for the publication of this book. Thank you all, and I hope you like the result.

The Architecture Foundation of Oregon Van Evera Bailey Fellowship

L. James Onstott

Betsy Priddy

Richard Louis Brown

Thomas & Margaret Hacker

Mark Desbrow | Green Light Development

Mark & Kathie Foster

Steven Edelman

Don Tankersley | Don Tankersley Construction

Larry Bruton

Harry M. Dinihanian

Linda Czopek | Czopek Design Studio

Samuel Naito

Mic Johnson | Architecture Field Office

Craig & Anne Swinford

Gary Moye | Gary Moye Architect Inc.

This research was initiated by a grant from the Van Evera Bailey Fellowship through the Oregon Community Foundation and the Architecture Foundation of Oregon (AFO.) Jane Jarrett, Rod Ashley, and Susan Myers of AFO dispensed the combination of therapy, motivation, and support necessary for publication. Their patience with my prolonged timeframe has been exceeded only by their generosity in awarding the original funding. Although less of a product than initially proposed, I hope this manuscript validates that support. No research on Yeon’s life or work could be accomplished without the assistance of Richard Louis Brown. Besides allowing unrestricted access to Yeon’s archives, Richard was always available for assistance and encouragement. He endured my travails during this time with patience, kindness, humor, and an uncommon generosity of spirit. I am indebted to Ben King—who helped shape the initial project, and to Dan Toole—who performed some of the more difficult research. Juan Nunez skillfully created new drawings with very limited resources. Discussions of Yeon’s work with my thoughtful architectural colleagues Brent Hinrichs, Richard Potestio, and William Tripp were enlightening and enjoyable. Steve Koch illuminated Yeon’s gardens and provided much needed optimism from beginning to end. Boyce Postma succeeded in the Herculean task of dusting off, restarting, and creating— out of a thousand fragments—a coherent and pleasing entity; all of which he performed with remarkable efficiency, skill, and optimism. I would like to thank Kelly Rodriguez at ARCADE journal in Seattle and Greg Bellerby at the Emily Carr Institute in Vancouver for publishing prior pieces of mine on Yeon, and the team of Mike Bernard, Leah Mallen, and Gavin Froome for including my Yeon/Northwest research in their documentary film, Coast Modern. At ORO Editions, Gordon Cuff has taken patience to new heights for his long-standing support, while Jake Anderson made the complexities of production seem effortless. There is no quantifiable amount of gratitude I could give to my family that would begin to make up for the amount of personal time and finances diverted into this project; their patience is a gift. Finally, I am privileged to have studied and/or worked with three truly exceptional teachers: Kenneth Frampton, Thomas Hacker, and Louis Kahn. Their vision and inspiration profoundly shaped my view of architecture. Without them, I would be hard-pressed to appreciate, much less to understand, Yeon’s work.

PART 1

E-01 E-02 E-03 E-04 E-05 E-06 E-07 E-08 E-09 E-10 E-11

Introduction Regionalism Architecture Theory The Business of Architecture The Art of Building Architecture Contemporaries Art and Architecture Personal History Interiors Landscape Conservation

PART 2

H-01 H-02 H-03 H-04 H-05 H-06 H-07 H-08 H-09 H-10 H-11 H-12 H-13 H-14 H-15 H-16 H-17 H-18 H-19 H-20 H-21 H-22 H-23 H-24 H-25 H-26 H-27 H-28 H-29

Kistner House Manifesto House Mrs. John B. Yeon House Watzek House Plywood Houses Jorgensen House Mackaness House Oxford House Vietor House Oliver House Morgan House Corbett House De Sola House Soby House Van Buren House Jennings House Gazebo House Swan House Mears House Cottrell House Shaw House Bullitt House DeCanizares House Franck House Preble House Bianchi House Corbett Cabin Edwards House Collins House

PART 3

C-01 C-02 C-03 C-04

Cloud Cap Lodge Portland Garden Club Locatell Real Estate Office Portland Visitors Center

A-01 A-02 A-03

Chronology of Buildings and Projects Appendix Selected Bibliography

Essays

Houses

Civic Work & Other Projects

Introduction

01 02

“It seems to me that without question you are the dean of Northwest architecture.” 1 “John Yeon’s approach is frankly romantic. He is not afraid of beauty. Yet he is one of the few men who are able to achieve it without sacrificing the solidity and discipline which distinguish architecture from building... Perhaps his greatest gift is in being able to make his houses seem to grow organically—though not haphazardly— from their sites, echoing the big contours of the landscape yet living intimately with native flowers and shrubs and trees.” 2

wonderful places, whose skillful and thoughtful design ranks them among the best modern residential architecture of mid-century America. Other than the few character traits that directly affect his architecture, Yeon’s biography is not addressed in this book. Reading plans like musical scores, as Louis Kahn suggested architects do, Yeon’s messages speak clearly enough through his design. In light of the clarity and strength of this work, the notes that follow are those of a tour guide, pointing out elements of interest along the way. These architectural gestures are refreshingly straightforward and require no more than that to be understood.

John Yeon (1910–1994) was a life-long Oregonian. Yeon’s arrival into the realm of architecture is wellLargely self-taught as an architect—he did not even known both for its lack of academic background, and finish high school—he nevertheless designed some for his first built work, the Watzek House—a building of the most beautiful and influential structures in so profound and mature that it received instant national the Pacific Northwest. At the same time, he built an acclaim.3 It’s as if a young composer without musical important legacy as a tireless advocate for parks and training wrote, as a first composition, the “Jupiter” for protection of the sweeping natural landscapes of symphony. Yeon never looked back, nor did he—after the region. He also built a large art collection, chosen an early and brief encounter—engage the formal with the informed eye of a true connoisseur. professional, or educational systems. He had little patience for overblown trappings of bureaucracies and I leave future expositions on Yeon the preservationist, no need for their validation, preferring a more nimble the art collector, and the humanist to other scholars. individual pursuit of the essence of things. Yeon This volume focuses mostly on Yeon’s residential shared this trait with Frank Lloyd Wright, who among work wherein I feel his most influential and inspiring others, famously eschewed professional organizations creations are to be found. As such, it is a collection of and universities, too entrenched in their stagnant rules thoughts, notes, and research that I thought might be to rationally evaluate new work that challenged them.4 as eye-opening and useful for others as its compilation Yeon also shared with Wright a particular spirit of has been to me. In these buildings and gardens reside innovation, fueled and shored by a sense of honor and strong ideas about creating space and designing on the societal principles. This is an American conservatism, land. These seemed worth bringing to a larger audience built on deep respect for the land, age-old conventions for, as of this writing, there is little published on these of family, and the notion of home.5 Like Wright,

Henry-Russell Hitchcock, letter to John Yeon, April 15, 1954. Aline B. Saarinen (née Louchheim), New York Times article, 1948. She was an arts editor and critic at the New York Times from 1948–1953, prior to marrying Eero Saarinen. 3 Yeon only briefly attended architecture school at Columbia in the evenings, while working days in the New York office of the vaguely modernist-Art Deco architects, de Young, Moscowitz & Rosenberg, the architects remodeling the Portland Meier & Frank store; Julius Meier was a friend of Yeon’s father. There is a charcoal and chalk analytique drawing from this period of Yeon’s that survives, entitled “Loge of Honor.” 1 2

Although oddly enough, the great architect and educator, Ellis Lawrence at the University of Oregon in 1931 was one of the only academics to invite Wright to his campus. Wright praised the rear blank facades of the University Art Museum. 5 See Norris Smith’s excellent book on Frank Lloyd Wright which reveals and supports this idea. 6 Yeon was a ”summertime office boy” for Brookman at the age of 15. Transcript of A. Watzek award speech, 1980. 7 An implied criticism of A.E. Doyle, since Yeon was previously an office boy in his firm. 4

Yeon persevered against all odds, though following a different path than the master of Taliesin. And in the end, his perseverance left us a legacy of wonder, beauty, and delight. Yeon described the Portland architect Herman Brookman, by whom he was briefly employed,6 as one of his early heroes. His reminiscences of Brookman and his work provide some of the best insights we have of Yeon’s deep emotional connection with the art of architecture, and how it transformed over his lifetime.

“I don’t remember what I did beyond making models of houses which were never built, and looking at architectural books and magazines from many countries in the office library. But I remember Brookman very clearly. He was at least a head shorter than I with enormous dark eyes and unusually long lashes. They were not dreamy placid eyes; they synchronized with his excitable speech and darting body movements. They were incandescent with enthusiasm or intense with concern. Above all else, Brookman was passionate about what he was doing, and I was there because I was passionate about what he had done. His architecture was my first exposure to the ‘real thing’ 7 and I responded with the fervor of first love. I liked its romantic nature, its inventive surprises of forms and details, its use of crafts and unusual materials, its magical evocation of long ago and far away.

Later I became a zealot for a new and less derivative architecture for the here and now, for a new style for this singular regional landscape which had no indigenous style of its own. But somehow I continued to admire Brookman’s work even when I was cursing with missionary zeal, architecture transplanted from other times and places. I am not such a zealot now, nor are many others who once embraced modern architecture with the fanaticism of early Christians. Now there is a broadening of interest in talents such as Brookman’s which flourished before the great depression literally cramped their style, and before the quietus was put upon them by the overwhelming surge of fashion for a machine age aesthetic which propelled the modern movement. Even during his lifetime, Brookman’s early works seemed like relics from a long lost world.” 8

Yeon’s short apprenticeship with Brookman could be compared with that of William Wurster’s one-year stint in 1923 at the renowned New York office of Delano and Aldrich,10 a firm known at the time for designing large, eclectic, and expensive houses for East Coast aristocrats. Both Yeon and Wurster were somewhat intellectually aligned with the Beaux-Arts California architect and teacher, John Galen Howard. Howard believed in a conservative and cautious approach to modernism. In 1907, he lucidly described the attitude of architects like Brookman, reluctant to entirely give up the melodic lyricism contained in historic styles, yet seeking something modern with:

“a poetic message stripped of verbiage: classic to the core, yet classic of that primitive type which might almost be called archaic, were it not that it is quickened by the breath of modern life.”11

As late as 1990, Yeon passionately defended one of Brookman’s prominent buildings—the eclectic and Byzantine-style Temple Beth Israel—against a proposed addition he considered inappropriate and Yeon was both modernist and classicist, revolutionary destructive, going so far as to call it “a serious act of and traditionalist. He retained a lifelong respect cultural vandalism.”9 He understood the need for and love of cultural history and believed firmly that significant and beautiful architecture in Portland and architecture had a significant role within that history. pleaded for a more discreet method of adding space. Yeon understood that buildings and gardens hold an “A masterpiece has been defined as a work of art even greater significance in the present. Inextricably wherein any alteration (addition or subtraction) would woven into the rich fabric of our existence, they have damage its supremacy. The Temple is such a building. the power—collectively and individually—to nourish Its composition is complete, finite and crystal clear: a our awareness and enjoyment of everyday life. semi-spherical dome above a faceted octagonal block with axial extensions east and west. It is enriched with evocations of architecture from long ago and far away, and with craftsmanship and decorative details which were to become virtually extinguished by the juggernaut of the modern International Style.”

Transcript of acceptance speech, Aubrey Watzek Award, Lewis & Clark College, 1980. 9 Yeon letter, Sept 1, 1990. 8

Treib, Marc. William Wurster, An Everyday Modernism, the Houses of William Wurster. University of California Press, 1996. p. 87. Ibid, p. 16.

Left Top: Early drawings by Yeon. The Quill, Culver Academy. Left Middle: Herman Brookman, Menucha. Corbett, Oregon. 1928. Left Bottom: Wade Pipes, Kistner House. Portland, Oregon. 1930.

Right Top: Herman Brookman, Temple Beth Israel. Portland, Oregon. 1928. Right Middle: Herman Brookman, Bitar Mansion. Portland, Oregon. 1928. Right Bottom: Early drawings by Yeon. The Quill, Culver Academy.

Plywood Houses

1939–1955 Portland, Oregon

Built—Standing

without interfering with ventilation. The color of the house is a yellowish gray green with a chocolate brown roof and burnt orange front door.

“I was interested in the concept of a ‘minimal’ house, because the Watzek house was so large and costly. Making the Watzek house exterior look clean was a very expensive way to build. I happily entered into an agreement to do nine builder houses shortly thereafter.”1 “Burt Smith came to me and asked me to design some inexpensive houses; he had been the contractor for the Watzek house...The houses were built on wooded and rocky lots that had nothing but rocks and trees to recommend them, and all the trees and rocks and mosses were still there. So I painted the houses with colors that blended into the sites. The first one was a celadon color with a bright burnt orange front door; they all had variations of colors like that, some were bluer or yellower according to the plants that were there...they were nice colors.”2 “This house is the first completed of an eventual group of 10 small houses on rocky wooded sites. The materials and style of the group will be consistent but the plan will be individual for each house. Perhaps the most distinguishing features of the house are the windows and ventilating systems. The glass is fixed between structural vertical members with ventilators below each window. This arrangement permits the narrow divisions between the glass which is not usually possible in wooden sash construction. It provides windows which are never obscured by screens, permits rain proof ventilation, and makes the one-story house burglar proof as far as the windows are concerned. Also, curtains can cover the windows

Salkin, Andrew H. “John Yeon; The Influence of the Region.” ARCADE 1982–83. John Yeon interview with Richard Brown, December 1993. Unpublished transcript. 3 Yeon, letter to Architectural Forum, February 25, 1939. 4 Due to rising real estate values, most if these homes are regrettably no 1

The problem was to produce a house on a densely wooded site which would be sufficiently light and cheerful without necessitating the clearing which would destroy the character of the location. An attempt was made to design a wooden house which was contemporary in feeling without using the forms made fashionable by modern architecture in other materials.”3 Published in the April 1939 issue of The Architectural Forum with the theme of “The Low Cost House,” this was one of 46 built projects, of which only six could really be called modern.4 Among these are designs by Raphael Soriano (California), Alden Dow (Michigan), and Paul Thiry (Seattle). This indicates how difficult a problem it was—and still is—for architects working in a modern syntax to compete in the low cost housing market with conventional houses, which are easy and accessible for bankers, builders, and buyers. Given Architectural Forum’s predilection for publishing modern work, it means they could find very little of it in 1939 that qualified as low cost housing and they warned that “The Forum anticipates more than one raised eyebrow over the esthetic quality of some of the houses presented in this issue.”5 Their main criterion was that the cost to occupants be between $25–$406 per month in payments, or a total cost for the house and land of $4,0007 or less. Yeon’s house was slightly over the limit, at $4,750, although they acknowledged that this “excellent” plan was “a deluxe version of the minimum house.” Yeon’s achievement in this regard is

longer “low cost.” One of Yeon’s small houses, on SW Upland Drive, Portland (remodeled) sold in 2013 for over $600,000. Architectural Forum, “The Low Cost House,” April 1939. p. 233. 6 $450–$650 in 2013 currency. 7 About $67,000 in 2013. 5

astounding, given the pronounced failures of so many simple planning, the Life houses are three-bedroom, other accomplished modern architects in this endeavor. while Yeon’s is two-bedroom. However, Yeon’s house As The Forum notes in its introduction, “More often appears to cost only half as much to build as either than not these small houses are designed without of the two less expensive Life houses, “traditional” or benefit of architect. More often than not architects “modern.” The latter was produced by the renowned will say they cannot afford to do small houses. But Edward Durell Stone, who only a year earlier designed there is little comfort in that answer to the architect the Museum of Modern Art in New York.11 Stone was who believes his profession can no longer ignore the a devoted acolyte of the International Style, although housing requirements of nearly three-quarters of the his “functional” house planning in this case consisted people in the U.S.”8 mainly of eliminating the perceived “wasted” space of corridors. The plan he presents—prefiguring his The interest in this topic was driven by the fact that later career of geometrically pure buildings—is nearly the U. S. was still struggling with the effects of the a perfect square. A service core fills the center with a Depression—low cost housing was not an issue at all single car garage and screened porch attached to one in the 1920s, but The Forum noted that in 1939 over 70% side, unfortunately blocking the kitchen from light or of American families earned less than $2,000 per year, view. The “traditional” version of the inexpensive whereas ten years earlier, well over half the population Life house, designed by Richard Koch, is a singularly earned more than that. unaccomplished and unimaginative representation of a typical American suburban home of the period.12 An interesting comparison is to be made with the “low cost” houses published in Life magazine a year “The plywood houses were cheaper than tract before.9 Although the article steadfastly refuses houses. Besides the looks—and the outlook from to put a specific price on each house, claiming too them—appealed to some people...they were fairly well much pricing variability from region to region, one described in magazines at the time.”13 can extrapolate projected costs for the eight houses— four “traditional” and four “modern”—each in a slightly different price range. The least expensive pair appears to be in the $4,000 to $6,000 range. The next In this context, Yeon’s unofficial entry to the genre as pair jumps to around $6,000 to $8,000, including the it were, is a refreshing solution to the problem. It is “modern” house designed by William Wurster. Frank relaxed and livable, an easy combination of modernism Lloyd Wright has an equally modern entry, but only and tradition without rhetoric. In planning, every at the higher $10,000 to $12,000 level, and a completely room in the house, except the bath, has exposure to glazed modern home for the highest income bracket natural light and fresh air on two sides via floor-tois presented by the prestigious commercial firm of ceiling glazing and ventilation. Notably, this includes the kitchen, which in both of the cheaper Life houses, Harrison & Fouiloux for approximately $20,000.10 barely qualify for the nomenclature of “room.” The It is revealing to compare the less expensive Life versions formal characteristics of Yeon’s house are without with Yeon’s “low cost” plywood house. In terms of obedience to any abstract theory or fashion. They

Ibid. “Eight Houses for Modern Living,” Life, September 1938. 10 This translates in 2013 dollars to: $67,000–100,000 for the least expensive, $100,000–130,000 for the Wurster, $167,000–200,000 for Wright’s home, and $335,000 for Harrison’s.

Along with Philip L. Goodwin. Koch was a New Orleans architect specializing in historic buildings of the Southern United States. 13 John Yeon interview with Richard Brown, December 1993. Unpublished transcript.

derive from a rational distribution of space on the site, Yeon outfitted all windows with Venetian blinds from guided by a fierce determination to bring natural light, the Oregon Venetian Blind Company.15 The total fresh air, comfort, beauty, and the natural world into construction cost at the time was $3,280.00.16 The cost the design of even the least expensive homes. of the land and other miscellaneous costs added up to a grand total of $4,750.00 for the project. The construction of the Plywood houses consists of 2x4 fir studs at 16 inches on center with rough 1x6 fir These unpretentious modern homes of Yeon’s tongue and groove for structural sheathing, 15 lb. felt have met with various fates over the years. Most building paper, and painted “Resn-Prest” plywood as have simply outlived their site’s “low cost” status, the exterior skin, modulated with (painted) vertical particularly the Lake Oswego and West Hills locations, fir battens 28 inches on center. The interior walls are now prestigious and expensive neighborhoods. Most standard 2x4 studs supporting plaster & metal lath have been remodeled, though one of the West Hills construction. Wood trim is eliminated at the interior of homes remains relatively intact. Due to lesser real the windows, with Yeon’s preferred detail of a curved estate pressures, the Mock’s Crest pair are probably ¾ inch plaster casing making the transition from in the best condition, one of them now on the Historic plaster to wood. Floors are concrete slabs, finished Register. with oak blocks, or “parquet,” set in asphalt, with linoleum in the kitchens and baths. “I was dismayed by the estimates [of the Watzek house] and expected it could not be built. As penance, the The roof construction is unusual, consisting of 2x6 inch following year I did inexpensive small speculation tongue and groove fir boards spanning from ridge to houses for the contractor who built the Watzek house. eave, without the presence of normal roof rafters. The The first one, with two bedrooms, cost $3,280. After roof is of cedar shingles with a four inch exposure, four or five of these, the contractor took orders for giving a tight appearance and a greater than average specific clients for several more. All had somewhat degree of waterproofing. This system was, as Yeon differing plans and colors, but the construction explained, “a great economy and produced a very formula was the same. The balloon framing was made refined eave, overhanging 18 or 24 inches.”14 visible. The framing was exposed in the window areas; glass was fitted between the studs at two-foot The windows are without sash and comprised of fixed intervals. Exterior plywood was newly available panes of 3/16 inch plate glass inserted between the and it sheathed the house, with battens at the same standard stud spacing with ventilation provided by interval. 2 x 6 tongue and groove [boards] made operable louvers below. For sun control and privacy, inclined slabs for the roofs without rafters. This

John Yeon interview with Richard Brown, December 1993. Unpublished transcript. Architectural Forum, April 1939. 16 The success of this venture in terms of cost is remarkable if we translate the price of the home into 2013 dollars, which would be approximately $55,000.00 for construction costs. This is less than half the price per square 14

foot required to construct a comparable home in 2013. This can partly be accounted for by the dramatic rise in labor wages proportional to materials in today’s economy versus that of 1940 and there are variables in that many materials that were inexpensive in 1940 are luxury items today. 17 John Yeon. Pries Lecture, 1986.

produced a thin clean eave line in scale with the size of the house and the narrow window divisions. Ventilation under or above the windows was provided by fixed louvered openings with adjustable small inside doors. The separation of ventilation from view and light sources eliminated the complication of movable windows and increased security.

All this may seem old hat now, but it certainly wasn’t at the time. Fixed glass and louver ventilation spread like wildfire until aluminum sliding doors and windows became popular. The formula was invented for a tree-shaded site with exterior doors providing ventilation. In many situations where it was used by others, louver ventilation alone was inadequate—twostory public housing in particular.”17

Portland Visitors Center

1948 Portland, Oregon

Built

When Robert Moses prepared his report for Portland in the fall of 1943, waterfront development along the Willamette was a key ingredient.1 In typical Moses fashion, the waterfront was envisioned as a grand design with recreational plazas and dramatic civic buildings flanking the river—markets, theaters, municipal offices, and museums. Moses specifically commented on one important aspect, “the deplorable entrance to the city” from the south. This was one motivation for the siting and subsequent construction of the Visitors Information Center five years later. Yeon best explained this building—what he referred to as his only real “urban proposition”2—when, ironically, he was making a plea for its destruction, attempting to prevent its conversion to a restaurant. His rationale for this reveals Yeon’s extraordinary self-effacement and willingness to go so far as to recommend the destruction of his own building—his only public building, one with landmark status no less—in order to serve a larger ideal, which in this case was the development of Governor Tom McCall Waterfront Park, then underway. Built at the scale of a large house, this building is a brilliant example of Yeon’s thinking about interior and exterior space. Executed with sensitivity and skill it is a rigorous and disciplined work of civic architecture. The basic concept is an asymmetrical pinwheel arrangement of four rectangular blocks of varying heights and sizes. The boundary of the main public space is implied within the empty space found between three of those blocks, and further defined by a ceiling which they support. Floor to ceiling glass walls are set between the blocks to weatherproof this public space without inhibiting natural light or views in all four

Morin, Roy L. Waterfront Development, Portland Ore. The Architectural Forum. April 1944. p. 119–124. 2 John Yeon. Letter to Douglas Haskell, House and Home Magazine, January 21, 1954. 3 John Yeon, letter, January 23, 1986. 1

directions. The smallest block—containing garden equipment and storage—maintains the pinwheel alignment, spinning out from the central formation and terminating in the pool. “The solid blocks have identical surrounding surfaces whether these are within or without the glass enclosures of the public area. This is a quintessential inside-outside building. The color and details of the outside walls are the same as for the solid walls of the interior. The public rooms which exist inside two of the blocks have a different treatment: hemlock walls and ceilings relating to the ceiling of the main public space. The rooms within the blocks are illuminated by windows near the ceiling. The absence of lower windows gives an illusion of solidity both inside and outside.”3 In the passage below, Yeon describes the site, the building’s original intent, and its orphaned status as the physical and political landscape of the area changed over time. He rightly thought the structure had outlived its usefulness and that flexibility, appropriateness and common sense should prevail over rules and regulations. This indicates Yeon’s worldview of architecture as inextricably bound to context, of use and of place. Despite his understanding of the Information Center as “a significant little building”4 he felt it was ill suited to what we now call “adaptive reuse” and—with the development of Waterfront Park—had become an awkward relic, more of an impediment than an aid to the park’s completion.5

John Yeon, letter to William J. Hawkins, III, architect for the proposed conversion to a restaurant, October 29, 1985. 5 The building did have an interesting brief spell hosting the city’s Bureau of Architectural Planning. 4

“When the building was first constructed, the surroundings were far less attractive than now. The Journal Building (originally a market) loomed to the north. Harbor Drive with heavy traffic passed between it and the river, the surrounding park did not exist, and the drift of new construction towards the waterfront had not begun.”6

rectangular blocks having surrounding surfaces of identical color and detail. If this single-minded concept is impaired, the building has nothing to offer architecturally. The inflexible stubbornness of the concept gave it whatever merit or interest it had….The most logical use of the structure would be resumption of its original use.”8

“Neither the exterior nor the interior can be separately altered without affecting the other. It is a quintessential inside-outside concept. The central space is a transparent glazed enclosure between dense

Considered by some to be “Portland’s first encounter with the International Style,”9 the Center was built entirely on a three-foot modular grid (similar to many of the houses). The original colors were signature Yeon: light sea-green for the battens and mullions, set against a darker blue-green for the exterior plywood panels, with exposed framing edges (2 x 6’s on the exterior, 2 x 4’s on the interior) painted an even darker blue-black, and a deep Venetian red or “Cherokee” red on the doors. The large exhibit room (the block parallel to the river) could be transformed into a small theater by raising hinged panels to cover the high clerestory windows. Benches that were normally set against the wall were then moved out to the center to face the screen. Ceilings are six-foot clear-grain hemlock squares in an alternating parquetlike pattern, with recessed lighting in the center of each square. The long stately pergola that stretches along the river side originally held wisteria, but was quickly replaced with climbing roses. On the other side of the garden, bamboo was planted inside the fence that protected the garden from the parking area, and flowering water-plants grew in the pool. The

John Yeon, letter to Bill Hawkins, October 29, 1985. John Yeon. Pries Lecture, 1986. John Yeon. Letter to Bill Hawkins, October 29, 1985. In this letter, Yeon did suggest several alternative ideas for the building’s reuse as a public facility, preferable to a privately owned restaurant, among them a headquarters for the Metropolitan Arts Commission, Oregon state tourist information, or a

Park Bureau facility taking care of all waterfront-park related activities—an easy and logical solution. Although the building did become a restaurant, it was never a success. Today it is fully renovated (though not restored) as offices for the Portland Rose Festival Foundation, so its public use now comes close to Yeon’s suggestions. 9 A Century of Portland Architecture. p. 173.

“The Visitors Information Center was a Chamber of Commerce project abandoned when Harbor Drive was removed, eliminating the access which was the rationale for its location. The great 1962 storm leveled the pergola which then was overburdened with the weight of untrimmed climbing roses. It also removed the garden wall. But the building had suffered the changing notions of changing committees long before this happened. The original site was a brutal one, beside a two-block-long building and behind Harbor Drive. Both of these are now removed to accommodate a park where the building survives in a derelict state [in 1986], and should be removed for many reasons. I have been opposed to proposals to restore it for adaptive uses which would alter essentials of the original concept. The removal is complicated by a landmark designation.7

6 7 8

building had radiant heat under light brown asphalt tile floors while ventilation for cooling and fresh air was provided, as in nearly all of Yeon’s buildings with operable louvers distinct from the fixed glazing set inexpensively into the modular frame. This small but lovely building was widely published, perhaps most significantly in the Museum of Modern Art’s 1952 exhibit and book, Built in USA: Post-war Architecture. Here, it was featured alongside Belluschi’s much larger Equitable Building, and a number of American mid-century monuments: Johnson’s Glass House, the Eames’s own house, Aalto’s MIT Dormitory, Neutra’s Tremaine House, Mies’s Farnsworth House, SOM’s Lever House, and Frank Lloyd Wright’s Johnson Wax Building. The success of this building raises the tantalizing question of what Yeon might have done, had he been given more opportunities to design in the urban realm.