Preservation Group Protests Against the Dismantling of San Francisco’s Brutalist Fountain
**San Francisco’s Vaillancourt Fountain Faces Uncertain Future Amid Preservationist Appeal**
San Francisco’s iconic Vaillancourt Fountain, a hallmark of Brutalist architecture, finds itself at the center of a heated legal and cultural dispute just a month after the city’s arts commission decided to dismantle it. Located along the Embarcadero, the fountain has been an integral component of the urban landscape since it was crafted by Canadian artist Armand Vaillancourt in 1971. However, plans to replace it with a new waterfront park have ignited opposition from preservationists and community members alike.
In a recent development, Docomomo US’s Northern California chapter has formally challenged the demolition order. On December 1, they filed an appeal to San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors, claiming procedural oversight by the parks and recreation department, which allegedly bypassed necessary review processes. The nonprofit, dedicated to Modernist site preservation, contends the fountain’s deteriorated state stems from deliberate negligence in maintenance rather than inherent hazard, as claimed by city officials. The city cited findings of lead and asbestos as justification for fast-tracking the removal without environmental review, invoking a safety exemption under California law.
The fountain, also known as “Québec Libre,” holds a storied place in San Francisco’s cultural history. It gained renown in part when U2’s Bono famously graffitied it in 1987, and it served as a nexus for the skateboarding culture that thrived in the city during the late 20th century. The fountain’s planned dismantling has provoked fierce debate, with supporters advocating its preservation as an architectural landmark. Docomomo, backed by Vaillancourt himself, proposes rehabilitating the sculpture, estimating the cost at $29 million—substantially more than the $4.4 million required for its removal and storage.
Approaching his 97th birthday, Vaillancourt has voiced his opposition to the fountain’s destruction, describing it as his most profound artistic achievement. During its construction, Vaillancourt’s activism manifested in solidarity with the American Indian Movement, an episode he recounted with pride, affirming the fountain as a monument to justice and artistic freedom.
Despite being fenced off and absent of water, the fountain remains a potent symbol for many, encapsulating a chapter of San Francisco’s urban history. As this legal battle unfolds, the city braces for a decision that may redefine its cultural landscape, blending the necessity for urban renewal with the preservation of its historical artifacts. The Board of Supervisors is expected to deliberate on the appeal in the coming months, with potential implications that resonate beyond San Francisco, leaving the fate of Vaillancourt’s vision hanging in the balance.