Category Archives: Worth reconsidering

New development proposal for Mountain/St-Antoine district

Cadillac-Fairview proposal for Mountain/St-Antoine district

The Toronto-based Cadillac-Fairview Corporation recently announced their intention to build new condo towers and a commercial office building around the Bell Center, occupying the site of Centennial Plaza. From the looks of things, the plan would include demolishing the old Canadian Pacific accounting building on St-Antoine, a nondescript 1950s structure located between the Bell Centre and Windsor Station. Cadillac-Fairview also owns property south of Windsor Station on St-Antoine it also hopes to develop in the future.

It definitely sounds like a good idea in theory. The area is in dire need of revitalization, though the Bell Centre has always seemed to be a gigantic box obstructing any sense of place or community, and as such a leading cause of the area’s poor state. Unfortunate too, as the area should be a major junction, linking the already established Underground City to Little Burgundy, the northern edge of Griffintown and the CBD of Montreal. However, while 710 new condo units, retail space and two new office towers would likely bring new life to the sector, it may come at the cost of permanently losing the possibility of revitalizing Windsor Station as a functioning train station.

Though construction of the Bell Centre cut Windsor Station off from the CPR tracks, and the station had not been in use for over a decade when construction began in the early 1990s, the Bell Centre is hardly an established, heritage building. For more on the details of the project, click here.

Allow me to explain: the Bell Centre was constructed to replace the Montreal Forum as the Forum had simply grown too old and was no longer capable of meeting the demands of a major sports and entertainment venue. In other words, arenas are designed either to be replaced or extensively modified, but the latter option can only go so far. The Bell Centre does its job extremely well and is located in a high-traffic area, but it is already beginning to show its limitations. Acoustics are far from ideal, and this is a problem given it serves as one of a small number of high-capacity concert venues in the downtown. Capacity has pretty much been met, and its my understanding that Habs games are regularly sold-out, so it is reasonable to think that Montrealers may be flocking to new arena sometime within the next twenty years, perhaps considerably sooner. There are other locations for a high-capacity arena (personally, I think either the site of the old Canada Post sorting facility in Griffintown, or the parking-lot of the Maison Radio-Canada would be ideal), and we should consider what we’ll do with the Bell Centre once it becomes obsolete.

I recommend destroying it completely, and re-activating Windsor Station as a primary urban train station with VIA, Amtrak and AMT service. Unfortunately, it seems as though Cadillac-Fairview and the AMT have no interest in seeing Windsor Station used as an actual train station. Andy Riga writes about this issue somewhat pessimistically on his blog, Metropolitan News.

The question as far as I see it is why the city doesn’t seem to be involved in determining how train stations are used, and what role they play in determining new development. Why is it that the real-estate speculators and developers come up with the plans? Shouldn’t the city be making the proposals, calling for tenders and such?

I’d like to see this development take place south of St-Antoine, between Peel and Mountain – there’s ample land available and several derelict and/or abandoned buildings. This kind of development would be ideal for this area, and as far as I know, it seems Cadillac-Fairview already owns the land. But building condo and office towers around a hockey rink that may already be obsolescent seems idiotic to me.

I think this city needs a more proactive planning agency – otherwise, as plans like this demonstrate, we may be creating more problems for ourselves and our future city.

If only I had a machine to rage against… {MUHC Superhospital WTF!}

Conceptual image of the planned MUHC Superhospital - gladly, not the work of the author

So today I was treated to a lecture by a McGill architecture prof on the history of Montréal hospitals, with a focus on the Royal Victoria Hospital as an interesting perspective on local social history. Among several key themes, the idea of a personal and societal connexion to a particular hospital arose, with the Vic serving as an even better case study on some of the cultural and ethical considerations to make when proposing radical modernization of institutions. As we ought to know, the Vic, along with the Montreal Children’s, a sizable chunk of the General and the Montreal Chest Institute will all be folded into the new MUHC Superhospital currently being excavated at the site of the former Glen Yard, near Vendome Métro.

If you’ve been reading the news for the last twenty years, you no doubt have a vague, intrinsically hostile reaction to the mere mention of the new compound word superhospital; it’s a seemingly endless quagmire of incompetence, delays and, compounding it all, that eerie sixth-sense tingling at the back of your spine nagging as to its fundamental necessity. Unfortunately for those of us not yet completely numbed to the inertia of the Québec government (in any form), we’ve been left to go back and look over the evidence, and its pretty damning. Worse still is that the superhospital project has finally broken ground – literally. They’re excavating about five floors worth of highly contaminated soil to eventually build a 2,500 car capacity parking garage – right at the corner of one of the busiest intersections in the entire country. Atop this vehicular birdhouse will sit the hospital digitally rendered above; easily twenty years behind schedule, both new superhospitals have entered the preliminary stages of construction – that is to say, the demolition, excavation component. I encourage all of you to go see the mesmerizing sight of roughly ten construction towers looming over a massive floodlit pit – it’s truly breath-taking. The problem here is that the MUHC Superhospital is gearing up to be yet another white elephant in a city which has too many as is. Given that the buildings are in such an early stage of development, I think a new round of public debate needs to occur to make sure this project doesn’t become a complete disaster.

Here’s a short list of what’s going wrong. We’ve already covered the toxic soil – a result of the site’s former occupation as a freight railyard, pictured here:

The Glen Yard in the 1960s, looking east-northeast (I think)

And the fact that it’s located in the worst possible location, adjacent to the Turcot Interchange – which is due for a major renovation. And that they still haven’t factored in connecting this damned hospital to the Vendome Intermodal station (which is beyond incompetence – it seems clear to me that this omission was on purpose so that a contractor could benefit from an inflated price (estimated at $30 million to build a tunnel under the railway).

So on top of these scandals, and that the project is retarded to the tune of twenty years, it also won’t be able to accommodate the number of beds available in the hospitals it will replace – about 800 for the new hospital compared with about 1200 spread out through the current MUHC system. Read all about that here.

And then there are the common sense issues, like why anyone would build one big hospital when the city and province have already had considerable problems containing hospital based disease, such as C. difficile. Then there are the practical considerations: communities require hospitals, and hospitals build and maintain communities. Institutional memory and public reverence for institutions build character and solidify the social solidarity. It builds community consciousness and civic proprietorship. Building a white elephant superhospital, which is what this plan is shaping up to be, will not only result in cost overruns and traffic jams, it may also result in the hospital’s public losing faith in the institution. I don’t think Montréal Anglophones have much left to lose faith in – can we afford to lose important hospitals for the sake of modernization and efficiency?

That last point is another bone of contention. While the argument that a superhospital will save money because expensive equipment can be shared, the idea that the superhospital will be in any architectural or societal fashion ‘modern’ is blatantly false. This hospital was designed and conceived of in the 1980s. And it has been such an ordeal just to get to the point of breaking ground no one has given much thought to finding a more suitable location (ideally, closer to the city and university it is affiliated with and away from a traffic logjam) or what impact the hospital closings may have on the population it is intended to serve.

Among the hospitals slated for closing, the Royal Victoria Hospital is perhaps the most iconic and established amongst Montreal’s anglophone population; a building with far too many memories to be demolished. It has been expanded several times since it opened in 1893, and carries a caveat attached to the donated land and buildings – they can only ever be used for education and healing. A very old woman in Westmount is committed to making sure the wishes of Lord Strathcona & Mount Royal and Lord Mount Stephen are carried out, if it’s the last thing she ever does.

There has been speculation that the Vic may simply be absorbed into McGill University, which could greatly expand its medical school and potentially convert some buildings into student dormitories – an almost ideal evolution of the built environment at the corner of Pine and University.

But what of the Children’s?

If there was ever a hospital population to be segregated from the general population, it is undeniably children. Sick kids require a special environment, one ideally sealed from adult diseases, pain and suffering. A children’s hospital ought to foster the notion of recuperation, rehabilitation and optimism. I always thought the pediatric hospital and the birthing hospital should be in the same place – I can think of no other kind of hospital where the demand for a miracle be as high as in a children’s hospital, and can think of no better provider of miracles than a maternity ward. Our Children’s should be kept where it is – as it stands now it is an anchor of the Atwater/Shaughnessy Village area, and that area has already suffered the loss of the Reddy Women’s Hospital some years ago.

As for the General, it is unclear as to exactly what will happen here; since it will remain a level-1 trauma center and has a significant amount of space, it seems likely that it will be used to handle ‘overflow’, though how this will work is unclear to me. At the end of the day, the MUHC Superhospital is looking more and more like a highly specialized jack-of-all-trades teaching hospital. High specialization. Concentration. Education. Those are a lot of hats to wear simultaneously, and like anything else that tries to hard to be too many things to too many people, it will likely fail at its intended purpose. The Superhospital is probably going to be looked on as a super mistake, and the taxpayers will be left with a supersized bill. Once the project reaches the state of public derision and ridicule, much like the Olympic Stadium or Mirabel International, it will be seen pessimistically as little more than yet another recent failure of a once proud and successful people. Can we afford such malaise?

Perspective on the City { No.12 } – Phillips Square

The King Edward VII Monument, (built 1914) in Phillips Square - work of the author, Summer 2009

Having a close friend who happens to live right next to Phillips Square has allowed me to experience this space with a fair degree of regularity. It has been a public space since Thomas Phillips granted the land to the city in 1842, though at that time it would have served as a focal point and common green for a residential area developing well to the West of the urban environment. The character of the space began to change in the late 19th century with the construction of Morgan’s department store (currently The Bay’s Montréal flagship store), followed by the construction of the Birks Store, the new Birks building and the Canada Cement Company building, seen in the background of the photo above.

The retail-commercial nature of this space became quite evident in the 1890s, though the Art Association of Montreal occupied a spot towards the Northeast corner of the square from 1877 until it moved to its Sherbrooke Street location and became the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts in 1912.

The monument in the center of the square is dedicated to the “Roi Pacificateur” or the Pacifying King, somewhat ironically in 1914; the monument was unveiled just as the First World War was commencing. As is typical of public monuments of that era, its construction was sponsored by the Birks Family and was designed to impart various ‘kingly’ ideals and a specific vision of the king, the empire and the dominion. The figures at the base of the monument are highly symbolic in nature; among others – at rear a sculpture symbolizing Edward’s first act as king – to officially abolish the tradition of Catholic persecution by the British Royal Family. On the West side, the four majority nations of Canada – English, French, Scottish and Irish – a kind of Edwardian-era vision of multi-culturalism. The East side figures represent bounty and the progress through industry and education; and on the front – a figure representing ‘armed peace’. For more details, check out the City of Montréal’s website detailing public art, here.

I’ve always found the juxtaposition of the values presented in this monument and the reality of the values demonstrated by the services offered in and around this space rather striking. I think I’d prefer various institutions gathered around this space, something more akin to the way it would have been back before the monument was constructed. I suppose the square offers more-or-less direct access to Christ Church Cathedral and St. James Church, which are cultural venues by necessity, but it would be refreshing to see this space used for something aside from mere commerce. As an example – take a walk through this space on a Friday or Saturday night anytime after 9pm and you’ll see how it becomes a kind of gathering point for drunken fools. A real pity too given that it has also made Raoul Wallenberg Square unpleasant at times for similar reasons.

There’s a Canderel proposal for what to do with this space here:

Parking lot area right next to Phillips Square, behind the Hotel - not the work of the author

There proposal is this:

Canderel's proposal for a potential office tower at 1215 Phillips Square - not the work of the author

Not sure how this is going to affect the space in total, but given the trend towards densification of the urban environment, it makes sense that this area would become yet another pole for high-rise commercial office towers; perhaps its the necessary next phase of evolution? I’m not crazy about Canderel since they’re responsible for the Forum fiasco, but I’d be willing to forgive if this particular structure was externally and internally well-designed, environmentally sound, and served as a kind of hub for an expanded Underground City – namely, connecting the Quartier des Spectacles and Paper Hill/Little Dublin area with the retail and entertainment sector concentrated around McGill College. If it breeds better growth in this area, I’m all for it. I just hope it doesn’t end up looking like the Centre du Commerce Electronique!

What interests me is the prospect of linking McGill Métro station to Square-Victoria by means of underground tunnels running from 1080 Beaver Hall Hill to 500 René-Lévesque, then to this new structure and finally hooking up under the Square and further accessing the Bay, providing another North-South axis in the Underground City.

On a final note; consider the pathways you take through the city, and just how often you pass large open tracts of land which serve, either officially or unofficially, as meeting places and focal points. Our city happens to be almost galactic in nature, with multiple poles pulling a wide variety of activities towards them, providing links between a variety of defined-activity quarters.

Now is this good planning, a complete fluke, or the realization a past fluke was fortuitous and thus so happened to be worked into our urban tapestry?

Perspective on the City {No. 11} – the Bickerdyke Pier

The Bickerdyke Pier during its Expo 67 heyday - not the work of the author

I can’t get enough of this picture.

From this perspective we see the Bickerdyke Pier in its Expo 67 glory. In the foreground is Habitat 67 with the assembly crane from Dominion Bridge Co. which demonstrated the work-in-progress aspect of Habitat, a big kick for visitors. Behind Habitat are the Man and the Community and Man and his Health pavilions, Labyrinthe, the Olympic House, Québec Industries Pavilion, the launch site for the Expo Hovercraft, the International Commerce pavilion, the Hospitality Centre and Man and his Music. Key arts and media pavilions were located next to the Place d’Acceuil (the building just above the middle of the pic, with the tent-like roof, next to the stadium with the train-line running out of it); including the Photography and Industrial Design pavilion, the Art Gallery, the Expo Theatre, the International Broadcasting pavilion and the News and Administration pavilion. The Art Gallery is now used by Lotto-Québec, while the theatre has since become Mel’s Cité-du-Cinéma and the Administration pavilion is now used by the Cité-du-Havre Corporation. Condos now stand where the Man and his Community and Labyrinthe pavilions once stood, while the Corby Distillery and a Canada Post sorting facility occupy the former site of the Autostade, which in turn occupied the site of the former Goose Village. Near the top right corner of the picture, you can see the vast parking lot built on land created by piling massive quantities of garbage along the shoreline and then paving it over. After its brief tenure as a parking lot, this space was then transformed into the Victoria STOLport, a short-take-off-and-landing airport similar to Toronto’s Billy Bishop serving a largely business and political crowd. The idea never really ‘took-off’ as it were, and the site was then developed into the Montréal Technoparc, one of at least three I can think of in this city.

As you look down the length of the jetty you’ll notice the Expo Express train and the station near Habitat 67. Consider that this space would have been Expo’s introduction, the appetizer if you will before reaching the spectacular national and thematic pavilions built on the park islands. Consider as well the type of pavilions located here in comparison to what would lie beyond. Note that while the area contained some rather interesting and attractive architecture, it was certainly muted when compared to the other Expo super structures. Consider the centralization of key services in this area and the general-taste atmosphere of the site, its proximity to the city and CBD, not to mention the pairing of communication and transportation infrastructure in the same place. Finally, notice how clean, manicured and modern this space is. Today much of the Pier and the park islands are overgrown, especially the former Place des Nations.

It’s amazing how quickly large tracts of the city can be temporarily ultra-modernized, and then fall back into a more natural state almost as quickly.

A critique of the hyperbolic newspaper *updated*

Another example of this terrible paper: is the actual situation this cut and dry?

This is the letter I just fired off to David Johnston of the Gazette for the rather poor working of this particular article: Westmount Mini-war

Sir –

“Mini-war”? Really?

A bit hyperbolic don’t you think? I think what’s going on in Bahrain, Libya or Yemen right now qualifies as a ‘mini-war’. Ask an Iraqi or an Afghani what war is like and you’ll be surprised to learn there’s usually very little talk of burying hockey rinks or ameliorating community services.

From my experience, debates of this nature during war time are typically interrupted by massive explosions, choking via chemical gas and the constant, droning rhythms of machine gun fire.

I guess what I’m trying to say is, if you want to be taken seriously – and trust me when I say this applies to the Gazette as a whole – you can’t keep submitting ridiculous headlines and bylines like this. It’s not the first time I’ve written to complain about your paper’s poor (or exploitative) command of the English language, but I’ve typically been given the run-around. A lot of ‘it’s not my decision, pass the buck, I’m not responsible etc etc’.

The Gazette likes to think it is a Montréal institution, and it should be. But as long as it feeds the innate human desire for scandal and uses the worst kind of Fox News rhetoric to convey information, it will remain a joke. A bad joke, one which brings shame and humiliation to the entirety of the local Anglophone population.

We need a newspaper of record, one which is taken seriously. But more and more I see a scandal rag with an editorial board taking cues from Hearst’s portrayal of the Spanish-American War.

Try harder…

With utmost sincerity,

Taylor C. Noakes

_____________________________________

And here is Mr. Johnston’s response:

Hello Mr. Noakes:

Thank you for your letter. I couldn’t agree with you more. You might not know that writers don’t write their own headlines. That’s a job for copy editors and, like writers, they have good days and bad days, good habits and bad habits. I also think that war metaphors are greatly overused in our business – and as you say, they are particularly silly and inappropriate these days, given what we are seeing in the Middle East. I’m going to talk to the senior editors here and see if we can start making it a policy not to use the word war so loosely.
Thank you,

Dave Johnston

***

Frankly, I couldn’t be happier with this response. I think we have a friend on the inside!

Who did it better? Montréal vs. Los Angeles

AON Building, Los Angeles Financial District - work of the author, October 2010

The AON Center in downtown LA, a 62-story Modernist office tower design by Charles Luckman and completed in 1973.

Tour de la Bourse, Square Victoria - work of the author, Spring 2009

The Tour de la Bourse on Square Victoria, completed in 1964 and rising 47 floors. It is considered to be a prime example of Internationalist-style modern architecture, and was designed by Nervi and Moretti.