Tag Archives: MUHC

A modest proposal, Commentary, Cultural commentary, Economic commentary, History and Culture, Kondiaronk - My Montréal Experience, Let's make this an election issue, Montréal Architecture, Montréal Landmarks, Political commentary, Social commentary, Urban Redevelopment, Worth reconsidering

The Future of Institutional Space in the Mountain Domain

Leave a comment
Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal - circa 1895
Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal – circa 1895

An important public forum will take place at the Maison Smith up on Mount Royal Thursday night beginning at 18h00 and dealing with the future of the soon to be vacated hospitals within the ‘Mountain Domain’.

The forum will be presented by Les Amis de la Montagne and will feature three presentations, one on the mountain itself, another on the Plateau Mont Royal’s plan for the Hotel Dieu and another concerning McGill’s plans for the Royal Victoria Hospital. Presenters will include municipal councillor Alex Norris, McGill University external relations VP Olivier Marcil and Marie-Odile Trépanier, urbanism professor from the Université de Montréal.

I’ll write more on the specifics later, but for the time being it seems like the Royal Victoria Hospital will be annexed by McGill University.

Not the worst idea in the world. McGill apparently needs the space and annexing the Vic makes a lot of sense given that the university has grown up all around it, not to mention that the hospital is part of the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC).

In other words – this was expected.

The hospital was a gift from two prominent figures in our city’s history, the cousins Donald Smith and George Stephen (later the Lords Strathcona and Mount Stephen). They were the men principally responsible for the creation of the nation’s first transcontinental rail line, but it is the Royal Victoria which is arguably the greater legacy. For as central and important as rail has been in our city’s economic development, I don’t believe it equals the global significance of the medical innovations that have come from this institution, nor the building’s role as a local ‘lieux de mémoire’ for tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Montreal moms.

Though the deed to the land initially stated the land be used in perpetuity in the service of the public as a medical institution, the remaining heirs have relinquished this requirement. Instead, they have simply requested that the soon-to-be former hospital be used to serve the public interest.

Enter McGill University. If the choice is between handing these buildings over to the university or developing the land into luxury condominiums I’d be the first to rig up and hoist the Martlet flag from the turrets of this masterpiece of late-Victorian Scottish Baronial institutional architecture.

That said, I’m concerned McGill will use this space for dormitories and not classrooms.

I’m also concerned the new MUHC Glen Yards campus will not be able to fully replace all the hospital beds it currently operates. The MUHC has acknowledged the new superhospital will indeed provide fewer beds than currently available in the extant hospital system.

So, with this in mind, is it really wise to eliminate all hospital operations from the Vic?

Is it not possible to keep at least one pavilion open for public medical purposes while handing over the rest to the university?

The hospital has a particularly strong link with the women of our city, principally owing to the strength of their maternity ward. Why not keep the main pavilion operating as a maternity and women’s hospital? It’ll ensure more beds are available and permit at least part of the building to retain its original function.

As to the Hotel Dieu, I’ve heard murmurings that at least one proposal would seek to have the rather expansive facility converted for the purposes of becoming an old age home.

This isn’t an altogether bad idea either given our aging population and the shrinking retirement assets of the working and middle classes. Private elder care is outrageously expensive and public facilities leave a lot to be desired as is, so converting a hospital into a massive retirement home seems opportune. It’ll certainly cost less than building a new structure and you can make the argument that, as far as institutional buildings are concerned, it’s well suited and well situated for the purpose.

But what of the old Shriner’s hospital, or the Montreal General? What of Hopital Notre Dame facing Parc Lafontaine, or the Thoracic Institute, or the Children’s?

Not all of these facilities are strictly speaking within the ‘Mountain Domain’, but they do represent the entirety of institutional space that will become available for repurposing over the next few years.

Which is why limiting the public conversation to those hospitals closest to Mount Royal Park seems illogical. All these spaces need to be considered in terms of the broad demands for public institutional space in our city.

We need more space to teach and to heal. We could use a lot more space to create and to exhibit our creations. We badly need space for the elderly, but not nearly as bad as we do for the homeless.

In any event, if we had a municipal institutional space oversight and coordinating committee I think our city would be able to strategize more effectively, respond more appropriately to public demand and ensure these prized properties serve the public interest to the best of their abilities.

Unfortunately, such is not currently the case.

A modest proposal, Commentary, Cultural commentary, Economic commentary, Let's make this an election issue, Perspectives on the City, Political commentary, Social commentary, Urban Redevelopment

Repurposing Institutional Space in Montreal

3 Comments
Montreal Children's Hospital
Montreal Children’s Hospital

What should we do with this building?

I ask what we should do because I believe this building, like all public and institutional space, belongs to the citizenry, and not the government or any of its ministries. The government exists for and by the people, and thus, because it is the people’s taxes which pay for the construction and operation of hospitals and schools (to say nothing of the operation of the government in and of itself) it should be the people who get to decide what we do with institutional space once it’s determined the facilities are no longer ideally suited to their original purpose(s). In the case of the Montreal Children’s Hospital, it is slated to leave this building for the greener pastures of the MUHC Superhospital in 2015, a project I’ve derided at some length.

So what will become of the building that once housed the Children’s?

Most likely it will be sold off to private real estate developers and either be demolished or converted into condominiums. It’s also possible (though not probable) that the building be demolished for the purposes of a new office tower or (god forbid) a shopping mall.

Of course, in all of these cases, the people lose vital institutional space, and lose their investment and ownership of the land and its buildings. We paid for it, but government gets to decide what happens to it, and apparently privatisation is on the table.

In my opinion there’s a far greater need for institutional space than new sites for condo development, and it just so happens that this particular part of the city – Shaughnessy Village – already has several other sites slightly more ideally suited for medium-height condominium projects (again, assuming our local real estate market could even handle more).

Aerial Perspective of Montreal Children's Hospital and Surrounding Shaughnessy Village
Aerial Perspective of Montreal Children’s Hospital and Surrounding Shaughnessy Village

Above you can see the area in question. The Children’s and Cabot Square are outlined in blue. Places where we’re likely to see demolitions for new construction (or where it’s already occurred) are outlined in red. The yellow arrow points to an existing RÉSO tunnel linking Place Alexis-Nihon, Dawson College, Westmount Square and Atwater Métro station with Cabot Square, the green arrow points to a potential RÉSO tunnel linking the aforementioned with the Forum and pointing to what is now the Seville Condominium project, and the purple arrow demonstrates how another tunnel could link the Children’s to the rest of the Underground City. This would allow someone to ‘warmcut’ from tony Greene Avenue in Westmount to within two blocks of the Canadian Centre for Architecture and its sculpture garden. Not too shabby.

But what could we use the Children’s for?

In all likelihood the Montreal General Hospital, located just up the street, will remain open and fully operational once the MUHC Superhospital comes online in 2015. I think parts of the Vic or some other slated-to-close-hospital might have to stay open as well simply because the Superhospital likely won’t have sufficient beds to replace all the hospitals it’s intended to. But I have a feeling the Children’s won’t be one kept open. From what I’ve heard, it would require a significant renovation in order to continue being useful, regardless of future functions.

If we were to look beyond continuing to use the Children’s as a hospital, what other functions could it serve?

A long-term care facility?
Subsidized housing?
Old age home?
The greatest daycare of all time?

Or perhaps as a school?

I think the Children’s might be a very interesting location for a rather large public school. Ideally, it would be an experimental joint venture between the CSDM and EMSB, a bilingual immersion school serving grades K-11. The Children’s is big enough it could easily facilitate such a school, and considering the downtown’s near total lack of public schools (FACE and Westmount High are the only public schools I can think of that are actually in the ‘downtown’) and the city’s stated goal of encouraging more families to move into the city, it makes sense to me that Children’s might be repurposed into such a role. Far better to recycle something already standing than start from scratch.

The most useless street in the city.
The most useless part of a street in the city.

The principle drawback however, is the lack of green space. The hospital occupies a large block bounded by (clockwise) Lambert-Closse to the east, René-Lévesque, Atwater and Tupper. I think it would be worthwhile to examine the feasibility of removing Tupper Street and reclaiming that space as part of Cabot Square (which would allow the square to grow by about a third) and relocate bus stops located around the square to a single location, outlined in black in the aerial view above. If I’m not mistaken there was once an STM bus terminus located here. A single terminus, ideally heated and hooked up to the Underground City by means of a tunnel, would be ideal compared to the current wide distribution of unheated, piss-drenched glass boxes underserving STM user’s needs. As part of the former Children’s renovation, an entrance on this side would aesthetically link the building to the square and should be considered. Cabot Square would be renovated to be part public square and part school yard. Suffice it to say the presence of a public school in this part of town would likely serve to improve the overall mood, if not the security, cleanliness and upkeep. Necessity would quickly make this one of the safest parts of the city to live and work in.

Though there’s no way a school here would have the green space of a suburban school, this shouldn’t bar us from considering the possibility. After all, other urban schools manage with limited access to green space by securing access to public recreation space and sporting facilities. Playgrounds could also just as easily be installed on the hospital’s ample rooftops.

This would not be a simple project; the Children’s and the public spaces around it would require a significant renovation and transformation, and an entirely new kind of school would need to be created, one that may test the abilities of our two largest school boards and the political will of the provincial government. And this is saying nothing of the lobbying that would be required to accomplish such a large undertaking.

But would it be worth it?

I honestly think so. It would provide a major incentive for families to to move back into the city, keep institutional space in the hands of the people, serve the public good and help kickstart a broad renaissance in a somewhat overlooked and run-down part of the city. Embarking on such a project would legitimately stimulate new residential construction, perhaps finally providing sufficient justification for new family-oriented condo towers. The areas outlined in red would likely be redeveloped very quickly, and the centrality of the location would make this an ideal public school for urban, working families.

In any event, just something to think about. What do you think should happen? What would you like to see here?