internationalx

I like the pre-fab facades: the big square windows, lots of symmetry.... it's mostly windows with not big swaths of pre-fab. What I'm seeing from the north facade is a little worrisome...like is that black siding in between the windows? I was expecting more glass here. It may look like a cheap apartment building renovation circa 1972 on steroids.

They couldn't align the facade (of at least the base) with the neighboring building? I feel like we're seeing this often - no one seems to know how to build up to lot lines with existing buildings anymore.

Frankly, they have all aged well; the quality of the materials and the construction were top notch.

Well, it's still an airport. Just not a passenger airport.

The bases/podiums of both Le 1500 and YUL 1 & 2 are awful.

I thought they were both supposed to be 38 floors.... Le 600 (BNC) would have looked fantastic at 45 or 50 floors IMHO.

To match the Bell Centre... icon of mid-90's design. The planning commission agreed that it "fit" the surrounding context.

Even in wealthy cities, the amount of bland and cheap is remarkable.

I don't if that's a "problem." It's certainly much-needed newness in a location stuck in time. But also, Peel from Sherbrooke to Ste-Catherine is beautifully dense IMHO and this will up that very urban look. Quite frankly, it's a far more interesting neighborhood and even pedestrian friendly area than around the Bell Center.

Read the article before I saw this thread... not once did I sense a "Montreal bashing" sentiment. If anything, it was CBC-bashing, anti-gentrification bashing, and also, making some fair observations about the politics of development in Montreal. Just the other day, I made similar comments to another Montrealer about development in the city.

A lot going on. Not elegant at all.

This seems like the best angle.

I'm still perplexed by the placement of the tower on the very south east quad of the lot; why jam it right up to the trio of tear-downs on R-L? In theory, a developer could build a tower on 1 or by combining 2 of those in a land-assembly. And the city didn't or doesn't even see that potential either?

Good. It's current form is straight out of 1988. It's not very inspiring at all. And with zoning allowing 120m, I would think apartments with views would/should command a premium, especially with a Sherbrooke St. address. Brocco phoned it in here.

Wow. I had no idea. It could be so lovely and charming on the streetscape if it could be restored.

if this project gets put on hold or aborted in its current form... totally fine with it. Like someone has said, the Waldorf project was 1000x better.

When you lose 16 floors of units, it's unfeasible from every vantage; those units would be so expensive no one will buy them.

"La justification de la Ville est d’assurer un meilleur ensoleillement des espaces publics et une intégration architecturale plus judicieuse du futur bâtiment avec la Maison des infirmières voisine." 1). There are new towers that rise up to 120 m on the site already. 2). From 20 to 4 floors? Downtown on Boul. R-L? 3). Do they even consider that it's no longer economically feasible for a private developer to bother building anything? There is this new willy-nilly attitude towards taking away entitled, by-right zoning from a developer. How can any investor/developer properly consider a site for acquisition and model any project based on existing zoning allowances when the city might suddenly feel like too much of this or that will be blocked by height?

Didn't they convert like 2 floors of retail into parking the last time they renovated? I recall the grand-ness of the original space (high 80's glam) and it became a glorified corridor with boutiques and services; a connector between the Bay and Eaton.

Boy, there is a lot going-on with respect to the podium. Busy, busy, busy.

Well, you can still build two towers even if you build over the tracks in some fashion... in its entirety, the block is massive!

Any insight into air rights over the viaduct? It would be nice to build over those tracks or even partially over the tracks; It's not exactly as complex as Hudson rail yards - FAR from it.

If the detail of the tower's pre-fab panels are true to the renderings, then it should be a pretty good neo-brutalist tower; I hope it is.

This will be quite slender so at 200m should also look very tall.

It's so prominent! Yikes.