Aller au contenu

internationalx

Membre
  • Compteur de contenus

    1 757
  • Inscription

  • Dernière visite

Messages posté(e)s par internationalx

  1. 43 minutes ago, KOOL said:

    Le projet a été bloqué à cause de son architecture et non de sa hauteur car comme l'a dit Rocco, c'est du 200m de plein droit. :cool:

    Pretty sure it was mainly about blocking views... of 1250 R-L and the river from Kondiaronk.   They wanted them to chop down the height. 

     

    • Like 2
  2. Gotta love that the only concern with new development is height.  Griffintown (skyline) is largely ugly because of height restrictions which in turn impact design and in the end, it all looks the same (height, shape, volume).    It would be nice if we heard about challenging developers (and their architects to be more audacious) in design. 

  3. 32 minutes ago, Rocco said:

    Do we really expect something iconic in Montreal? We are still traumatized by the Big Owe after 45 years. Traumatized, poor, humble... you get that architecture.

    Someone put together a side-by-side shot of the Expo site and Griffintown....  :stirthepot:

  4. Ayoye.  Talk about unimaginative architecture.  It's like a big blunt object standing there in the wide open space... to remain that way because of the constraints around it.    This spot should have gotten something sculptural.  Iconic.  Oh, wait, Plante said this is iconic. 🙄  We're letting someone with that taste level run the city? 😜

    ...I keep thinking about Via 57 West in NYC and how something like that would have been perfect here. 

  5. Isn't CCE also 128m?    I find it interesting how this proposal is the exact, random height.   And 1355 R-L is proposed to be 120 m?  Definitely seems to be some sort of lowering of heights to match whatever is already built...   it just makes for an oppressive streetscape, the opposite of the desired outcome.  

    • D'accord 2
  6. The problem is the shape and general architecture of the building.  The art does give it "ooomf" as they say in the article but the silhouette of the building is still the same.  You know, just an extention of Generictown, er, Griffintown.  

    • D'accord 1
  7. On 2023-09-02 at 12:17 PM, Rocco said:

    Missed opportunity. What was Brocco thinking?

    431264800876c2e95ec32f2522cdc13fdfb3669d.jpeg

    Big time missed opportunity.  To build a sizable (height-wise) project on Sherbrooke Street for (at least part) a luxury hotel and branded condos is a huge fail.  To say nothing of Monit dropping the ball too....

  8. The city has been chasing families to inhabit the downtown core since the 1980's - so far as I can remember.  It didn't work then and it can't work now given the cost of such condos.  (That said,  3-bedroom condos in new towers shouldn't be unicorns either  but of course, they will cost the buyer more as stated above.)   Montreal isn't Manhattan and families like yards and such for their kids and the suburbs and exurbs of Montreal have that.  Even many central / inner city neighborhoods have that.  

    • Like 1
    • D'accord 3
  9. 17 hours ago, Weka 29 said:

    J'espère qu'un jour pas trop lointain (5 ans?) un projet remplacera le feu Icone 2 pour cacher complètement cette verrue qu'est l'édifice du CAA. Je me contenterais presque d'une coop d'habitation. Oups, non quand même, ça risque d'être une verrue encore plus grosse et plus visible.

    The CAA lot / building should be incorporated with the Icone 2 site.  Oh, wait... the zoning is different. 🙄 

    • Haha 1
×
×
  • Créer...