Aller au contenu

Mondo_Grosso

Membre
  • Compteur de contenus

    1 627
  • Inscription

  • Dernière visite

  • Jours gagnés

    64

Tout ce qui a été posté par Mondo_Grosso

  1. Il n'y a pas si longtemps, ma femme et moi voulait acheter un condo. Un jour, elle vient me voir tout excitée pour me montré un condo dans ce même bâtiment. Elle était excitée parce que c'était vraiment pas chère et avait une vue magnifique sur Griffintown. Le seul problème? Ils utilisaient de vieilles photos avant la construction d'Amati pour vendre le condo!
  2. %100 agree, it would be great to be able to watch on a screen the concert at place des festivals, an alternative for people who want a quieter place to sit.
  3. Malheureusement, 35,000 pieds carrés c'est trop petit pour Eataly.
  4. J'espère qu'on aura plus de grands immeubles locatifs de qualité. Les immeubles locatifs sont rarement construits à Toronto et à Vancouver, ce serait un moyen pour Montréal de rattraper son retard et de créer un marché plus distinct.
  5. Si j'ai bien compris, on parle d'un parc?
  6. Ils vendent actuellement la phase 1, qui est de 12 étages. Leur job consiste à vendre la phase 1, pourquoi le vendeur te parlerait d'une deuxième phase qui est encore au stade de planification?
  7. Exactement, il existe plein de villes qui ont des gratte-ciel bling-bling, cela ne fait pas automatiquement d'eux un "landmark". Même avec tous ses nouveaux bâtiments, les principaux monuments de Toronto sont la tour CN, le Skydome et le centre Eaton. New York est un autre bon exemple, bien qu'ils aient récemment ajouté quelques nouveaux monuments, les principaux sont très vieux aussi (Empire State building, Brooklyn bridge, statue of liberty.) Le Highline est nouveau et emblématique, le tout sans être bling bling. D'autres nouveaux points de repère incluent the Oculus, the Vessel et One word trade center, qui sont tous bling bling. That's it, that's all.
  8. I think an issue with what you say is that people associate achitectural audacity to landmark status, which isn't always true. There have been new landmarks since the Big O that aren't bold new architecture and vise versa. Off the top of my head, some new landmarks since the Big O include: - Le Palais des Congrès, with it's multicolored façade, bright interior and pink trees. - "Nouveau Vieux-Port de Montréal", the 1992 revitalization of an industrial sector made for a world renowned landmark. - Place Des Festivals, a landmark more known for its vocation than it's architecture. - The Montreal World trade center, it is a 'horizontal skyscraper' and a leading example of urban renewal, architectural preservation and rehabilitation.
  9. L'audace architecturale n'est que des gigantesques projets avec des angles irrégulières?
  10. At that stage, what would be a reasonable alternative? These victorians have changed hands and designation over and over again through the years. New owners/tenants will renovate and after consecutive renovations the historic value inside is all but gone. In most cases, the developer purchased the buildings in that state. Refusing landlords the ability to redevelop neglected buildings will just lead to further neglect. I believe that it is ideal that someone with deep pockets purchases the buildings and then save the parts worth saving (usually just the facades), which in turn stabilizes them. We have seen some excellent efforts recently, like at YUL and Le Brickfield. I look forward to seeing what Enticy does, either way I am sure it won't be worse than the cheap Indian buffet that use to be in those buildings. Ideally the city would regulate the preservation of interiors, but then on the flipside this is an expense that not all owners can afford.
  11. It is a nightmare when there is an event at the Rogers Stadium and Scotiabank arena at the same time in Toronto, which are very close to each other. Although there is very little crossover between the MLB and NHL seasons (especially since the Leafs never go far in the playoffs), there are always events at the Scotiabank arena that happen the same day as MLB games.
  12. En effet, c'est très européenne. J'ai visité Zurich l'année dernière, beaucoup de leurs nouveaux bâtiments ressemblent à ceci, mais avec moin d'étages. Personnellement, j'adore ce style. Des matériaux de haute qualité dans un emballage contemporain. J'ai hâte de voir ce bâtiment se construire.
  13. All lobbying is advocacy, but not all advocacy is lobbying. I am not saying to lobby the government to change a specific law, but rather to promote the general benefits of increased density, and the adverse effects of low density and urban sprawl. You say we dont need "incredible heights", but what does that mean? Is really anything more than 120m an "incredible height"? Density and height don't necessarily always have to go in pair, but it is one of the only ways in a downtown core with limited space like Montreal. Your term of "comfort and wellbeing" is vague and sounds more like socioeconomic issues. Despite living in cities with similar density, a person living in a Manhattan skyscraper has great comfort and wellbeing compared to someone living in Port-au-Prince. The science proves that urban sprawl is unsustainable form of development due to its many harmful environmental, economic and social effects. Montreal has some of the fastest growing urban sprawl in north america. Skyscrapers are not the only answer, mid-rise developments in transport oriented developments would be ideal. https://cmm.qc.ca/planification/plan-metropolitain-damenagement-et-de-developpement-pmad/
×
×
  • Créer...