ville-marie Bishop Ambassade - 10 étages

[Dominic723]

Donc on peut conclure que le Irish Embassy ne ré-ouvrira pas ? Sinon temps mieux qu'on rénove le site, les façades éventrée et protégées par une bâche ont faites leur temps... 

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.496153,-73.5754725,3a,90y,211.99h,103.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2O0rVFRPahUBFd_0D-fCvA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=fr

[louisleonardo]

Je suis un peu déçu. J'aimais beaucoup mieux la version slim.

[steve_36]

Oui, la version ''slim'' avait plus de gueule et c'est aussi dommage de constater la disparition du Irish Embassy. Mais il est temps de faire quelque chose et se cela passe par le reconversion de tout ce pâté de maison alors vaut mieux faire avec, surtout s'ils conservent la façade, ce qui est essentiel à mon avis.

[internationalx]

Love it.  This block of Bishop is going look quite good.  

[Jollysnork]

Although these drawings look clean, I still think we lose architectural heritage by gutting old townhouses. Clearly, the whole needs to be protected so interior space, cornices, woodwork, moulding, grills, hearths/fireplaces, cabinetry, waterworks, doors and doorways are preserved and restored. The outside shell is nice, agreed, but the heart of a building is undervalued. Unfortunately, destroying the inside just becomes another cost savings for developers. 

The second issue I find puzzling is why developers are allowed to build beyond scale, especially considering the plethora of vacant lots or decrepit  buildings throughout the city. Building ugly towers behind 3 floor row houses changes the character of the street. Developers leverage street character and location for their gain; once sold, we are all left with their byproduct.

[internationalx]

There is hardly, if anything left of the original townhouses on the inside.  They have been so altered over the decades that by now only the facades are worthy of preservation.  A couple of fireplaces here and there or some crown moulding is not enough to landmark interiors.    These long ago became commercial buildings, as rooming houses with chopped-up floorpans, modernized, ground floors turned into retail units....  they were gutted long before these developers took control.  Not to mention, from the backside they look like slums.  

[acpnc]

Je trouve ce projet plus équilibré que l'original, matière de goût évidemment. Cependant je crois que c'est faire un meilleur usage du potentiel de ce site en plein coeur du centre-ville, par une densification supérieure. On sauve l'image des belles victoriennes, une pratique devenue un compromis classique. Mais en même temps on conserve l'apparence élégante de la rue ce qui est à mon avis un moindre mal. On peut certainement déplorer le façadisme, rien ne sera jamais parfait. Mais quand il s'agit de payer les taxes élevées au centre-ville et la nécessité d'une certaine rentabilité, le choix s'impose souvent de lui-même.

[MartinMtl]

il y a une heure, internationalx a dit :

There is hardly, if anything left of the original townhouses on the inside.  They have been so altered over the decades that by now only the facades are worthy of preservation.  A couple of fireplaces here and there or some crown moulding is not enough to landmark interiors.    These long ago became commercial buildings, as rooming houses with chopped-up floorpans, modernized, ground floors turned into retail units....  they were gutted long before these developers took control.  Not to mention, from the backside they look like slums.  

Not to mention the fire of 2018. This restoration of the facades and the roof ornementation is about the best we can hope and expect. 

[Jollysnork]

IF this is true, so be it!  Cependant, I think Montrealers and New Yorkers and ... should uphold more rigorous processes to evaluate interior spaces after a fire or any other changes that might have occurred.  I guess what it comes down to is whether I really trust what is classified as patrimoine - especially when vested interests (developers) are involved - or should I be more skeptical (?)
Thus far, I get the feeling the responses to my initial comment seem more aligned with what developers would argue. Though I’m super psyched about Philips Square,  preservation still matters and should always be part of the conversation.

[internationalx]

12 hours ago, Jollysnork said:

IF this is true, so be it!  Cependant, I think Montrealers and New Yorkers and ... should uphold more rigorous processes to evaluate interior spaces after a fire or any other changes that might have occurred.  I guess what it comes down to is whether I really trust what is classified as patrimoine - especially when vested interests (developers) are involved - or should I be more skeptical (?)
Thus far, I get the feeling the responses to my initial comment seem more aligned with what developers would argue. Though I’m super psyched about Philips Square,  preservation still matters and should always be part of the conversation.

In a lot of ways, New York was/has been much better at declaring entire neighborhoods as historic districts.  They are also acutely aware of the fact that outside those areas, not every old building is deemed worthy of preservation and that is some areas, densification comes first.  It's a different balance.   In Montreal it sometimes seems like every old building must be preserved even when there may be little worth of it.  IMHO:  An entire row of greystone townhouses yes, but a single, badly mangled one left over that wasn't even that good quality to begin with  architecturally  - no.