ville-marie 1001, av. des Canadiens-de-Montréal - 52 étages (2020)

[yarabundi]

Le 2020-11-17 à 14:42, ConcordiaSalus a dit :

Wow. Merci. C'est hallucinant de voir à quel point il y avait des plans pour changer l'échelle de la ville au grand complet. De passer du côté un peu "Brooklyn", vieux et très dense de Montréal pour aller dans le sens de... Brasilia... c'est presque si j'entends la navette des Jetsons s'approcher.   

«des plans» ?? Il n'y avait qu'un plan : détruire toutes traces du passé -quel que soit le prix à payer. Laisser toute la place à l'automobile. C'était ça le plan. Il n'y en avait pas d'autre.

[Rocco]

🙄

[Rocco]

5 hours ago, internationalx said:

Considering that this lot - irrespective of the church - is zoned for 200m by-right, not sure their demand that the tower be reduced in height to 92m is valid.  Also, won't a 92m building also dominate over the church?  Taller and slender would be much more advisable here and provide a greater opportunity to highlight the church - juxtapose it against a sleek glassy backdrop.   Just look at how the current BNC HQ blocks the Bell Telephone building completely from view as an example of this flawed thinking.   

Your thinking is flawed. Tour KPMG complements greatly the Christ Church in front of it. Dont make general assumptions.

[budgebandit]

No one will build 92m here. It would not be financially viable given the complexity of the project and land cost. It needs to be at least 150 - 160m. 

[internationalx]

16 hours ago, Rocco said:

Your thinking is flawed. Tour KPMG complements greatly the Christ Church in front of it. Dont make general assumptions.

I agree.  But it's much taller than Christ Church - which is my point.   Taller is better in order to compliment a historic (shorter) building.  

 

 

[internationalx]

16 hours ago, budgebandit said:

No one will build 92m here. It would not be financially viable given the complexity of the project and land cost. It needs to be at least 150 - 160m. 

Curious how they came up with 92m... seems so arbitrary.  You're right:  the project will make zero financial sense at such a height.   

[SameGuy]

I think they used a 10ft/storey guideline and came up with 300 feet (~91.5 m)

[MaximeMTL]

«With no debate, Montreal city council approved plans Tuesday for a 25-storey office tower to be built atop the 130-year-old Bay store on Ste-Catherine St. W.»

«The project by Hudson Bay Co. required a zoning change because it exceeds height restrictions and blocks a protected view of the river from Mount Royal.»

 

Pour LaBaie c'est pas grave ? Je sais bien que ce n'est pas la seule raison qu'e le CCU a donné, mais je trouve ca fort de le reprocher a un projet et le laisser faire pour un autre...

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/city-council-continues-2?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Montreal Gazette Headline News - Weekdays 2021-02-24&utm_term=MG_HeadlineNews&fbclid=IwAR1n6YRSph8Yho2hWKWA5wnJ5snMbamNw9GLeKgVCwN5O74hAy8FhPUcUeI

[internationalx]

When you look at the zoning map, The Bay has a carve-out in an otherwise 120m zone.  It looked arbitrary to begin with, though I understand the thinking (circa 1992) that it's a heritage building.   

If I'm not mistaken, the lot at 1001 Ave-des-Canadiens is zoned for 200m.  So by-right, you can built the max height given. 

[FrancSoisD]

On 2021-02-25 at 4:37 PM, MaximeMTL said:

Pour LaBaie c'est pas grave ? Je sais bien que ce n'est pas la seule raison qu'e le CCU a donné, mais je trouve ca fort de le reprocher a un projet et le laisser faire pour un autre...

Incohérence, much... ou nivellement vers le bas à trop d'égards?