SYMBIOTICcenter
The downtown core of Montreal is presently associated to economic and commercial activities and its identity remains ambiguous, since it is occupied by a temporary population. The core is made for working, shopping, and entertainment, and is occupied by a constantly renewed moving mass. It is thus essential to give a sense of permanence to the insertion of a residential sector in the city center, especially if it is social housing. The integration of a residential neighbourhood in this particular city centre in its current state, allows us primarily to diversify its usages. In addition, the image of the city core can be revitalized by its new inhabitants.
Integration and social diversity are key elements in creating a « neighbourhood » and not a « ghetto ». The principle of symbiosis has revealed itself as the most pertinent factor of the proposed architectural and urban gestures. Indeed, in order to add social housing, it does not suffice to solely build them or to make room for a population in need. We must instead consider the resulting neighbourhood in its entirety. Thus, a symbiosis amongst the different social classes will justify the establishment and construction of new community services. It is a matter of accentuating each element that decomposes and recomposes itself in its totality and as a unit. Housing helps to increase the density of the city core, and also gifts it with a permanent population that will bear its identity.
Montreal Situation
Alleyways are and always have been an important part of Montreal's architectural landscape. Unfortunately, the destruction of the city's core has instead generated large gaping holes, large open spaces perfect for the multiplication of parking lots. Interpreting differently the existing space, it is possible to appropriate the interior of the city blocks in order to create new transitional spaces as well as living spaces for residents of the neighbourhood. The relationship to the street is thus transformed, and it is in the new alleys that interactions between the habitat, public spaces, and the community occur. The architectural language adopted in the interior of the block differs from that of the street, in order to clearly distinguish its link with the public space. Even though they are open to the public, parks created within the internal alleys give more of a human dimension to each city block, at the scale of the community.
Homelessness and itinerancy are difficult social phenomenon to manage. Parks and other green spaces seem to be a gathering place for the homeless, creating awkwardness when the street's inhabitants and the neighbourhood residents wish to appropriate these public spaces. A homeless shelter in the downtown core could be a part of the solution to this problem, allowing homeless people to have a centre where they are welcomed day and night.
Symbiosis in time and space
Each city block of this neighbourhood is addressed by the following principles: respect for the existing condition, densification, and new usage of space. By conserving the existing buildings, we do not modify the neighbourhood's current vocation. Instead, we propose a gradual insertion within the existing architecture. The project can be inserted in numerous phases of time and space. The addition of new buildings restructures the neighbourhood's streets, while conserving ground-level commercial activity.
With this in mind, the interventions within the targeted zone must not be understood as final. A development that delineates too clearly a quadrangle associated to social housing would undermine the intention to create a dialogue between this zone and the rest of the city.
Annexe, panel A
The numerous vacant lots used for parking are reused in order to increase the density of each city block. Since these parking lots are essential to downtown users, they will be relocated, underground, beneath the different public spaces that will be created. We maintain the same number of existing parking spots, and have in fact added spots for some of the new residents. (1 spot for every 2 dwellings created.)
Annex, panel B
The architectural language of this city block may be modified in time and depending on, the type of dwelling desired within the new constructions. We must take into consideration that the aesthetics may vary from block to block, in order to avoid standardization of the neighbourhood in its whole, and to inhibit the association of social housing to a certain type of architecture. Variety in the architectural treatment and the treatment of public spaces is favourable in order to allow for diversity in its uniqueness.
Annex, panel C
The living unit is a 4m x 8m module, stacked and modulated when needed. It is thus possible to vary the size of the dwellings, and similarly the number of residents per unit: housing for singles, or couples with or without children. Exterior terraces are integrated to the units, and it is even possible to create collective exterior spaces for the tenants living on the same floor. Furthermore, the exterior pathways are an effective means to light the interior of the dwellings and to allow them a degree of independence.
(Competitor's text)
(Unofficial automated translation)
16 scanned / 15 viewable
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Descriptive Chart
- Descriptive Chart
- Descriptive Chart
- Descriptive Chart
- Descriptive Chart
- Descriptive Chart
