Presentation by Manon Asselin, architect/Jodoin Lamarre Pratte, architects
Jack-in-the-box
This project, made up of two (2) volumes separated by an exterior ramp, proposes an attractive walking scenario, crossing the two (2) main functions, the performance hall and the Circus School, whose roof is transformed into a green roof, all leading to a belvedere on the river side. The volume of Studio B, by its texture and shape, reminds us of winter, like an "iceberg" on the shore. At night, the lighting recalls the colors of the interior of the room. A basilica, housing the lobby and public functions, is served by a rear side entrance, which offers another route lacking visibility. The exterior cladding consists of wood and metal.
The jury evaluates the projects by criteria.
STRENGTH OF IDENTITY/
The party proposes an exterior ramp leading to the roof, which clearly identifies the two (2) functions, Studio A and Studio B. This idea represents the key element of the identity strength because the entrance of Studio A is not very visible at the back of the theater, on the river side. This very interesting idea is questionable from an operational and security standpoint, for an isolated location. The option of moving the parking lot into the park detracts from the identity of a pavilion in a park by increasing the paved area on the Lasalle Boulevard side.
CRITERION 1/Atmosphere
Located on the river side, the hall, with its linear form and large windows overlooking the river, offers a disappointing treatment, providing little reminder of the circus function. Because of its shape, the interior space is not conducive to indoor/outdoor animation; the exhibition hall is far from the entrance and the foyer.
CRITERION 2/The quality of the building's relationship with its riverside site and the city in a transparent manner
The presentation clearly demonstrated the depth of analysis of the site and the Program but the party puts a lot of effort into an unconvincing result. The entrance is too far from the parking lot and not very visible; the pedestrian circuit is difficult even for the river side ramp. Transparency is provided only by the mediation room and the successful treatment of the stage house.
CRITERION 3/Functionality and innovation of the ensemble
This party proposes a functional organization with good ideas such as the sharing of the cafeteria and the common axis between the two (2) studios; the universal accessibility component has been well integrated into the sloping entrance. On the other hand, the hall appears too narrow and makes it not very flexible operationally; the exhibition room is far from the entrance while the mediation does not represent an attractive character as proposed by its location.
CRITERION 4/Integration of volume and materiality
The volumetry is distinguished by the treatment of the stage house, an imposing white volume placed on a horizontal wooden base. This proposal lacks coherence and does not create an integrated whole.
CRITERION 5/Technical feasibility and potential to respect the budget
The project by Manon Asselin, architect/JLP appears to be the most vulnerable despite its small existing encroachment.
(From jury report)
(Unofficial automated translation)
20 scanned / 18 viewable
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Plan
- Plan
- Plan
- Plan
- Section
- Section
- Elevation
- Elevation
- Diagram
- Diagram
- Diagram
- Diagram
- Diagram
- Diagram
