U2 studio
arch 304
Project
Winter 2010
Pieter Sijpkes' Section.
| Links to two
pages of images about glass and steel construction detail taken in Vancouver and shown in class recently: set one, set two |
Introduction
In this term we will take on two challenges:
The first challenge will
be to study Montreal's Indoor City, list the weaknesses and strenghths
and come up with proposals to remedy some of the weaknesses, foremost
among them lack of daylight and lack of truly public space.
We will scout for a location within the downton area where a public,
daylit indoor pavilion might form a vibrant link between the 'outdoor
world' and the 'indoor world'. Every student will propose an individual
solution and will keep an 'underground note book' that will record the
research efforts made over the course of this term.
This project
will take about half the term
The second challenge will
be to take part in the annual Steel Structures
Education Foundation's
competition.
The topic this year is 'Curvature', and the pavilion proposed in the
first half of the term as an addition to Montreal's Indoor City in the first challenge may be a good
basis for a succesful submission to the SSEF competition.
This project will take place during the latter half of the term and
students will work in teams of two.
Challenge no
1.
Let
the sun shine in!
The
feasibility
and design of a daylit public indoor park that would form a public
focus for
of Montreal's Indoor City:
An indoor Square St. Louis , and indoor McGill Campus, and indoor
Domion Square
The power of natural light: The Pantheon in Rome only being lit though
an 8 meter oculus in the top of the dome.
Time Magazine (page-2) article about Vincent Ponte
'the multi-level man' who designed Place Ville Marie
Introduction.
The
'indoor/underground' part of Montreal has been gaining in importance
ever since the beginning of the system was inaugurated in 1962 with the
opening of Place Ville Marie's enclosed shopping mall. And it was not
the mall itself that was the key issue: the two subterranean links
constructed under Dorchester Boulevard (now Boulevard Rene Levesque)
beteen Place Ville Marie and Central Station were the key innovations.
These links were so 'subversive' that the decision to build them can be
called the second most
important urban planning decision ever taken in Montreal. The first one
was to found Montreal on the spit of land formed by the St. Pierre
river's oblique outflow into the St. Larence river in 1642.
That settlement was called Ville Marie, so we can say that Montreal was
founded twice, Ville Marie in 1642 and Place Ville Marie in 1960.
(It should be mentioned here that the opportunity to build Place Ville
Marie at the scale it was done was due to a previous underground
experiment: the construction of the train line under the Mountain,
linking downtonw with the vast area north of the Mountain. The big scar
left in the downtown core by this project and the nature of Central
station's below ground tracks and concourse prepared the scene for
Place Ville Marie)
The 'scar' crossing underneath Rene
Levesque
Geology of the Mountain following the tunnel in section
 |
 |
| Ville Marie in 1648 |
Indoor City with Place Ville
Marie as original generator |
mapping the
Growth of the Indoor City 1962-1989
 |
 |
| Christ Church on new
foundation piles |
Christ Church on new foundation
piles |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
 |
Here are some
recent statistics:
A very good introduction to the Montreal Underground that I used as the
basis for my lecture on the underground city last term:
http://www.authorstream.com/presentation/Crystal-32681-McGill-presentation-march06-pps-Planning-Development-Management-Underground-Space-Canada-INTRODUCTION-TORONTO-WALKWAYS-as-Entertainment-ppt-powerpoint/
| negative |
positive |
| *The
feeling of 'being
underground: claustrophobia" *the lack of landmarks and the inability to see the sun, and resulting difficulty of orientation. *the invisibility of the system at street level *the hundreds of different doors between different segments; different air pressures make doors hard to operate *handicapped unfriendly: http://tram.mcgill.ca/Research/Publications/Inddor_city_accessible.pdf *legally the indoor environment is a confusing patchwork of mainly private spaces, under private control. (The Metro is under non-private jurisdiction and so are the tunnels) *the lack of truly public space |
*a
safe, pedestrians-only
environment not paid by tax money *increase in commercial retail space downtown * *absence of snow and road curbs makes spaces navigable by wheelchairs and other wheeled movement aids *the system encourages the use of the Metro |
 |
 |
| link to apple-blog |