The PFT's vision statement on the stakes and ambitions of the Gadbois renovation and reconstruction project is very clear: the challenge it presents is a major one! The new Gadbois center project fully meets this challenge. It considerably simplifies and clarifies the organization of the complex. It proposes spaces that are largely open to the outside world, and to each other, as well as a significant expression of the sports center on the scale of the park, the neighborhood and the city. As announced in the first stage of the competition, we opted for a straightforward, bright and airy insertion into the mass of the existing complex in order to adequately address four key aspects of the project: the addition of the large volumes of the triple gymnasium and the palestra, the opening up of a generous interior public square, which we named the athletes' agora, the major restructuring of the circulations and the creation of a series of visual and physical links between the sports facilities and towards the outside. The architecture of the insertion contrasts with that of the 1960 functionalist building, helping to assert its presence. On the park side, the cut-out in the existing structure highlights the volume of the pool. Inside, the glass brick openings of the pool and former gymnasium have been preserved and opened up to preserve and restore the original lighting ambience.
(From competitor's text)
(Unofficial automated translation)
Arguments in favor of the proposal
• Since the 1960s, the area surrounding the Gadbois sports complex has undergone significant development, particularly in terms of highway infrastructure. This bold project will allow the complex to reclaim its place in the urban landscape of this sector. It stands out alongside the highway, like a protective screen.
• The proposal is heroic and playful in this context.
• The added volume is contrasting and gives the new Gadbois center a strong personality.
• The proposal ensures the visibility of the sports complex in the area, making it the sought-after flagship element.
• The linear interior agora is well defined.
• The generous amount of natural light is appreciated.
• The view of the multiple walkways and stairways provides a sense of security and openness for users.
• The team proposes several measures for sustainable development and ecological transition. Based on the points listed for achieving LEED Gold certification, this is the most ambitious proposal in this regard, surpassing the required LEED Silver objective.
• The proposed electromechanical systems are varied and safe due to their diversity.
• Overall, the budgetary feasibility has been demonstrated.
Arguments against the proposal
• The proposal does not present an integration that can easily be described as harmonious, but rather a new extension intended to be the new identity of Gadbois, in contrast to the existing structure. The proposal presents the same type of development that has been criticized since the 1960s, namely the lack of an overall vision.
• The architectural style is not easily identifiable as a sports center.
• The alternation of solid and glass walls in the exterior envelope is not adjusted to internal use. Thus, the predictable glare in certain sports areas will require additional measures to control natural light.
• The interior spaces lack clarity. The multiple columns and bracing are visual and physical obstructions.
• Interior circulation remains perceptually complex due to multiple walkways and staircases. In this sense, the proposal may cause discomfort for some customers and does not encourage use of the premises.
• The decision to install open changing rooms in the agora is rather surprising and does not ensure the privacy suggested for this function according to today's conventions.
• The layout of the changing rooms opening onto the gym poses a maintenance problem due to the spread of chalk dust used by gymnasts. It also poses a problem in terms of privacy and safety during training sessions or activities (the spontaneity of children is particularly affected).
• The layout of an exterior exit via a rooftop walkway is not adequate in winter.
• The technical report highlights several non-compliant functional elements.
• The objectives for ensuring ADS+ have not been met.
• Although it could be built as planned, the wooden structure requires the approval of different measures by the Régie du bâtiment du Québec.
• Not all LEED credits imposed by the City are being met.
• The generous volumes proposed will result in higher heating, air conditioning, lighting, and operating costs.
• The multiplicity of structures, bracing, walkways, and staircases, both exterior and interior, will require increased maintenance efforts in a context of limited resources.
Jury reservations
• The striking nature of the proposal has elicited differing opinions among the jury.
• The choice of colors for the exterior cladding has been questioned.
• According to some jury members, the potential color variations between the bricks and metal fascias of the cantilevered section raise some doubts as to the actual continuity of the colors as represented graphically.
• The extent of the work outside the west entrance (highway side) and the presence of a roof terrace adjacent to the highway are questioned.
• The feasibility of the long, slender wooden columns is discussed.
• The interior positioning of the mechanical room is questioned.
(From jury report)
(Automated unofficial translation)
54 scanned / 54 viewable
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Perspective
- Presentation Panel
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Site Plan
- Cross-sectional perspective
- Perspective
- Cross-sectional perspective
- Site Plan
- Axonometric Drawing
- Site Plan
- Axonometric Drawing
- Plan
- Axonometric Drawing
- Plan
- Axonometric Drawing
- Plan
- Axonometric Drawing
- Plan
- Plan
- Schema
- Plan
- Plan
- Section
- Cross-sectional perspective
- Elevation
- Elevation
- Elevation
- Elevation
- Axonometric Drawing
- Axonometric Drawing
- Axonometric Drawing
- Axonometric Drawing
- Axonometric Drawing
- Axonometric Drawing
- View
- View
- View
- View
