The building which initially housed the Montreal Museum of Contemporary Art has been put up for sale by Loto-Québec. Faced with pressure, it was temporarily withdrawn from the market recently. Located in the Cité-du Havre, built as part of the 1967 Universal Exhibition, could this vast building, with its large rooms, experience a new public vocation?
It no longer met the needs of Loto-Québec, argued this parapublic organization which is the owner. So he put it up for sale. It was at the request of the Société du parc Jean-Drapeau that Loto-Québec agreed to withdraw the building from the real estate market for the moment.
The sale has been suspended. The affair continues to concern several observers. The place could well serve as a possible welcome pavilion for the Société du parc Jean-Drapeau, believes Véronique Doucet, the general director of the organization, in an interview with Radio-Canada.
Joined by The duty, the Company affirms that, as part of a transformation project, it is working “to define strategies linked to the valorization of heritage”. Discussions have begun in order to be able to recover this building, a sort of natural gateway to the entire site planted in the middle of the river. “This approach is part of our vision for the future of the park, which is based on our commitment to make the general public benefit from the richness of its cultural, natural and built heritage, and this, by focusing on the protection of heritage for generations future. »
Concerns of Phyllis Lambert
Phyllis Lambert, the founder of the Canadian Center for Architecture, can’t believe it. “If the government and its creatures do not want to have private projects that are not in the public interest, why do they do the worst themselves? » She recalls that if “protecting the language seems obvious in Quebec”, the question of heritage should be considered in the same light. “Heritage is the same thing! This must be taken at the same time [que la langue]. It is just as important to say who we are,” maintains the emeritus architect. “There is no clear desire from the government to take care of heritage. It always falls between two departments, in a vacuum,” she laments.
The building bobbing on the waves of public authorities’ disengagement is located in the Cité-du-Havre, a stone’s throw from the emblematic Habitat 67, designed by architect Moshe Safdie. Initially known as the Expo 67 Art Museum, the building was designed by a renowned Quebec architectural firm. This is one of the first important achievements of Paul Gauthier and Gilles Guité, two young architects who will form, with their elder Jean-Marie Roy, one of the most important agencies in Quebec which gives substance to an architecture of here at the time of the Quiet Revolution.
It is in these places that the exhibitions of the Museum of Contemporary Art of Montreal were housed until the institution moved in 1992, to its current site at Place des Arts, closed for renovations whose deadline is uncertain. ceases to be postponed.
One of the last buildings of Expo 67
According to Héritage Montréal, this building constitutes “one of the last buildings dating from Expo 67 in good condition that can still be used today”. The organization explains that the building was built to host a thematic exhibition made up of works from around the world.
How can we still find ourselves with a building of such cultural importance put up for sale overnight by a company linked to the State? For Phyllis Lambert, “it is not acceptable that we want to sell a public building like that, without public discussion. We must find solutions. How can we plan the future of our collective assets so poorly? » The distinguished architect is shocked at the bad fate cast upon this building, like many others. “The government is there to protect society and its heritage. How can he dare to put something like that up for sale? It’s located in a major cultural area,” says Phyllis Lambert in an interview.
Resident of Habitat 67, former film researcher, Lucette Lupien has gone out of her way over the past few months to alert the public of the risk facing this historic building. It is, she maintains, an important witness to the excitement of the 1960s. “I hope that a solution will be found. It makes no sense to let go of a public good like this, designed by Quebecers, without more consideration of what it represents, of what it is. »