Developer Mondev wants to demolish some rows of familiar buildings near Place Émilie-Gamelin to build two tall condo towers.
Updates from January, 2021 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
-
Kate
-
Kate
The city has named its first commissioner against racism, Bochra Manaï, who has a long list of academic credentials as well as experience with social justice groups in town.
david244
Just what we need at this desperate time in the history of the city.
Hard to tell if this is PM shoring up the base before the re-election campaign, or PM’s actual re-election campaign plan (ie. to enthuse the base with these gestures to meet the US media zeitgeist).
Michael Black
But the Gazette has a story where some feel the choice is not right.
J
I thought Cathy Wong was in charge of this?
Michael Black
I think this is another role, but Cathy Wong is on maternity leave so perhaps that factors in.
Kate
Michael Black, do you have a link to the Gazette story you mention?
Michael Black
“Montreal is dragging its feet on Systemic Racism”
Jack
OMG she is going to be crushed tomorrow by Quebecor. Anyone want to bet how many columnists and news stories will castigate her, I’d guess 3 the first day, get a little traction, 5 the next day and finally a demand for her resignation.
https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/grand-montreal/2021-01-13/commissaire-anti-racisme/montreal-embauche-une-militante-contre-la-loi-sur-la-laicite.phpJack
Kind of disappointed , only one article of alarm followed by MBC’s fill in the blank white angst . I expect better tomorrow. Richard, Sophie or Joseph don’t disappoint me.
-
Kate
Two east-end hospital ERs are coping with Covid outbreaks, Maisonneuve-Rosemont and Santa Cabrini, and we’re advised to avoid them.
walkerp
Starting to get real again…
Shay
After almost a year, what has been learnt???
-
Kate
Despite carrying letters attesting that they were outside because they work in the evening, some workers have been issued fines by police.
Ephraim
The likely can just send in paperwork and get it dismissed, though it will take a LONG time and it’s a useless hassle. The problem is, power corrupts and absolutely power corrupts absolutely. Letting them write tickets without a repercussion means that they feel powerful when issuing the ticket… a feeling that is like catnip for them.
DeWolf
Gee, who would have thought that giving police total discretion in enforcing the curfew would result in people being unfairly ticketed.
This is what happens when a government gives up any meaningful attempt to manage the pandemic. After the spring outbreak, they buried their head in the sand and didn’t take any steps to avoid or mitigate the second wave, like bolstering the test-and-trace infrastructure, boosting resources for online learning, improving ventilation in schools and expanding the mask mandate. Now they’re out of ideas so they’ve turned Covid into a law-and-order issue instead of a public health issue.
Faiz Imam
I’ve been living in Toronto for the past few months, and am taking the train back to Montreal next Friday which arrives at 11pm.
Im hoping that if I’m stopped I can show my ticket and be allowed to get home, but I’m starting to be concerned.
Kate
Faiz Imam, it really is a concern. A couple who drove back to Quebec from New Brunswick on the weekend and got into town after 8 were ticketed. Could you get a hotel room at the Queen Elizabeth for that night so you don’t have to exit from the train station complex?
In any case, hang onto your train ticket, because in theory you are legally allowed to go home after arriving in town on a train, you can show it to a cop and even if you still get ticketed you’ll have evidence to challenge it.
Joey
Seems like you’d have a stronger case than them but I wouldn’t trust the discretion of our cops. Come back during the daytime.
“They also cited one of Quebec’s curfew exceptions, that allows travel for “a person who is going to take an inter-regional or inter-provincial bus, a train or a plane for final travel to the person’s destination,” which they thought would also apply to them.“
walkerp
Faiz, can you bring a dog with you?
Ephraim
Are the cops accepting puppy play masks? 😀
Kate
A couple in Sherbrooke who went out with the man on a leash were ticketed and kink‑shamed simultaneously, and the story hit the international wires.
Michael Black
I had to return a library book, so did it at 6pm. There seemed to be a lot of dogs out without people. I guess they figured the curfew law meant they only needed a person after 8pm.
(And yes, that’s a joke)
-
Kate
It’s alleged here that seven Maimonides residents who had their first vaccination have nonetheless caught Covid. If true, at best this means Quebec’s policy of indefinitely delaying the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine is not wise; at worst, the vaccine is bogus. Or the batch was bad.
LJ
Or it could be that they were exposed before or soon after being vaccinated, before it takes effect.
Chris
>at best this means Quebec’s policy of indefinitely delaying the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine is not wise
Not wise for who? Those particular people, or society as a whole? If the former, well duh. If the latter, then very debatable.
Also, although these people may now have covid, the effects could be reduced due to the immune system being more prepared from the first dose.
Kevin
If it’s 92 % effective after 3 weeks (and before getting a second dose) we should expect 8 people out of every 100 vaccinated to get the disease.
Blork
No, you would expect 8 out of 100 vaccinated and EXPOSED people to get the disease.
Chris
And by “people” that stat presumably refers to a random sampling of people: young, old, male, female, healthy, ill, etc. Maimonides are not such a sample. They are more like a worse case example: old and generally not so healthy. So we’d expect *more* to get the disease.
Blork
Also bear in mind that the more people get vaccinated, the fewer people there will be running around exposing people, so the exposure rate drops as well as the infection rate. They work together like that. (It’s not as if “exposure” were a constant.)
Michael Black
They decided people in “old age homes” were most vulnerable (and some of that vulneranility is because they are dependent on others to get through the day). Then it’s decided to not do the prescribed doseage “so we can vaccinate more people”. But if it doesn’t fully protect them, why bother?
A tiny percentage of people have been vaccinated. It won’t be speeded up by much if they only get one dose, and these are the previously described “vulnerable”.
Maybe later, when halving means a lot more people get vaccinated, but one hopes the vaccine comes more freely soon enough.
Everyone now wants to be first, everyone claiming their group needs it most. That’s a problem, and a problem only fixed by vaccinating faster and getting tge doses faster.
Chris
>But if it doesn’t fully protect them, why bother?
Uh, because partial protection is better than no protection!
You realize that not everyone in ‘old age homes’ has had a *first* shot yet, right? Should some such residents get two while others have had zero? Or should we get them all at least one, then starting giving seconds? Quebec has decided, in my view rightly, on the second course.
Once all the old age home residents (and health workers) have had one dose, we can argue again about how to proceed next.
Kate
Chris, Pfizer is threatening to withdraw its vaccine if Quebec doesn’t follow its dosing schedule. I wouldn’t be able to understand the science here, but I assume enough light has been shed on this matter that we can assume Pfizer is not doing this to angle for a bigger payoff, but to ensure that the vaccine is optimally administered. I tend to rely on science in this, rather than political optics. Your choice, of course.
Chris
>I tend to rely on science in this
As do I. Of course we don’t have perfect information to decide from, there’s conflicting evidence, and pros and cons to be sure. You might find this a good read: https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n18
Kevin
Blork
I’m afraid that’s not what efficacy means.(This problem comes up a lot when talking science. Scientists use jargon which sounds a lot like normal English.)
“Scientists can calculate how well a vaccine candidate works by looking at the difference in new cases of the disease between the group receiving a placebo and the group receiving the experimental vaccine.
This is called vaccine efficacy. For example, Pfizer/BioNTech reported an efficacy of 95% for the COVID-19 vaccine. This means a 95% reduction in new cases of the disease in the vaccine group compared with the placebo group. ”
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/what-is-vaccine-efficacy
Alison Cummins
Old people often mount a less-robust immune response to vaccinations. They’re both more vulnerable to the disease and more difficult to protect.
I’d imagine that if you were going to vaccinate old people you’d want to be sure they got both shots. It might be more effective to fully-vaccinate the people they are in contact with, instead.
This is the kind of thing we can speculate about now but will know more about later.
Joey
Kevin, I’m pretty sure that’s incorrect. I’m also pretty sure your second comment is inconsistent with your first. See here: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccine-efficacy-e/shot-in-the-dark-early-covid-19-vaccine-efficacy-explained-idUSKBN27S2EI
The 95% figure means that 95% of the cases observed among the vaccine and control groups after 14 days (or however long) were recorded in the control group. The Pfizer trial recorded something like 160 cases among 40,000+ participants. If 8% of Maimonides patients got COVID after their first dose that’s because the disease is rampant in that hospital.
nau
Regardless of how exactly vaccine efficacy is defined, the interesting distinction in those articles is between vaccine efficacy and vaccine effectiveness. Vaccine efficacy measures how the vaccine performs in controlled trials and is used to determine if the vaccine performs well enough to be approved for use outside of trials. It does not tell us beforehand what percentage of vaccinated people will get sick when the vaccine is then actually used. Vaccine effectiveness measures how the vaccine actually works when used in everyday conditions. These two measurements are not expected to be exactly the same, and so we can’t predict in advance what percentage of vaccinated people will still get sick by using the percentage score of vaccine efficacy.
One CTV article from Dec. 15/6 (titled Only 40% of Maimonides staff…) I read stated that 143 patients were vaccinated at Maimonides. Perhaps more were vaccinated in subsequent days. Either way 7 out of 143(+) would be a vaccine effectiveness better than the announced vaccine efficacy (though too small a sample and too soon to make a meaningful comparison), so I don’t see how this story tells us anything about the quality of the vaccine or the effect of delaying second doses.
-
Kate
Steve Faguy lists the new players on the Canadiens as the new, brief season is about to begin.
-
Kate
Hospitals here are getting close to a critical moment when decisions will have to be made who to prioritize to live. TVA is leaning on the story of one woman whose heart operation has been postponed because of Covid, contrasting it with the sexual reassignment surgery being offered to convicted murderer Jamie (once John) Boulachanis.
Since Christmas, more homeless folks are testing positive for Covid and shelters are having trouble finding room to get people off the streets for curfew. Monday evening, representatives of groups championing the homeless held a protest to make the point that curfew is particularly hard on itinerants but – they claim – does little to stem the pandemic. People running shelters say police have been tolerant so far of those who appear to have nowhere to go after 8 p.m.
Update: Some say the homeless should get vaccination priority.
david244
I don’t think you have to be a Klu Klux Klan member to wonder at a health system that prioritized the sex change of a murderous tranny over life-saving heart surgeries. And the argument I heard about different surgeons with different specialties ignores the huge number of support staff involved. It’s just very very strange and totally indefensible. Instead of defending it, the change should be made so that it doesn’t happen.
Also, on the curfew, a key curfew goal is basically to give people nothing to do at night. Basically, if everything’s closed, they can’t engage in the sort of risky behavior that people get up to when the sun goes down. Do we need to arrest curfew violators? No. Does a lack of enforcement and/or impunity for violators lead to an increase in precisely the sorts of disease-spreading behaviors the curfew is imposed to avoid? Obviously, yes.
MarcG
‘Tranny’ is a hateful word, ya klansman.
Kate
david∞ – I was metacommenting more on the implicit QMI-style contrast in those two stories. Obviously the fact that Boulachanis’s surgery won’t be taking place in a heart institute is the thing you need to keep your eye on.
The argument for giving prisoners sex changes is that if you don’t, they can become suicidal. I don’t really understand the full logic, since I didn’t think a non-convict could get sex reassignment on the RAMQ for the asking, but maybe they can. I hear of people saving up for them, but maybe that’s more for the additional cosmetic procedures.
Michael Black
Being in prison is punishment, but I guess there’s a level of responsibility towards the prisoners. So perhaps there’s obligation that doesn’t exist in the outside world.
When I spent a weekend in jail in 1979, they issued either free cigarettes, or tobacco, I can’t remember which. I wasn’t offered an alternative. There had to be a reason, thiugh I gather the policy later changed.
david244 23:30 on 2021-01-12 Permalink
There’s no “row” of buildings proposed to be demolished under the typical understanding of that word, these are basically super low rise dumps of buildings, that will be replaced by much, much better structures and uses. There is, however, a huge drop in design quality, here’s what was initially proposed.
Bummer. Especially because twin towers like this in Montreal are rarely successful, so that there’s a significant risk of even further value engineering, and/or delays.
I seem to recall that we’ve already talked about the loss of L’escalier, which was one of my 30-50 favorite places in all the world. The rest though is well enough replaced.
Kate 11:00 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
This is the row of buildings. No, they are not architectural gems, but they are part of a vital urban landscape.
It’s probably futile to argue with you – you’ve made it quite clear your urban ideal is endless rows of identical glass box highrises – the point that an interesting urban setting should involve buildings that are varied in height, style and age. Montreal used to do that kind of thing well, but the variation is disappearing.
If everything has to be leased from the owner of a 20-storey glass box, a lot of commercial and cultural diversity is going to disappear.
In any case, read the Metro piece. I don’t know how the planner is intending to openly flout city guidelines for a minimum of social housing, but they are.
Ephraim 11:57 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
The block with the McDonald’s is new non-descript and basically could be replaced by Lego. The other block isn’t that interesting, if you ask me. And the place where the Amir was was purpose-built and no one knows what to do with that square of glass. (Not to mention energy inefficient.)
The city should negotiate the ownership of a few condos in exchange for this and then use the condos as social housing. The city should also require condo towers like that to be LEED certified and use geothermal heating. It’s time we set higher requirements on new builds. There should be a requirement to have wiring for 220V electrical in a garage for car charging. And that owners will be considered as if they have one parking permit for the city, and therefore be charged the rate of the second permit.
I understand what you are saying Kate, but there these aren’t really worth chaining ourselves to the tree for. We definitely need higher buildings to increase city density. That being said, it’s time we have higher requirements for them… make the developers create more efficient buildings. And if we can’t get them to build social housing, then find new ways. For example, create a new classification category for buildings without social housing that have more than 10 units that charges them 20% more property tax. New buildings that are not LEED certified, that charges them more property tax. Make it hurt in the pocketbooks when they tell people they are going to be paying forever for their misdeeds. Put language into the grants that excludes them because of these choices.
Alison Cummins 12:46 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
I haven’t been following along. What does it mean to say we need higher buildings to increase density? The plateau is the densest borough in Canada.
We need buildings with elevators and malls to improve accessibility, Place du Parc style. People eventually age out of their top-floor triplex apartments and need somewhere to live that doesn’t involve icy staircases. Our traditional housing stock is absolutely terrible for wheelchairs.
But our traditional housing stock is absolutely terrific for building somewhat mixed communities with enough density to support local businesses. It’s great for living close enough to your friends that you can walk or bike over to see them, or (these days) meet at the dog park.
Our density is just fine without towers. They serve an important function but density isn’t it.
Or am I missing something?
Ephraim 12:57 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
There was a lot of discussion about density. The government is supposed to be protecting our green belt, which means we should be growing upward rather than outward in the burbs.
But we definitely need more accessibility.
Alison Cummins 13:05 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Ephraim, I am in full agreement. We need density.
I question whether towers are a necessary or desirable means to that end. The plateau has few towers but great density.
dwgs 13:09 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
If the goal is maximum density then towers are the answer. If the goal is having a human scaled livable neighbourhood towers are a non starter.
Bill Binns 13:51 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Build build build! Hopefully they will build a playground in Berri Square for all the families that move in across the street. A few hundred nervous, cop calling moms is just the medicine this neighborhood needs.
Those two zombie restaurants will be no great loss. I’ve lived here for 5 years and do not believe I have ever seen a customer enter or exit either one. There is some kind of a magazine store on the same block with about the same amount of activity. I can’t imagine how these places make their rent.
Now if they will just do something with the old rat infested bus station.
Alison Cummins 13:51 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Towers were imagined as the answer in the 1920s. People would live in towers in parks. Utopia was everyone living in Nun’s Island.
Nun’s Island is not Canada’s densest neighbourhood. Also, everyone needs a car. If you want to combine density with towers you need to take away the parks and cars. You get what Americans call The Projects. (And what Canadians call Jane And Finch?)
Then the people with money leave to live in low-density neighbourhoods and we’re worse off than when we started.
There are lots of ways to promote densification that don’t involve adding towers to high-density neighbourhoods.
A typical evolution of a city involves lower middle class people building homes on the cheap land at the outskirts. As the city grows, that land grows in value. The houses are not necessarily in great shape, so developers buy the land and rebuild.
Sometimes they’ll split the lots and replace a small bungalow with a semi-detached 3.5-storey building. Density increases! Sometimes they build a McMansion sprawling over the entire thing. No change in density; bad for community (no room for a backyard skating rink); and unsuited to expected long-term changes including rising prices of heating fuel.
Zoning can encourage the former and forbid the latter.
Granny flats can be encouraged with loans, grants and flexible zoning committees. Garages can be converted to apartments. Neighbourhoods become denser over time and detached single-family homes become the exception. Tax revenue goes up. Transit can improve. There is no need to negotiate with large developers so corruption is less of a temptation. These neighbourhoods typically also have large apartment buildings on the other side of a highway as well, so the area becomes more mixed and integrated.
There are lots of ways to get more people living happily together in currently low-density neighbourhoods and sparing our remaining agricultural land.
DeWolf 13:53 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
I personally think it’s a shame that the block in front of the square is being demolished because, although some seem rather dismissive, those buildings do have architectural and heritage value. There’s no reason a tower can’t be built in parking lot behind them instead. The McDonald’s block, on the other hand, looks like it was always meant to be temporary. No redeeming value.
Alison, it’s a bit of a myth that the Plateau is the densest part of Canada. It’s not even the densest neighbourhood in Montreal. Shaughnessy Village and Park Extension are both denser. You can actually see the density of each census tract in Canada at censusmapper.ca, which is a great way to visualize all sorts of census data.
I agree that the Plateau strikes an almost perfect balance between liveability and density. I think we should be densifying on-island suburbs by replacing single-family houses with triplexes instead of creating Toronto-style pockets of towers with low-density sprawl in between. That’s the gentle density approach you’re arguing for. But downtown is another story. It has always been dense and it has had tall buildings, including tall residential buildings, for 100 years. There’s no reason why development downtown should be restricted to triplexes and small buildings.
Besides, the two towers being proposed here are not especially large or tall. 15 storeys is barely a high-rise. It’s shorter than Place Dupuis next door and not much taller than the Archambault building that has been around for a century.
DeWolf 14:03 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
I also feel like it should be pointed out that, while plexes form a baseline density for the Plateau, its main characteristic is the diversity of its built form. Beyond plexes, there are also a lot of large buildings, from the big apartment blocks on Park Avenue to the giant industrial buildings in Mile End, old industrial buildings on St-Laurent and of course the high-rises next to Lafontaine Park. People always seem to discount these big buildings, but without them the Plateau wouldn’t be the Plateau, it would be Verdun or Hochelaga or Villeray.
Alison Cummins 14:16 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
What I might see for that area is not condo towers but medium-rise dorm-style rental units over commercial space to make life easy for single people, odd couples and young families while taking into account the wide range of neighbourhood third-spaces.
By dorm-style I mean that some facilities are shared in a way that promotes community. Apartments are tiny; each floor has its own laundry facilities and lounge area; there are communal eating spots, meeting rooms and party rooms; there’s gym equipment but probably not a pool; theres’s a deck on the roof. No garage space, period. (Is the word micro-apartment or something?) There are a lot of people who would pay good rent for that if it was nice. I definitely would, if I were single.
Airbnb actively policed and forbidden.
Condo builds are popular with developers because financing is easier, but selling the building or repurposing space is hell. They aren’t suitable for people who aren’t into home maintenance. They take up more space because everyone needs their own stuff, and condo-owners want parking.
Ephraim 14:20 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Just to mention it, these buildings aren’t in the Plateau, but Ville-Marie. I’ve lived not far from here… it can use more day time traffic, offices, to bring in day time business.
As for that magazine store… my only memory is of a cashier giving me back change as if I paid with a $10 when I paid with a $20 and the manager refusing to do a cash count… giving them enough time to pocket the money. I never did walk back in.
I’d like to see AirBnB actively policed anywhere in Montreal. Revenu Quebec is NOT doing their job.
I’d like to see better requirements on such buildings, that’s why I want them LEED certified with geothermal heating/cooling.
I don’t think these will attract families, but rather will attract older people who want easy access to the metro, groceries, pharmacy, etc. They will also use the park.
Tim S. 14:40 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
As far as the triplex vs high-rise question, I think it was in Jan Gehl’s Cities for People that he said 6 stories was a happy medium between density and human-scale neighbourhoods. They would be big enough to have elevators for accessibility, but a person on a 6th floor balcony can (just barely) be considered part of street life.
DeWolf 14:48 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Alison, I think what you’re describing can be described either as micro-flats or co-living, depending on just how many facilities are shared between residents.
This particular project is not condos, though, it’s rental apartments.
Alison Cummins 15:05 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Thanks, DeWolf. I knew I hadn’t invented it, I’m just not up to date on the terminology. I obviously hadn’t read the article since I thought it was condos. Will fix that now.
I enjoyed dorm life. I needed to get out of it for my own sanity—conflicts with roomies (two people shared one room back then, bathrooms were communal for the floor)—eww shared kitchens—but moving into a Pointe-Claire low-rise with a roommate was not the answer.
Today I love being a landlord and living where I do, but I live with a determinedly handy partner with excellent taste and a driver’s license. It used to be more awkward with half-solutions, though I still liked it.
If I lived alone I’d want to pare down and let someone else look after the infrastructure. I’d want both privacy and the opportunity to build friendships. I can’t be the only one.
Alison Cummins 15:10 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Tim S., I thought it was Jane Jacobs? But I think she said a range between 3 and (max) 6.
Ephraim 16:35 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Alison, my dorms were 10 rooms to a floor, 2 people to a room. 3 toilets and 3 showers for the floor. And the kitchen had 1 fridge with 5 doors, so we all got half a shelf. And there were 4 burners for cooking. No microwave, no oven. I eventually graduated to the fancy doors. 2 to a room, 6 to an apartment, 2 toilets, 2 showers. LUXURY!
Alison Cummins 17:17 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Ephraim,
My grandfather was raised in the Great Depression by a single father who worked-from-home rolling cigars so he could look after his small boys. All my great-grandfather could afford on that pittance was a horrible garret, stuffy in the summer, frosty in Saskatchewan’s winters. I’m pretty sure horrible garrets don’t come with their own bathrooms.
When my grandfather finally left home to earn his PhD in Wisconsin, he shared a single room in a rooming house with another grad student. LUXURY. There was even a bathroom on the same floor!
(Once he’d completed his PhD, he went to work at the Rothamstead research centre in England where my grandmother immediately developed a crush on the dashing new researcher with jazzy american socks. That would have been about 1942. I never asked my grandmother about the socks her British colleagues were wearing; possibly home-knit and patched, or re-knit, or even none at all.)
What was that book about a Chinese-American family — came out in the 1980s — where the grandmother has studied as a midwife in China. She shared her dorm room with five other women. It had three bunkbeds and two dressers with three drawers each. She thought she was in heaven. All that privacy! A whole bed to herself! Her own drawer for her clothes!
Luxury is relative.
Tim S. 18:56 on 2021-01-13 Permalink
Oh, likely Jane Jacobs had similar ideas. I haven’t read all her stuff. But Gehl’s book has all kinds of diagrams showing what kind of interaction is possible from different heights and so on, and for non-specialist me it explained a lot about things I had instinctively liked without knowing why.
su 11:46 on 2021-01-14 Permalink
“Ils ne veulent pas que le règlement pour une métropole mixte s’applique, donc ils essaient de la passer en toute vitesse», analyse le coordonnateur du Comité logement Ville-Marie, Éric Michaud”
Ah yes. PMs 20 20 20 bylaw was put on hold due to COVID .It was supposed to kick in on Jan.1st 2021.
su 12:34 on 2021-01-14 Permalink
Ephraim
I know there has been alot of discussion about protecting our black earth green belt, but I am not sure what concrete policies have been put in place. Hudson, St Lazare, Chateauguay, Laval, Lachute, Brossard, have all been subject to massive rezoning of agricultural land in the recent decade I get the impression that rezoning is up to local councils.
Do you ( or anyone else) know if there is any level of government charged with recording agrictural land loss in a rigorous and detailed manner?
Alison Cummins 14:42 on 2021-01-14 Permalink
I don’t know who is saying the building across from Parc Émilie-Gamelin is not that tall. It’s way too big for a building across the street from a park. It blocks the sky.
If I were queen of the world I’d tell them they could make the east building taller on condition they made the park building a lot shorter.