chris

What is that CN building???

Can't we just get rid of the height limit already?

That's right.

Wait, so there's still work that needs to be done? They're not finished?

During the North American economic booms of the 80s and 90s (which Montreal totally missed out on, by the way), developers were already doing very well at preserving historical architecture and respecting zoning and building codes. Montreal is not lucky for having experienced economic turmoil during much of the late 20th century.

LOL

Yes very true, thank you for the correction.

I am pro this development... I just don't use development as an excuse to give more money to the government.

The government doesn't need more money. If it needs/wants more money, it needs to prove that it can better manage the funds it already has before I even think/consider giving it more.

It's hard to give a name of a hotel chain before the hotel piece itself is approved for construction. Basically, major hotels like Holiday Inn, Marriott, Sheraton, Hilton, etc are all franchises. Someone would need to invest in opening up a hotel of one of those chains. At this point I'm going to assume that someone either hasn't decided to invest in opening up a hotel yet, or they have but haven't decided which brand they would open. With that being said, a hotel of this size and in this part of the city would probably be a "flagship" brand hotel such as Holiday Inn, Marriott, Hilton, Sheraton, etc or a more budget/classic brand such as "Courtyard" or "Hilton Garden Inn". The Luxury Hotels and Boutique Hotels are usually reserved for the downtowns or very touristy areas.

I would agree - you're not really hungry unless you've been lost in the Sahara without food or water for a week.

No worries!

My comments weren't specifically directed to you.

LOL Firstly, the city of Montreal doesn't need more revenue...it needs to better manage the money it already has and collects. More money to our local government is rarely a good thing - better management of it always is. Secondly, the potential loss of jobs at Rockland would be more than offset by the creation of new jobs at Royalmount. Seriously, who stops a new development because of the "potential" loss of jobs somewhere else? In addition, if Rockland were to become a relic of the past, who said that's a bad thing? Jobs will be created in new locations. Stores will open up in new locations. Seriously, who came up with this notion that everything needs to stay the same? If Rockland became a relic of the past, they can tear it down and build housing on top of it. There's already a shortage of housing in the center of the Island of Montreal. An increase in supply can moderate housing/living costs, to the benefit of literally anyone looking for decent housing. Thirdly, pollution...well...if you're inferring that development should be stopped because of "pollution" (and what do you mean by that exactly? Do you mean the creation of more pollution? Do you mean the spreading of pollution from one area to another?)...then I guess we can all go back to living in trees and caves. This thread and the comments I am reading on it are very amusing. Keep it going guys!

I sincerely do not understand the opposition to this project.