Maisonneuve

I prefer the first version too, even if the towers required more creativity. It would have made more of an impact overall on the downtown area. This supposed new version looks like something they would build in Longueuil or Dix30. This is very disappointing. Then again, we trust that Montrealers who live in that area know what's best for their neighbourhood.

Once the Turcot is completed and the new highway 20 is open, there are plans to develop the land where the existing highway is. That land between the new highway 20 and the canal. Does anyone have any knowledge about serious plans or intentions to develop that land? My desire is for that land to be zoned for buildings taller than the St. Jacques Escarpment. I would prefer a mixed-use master-planned neigbourhood like CityPlace or Concord Pacific Place. It would be a nice way to stretch the skyline of Montreal, because west of Westmount Square there are few tall buildings. Having a mixed-use master-planned neigbourhood would be better than an industrial no-mans land.

Ten years after the REM is built, they should do part of the Grand Deblocage just to make those people happy. Enough with the false dichotomy, we can build the REM and Grand Deblocage. Not at the same time, but in phases. Trainsparence is full of it. When the REM was announced, the Caisse held interactive information sessions in various municipalities across the metropolitan area. The public were able to come and ask questions directly to the people involved. Some of us on here went to these sessions, and they were very informative. I went to one of them. I even volunteered to write some of my questions on paper, submitted it to them, and they responded to my questions via email as promised. So this idea that the REM is being pushed on Montrealers without any transparency, as most people on this forum already know, is pure nonsense.

Rob Lurie is one of the worst reporters on CTV News Montreal. His stories are always laced with incredulity, no matter the topic. Like dude, if an expert makes a statement about a topic, don't say "they claim", "they insist", "they promise", "...but critics say..." as if the expert is some moron. In general, that news panders to boomer anglophones, who for them Montreal was only great during the "good old days" of the 60s. If I hear another boomer anglo speak poetically about Expo 67 I'm going to throw up. That is why the progress that has been happening in the city, on many levels other than real estate development, is not seen or believed. But the more the city develops, with buildings, parks, bike paths, pedestrian areas, and roads, the better it will be for everyone. That's what these CTV News Montreal stories miss. It's not about one project like 700 rue St.Jacques being one too many, but about the holistic, overall idea of what Montreal is becoming. That's the story! But when you have spent the last 30 years pandering to people whose existential conclusion of Montreal is based on the last quarter of the 20th century, it becomes impossible to see anything else but that.

This is the link that I broke down earlier this year on April 30 in the "New office towers without jobs to fill them won’t help Montreal" post No.70. As I wrote in that post, Quebec City has a higher GDP per capita than Montreal. Quebec City outperforms many big metropolises, world capitals and top financial centres in terms of GDP per capita (Madrid, Barcelona, Rome, Milan, Berlin, Dubai, Delhi, Mumbai, Shanghai, Beijing, Melborne, and Sao Paulo). These global metropolises are some of the world's great cities. Some of them are giants in the business world. Yet, they all have lower, sometimes tens of thousands of dollars lower, GDP per capita than Quebec City. Even with the much derided bureaucracy of the Quebec state, Quebec City still has a higher GDP per capita than the capitals of Spain, India and China. Quebec City has very positive Overall Performance Rankings in the Brookings data (it's a blue dot like many cities in Western US and Canada!). It also has the same language laws and high provincial taxes as Montreal. Basically, the same perceived negatives as Montreal. That's why I love when you use this Brookings data mark_ac, because you're so caught up in the small world of MTLvTOR, which makes us Canadians look very provincial to outsiders I must say, that you haven't noticed that Quebec City, language laws, high taxes and all, disproves your theory about Montreal. Not claiming victory over angryphones. I sometimes agree with you. Sometimes... I am an anglophone, but I don't like other anglophones who have an allergic reaction to French, and see French as an obstacle to Montreal's success. Don't tell me that if Quebec, who controls its own immigration policy, ambitiously and aggressively, sought to increase its population by 250K immigrants a year, focused on French speaking countries, with the aim of creating/growing our own low-skilled manufacturing industries/markets, growing our retail sector and other sectors of lower middle class jobs for all those new Quebecers, that it wouldn't be good for our economy. Not to mention making it easier for professionals to practice in Quebec. We would almost double our population in a generation, with millions more French speaking people. Such a Quebec would be more diverse and less insular, more prosperous and less stagnant, and by sheer number, much more French. It's not the language, it's our approach to society building in Quebec that has to change. When this place starts thinking big with it's immigration strategy and sees the world's over 200 million francophones as an opportunity and not something to legislative and discriminate against, Quebec will soar with the eagles. Once we get out of seeing ourselves as besieged by a sea of English North America that we need to protect against, while we continue to look back at 1960s, holding on to "valeurs québécois" for dear life as our average age increases and our birth rate decreases, and instead the thoroughly franco-international, diverse society that we can become, then maybe Montreal (with 8 million people by then) will be in the top 50 of cities in GDP per capita. I'm not a separatist, and I am against the idea of an independent Quebec, but if I was running for the leadership of the PQ, what I just wrote would be my whole platform. Hey, if you want your own county, go big or go home! You're playing fast and loose with your own stats, mark_ac. I took the time to break down your link back in April. You cite Montreal as No. 147 for GDP per capital. According to the link, that's "GDP per capita (PPP): $38,867 (147th). No argument there my friend. But then when you compare it with Toronto, you cite it as GDP (PPP $Millions): $276,313 (39th). Wouldn't it make more sense, and be less intellectually dishonest, to have compared the GDP per capita (PPP) for both? Montreal $38,867 (147th) and Toronto $45,771 (100th). And yes, Toronto's is higher, we bow down and worship the Queen City, their GDP per capita is higher....by $6,904. Do a rough calculation of income taxes and gas (both higher here) and rent, childcare, utilities, public transit and car insurance in Toronto (all drastically higher there) and that $6,904 disappears faster than it takes to scramble cross at Yonge-Dundas Square on a Saturday night at 3am. But all hail the mighty Toronto, with their higher GDP per capita than Montreal! mark_ac, move to Toronto, take your extra bump in GDP per capita you expect to make (+/-$6,904) and put it towards a down payment on a condo at CityPlace....you're gonna need it! Beware of the falling glass and leaky dishwasher pipes (pray the 20 floors above you don't leak!), as we beware the potholes and crumbling (but under (re)construction!) infrastructure. Ah life, no matter what you do, it all comes out to the same thing!

Look at it this way: Of the 110 cities on the list, do you believe that on average, Montreal is last in terms of economic significance and GDP per capita? I use the latter stat because I know how much you love it mark_ac and love to prove a lot of your points with it. Consider all 110 cities and their GDP per capita, is Montreal last? Is Montreal worse than , Barcelona, Rome, Berlin, Dubai, and Shanghai? These are not nothing cities. Or any city in the UK, outside of London? acpnc is not saying that Quebec is an economic superpower. He's making a point with a statistic, that is worth making. You do it all the time. The CD Howe Institute does it all the time. Had the ranking germane to this thread showed Montreal last of 110 cities, you would no doubt have started this thread and we'd never read the end of it...

The numbers do a lot of talking: Quebec City has a higher GDP per capita than the following cities: Berlin, Dubai, Shanghai, Melborne and many other cities outside of North America. Quebec City has a higher GDP than Montreal with the same often cited negatives. Vancouver has a slightly higher GDP per capita than Montreal. Which tells us all we need to know about the importance of GDP per capita as an indicator, because nobody can make the argument that Quebec City and Vancouver are not desirable places because they have a low GDP per capita.

I actually liked Todd's article. When I saw that he was the author I was expecting the mother of all anti-Montreal articles. But he was honest, thorough and fair. Those Olympics took a toll on the city and its image. And the debt kept us from making drastic improvements to the city for 30 years. It's not a coincidence that once the debt was paid off that we saw major projects come to the fore. From 2006 onward this place has been changing.

Finally Montreal won. For the past few years, Montreal made the top 21 and top 7, but this year they actually won.

Revitalizing Calgary's core: Some possibilities for rebirth 'Calgary has reinvented itself before ... from a ranching/agriculture-based economy to oil and gas' By Richard White, CBC News Posted: Jun 17, 2016 While it is shocking that Calgary's downtown skyscraper vacancy rate skyrocketed to 20 per cent at the end of March, and that it could soon surpass the vacancy record of 22 per cent set in 1983 (twice what it was a year ago), we should keep some perspective. These numbers are not unheard of in major corporate headquarter cities. Back in the 1970s, New York City was in decline. By the mid-70s, the city came close to bankruptcy and its office vacancy rate hit 20 per cent. In 1993, Toronto's downtown office vacancy rate hit 20.4 per cent. Vancouver's rose to 17.4 per cent in 2004. And these may not even be records, as data only goes back to 1990 for those cities. Today, New York City, Toronto and Vancouver's downtowns are booming. All downtowns go through periods of growth, decline and rebirth. Montreal's decline and rebirth In the '60s, the case could still be made Montreal was Canada's business capital. Its downtown was a major office headquarters for Quebec's natural resource industry as well as a thriving financial industry, including the head offices of the Bank of Montreal, Royal Bank of Canada and insurance giant Sun Life. In 1962, when the Place Ville Marie office designed by iconic architects I.M. Pei and Henry N. Cobb opened, it symbolized Montreal's arrival as a world-class city. This was further reinforced with the hosting of Expo '67, the arrival of Montreal Expos baseball team in 1969, and the 1976 Olympics. However, the '70s brought the threat of separation, which prompted many corporate headquarters and their executives to move to Toronto. By 1971, Toronto's population surpassed Montreal's. The 1976 Montreal Olympics, the most expensive in history, plunged the city into a legacy of debt and decline for decades. Today, Montreal has reinvented itself as an international tourist destination and a major player in the gaming and music industries. New York's return from the brink In 1975, New York City was on the brink of bankruptcy. The gradual economic and social decay set in during the '60s. The city's subway system was regarded as unsafe due to crime and frequent mechanical breakdowns. Central Park was the site of numerous muggings and rapes; homeless persons and drug dealers occupied boarded-up and abandoned buildings. Times Square became an ugly, seedy place dominated by crime, drugs and prostitution. Today, New York City is back as one of the world's most successful cities, economically and culturally, and Times Square is again one of the world's most popular urban tourist attractions. Calgary's future Perhaps Calgary has already begun to reinvent itself. Despite the growing vacancy rate downtown, the CBRE's First Quarter 2016 Report says, "Not all commercial real estate in the city has been affected, though. Suburban office space held steady from the last quarter, and the industrial real estate market is still robust because it's not tied to oil and gas." Indeed, Calgary has become one of North America's largest inland port cities, including two state-of-the art intermodal rail operations. Calgary is now the distribution headquarters for Western Canada, a position once held by Winnipeg. And so Calgary's industrial sectors employ more people than the energy sector. Calgary Economic Development is working with the real estate community to implement a "Head Office/Downtown Office Plan" with three action items. One idea is the repurposing of smaller older office spaces as incubators and innovation hubs to attract millennials and/or entrepreneurs. A good example of this is in West Hillhurst, where Arlene Dickenson has converted an old office building at the corner of Memorial Drive and Kensington Road that was once home to an engineering firm into District Ventures, home to several startup packaged goods companies. Another repurposing idea would be to convert some older office buildings into residential uses. In the U.S., programs like Vacant Places Into Vibrant Spaces have been successful but mostly for office to residential conversions of older buildings with smaller floor plates. They don't work for offices buildings with floor plates over 7,500 square feet (which is the case for most of Calgary's empty high-rise office space), as it is expensive and difficult to meet residential building codes, which are very different from commercial ones, making it tough to compete with new residential construction. In an ideal world, Calgary could become a global talent hub, where skilled workers who have been displaced from the energy and related industries continue to live in Calgary but become a remote workforce for energy projects around the world. Temporary and permanent satellite offices could be established in Calgary with teams of engineers, geologists, accountants, bankers etc. working on projects around the world. The obvious strategy would be to woo international companies in the finance, insurance, transportation, agriculture, digital media and renewable resources to set up a Canadian or North American office in Calgary, maybe even relocate here. With cities like San Francisco, Seattle and Boston facing major affordable housing crises for millennial workers, Calgary could become a very attractive place for a satellite office for companies in those cities. One "off the wall" idea postulated by George Brookman, CEO of West Canadian Industries, would be to promote Calgary as an "International Centre for Energy Dispute Resolution," similar to the Netherland's TAMARA (Transportation And Maritime Arbitration Rotterdam-Amsterdam), which offers an extrajudicial platform for conducting professional arbitration for settling disputes. However, one wonders: Could Calgary compete with London and New York, which are already leaders in the international arbitration business? Incentivize rebirth Calgary has reinvented itself before, evolving from a ranching/agriculture-based economy to oil and gas in the middle of the 20th century. Indeed, the downtown core, which is an office ghetto today, would benefit immensely if incentives could be made to convert a dozen or so office buildings into condos, apartments or hotels to foster a rebirth of the core as a place to live. Calgary at a Crossroads is CBC Calgary's special focus on life in our city during the downturn. A look at Calgary's culture, identity and what it means to be Calgarian. Read more stories from the series at Calgary at a Crossroads. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-core-kickstart-richard-white-1.3638276

I never thought I'd say this, but I think Bernie should take his race and go elsewhere. I'm tired of giving him money, until the next time he threatens to pull the race. France had a race for 102 years, but when they didn't have the money to keep the race or improve the track, they let it go. Their last race was 2008. I know it is Montreal's premier international event, but I believe that Montreal can do so much better than a car race, which is part of a "professional organisation" that has lost 1/3 of its global TV audience since 2008.

Bernie Ecclestone casts doubt on Montreal F1 contract F1 head says required improvements to Montreal track haven't been done CBC News Posted: Jun 10, 2016 8:33 AM ET Last Updated: Jun 10, 2016 8:47 AM ET Formula One Group CEO Bernie Ecclestone says Montreal's lack of action on promised improvements to the city's Gilles-Villeneuve racetrack may be putting the city's F1 contract in doubt. Ecclestone made the comments in Montreal, where he's in town for the Canadian Grand Prix race this weekend. When Montreal renewed its contract for the F1 race in 2014, the city promised to renovate the garages, control tower and medical centre at the Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve in time for the 2017 Grand Prix. The cost of the improvements was estimated at $32.6 million. When asked Thursday if he was optimistic that the fixes would be in place for 2017, Ecclestone said "I doubt it." He then said "we'll see" if the 2017 Grand Prix gets the green light if the renovations aren't complete. Montreal's 'forgotten' contractual obligations He said the improvements were part of the 10-year deal Montreal signed in 2014 with F1. If they're not finished, the city's contract with F1 could be in doubt, Ecclestone said. "When you've got a contract, normally it's got the terms set out in the contract for what people are supposed to do – both sides. And it's been forgotten a little bit from the city's side," he told reporters. Ecclestone partly to blame, says Coderre Ecclestone is well-known for his off-the-cuff comments, and this one received an immediate response from Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre. Coderre acknowledged that the work is behind schedule, but said put the blame on disagreements between Ecclestone and Montreal Grand Prix promoter François Dumontier. "Sometimes, when the promoter and Bernie Ecclestone don't agree on how things should be done, that's what causes delays," he said. However, he said Montreal's 2017 Grand Prix will be as good as ever. "We'll make sure there's a good Grand Prix and you'll see that the city's done its work."

Definitely!

It's unfortunate. The location would have been good for Rad-Can based on all the reasons that the article said it would be. I guess they want to remain in the media hood with CTV, TVA and the big radio stations.

But heritage icon Phyllis Lambert, founder of the neighbouring Canadian Centre for Architecture, told the Office de consultation publique de Montréal (OCPM) she agreed in principle with the condo towers. “The neighbourhood really needs good, middle-class people,” Lambert said in an interview with the Montreal Gazette after delivering her brief. “The park doesn’t make sense to me at all,” she said. I'm shocked that Lambert is in favour of this project. I was certain that she would be on the same side as the neighbourhood residents.

LE NEZ COLLÉ SUR LES CHANTIERS… Édition du 5 juin 2016, FRANÇOIS CARDINAL LA PRESSE On a le nez collé sur les grilles de chantier depuis, quoi ? Le tournant du millénaire ? Ça fait une quinzaine d’années qu’on se plaint du barda et du bordel, qu’on se désole des cônes et du trafic, qu’on peste contre les détours et la poussière. Il y a tellement de chantiers à Montréal qu’à la seconde où l’un disparaît, on en trouve 10 autres contre lesquels se plaindre, se désoler, pester… Du coup, on ne voit que ça. Et on perd de vue une chose toute bête : chaque chantier est un projet en devenir. Fou de même ! Chaque chantier qui nous a dérangés depuis 2000 est devenu une construction, un édifice, un gratte-ciel, un équipement sportif, une bibliothèque, une infrastructure nouvelle, un aménagement urbain, une piste cyclable… On se croit encore à l’ère de l’immobilisme, alors que la cadence des chantiers nous prouve très exactement le contraire. Comme si on voyait le verre au tiers vide plutôt qu’aux deux tiers plein. On voit les pancartes « À louer », mais pas les artères qui ont réussi à s’adapter à la nouvelle réalité. Comme si Masson, Beaubien et Fleury étaient dans notre angle mort. On se désole du taux de chômage, sans voir l’attrait qu’a retrouvé la métropole auprès des jeunes, des familles et des travailleurs de la nouvelle économie. Comme si le Mile End, Griffintown et le Quartier des spectacles n’existaient pas. On remarque tous les détours, mais pas l’incroyable dynamisme qui se cache derrière : le CHUM, Bonaventure, Turcot, Champlain. Comme si on tenait pour acquis ce qui se fait… dès que ça se fait. Prenez l’exemple des gratte-ciel. Pendant 22 longues années, aucune tour ne s’est construite au centre-ville. Aucune. Zéro. Nada. On a érigé la magnifique Tour IBM Marathon en 1992, puis… plus rien jusqu’en 2014 ! Or, avez-vous entendu beaucoup de monde se féliciter de cette renaissance du centre-ville, devenu l’un des plus habités du continent ? Pas moi. Mais des critiques contre les chantiers, par contre… *** Vous me trouvez jovialiste ? Je m’en doutais. Je suis donc retourné lire les textes que j’ai signés il y a un peu plus de 15 ans, quand j’étais journaliste municipal, pour voir si, comme de fait, le Montréal d’aujourd’hui est bien mieux que le Montréal d’alors. Pas sorcier, j’ai eu l’impression de lire un journal vieux de 100 ans ! Rappelez-vous cette époque où le 11 septembre était une date comme une autre. Les Expos perdaient au Stade. L’énigmatique Pierre Bourque était maire. La démocratie municipale était une abstraction. Et les fusions municipales étaient l’unique projet d’avenir… Montréal, on l’oublie, était alors un champ de ruines. J’exagère à peine. Le centre-ville avait l’air bombardé, et pas à cause des nids-de-poule, parce qu’il y avait un nombre incroyable de terrains vagues et de stationnements sauvages. Il y avait tellement d’espaces vides, en fait, qu’on pensait construire sans problème un stade de baseball en plein quartier des affaires ! À côté, on espérait le Quartier international sans même s’imaginer qu’une aussi belle réussite était possible. L’idée d’un Quartier des spectacles n’existait pas, une poignée de fous se contentait de rêver à un « Quartier des théâtres ». Juste au nord, telle une forteresse de béton, l’horrible échangeur routier au coin des avenues du Parc et des Pins bloquait la vue et l’accès au mont Royal, qui n’était d’ailleurs toujours pas protégé. Au contraire, même… Pas de Grande Bibliothèque pour rapiécer le Quartier latin, à l’est. Pas d’agrandissement du Palais des congrès, ni de recouvrement d’autoroute. Et pas de CHUM non plus, qu’on prévoyait plutôt construire en plein quartier résidentiel, dans la Petite-Patrie. Oui, oui. Au sud du centre-ville, guère mieux… Le Vieux-Montréal était à ce point abandonné que le gouvernement avait mis sur pied un programme généreux en subventions pour attirer des hôtels. À un jet de pierre, le Vieux-Port se cherchait. Il n’y avait pas encore de Centre des sciences. Pas de condos dans les entrepôts frigorifiques. Pas de véritable vision, en fait, sinon celle de permettre aux promoteurs de faire n’importe quoi, n’importe où. Un aquarium Ripley’s ? Une maison de l’OSM sur le quai Bickerdike ? Un « technodôme » à la Disney World ? Ou, tant qu’à y être, le siège social de l’ONU ? Autant d’idées qui ont été détaillées et même présentées. Oui, oui… Vers l’ouest, la Cité du multimédia venait tout juste d’être annoncée. Pas aménagée, juste annoncée, comme un autre de ces projets auxquels on ne croit pas tant qu’on ne le voit pas. On réfléchissait à une cité du commerce électronique un peu plus loin. On envisageait d’aménager des cinémas dans l’ancien Forum vide. Et le quartier Griffintown ? Aussi inconnu que son nom. Oui, oui. *** Pour apprécier le chemin parcouru, c’est bien connu, il faut se rappeler d’où on part. D’une ville morose, donc, où le problème était justement l’absence de chantiers. Bien sûr, tout ne s’est pas métamorphosé comme par magie. On n’a pas réussi à tout faire ce qu’on aurait dû faire. Et bien des projets ont été abandonnés (la « modernisation » de la rue Notre-Dame Est), balayés (le prolongement de la ligne jaune, des deux côtés) ou se sont enrayés (le rond-point Dorval, dont on parlait déjà en 2000). N’empêche que Montréal est aujourd’hui une ville autrement plus dynamique que la métropole qu’elle était, malgré son incapacité à améliorer la mobilité. C’est une ville que je préfère nettement à sa version d’il y a 15 ans, malgré ses cônes orange. C’est un milieu de vie infiniment plus grouillant qu’au tournant du millénaire, malgré ses défauts, ses laideurs et ses errements. On peut bien rouspéter en empruntant tous ces détours continuellement, mais prenons quelques minutes lorsque nous sommes coincés dans le trafic pour rêver à ce qui s’en vient. Cet échangeur Turcot qui s’annonce plus fluide et ancré dans les quartiers qu’il traverse. Ce CHUM noir autrement plus réussi que son pendant anglophone. Cette autoroute Bonaventure qui disparaîtra au profit d’une majestueuse entrée de ville. Et ce futur pont Champlain, avec ses haubans élancés, à la fois sobre et élégant. Donc oui, quand on se regarde, quand on s’attarde à tout ce qui va tout croche aujourd’hui, on se désole. Mais quand on se compare, quand on regarde le chemin parcouru et celui qui s’en vient, on se console. À condition, bien sûr, de se décoller le nez des grilles de chantier. http://plus.lapresse.ca/screens/df6be48e-9f7e-48a7-b08b-6487909e4368%7C_0.html

Like the New York Mets logo.

Maybe we can pull a Leicester City! lol. Foreign owner comes in, we win the league!

I was thinking the same thing. The Quebec immigrant-investor program is very popular.

I was at the public consultation last night too. Normally, I'm pro development, but listening to the complaints of the residents, I happen to agree with them. Downtown West has very little public parks. The small parks that the panel kept reminding people about (Cabot Square, Place Henri-Dunant & Place Hector-Toe Blake) are not enough. People seem to want a park where kids can play. Mayor Coderre says that making the site a park would be too dangerous because of traffic, plus too polluted being next to the highway. I like Coderre a lot, but obviously as the mayor of Montreal, he might not know that about 1km west down René Lévesque/Dorchester there's a soccer/football next to the same highway/train tracks by Westmount High School. However, as some attendees expressed last night, and some quite angrily, their community needs more green space specifically for kids to play. To counter this objection, the panel kept coming back to the promise of the former Montreal Children's Hospital being transformed into a mixed-use public site that would include a library and some sort of park. I'm sceptical that the old hospital will be demolished to create this new green space any time soon.

Une nouvelle franchise de MLB à Montréal aurait besoin de moins de redistribution des revenus si leur propriétaire était une société de télécommunications avec un réseau sportif pour diffuser tous leurs matches, comme Rogers le fait avec les Blue Jays. Avec la concurrence des médias sportifs à Montréal, une réalité qui n'existait pas à l'époque, un réseau qui a perdu les droits télévisuels de hockey a un compétiteur (pas exemple) et cherche du contenu à vendre, va payer beaucoup pour rester pertinent dans le marché. Maintenant, juste le sport en direct soutient les abonnements de télévision, et cela est plus important que les ventes de billets dans un stade. Le propriétaire idéal pour une nouvelle franchise serait une société de télécommunications avec un réseau sportif qui a faim pour le sport en direct. Le jour quand nous entendons cela dans les nouvelles, tout est possible. Un propriétaire (pas un consortium) avec un réseau sportif. Le nom du stade serait «Stade (société de télécommunications),» avec leur grand logo sur la façade. Ce que cela signifie est, peu importe si nous regardons les matches au stade, à la maison ou en déplacement sur ​​un appareil mobile, nous serons captifs dans le monde du propriétaire. All Expos, 24/7, at home or on the go! Mon désir est que le nouveau stade est plus que juste un stade normal, mais un entroit construit sur les concepts du design expérientiel. J'espère voir Sid Lee Architecture faire la conception d'un nouveau stade, et peut-être qu'ils pourraient collaborer avec Moment Factory pour le multimédia des intérieurs. Chaque match des Expos dans ce stade doit se sentir comme un événement. Les Montréalais aiment bien les événements. Watching pro sports in a stadium in 2016 is about the experience, not the sport. If the experience is memorable and special, you can fill a stadium win or lose. Not all 21K people who go to the Bell Centre to see the Canadiens are crazy about hockey, but they go for the experience. Most Montrealers don't care about the Canadiens until they're in the playoffs. That's because they want to feel part of the experience. Same for people who go to watch the Impact at Saputo Stadium. The chanting, the stomping, the bell - it's the experience. Not all in attendance are soccer fanatics, but they go for the experience. What will be the new Montreal Expos baseball experience? It use to be watching an outdoors sport indoors, in an oversized, cavernous stadium, with bad sight lines, and a terrible echo. A big concrete tomb, that was psychologically far, even though it wasn't that far at all. It wasn't even an inviting place on TV. That was the experience. What will be the new baseball experience in Montreal with a stadium close to the Peel basin? I think this question is as important as the stadium location and orientation.

Je crois que vous avez raison. Rappelez-vous en 2005-2006 quand il a été question que l'ONU déménage à Montréal? Le projet exploratoire reste encore sur le site de Provencher Roy avec le site de mon option 1 développé pour l’ONU. http://provencherroy.ca/fr/urbanisme-design-urbain/design-urbain/montreal-international-cite-globale.html Même si Farine Five Roses et Silo No.5 sont classés patrimonial, le site a encore assez d'espace pour construire un stade et beaucoup plus de développements aussi. Oui les coûts reliés à bloquer, égoutter, démolir et excaver ces bassins seront coûteux, mais avec un grand ROI pour la ville (impôt$ foncier$ au centre-ville au bord de l'eau!!).

je suis d'accord avec toi, Né entre les rapides. Et je suis parmi ceux qui croient que dans les dix prochaines années il aura une franchise de MLB à Montréal dans un nouveau stade. Oui le bassin Peel serait le meilleur endroit pour construire un stade, mais il y a deux autres endroits qui serait intéressant aussi: 1-La côté nord-est du bassin Peel. Ils pourraient démolir Farine Five Roses et Silo No.5, bloquer les bassins Wind-mill Point et Bikerdike et les égoutter d'eau. Ensuite, démolir les bassins et excaver pour un nouveau stade et d'autres développements résidentiel de 5 à 10 étages. On devrait conserver les Jardins des écluses par contre. Imaginez une foule de gens qui marchent vers le sud sur les larges trottoirs du nouveau boulevard urbain Bonaventure, ensuite sur un pont piétonnier de 50 pieds large qui traversera le canal, à le nouveau stade. Et il serait pas loin du station train électrique Wellington-Bridge. Aussi, les gens pourraient marcher du Vieux-Port jusqu'à Habitat 67 sans monter en véhicule ou l'autoroute. Un tel projet rejoindra la Cité de Havre au reste de la ville et créera un nouveau petit quartier au bord de l'eau, dans l'ombre d'un nouveau stade. Ce projet serait aussi la solution pour les silos...avec des coups de circuit à l'eau avec Habitat 67 et le pont Jacques-Cartier dans en l'arrière-plan. 2- La partie l'ouest de l'îlot de la Maison Radio-Canada bordé par Boul. René-Lévesque, Rue Wolfe et le 720 (la partie plus gros de l'îlot). La partie l'ouest de l'îlot est plus gros que l'option du site de l'ancien Montreal Children's Hospital. En plus, le centre et l'est de l'îlot vers Papineau pourraient être développés avec des condos de 10-15 étages et un parc urbain. *** Donc, même si «d'autres usages (alternatifs) très rentables peuvent aussi être trouvés pour ce site», il reste à Montréal deux autres options, si nécessaire. Non seulement pour construire un stade pour les Expos, mais pour développés des espaces sous-utilisés dans son tissu urbain. Why not hit two birds with one stone.

J'ai ri quand j'ai lu qu'il y a des gens qui on dit ça. Autre que YUL, l'ouest a quoi? L'ouest n'a pas de stations de métro, pas deux stades, pas de grands parcs urbains, pas de quartiers intéressants. Mais l'est a tout ça!

Thanks jerry!