Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'public'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Real estate projects
    • Proposals
    • Going up
    • Completed
    • Mass Transit
    • Infrastructures
    • Cultural, entertainment and sport projects
    • Cancelled projects
  • General topics
    • City planning and architecture
    • Economy discussions
    • Technology, video games and gadgets
    • Urban tech
    • General discussions
    • Entertainment, food and culture
    • Current events
    • Off Topic
  • MTLYUL Aviation
    • General discussion
    • Spotting at YUL
  • Here and abroad
    • City of Québec
    • Around the province of Québec.
    • Toronto and the rest of Canada
    • USA
    • Europe
    • Projects elsewhere in the world
  • Photography and videos
    • Urban photography
    • Other pictures
    • Old pictures


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



About Me





Type of dwelling

Found 100 results

  1. Nom: Tour Deloitte Hauteur en étages: 26 Hauteur en mètres: 135 Coût du projet: 100 000 000,00$ Promoteur: Cadillac Fairview Architecte: KPF et Groupe IBI DAA Entrepreneur général: PCL Constructors / Construction C.A.L. Emplacement: Début de construction: Octobre 2012 Fin de construction: Juin 2015 Site internet: Lien webcam: Autres informations: * Louée à 70.3% (septembre 2013) * 48 000m2 (514 000p2) de superficie de bureaux * Édifice LEED platine * Le locataire principal sera la firme Deloitte pour 160 000p2 * Rio Tinto Alcan sera locataire des étages 18 à 26 * Signature, 32-foot-high lobby facing the historic Windsor Court * Outdoor courtyard with a skating rink, public seating and park area qui sera nommé "Cour Rio Tinto Alcan" * Bush shed (a heritage-designated remnant of Windsor Station's original rail platforms) will be incorporated into the window line of the courtyard-level lobby * 135 mètres Rumeurs: Aperçu du projet: 9 autres images: Vidéo promotionnelle:
  2. Atop the 1,300-foot office tower, soon to rise at 33rd Street and Tenth Avenue, by Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates. Photo: Rendering by Visualhouse From 0 to 12 Million Square Feet In a few weeks, construction begins on New York’s largest development ever. Hudson Yards is handsome, ambitious, and potentially full of life. Should we care that it’s also a giant slab of private property? An exclusive preview. By Justin Davidson Published Oct 7, 2012 ShareThis On a Friday afternoon in September, a conclave of architects and real-estate executives gathers in a hotel conference room to look over plans for Manhattan’s largest remaining chunk of emptiness. Hudson Yards, the railroad depot that stretches from Tenth Avenue to the Hudson River, and from 30th to 33rd Street, barely registers on the mental map of most New Yorkers. Look down from a neighboring window, and you see only a pit full of trains hazed with their diesel fumes. The planners’ view, though, takes in sugarplum dreams of the city’s shiny next wing: an $800 million concrete roof over the yards, and above it the country’s largest and densest real-estate development: 12 million square feet of *offices, shops, movie theaters, gyms, hotel rooms, museum galleries, and open space, and 5,000 apartments, all packed into 26 acres. In the first, $6 billion phase—scheduled for completion by late 2017—the tallest tower will top the Empire State Building, and even the shortest will have a penthouse on the 75th floor. The people in the conference room can visualize that future in high-resolution detail. On the screen, digital couples stroll among trees pruned to cubical perfection. A chain of glowing towers garlands the skyline, and tiny figures stroll onto a deck hanging nearly a quarter-mile in the air. Architects discuss access points, sidewalk widths, ceiling heights, flower beds, and the qualities of crushed-stone pathways. You could almost forget that none of this exists yet—until one architect points to a lozenge-shaped skyscraper and casually, with a twist of his wrist, remarks that he’s thinking of swiveling it 90 degrees. The Related Companies, the main developer of the site, has called this meeting so that the designers of the various buildings can finally talk to each other, instead of just to the client. I’m getting the first look at the details at the same time some of the participants are. Suddenly, after years of desultory negotiations and leisurely design, the project has acquired urgency: Ground-breaking on the first tower will take place in the coming weeks. There’s a high-octane crew in the room: William Pedersen, co-founder of the high-rise titans Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates; David Childs, partner at the juggernaut Skidmore Owings and Merrill; Elizabeth Diller, front woman for the cerebral boutique Diller Scofidio + Renfro; *David Rockwell, a virtuoso of showbiz and restaurant design; Howard Elkus, from the high-end shopping-center specialists Elkus Manfredi; and landscape architect Thomas Woltz, the only member of the group new to New York real-estate politics. Their task is to compose a neighborhood from scratch. The success of Hudson Yards depends on the question: Can a private developer manufacture a complete and authentic high-rise neighborhood in a desolate part of New York? “This isn’t just a project; it’s an extension of the city,” says Stephen Ross, Related’s founder and chairman. New York has always grown in nibbles and crumbs, and only occasionally in such great whale-gulps of real estate. In the richest, most layered sections of the city, each generation’s new buildings spring up among clumps of older ones, so that freshness and tradition coexist. A project of this magnitude, concocted around a conference table, could easily turn out to be a catastrophe. The centrally planned district has its success stories—most famously, Rockefeller Center. Coordinated frenzies of building also produced Park Avenue, Battery Park City, and the current incarnation of Times Square. But this enterprise is even more ambitious than any of those, and more potentially transformative than the ongoing saga of the World Trade Center. New York has no precedent for such a dense and complex neighborhood, covering such a vast range of uses, built in one go. That makes this Ross’s baby. Hundreds of architects, engineers, consultants, planners, and construction workers will contribute to the finished product. Oxford Properties Group has partnered with Related, and the city dictated much of the basic arrangement. But in the end, how tightly the new superblocks are woven into the city fabric, how organic their feel, and how bright their allure will depend on the judgment and taste of a billionaire whose aesthetic ambitions match the site’s expanse, and who slips almost unconsciously from we to I. “We went out and selected great architects and then created a whole five-acre plaza,” Ross says. “People will have never seen such a world-class landscaping project. I can’t tell you what that plaza will look like, but what I visualize is a modern-day Trevi Fountain. It’s going to be classical and unique.” The best clue to what he has in mind isn’t in Rome, but at Columbus Circle. Ross lives and works in the Time Warner Center, which Related built, and if you imagine the complex blown out to five times its size, you begin to get a sense of what’s coming at Hudson Yards: crowds flowing from home to boutique, hotel to subway, office to spa, concert to restaurant—and all that activity threaded around and through a curving plaza equipped with fountains and a very tall monument, as yet unchosen. The Time Warner Center brought profitable liveliness to Columbus Circle, the once moribund, now vibrant hinge between midtown and the Upper West Side. But massive as it is, the Time Warner Center is dainty by comparison. Hudson Yards circa 2017 1. This office tower, by Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates, will become Coach headquarters. 2. Apartments by Diller Scofidio +Renfro, joined by David Rockwell: condos on top, rentals below. 3. The flagship office building, also by KPF: 1,300 feet high. 4. The curvy multiuse tower by David Childs contains a hotel, condominiums, and a big Equinox gym. 5. The shopping arcade (please don't call it the mall). 6.The Culture Shed: still unrevealed, but a great big space for traveling exhibits and other events. Photo: Rendering by Visualhouse Unnumbered buildings (the western half of the development) have yet to be designed. Photo: Map by Jason Lee The view from the High Line. Photo: Rendering by Visualhouse Photo: Rendering by Visualhouse Photo: Rendering by Visualhouse Photo: Rendering by Visualhouse Photo: Rendering by Visualhouse Start on the High Line, at West 30th Street near Tenth Avenue. At the moment, the landscaped section peters out here, but the old elevated railway continues, forking both east and west to form the southern border of Hudson Yards. Eventually, you’ll be able to continue your stroll beneath the canopy of an office tower housing the headquarters of the leather-goods company Coach. It’s a tricky spot, and the interaction of city street and raised park forces the architecture to perform some fancy steps. The building genuflects toward Tenth Avenue on muscular concrete legs. Coach’s unit reaches out toward the High Line, and the crown greets the skyline at a jaunty tilt. With all its connections and contortions, the tower, designed by Kohn Pedersen Fox, assembles its identity out of the complexities of city life. “My whole career has been about taking buildings that are inherently autonomous and getting them to become social gestures,” remarks Pedersen. Head up a couple of blocks from Coach’s future headquarters, and at West 33rd Street, another KPF tower tapers from vast hoped-for trading floors to a jagged peak 1,300 feet up. A state-of-the-art office building these days requires huge open layouts and thick bundles of elevator shafts, which tend to give it the natural grace of a hippopotamus thigh. But look up: Here, the design artfully disguises the two towers’ bulk by making them seem dramatically foreshortened, as if they were speeding toward the sky. One slopes toward the river, the other in the direction of midtown, parted like stalks of corn in a breeze. The cone of space between them draws sunlight to the ground and leaves a welcome break in the city’s increasingly crowded skyline. With any luck, you should be able to stand at the foot of these towers and feel sheltered but not squashed. It would have been far easier to wall the development off and let each tower stand in isolated splendor. Instead, planners have tried to soften the borders of their domain. That’s not just civic-mindedness; it’s good business. If Hudson Yards is going to be a truly urban place, it will have to lure people who neither work nor live there but who come because everyone else does. The development will have two major magnets, one for commerce, food, and entertainment, the other for that primal necessity of New York life: culture. Related is pinning a lot of financial optimism on a five-floor, two-block-long retail extravaganza that links the two KPF towers, rather like the Time Warner Center shops, only bigger, busier, sunnier, and more tightly knit to the city. “We don’t want this to feel like a mall,” insists its architect, Howard Elkus. Pedestrian passageways cut through the building, extending the streets indoors, and a succession of great glass walls turn window-shopping into a spectator sport. The liveliness engine is on the fourth floor, where a collection of informal but high-end food outlets curated by Danny Meyer looks out over the central plaza—“Eataly on steroids” is how one Related executive describes it. Above that are more expensive restaurants and a ten-screen multiplex. Stroll out the western side of the shopping center toward the central plaza, walk diagonally across to 30th Street, halfway between Tenth and Eleventh Avenues, and you come to the most intriguing and mysterious element of Hudson Yards: the Culture Shed. Having set aside a parcel of land for cultural use, the city put out a call for ideas. Elizabeth Diller and David Rockwell answered with an amalgam of architectural and institutional innovations: a flexible gallery complex to accommodate traveling exhibits and nomadic performing events. Together, they designed an enormous trusslike shell that could fit over the galleries or roll out like a shipyard gantry to enclose a vast performance space. The city refuses to discuss architectural details, how the still-theoretical organization will function, or who would pay to build and operate it. But it’s easy to imagine it being used for film premieres and high-definition broadcasts from the Metropolitan Opera or as a permanent home for Fashion Week, which now camps out in tents. The Culture Shed can give Hudson Yards the highbrow legitimacy and cutting-edge cool it needs to become an integral part of New York, and also create a cultural corridor running from the Whitney Museum at Gansevoort Street (now under construction), through Chelsea’s gallery district, and up to Lincoln Center. The project may be in the wishful-thinking stage—it could still get scaled back or dumbed down, or it could vanish altogether. But it does have one crucial booster: the Related Companies. “The Culture Shed is critically important,” says Jay Cross, the executive who is running the Hudson Yards project. “We’re going to be major supporters because we want and need to see it come to fruition.” Hudson Yards is getting much more from the city than just the Culture Shed. While planners keep working out ways to weld the complex to its environs, the West Side has already begun to embrace its coming addition. New rental towers have sprouted in the West Thirties and burly office buildings will soon rise along Ninth and Tenth Avenues. “There are communities around us—Hell’s Kitchen, Midtown South, West Chelsea, New Jersey to the west—that if we do a great job are just naturally going to flow in and populate that space,” says Cross. The site as a whole is a yawning pit, not so much a blank slate as an empty socket, surrounded by amenities and infrastructure just waiting to be plugged in. Hudson River Park runs along the western edge (set off by Twelfth Avenue), the High Line spills in from the south, and the future Hudson Park and Boulevard will swoop down from the north. The No. 7 subway-line extension is on the way to completion, the Javits Center is being overhauled, and maybe one day Moynihan Station will even get built. In all, $3 billion in taxpayer-funded improvements encircle the Related fiefdom—not including city tax abatements. “Where else have you ever seen this kind of public money for infrastructure to service a whole new development, in the heart of the city, with that much land and no obstacles?” Ross asks. His vocal enthusiasm for Mitt Romney and the Republican Party’s small-*government credo evidently hasn’t curbed his appreciation for public support. Although it’s the next mayor who will cut the first ribbon, in the long run Hudson Yards may well be the grandest and most dramatic piece of Michael Bloomberg’s legacy. It’s been on the city’s to-do list for almost a decade, ever since Bloomberg hoped to draw the 2012 Olympics to New York with promises of a West Side stadium. The fact that London won the games was a disappointment to him but a stroke of luck for the West Side, scuttling what would have been a disastrous stadium plan, while at the same time calling attention to the value of the real estate above the tracks. Eager for space to put up high-rises and now prompted by a big hole on Manhattan’s western flank, the city focused on a rezoning that is gradually pulling midtown’s center of gravity westward. There are two ways to conceive such a monster project. One is for a single architectural overlord to shape the whole shebang, as Raymond Hood did at Rockefeller Center. Steven Holl, whose offices overlook Hudson Yards and who has designed two similarly gargantuan complexes in China, submitted an entry that might have resulted in a work of thrilling coherence, with the same sensibility imbuing every detail, from door handles to office blocks. But the auteur development also risks yielding a place of oppressive uniformity, where each aesthetic miscalculation is multiplied many times over. Related chose the second option: recruiting an ensemble of brand-name designers. That approach emulates a sped-up version of New York’s gradual, lot-by-lot evolution; the danger is that it can produce a jumble. “Sometimes architectural vitality leads to messiness, or varying degrees of quality, and we’re trying to avoid that,” acknowledges Cross. “Every building is going to be best in class. That’s the common thread.” But bestness is not actually a unifying concept, and when the city held the competition to award the development rights in 2008, the Related entry failed to wow the city, the public, or the critics. “With a drop-dead list of consultants, contributors, collaborators, and anyone else who could be thrown into the mix … [the company] has covered all possible bases with something dreadful for everybody. This is not planning, it’s pandering,” wrote the critic Ada Louise Huxtable in The Wall Street Journal. None of that mattered: The project originally went to another developer, Tishman Speyer, and when that deal fell through, Related scooped it up. Architecture had nothing to do with it. Yet nearly five years later, with contracts signed and money starting to flow, that gold-plated crew of designers, working in separate studios, with different philosophies and, until recently, little consultation, has nevertheless produced a kind of haphazard harmony. What unites them is their taste for complexity and the deftness with which they maneuver conflicting programs into a single composition. Just past the Culture Shed, on the 30th Street side of the site at Eleventh Avenue, is the eastern half’s only purely residential tower, designed by Diller Scofidio + Renfro, with David Rockwell. It’s an architectural griffin, grafting together rectilinear rental units on the lower floors with flower-petal condo layouts up high—about 680 apartments in all. The fantastically idiosyncratic bulges and dimples join in complicated ways that make the glass façade look quilted. Now walk north, back across the plaza and past a still-to-be-designed café pavilion, and you come to another tower with a textured exterior—vertical folds with stone on one side and glass on the other, as if a palazzo had merged with a modernist shaft. Actually, the building is even more hybridized than that. David Childs, the architect of the Time Warner Center and One World Trade Center, had to shoehorn a large Equinox gym plus offices, an orthopedic hospital, a sports emporium, a hotel, and a condominium into a curved base and a slender tube. “Hudson Yards is a city within a city. This tower is a city within a city—within a city,” he says. The most delicate, crucial, and treacherous design problem at Hudson Yards isn’t a building at all but the public space, and especially the five acres in the middle, an expanse about as large as Bryant Park. Done right, it could be the most vibrant gathering spot on the West Side, a New York version of Venice’s Piazza San Marco. Done wrong, it could be a windswept tundra populated only by office workers scuttling between the subway and their desks. It’s worrisome that Ross and his team postponed thinking about that void until so much of the architecture had been designed, but heartening that they are intensely focused on it now. Related has given the job to the talented Thomas Woltz, whose quietly refined restorations of gardens and college campuses may not quite have prepared him for the fierce pressure of shaping New York’s most ample new public space. It’s not just a place for people to mingle but for the relationships between the various buildings to express themselves across the connecting plaza. “One of the paintings I admire most is The School of Athens,” says KPF’s William Pedersen, referring to Raphael’s klatch of bearded philosophers chatting beneath noble vaults. “You have great historical and intellectual figures gathered together in dynamic groups of interchange, gesturing to each other. That’s the architectural assignment for each of us.” David Childs phrases a similar thought in a way that graciously defers to Woltz even while sending the message: Don’t screw this up. “We have an obligation to create great architecture, and all the buildings have to be related to the space in the center,” he says. “The void is the most important part.” Woltz has gotten it wrong once. In his first presentation, he placed a plush lawn at the center of the complex, and Ross nearly kicked him out of the room. What Ross wants is not a place to toss a Frisbee, but a town square alive with purpose and electricity. That’s a spectacular challenge; there are few great models for a European-style piazza within a ring of skyscrapers. For now, Woltz’s solution is a paved ellipse, outlined by a perimeter of trees cultivated with geometric severity—given “the Edward Scissorhands topiary treatment,” as one designer puts it. The idea is to create a verdant transition from the human scale to that of glass-and-steel giants. “In an open space next to 1,000-foot towers, our tallest tree is going to be like an ant next to a tall man’s shoe,” Woltz says. But the most maddening paradox of Woltz’s assignment is that he must tailor an open space to the motley public—in ways that will please a potentate. Like some fairy-tale monarch, Ross has dispatched his counselors to find an artist capable of supplying his modern Trevi Fountain. What he wants is something monumental enough to focus the entire project, a piece that’s not just watery and impressive but so instantly iconic that people will meet by it, shoot photos of it, notice it from three blocks away, and recognize it from the cover of guidebooks. You get the feeling that Ross is hedging his bets: If Woltz can’t deliver a world-class plaza with his trees and pavers, maybe a Jeff Koons or an Anish Kapoor can force it into life with a big honking hunk of sculpture. A giant puppy can’t solve an urban design problem, though. It’s nice that a hardheaded mogul like Ross places so much faith in the civic power of art, but he may be asking it to do too much. The plaza is the node where the site’s conflicting forces reveal themselves: the tension between public and private, between city and campus, between democratic space and commercial real estate. Occupy Wall Street’s takeover of Zuccotti Park last year pointed up the oxymoron inherent in the concept of privately owned public space: You can do anything you like there, as long as the owners deem it okay. Childs hopes that his client’s insistence on premium-brand design won’t make Hudson Yards just the province of privilege. “We want this project to be laced through with public streets, so that everyone has ownership of it, whether you’re arriving in your $100,000 limo or pushing a shopping cart full of your belongings.” The plans include drop-off lanes, so the limos are taken care of. But if the shopping-cart pushers, buskers, protesters, skateboarders, and bongo players start feeling too welcome at Hudson Yards, Related’s security guards will have a ready-made *argument to get them to disperse: This is private property.
  3. MONTREAL, July 6, 2016 /CNW Telbec/ - Technoparc Montreal is pleased to present its activity report of 2015 via its annual report. The annual report describes the activities of 2015, a definite year of building! During the year, three major industrial projects (amongst the largest in Greater Montreal) were launched. These projects are the installation of the North American headquarters of Green Cross Biotherapeutics, the installation of ABB's Canadian headquarters and the construction of Vidéotron's 4Degrés data centre. These three major projects can be added to the list of companies that have chosen to locate their activities at the Technoparc. According to an analysis conducted by E&B DATA in 2015, the future construction of the new buildings at the Technoparc will generate $580 million to Quebec's GDP, $109 million to Quebec's public administration revenues and $37 million to federal public administration revenues. According to Carl Baillargeon, Technoparc Montreal's Director – Communications & Marketing "These projects represent the creation of more than 1,000 new jobs at the Technoparc, an investment of $400 million and the addition of 600 000 square feet to the real estate inventory. These are indeed excellent news for the economy of Montreal and the province of Quebec. This also confirms Technoparc's role as an important component of the economical development. In addition, the recent announcement of the proposed Réseau Électrique Métropolitain (electric train) by the CDPQ Infra, in which a station is planned at the Technoparc, reinforces the strategic location of the site and will thereby facilitate the access to the site via transportation means other than the car. " Technoparc Montréal is a non-profit organization that provides high-tech companies and entrepreneurs with environments and real-estate solutions conducive to innovation, cooperation and success. For more information, please see the website at The 2015 annual report can be consulted online at: SOURCE Technoparc Montréal
  4. Je vais déménager à Manhattan au mois d'Août. Je garde un pied-à-terre à Vancouver et reviens fréquemment à Montréal. Je viens de voir cette nouvelle toute fraiche. Je vais habiter tout juste à côté de Washington Square, et ce nouveau développement m'intéresse au plus haut point. J'esssaierai de vous en faire part régulièrement. Voici l'article du Wall Street Journal: First Look at NYU Tower Plan University Wants 38-Story Building on Village Site; Critics Fret Over Pei Design By CRAIG KARMIN New York University on Thursday expects to unveil its much-anticipated design plans for the proposed 38-story tower in Greenwich Village, one of the most ambitious projects in the school's controversial 25-year expansion plan. Before and after: The space between two towers designed by I.M. Pei, above, would be filled by a new tower, in rendering below, under NYU's plan. The tower, sight-unseen, is already facing backlash from community groups who say the building would interfere with the original three-tower design by famed architect I.M. Pei. Critics also say the new building would flood the neighborhood with more construction and cause other disruptions. The concrete fourth tower with floor-to-ceiling glass windows would be built on the Bleecker Street side of the site, known as University Village. It would house a moderate-priced hotel on the bottom 15 floors. The 240-room hotel would be intended for visiting professors and other NYU guests, but would also be available to the public. The top floors would be housing for school faculty. In addition, NYU would move the Jerome S. Coles Sports Center farther east toward Mercer Street to clear space for a broader walkway through the site that connects Bleecker and Houston streets. The sports complex would be torn down and rebuilt with a new design. Grimshaw Architects The plan also calls for replacing a grocery store that is currently in the northwest corner of the site with a playground. As a result, the site would gain 8,000 square feet of public space under the tower proposal, according to an NYU spokesman. NYU considers the new tower a crucial component of its ambitious expansion plans to add six million square feet to the campus by 2031—including proposed sites in Brooklyn, Governors Island and possibly the World Trade Center site—in an effort to increase its current student population of about 40,000 by 5,500. The tower is also one of the most contentious parts of the plan because the University Village site received landmark status in 2008 and is home to a Pablo Picasso statue. The three existing towers, including one dedicated to affordable public housing, were designed by Mr. Pei in the 1960s. The 30-story cast-concrete structures are considered a classic example of modernism. Grimshaw Architects, the New York firm that designed the proposed tower, says it wants the new structure to complement Mr. Pei's work. "It would be built with a sensitivity to the existing buildings," says Mark Husser, a Grimshaw partner. "It is meant to relate to the towers but also be contemporary." Grimshaw Architects NYU says the planned building, at center of rendering above, would relate to current towers. He said the new tower would use similar materials to the Pei structures and would be positioned at the site in a way not to cut off views from the existing buildings. Little of this news is likely to pacify local opposition. "A fourth tower would utterly change Pei's design," says Andrew Berman, executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation. He says that Mr. Pei designed a number of plans about the same time that similarly featured three towers around open space, such as the Society Hill Towers in Philadelphia. Watch a video showing a rendering of New York University's proposed 38-story tower, one of the most ambitious projects in the university's vast 2031 expansion plan. The tower would be located near Bleecker Street in Manhattan. Video courtesy of Grimshaw Architects. Residents say they fear that the new tower would bring years of construction and reduce green spaces and trees. "We are oversaturated with NYU buildings," says Sylvia Rackow, who lives in the tower for public housing. "They have a lot of other options, like in the financial district, but they are just greedy." NYU will have to win permission from the city's Landmark Commission before it can proceed. This process begins on Monday when NYU makes a preliminary presentation to the local community board. Jason Andrew for the Wall Street Journal NYU is 'just greedy,' says Sylvia Rackow, seen in her apartment. Grimshaw. While the commission typically designates a particular district or building, University Village is unusual in that it granted landmark status to a site and the surrounding landscaping, making it harder to predict how the commission may respond. NYU also would need to get commercial zoning approval to build a hotel in an area designated as residential. And the university would have to get approval to purchase small strips of land on the site from the city. If the university is tripped up in getting required approvals, it has a backup plan to build a tower on the site currently occupied by a grocery store at Bleecker and LaGuardia, which would have a size similar to the proposed tower of 270,000 square feet.
  5. À la suite de pressions du gestionnaire The Ethical Funds, le détaillant compte rendre public le code d'éthique auquel elle soumet ses fournisseurs. Pour en lire plus...
  6. Selon un analyste de l'Institut Fraser, le financement public des événements bien établis, tels le Festival Juste pour rire et le Festival international de jazz de Montréal, devrait être aboli. Pour en lire plus...
  7. Dévoilement du concept d'aménagement de la rue Chabanel et prolongement de la rue Jean-Pratt Des investissements de 19,3 M$ pour la revitalisation de l'Acadie-Chabanel Montréal, le 6 août 2008 - Le maire de Montréal, M. Gérald Tremblay, accompagné de M. Alan DeSousa, responsable du développement économique, du développement durable et de Montréal 2025 au comité exécutif, et de Mme Marie-Andrée Beaudoin, mairesse de l'arrondissement d'Ahuntsic-Cartierville et responsable du développement social et communautaire au comité exécutif, a annoncé des investissements de 19,3 M$ pour la revitalisation du secteur l'Acadie-Chabanel. De cette somme, un montant de 17 M$ servira à réaménager la rue Chabanel et un montant de 2,3 M$, à prolonger la rue Jean-Pratt où les travaux ont, d'ailleurs, débuté à la fin juillet. « En 2005, nous nous étions engagés à consentir des investissements majeurs pour la revitalisation du secteur l'Acadie-Chabanel. Cette dernière étape finalise un projet qui permettra entre autres d'améliorer l'attractivité de cette artère importante. Déjà les projets d'investissements privés dans le secteur sont estimés à 250 M$, voilà des retombées concrètes », a déclaré M. Tremblay. « Ce secteur offre un important potentiel de développement grâce, notamment, au fort gabarit des immeubles dont la superficie de plancher atteint les dix millions de pieds carrés. D'ailleurs, l'Acadie-Chabanel représente un pôle de développement dont la portée dépasse largement l'arrondissement. C'est pourquoi nous avons identifié ce quartier comme prioritaire dans notre stratégie de développement économique », a ajouté M. DeSousa. Le réaménagement de la rue Chabanel, entre le boulevard Saint-Laurent et la rue Meilleur, vise à transformer la rue pour y créer un véritable milieu de vie. Ainsi, le concept d'aménagement retenu permet d'améliorer la sécurité et le confort des piétons, de rehausser la qualité des aménagements du domaine public, d'offrir un cadre vert et durable par un reverdissement important, de favoriser la présence des transports actifs et de donner une identité propre à la rue Chabanel. Les travaux de prolongement de la rue Jean-Pratt, entre les rues Chabanel et Beauharnois, offriront, de plus, un meilleur accès aux nouveaux immeubles qui y ont été construits récemment. « Ces travaux permettront d'améliorer considérablement le cadre de vie du quartier conformément aux préoccupations des résidants et des commerçants que nous avons consultés à plusieurs reprises. Et nous avons la ferme intention de les tenir informés de l'avancement des travaux et d'être à l'écoute de leurs besoins afin de minimiser les impacts sur leur quotidien », a noté Mme Beaudoin. Le concept d'aménagement de la rue Chabanel a été développé par un consortium composé de la firme Affleck + de la Riva architectes, de Version & Vlan paysages et d'Éclairagepublic à la suite d'un appel de propositions. Adopté en 2005, le plan d'action Réussir l'Acadie-Chabanel comportait cinq volets, soit l'implantation de la gare Chabanel, inaugurée en janvier 2007, la mise en place d'initiatives économiques structurantes, la création d'un partenariat de gens d'affaires, mis sur pied en mars 2007, la planification détaillée du secteur, approuvée en octobre 2006, et la création d'un programme d'aide aux propriétaires d'immeubles à grand gabarit, en vigueur depuis le début de l'année. Arrondissement Ahuntsic-Cartierville / Montréal, QC Portes Ouvertes Réaménagement de la rue Chabanel 29 mai 2008 Les dessins préliminaires du réaménagement de la rue Chabanel - un projet réalisé par Affleck + de la Riva en collaboration avec Version/Vlan Paysages, Éclairage Public et l'agence de signalisation IF - seront presentés au public lors de l'événement des Portes Ouvertes du bureau de l'arrondissement Ahuntsic-Cartiervlle au 555 Chabanel Ouest, 6é étage.
  8. Montreal's tempest in a beer cup A summertime deal between Labatt and the city's Gay Village raises questions about private interests dominating public spaces From Tuesday's Globe and Mail August 5, 2008 at 3:57 AM EDT MONTREAL — Stéphanie Dagenais didn't mind the Bud Light parasols and cups she was forced to use on her restaurant patio in Montreal's Gay Village. It's when the brewery started telling her Bud Light had to go in those plastic cups that the manager of Kilo bristled. "I think it's an aggressive way of doing a sponsorship," said Ms. Dagenais, who was forced to sell the beer under an exclusive deal struck between Labatt, which brews the beer in Canada, and the Gay Village business improvement group. The business association sold the right to sell beer on 54 new patios along a stretch of Ste-Catherine Street to Labatt, part of a summer-long festival that will see cars banished from the street. Owners say the $100,000 deal came with minimum sales quotas for each bar and restaurant, including a healthy sample of Bud Light. Patrons at a bar on Ste-Catherine Street in Montreal drink Molson Export out of the Bud Light cups required through Labatt’s sponsorship of the area. (John Morstad for The Globe and Mail) The Globe and Mail The deal irks restaurateurs like Ms. Dagenais, who doesn't sell much beer at her small restaurant, best known for tasty desserts, and others who try to tempt palates with fine dining, wine and specialty ales. A representative of the business group even suggested Bud Light is a popular beer among gays in the United States. While the banishment of cars from the street has been good for many businesses and great for pedestrians, the sponsorship is triggering a broader tempest in a beer cup over how much control private enterprises should have over public space. "I guess everything has a price," said Ms. Dagenais, who has several cases of Bud Light collecting dust. "But should it be that way? I don't think so, but it seems to be the way we work in North America." Christopher DeWolf, a writer for Spacing Montreal, an urban affairs website affiliated with the Toronto magazine Spacing, questions how corporate interests were allowed to take over a public street. "The closure to cars has created a destination, it creates an ambience that is impossible with cars," Mr. DeWolf said. "But here you have a product foisted on merchants and their customers. It raises the question of how far we should allow private interests to have such control over our public spaces. I think it's a burden on merchants and it restricts public choice." Bernard Plante, director of the Gay Village business association, said the deal is no different than exclusive beer rights negotiated at other city venues. He pointed to the privately owned Bell Centre where only Molson beer is sold. Mr. Plante brushed aside complaints about the use of public space, saying his business group is provincially legislated and democratically run. "These are the decisions we made on behalf of businesses on the street," Mr. Plante said. Merchants could shed the restraints of sponsorship when the deal runs out after the summer of 2009, he added. But they will have to agree to pay for the street closing, including the cost of street decor and rent to the city for having patios on public streets and sidewalks. Across North America, summer festivals run by private entities take over parks and streets, often with exclusive rights to allow access and to sell products. Many of the examples are more intrusive than the Montreal beer sponsorship. In one infamous example in the United States, Washington's National Mall was fenced off for a Pepsi product launch and concert - a 2003 scene described by the Project for Public Spaces as "singularly shocking for its sheer scope and audacity." Steve Davies, a vice-president of the New York-based group that encourages sensible integration of private business in public spaces, says sponsors get in trouble when they start constraining normal commercial activity. "It goes too far when they use a sponsorship to start telling dozens of private businesses what to do on public land over an entire summer," Mr. Davies said. In Montreal, big chunks of major downtown streets are regularly closed to traffic for short periods for everything from the Jazz Festival to Just for Laughs. The Gay Village pedestrian mall will last 2½ months. Mr. DeWolf said Montreal has one big thing right: The city usually emphasizes free public access, even if access to products like food and drink are often restricted. Labatt officials could not be reached yesterday. But Jean-Luc Raymond, owner of La Planète, which specializes in international cuisine, says he's noticed a little more flexibility from his brewery representative since the controversy broke out. Mr. Raymond has managed to get a little more of the fashionable Stella Artois and a little less Bud Light. "The Bud Light is still languishing," he said, "but I'm not like some others who have to try to sell Bud Light and cheesecake."
  9. City planners take new look at urban vistas Frances Bula, Special to the Globe and Mail, March 30th, 2009 --------------------- Vancouver’s famous view corridors have prompted more anguished howls from architects than almost anything else I can think of over the years. Now, the city is looking at re-examining them. (And, as the sharp-eyed people at have noted, the posting for people to run the public consultation went up on city website Friday. You can see their comments on the whole debate here.) You can get a flavour of the arguments from my story in the Globe today, which I’ve reproduced below. --------------------- Vancouver is legendary as a city that has fought to prevent buildings from intruding on its spectacular mountain backdrop and ocean setting. Unlike Calgary, which lost its chance to preserve views of the Rockies 25 years ago, or Toronto, which has allowed a highway plus a wall of condo towers to go up between the city and its lake, Vancouver set an aggressive policy almost two decades ago to protect more than two dozen designated view corridors. But now the city is entertaining re-examining that controversial policy, one that has its fierce defenders and its equally fierce critics, especially the architects who have had to slice off or squish parts of buildings to make them fit around the corridors. And the city’s head planner is signalling that he’s definitely open to change. “I’ve got a serious appetite for shifting those view corridors,” says Brent Toderian, a former Calgary planner hired two years ago, who has been working hard to set new directions in a city famous for its urban planning. “The view corridors have been one of the most monumental city-shaping tools in Vancouver’s history but they need to be looked at again. We have a mountain line and we have a building line where that line is inherently subjective.” The issue isn’t just about preserving views versus giving architects free rein. Vancouver has used height and density bonuses to developers with increasing frequency in return for all kinds of community benefits, including daycares, parks, theatres and social housing. A height limit means less to trade for those amenities. Mr. Toderian, who thinks the city also needs to establish some new view corridors along with adjusting or eliminating others, says a public hearing on the issue won’t happen until the fall, but he is already kicking off the discussion quietly in the hope that it will turn into a wide-ranging debate. “The input for the last few years has been one-sided, from the people who think the view corridors should be abolished,” he said. “But we’re looking forward to hearing what everyone thinks. Most people who would support them don’t even think about them. They think the views we have are by accident.” The view-corridor policy, formally adopted in 1989, was the result of public complaints over some tall buildings going up, including Harbour Centre, which is now, with its tower and revolving restaurant, seen as a defining part of the Vancouver skyline. But then, it helped spur a public consultation process and policy development that many say confused the goal of preserving views with a mathematical set of rules that often didn’t make sense. One of those critics is prominent architect Richard Henriquez, who said the corridors don’t protect the views that people have consistently said they value most from the city’s many beaches and along streets that terminate at the water. Instead, he says many of the view corridors are arbitrarily chosen points that preserve a shard of view for commuters coming into town. That has resulted in the city losing billions of dollars of potential development “for someone driving along so they can get a glimpse of something for a second.” And, Mr. Henriquez argues, city residents have a wealth of exposure to the city’s mountains throughout the region. “Downtown Vancouver is a speck of urbanity in a sea of views,” said Mr. Henriquez, who is feeling the problem acutely these days while he works on a development project downtown where the owners are trying to preserve a historic residential hotel, the Murray, while building an economically feasible tower on the smaller piece of land next to it. The view corridor means the building has to be shorter and broader and is potentially undoable. His project is one in a long list of projects that have been abandoned or altered because of view corridor rules in Vancouver. The Shangri-La Hotel, currently the tallest building in the city at 650 feet, is sliced diagonally along one side to prevent it from straying into the view corridor. At the Woodward’s project, which redeveloped the city’s historic department store, one tower had to be shortened and the other raised to fit the corridor. And architect Bing Thom’s plan for a crystal spire on top of a development next to the Hotel Georgia was eventually dropped because city officials refused to budge on allowing the needle-like top to protrude. But one person wary about the city tinkering with the policy is former city councillor Gordon Price. “When people talk about revisiting, it just means one thing: eroding,” said Mr. Price, still a vocal advocate on urban issues. “People may only get this fragment of a view but it’s very precious. And those fragments will become scarcer as the city grows. The longer they remain intact, the more valuable they become.” It’s a debate that’s unique to Vancouver. Mr. Toderian said that when he was in Calgary, there was no discussion about trying to preserve views from the downtown to the Rockies in the distance. --------------------- cet article n'est pas tres recent, mais je sais pas s'il avait deja ete poste sur ce forum. meme s'il y a des differences, a mon avis beaucoup de ces arguments pourraient s'appliquer aussi pour Montreal. est-ce qu'on devra attendre une autre vague de demande bousillee pour relancer le debat ?
  10. CBC, VIA Rail considered for auction block: Documents BY ANDREW MAYEDA, CANWEST NEWS SERVICE JUNE 1, 2009 6:49 PM OTTAWA — The federal Department of Finance has flagged several prominent Crown corporations as "not self-sustaining," including the CBC, VIA Rail and the National Arts Centre, and has identified them as entities that could be sold as part of the government's asset review, newly released documents show. In its fiscal update last November, the government announced that it would launch a review of its Crown assets, including so-called enterprise Crown corporations, real estate and "other holdings." Finance Department documents, obtained by Canwest News Service under the Access to Information Act, reveal that the review will focus on enterprise Crown corporations, which are not financially dependent on parliamentary subsidies. Such corporations include the Royal Canadian Mint and Ridley Terminals, which is a coal-shipping terminal in Prince Rupert, B.C. But the documents also reveal that the government will consider privatizing Crown corporations that require public subsidies to stay afloat. "The reviews will also examine other holdings in which the government competes directly with private enterprises, earn income from property or performs a commercial activity," states a Finance briefing note dated Dec. 2, 2008. "It includes Crown corporations that are not self-sustaining even though they are of a commercial nature." In the briefing note, the Finance Department identifies nine Crown corporations that fall in that category, including Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., the CBC and VIA Rail. The government announced last week that it will split AECL in two and seek private-sector investors for the Crown corporation's CANDU nuclear-reactor business. The Crown asset review comes as the government struggles to contain the country's deficit, now expected to top $50 billion this year. The Jan. 27 budget assumes that the government will be able to raise as much as $4 billion through asset sales by the end of March 2010. The budget identified four federal departments whose Crown assets are being reviewed first: Finance, Indian and Northern Affairs, Natural Resources, and Transport and Infrastructure. VIA Rail is overseen by the Transport Department, while the CBC and the National Arts Centre fall under the portfolio of the Canadian Heritage department. The Finance Department documents confirm that all government assets will eventually be reviewed. Privatizations tend to work well when Crown corporations enter a reasonably competitive market with a good chance of turning a profit, said Aidan Vining, a professor of business and government relations at Simon Fraser University. Unlike successfully privatized firms such as Canadian National Railway, it's not clear that CBC and VIA Rail could operate as profitable ventures while maintaining the public mandates they provided as Crown corporations, he noted. "They're not the classic privatization candidates, where you sell and walk away," said Vining, an expert in Crown corporation privatizations. "Unless, of course, you're prepared to fully withdraw from the public purpose (of the Crown corporation)." Certainly, the sale of a flagship Crown asset such as the CBC would be politically controversial. After the CBC announced this spring that it would lay off hundreds of employees, opposition critics accused the government of turning a cold shoulder to the public broadcaster's struggles. Under the Financial Administration Act, Parliament would have to approve the privatization of any Crown corporation. "It's hard to believe that some of these sales would go forward in a minority Parliament," said Vining. The Finance Department has also begun to examine the government's vast real-estate portfolio, which includes 31 million hectares of land, and more than 46,000 buildings totalling 103 million square metres — more than double the office space available in the Greater Toronto Area, according to the Finance documents. The government's holdings are worth at least $17 billion, Finance officials estimate. A briefing note labelled "secret" said that the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs acquired $7 million in surplus properties between 1998 and 2006 for potential use in land-claims deals. Over the same period, the properties cost $2 million to maintain. Divesting such properties could not only generate revenue for the government, but also cut "ongoing operations and maintenance costs," states the briefing note. A Finance Department spokeswoman said the asset review won't necessarily lead to sales in all cases. "Reviews will assess whether value could be created through changes to the assets' structure and ownership, and report on a wide set of options including the status quo, amendments to current mandates or governance," department spokeswoman Stephanie Rubec said in an e-mail. "In some cases, it may be concluded that selling an asset to a private sector entity may generate more economic activity and deliver greater value to taxpayers." Crown corporations identified by the government as "not self-sustaining": (Company name, commercial revenues, parliamentary subsidy, expenses) Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., $614.2 million, $285.3 million, $1.3 billion CBC, $565.5 million, $1.1 billion, $1.7 billion Cape Breton Development Corp., $5.1 million, $60 million, $94.1 million Federal Bridge Corp. Ltd., $14.6 million, $31.0 million, $42.9 million National Arts Centre Corp., $26.0 million, $40.6 million, $65.7 million Old Port of Montreal Corp., $16.7 million, $15.1 million, $32.0 million Parc Downsview Park Inc., not available, not available, not available VIA Rail Canada Inc., $293.9 million, $266.2 million, $505.5 million Source: Department of Finance, Public Accounts of Canada Note: Financial results are for 2007-08
  11. The jury members are: - Melvin Charney, architect; - Odile Decq, architect and Director of the École Spéciale d'Architecture, Paris; - Jacques Des Rochers, Curator of Canadian Art, Montréal Museum of Fine Arts; - Michel Dionne, architect, Cooper, Robertson & Partners, New York; - Raphaël Fischler, urban planner and professor at the School of Urban Planning, McGill University; - Mario Masson, landscape architect and Division Manager, Service du développement culturel, de la qualité du milieu de vie et de la diversité ethnoculturelle, Ville de Montréal; - Alessandra Ponte, associate professor, School of Architecture, Université de Montréal; - Philippe Poullaouec-Gonidec, landscape architect and holder of the UNESCO Chair in Landscape and Environmental Design at Université de Montréal. Instructions for prospective entrants (Courtesy of CNW Telbec)
  12. Un nouveau marché public à Montréal Jean-Louis Fortin 11/01/2011 17h46 En plus de pouvoir fréquenter les marchés Atwater et Jean-Talon, les Montréalais seront en mesure d’acheter des aliments frais dans un nouveau marché public qui pourrait voir le jour à proximité des autoroutes 15 et 40, dans l’arrondissement Ahuntsic-Cartierville, a appris 24H. Le projet d’entre 3 et 4 millions $, encore à l’étape des approbations, pourrait obtenir le feu vert dans les prochaines semaines, selon nos informations, d’autant plus que les autorités politiques et administratives de l’arrondissement souhaitent qu’il voie le jour. C’est l’Association des jardiniers maraîchers du Québec (AJMQ) qui a présenté une demande en ce sens à la Ville. Une centaine producteurs membres de l’AJMQ, qui occupent un centre de distribution agroalimentaire pour les commerces et restaurants, situé à côté du Marché Central, pourront ainsi vendre leurs produits directement grand public. Achalandage élevé Sur le site, au moins un des immenses quais de chargement pour camions serait converti en un « grand marché public », explique André Plante, directeur général de l’AJMQ. Un endroit un peu à l’image du marché Jean-Talon, mais de moindre ampleur, illustre-t-il. Selon, lui, la proximité du Marché Central, un grand centre commercial, est susceptible d’attirer un nombre important de visiteurs. « On s’attend à ce que ça soit extrêmement achalandé. On pense que les gens voudront venir acheter des produits frais », prévoit André Plante. Ronald Cyr, directeur de l’arrondissement, précise que les fonctionnaires municipaux accompagnent actuellement l’AJMQ, mais que le permis de construction n’a pas encore été émis. « La construction d’un marché est certainement un point d’intérêt pour les marchands et les citoyens », assure-t-il toutefois. Sur place pour longtemps André Plante attend un feu vert de l’arrondissement « d’ici un mois ». L’AJMQ, décrit-il, devra d’abord transformer l’un des autres quais sur le site en un entrepôt fermé, pour y transférer une partie des activités de distribution. Dans une deuxième phase de construction, 10 000 pieds carrés de superficie à l’intérieur d’un bâtiment adjacent pourraient aussi accueillir des commerces à l’abri des caprices de Dame Nature. Ce projet d’expansion survient moins de six mois après que les maraîchers aient refusé de déménager du site de 800 000 pieds carrés qu’ils occupent actuellement pour le centre de distribution. La firme Bentall, le gestionnaire du Marché Central, leur avait proposé de se relocaliser dans l’Est de la Ville pour pouvoir compléter le développement du centre commercial, mais les maraîchers ont rejeté l’idée à 75%, de peut de perdre leur clientèle. [email protected]
  13. MVRDV and ADEPT win Copenhagen high-rise competition with design ‘Sky Village’ The municipality of Rødovre, an independent municipality of Copenhagen, Denmark, announced today MVRDV and co-architect ADEPT winner of the design competition of the Rødovre Skyscraper. The 116 meter tall tower accommodates apartments, a hotel, retail and offices. A public park and a plaza are also part of the privately funded scheme. The new skyscraper with a total surface of 21,688 sq m will be located at Roskildevej, a major artery East of the centre of Copenhagen. It is, after the Frøsilos, MVRDV’s second project in Copenhagen. The skyscraper is shaped to reflect Copenhagen’s historical spire and present day high-rise blending in the skyline of the city, it further combines the two distinctive typologies of Rødovre, the single family home and the skyscraper in a vertical village. Consideration of these local characteristics leads to Copenhagen’s first contemporary high-rise. Responding to unstable markets the design is based on a flexible grid, allowing alteration of the program by re-designating units. These ‘pixels’ are each 60m2 square and arranged around the central core of the building, which for flexibility consists of three bundled cores allowing separate access to the different program segments. On the lower floors the volume is slim to create space for the surrounding public plaza with retail and restaurants; the lower part of the high rise consists of offices, the middle part leans north in order to create a variety of sky gardens that are terraced along the south side. This creates a stacked neighbourhood, a Sky Village. From this south orientation the apartments are benefitting. The top of the building will be occupied by a hotel enjoying the view towards Copenhagen city centre. The constellation of the pixels allows flexibility in function; the building can be transformed by market forces, however at this moment it is foreseen to include 970 sq m retail, 15,800 sq m offices, 3,650 sq m housing and 2,000 sq m hotel and a basement of 13,600 sq m containing parking and storage. Flexibility for adaptation is one of the best sustainable characteristics of a building. Besides this the Sky Village will also integrate the latest technologies according to the progressive Danish environmental standards. Furthermore the plans include a greywater circuit, the use of 40% recycled concrete in the foundation and a variety of energy producing devices on the façade. A public park adjacent to the Sky Village is part of the project and will be refurbished with additional vegetation and the construction of a ‘superbench’, a meandering public path and bench. A playground, picnic area and exercise areas for elderly citizens are also part of the plan. Lead architect MVRDV and co-architect ADEPT Architects won the competition from BIG, Behnisch and MAD. Winy Maas and Jacob van Rijs present the plan today in Copenhagen together with Anders Lonka and Martin Krogh from local office Adept Architects, Dutch engineering firm ABT and Søren Jenssen act as consultants for the project. Earlier MVRDV realised the Frøsilos / Gemini Residence in the port of Copenhagen: a residential project marking a new way in refurbishment of old silo’s which was highly acclaimed and received international awards.
  14. KPF wins planning approval for Gravesend riverside renewal project Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates (London) have won planning approval for a new riverfront development to the north-west of Gravesend Town Centre that combines affordable housing, public amenity space and the restoration of Thames riverside heritage. Clifton Wharf will occupy two brownfield sites separated by West Street. The unique location includes a disused iron railway pier extending out into the Thames. KPF’s proposed re-development advances both the Kent and Medway Structure Plan and the Gravesham Local Plan by redressing the legacy of decline to the environment and infrastructure of this area. It will revitalise Gravesend town centre by bringing life into the neighbourhood though the creation of jobs and much needed accommodation. The scheme comprises 145 residential apartments, a retail unit and provisional river-related uses. The design overcomes the challenge of a split location by means of five sliced ellipsoidal buildings. Cutaway roofs allow for terraces at the top levels; punctuations in the wooden façades provide balconies for lower flats. The buildings, pebble-like in form, sit on a landscaped podium that stretches out in line with the pier. Every building in the cluster uses cutting edge morphology and careful positioning to maximise variety, giving the appearance of differing volumes and heights and taking advantage of the site’s access to unique views and natural light. KPF’s scheme restores the old iron pier and introduces steps and ramps to allow members of the public to get close to the original engineering. The shape and orientation of the pier is echoed and extended inland by the podium which unifies the site and reinforces the connection with the river. The new public walkway, which extends across the road to the pier, provides pedestrian access to the terraces and viewpoints on the water. The relocation of the old river defence wall creates space for proper pavements on West Street and an improved flood protection barrier further to the north.
  15. D'un marché public de Winnipeg, Stephen Harper a promis de réduire de moitié la taxe d'accise sur le diesel, ce qui, selon lui, aiderait à juguler le coût de la vie. En Ontario, il a invité les immigrants à se joindre massivement à son parti. Pour en lire plus...
  16. Une centaine d'arbres abattus, deux bâtiments démolis, une chapelle en danger et des vues sur la montagne masquées. Voilà les grandes lignes du projet de transformation extrême de l'ancien collège Marianopolis, situé en plein écoterritoire du mont Royal, sur lequel les élus de la garde rapprochée du maire Tremblay devront se prononcer aujourd'hui. Dans un avis carrément «défavorable», dont La Presse a obtenu copie, et qui sera rendu public aujourd'hui, le Conseil du patrimoine de Montréal recommande que le projet de complexe résidentiel, avec clinique médicale, soit modifié de fond en comble. L'instance consultative estime que le promoteur, Développement Cato inc., devrait par ailleurs refaire ses devoirs pour préserver le site de 16 âcres tout en garantissant un accès au public malgré la nouvelle vocation privée. Depuis que l'ancienne propriété des prêtres de Saint-Sulpice a été mise en vente, en mars 2008, l'organisme de défense du mont Royal, Les Amis de la montagne, a demandé à plusieurs reprises de voir les plans détaillés du futur acquéreur. Mais en vain. Ce n'est qu'aujourd'hui, alors que le projet sera fort probablement soumis à des audiences de l'Office de consultation publique de Montréal (OCPM), un organisme de la Ville sans pouvoir décisionnel, qu'on apprend l'ampleur des travaux et l'impact sur la montagne. Un complexe de 325 logements Dans l'ensemble, il est projeté de recycler l'ancien séminaire de philosophie du chemin de la Côte-des-Neiges en un complexe de 325 logements comprenant des maisons superposées, des unifamiliales isolées et des multiplex. Outre les deux nouveaux immeubles d'une hauteur variant de 3 à 9 étages, le promoteur entend aménager une clinique médicale, possiblement à vocation privée, d'une superficie de 2000 m2, soit l'équivalent de la superficie du tablier du viaduc Rockland. Il est aussi question de creuser une piscine et d'aménager 671 unités de stationnement souterrain. Afin d'analyser le projet et de tirer des conclusions, le Conseil du patrimoine (CPM) s'est basé sur la version finale du plan directeur de développement du promoteur Cato, datée du 7 janvier. À la lumière des maquettes, le CPM en vient à la conclusion que le site aurait dû demeurer à vocation institutionnelle ou publique, et croit qu'il serait temps d'explorer les moyens pour «transférer les droits de développement du promoteur Cato sur un autre site.» Mais comme le site a déjà été vendu pour la somme de 45 millions et que la Ville n'a pas le pouvoir de dire non, le Conseil du patrimoine va de l'avant avec ses recommandations. Au chapitre des arbres, on apprend que l'abattage d'une rangée d'arbres matures doit servir à installer des maisons unifamiliales à l'ouest du site, donc en direction du sommet Westmount. À cet égard, le CPM déplore qu'aucune information n'a été fournie sur les mesures de plantation et les espèces retenues. Tous les travaux de déblai et de remblai projetés font par ailleurs penser qu'on est encore une fois «en train de grignoter les flancs du mont Royal.» Éléphant dans un jeu de quilles Dans un endroit où la circulation est particulièrement délicate, avec des impératifs de développement durable, les ambitions d'ouvrir une clinique médicale et d'aménager 671 unités de stationnement sont aussi vertement critiquées par le CPM. «La capacité d'accueil du site est limitée, note le Conseil. Et compte tenu de la proximité de l'Hôpital général de Montréal et des difficultés probables d'accès à partir de Côte-des-Neiges, il est difficile d'assurer un équilibre.» En ce qui concerne la démolition du centre sportif et de la maison des employés, l'instance patrimoniale estime enfin que la nouvelle construction de neuf étages, plus haute que l'ancienne, cachera la vue sur l'ancien séminaire à partir de l'avenue Cedar. En conséquence, le Conseil craint qu'on répète l'erreur du projet de la Ferme sous les noyers, tout près du séminaire, qui a eu pour effet de rendre invisible la maison rénovée. Informée par La Presse des conclusions du Conseil du patrimoine, la directrice générale des Amis de la montagne, Sylvie Guilbault, partage entièrement l'avis du Conseil, particulièrement au sujet de l'importance d'étudier les façons de transférer au public ou à l'institutionnel les droits de construction. «Ce projet, dans un endroit particulièrement achalandé, avec en plus l'agrandissement prévu de l'Hôpital général de Montréal, constituera un bon test pour les gouvernements. Si on prend juste le nombre de stationnements que le groupe veut construire, c'est effarant», ajoute Mme Guilbault.
  17. New York City fears return to 1970s Tue Jan 27, 2009 By Joan Gralla
  18. Je suis sur le conseil d'administration de l'association professionnelle des guides touristiques de Montréal, l'A.P.G.T. depuis le renouvellement d'octobre 2008. J'en ai déjà été le président en 1997. À l'époque nous avions un bulletin d'information imprimé que nous envoyions par la poste à tous nos membres au moins quatre ou cinq fois par année de façon assez irrégulière et qui s'appelait Info-APGT. Il y avait toutes sortes de rubriques dont toutes avaient un rapport direct avec notre domaine d'activités. Pour diverses raisons, ce bulletin a disparu, a cessé d'être diffusé -bref il n'existe plus. En gros, le nouveau c.a. va le rescussiter mais cette fois en ligne sur notre site internet (qui est littéralement abandonné : aucune mise à jour n'ayant étét fait depuis plus de quatre ans !!). Nous cherchons un titre pour ce nouveau bulletin -qui sera probablement accompagné d'un forum de discussion (peut-être en partie ouvert en public selon mes souhaits et assûrément avec une section ouverte aux seuls guides de Montréal). Le nom actuel me semble dépassé. Notre président a lancé comme ça quelques suggestions : La Pige, Le Pigiste, Le Leader mais je ne suis pas très enthousiasme pour ces trois suggestions. Je souhaite que vous me suggériez ici des noms qui pourraient nous inspirer. Merci d'avance.
  19. Le gouvernement allemand préparait samedi un plan d'urgence pour aider le secteur financier qui prévoirait selon des informations de presse l'apport aux banques de garanties et de capital public. Pour en lire plus...
  20. Hope that this isn't classified as politics.<!-- WPGCCWEB26 16 -->
  21. 23-06-2007 Paysages éphémères investit l’avenue du Mont-Royal du 26 juin au 2septembre prochain et propose au public un parcours de cinq interventions urbaines plus surprenantes les unes que les autres. Le but de l’évènement est de permettre aux résidants et visiteurs du quartier de voir la ville autrement. Encore une fois cette année, les concepteurs nous offrent la cité sous ses dimensions les plus inattendues. Déjà en 2005, le projet Pause de NIPpaysage, composé de quatre chaises Adirondack géantes installées au métroMont-Royal, avait séduit le public. En 2006, c’est l’arbre doré d’Un arbre/Un contrat deKdesign qui avait marqué les consciences. 5 nouvelles interventions urbaines Dans le projet Les Boutons Verts de Thomas Baladan, une série de monticules végétalisés envahiront la place Gérald-Godin. Les 2000 pieds de corde à linge du projet Fau Filade de Carole Lévesque formeront un filtre le long duquel le promeneur pourra se faufiler. Leparcdes Compagnons de Saint-Laurent accueillera quant à lui les lits miroirs du projet Mirages de Giorgia Volpe. Dix lits antiques recouverts demiroirs formeront un dortoir à ciel ouvert. Le projet Étoiles urbaines du collectif Spoon offrira une reconstitution des grandes constellations célestes afin de permettre aux citadins de redécouvrir la beauté du ciel étoilé. Finalement, le projet 21 visages en tête de Martin Brière, Gilbert et associés présentera à même les trottoirs de l’avenue du Mont-Royal des images de personnages ayant donné leur nom aux rues du quartier.
  22. Le mercredi 06 juin 2007 Maison de la culture et de la bibliothèque de Côte-des-Neiges. Par l’intérieur, on accède à la terrasse du deuxième étage. Outre la vue sur le mont Royal qui s’étend aux pieds du visiteur, celui-ci aura la surprise de découvrir des plants de géranium, de la lavande ou des iris.Il se trouve en effet sur le premier toit vert accessible au grand public à Montréal, qui a été inauguré hier, Journée mondiale de l’environnement, en présence du maire Gérald Tremblay et du maire de l’arrondissement de Côte-des-Neiges–Notre-Dame- de-Grâce (CDN-NDG), Michael Applebaum. « La rénovation du toit, nécessaire, s’est transformée en une remarquable occasion », explique le maire d’arrondissement. En effet, tout est parti de ce besoin, et d’une discussion entre Monique Côté, chargée de projet, et Jean Landry, architecte-paysagiste de l’arrondissement de CDN-NDG. L’idée d’un toit vert a germé. Christine Brault et Thérèse Chabot, deux artistes à la main verte, accompagnées du maire Gérald Tremblay inaugurent le premier toit vert accessible au grand public à Montréal, à la maison de la culture et de la bibliothèque de Côte-des-Neiges. Les travaux ont commencé à l’été 2006 et les derniers ajustements ont été terminés il y a quelques jours. « Ici, c’est plus qu’un toit vert, explique Jean Landry. C’est un toit-jardin. » Un espace de végétation clos, bordé d’une terrasse aménagée accessible à tous. Pour en arriver à un tel résultat, des études ont été faites pour savoir si la structure du toit pouvait supporter une telle charge. Au final, ce sont 250 m2 de verdure entièrement consacrés à ce projet de développement durable. Car un toit végétal peut faire beaucoup pour l’environnement : purification de l’air, réduction des effets de smog, régulation de la température ou récupération de l’eau de pluie. La réfection du toit de la maison de la culture et sa transformation en espace public ont nécessité des investissements de l’arrondissement de 680 000 $. Un coût supplémentaire d’environ 100 000 $ par rapport à une rénovation classique. Des fonds supplémentaires d’un total de 55 000 $ ont été apportés par la Ville et la Société de verdissement de Montréal métropolitain. De nombreux expositions, animations ou documentaires seront présentés à la population dans une visée didactique.
  23. <header id="page-header"> 24/10/2016 Mise à jour : 24 octobre 2016 | 19:48 Ajuster la taille du texte [h=1]KM3: un parcours d’une vingtaine d’œuvres d’art public pour le 375e[/h] Par Laurence Houde-Roy Métro </header> <figure> <figcaption> Paquet de lumière, de Gilles Mihalcean, est l'une des deux œuvres d'art permanentes du parcours KM3. Elle sera installée en face de la Maison symphonique de Montréal au coût de 672 603$. </figcaption> </figure> Un parcours d’une vingtaine d’œuvres d’art public temporaires et permanentes intitulé KM3 sera créé à l’automne prochain et installé sur l’ensemble du territoire du Quartier des spectacles, à l’occasion du 375e anniversaire de Montréal. Ces créations, principalement installées autour de l’axe de la rue Sainte-Catherine, seront sur la place publique du 31 août au 15 octobre 2017. Décrit comme le «plus important événement d’art public temporaire extérieur à Montréal», le projet orchestré par le Partenariat du Quartier des spectacles invitera des créateurs québécois «reconnus pour leur contribution dans le domaine de l’art public, mais aussi des créateurs qui auront la possibilité de s’exprimer pour la première fois dans l’espace public» à créer ces oeuvres. L’appel à ces créateurs et les commandes seront passés au courant de la prochaine année. <aside class="related-articles"> </aside> «L’événement mettra en valeur les arts visuels, l’art urbain, l’art numérique, le design et l’architecture en occupant des murs d’édifices, des places publiques et des lieux inusités», indique le Partenariat du Quartier des spectacles. Paquet de lumière, de Gilles Mihalcean, sera installée en face de la Maison symphonique de Montréal Seulement deux oeuvres de ce parcours ont été dévoilées lundi. Contrairement au reste des oeuvres, celles-ci seront permanentes et seront acquises par la Ville de Montréal. Elles seront situées sur la rue Émery, en face du cinéma Quartier Latin, et sur le Parterre, en face de la Maison symphonique de Montréal. Une troisième oeuvre permanente sera dévoilée. À la fin de cette édition, les installations artistiques iront rejoindre la collection permanente du Partenariat du Quartier des spectacles et pourront être présentées ailleurs dans le monde. Lux Obscura, de Jonathan Villeneuve, sera installée sur la rue Emery, en face du cinéma Quartier Latin Le Quartier des spectacles souhaite faire de KM3 un événement bisannuel et en faire une offre touristique importante. La scénographie de cette première édition a été confiée à Melissa Mongiat et Mouna Andraos, à qui l’on doit notamment les fameuses 21 Balançoires. <aside class="stat-highlight"> 2,5M$ L’aide financière de 2,5 M$ provenant de la Ville de Montréal et le gouvernement du Québec permettra la réalisation de plusieurs oeuvres temporaires (1,5 M$), puis la création de deux nouvelles oeuvres d’art public permanentes (1 M$) acquises par la Ville de Montréal. </aside> KM3: un parcours d’une vingtaine d’œuvres d’art public pour le 375e | Metro
  24. When NIMBYism is warranted, and when it isn’t Of course, the question is whether a proposed development, infill project or new infrastructure build really does pose a risk to these cherished things. Developers and urban planners must always be cognizant of the fact that there is a segment of the population, a fringe element, who will object to just about anything “new” as a matter of principle. I’ve been to many open houses and public consultations for one proposed project or another over the years. There is almost always that contingent of dogged objectors who invariably fixate on the same things: Parking – Will there be enough if the development increases the population density of the neighbourhood or draws more shoppers/workers from elsewhere? Traffic – Will streets become unsafe and congested due to more cars on the road? Transit – Will this mean more busses on the road, increasing the safety hazard on residential streets, or conversely will there be a need for more? Shadowing – is the new build going to leave parts of the neighbourhood stuck in the shade of a skyscraper? These are all legitimate concerns, depending on the nature of the project in question. They are also easy targets for the activist obstructionist. Full and honest disclosure is the best defence Why? Because I see, time and again, some developers and urban planners who should know better fail to be prepared for objections rooted on any of these points. With any new development or infrastructure project, there has to be, as a simple matter of sound public policy, studies that examine and seek to mitigate impacts and effects related to parking, traffic, shadowing, transit and other considerations. It therefore only makes sense, during a public consult or open house, to address the most likely opposition head on by presenting the findings and recommendations of these studies up front in a clear and obvious manner. But too often, this isn’t done. I’ve was at an open house a few years ago where, when asked about traffic impact, the developer said there wouldn’t be any. Excuse me? If your project adds even one car to the street, there’s an impact. I expect he meant there would be only minimal impact, but that’s not what he said. The obstructionists had a field day with that – another greedy developer, trying to pull the wool over the eyes of honest residents. This is a marketing exercise – treat it like one This is ultimately a marketing exercise – you have to sell residents on the value and need of the development. Take another example – a retirement residence. With an aging population, we are obviously going to need more assisted living facilities in the years to come. But in this case, the developer, speaking to an audience full of grey hairs, didn’t even make the point that the new residence would give people a quality assisted-living option, without having to leave their community, when they were no longer able to live on their own. I also hear people who object to infill projects because they think their tax dollars have paid for infrastructure that a developer is now going to take advantage of – they think the developer is somehow getting a free ride. And yet, that developer must pay development charges to the city to proceed with construction. The new build will also pay its full utility costs and property taxes like the rest of the street. City hall gets more revenue for infrastructure that has already been paid for, and these additional development charges fund municipal projects throughout the city. Another point, often overlooked – when you take an underperforming property and redevelop it, its assessed value goes up, and its tax bill goes up. The local assessment base has just grown. City hall isn’t in the business of making a profit, just collecting enough property tax to cover the bills. The more properties there are in your neighbourhood, the further that tax burden is spread. In other words, that infill project will give everyone else a marginal reduction on their tax bill. It likely isn’t much, but still, it’s something. Developers must use the facts to defuse criticism Bottom line, development is necessary and good most of the time. If we didn’t have good regulated development, we would be living in horrid medieval conditions. Over the last century and a bit, ever growing regulation have given us safer communities, with more reliable utilities and key services such as policing and fire. Yes, there are examples of bad development, but if we had none, as some people seem to want, no one would have a decent place to live. It just astonishes me that developers and urban planners don’t make better use of the facts available to them to defuse criticism. It’s so easy to do it in the right way. Proper preparation for new development public information sessions is the proponent’s one opportunity to tell their story, and should not be wasted by failing to get the facts out and explaining why a project is a good idea. To discuss this or any other valuation topic in the context of your property, please contact me at [email protected] I am also interested in your feedback and suggestions for future articles. The post Why do public planning projects go off the rails? appeared first on Real Estate News Exchange (RENX). sent via Tapatalk