ville-marie Tour des Canadiens - 50 étages

[qwerty]

Guys, there is potential for new condo construction. Period.

Whether this is CF or another guy, who cares?

40 stories is not bad and this could be a market test for CF.

Lots a of companies have suffered in Mtl.

They are slow to come back.

Let it go and lets keep buying condos...

[bxlmontreal]

Avec les problèmes de circulation vers les banlieues de plus en plus importants, la tendance est à terme à un retour vers MTL.

Les Québécois c'est culturel ont toujours été 'très maison', c'est assez récent ce switch vers les condos.On a construit ou on est

entrain de construire plus de condos que jamais avant à Montréal.N'oubliez pas que MTL est (enfin l'était plus encore avant),

une ville de locataires.Les mentalités on sagement évolué.Les jeunes voient les choses deja bien autrement.Restera à convaincre

les familles et la c'est le prix qui joue et les facilités.Mais je trouve qu'il y a énormément d'avantages pour les familles à vivre en ville

car on épargne un temps perdu fou, sans parler d'argent(essence etc).Passer 2h ou + dans les bouchons chaque jour finalement

quel intérêt?Le temps que de nouveaux ponts et ou tunnels soient construits, on aura construit des tonnes de condos.Cela renforcera

l'avantage d'habiter en ville, sans oublier des plus-values comme l'espace libre diminuera forcément.Je crois qu'il y aura de la place pour tous

types de promoteurs et tous types de produits.Cela rendra la ville encore plus dense et plus vivante et cela développera de nombreux

services.MTL doit aussi garder son identité (mix américain et Européen)si c'est pour devenir un mini Chicago ou NYC ou TO, ben non ici on a

aussi d'autres valeurs et d'autres priorités.Faut cesser d'être pessimistes mais je crois que c'est du beaucoup aux médias qui ne savent plus

quoi dire pour remplir leurs gazettes ou leurs bulletins de nouvelles...

[SKYMTL]

I couldn't be happier if this project was completely cancelled. I have said it from the start: it is ridiculous to jam a building such as this one next to the Bell Center when there are plenty of places around that would be just as suitable.

 

HOWEVER, there is another option none of you have been discussing: the possibility that the core / soil samples came back and CF found out that either A) The soil depth versus bedrock / rockhead depth in that location won't support a 200M+ structure on such a small footprint or B) that reinforcing the area would require a huge investment.

 

IMO, we shouldn't jump down their throats in this situation since no one really knows what's going on.

[Anderson]

the possibility that the core / soil samples came back and CF found out that either A) The soil depth versus bedrock / rockhead depth in that location won't support a 200M+ structure on such a small footprint or B) that reinforcing the area would require a huge investment.

 

Je suis pas ingénieur civil mais j'imagine que le terrain est probablement comme au 1 000 la Gauchetière. C'est juste en haut d'une ancienne terrasse de la mer de Champlain. C'était une belle plage... il y a peut-être 5 000 ans! Donc 10 m de sable environ et en dessous, le même roc que partout ailleurs au centre-ville. Rien de bien dangereux pour un édifice de 40, 50 ou 60 étages.

Modifié 21 février 2012 par Anderson

[Russell]

the issue is not the soil bed, but how to efficiently build parking for that large a tower...i think that they have come to the conclusion that building a vertical parking podium of 8-11 stories is financially challenging. that, or they are responding to some RFP for the office project they have and are only prepared to build one project at a time since their development team must be pretty small still in montreal.

 

there are plenty of other condo projects to get excited about in downtown montreal beyond cadillac...expect 3-4 major announcements in the next 3-4 months and quit the hate parade, it is pretty pointless venom.

[swansongtoo]

HOWEVER, there is another option none of you have been discussing: the possibility that the core / soil samples came back and CF found out that either A) The soil depth versus bedrock / rockhead depth in that location won't support a 200M+ structure on such a small footprint or B) that reinforcing the area would require a huge investment.

****

Above is an interesting point actually.

 

However in the early 90s I was doing my BComm at Concordia and took a real estate class (still have the book). A presenter from the guys that built the Bell Center lectured a class and I remember him saying that two 50 story towers could be build on top of the Center.

[BiloMtl]

This is my interpretation of this whole project:

- Over a year ago someone at CF started to see the increase in condo sales in Montreal and wondered why they were not in the game

- That someone managed to convince CF to go ahead and try and replicate what Toronto has here next to the bell centre.

- Some people at CF (most probably some whinny ex-Montreal anglo who couldn't get a job here) were bad mouthing Montreal saying its a "has-been" and warned CF not to build big here.

- CF still went ahead anyway with a huge press conference in March '11.

- Numbers started to show unemployment way up in Montreal (9%) and bad press about QC being poor blah blah blah...

- That same a$$hole stared saying "I told you Montreal is crap"

- Project scaled down because of fear.

 

I hope that this project gets shelved. I'd rather have an empty space in a 200 meter zone and wait for a develloper with balls. (Hopefully a local one) than what CF is doing.

 

BTW, I wouldn't feel this way if we had over 200 meter towers being built every 5 years. Heck, I'd even settle for every 10-12 years. But this is ridiculous. Not worthy of a 4 million city.

 

T'as vraiment pas rapport... Bien que je sois autant déçu que toi de la diminution de hauteur je suis loin d'avoir la même interprétation que toi. Il y a un joueur local dans le projet avec Canderel depuis peu et cela ne change rien, même que la tour est maintenant moins haute.

[SKYMTL]

I don't think this is an issue of building vertically. Rather, it is an issue of verticality combined with a small footprint which limits the amount of load dispersion.

 

But then again, maybe CF just got cold feet....or they could be experiencing a financial strain due to their massive Toronto developments.

[monctezuma]

...expect 3-4 major announcements in the next 3-4 months and quit the hate parade, it is pretty pointless venom.

 

C'est une pensée positive ou tu as des infos que nous n'avons pas ?

 

Par "major announcements", peut-on espérer quelque chose d'aussi haut que la Tour des Canadiens version 62 étages ?

[1331Massi]

N'espèrez pas, mes amis. La raison qu'on ne peut pas bâtir haut est dans l'histoire. Il y a 100 ans, la limite d'hauteure n'était pas de 233 mètres en haut du niveau de la mer, mais 10 étages ( ou environ 30 m). Ceci à causé l'étallement urbain, et le contraire de ce qui s'est passé à Vancouver s'est déroulé. Résultat: On sera toujours coincé avec 5 hautes tours, sauf s'il y a un autre P-E Trudeau et Jean Drapeau qui se cachent quelquepart...