ville mont-royal Royalmount

[FrancSoisD]

20 minutes ago, Dominic723 said:

C'est probablement des images shunter stock, ce qui est beaucoup moins dispendieux que de faire des shootings personnalisés pour 3secondes, c'est pas une pratique rare

Yup, je comprends.

Mais quand un promoteur de la trempe de Carbonleo prévoit dépenser des milliards $ pour l'un des plus grands projets montréalais des 60 dernières années, qu'il fait concocter une vidéo s'adressant probablement avant tout à des entreprises, des bannières hôtelières et de commerce de détail, puis qu'il montre des images d'une ville sous un climat aride achetées pas cher pour illustrer les investissements effectués à Mtl, sa crédibilité pourrait en avoir pris un p'tit coup!

Imaginez un instant le promoteur d'un mégaprojet de... Dubaï, tiens, qui mettrait un plan de la construction dans Griffintown dans un segment traitant du développement immobilier des capitales des principales capitales des Émirats Arabes Unis! 😂🙈

[Decel]

Il y a 11 heures, FrancSoisD a dit :

Yup, je comprends.

Mais quand un promoteur de la trempe de Carbonleo prévoit dépenser des milliards $ pour l'un des plus grands projets montréalais des 60 dernières années, qu'il fait concocter une vidéo s'adressant probablement avant tout à des entreprises, des bannières hôtelières et de commerce de détail, puis qu'il montre des images d'une ville sous un climat aride achetées pas cher pour illustrer les investissements effectués à Mtl, sa crédibilité pourrait en avoir pris un p'tit coup!

Imaginez un instant le promoteur d'un mégaprojet de... Dubaï, tiens, qui mettrait un plan de la construction dans Griffintown dans un segment traitant du développement immobilier des capitales des principales capitales des Émirats Arabes Unis! 😂🙈

Pas mal sûr que les bannières sont déjà signés ou en voie de l'être. C'est pas une fraction de quelques secondes dans une vidéo promotionnelle qui va faire aborder cela.

[FrancSoisD]

En fait, je pensais davantage aux investisseurs et bailleurs de fonds, puis aux entreprises montréalaises qui pourraient être intéressées à louer des bureaux dans ce secteur. Ce sont généralement des gens sérieux, et qui évaluent longuement le sérieux d'un projet.

La fausse représentation d'un projet immobilier dans une ville aride pour illustrer le développement Montréal n'aide pas au sérieux de la vidéo, autrement réussie.

[LexD]

15 hours ago, FrancSoisD said:

Once again, i agree with some of the points you bring, yet i disagree with some others. To simplify answering with my cellphone, i'll reply under each assertion in the quote below.

Cheers!

Questions pertinentes, quoique la #3 dépende a priori de VMR, et non de Carbonleo...

I dont think we disagree very much, and you make good points , they reinforce my original post that Montreal is decades behind in sustainable developement. Here is a few replies :

 

name one city that builds bedroom communities at the rate Montréal does considering the popular growth in relation to Montreal.

■ Calgary, Edmonton & Toronto proportionally DO compete with us in terms of sprawl, yet they beat us in per capita growth! TO's exurbs beyond Hamilton, Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge, Guelph, Barrie, Peterborough, Port Hope, etc. make Mtl's Lachute, St. Jérôme, Joliette & other satellite towns & surrounding smaller low-density communities pale in comparison... 😨

- The Ontario places you mention cannot be compared with the Quebec ones. None of those cities are part of the GTA. They are part of the Golden Horseshoe and most are independant to the GTA and self sustainsable (most have there own CBD) these cities are more akin to Sherbrooke , Trois-Rivieres, Valleyfield and Cornwall. As for the Quebec cities you do mention, they are all part of the CMM and many of its residents work on the island of Montreal.

other cities in Canada are expanding and developing faster but what i am speaking of is type of building. I lived in Vancouver many years. I watched the Millenium line go up. they built high density TOD all along that line, even with the REM coming , there is no area along that line that has anything remotely close to the density and number of floors you see  go up in Vancouver.

■ True, for the time being. However, at least 2 Brossard TODs located along the REM have plans for towers between 25-35-storeys. It's perhaps nothing compared to the 60-80-storey bldgs that may pop up in places such as Burnaby, New Westminster, Mississauga, or Vaughan, yet it's a "game changer" for the Greater Mtl, as max 4-storey rental appt. bldgs. had been the norm here for at least 4 decades! 

Agreed. Like I say , we are just starting to build high rises outside the downtown core and expanding our rapid transit.

Toronto has North York for its midtown. Vancouver has MetroTown. Almost all développements in these cities are multi-dwelling post 2000. Its only here we are building cul-de sac neighborhoods that are exploding populations in places like Mirabel.

■ I strongly disagree that this old American dream model doesn't exist elsewhere in Canada! As i wrote earlier, ON and BC cities have taken the lead, but we're gradually playing catch-up. (Finally!) 

- I'm not saying these developements dont exist elsewhere, im saying that in other canadian cities, for over 20 years they have taken a backseat to smarter devellopements, namely TOD's and residential densification of downtown cores in cities like Toronto and Vancouver. In Montreal we still celebrate and favour this archaic environmentally unfriendly form of sprawl. 

The worst part of this is we are geographically the most destined to fail at this form of urbanization. Montreal is an island , its main suburb to the north is an island. People on the North shore have to cross 2 bridges just to get to the northern most end of the island, downtown is on the south side. We can only have so many bridges. we cant build anymore bridges without destroying entire neighborhoods or eco systems.

■ Disagreed regarding the highlighted phrase! Basically, other than more or less heavy public transit lines, it's the highway system that ensures a metropolis' mobility. Mtl has an "overdeveloped" hwy system that encompasses way more sectors than TO's or Vancouver's Greater areas, with seven (!) E-W hwys (counting Hwy 50), and 6 (!) N-S (counting Hwy 30 between the 40 and Valleyfield's Grande Île). Of course, our hwy network is older, and offers less capacity per corridor than TO's major ones, but that's also a matter of induced demand, which would be a complex tangent to include in this discussion...

- Montreal has more highway infrastructure due to the first wave of urban sprawl from the 60's. Toronto and Vancouver dont need more highways because their growth has been based off sustainable developement (last 25yrs). Its not an anomaly that we have the longest commutes in the country .  Take Sainte Dorothy for example, the only way into montreal is by the highway 13 , now take a look at chomedy ouest , and all northen neighborhoods extending as far as OKA...they all have to take the 13. There is no solution to this because of the geography. If this were to happen in Toronto, alternate routes would be available or could be created at lower cost and lower disruption to existing areas.

Our bridges have become narrow funnels for massive sprawl. We should work twice as hard at countering sprawl (then other cities), but we do the opposite.

The PMAD is great but its lack luster. it focuses on Montreal's old pre-merger limits.

■ Yes, it does lack ambition. Keep in mind it's a work-in-progress which can be readjusted by the involved municipalities and other actors once every 2 years! And nope, it actually applies to the whole CMM territory, which encompasses the North Shore's 2nd and 3rd belts, Vaudreuil, Laval, the South Shore's 1st and 2nd belts.

It applies to the whole CMM but it is not enforced. The PMAD should be the rule the thumb but since its conception, it seems to be simply a document of ''recommended guidelines''. What is currently being enforced is borough urban plans (or municipality). Most borough urban plans do not have the zoning that permits the density needed to follow the PMAD.  So whenever a project is proposed that is conform to the PMAD , it still has to go through a public consultation before allowing a zoning change. It takes very little to shut down a developpement. A minimal amount of votes is all that is needed to request a referendum and most councils will choose to shut down a project before going through a costly referendum. So the PMAD looks OK on paper only. 

But our mayor believes all roads should still lead to downtown...and they should all be bike paths or pink metros.

■ Yep, the Projet Mtl-controlled Executive Council so far seems to be downtown-centric. However, many dissenting voices inside the party are evermore manifest, too. Nope, the party doesn't believe everyone shall cycle nor take the pink line, come on! (Or else they wouldn't have boosted road maintenance as they did, while not really increasing the dismal bike network budget since Coderre.)

- The bus only new urban boulevard linking north ouest pierrefonds to the kirkland REM

- Her pilot project road closure of camilien houde

- Her criticism of the Royalmount commercial aspect of the project, claiming it threatens the suppremacy of downtown shopping (all that downtown needs to sustain itself is more of what has been going on for last few years which is massive high density residential developement).

Road maintenance is a security issue , it has to get done.

Thanks for your replies, and the exchange of perspective, like i say you bring good points!

 

 

[LexD]

20 hours ago, louisleonardo said:

Je n'avais pas vu ce plan avant...:

 

Aussi, ceci a été posté sur leur site le 15 janvier dernier...: 

Ca l'explique le positionnement des grues presentement

[go_habs_go]

21 hours ago, louisleonardo said:

Je n'avais pas vu ce plan avant...:

 

Aussi, ceci a été posté sur leur site le 15 janvier dernier...: 

Interesting, merci! However where are the current buildings that are left on the site - I'm talking about the old Ericsson buildings that I believe they are keeping. How come we don't see them on this rendering? Or is one of them tucked just behind the semi-circular building?

Also, the buildings here don't look very high, this is disappointing. Hopefully there will be some higher towers included.

[Ousb]

il y a 7 minutes, go_habs_go a dit :

Interesting, merci! However where are the current buildings that are left on the site - I'm talking about the old Ericsson buildings that I believe they are keeping. How come we don't see them on this rendering? Or is one of them tucked just behind the semi-circular building?

Also, the buildings here don't look very high, this is disappointing. Hopefully there will be some higher towers included.

I think that this is just the phase 1. Higher residential towers (if approved) will be built later

[LexD]

2 minutes ago, go_habs_go said:

Interesting, merci! However where are the current buildings that are left on the site - I'm talking about the old Ericsson buildings that I believe they are keeping. How come we don't see them on this rendering? Or is one of them tucked just behind the semi-circular building?

Also, the buildings here don't look very high, this is disappointing. Hopefully there will be some higher towers included.

the 2 buildings being preserved are the ones on each side of the semi- circular building (I believe)

[maxi2515]

Il y a 8 heures, go_habs_go a dit :

Interesting, merci! However where are the current buildings that are left on the site - I'm talking about the old Ericsson buildings that I believe they are keeping. How come we don't see them on this rendering? Or is one of them tucked just behind the semi-circular building?

Also, the buildings here don't look very high, this is disappointing. Hopefully there will be some higher towers included.

 

[Rocco]

40 minutes ago, YMQ said:

Very happy to see this project in full force.

Go RoyalMount!! 

Go Dix... nevermind