1 Van Horne - 7 étages

[Brick]

Les citoyens ont dit: «non»!

Du jamais vu à Montréal.

Modifié 3 avril 2023 par Brick

[acpnc]

Si le promoteur se désiste, on pourrait attendre encore très longtemps pour développer un nouveau projet pour cet édifice patrimonial. Dommage car pendant ce temps l'immeuble se détériore et ne rapporte rien à personne. Tandis que trouver les sommes importantes pour le réhabiliter risque de prendre beaucoup de temps, surtout que son voisinage immédiat aux voies ferrées en condamne irrémédiablement l'usage résidentiel pour une question de sécurité publique.

C'est bien beau consulter la population, mais sans communiquer clairement les options limitées de vocation dans ce cas particulier, c'est faire perdre son temps à tout le monde et cela nous éloigne définitivement d'une véritable solution de compromis.

 

[mtlurb]

La "population" veut des locaux pour le communautaire/artisans... est-ce qu'ils vont payer un loyer?

Où c'est juste une subvention déguisée/imposée pour les amis du parti?

[Spiter_01]

The idea of consulting people that don't have any skin in the game is becoming troublesome, obviously there needs to be a level of acceptability and respect for the existing environment and community but the idea that it would be possible to veto any development or project until someone does what we want is in a sense anti-progressive. 

Remember the redesigned garage for the STM on bellechasse only became underground following local consultations and the subsequent rushed/improvised foundation work. Are any of the people that "voiced their concern" paying a penny of the tens if not hundred of millions in extra costs? 

Fundamentally I don't believe these people are as virtuous as they pretend to be, if you proposed the polar opposite project, lets say a massive 500 unit rooming house they'd be equally as opposed to that. They aren't against a hotel, they're against anything happening as if they lived in a conservation area of a quaint English village. It's very easy to be against any and everything when you don't have to shoulder any of the cost of this opposition. Posed differently I suspect these people would behave very differently if presented with 3 realistic and binding options: project A, project B or tear the whole thing down and leave it as a mountain of rubble.  

[Brick]

Il ne faut pas oublier que la conversion de cet édifice en logements est interdite en raison de la proximité des voies ferrées. Il faudrait le rappeler pour ne pas susciter de faux espoirs.

[Spiter_01]

2 hours ago, Brick said:

Il ne faut pas oublier que la conversion de cet édifice en logements est interdite en raison de la proximité des voies ferrées. Il faudrait le rappeler pour ne pas susciter de faux espoirs.

It wouldn't matter, it isn't a conservation issue it's not even about community preservation or social equality. Certain residents all too easily buy into the impending doom and destruction of their way of life if anything too big were to change. The negative externalities are crystallized in their minds as inevitable outcomes while any positives are just palatable lies being told by developers. The people who are the most opposed to this are the same people that wish Ubisoft had never (and would leave) the mile end, were against and are now happy that the hotel project on Laurier is an empty shell.

Montreal has a long history of not caring for its heritage buildings and opposing timely projects which leads them to be neglected for decades and eventually lost.

The worst thing that can happen to a heritage building is to leave it empty for too long, people become accustomed to it being shut, it looses all sense of purpose it might have once had and no one wants to spend a cent on the maintenance until eventually it's degraded so much that it's just a financial investment for the owner that's more valuable as a lot for a new project than a historically significant building. 

I fear the worst for the old royal-vic when you've got political parties playing dumb language games with its redevelopment. 

[KOOL]

R.I.P

 

=> annulés

[SameGuy]

Why was this moved to “cancelled”?