Voir page 1452 pour d'autres images
CA du 7 mai 2019
1) D'accorder, pour le bâtiment situé sur une le lot 1 066 120 du cadastre du Québec,
conformément au Règlement sur les projets particuliers de construction, de modification
ou d'occupation d'un immeuble (CA-24-011), l'autorisation
a) de déroger notamment aux articles 10, 34, 81, 85, 207, 381 et 656 du Règlement
d'urbanisme de l'arrondissement de Ville-Marie (01-282);
b) de déroger au Règlement sur la construction et la transformation de bâtiments
c) de construire, d'occuper temporairement, puis de démolir un bâtiment de deux
étages, aux fins de l'usage « université », conformément aux plans numérotés 2 à
20, réalisés par la firme Lapointe Magne et associés , estampillés le 8 avril 2019;
2) D'assortir cette autorisation des conditions suivantes:
a) l'alignement sur rue, la volumétrie, les retraits d'alignements et l'apparence
doivent être substantiellement conformes aux plans mentionnés précédemment;
b) seul l'usage « université » est autorisé dans l'ensemble du bâtiment;
c) fournir un rapport de conformité au Code national du bâtiment lors du dépôt de la
demande de permis;
d) fournir un plan d'aménagement paysager temporaire lors de la demande de
certificat d'autorisation de démolition;
e) dans les 6 mois suivant l'obtention du certificat d'autorisation de démolition,
déposer une demande de permis de construction pour l'érection d'un nouveau
bâtiment ou réaliser les travaux d'aménagement paysager temporaire.
3) De fixer un délai de 72 mois dès la prise d'effet de cette autorisation pour
l'occupation temporaire, puis la démolition complète visés par la présente
Afin de pallier au manque d’espace pour maintenir les activités d’enseignements pendant la
durée des rénovations majeures de l’édifice Hall, il est proposé d’ériger un bâtiment
temporaire de 2 étages soit d’environ 9 m de hauteur pour une durée approximative d’au
plus 5 ans. Cette proposition permettrait l’aménagement de 8 ou 10 salles de cours qui
pourraient accueillir entre 648 et 816 étudiants.
Place Norman Bethune
Lapointe Magne et associés
05 Avril 2019 Rév. 02
A feasibility study to consider the addition of various options in proximity to McTavish Street to facilitate access to the Belvedere Kondiaronk/Chalet and other areas up the hill from downtown, especially for seniors and the mobility/physically challenged, but also to serve other users.
Making the Mont-Royal and other points up the hill more accessible
As it now stands, as far as reaching the lookout or chalet is concerned, the Peel steps and various inclines encountered are out of the question for many, including families. The closest alternate route by public transit is via Guy, plus 2 buses and a walk. That is not very convenient for many. Another important consideration is that there are no elevators in the Guy metro for people who need them. The McTavish route could let people off in the Allan Memorial Institute parking lot, a few steps from the Route Olmstead which has a much gentler slope for going the rest of the way to the lookout. If a bus route is the option selected, the service could be seasonal, or only in service on week-ends, holidays and special events. Other options for the mountain could be a funiculaire or an electric shuttle that would travel on the Olmstead Road at a reduced speed about once an hour. Advantages
A more convenient route would be an enticement to visit the mountain, and more often, since it would be much simpler and quicker for tourists and montrealers to reach the lookout. It would also ensure that the chalet be better utilized since it would be so much easier to get to, no matter the season. More concerts and special events could be held there throughout the seasons. Since the McTavish line would run though the McGill Campus, it would also be a N-S shuttle of sorts, getting McGill students and employees between the various campus buildings and the REM/Metro/downtown. This line could also be used for residents in the Square Mille, McGill Ghetto as well people going to games at Molson stadium or the other McGill athletic facilities. Being part of the Fleuve-Montagne makes it an natural draw for tourists and this line is only steps away from the main tourist office on Square Dorchester as well as Sainte-Catherine and may major hotels. People could also transfer to the ave des Pins bus for other points east and west. The line is a short hop from McGill Metro, the REM and Central Station, making it part of the hub. The route could be extended further southward to the Tourist office at Dorchester or widened to cover a broader area if need be. This line would be an alternative to the bus lines that run north, on Guy and du Parc. Easier public access means fewer private cars and tour busses traveling to the mountain, and fewer vehicles on the road. A fee structure could be put in place to include the shuttle and funicular, or just the shuttle to the site (reg. STM bus pass) (close to the Grand Escalier et the Route Olmstead). Access to PVM & Olympic Tower are in the ($20-25). The Kondiaronk summit on Mont-Royal is a major tourist attraction.
Let's facilitate access for all groups & promote another way to experience the mountain.
Image 1: McTavish Funicular Shuttle Route (in orange)
Image 2: Funicular (universal access) inspired by the one in use at Montmartre (Paris)
Montreal stands out more for quality of life than economic vitality
The report suggests Montreal isn't quite living up to its potential, but the city does have one card up its sleeve: quality of life.
PRESSE CANADIENNE Published on: May 22, 2018 | Last Updated: May 22, 2018 8:41 AM EDT "In Montreal, you don't necessarily have the salaries of Silicon Valley, around San Francisco, but you have a very good quality of life."DARIO AYALA / MONTREAL GAZETTE
Montreal continues to lag behind other large North American cities when it comers to economic vitality, according to a ranking produced by the Institut du Québec, but the city does have one card up its sleeve: its quality of life.
“In Montreal, you don’t necessarily have the salaries of Silicon Valley, around San Francisco, but you have a very good quality of life,” Jean-Guy Côté, the associate director of the institute, said in an interview.
“Studies are starting to show that the younger generations, people who have a lot of talent, aren’t only concerned about salary,” he said.
For three years, the research institute, a joint venture between the Conference Board of Canada and HEC Montréal, has compared Montreal to other North American cities. It looks at five categories: economic vitality, human capital, innovation, quality of life and attractiveness.
The ranking compares Montreal with Toronto, Vancouver, Boston, Philadelphia, Denver and San Francisco, among others. It uses data from the most recent Canadian census, conducted in 2016.
La Presse Canadienne was able to consult the most recent report, released on Tuesday, in advance.
According to its conclusions, Montreal has several weaknesses when it comes to the economy but it makes up for it when it comes to quality of life.
Montreal has affordable housing, the crime rate is low and the public transit offering is diverse — all of which compare well to the 14 other large cities studied.
The economy: the weak point
When it comes to the economy, Montreal continues to struggle to stand out.
Even though 2016 and 2017 were very good years for Montreal, the city was ranked 14 out of 15 for economic activity in 2016.
In terms of economic growth, Montreal rose two spots between 2014 and 2016, but it remains in 13th place, tied with Philadelphia.
San Francisco was ranked first in both categories.
“Of course we can’t see the needle moving much yet. It’s going to take many years like this before Montreal can move up the ranking,” Côté said. “What Montreal can do, is to continue the strategy that’s already begun, that is, attract investors but also attract talent, so people who have a particular field or expertise.”
Improvements as well
The city’s results improved a little when it comes to attractiveness, innovation and human capital — which notably takes into account the percentage of residents who have a bachelor’s degree and the integration of immigrants into the labour market.
On those last two points, the researchers say the improvements are not enough. Montreal ranks 14th.
“Since 2013, there have been more Montrealers aged 25 to 64 who have a university degree. This increase of 1.4 per cent exceeds only the rate of the increase seen in Minneapolis, St. Louis and Phoenix,” they said.
As for innovation, the results are acceptable, according to the report, but Montreal has the potential to go much further.
Other observations from the report Comparer Montréal
Montreal was in 15th place when it comes to disposable income per capita, which was $28,600 in 2016. Toronto and Vancouver are just ahead, in 14th and 13th place respectively. “Note, however, that when private health care spending per resident is taken into account on both sides of the border, the gap between the other Canadian and American cities is significantly smaller.”
Montreal was ahead of Philadelphia, Boston and Pittsburgh when it came to the growth in the number of building permits. “Using a three-year moving average, the growth in the number of building permits issued increased from minus-7.7 per cent to 5.8 per cent.”
Montreal is in last place when it comes to the percentage of the population living below the poverty line. That percentage increased from 13.3 per cent to 18.9 per cent in 2016.
Montreal’s record on road congestion has stalled, falling behind cities like Boston, Philadelphia and Denver. Toronto and Vancouver remain in 12th and 13th place respectively. “Montreal wasn’t designed around automobile traffic,” Côté said. Many American cities were built around road grids.
by Vicky Fragasso-Marquis
I know that many of you are against Montreal having it's own version of Time Square, but the point of this post is not to debate that. Rather, it's to look at potential locations if we had to chose one.
Based on examples like Time Square in New York, Shibuya District in Tokyo, Piccadilly Circus in London, Dundas Square in Toronto, I defined my own criteria as:
Must be by an open area Must be close to commercial sector Must be accessible by metro At that, I have come up with Square Concordia, this is the area today:
Here is why I think that this is the ideal area:
There are 3 large blind walls for the screens High density of 24/hour restaurants and bars High levels of foot traffic at all times Proximity to various festivals There are already renovated squares on each side of the street. The pedestrian area could be expanded to the parking lot on the right. There's a back lane in the lower right corner where food trucks could enter by and park in the square. A stage could also be setup there for events like Crescent Street Grand Prix Festival, Fantasia Film Festival, etc.
Highlighted in green are areas where a screen could go, solid green are screens on top of buildings, the yellow is where I would put food trucks or a stage:
These type of squares a great tourist attractions, both Toronto and New York list them at the top of tourist attractions. I also think that having a second public area in the west of downtown for smaller festivals would be a great compliment to the bigger festivals east at Place Des Festivals.
Let me know what you think, if you have another suggestion, please share. Thank you for reading!