Suburbs resist densification
Some of Montreal’s suburbs are resisting the idea of densifying their existing territory and prefer the idea of spreading single‑family sprawl beyond their current borders. But it’s a complex problem, affecting transit and services, and not every suburb is keen on suddenly having thousands of new people set down in their sleepy single‑family streets.
Paul 10:26 on 2022-05-18 Permalink
This article seems biased. It implies the the developer’s proposal of 8-storey towers is a positive thing, and that they have the community’s best interests at heart. No mention of any financial incentives for them to densify the site to its maximum potential.
It paints the city as being NIMBY without identifying what the City is proposing as an alternative (IMO 4-5 storeys is considered a much more human scale), and engages no independent experts to weigh in on if an 8-storey tower is a good option considering the surrounding context (it isn’t).
Since when is La Press about Gotcha journalism??
Kate 11:27 on 2022-05-18 Permalink
Maybe, but sooner or later these 1960s-style suburbs are going to have to come to terms with the growing population. We shouldn’t swallow up more and more natural areas and farmland outside the city when there are areas to be redeveloped inside the city and its existing suburbs.
Michael 12:07 on 2022-05-18 Permalink
Having 3-4 humans live within a 4-5000 square foot lot was never sustainable on an increasingly populated island.
Poutine Pundit 12:23 on 2022-05-18 Permalink
The St.Bruno article is not about spreading single family sprawl beyond the borders but about building 5-6 storey housing towers next to a shopping mall. Either way, can’t see what they could possibly do to St. Bruno to make it a place I’d ever want to live in.
DeWolf 17:45 on 2022-05-18 Permalink
I don’t think you can consider eight storeys to be a tower. Many buildings in Paris, Rome, Barcelona and other low-rise European cities are that height. Four to five storeys is great but not in the context of a leftover industrial site in a suburb filled with big single-family houses that will be ferociously protected from redevelopment. Besides, St-Lambert already has a bunch of actual towers so I’m not really sure why this site is subject to so much fuss.
As for St-Bruno, the mayor clearly doesn’t care that his policies mean it won’t be long before only the rich can afford to live there. That doesn’t surprise me though given the culture of the place. Its precious town centre is mostly strip malls and parking lots — way less characterful or interesting than half a dozen other old town centres on the South Shore — but I get the impression that it’s the kind of suburb that has holds itself in particularly high regard.
Blork 20:57 on 2022-05-18 Permalink
I think the issue in St-Lambert is that packing in a bunch of new residents in that former industrial site will create a lot of vehicle traffic on the otherwise pretty quiet Ave. St-Charles. (Which, BTW, looks like a random street in St-Leonard. Streetview: https://goo.gl/maps/zg6fVbWrVKhc9aPF7 )
Since there are railroad tracks on the other side of the lot, St-Charles is the only way in and out of that area.
There’s apparently also some concern that tall buildings will put the existing residences in permanent shadow, but I’m nit buying that. Maybe it will cut the light a bit at sundown in winter, but unless the towers are built right at sidewalk level — highly unlikely — then I can’t see how that would be a problem.
Robert H 23:33 on 2022-05-18 Permalink
Dans ces drames du développement urbain que l’on trouve dans tant de zones métropolitaines de nos jours, on cherche le méchant et le héros de la pièce. Il ne s’agit toujours le cas d’un promoteur rapace contre un quartier assiégé, même si les résidents peuvent avoir cette impression. Derrière le conflit entre les promoteurs et les habitants se cache une profonde ambivalence de la part de ces derniers. Ce n’est pas qu’ils préfèrent des immeubles de 4 ou 5 étages plutôt que de 8, c’est qu’ils ne veulent rien changer! Les promoteurs sont naturellement frustrés. À Saint–Lambert, la ville a besoin des revenus qui proviendraient d’un développement plus intense. Mais les citoyens préfèrent se plaindre que l’infrastructure ne peut pas supporter l’ampleur de ce qui est proposé. À Saint-Bruno, comme l’a dit DeWolf, c’est surtout des mails linéaires et stationnements qui bordent la Rue de Montarville. Un étage de plus ne serait pas la fin du monde. Le progrès est difficiles à réaliser car tout le monde veut que tout soit construit ailleurs.
Uatu 10:53 on 2022-05-19 Permalink
I don’t know what the big deal is in St Lambert because there’s high rises within walking distance that have been there for years. Suddenly it’s a problem?
Blork 12:28 on 2022-05-19 Permalink
@Uatu, the problem isn’t high rises in general, it’s those particular (proposed) high rises. See my comment above about the concerns regarding traffic for the existing people in that neighbourhood.
The existing high rises are pretty much all along Riverside Drive, where there’s plenty of room for traffic flow (and already a lot of traffic). That said, I’m sure the residents along there were not happy to have their views on the river obscured back when those buildings were proposed.