Skip to content

Canadian Urbanism Uncovered

Reaction to the Griffintown mega-development

Read more articles by

Since news broke yesterday afternoon with details about Devimco’s plan to massively redevelop Griffintown, the blogosphere has been abuzz with reaction.

Some are concerned about the effect on current Griffintown residents. Although Devimco insists that no homeowners will be expropriated, Kristian Gravenor isn’t buying that assurance at face value. He has lived through the Overdale boondoggle, in which an entire nineteenth-century downtown block was demolished, and hundreds of residents evicted, for a luxury property development that never materialized. “[Some] suspect that this will end badly, that they’ll kick people out and the developers will run out of money as they always do and leave everybody miserable and the place looking like Dresden in 1946,” he writes.

AJ Kandy, over at Save Griffintown, has been running images and maps of the proposed development on his blog, pointing out and commenting on some elements of the design. He also writes a more substantial critique of the plan at Urbanphoto, where he raises some very interesting points:

Why the megablocks? The design currently imposes some superblocks onto existing streets, blocking Shannon and Young. The plan view can be misleading, seeming to show through streets in the two large residential-commercial buildings, but these are actually sky terraces for the tower dwellers. Surely the same amount of space could be incorporated with more, smaller buildings, on more intimately scaled streets, and preserving the historic street grid?

Why ‘Towers in the park?’ Good retail urban design involves building right to the sidewalk, and lining the streets with shops, windows and displays. The current “superblock” design would seem to impose a lot of blank walls on side streets, and further separates the buildings from the streets with berms and plazas. The same seems to go for some of the smaller apartment buildings to be built canalside – creating isolated, “Habitations Jeanne Mance” dead zones, instead of lively / leafy / intimate streets. The city of Portland in fact discourages new commercial buildings without providing for “living streets” in this fashion, and it’s something we should look at here.

Why the secrecy? Why was this project developed behind closed doors for so long? According to the Sud-Ouest borough mayors’ office there will be public consultations in either December or January, and a decision has to be made by April…a bit rushed for something that affects something so important, no?

Finally, Kate McDonnell at the Montreal City Weblog rues the inevitably corporate flavour of this development. “What makes me saddest about this kind of megadevelopment, even more than the knowledge that it brings more suburban values right into the heart of town, is that such developments are relentlessly corporate. Where’s the space for the used bookshop, the neighbourhood café, the ethnic chicken rotisserie?” she asks.

I wouldn’t be quite so pessimistic. The plans are, on the surface, much better than they could have been. They are high-density, at the very least, with important pedestrian and transit connections and significant attention paid to the public sphere. But they’re still rough: they obviously aren’t finalized, which means that citizens and urban planning experts both need to weigh in to make sure that Griffintown is redeveloped in the best way possible. Without a comprehensive and inclusive planning process, this project risks being a failure.

Recommended

9 comments

  1. “Where’s the space for the used bookshop, the neighbourhood café, the ethnic chicken rotisserie?”

    Now come on, they can’t complaint on the low income residence because the promoter thought about it, they can’t complain about transit because they thought about it, they can’t complain about green space because the thought about it and they can’t complain about big box store because they reduced it, they can’t complain about job creation because there is a ton to come because of all the new stores. So the best could find was Ethnic Chicken? isn’t that far fetched.

  2. “Low income residences” may refer to affordably priced basic condos in the $139K range. It doesn’t mean a set of apartments set aside for the SHDM!

    The transit plan is a big MAYBE. We don’t know if we’re going to get this vaunted tramway or not, or if it would displace enough cars to be profitable.

    What green space is there? They’re basically got private sky terraces for residents only, and some extra landscaping around church ruins. It’s not like they got Place St-Henri or Place Georges-Etienne Cartier here.

    Sure there will be job creation – low paying, service sector wage slave jobs with no career prospects.

    When there is space for LOCAL businesses, instead of chains headquartered elsewhere, then there is a chance for money to stay in the community. And as communities evolve, local businesses need space to address their needs, change, turn over, etc.

    Oh, and have I mentioned how this doesn’t blend in with the neighborhood at all? It doesn’t even look “Montreal,” if Montreal can be said to have a look…it could be from Calgary or Rochester.

  3. BruB- Exactly what I was thinking, but you put it into words. But don’t take the poster’s comments too seriously. She is extemely negative and pessimistic towards everything, as seen in her blog, so I would take her comments with a grain of salt.

  4. The city cannot legally expropriate for a private project.

    If they could, St. Lawrence would have been pasteurized below St. Catherine long ago.

    If an owner of an apartment building wants to sell out, he’ll have to buy out his tenants or wait for them to move.

    If the tenants hold out they could score who knows, $20 k maybe and the demolition permit would likely soon follow assuming Heritage Montreal and pals don’t have a hissy fit.

    If the city has to resort to other sneaky means to get buildings demolished – as Dore did when he sent fire inspectors in to declare Overdale unfit for habitation – then you know they’ve gone to the dark side.

    I’d be surprised if this happened as Tremblay is conflict averse, he doesn’t want his legacy as a mayor who left his bootprint on the face of the little guy.

  5. I am relieved that the plan is not worse! It reminds me a bit of Yaletown in Vancouver.

  6. Low paying jobs are still…well, jobs. it’s still better then unemployment and welfare isn’t it?

    Private money is taking a dead neighborhood and putting something in it that’s a good thing isn’t it?

    Don’t forget I’m a local from that area and happy about the project so ask the real people that count, ask the resident and see what they say.

  7. I think we ought to be careful about making large assumptions based on the little information that is available.

    Unless I’m mistaken, the press release refers to both low-income housing and “affordable” condos, which would seem to indicate a mix of bona fide social housing and condos that qualify for the city’s affordable housing tax credit.

    Any discussion about retail is speculative and entirely futile. The buildings haven’t have been designed — there’s no way to tell what kind of retail space they will offer and for how much. I can definitely say that similar projects in Portland and Vancouver do include independent retail. Concord Pacific Place does not contain a shopping centre, but nearly all of its neighbourhood retail (depanneurs, grocery stores, fruiteries, cafes, restaurants, etc.) is local.

    Nitpicking about the aesthetics seems a bit silly, too, especially since the renderings are not final. These are details that will inevitably change later. But I’m curious what AJ is referring to when he talks about blending in with the neighbourhood. There is virtually no original housing stock left in Griffintown, and most of the housing in the rest of the area consists of redbrick infill from the 1980s.

  8. Personally I preferred the concept idea we saw a little while ago that proposed to have the new UN headquarters put in Griffintown. But of course it was very wishful thinking.

  9. This proget seems intesting but what will happen to the ugly industrial buildings between Barré and William street which is home to Garda and a bus repair shop.
    These areas are part of griffintown and should be included in the revitisaltion program.
    Cora

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *