Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Bouchard, professeure à temps partiel I Part-time professor, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa
Several housing developments are currently underway in Montréal incorporating community‑scale features, including walkable streets, lively commercial corridors, galleries and public spaces.
While building on infill sites already located in the heart of established cities offers many advantages, densification projects can also present complex challenges during implementation.
Drawing on my experiences working as an urban planner and teaching governance at the University of Ottawa, let’s examine emerging trends in urban development projects.
Building a neighbourhood
Several development projects currently underway in Montréal include multiple buildings as well as community facilities like parks, gardens, patios, terraces, playgrounds and sports or cultural centers.
So when did the practice of building several structures at once, together with shared community amenities, first begin? The goal of urban planning has always been to organize space, both public and private. But the balance between how these spaces are managed has been conceived in different ways, and has taken on different characteristics over time.In North America, the commercial development of housing subdivisions expanded significantly after the Second World War. A new transportation technology came to the fore: the automobile.
Read more: Boomburbs: The rapid rise of Toronto’s northern suburbs
The proliferation of very low‑density housing developments from those years onward was a direct consequence of the widespread availability of cars. New York’s Levittown neighborhood is frequently cited as a key example of suburban development patterns and of the rise of housing construction as an assembly‑line process..
Suburban life was uniform and standardized, matching the mass-market approach to post-war housing. Homes were built the same for everyone, not customized for individual owners. Despite this sameness, people liked them, making them profitable and keeping developers focused on these types of houses for decades.
North American governments also encouraged developers to build suburbs by strictly enforcing zoning rules that separated housing from commercial areas and social spaces. The distances between these areas, and even to employment centres, often necessitated car ownership to get around.
In contrast, current developments in Montréal (including Canoë, Quartier des Lumières, Bridge-Bonaventure, Langelier, Quartier Molson, Esplanad-Cartier) emphasize their walkability and proximity to subway stations in their marketing to prospective buyers.
Adopting mixed-use zoning, walkability
By the late 1970s, critics were already pointing out the weaknesses of communities overly dependent on the automobile. Their concerns included sedentary lifestyles, social fragmentation, reduced community interaction, loss of farmland and various economic and environmental costs.
Current trends toward mixed‑use zoning and walkability can be traced back to the ‘80s, when North American urban planners began organizing the New Urbanism movement. Some of the movement’s principles:
-
The belief that good design creates strong communities.
-
Promoting mixed‑use development and placing particular emphasis on high‑quality urban design.
-
An appreciation for the compact urban form of pre‑automobile cities (as opposed to low‑density sprawl).
-
Support for transit‑oriented urban design.
-
A preference for mid‑rise buildings (associated with pre‑industrial urbanism) over skyscrapers (associated with modernist planning).
-
Valuing and enhancing urban heritage.
-
Promoting the redevelopment of historic urban neighbourhoods, particularly those affected by deindustrialization or poverty.
-
Supporting more participatory design practices that involve a range of stakeholders.
Although Canadian cities have continued to build suburbs on their outskirts, several initiatives now aim to encourage urban development and infill projects.
Many municipal governments are reconsidering and rolling back the regressive zoning policies they once enforced. The consensus has shifted so much that the federal government has even offered direct funding to municipalities as an incentive to adopt policies that support greater urban density.
Read more: Dense, compact urban growth is favoured by mid-sized Canadian cities
These fundamental questions about mixed‑use development are accompanied by important design details that help make cities pleasant and human‑scaled.
Modernist developments of the “Tower on the Park” type have often included lawns with pedestrian paths. But these pedestrian facilities tended to regard walking primarily as a recreational activity alongside green space.
In contrast, today’s urban densification projects are more socially oriented, making it possible to walk or bike to shops, community centres, schools and other everyday destinations. New developments place community spaces close to commercial amenities like grocery stores and make them more accessible for people who want to walk, cycle or use public transit.
Addressing gaps in established urban areas
The infrastructure costs associated with urban sprawl have also encouraged municipalities to recognize the development potential of unused or underused land within their cities. But planning and developing these kinds of sites can be more complex than building on peripheral greenfield land, precisely because they are located within existing urban areas.
Montréal’s Molson site, for example, benefits from historic buildings, but it’s challenging to rethink a place that previously served industrial purposes.
Urban redevelopment can entail significant costs, such as the time and resources required to remediate industrial contamination, carry out archeological assessments or consult with affected stakeholders. Redeveloping urban land parcels may also involve more complex governance arrangements, depending on former ownership and the relevant land‑use rights.
Although these infill sites are close to existing road networks, public transit, and other infrastructure, the costs of connecting them to these systems remain.
For example, in the case of the Namur‑Hippodrome project in Montréal, developers have been reluctant to build the roads, sewers and other infrastructure needed to serve the site, preferring that this work be carried out by government.
This situation reminds us that, ultimately, developers are for‑profit companies that weigh the costs and benefits of projects in terms of their own expenditures rather than broader social objectives.
A more diverse urban form
For several years, cities have aimed to create more diverse and appealing urban spaces, featuring varied building heights, destinations and housing types. A thoughtful mix of public and private spaces encourages community interaction and provides natural “eyes on the street,” enhancing the sense of safety. Montreal’s new developments are designed to be vibrant, lively and community-focused.
The creation of social spaces aims to encourage positive social interactions and prevent feelings of anonymity or disconnection during the regular course of daily activities.
The Molson project includes a large park along the banks of the St. Lawrence River. The Esplanade-Cartier project has emphasized social amenities, featuring not only a pedestrian street but also a “project house” with a community garden on the rooftop terrace. Rooftop gardening is already well established in Montréal commercially, but this project is among the first community garden on the roof of a private building in Québec.
Read more: Growing pains: An Ontario city’s urban agriculture efforts show good policy requires real capacity
Embracing the complexity of cities
Building within already developed areas can be complex. The 10-year consultation and planning process for the Namur-Hippodrome project in Montréal is one example, but there are others.
Just a stone’s throw from Parliament Hill, the redevelopment of the Lebreton Flats in Ottawa has been promised for decades. The process of developing the Ookwemin Minising residential neighbourhood on Toronto’s waterfront has been underway since 2017.
The numerous urban densification projects currently underway in Montréal indicate a growing recognition that suburban development models lacked diversity.
Today’s projects aim to place new housing near vibrant cultural and commercial corridors. While elements of the 15-minute neighborhood concept — such as mixed-use zoning that encourages walking and transit — aren’t new, stakeholders seen to be embracing New Urbanism principles in planning, design and construction. It’s clear there’s been a shift in thinking about what makes a neighbourhood desirable.
– ref. Neighbourhoods are changing as cities prioritize diversity, connectivity and livability – https://theconversation.com/neighbourhoods-are-changing-as-cities-prioritize-diversity-connectivity-and-livability-279426
