In a dissonant outing against the City of Montreal, real estate developers denounce the Plante administration’s vision for the Bridge-Bonaventure sector. The object of the dispute: the density and the permitted heights. According to Devimco, Mach and Coprim, this “backward-looking vision worthy of the XXand century” would provide no response to urban sprawl or the housing crisis. It would be contrary to the interests of the population, which would have to finance an “underdeveloped project” out of its taxes, being deprived of the capital and expertise of the promoters.
This rant from promoters who claim to be muzzled and who are scandalized by the fact that the City does not roll out the red carpet for them reveals above all in broad daylight their claim to want to reign supreme over urban development. Outdated vision, if any! The development of the City and its neighborhoods is a public responsibility and must be defined with those who live there, travel there and work there on a daily basis. Serge Goulet, from the Devimco group, calls for a “substantive debate on the way the City has to work with the private sector”. On this last point, at least, we will agree with him.
The era — not so long ago — when condo tower projects were negotiated only behind closed doors is over. Citizen consultation processes are now widespread. But developers wield immense power over real estate development. High-density residential projects are concentrated in the hands of a small number of developers who have significant capital at their disposal thanks to investment funds. In the context of speculation and financialization of the housing market, and with the lack of levers from the public authorities, the City depends on these promoters. It delegates entire sections of development to them, while negotiating benefits in exchange for zoning and permissive uses.
Do we really need to remember it? Promoters reason first and foremost in terms of financial profitability. Under no circumstances can they claim to represent the interests of the population. The primary objective of high-rise towers is not to provide everyone with a roof or to think of the city on a human scale, but to achieve the most enviable yields possible. Their incessant threats to withdraw their marbles if they are not given complete satisfaction also reveal the lack of real interest shown in living environments.
The stakes are high: that of the ability of Montrealers to find housing. Housing is no longer a right. It has become a source of accumulation and financial speculation for banks and investors. So yes, a debate is needed, a debate that will also have to question the social responsibility of investment funds, including union funds.
Let’s keep public land out of the speculative market!
How do the projects promoted by these promoters meet the objectives of truly affordable housing and climate resilience in the metropolitan area? With its condominium towers and a meager percentage of social housing, the development of Griffintown has rather accentuated the crisis for the poorly housed and exacerbated gentrification. Despite municipal efforts to make up for the initial lack of planning, what will be remembered in this neighborhood left in the hands of developers — with Devimco at the forefront — is the exorbitant price of single-family dwellings, the proliferation of small condos, the lack of public infrastructure , the scarcity of affordable rental and the growth of short-term Airbnb rentals.
A CMHC study tells us that during the pandemic, it was in Griffintown that we observed the strongest increase in transactions due to the departure of households to the suburbs. For the retention of families in the city, we will go back…
Yet it is this same mode of development that Devimco and other promoters intend to extend to Bridge-Bonaventure. The municipality, like us, should say “never again”! Because even with better upstream planning, this will not respond to the housing crisis.
Too often, we have played in this bad movie where consultations on a vision for the future of a sector of Montreal are transformed into negotiation and a balance of power on private projects. Far from being muzzled, the promoters are seated at the consultation table led by the City of Montreal. Including Devimco, which recently acquired private land in the area and is increasing lobbying operations to get its hands on public land in Bridge-Bonaventure. Why are real estate transactions not frozen during planning exercises? This would avoid speculative pushes and undue influence from developers.
Mastery of land rights is the key to directing urban development. And in the Peel Basin, there are still vast public lands that belong to the Canada Lands Company and Loto-Québec. We are calling, and quickly, for concerted action between the three levels of government and for a real political will to act before it is too late. Let’s create a living environment with housing cooperatives and other non-profit rental housing, parks, green spaces, local businesses and quality public infrastructure. Let’s give ourselves the means for development in response to the urgent needs and aspirations of citizens, and not to the interests of promoters.