The Saint-Sacrement district is another area with an interesting density of highrises (between downtown and Ste-Foy):
https://cromwellmgt.ca/wp-content/up...0-1024x647.jpg
https://cromwellmgt.ca/category/proj...ojet-en-cours/

https://images.rentals.ca/property-p...-310113451.jpg
https://rentals.ca/fr/a-louer-quebec...gnon-edifice-4

https://monmontcalm.com/wp-content/u...5-1200x675.jpg
https://monmontcalm.com/2019/cite-ve...-lecoquartier/

https://groleaudeveloppement.com/wp-...3_Web_600k.jpg
https://groleaudeveloppement.com/pro...charest-ouest/

Isn't it ideally located between colleges, hospitals and, the historic downtown?

These past few posts show that QC has the density and built form commensurate with its size (with a much nicer urban fabric than most if not all comparable urban centres in North America). It is a wonderful place. I used to visit at least once a year when I lived in Montreal (but I've only been there once since moving to Ontario, alas).

Sainte Foy looks like your typical suburban hell hole and the above (highlighting Cromwell's Green City ) could pass for Waterloo.

But QC has other parts that more than make up for its Waterlooian areas. What does Waterloo have, otherwise?

https://www.therecord.com/news/water...a376b5fdc.html
Developer wants 22-storey buildings in mixed-use project beside Kitchener natural area
The development would be part of the new Rosenberg community in southwest Kitchener.
April 25, 2025
Map showing the location (outlined in red) of a proposed mixed-use development on Fischer-Hallman Road next to the Huron Natural Area in Kitchener. MHBC
https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...a5f6.image.jpg


https://www.therecord.com/news/water...b57842524.html
Waterloo council OKs new homes after lengthy delays, with more waiting to come
Waterloo city council is adding homes at just half the pace needed to meet the city’s housing goals
May 6, 2025
Rendering of a housing concept for city-owned land to be sold to developer Paul Leveck. City of Waterloo
https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...dc74.image.jpg

https://www.therecord.com/news/water...279b3df08.html
140 apartments will replace 6 Waterloo houses in campus neighbourhood
Planning consultant for the developer could not tell mayor when construction will launch.
May 13, 2025
Illustration of an apartment building approved Monday by Waterloo city council at Albert and Hemlock streets. KLM Planning
https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...5536.image.jpg

https://dbzmvmwkjaqfff.archive.ph/75...542ef863a0.png

https://www.therecord.com/news/counc...b884e626b.html
‘Missing middle’ townhouse project approved by Kitchener councillors
The 16 stacked townhomes would be built along a busy transit and commercial corridor.
May 15, 2025
Rendering of a proposed townhouse development on Arlington Boulevard at Weber Street East in Kitchener. mcCallumSather rendering
https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...ize=1200%2C651


https://www.therecord.com/news/water...f583f718f.html
Developer seeks to replace 37 older apartments with 224 new ones in Waterloo
22 affordable units are proposed if city council says yes to two new rental buildings of six to eight storeys on Erb Street West.
May 24, 2025
Artistic rendering of a new apartment building proposed at 359-369 Erb St. W. in Waterloo. Savic Homes
https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...eb9f.image.jpg

These apartments on Erb Street West in Waterloo are proposed for demolition to make way for new apartments. Jeff Outhit
https://dcga7ncs276wgw.archive.ph/BO...7572cf6d42.jpg

https://dcga7ncs276wgw.archive.ph/BO...849f84f030.png


https://www.engagewr.ca/177-179-albert-st
177 to 179 Albert St (Z-24-03)
Proposal to build a 30 storey building with a mix of unit sizes. This is a resubmission of a previous application.
Third Submission (May 2025) MASRI O Inc. ARCHITECTS
https://hdp-ca-prod-app-wr-engage-fi...08/Image_3.jpg


https://www.waterlooregionconnected....8802#pid118802
171 King St S Waterloo
@ZEBuilder 05-29-2025
https://www.waterlooregionconnected....t.php?aid=9000

It has Kitchener!

New tower design for Broadway on 17th in Calgary:

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/forum/...03-png.654620/

697 units. South tower is 113.7m, 34 stories, West tower is 153.9m, 47 stories. The east tower is a future DP phase.

https://calgary.skyrisecities.com/fo...7#post-2239013

^ Great-looking project!

I like that one.

Good podium, I like the street interactions, and the towers are basic but sleek. Nice.

I don't think this one's been posted yet. "Downtown Gateway" planning area for Cogswell Street, downtown Halifax: https://cdn.halifax.ca/sites/default...0806rc1512.pdf

(The round building is already under construction.)
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c4fe3023_o.png

This triangular block is underused today. It used to have barracks that were torn down around the 1950's or 60's.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c282ecdd_o.png

It is a gateway to the new Cogswell lands that are almost open for redevelopment:

https://i.imgur.com/HzuHGw3.jpeg
https://www.cbre.ca/insights/article...change-halifax

The focal point in the middle is great but, the rest is just a mega block. The right side appears to be mid to high rise podium block buildings around a cul de sac with surface parking.

They should have left the route along the Citadel (?) multi-nodal with slowed vehicular access with mixed use commercial and/or live/work coming right up to a generous sidewalk and trees. Fully pedestrianized has a lesser chance of long term success. Many of today's masterplans remind me of the modernist era garden cities. Shrouded in idealism over practical sense. Locals that drive will make up a considerable percentage of customers for the foreseeable future. We need a better car. One that offers the same luxury and cargo space (when necessary) that doesn't pollute (as much) and occupies much less real estate.

This is downtown in a historic, urban city filled with tourists and students. So if the majority of people arrive by car now (and I'm not sure that's true) there's no reason it needs to continue "into the forseeable future". If someone said that about a suburban site then I'd probably agree.

I tend to agree. I think part of what's going on here is a lack of vision and coordination around what to do with the Citadel lands. If I were designing a long-term plan for the area, I would keep the streets but put some developments on the Citadel side to activate that inner side. I'd do things like put an outdoor amphitheatre on one side of the hill (upgrade Garrison Grounds) and I would have considered building the central library or new art gallery into the hill.

I find the road around the Citadel kind of unattractive and the pathway up the clock side is super basic. There was a plan to build it into something grander in the style of the Grand Parade do-over of the late 1800's but it was never built.

So many of the municipal plans in Halifax are just basic land apportionment and road planning with some density limits and parking requirements built in. There isn't much vision around how to make some areas stand out or how to improve public amenities. The transit planning for Cogswell is incredibly basic. It's an improvement over what was there but seems like a plan from 2010 or so. It's not terrible but it could be much better. I question if the old ramparts bylaw is helpful. That is why the buildings have to step down so much near the Citadel. It would be unattractive to have a wall of buildings all around the site but more attractive to have a select few good quality architectural elements that are allowed to go higher. The municipality doesn't even let developers rebuild heritage elements like cupolas on Victorian buildings if they now infringe into the height limit envelopes. It makes for very boxy buildings.

Majority of Canadians live in suburbs and that isn't going to change in our lifetime. Tourists are seasonal and students, well, having been one and now looking back, I don't consider them to be classy. The middle class students today won't have my disposable income either.

I've been in 400 year old towns. There are cars in the alleys. Manhattan's Upper East/West Side are peak urban living and it's built on a grid of small blocks divided by streets.

A cobblestone woonerf is more what I had in mind than a street. That can include bollards at either end closing off the street on special occasions. Permanent pedestrianisation, the separation of people from cars, is the same mentality behind the construction of Plus 15/ Undergrounds networks but, unlike those systems, have universally done worse than making thoroughfares more pedestrian friendly

That's a strict building height envelope. Generally they exempt architectural elements like cupolas and parapets (within limits) Rebuilding should be grandfathered. New construction should take into account the strict building height envelope.

100%

Even more so in a city like Moncton which doesn't have a dense historic downtown. Moncton is a relatively new city, which didn't really start to grow until the late 19th century because of a growing railway industry. The downtown therefore lacks universities, hospitals and government buildings (these are generally located in the inner suburbs). The downtown is almost completely commercial. People (historically) didn't live there . Most people lived in surrounding residential neighbourhoods, and, later, suburbs.

This is changing now, but, the downtown remains heavily car dependent.

When the city built the Avenir Centre about eight years ago (arena with 8,800 seats for hockey, ad up to 10,000 for concerts), they consciously decided to put it on Main Street to try and maximize downtown residential and commercial development in the area. This has worked very well. At the same time, they decided not to include a dedicated parking structure. This caused great consternation at the time, as our old arena (the Coliseum) had a huge parking lot out front.

The city decided there was more than enough parking downtown (on street and in private lots), that they didn't need a dedicated structure, and, this would interfere with the ultimate plan of increasing densification and urbanization. They were proven correct. People might have to walk 5-6 blocks to get to the Avenir Centre, but people have adapted to the situation.

Now the city is looking for a new master plan for St. George Street (downtown Moncton's second street after Main Street). The urban planners are taking to this with great zeal and have come up with several options for the public to consider. They are going overboard.

One of their plans (the St. George Trail) envisages wide sidewalks, dedicated bicycle lanes, trees, planters, benches and street side patios, but, only a single one-way traffic lane and no on street parking. This is daft!

St. George is a commercial street, that also serves as a through street across the downtown. Businesses along the street rely on on street parking for their customers (and for deliveries). The "St. George Trail" would force people to park on side streets, and would make deliveries nearly impossible.

The loss of several hundred on street parking spots would severely affect the Avenir Centre as well. In addition, following an event at the Avenir Centre, St. George is one of the principle routes they use to get out of downtown. How would this work with a single one-way traffic lane!!!

I'm sure the "St. George Trail" would be quite pretty, but, practically speaking, is completely unworkable. Planning zealots are allowing themselves to be governed completely by ideology rather than practicality. It makes you shake your head.

I'm all for improving St. George, and, have no problem with narrowing traffic lanes and removing on street parking from one side of the street to allow for a dedicated bike lane, but, I think that should be it. Any modernization of the street needs to be viewed through a practical lens.

This would probably be a better/more flexible approach, but I would say that in terms of vehicular access, the road network being rebuilt in this area does have a lot of vehicular capacity (Cogswell, the street on the other side of all those buildings, is a boulevard-width street that is basically never congested).

Still, this area is a little peripheral to downtown right now, and besides the Citadel itself, there isn’t much to draw people. I can see this pedestrianized stretch being mostly empty fairly often, even as the streets just a couple of blocks away are packed.

All that said, it’s a big improvement on the status quo and I would hope that it can be tweaked and improved as needed.

Just because the majority of people currently live in car-centric areas doesn't mean that non car-centric areas can't exist. We're not talking about the design of the entire metro area. We're talking about the development of a specific downtown block. Sure there are historic places that allow lots of car access. Doesn't change the fact that a historic place is also able to be successful if it doesn't. The design of buildings and streets doesn't cause a place to be one way or another. It just allows it to be one way or the other more easily.

And the fact is, regardless of seasonality, central Halifax has lots of pedestrian and transit activity. I didn't mention students and tourists to say that we should conclude there are lots of pedestrians because these type of people exist in the city. The pedestrians exist regardless of the explanation, so any explanation simply helps to understand why. There are many regions in which the majority of people live in relatively car centric outer areas but the central parts of the metro are transit and pedestrian oriented. Even in Toronto which has massive expanses of suburbia, the majority of people coming in and out of downtown are by transit. So a development having little or no parking or having pedestrianized areas is not a valid critique in such contexts.