Photo des travaux, partagée sur le site de NouvLR: 
Station Pierrefonds-Roxboro - Été 2023
8 « J'aime »
It must be driving the NIMBYest of the neighbours absolutely bonkers.
1 « J'aime »
Vous allez voir. Quand les 23 stations du REM seront en services cette fin année, ils devrions voir plus d’endroits qu’actuellement. Qu’ils sortent de leurs bulles !
1 « J'aime »
I don’t hear them too much now. They got used to the sight I guess
But oh boy in a few months when they will test the line…
5 « J'aime »
One must remember with what kind of psychotic break we are dealing when witnessing NIMBY outrage.
These same people who are expressing such vehemence on the Koko surveys are also perfectly fine with “downtown Pierrefonds” being an intersection of two stroads, with decaying strip malls on three corners, a SuperGaz, and the penitentiary walls enclosing the borough’s Public Works department.
While I’m on it, let’s not forget the adjacent fortified Maginot Line casemate also known as PCHS that has blighted the “downtown” for over 50 years.
Oh yeah, and what about the abandoned parking lot that was the Pierrefonds Arena until the late-90s, and torn down more than two decades ago?
Yeah. It’s not about the physical presence of condo towers and mass transit to these folks; it’s about change, and it’s about xenophobia to them. Transit and residential density brings in “those people.” It’s shameful.
7 « J'aime »
Thinking about the folks that were saying how this is ruining there life, lowering the value of their property and how they’re going to move, but I’m still waiting to find below value or even fair value houses close to the station (or just along the alignment) flooding the market. 
5 « J'aime »
Very very pertinent. Perhaps has to do with the dire lack of available housing for new arrivals, but values are not leveling off yet despite high rates.
If we’re being completely honest, theses peoples bought those homes in the 70s and 80s when prices were much lower. With the rise in value and the current interest rates, peoples of the millennial generation simply cannot afford those homes, so there’s bound to be a changing of the guard soon.
Not if we keep allowing 32 voters the right to block much-needed new developments.
9 « J'aime »
From the houses I’ve seen being sold around me, the fact they’re close to a rem station is an add on lol
Who could have thought that living near a metro was something people were interested in and ready to pay more for?
3 « J'aime »
I am a whole 3 km from RioCan Kirkland, 4½ km from Fairview, and almost 8 km from Roxboro station, so the red-hot market pricing doesn’t really have much to do with proximity to a metro station right now. The original owners of my home paid $16,000 in 1968; I paid $100,000 in 1996; I haven’t had a recent bank appraisal, but smaller, simpler houses nearby, with fewer amenities, have sold for close to $600,000 in the past six months. I consider myself a progressive, but I am also a pragmatist. Even if I turned around and sold my home tomorrow, what am I going to get for that kind of money closer to town and real, efficient public transit? Crappy, cardboard condos in Dorion are selling for half a million dollars now. And with just a few years left before retirement, do I really want to take on a mortgage just so I can live near Rocco? Lol
2 « J'aime »
I’m near Atwater and condos here have A proximité du REM! as an asset. 
1 « J'aime »
A couple of kids with whom I work are renting an apartment just above Sherbrooke on Atwater, and paying $2400 a month. They broke up a while ago, but are forced to cohabitate because neither of them can find anything reasonable pretty much anywhere for $1200 a month.
1 « J'aime »
That’s 133 000 adjusted for inflation in 1968 and 177 000 in 1996.
And yeah it makes me sad to see all that. It’s similar for me and I’m at like 1km from Sunnybrooke and Roxboro stations.
There’s currently an empty lot for a residential house selling at 400k at 500 meters from the REM in Roxboro. (And bungalows in the neighborhood are selling at minimum 700k). How do you expect the general population to be able to buy a house when the problem is land scarcity and our laws making it impossible to build denser buildings.
And the worst is that in Roxboro (but honestly a bit everywhere) you see rich people buy those houses. Then they destroy them and rebuilt a manoir that cost 1.5m or more in place of those cheap 1950-60 houses. How do you expect then the city to be able to change their zoning when the population will be even more against new housing because they bought their house specifically to be in a rich and exclusive neighborhood.
Anyway it’s not really about the Roxboro station anymore. But I’m in my early 20s and it’s hard to watch all of this.
5 « J'aime »
It sucks to say, but citizens shouldn’t have a say when it comes to densification… That’s the only way we’ll be able to lower housing costs…
12 « J'aime »
Speaking at city council Monday night [about the new cyling and pedestrian path being built by the city to access the Kirkland station], Pierrefonds—Roxboro Mayor Jim Beis urged the city to reconsider banning cars in an area where traffic congestion is a daily reality.
“Again, we see that unilaterally they decide to do something, and they don’t consult us or our residents because they’re completely against this,” Beis said.
Seeing this, we will probably not see any amelioration for accessing the station other then by car… Maybe he doesn’t believe what he’s saying but just endorsing that idea when it’s such a terrible one is stupid and show how there will be no amelioration for active transport users apart of what Montreal is able to force the borough to do.
The title of the article is misleading. We are not « banning cars » we’re building infrastructure that are not for cars. Cars have never been on that access road because it hasn’t been built yet. It’s like saying « cars to be banned on airport runways ». We need to stop assuming that cars are the default natural state of the universe.
33 « J'aime »
