Recent Updates Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 22:54 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    Benoit Aubin is a little taken aback that there was no sign of any rioting after the Canadiens put away Tampa Bay.

     
    • Faiz Imam 00:51 on 2014/04/23 Permalink

      I’m not.

      We came into this 3 and 0. We dominated the series from start to finish. Victory was expected. Also it was the first round.

      Riots require a certain momentum as well as a spark, the fanbase simply has too high of expectations to let loose at this point.

      If we beat Boston next series? then we’ll see.

  • Kate 16:57 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    This item says that the Budweiser dirigible is in the air over lower Mountain Street and will flash whenever the Canadiens score. But it looks more like a fancy tethered balloon than, properly speaking, a blimp.

    Ginette Reno is said to be going to sing the anthem again Tuesday evening at the team’s request.

     
    • ProposMontreal (Martin) 20:49 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Why is this even news ?

    • Kate 21:01 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I posted this because I saw some people asking on Twitter what was in the sky near the Bell Centre so it would answer that question if anyone wondered.

    • Faiz Imam 22:37 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      A giant flashing light in the sky related to the biggest story in the city and you ask “Why is this even news”?

      It’s hella cool is what it is

  • Kate 16:52 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    A municipal judge has upheld article 500.1 of the highway code which has been used to quash demonstrations. The article makes it illegal to block traffic. A case was made that the law was not intended to be used to silence dissent, but the judge has given the nod to its use in this way.

    The Ligue des droits et libertés has not decided whether to take the issue to appeal.

     
    • Joe 17:08 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Good, another win for the good guys.

    • Steph 17:12 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Since any vehicle in traffic is essentially also blocking traffic the city can make a killing ticketing people who drive during rush hour!

    • Kate 17:16 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Cheers Steph.

    • Joe 17:26 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Lol @ Steph
      That almost makes sense.
      Vehicles who block intersections and create traffic do get ticketed btw.

    • Hamza 20:04 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I guess this means pedestrians are forbidden from crossing the street too?

  • Kate 16:48 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    A meeting is being held Thursday at Maison Smith to discuss the future of the hospital buildings being vacated on Mount Royal.

     
    • Patrick 19:44 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      McGill Principal Suzanne Fortier just gave a speech saying the university was looking at acquiring the buildings to remedy its space shortage.

    • Kate 21:03 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Yes, it was mentioned a couple of weeks ago that McGill would like to buy the Royal Vic. Hôtel-Dieu would still hang in the balance.

    • Taylor 22:19 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I think Hotel Dieu would make for one hell of a museum.

      The sector could use the stimulus and it’s not too far off the beaten path for tourists and the people who’ll likely work there. Plus ample parking and space for development, not to mention the gardens. That there’s a residential component is a cherry atop the sundae: could make for some great ‘artist in residence’ programs.

      Better still the place becomes an art institute/museum dedicated to Canadian, Quebec and Montreal visual arts.

  • Kate 16:36 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    Verdun borough let a contractor dump toxic soil near its waterfront. Now the borough mayor says it will remove the pile, which could be leaching toxins into the river.

     
  • Kate 16:32 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    CTV spots a number of election posters still adorning the city streets. (Video.)

     
  • Kate 16:28 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    IMG_2256

    Noticed the potholes just now at the corner of my street. This is definitely worse than last year, and as you can see, they’re also at the crosswalk. The farthest one is a real monster.

     
    • Ephraim 16:30 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Ah, that’s a patch that has potholes. So likely the patch wasn’t done properly in the first place (you can see the outline of the patch.) It’s like downtown, this is the best time of the year to see the old tramway tracks.

    • Kate 16:36 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Doubt there were ever tracks down my street, which has always been residential north of the tracks.

    • Ephraim 16:51 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      No, but you can see the outline of a large patch (likely done for water repairs) and that’s what’s coming up, mostly. See the indent?

    • Kate 17:23 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Yes, I’m sure you’re right about that.

  • Kate 12:27 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    The SPVM announces that they’re ready for any excesses that may follow a win by the Canadiens Tuesday night over Tampa, saying that P-6 will be applied to any march for which an itinerary has not been approved – which kind of misses the point.

    Quoting Anarchopanda’s commentary on this point:

    Vous permettrez à Anarchopanda pour la gratuité scolaire de signaler que M. Gingras [SPVM spokesman] est ici en totale contradiction avec son chef, Marc Parent, qui affirmait au conseil municipal en avril 2013: « On sait très bien qu’à ce moment-là, on n’est pas là pour demander à quelqu’un son itinéraire. Ce n’est pas organisé, c’est spontané, et ça, on le sait très bien. »

    Alors qui faut-il croire? La bouche où la tête?
    Anarchopanda vous suggère humblement la continuation du scénario suivant:

    Les mauvaises manifestations anticapitalistes ou contre la brutalité policière ou pleines d’étudiant-es qui même spontanées ne causent habituellement aucun dommage = tuées dans l’oeuf.

    Les bonnes manifestations spontanées à caractère sportif, pleines de bons contribuables et non de ces pouilleux de jeunes, et qui la dernière fois ont foutu en feu 5 voitures de police et endommagé 16 autres = c’est normal, c’est la fièvre du hockey.

     
    • Steph 12:58 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Do people even march after these hockey wins? They tend to just gather directly on St-Cathrine between Crescent and Peel.

      Please keep making the distinction between “submitted itinerary” and “approved itinerary”. The difference is quite important!

    • yossarian 15:34 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      little known fact: the STM has not replaced the missing (smashed) front panels on bus shelters in central TMR beside the train station since the last hockey riot vandalism spree occurred several years ago.

    • Bill Binns 15:46 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      The Police here have had a lot of experience dealing with unruly mobs since the last round of hockey riots. Hopefuly, they can keep a lid on things if neccesary this time around.

  • Kate 10:19 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    Are there more potholes this year or does it just always seem that way?

     
  • Kate 09:56 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    Despite concerns whether ICAO will stay in town, the STM is going to proceed with changing the name of Square-Victoria station anyway to Square-Victoria-OACI.

     
    • Blork 09:58 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I hope (and expect) most people will just call it Square-Victoria (or “Square Vic”). Adding four random-sounding letters to the end is just ugly. I can guarantee that 20 years from now I still won’t remember if it’s OACI, OACI, OCAI, OOAC, etc.

    • Steph 10:14 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I’m surprised people constantly bother to pronounce Berri UQAM – Berry You-Cam.

    • Blork 10:25 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      At least UQAM is only two syllables.

    • Ian 10:54 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I propose that OACI be pronounced “wacky”.

    • Kate 11:00 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

    • Ian 11:49 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Is this an instance of “great minds think alike”, or “fools seldom differ”? The former, I hope. :)

    • Taylor 12:24 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      So the STM can change the name of Square-Victoria stn but all other stations cannot be re-named?

      Is the STM (i.e. taxpayers) paying for the privilege as well?

    • Kate 12:34 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Taylor, my impression is that changing Square-Victoria is just a lagniappe on top of the other schmoozes various levels of government are doing to keep ICAO here.

      I don’t believe the STM is opening the metro station renaming file for anything else. As noted before here, there’s been a notion to rename Beaudry to Beaudry-Village for ages, but the STM always cited the renaming moratorium (which I expand on here) and it has not been mentioned in tandem with the Square Vicky renaming.

      I believe public money would pay for the change of name, yes.

    • Taylor 13:14 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      That’s really unfortunate. What next? Tax breaks on their property?

    • Blork 13:20 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      It should be noted that nobody calls the Longueuil Metro station “Longueuil-Université-de-Sherbrooke.” Well, nobody except the disembodied electronic voices on the Metro. I suspect the same will happen with Square Victoria, although I hereby declare that as of today I will refer to it as “Wacky Vic.”

    • yossarian 15:38 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      The renaming of Square Victoria to Square Victoria-OACI is aligned with the subtle long-term plan to reduce the number and status of English heritage landmarks all through Quebec. Example, Valleyfield region is now on maps as Salaberry-Beauharnois.

  • Kate 09:43 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    I’m a bit confused by this piece about the conversion of a St-Jacques Street bank building to condos because the pillared building shown, and described in the text, is not the old Royal Bank building as the writer seems to think. I think it used to be a Bank of Commerce branch but – as he says – was boarded up for a long time.

    The Royal Bank headquarters is close by, but only ceased being an operating bank branch recently, and doesn’t have pillars like that.

     
    • Blork 09:56 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      That’s 221 rue Saint-Jacques (between Saint-Francois-Xavier and St-Jean, on the north side). It was a Royal Bank, although not the HQ.

    • Kate 09:57 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Are you sure? The main Royal Bank branch was at 360 St-Jacques, at the corner of St-Pierre – barely a stone’s throw away. Why did they need another branch so close by?

    • Blork 10:00 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      It seems to say so on the sign in the window: http://goo.gl/maps/myGyK

    • Ephraim 10:13 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

    • Kate 10:15 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I’m looking it up in the Lovell directories. Picking the 1970 issue at random: there’s a Royal Bank at 360 St-Jacques and another at 997 St-Jacques at the corner of de la Cathédrale – the building that became Time Supper Club, if I’m not mistaken. Nothing listed at 221:

      PDF page from Lovell.

      It was the banking district. There was a Toronto-Dominion at 240 St-Jacques, a City & District at 262, a Banque Canadienne-Nationale at 500 Place d’Armes, the big Bank of Montreal on the same square.

      Kristian G. says in this article that 221 was the Provincial Bank of Canada. And yes, Lovell says 221 was the headquarters of the Banque Provinciale:

      http://bibnum2.banq.qc.ca/bna/lovell/src/1970-1971/8.Section_commerciale/B/110780_1970-1971_0942.pdf

      I rest my case.

      …OK. Maybe originally it was the Royal Bank, before they built the high building at 360 – but that was constructed in 1928! Alexis Hamel’s page on the 221 building. But 221 hadn’t been a Royal Bank for decades before it was boarded up.

    • Blork 10:29 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Well it seems you’re right. Most likely the Royal Bank reference is either a flat-out mistake or some convoluted thing that results in a mistake. As in, maybe the RB bought the building, or bought the Provincial Bank of Canada, and although it was never an official RB branch, they were the actual owners so some arse who was putting the history together for the sales brochures went with the more recognized name, or just didn’t realize that it never manifested as a RB branch. Bad research whatever the case.

    • Kate 11:08 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Well, it does seem the building was put up originally for the Royal Bank in 1907 and it was used by them till 360 St-Jacques was built in 1928. But it was a different bank for a long time before it was boarded up, which it has been for a couple of decades; I worked nearby awhile in the mid-1990s and it was boarded then.

    • Blork 11:09 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      It would be interesting to do a forensic history of a mistake. According to Wikipedia, RB’s head office in Montreal from 1907 to 1928 was in the “Four Pillars Building” at 147 rue Saint-Jacques. That building no longer exists, but it was close to 221 Saint-Jacques. The La Presse article (and a handful of other articles and promo materials about the “Condo Bank” development) all mention the four pillars at 221 St-Jacques as being somehow emblematic of the Royal Bank headquarters.

      We can see what’s going on here. Someone mixed up the long-gone 147 rue Saint-Jacques with the extant 221 rue Saint-Jacques. Whether this was deliberate or out of ignorance is unknown, but we are now awash in mistaken information about the history of the building.

      I have to admit this drives me crazy. Not just that the mistake is forever embedded into the Internet, but that the developers have merged it into their promotional materials.

    • Kate 12:01 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I wonder whether some of the buildings could have had their addresses renumbered.

    • Taylor 12:34 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I was reading an interview with Melvin Charney from an old issue of Canadian Art. He proposed back in the mid-1970s that the city use ‘the power of computer technology’ to put together a catalogue of every single building in the city, along with all pertinent information (including design, style, original function, building materials, what occupied the location previously, list of tenants through the years, architect, construction firm etc etc – effectively, a catalogue of every single building’s architectural DNA throughout the whole of the city.

      While having such a catalogue would certainly make it easier to solve issues such as the one we’re debating here, more importantly, it could allow the city to plan far more effectively and get greater value from the built environment. Further, making the info public could dramatically change the nature of real estate here as we know it.

      Neat idea, and with the right program it probably wouldn’t be as expensive as all that.

    • Kate 00:11 on 2014/04/23 Permalink

      The basis of such a list already exists. The city has tax rolls and the insurance companies have mass quantities of data on various buildings. If you get tenants’ insurance they don’t need to come look at your place – it’s in a database, they know when the place was built and what kind of structure it is already.

  • Kate 09:38 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    A GQ article on Montreal restaurants takes a strange line that until Pied de Cochon, we all got dressed up and went out to eat in places with tuxedoed waiters and strolling violinists. The writer’s ideal seems to be for diners to get down in a trough with their bare hands.

     
    • Blork 10:06 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      The writer, Alan Richman, is 70 years old, I suspect he probably came to know Montreal in the 1970s, when “dining” meant either fine dining in the kind of place he describes, or casse-croutes and diners, with not much in between. Perhaps he hasn’t been back since. He definitely seems to have a certain “type” of diner in mind.

    • carswell 10:32 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      That article is seriously flawed. Not only is the author wrong about the advent of casual dining (it’s been common, though maybe not at the Beaver Club and Ritz, since at least the mid-1980s), stereotyping and inaccurate lines like “When I lived in Montreal in the 1970s, during the separatist movement, concerned young people would gather in bars and pubs to sing protest songs demanding freedom from Canada” (emphasis mine) just make you want to slap your forehead. Or maybe I just didn’t hang out at the right boîtes à chansons?

      “Many of the dishes, surprisingly, are vegetarian — remember, the founding restaurant of this group is called Joe Beef, not Joe Broccoli” is not only cringe-worthy, it’s doubly misleading: (1) while several dishes are vegetable-centric, quite a few are definitely not vegetarian (the rotisserie cauliflower is garnished with fried chicken skin, for example); and (2) Joe Beef was chosen as the resto’s namesake mainly for the historical connotations, not because the cuisine is cattle-centric.

      And, hey, portions at Vin Papillon are not humongous. Most of the plates are designed to be shared by two diners, a fact you’d think a resto reviewer should know.

      Richman used to be someone worth paying attention to. This has me thinking otherwise.

    • No\Deli 10:38 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      In fairness, “rotisserie cauliflower garnished with fried chicken skin” is exactly an elderly carnivore’s idea of a hearty vegetarian meal.

    • carswell 10:38 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      Oh, and that title (which may not be Richman’s): Montreal’s Best New Restaurants. Not to knock Vin Papillon, which I love, or Maison publique, which I like, but that’s it?!

    • Jack 10:43 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I know this is a roast but Bourdain takes Richman down well.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtpPpRZkNTE

  • Kate 09:33 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    The orange line was down at rush hour Tuesday morning but was restored after 9:00.

     
  • Kate 09:29 on 2014/04/22 Permalink | Reply  

    A woman was found seriously injured in a desolate part of Hochelaga-Maisonneuve early Tuesday. TVA (video plays) says delicately that she was known in the area and CBC that she was known to police.

     
    • Alison Cummins 10:45 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      I will always remember the terrified look on the face of a young hooker I passed working on Ste-Catherine near St-Laurent thirty years ago.

    • Kate 11:11 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      What I was wondering was whether Hochelaga-Maisonneuve’s proposed policy to push prostitutes off commercial-residential streets into stark industrial areas ever went through and might be one of the reasons for this incident. It was floated by borough mayor Réal Ménard in 2012. Ménard was re-elected in 2013.

    • NDG07 15:30 on 2014/04/22 Permalink

      If they tried to push them off residential streets, it wasn’t working as of a month or two ago on Préfontaine just one block east of this. On a Saturday morning in March, going to Aréna Francis Bouillon, I opened my car window because I thought a woman looked like she wanted to ask a question, and she seemed surprised to see I had my kids in the car as it seemed she was going to ask if I wanted a date. I was surprised to be solicited in the city in the daytime.

  • Kate 22:06 on 2014/04/21 Permalink | Reply  

    The collapse of a wall of the building that once housed the Negro Community Centre, although it’s been boarded up for decades, is making a successor organization ponder what to do next – can the building be saved, or is it possible for the community to raise enough money for a new facility?

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel