Recent Updates Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 17:54 on 2015/04/25 Permalink | Reply  

    Guillaume St-Jean takes note of an earlier vanishing hospital, the Children’s Memorial, which was on Cedar across from where the General is now. Then-and-now shots: A, B, C and an aerial view from ant6n’s site.

     
  • Kate 17:23 on 2015/04/25 Permalink | Reply  

    Owners of some buildings in Côte-des-Neiges–Notre-Dame-de-Grâce are being fined for having graffiti, which some think is unfair.

     
    • Ephraim 19:46 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      That’s tagging, not graffiti. No artistic merit… except of course fining the victim is definitely the way to go…

    • steph 20:20 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      When taggers are caught, they get fined? Are fines cumulative of all instances of that ‘tag’ they can attach the tagger to? Are merchants getting refunded or is the city just double dipping?

  • Kate 11:13 on 2015/04/25 Permalink | Reply  

    CBC has a list of what’s moving where at the MUHC starting with Sunday’s mass displacement of the Royal Vic. Ingrid Peritz writes about the move in the Globe and Mail; Radio-Canada shows the route that will be taken by the Vic’s ambulances; CTV even has a quiz about the old Vic by regular commenter Kevin. CTV has a whole dossier page. The historical photos popup with the statue of Queen Victoria leads to a good selection from the McGill archives showing wards and operating rooms as they looked in earlier years, and some of the people involved.

     
  • Kate 11:04 on 2015/04/25 Permalink | Reply  

    Eight new food trucks have been given the nod for this summer, making up a total of 35 trucks plying six boroughs of the city.

     
  • Kate 10:57 on 2015/04/25 Permalink | Reply  

    Mayor Coderre is to officiate at a small number of weddings at city hall this summer. Item explains how to apply.

     
  • Kate 01:01 on 2015/04/25 Permalink | Reply  

    The burnt-out Greek church in Park Ex is to be partly demolished after the city declared the structure unsafe. I imagine by now the congregation has retrieved anything of value that could’ve survived that inferno.

     
  • Kate 00:58 on 2015/04/25 Permalink | Reply  

    The Agence métropolitaine de transport, the AMT, is to be split into two separate agencies and a reorganization of transit authority will take place in the whole agglom. Vague promises are floated about streamlining administrations and simplifying things for those who have to juggle several fare types to get around. We’ll see.

     
    • faiz Imam 01:27 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Official announcement is apparently Monday.

      They mentioned fare integration, which might be huge on its own.

      As a resident of Brossard, it sucks to invite islanders over, I have to make them buy new special tickets. Many ways to have a better system, I hope we move forward in some fashion.

    • Chris 10:50 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      *two* separate agencies?!?! And the existing STM, etc.? WTF?

    • Kate 10:54 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      We’ll see what the official announcement says, but so far the STM is not involved in this. It sounds like it’s mostly about separating train operations from suburban bus services, but there could be more to it.

    • Chris 11:03 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      In other words more layers of crap, and increased complexity interoperating between agencies.

    • Doobious 12:09 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Seriously. How do they get away with doing a reorg with absolutely zero public input?

    • carswell 14:50 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Only in Quebec is replacing one arguably unnecessary agency with two considered streamlining. How about a unified transit agency for the greater Montreal area, one that is open to truly integrating the various bus, subway and train (including the airport train) systems? The need is achingly obvious to everyone who doesn’t have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Impossible not to conclude that the latter group, alas, includes our blinkered, so-called transport minister.

    • John B 14:57 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Splitting one agency into two doesn’t seem like streamlining to me…

      BUT Integrating everything, which should make sense, doesn’t always work well. Vancouver does it, and BC is having, (or just had?), a referendum on disbanding the whole thing because it’s so badly run. Toronto has the TTC, plus whoever runs the GO trains, and the airport train may or may not be separate.

      On the other hand, various branches of the MTA run transit in most of New York City and its suburbs. MTA-run trains go much farther north than we would expect – even out of New York State in to Connecticut, and from my limited experience on the system it works wonderfully.

    • Jerry 15:45 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Came to say exactly what John B pointed out about NY. In addition the cohesiveness of the MTA allows for an easier transition to live nowhere near the city center and still contribute to the health and wealth of the city that supports it’s surrounding. More can be said but you know how it is with these All- Stars that run the Province, let alone the city.

  • Kate 08:48 on 2015/04/24 Permalink | Reply  

    Various demonstrations are planned for May Day – Metro has a map.

    Ninety people were ticketed for demonstrating on Thursday after being kettled by police. Ironically, they were protesting political and police repression.

     
    • Mathieu 09:06 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Once again, there were people “arrested” there that had nothing to do with the protest, but were only trapped by the police blocking the way and giving tickets. You can’t just block one of the busiest corner of the city and ticket everyone that was there at the moment!

    • C_Erb 10:43 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      It happens though. I was once kettled at the corner of Ste-Catherine and Bleury and I was helping a lady who got caught in the kettle but didn’t even know there was a demonstration going on (at that point, it was over but they kettled us anyway as we were trying to leave). She pleaded with the police but they just stonewalled her. She was held in the kettle with the rest of us for about an hour and a half and then kept in the basement of the courthouse for at least another hour and a half. She just wanted to buy some shoes.

    • Dave M 11:51 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      So did she get the shoes?

    • Kate 11:51 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Is it just that they don’t give a shit, or is the eventual intent to make sure people stay far away from demonstrations out of fear of getting caught up in them?

    • Ian 12:40 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      If you’re not doing anything wrong (or buying shoes or out for a walk downtown or being in public in general) you have nothing to fear!

    • Noah 13:16 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Of course there are one-off stories of innocent people being caught up in police operations (not that I take most of the unsubstantiated ones seriously), and it’s not that it’s ok, but how else are police supposed to deal with endless riots? Should they just politely ask people to stop smashing windows? Or maybe just let them run wild? Is that the better solution?

      I don’t think there’s a good solution either way, honestly. This is one of the wrinkles of democracy. It’s a problem that will never be solved one way or another, but painting all protesters or all cops as bad guys is wrong either way.

    • Ian 14:24 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Ninety people were ticketed for demonstrating. There was no riot. No windows were smashed.

    • John B 14:26 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Once everyone’s in the kettle police have very little way of knowing who was there to protest and who was there to buy shoes, and if they believed everyone saying they’re only out shopping they would suddenly end up with a bunch of shoppers and no protesters. Unfortunately people who are actually out shopping do end up in kettles sometimes, and I’m not sure what the solution is. Stopping using kettles is an option, but they seem quite effective in holding and ticketing actual protesters, (that assumes that protesters deserve tickets – which may or may not be true), unfortunately they’re too effective.

      The right answer might be to let innocent people contest the ticket in court – that’s what the courts are for after all. If that’s what’s going to happen, though, people should be ticketed & processed out of the kettle quickly, otherwise innocent people are being held without cause. We should also reduce the amount of time it takes to actually get a hearing to contest the ticket.

    • ant6n 16:46 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Attitudes are strange: free speech is oppressed “effectively”. Then freedom of movement is curtailed because that repressing free speech is maybe “too effective” — so people should just fight back for those rights in court that are willy-nilly being taken away. It’s pretty upside down backwards thinking about what it means to have rights.

    • steph 18:07 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      I believe all those tickets will be thrown out eventually, but in the mean time it’s a headache for those that are getting them and a deterrent to those considering protesting. This is an unjust imbalance and an abuse of the the court legal system.

  • Kate 08:40 on 2015/04/24 Permalink | Reply  

    It’s pure comedy: Robert Poëti says that transparency will only apply to half the bills from the Turcot project, the other half to remain shrouded in political secrecy.

     
    • Noah 08:42 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      This. This is the reason I stopped believing in the Quebec Liberal Party a few years ago. I can’t support a party like this.

    • steph 08:54 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      I’m not reading it as “we can’t tell you what the rest of the money is going to”, but “that money is there for unforeseen expenses”. Regardless, 100% markup for unforeseen expenses is ridiculous. What kind of mickey mouse engineers did they hire?

    • mare 09:09 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Exactly what the Canadian dollar bills are designed for, half-transparency. Well, more like 30% actually, but 50% is a good effort.

    • Ephraim 10:14 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      How ironic… it’s like a Pirate with an eye patch… you can only see out of 50% of your eyes.

    • Chris 09:25 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Noah: agreed. But the CAQ would be no different.

    • Noah 14:44 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      @Chris: 1) my comment has nothing to do with the CAQ; 2) proactively condemning the CAQ or any other party is lazy. Until someone else gets a chance, saying “everyone is the same” is just weak.

    • Alison Cummins 17:41 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Steph, no, they do know what most of the money is for but they won’t tell us.

      There’s a package called «enveloppe de gestion des risques» (any PMs here who can explain what that is?) that has to remain secret so that the ministry knows we are paying the right amount if any of the risks materialize. It’s buried in the $1.5B. If they tell us what the rest of the $1.5B is for then we’ll be able to figure out how much the «enveloppe de gestion des risques» is. So the whole thing is going to be opaque.

      What it seems to be is that if everyone knows that we’ve budgeted $X in case X happens, then 1) someone might discover an interest in X happening and 2) gosh, X is going to cost exactly $X.

    • Chris 17:55 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Noah, I didn’t say “everyone is the same”, I only mentioned the CAQ.

  • Kate 08:06 on 2015/04/24 Permalink | Reply  

    The city will be taking down 3,300 ash trees and helping residents treat or remove infected trees on private property in a push to stop the emerald ash borer from doing further damage here.

     
  • Kate 08:03 on 2015/04/24 Permalink | Reply  

    The Université de Montréal has found a buyer for the hot potato convent building at 1420 Mont‑Royal, but is being coy about their identity for the moment. The Radio-Canada photo shows the sheer scale of the building, and the piece restates the wish held by some that it should maintain an institutional purpose and not become condos – but what are the odds?

     
    • Patrick 09:17 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Quoting from the Metro article :

      “Ainsi, l’administration de l’UdeM devait trouver un acheteur et débuter les travaux avant l’automne 2015 pour conserver la vocation résidentielle qui lui avait été attribuée par le conseil municipal de Montréal, il y a cinq ans.”

    • Kate 11:49 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Yes, but quoting from Radio-Canada (and I’m not saying it isn’t contradictory):

      “L’édifice devra respecter le zonage résidentiel du secteur où il se trouve. Plusieurs groupes espéraient que l’immeuble, qui a pignon sur rue au 1420, avenue du Mont-Royal, conserve sa vocation institutionnelle plutôt que de passer aux mains de promoteurs immobiliers privés.”

  • Kate 22:35 on 2015/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    A new bus line, the 77, will link Lionel-Groulx metro station, which has an elevator, with the new Glen hospital. It’s described as temporary until an entire new accessible entrance is built to Vendôme metro, so it may be in service for years. The new route starts on May 11.

     
    • faiz Imam 00:21 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      That’s not a bad idea. Cool.

    • Tux 08:13 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      The airport bus is the 747, the hospital bus shoulda been the 911

    • Dave M 08:47 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Is it too cynical for this site to assume this’ll be like the temporary reserved bus lanes on the Champlain Bridge?

      (And you would think that if this was at all planned, they could have started the route on Sunday. It’s not like the date of the move was a tightly held secret until recently.)

    • Robert J 09:49 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Meanwhile they can just make Vendome metro accessible, which will be much more cost effective in the long term.

    • Uatu 14:22 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      This is because it’s more about PR than access. I mentioned in the earlier post about the SHosp. that management seems to be making on the fly decisions. Here’s a prime example.

    • faiz Imam 16:34 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      @Robert:

      It`s much easier bureaucratically and operationally to spend a few $100,000 a year on a bus lane than the ~$70 million for the fully accessible entrance.

      It needs to happen, and its redicilous that it hasn`t happened already, but it doesn’t make this any less useful

  • Kate 22:32 on 2015/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    Guercy Edmond, the taxi driver involved in a 2012 incident in which his car rolled over a passenger who had been hostile with him, was acquitted of all charges Thursday. The incident was caught on video and was widely discussed at the time.

     
    • Blork 08:05 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Not that I want to open it up again, but it’s interesting that a black man who ran over a white man got acquitted and not much is said, but if Edmond had been white and the passenger black, the rhetoric would have been very different. (I say that to point out that sometimes — not always, but sometimes — a cigar is just a cigar, that things need to be taken at face value. As in, race likely had nothing to do with this case, and even if the races had been reversed, race would have had nothing to do with it.)

    • Kate 08:17 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      I’m trying to imagine a situation in which the cabbie was white and his passenger black, but it’s not coming into focus.

    • steph 09:00 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Are there any conspiracies linking Coderre & the Taxi industry to this story yet?

    • Blork 09:03 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Huh? I’ve been in a cab with white cabbies plenty of times.

    • Kate 11:53 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      steph: not that I’ve seen.

      Blork: yes, but how many instances of white cabbie/black customer does this city see per day compared to the reverse?

    • Blork 12:39 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Kate; true enough. But I refuse to see colour in this (as I would refuse to see colour if the races had been reversed). What I see is a guy being mobbed and just wanting to get the f&%k out of there. A complicating factor being that where he comes from, people are murdered in the streets on a not-infrequent basis. (That’s not a race thing either; the same would apply if he were from Syria, or Sarajevo circa 1990s, etc.)

      The lesson is if you harass someone personally, then turn a mob on them, they are going to do whatever it takes to flee, and this is particularly likely if the person comes from a place where mobs usually come to murder.

    • Kate 01:29 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      Note that I didn’t initially bring race into it. I don’t think it’s a story mostly about race, but I do think it may have crossed the minds of the white guys hassling the cabbie that they might get away with it more easily because police would take the black guy to be the troublemaker.

    • Blork 13:08 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      True again. (And I do note that you didn’t bring race into it. I was speaking in general.)

    • John B 14:59 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      It probably didn’t cross their minds consciously, but they may be conditioned to assume they might get away with it, (if you asked them they may not even realize they thought that way, even if they did).

  • Kate 22:28 on 2015/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    It’s been reported in various media this week, with Global leading the story, that a man whose son died of a drug overdose in a house in NDG a few weeks ago, and who wants Mayor Coderre to waive a parking ticket issued against the son’s car that night, is meeting firm resistance from the mayor. CJAD says the city may be relenting but gives no details.

     
    • John B 14:30 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Does Coderre even have the authority to intervene? I’m not sure letting the mayor randomly do the court’s work when he feels like it is a good idea.

    • Kate 01:29 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      That’s what Coderre said. I’m sure the mayor can make a phone call to get a ticket to disappear, but it’s clearly not a precedent he wants to set.

    • Alison Cummins 07:25 on 2015/04/25 Permalink

      I had to deal with the library claiming overdue fines when my mother died. I said she was dead and some idiot wrote back and said we had to pay anyway. I wrote back very firmly stating that my mother had been a strong supporter of the library for many years and that I was certain they would find a way to do the right thing and waive the fine. Which they did.

      It’s possible city bureaucracy may be less amenable to a stern talking-to.

  • Kate 21:40 on 2015/04/23 Permalink | Reply  

    This is not a great day for freedom of expression here. Jennifer Pawluck, who snapped an Instagram of a graffito showing police spokesman Ian Lafrenière with a bullet in his head, has been convicted of criminal harassment. I don’t think there’s even any suggestion Pawluck created the piece she photographed.

    Also today, the town of Granby wants to be able to issue fines against anyone caught insulting the police or municipal employees online.

    I’ve quite often snapped photos of protest art. I don’t think I need to sanitize my Flickr and Instagram feeds yet, but I will think twice before posting images like that in future.

     
    • Ian 05:27 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Where are all the “Je suis Charlie” folks now? This is absurd. Charging someone with criminal harassment for posting a picture of somebody else’s artwork is beyond belief. Then again, this is the place where you can be up on charges without bail for assault with a weapon – for spraying silly string at a cop. Are the police and judiciary trying to a make a mockery of the entire judicial system? If so, they are doing a fantastic job.

    • Ephraim 06:53 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Where is freedom of expression? You can damn well insult anyone you want, unless it’s libel. The city is going to lose and I’ll make bets that Julius Grey will be the first lawyer to sue them.

    • Ant6n 07:46 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Between this, the no-bail silly-string, and the cab rolling over a person, one starts to wonder who the justice system is protecting, and it isn’t.

    • Bill Binns 11:48 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      As an enthusiastic amateur photographer, I was pretty taken aback by this as well. But if you read the article it seems that the deciding factor was her caption “One bullet, one cop” and carefully adding Lafrenière’s name (and even correcting the spelling more than once) that really got her in trouble. If the crime was simply posting the photo, a whole bunch of newspapers would also be in trouble.

    • Noah 13:17 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      I’ve been chewing on this for a day and listening to and reading comments. The issue here isn’t/shouldn’t be the re-posting of the picture. It’s the hashtag. The threat is the hashtag and I agree with the verdict with that in mind.

    • John B 14:33 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      I read the articles about the Instagram post as well, and the judge is quoted somewhere, (La Presse maybe? – something in French), as saying the problem was the “One bullet, one cop” and, to a lesser extent, the “ACAB” (All Cops Are Bastards), hashtags. If she had posted something like “Montreal Street Art” instead it looks like she would have been found innocent, if she was even charged.

    • Ian 15:20 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      The argument is obviously in whether she posted this image to instagram and captioned it as she did with any intent other than describing the image. ACAB was the artist’s handle. Lafreniere’s name was also included inn the piece. “One bullet, one cop” could also be taken as a description, “One ___, one bullet” is an old political slogan going back over 40 years. It’s a shaky argument at best. What’s more, instagram is a platform specifically meant to share images. If she were actually making a sincere death threat and not simply describing the image she was posting instagram would not be the place to do that… twitter, maybe. Or facebook. Or on the wall of a building. They are only going after this woman because they are embarrassed they couldn’t find the artist. There were a bunch of these up around town. Pawluck is being scapegoated and being made an example of, pure and simple.

    • yossarian 17:30 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      Freedom of expression is dead in this nation.

      Quite an assortment of thought crimes will get you sent to jail, and quite a lot of people in this ex-fair-and-free nation seem to think this is a very good idea. (not me though, I am of the opinion that (—-self-censored—-). See how that works? Freedom of expression dies a little bit every day. Until it is all gone.

    • steph 18:15 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      You’re all on a list now.

    • Joe Bin 19:30 on 2015/04/24 Permalink

      I agree with the cabbie running over the guy, tho.

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