Updates from June, 2017 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 08:12 on 2017/06/26 Permalink | Reply  

    A big office building project is planned for Mile Ex and involves the demolition of a building on Waverly that served as headquarters for the Quebec Liberal party for a time. Before that it had been head office of a hardware chain, but I can’t remember which one. Anyway, even Dinu Bumbaru says the thing has no architectural or heritage value.

    On Twitter, Sasha Dyck points out that this was one of the last remaining sites that could’ve been developed for social housing by the borough (ViSaMiPex in this case) but wasn’t, and now it’s sold off into private hands.

     
    • Jack 09:25 on 2017/06/26 Permalink

      Any reader expertise on the subject of traffic and parking in this area. I’ve seen an enourmous amount of development in an area served by a two lane street ( Gary Carter ) and (Jean Talon) and wondered about the car infrastructure.

    • SMD 09:55 on 2017/06/26 Permalink

      Already in 2013 a traffic analysis gave grades of C, D, E and F to many of the Jean-Talon intersections between Park and St-Laurent, and predicted a worsening of the overall grades with the hundreds of new condo units that were proposed at the time (and have since been built). Zero planning in that sector, just bylaw and zoning dispensations left and right.

    • Dhomas 09:58 on 2017/06/26 Permalink

      If anyone is curious, that site used to be a “Brico Centre”, back in the 80s and maybe early 90s. As far as I know, it’s sat unused since Reno-Depot bought the company and shut down that location. There’s a stub about it on their history page: https://www.renodepot.com/en/reno-depot-history

    • DavidH 10:39 on 2017/06/26 Permalink

      I’m guessing everyone assumes the UdM’s plan at 1000 Beaumont and around will lead to the streets being opened up on the western side of the neighbourhood and easing flow. Problem is, everything else is being built now and those new passages need to go under or over the CP’s track. Those will take a long time to be built.

    • ant6n 10:58 on 2017/06/26 Permalink

      Re traffic, there’s the blue line in the area, which is always awkward.

      There’s also Gare Parc, which doesn’t have a direct connection downtown. This of course brings me back to warning about privatizing the Mount Royal tunnel — there’d been plans for a long time to connect the St-Jerome line serving Gare Parc directly to Gare Centrale. The rail lines in the area have a lot of space, and there isn’t that much freight — it would be technically possible to have a dedicated surface connection going downtown via the tunnel.

    • SMD 11:21 on 2017/06/26 Permalink

      1000 Beaumont is just a pedestrian-bike walkway (supposed to be finalized by the construction holiday, according to this video). It won’t open up any streets nor ease flow, unfortunately. Even the very hypothetical extension of de l’Épée street south across the tracks would only be for walkers and bikers.

      One easy step that would help encourage non-car transit to the area would be to link De Castelnau and Ogilvy streets, as proposed by everybody but blocked by the CP and dithered on by the city for years.

  • Kate 08:08 on 2017/06/26 Permalink | Reply  

    Terms of the deal struck between the police brotherhood and the city are still under wraps and will be revealed to its members only after the summer holidays.

     
  • Kate 08:06 on 2017/06/26 Permalink | Reply  

    The safe injection sites that opened last week say the experiment is a success so far.

     
  • Kate 01:02 on 2017/06/26 Permalink | Reply  

    Next few days will be très achalandé for your blogger, so apologies in advance if things get a little slow here or if I mess up a link from the phone. All will be well eventually.

     
  • Kate 00:56 on 2017/06/26 Permalink | Reply  

    This isn’t the first time, and won’t be the last, that Quebec has set aside millions to preserve religious buildings 🎥. Christ Church Cathedral’s bell tower will be fixed up, plus a long list of other items in churches around town.

     
    • jeather 14:42 on 2017/06/26 Permalink

      All I want is for these buildings, when sold, to have to repay the government for the repairs they are unwilling to pay for. Fine, you don’t need to pay property tax; fine, you make the taxpayers pay for upkeep too. But when you finally do want to make a profit, you owe us.

    • ant6n 00:36 on 2017/06/27 Permalink

      It seems that public should get equity in return for the money they spend on these buildings.

    • Kate 01:20 on 2017/06/27 Permalink

      And not just the heritage money that’s been spent in recent years, but something to offset the huge cut in taxes the buildings have always had. I find it deeply unjust that the church in various forms can simply sell off huge convents and churches as if they’re ordinary real estate. They’ve all been propped up by tax benefits for years, including from nonbelievers and members of other religions.

      This isn’t in conflict with my resistance to the city’s recent move to tax churches. I’m not saying tax churches, I’m saying regard church buildings as a repository of common wealth, not as private property.

    • Dhomas 07:15 on 2017/06/27 Permalink

      @Kate: I would add community contribution to your list. Churches have received most of their funding from the community of believers putting money in the collection plate, paying to get married at the church, as well as contributions for all the other sacraments. The church buildings should belong to the community just as much if not more than to the Church itself. It always pisses me off to see a community group turfed from a church building when it gets sold (or for any other reason).

    • Chris 07:52 on 2017/06/27 Permalink

      Dhomas, those examples seem weaker, since they are all voluntary. No one is forced to put money in a collection plate, get married, or take sacraments. If theists choose to give their money to their church, that’s their business.

    • Kate 08:54 on 2017/06/27 Permalink

      Chris, that’s easy to say now, but until about 1963 the overwhelming majority of Quebec residents were Catholic and participating in Catholic efforts was seen as civically important. We can’t just brush this off as ha-ha silly sky god. It’s almost impossible to overstate the Catholic church’s role in Quebec not so long ago – education, health care and social services were almost completely under its control until the 1960s, with only a few Protestant and Jewish institutions in Montreal standing apart.

    • Ian 09:39 on 2017/06/27 Permalink

      Also let’s not forget that if you didn’t tithe and send your kids to Catholic school you would get severely reprimanded by your priest. It was not optional when my Dad was a kid, that’s for sure.

  • Kate 00:39 on 2017/06/26 Permalink | Reply  

    Police have released a brief video of the car they think was involved in a hit-and-run early Saturday that badly injured a man on the Main. Given the distance and quality of the video, it’s a reach.

     
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