Montreal City Weblog

Kate 07:59 on 2019-07-12 Permalink Reply  

• david100 12:06 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  Ban chain stores, prohibit combining smaller commercial units to form a larger one, implement an empty storefront charge.

• Ian 12:06 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  Ooh all the horses have escaped, best close those barn doors. PM had the power to ban new restaurants in Little Burgundy yet they are powerless to stop this? I call bullshit.

• Ian 12:08 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  Arahova and Saint V Bagel are chain stores. Careful what you wish for.

• david100 12:13 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  San Francisco’s policy is good: 11 stores or more and it’s triggered. Also protects homegrown chains because they establish themselves before they hit the number to trigger restrictions. And, of course, any existing chains are grandfathered in. Not all neighborhoods are included, so Ville Marie would be mostly excluded, but places like Mile End, the Plateau, Saint Henri/Little Burgundy, Old Montreal, Park Ex/Jarry/Villeray/whatever they’re calling it these days, Hochelaga maybe, etc – all these could be protected from chains, which would decrease demand for the commercial spaces and improve/preserve the neighborhood character. It works!

• david100 12:16 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  People forget, but Montreal used to be a real hive of entrepreneurism – shops were opening all the time. It’s only in the last decade or so that the city has become more like the Canadian cities, with low levels of entrepreneurism and high levels of chains. I think the reason is that it’s just too risky and expensive now. The city should clamp down on rising commercial rents to bring back that culture of small business.

• Ian 12:17 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  So the Pizza Pizza, Starbucks, Copper Branch, Renaud Bray, Lululemon, David’s Tea etc are all grandfathered in. Too little too late.

• DeWolf 12:44 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  If you prohibit businesses from combining multiple storefronts, you would be strangling successful independent businesses like Vices & Versa (three storefronts), Moustache Café (two storefronts) and Fruiterie Mile-End (two storefronts before it moved to its new location). Even Le Cagibi occupied two storefronts before it was forced out.

• david100 12:48 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  Fine, then make combining storefronts a conditional use that requires overcoming a presumption against. The issues are that larger spaces are more expensive, they mean fewer shops – which means less activation by variable hours, etc and less variety – and they decrease in-neighborhood competition, with inflationary effects.

• Ephraim 13:50 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  It’s called Formula Business Restriction and it’s an interesting idea. I’m not sure how the city could implement the idea, but it’s interesting. The city should implement a separate tax rate on unoccupied premises or a speculative tax as it’s called in some ares. The money could go to provide subsidized housing in the area. Or a requirement that a pop-up be allowed to use the premises at no cost if the space is unlease/closed for 60 days. There are a number of ways this could work, including a tax on commercial “For Rent” signs on unoccupied premises. For example, a property that is unoccupied or has a “for rent” sign listed is subject to a tax rate that is 5x the standard commercial property tax rate because it affects the character of the street.

• david100 14:05 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  Implementation isn’t too tough. San Francisco doesn’t bar formula retail outright, it makes all formula retail in the designated areas subject to conditional use approval, which is rarely (but not never) granted. For instance, a Jean Coutu type shop might be approved where a smaller one closed, etc. So, you’d create the new conditional use process for formula retail, then you’d cover whatever areas were appropriate. I’d say you should blanket pretty much all of the city, with the exclusion of Ville Marie or maybe some shopping centers where it wouldn’t be an efficient use of the city’s time to be considering request for Foot Locker or Apple in the Loews mall or whatever. But everywhere else? We should stop dead any more flattening of the culture, ere before long Montreal will be just as soulless as Toronto or an airport.

• Spi 14:07 on 2019-07-12 Permalink

  Sure it does mean fewer shop but probably means better shops and more importantly more variety of shops. How many bakeries does Mile-End really need? There are probably half a dozen maybe even close to 10 (Without counting bagels) if you include the chain one’s like Premiere Moisson and Au Pain Dorée and let’s keep in mind the 2-3 that have closed in the past years.

  Mile End really does feel like it’s heading up-market and businesses are catering as much to tourist and residents.

  There’s a mirrored effect on the residential side, on Esplanade (between Mont-Royal and Villeneuve) There’s a stretch of 3 triplexes that have been completely gutted and renovated from the foundation up, I doubt they’ll be airbnb’s (I don’t think sinking that much money into Airbnb’s make sense) and there are 2 more triplexes a few doors down that are also undergoing complete remodels and one on Jeanne-Mance along the same stretch that finished.

  I’ll give you one guess as to how outrageous the rent is.

  https://www.louer.com/apartments-for-rent-plateau-mont-royal-4631e/

  Wealthy residents will inevitably demand fancier and more compelling businesses. But if the current trend keeps up commercial streets in mile end are going to be a wall of restaurants and bars