There’s already a preview of weekend traffic snarls.
Updates from February, 2019 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
-
Kate
-
Kate
An agreement has been arrived at between the STM and its maintenance union.
-
Kate
A man died from gunshot wounds Wednesday night in a Verdun flat. Whether it was a firearms accident or homicide is under investigation.
-
Kate
Before Outremont passed a ban on new “places of worship” on Bernard in 2016, it had given the green light to a building renovation that included a small synagogue, and recently confirmed the project could proceed. News items said the borough mostly wanted to avoid a costly court case. Now some residents want to fight this decision anyway.
This morning on CBC radio they had a spokesman for the religious community explaining that, in their interpretation of religious law, they have to walk to synagogue on the Sabbath, so they need to live fairly close by to allow the less mobile to attend. This was followed by one of the folks resisting the project, who invoked the holiest of sacred cows: parking. That his point had been previously invalidated was clever work by some news editor, but it made me wonder why there’s no complaint about people parking to go to the grocery stores, the bank, the veterinarian or any of the other establishments along there – just the synagogue. Which people walk to.
Chris
I presume you’re implying bigotry, which may well be the case!, but it could also be as simple as the fact that they make themselves so visually distinct. If everyone doing their groceries wore neon green, people might easily focus in to how much parking they use.
Ian
While I see your point, I live just down the street from a fairly large synagogue (Congregation Belz) on Jeanne-Mance and there are always lots of people there all through the week for various reasons. Jews don’t just go to the synagogue on Sabbath, especially ultraconservative ones like the Hassidim. Many times of the year people come gather in my neighbourhood from as far away as NY and Ontario, sometimes further, and while they may be walking to synagogue on the Sabbath all their vehicles are still parked in the street, or in the alley behind the synagogue. It’s crowded enough that at least one local merchant put up a sign behind their Parc-facing business “not synagogue parking” . I quite often can’t find parking on my block because there are so many out-of-town plates taking up spots and given their preponderance for black SUVs I’m pretty sure I know who is behind it. The vehicles get ticketed almost every day but they don’t seem to really care – I guess it’s cheaper & more convenient to pay a parking fine than paying for garage parking and having to walk from who knows where.
I mean yeah it sounds petty, but it’s frustrating to pay for a parking permit and still not be able to park on your block. While the synagogue will be on Bernard all the parking will be on nearby residential streets.
Kate
Then it strikes me Outremont has its response: yes, you can have your synagogue, but it must also include sufficient parking.
Ephraim
Most of the parking that @Ian is talking about is likely the cars of visitors who are staying with nearby family, not specifically driving to synagogue.
And even if they were driving to synagogue, it’s twice a day for maybe 30 to 45 minutes, once in the morning (morning prayers) and once before dusk (afternoon and evening prayers… one before dusk, the other, after.) But talking to the rabbi would likely help if this was a parking and synagogue problem, Of course, no cars on Friday/Saturday… so where they are parked, they stay.
They are correct, there is a limitation on walking on the sabbath, though, within the eruv it isn’t as limited. The definition of “work” on the sabbath is much more restrictive than the western definition…. it really is intended to make you rest and recuperate.
Ian
I’ve been shabbos goy for my neighbours lots of times. People that won’t even ring a doorbell or flip a light switch certainly won’t be driving their car.
While you’re right that most people are visiting family for specific holidays and whatnot there is still lots of parking around the synagogues going on. Trust me, I live in the neighbourhood, and I see it with my own eyes on a daily basis.Joey
The presence of a synagogue on Bernard will have no impact on the absolute number of cars in the neighbourhood, since the worshippers and their out-of-town family members are already in the neighbourhood. It might mean a small shift of some cars from farther away (e.g., Jeanne-Mance) occasionally, but that’s basically negligible. The synagogue won’t be attracting new people, it will simply serve the community that is already parking up and down Ian’s block.
Ian
You might think that but the Hassidic community is split up by synagogue, the folks on my street mostly go to the synagogue on my block. Outremont Hassidim go to their own places. There are a number of larger Hassidic communities throughout Montreal, they’re not homogeneous by any stretch. Even how much money they make is a factor, my neighbourhood is of course much less well-off than some of the Outremont community.
Joey
@Ian but that doesn’t contradict the notion that the synagogue will not induce demand for parking… that demand is already there, no?
Ian
A new synagogue also means more people can move near it. It’s one of the necessaries of neighbourhood expansion for people that can only walk to synagogue on the Sabbath.
I’m not anti-Hassidic or anything, I get along great with my neighbours and am happy to live in my neighbourhood. I totally get the parking thing though, and it’s not just a made-up excuse.
Kate
OK, fair enough.
-
Kate
A petition is circulating asking for no new construction projects in Chinatown, which is already tiny and could be changed forever by one or two big condo buildings.
Jack
I live in chinatown and I completely understand this petition.The condo tower going up on Viger and St. Laurent will change the surroundings and skyscape forever. What I would like to do is thank this blog contributors for schooling me, because correct me if I am wrong. If a developer buys land that was originally a movie theatre and decides to build a tower 10 stories higher than everything in its vicinity, in an historic part of Montreal, their is nothing that can be done… except sign a petition. Any veterans of Milton Park still alive, because that seems the only time a neighbourhood erasure was stopped, how did you do it?
Tee Owe
I wrote here about how my eviction notice was thrown out of court – I was just a student renter not exactly a local, I did some street action but I was on the fringes, busy with my degree – looking back on it I would guess that Concordia Estates (the bad guys) weren’t prepared for the coordinated opposition and they basically folded – I would guess they wouldn’t fold so easily today. But for sure, contesting the eviction notices was coordinated, and the courts were on the tenant’s side. Maybe someone else can add more informed response.
DeWolf
I think it’s a bit late for a petition given that the Serenity hotel/apartment project is already approved and well under construction. I doubt there are any legal means to stop work at this point. And of course, that would leave Chinatown with a hole in the ground for many years to come.
It’s a different story for the proposed project on the other side of St-Laurent, where the Robillard building burned down. It hasn’t been approved yet so I assume a moratorium could prevent it from being built, but that would probably trigger a lawsuit from the developer.
What Chinatown need is a master plan that can help guide growth and development. There are so many vacant lots and empty properties, if there’s no firm guidance, it will eventually be gentrified out of existence.
One thing that always mystifies me is how people could get up in arms about a “massive” 13-storey building when Chinatown is already surrounded by skyscrapers on all sides. It’s not the Plateau. The issue shouldn’t be high-rises, it should be what’s in the high-rises. Surely it would be a good thing if there was a 20-storey tower with social housing and apartments for Chinese old folks, right? Focusing on the height would get us into a situation like San Francisco where the cityscape is seen as being so precious, hardly anything gets built and the city is wickedly unaffordable.
Another thing: I wonder how most Chinatown residents and merchants feel about May Chiu’s group speaking on their behalf. If there’s anything I learned from my brief exposure to Chinatown politics a few years ago, it’s a very fragmented place and a lot of people would be very sceptical of a self-appointed group of “Chinois progressiste.”
-
Kate
The city has spent more than $20 million treating 50,000 trees to save them from the emerald ash borer, and it plans to go on making this effort. I hope the treatment is usually more effective than it was on the tree directly outside my place, which recovered for one season then withered away last year and was taken down.
-
Kate
A woman was hit by a chunk of ice from a construction site that smashed the sunroof of her car. She’s thinking of suing.
Ephraim
The car is covered by her car insurance. She is covered by the SAAQ. She would need to sue them and they sue the construction company’s insurance company. I bet the construction company’s insurance company is more eager to settle this than even her car insurance company.
mare
@Ephraim She might sue for psychological damages (or shock as they call it these days). It probably made quite a racket and she might have thought for a moment it was a big piece of concrete and she was going to die. I’m sure some ambulance chaser lawyer (do we have those here? Julius Grey?) would see a case. And often for companies it’s cheaper to pay a few grand and to settle than pay for legal counsel.
Ephraim
@Mare This is Canada, she’s going to need to prove actual damages. She better start seeing a psychologist immediately. In Canada, we pay actual damages. She’s going to need bills.
-
Kate
The airport has laid off 100 workers who would not accept a reduction in wages asked of them by their employer. They will be replaced by contractors.
As I understand employment law: if your employer lays you off, it’s usually because there isn’t enough work, either temporarily or permanently. If the employer immediately turns around and employs someone else to do your work, doesn’t that invalidate the stated reason for your layoff?
Vazken
Can they sue for this? I’m rusty on my labour laws.
Kate
Presumably at least some, if not most, of those workers will apply for EI. It’s in the federal government’s interest not to allow people to get EI because some hot shot management guy plans to save a few bucks by getting rid of regular jobs and turning them into junk jobs.
Who profits from the airport, anyway? A quo bono?
Spi
Aren’t these unionized workers that had agreed to this clause in their last collective bargaining agreement?
Reply