Updates from December, 2019 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 22:55 on 2019-12-06 Permalink | Reply  

    A local man with a record of creating web content honouring the Polytechnique shooter (and of owning illegal weapons) was arrested again Thursday and will be charged with inciting hatred against women.

    • Kate 13:36 on 2019-12-06 Permalink | Reply  

      Housing prices continue to rise while the supply of properties falls. Links are to English and French versions of the same CP story.

      • david100 20:09 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

        So, it’s a 9% increase in multi-story, 11% increase in -plex. How do you get such a huge jump in a single year?

        L’Association professionnelle des courtiers immobiliers du Québec a aussi observé que l’offre de propriétés résidentielles s’est repliée pour un 50e mois consécutif.

        Oh, the supply coming to market is shrinking.

        And then this:

        The Association professionnelle des courtiers immobiliers du Québec (APCIQ) on Friday reported that 4,084 residential sales were completed in November, up 13 per cent compared to November 2018.

        So, as the supply coming to market is shrinking, the number of sales in increasing! Ie. people moving to the region are buying more but the market is smaller.

        So prices are going up! And with them gentrification and displacement.

        But, of course, listening to our Plateau government, building new housing is the source of higher prices, gentrification, and displacement.

      • Faiz imam 20:48 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

        both can be true. it’s not just “housing” there is a difference between high priced luxury condos and more affordable units.

        We are generally building more expensive new housing in the center, and often removing cheaper units to do it. that gets reflected in the numbers as well.

      • Kate 11:17 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

        david100, I see one big flaw in your fetish for bigger, higher, denser buildings, which is this: our population is not growing so fast, so what you’re saying to me, and people like me, is that we should be delighted to live in 300 sq.ft. (rather than, say, the 700-750 sq.ft. we now have), on the 23rd floor of some anonymous highrise with no view except other highrises, with no access to the exterior, for twice what we pay now – and for what? So some investor somewhere can profit. Not for our good, or the good of the community, or the benefit of the environment. For profit.

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

        The issue is always more complicated than just supply and demand, but I wish we would stop ignoring that the basis of the market is still vaguely supply and demand, regardless of other issues like Airbnb and foreign investors. Kate, new construction comes in many forms, and especially in Montreal, it rarely comes in the form of you living in 300 sq.ft on the 23rd floor. A lot of people *do* like that however, and the amenities those buildings provide, so I would prefer someone is building them. But I’m personally going to be looking for the low rise type. And that’s fine. Construction should not be opposed because you wouldn’t be delighted living in a condo. But some people really don’t mind exchanging square footage for amenities or location! If people are buying them, then clearly some part of the market is being satisfied, and if they weren’t being built, where would that market go? If you’ve been in one of these buildings it’s quite clear (despite the hand wringing) that a majority of the units are actually occupied and lived in.

        I don’t think david100 was trying to be anti regulation in his comment either. 300.sq.ft is definitely horribly small, probably the lowest limit I can imagine someone living in for a studio. I think there is a difference between imposing minimum unit sizes and social housing requirements vs being purely obstructionist because you can’t fathom people living in a condo. I fully support a regulated market. But if you attend public consultations, at least half of the comments always end up being a roundabout way of saying – “I know people need a place to live, but can’t it just be somewhere else!!!!!”

      • Kate 12:55 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

        Flip, if I wanted to live like that I would’ve gone to live in a bigger city long ago. I’m mostly still arguing with david100, who has in the past championed the ideal of razing neighbourhoods like Rosemont and Villeray in favour of a more Hong Kong style cityscape.

        It may come to that, of course. But not in my time.

      • Michael Black 13:05 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

        I thought that some concerned about the environment made the case for denser housing.

        Less travel, less heating compared to.isolated houses, I can’t remember what else. Probably less space for stuff so you won’t be as much of a consumer.

        Ihave no idea how valid it is, but I think it’s a school of thought. And then others can propagate it, withiut adding or subtracting from the theory.

      • Faiz Imam 15:08 on 2019-12-08 Permalink

        Kate, one correction. Montréal is actually growing quite a lot, unfortunately most of that growth is unsustainable suburban housing.

        Moves like protection for agricultural lands is one part of the solution, but increasing density in the urban areas is the other to stop that spread.

        And while I accept 30 storey condo towers are part of the solution in certain areas of the CBD, it’s clear that lower scale projects are best farther out. We should be able to agree on slight increases in density without fear mongering about turning every street into Manhattan.

      • Mark Côté 22:12 on 2019-12-08 Permalink

        I have a family member who is a professor of political science. Although he supports building more social housing, he pointed me at this interesting article on upzoning (allowing taller and denser buildings) and how it won’t fix housing prices alone: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/05/housing-supply-home-prices-economic-inequality-cities/588997/

        One quote:

        As [Economist Tyler Cowen] puts it, “the gains from removing taxes/restrictions on building largely will be captured by landowners … More stuff will be built, urban output will expand, land still will be the scarce factor, and by the end of the process rents still will be high.” And a recent study by Yonah Freemark found that upzoning in Chicago led to higher, not lower, housing prices, while having no discernible impact on local housing supply.

      • Faiz Imam 00:27 on 2019-12-09 Permalink

        There is up zoning, then there is up zoning.

        Taking an urban lot that fits a 4 floor walk-up or apartment block allowing a 20 floor condo tower is problematic, but an encouraging tactic that we are seeing more commonly especially in The USA is wholesale dezoning of single family suburban areas and allowing ALL those areas to build row houses, triplexes, small apartments as desired.

        It’s the sort of thing that can quickly turn a very low density area into something quite decent after a few years, and because it’s so low scale it tends not to bother folks (apart from immediate neighbours, as in the other story today)

        While straight up banning single family houses is not in the cards, allowing areas that have them to move away from that type of they want is very important.

    • Kate 13:33 on 2019-12-06 Permalink | Reply  

      A three-year-old somehow got out of a stroller and was hit by a car Friday morning in the Mile End. He’s in critical condition.

      • Ian 15:17 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

        It’s odd that they should show this building (that coincidentally I rented in for a couple of years) on the northwest corner, as north of Saint Joseph the west side of Hutchison is Outremont, not Mile end. South of Saint Joey both sides of the Hutch are Mile End, so presumably any corner EXCEPT the one shown would be where this kid got hit by a car.

      • Blork 15:27 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

        CBC reports the boy is now in “Serious” condition instead of critical. Weird how a kid can fall out of a stroller. CBC says it was one of those “jogging” strollers that parents put their kids in when they go for a run. You’d think that type would be even harder to fall out of. The CBC story says the circumstances are still unknown but hinted that the boy might have fallen out when the parent moved the stroller quickly to avoid the vehicle.

      • Kate 09:54 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

        Ian, I knew this was close to the border, but not quite how close.

      • Orr 10:03 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

        This new configuration’s stop signs are not very visible (and no “warning: new stop sign” signs at all!).
        Direction Est is much worse: the new stop sign is way off to the side, partly hidden by a tree branch, which is multiplied by cars coming downhill so sight line from above hides the new stop sign even more.
        Add to that the fact that this is a downhill street where cars routinely go 50-60 (30 km/h zone) and don’t see the new stop until the last second and then it’s like well fuck it and roll through the stop with only a bit of slowing down.
        New stop signs need to be more visible from farther way, and excessive speed of vehicles need to be controlled. I would suggest some of those rubber/plastic bollards with 30 km’h signs in middle of street. They “visually narrow” the street but do not slow down the emergency vehicles or impede traffic flow like stops signs or speed bumps.
        Also, they reconfigured the intersection but did not do any sidewalk extension bumps to make pedestrians more visible as they begin to cross the street. With cars parked right up to the corner, pedestrians are not visible to car rivers a they start to cross the street.
        TL;dr: new stop signs not visible, cars still go too fast on St-Joseph, pedestrian crossing not improved in any meaningful way for improved pedestrian safety.

      • Joey 10:08 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

        @Orr agreed 100%. Who installs a stop sign that’s partially I obscured by a tree? I would add that the lane reduction (they painted those yellow diagonal lines) has led to a bottleneck that probably subconsciously encourages drivers to aggressively drive when they see some space opening up. I’m not sure what would be better, but the recent solution doesn’t seem to be it.

      • Kate 12:52 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

        Ian, Orr, Joey, it’s odd how this makes me realize I have a mental map of Montreal, very clearly coloured in terms of things like “streets I know and where it’s comfortable and worthwhile to walk” and “streets which aren’t welcoming and where I tend not to walk unless I have to.”

        Nothing to do with danger from other pedestrians, it’s largely based on motor traffic. In this case, St-Joseph between Park and St-Laurent is OK (although a little dull – Laurier’s more interesting) but west of Park has always felt less so, largely because drivers do seem to pick up speed coming down from upper Outremont (beyond Côte Ste-Catherine), along there, maybe simply because it’s less “encumbered” by pedestrians than Laurier.

    • Kate 13:29 on 2019-12-06 Permalink | Reply  

      A Catholic order called the Frères du Sacré-Cœur is facing two class action suits over alleged sexual abuses carried out in 26 institutions across Quebec, including in Montreal.

      • Kate 08:56 on 2019-12-06 Permalink | Reply  

        There will be a memorial Friday morning at the Polytechnique, and a bigger ceremony this evening with the fourteen lights up on the lookout, in memory of the 14 young women killed 30 years ago. TVA lists a few other memorials as well.

        The new park sign was installed Thursday.

        Update: La Presse has a detailed report on the lookout ceremony Friday evening.

        • Kate 08:50 on 2019-12-06 Permalink | Reply  

          A committee of councillors at city hall is recommending limiting distribution of Publisacs to people who actively opt in. On CBC radio just now, a Transcontinental spokesman said – which we’ve heard before – that the Sac is worthwhile because it helps keep local newspapers alive.

          My next door neighbour is not usually around, so I’ve picked up a few of her Publisacs to look at. (I have an anti-junk-mail sticker, so I don’t get them.) There is no local paper where I live in Villeray, any more. (The Metro paper has sections for the various boroughs, but the section on VSMPE contains mostly news from Rosemont right now.)

          That said, there are a lot of circulars, which, for people living on limited funds, would help them find sale prices, and I happened on a catalogue that has been useful to me at work. I don’t see why we can’t simply extend the sticker system, and make the stickers easier to get – apply for them on line and they get mailed to you, for example.

          As someone who’s done a lot of print media design, I see squelching the Publisac as a benefit to the environment, but also an attack on print media generally. People in my business will lose their jobs.

          • JaneyB 10:17 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

            VSMPE?? You must be meaning your neologism: ViSaMiPex! Soo much catchier and more useable. 🙂

          • Kate 10:19 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

            Ha. I’m glad you remembered that, JaneyB. I thought of using it, but was afraid it was getting a bit silly.

          • JaneyB 10:22 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

            Tribeca (eg: TRiangle BElow CAnal street), Nolita, Soho etc all started somewhere lol.

          • dwgs 11:26 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

            CoDeNeNoDaG represent!

          • Kevin 11:48 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

          • Blork 12:32 on 2019-12-06 Permalink

            There are three local papers in the Publisacs for my area. The biggest is the Courrier du Sud, which is surprisingly big; it’s almost as big as a small JdeM some weeks. There’s another one that’s about half as big, and a third one that’s really small.

          • Dhomas 10:43 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

            I quite like the Flambeau (Mercier & Anjou newspaper) that comes in my publisac. My kids also like to use the flyers from the sac to do some “bricolage”, especially during Christmas when they cut out pictures for their wishlists for Santa. That said, I don’t see why a) it couldn’t be opt-in or make opting out easier, and b) why the local newspaper can’t be delivered without all the rest of the paper and plastic waste that comes with the publisac.

          • Kate 21:44 on 2019-12-07 Permalink

            And what do people put in the bottom of their birdcages these days?

          • dhomas 10:52 on 2019-12-08 Permalink

        • Kate 08:36 on 2019-12-06 Permalink | Reply  

          Some notes on where you cannot drive this weekend.

        Compose new post
        Next post/Next comment
        Previous post/Previous comment
        Show/Hide comments
        Go to top
        Go to login
        Show/Hide help
        shift + esc