Updates from July, 2024 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 22:08 on 2024-07-03 Permalink  

    Now that the pro‑Palestinian encampment has been legally banished from the University of Toronto, Quebec’s public security minister François Bonnardel is slamming Montreal’s “passivity” on not doing the same with the camps at McGill and Square Victoria.

    I think the city is wise to be tolerant and keep the peace. Bonnardel can go piss up a rope.

     
    • Kate 15:48 on 2024-07-03 Permalink | Reply  

      Public transit will get a meager $200 million from Quebec for 2025, but no promises thereafter.

       
      • DeWolf 16:32 on 2024-07-03 Permalink

        CAQ currently polling at 24%…

        At least the PQ has a history of funding public transit.

      • Kate 16:37 on 2024-07-03 Permalink

        Public transit and cultural stuff. Too bad it comes at a cost.

      • Ian 20:12 on 2024-07-03 Permalink

        The PQ has historically been pretty progressive but the cuts to education, health and the environment by Patapouf were continued under Marois, her betrayal of the student movement notwithstanding.

    • Kate 15:45 on 2024-07-03 Permalink | Reply  

      A house on Atateken which was painted in fluorescent colours as a PR stunt for Koodo has led to a fine for the owner.

      The house is up for sale and it’s even less than a million dollars – a real find, in this economy.

       
      • Blork 11:50 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        I’m wondering what grounds the city has to issue a fine. Aside from the small Koodo sign, which is easily removed, this is just a paint job. The city has no business deciding that a certain colour scheme constitutes “unauthorized publicity.”

        It reminds me of those bougie suburbs where you can’t paint your house a colour that’s not approved by the neighbourhood association, or you get fined if your lawn isn’t mowed every 15 minutes. What’s the difference?

        My comment has no bearing on the choice of colours, which I find loud and weird yet oddly joyful. If this were not a publicity stunt — if the owner were simply an eccentric who opted to paint the house in flourescent colours — we’d all be charmed and drawing parallels with the maisons colorées on Square Saint-Louis or the Painted Ladies on Alamo Square in San Francisco.

        No?

      • MarcG 12:07 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        You’re not allowed to paint bricks. In this case the bricks were already painted and they re-painted them. I imagine that if they end up issuing a fine it will be for “unauthorized publicity” like you said, and I don’t think it matters if you remove the sign afterwards if a law was broken.

      • Tee Owe 12:49 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        You’re not allowed to paint bricks – this is a law? Can we paint stones? Steps? Concrete blocks? Who makes these rules?

      • Tee Owe 12:53 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        Agree with Blork – I like the colours, the fact that it’s for PR notwithstanding

      • MarcG 13:01 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        Boroughs have rules on what you can and can’t do with the outside of buildings (maybe the inside too?). Replacing your windows? Restrictions on colours, designs. Replacing facade? Bricks need to be a certain style and colour. Without regulations the world would look like Granby.

      • Kate 13:03 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        Does anyone else remember a similar case about a business on René‑Lévesque East, I think it was a motorcycle dealer, that painted their building a glaring acid yellow which wasn’t well received by its neighbours? I seem to recall the city objected then too, but not on what legal basis. This may even have been before the borough system.

      • Blork 13:49 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        And who can forget this yellow place that used to be on rue Ontario: https://flic.kr/p/TXXbbP

      • Blork 14:29 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        I’m not aware of a law forbidding the painting of bricks. I see painted bricks in Montreal all over the place. Can you cite that law MarcG? (Asking sincerely, not snarkily.)

        Also, the fine is for “unauthorized publicity” not “painting bricks.” So my feelings are unchanged. Is this just the city being all “A CORPORATION DID SOMETHING SO IT MUST BE BAD!” or maybe a Sopranosesque “a corporation did something without paying us first” sort of thing? Are they just mad because they didn’t get their taste?

      • MarcG 14:52 on 2024-07-04 Permalink

        I was just going by the quote in the article from Béatrice Saulnier-Yelle.

      • Ian 16:52 on 2024-07-05 Permalink

        Then there’s the brightly painted houses around carré St-Louis that appear on so many postcards that tourists are surprised all the homes in the Plateau aren’t painted like that. I say give the people what they want – what’s so charming about plain limestone, anyway?

    • Kate 09:27 on 2024-07-03 Permalink | Reply  

      La Presse has a detailed three‑part report Wednesday about real estate agents profiting from preying on the aged. CTV has a summary of the issue.

       
      • Ian 15:20 on 2024-07-03 Permalink

        And real estate agents wonder why their profession has the reputation of being parasites.

    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