The increasingly-crumbling abandoned block at St. Catherine and Papineau - north side - would make a good case study for urban decay. The property starts with a vacant terrain, likely a former gas station - and then a burnt-out theatre and greystone apartment building.
Oil company Suncor owns the empty lot - surely a former gas station - and an Ottawa company called Canril, had a halfhearted attempt to develop it last year, presumably due to lack of interest in new condos on a feed street to the bridge near a gay bar ghetto.
The adjacent buildings were burnt out a few years ago but I don't know when exactly. The buildings are owned by Normand Poirier. As in the case with abandoned properties, I wonder what plans the owner has with them.
When know that he had a fire and didn't repair the buildings and that usually means he was under-insured. If one pays for higher levels of insurance, one usually doesn't have the right to take the cash, one is forced to repair. So he's obviously not making money on the property other than his insurance cash and he must be paying taxes to the city on the property. He surely no longer has insurance on the the place because insurance companies don't like to insure abandoned property and will only sometimes do so at a very high fee. And they certainly wouldn't allow a building to have its windows left open, as this one does.
So the chances of this lovely old greystone burning to the ground seem very high, particularly since it's surrounded by good old time East End sketchiness.
There's some sort of drop in centre for troubled youth across the street. There's also what I suspect is a crackhouse just across. And there's a stripper placement agency with one-way mirror windows that has covered parts of its sign with duct tape. And of course there's what's known as the city's worst McDonald's nearby as well, where the cashiers famously try to shortchange patrons as I can attest from repeated personal experience.
The area is at the end of the Gay Village, although some say it unofficially ends at Papineau. The Bar Stud, a lousy little shoebox building that settled with Audrey Vachon in 2008 for refusing to serve her on the basis of her being a woman is the only brazenly gay establishment east of St. Cat.
One reason that it might be hard to redevelop these soon-to-be burnt down buildings is that a gay bar zone might not be soon as entirely family-friendly. However the gay tourism brings in something like $25 million to the city every year.
The city should really take some of that money and do something with abandoned property - which is very close to the Papineau metro. Either go whole hog and turn it into a huge gay circus museum or grant some sort of developer incentives to develop the property for conventional usage.
Montreal has been losing population to the suburbs and this sort of abandoned property could house a couple of thousand taxpayers pretty quickly. Some academics and politicians say there's plenty of land to develop on the island but I think they are probably wrong.
So my idea would be to make an unofficial boundary, say the gay village ends at Papineau and everything east of there would be good old regular housing.
Oil company Suncor owns the empty lot - surely a former gas station - and an Ottawa company called Canril, had a halfhearted attempt to develop it last year, presumably due to lack of interest in new condos on a feed street to the bridge near a gay bar ghetto.
 |
| Depanneur on Pap South of Cat |
When know that he had a fire and didn't repair the buildings and that usually means he was under-insured. If one pays for higher levels of insurance, one usually doesn't have the right to take the cash, one is forced to repair. So he's obviously not making money on the property other than his insurance cash and he must be paying taxes to the city on the property. He surely no longer has insurance on the the place because insurance companies don't like to insure abandoned property and will only sometimes do so at a very high fee. And they certainly wouldn't allow a building to have its windows left open, as this one does.
So the chances of this lovely old greystone burning to the ground seem very high, particularly since it's surrounded by good old time East End sketchiness.
 |
| Seemed like a good idea at the time |
The area is at the end of the Gay Village, although some say it unofficially ends at Papineau. The Bar Stud, a lousy little shoebox building that settled with Audrey Vachon in 2008 for refusing to serve her on the basis of her being a woman is the only brazenly gay establishment east of St. Cat.
One reason that it might be hard to redevelop these soon-to-be burnt down buildings is that a gay bar zone might not be soon as entirely family-friendly. However the gay tourism brings in something like $25 million to the city every year.
 |
| Agence Erotique 2000 stripper placement |
The city should really take some of that money and do something with abandoned property - which is very close to the Papineau metro. Either go whole hog and turn it into a huge gay circus museum or grant some sort of developer incentives to develop the property for conventional usage.Montreal has been losing population to the suburbs and this sort of abandoned property could house a couple of thousand taxpayers pretty quickly. Some academics and politicians say there's plenty of land to develop on the island but I think they are probably wrong.
So my idea would be to make an unofficial boundary, say the gay village ends at Papineau and everything east of there would be good old regular housing.
I'm not sure the cinema was burned out. It's worth noting that it went through a few years as a French Protestant Church (Église Vie et Reveil), and the congregation also had a thrift shop on the south side of Ste-Catherine.
ReplyDeleteI always wondered why they might have chosen to be across the street from The Stud, especially in summer, when its windows are all open to the world.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteBeside the church (cinema) was a bar with lots of local live music and amateur shows. That's where I learned the word "rigolade".
ReplyDeleteNever mind new businesses; anyone moving into this area as a resident would have to be more than a little nuts, if only for the fact that it's a high fire-risk part of town.
ReplyDeleteHow about building a couple more homeless shelters in the area instead? It would add to the "seedy glamour".
Pierre Rheault
ReplyDelete"Hors sujet" but fantastique!
For hockey lovers:
http://www.uni-watch.com/2012/01/15/old-time-hockey/
That fire was about 3 and a half years ago, above what was a Subway restaurant.
ReplyDeleteBut contrary to what @UrbanLegend says, there are not all that many fires in this neighbourhood. Last one I recall was last summer, a minor affair when a resident had some drapes too close to his AC unit.
The abandoned lot is indeed a former gas station -- there were still remnants of the building when I returned to Montreal 5 years ago.
The area's real danger comes from falling ice from the very steep rooftops. Two or 3 years ago a man standing outside the Mickey D's was killed by a falling slab of ice during a sudden mid-winter thaw.
It is a seedy neighbourhood, but given the number of parks and community centres in the area, I will not be surprised to see it become the next spot for gentrification -- say in 10 or 20 years.
-Kevin
As a general rule, districts around or under bridges generally deteriorate over time.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, there's the initial demolition of businesses and residences, then the building of access roads leading up to and away from such large bridges which destroys the original arrangement, driving people away.
Then, of course, there's the traffic noise and air pollution to contend with.
Would YOU live under or near the Jacques Cartier Bridge, the Brooklyn Bridge, etc.?
To add to Kevin's comment, there's a bunch of nice old buildings on that stretch. A wise promoter could easily turn this into a lively shopping area for the neighborhood. This area is getting gentrified rapidly.
ReplyDelete@UrbanLegend
ReplyDeleteBefore I returned to Montreal I was in New York, where the hottest area for development was DUMBO -- Down Under the Manhattan Bridge Overpass.
My friend Mindy (a part-time DA) had a sweet apartment with a view of the bridge :)
-Kevin
UrbanLegend, Anonymous makes a great point. I've seen that part of Brooklyn and it demonstrates the potential of neglected, overlooked areas adjacent to highway ramps and bridge approaches. The neighborhood around the 59th street bridge in Manhattan is another example of a district that has thrived next to a major viaduct; even the space underneath had been exploited to make a great urban market. I also agree with Chuck that a wise promoter(s) with the policy support of municipal government could make this an attractive place to live. The quartier around the Cartier (catchy branding!) looks seedy now but it has good bones: it's convenient to centreville, has the papineau métro at one end and the frontenac at the other, and remaining good building stock that could be renovated to form the anchor for new development. Vision + expertise + audacity + money could remake this part of the city.
ReplyDeleteWhile there will always be someone willing to move into a seedy neighbourhood for whatever reason wher it is justifiable or practical according to specific needs such as close proximity to a work place, for example, I believe that a straw poll taken among the general population would demonstrate a clear hesitation to do--especially those with children who would likely have no choice but to attend the worst schools in the city.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, recent news about the increase in crime around the gay village district has already discouraged potential residents or businesses to set up shop.
The other day, one business owner appeared on the TV news to say that she is fed up with the daily crime seen right outside of her window and that she is closing down to move elsewhere, while another gentleman resident told reporters that he discourages his wife from walking the dog at night because she has often been solicited as a prostitute.
Speculators build and promote their condos and lofts in and around such areas mainly because they've purchased the land cheap and may get a tax break in the bargain, but at the end of the day (or night) when you as a tenant or business owner step out of the door, it doesn't take long before you are looking over your shoulder. Is this how the average citizen prefers to live?
Speculators consistently pull out all the stops to promote whatever they are trying to sell, while deliberately glossing over any negatives. Could you really expect them to do otherwise?
While it is true that some individuals clearly get a cheap thrill out of "slumming", hanging out with "street people" and assorted other weirdos, druggies, and criminals, because they enjoy "feeling brave" in the face of potential danger, only a fool truly believes in invulnerability.
Whenever I ride busses through some areas of the city, I often ask myself, "Who the hell would live around here? Sure glad I don't!"
Taking it a step further: how many reading this would, honestly--given a choice--move tomorrow to an earthquake zone? Close to an active volcano? Tornado Alley? Hurricane zone? Flood plain? Adjacent to an airport?
The quality of life and living matters.
They are in the process of demolishing those brunt-out greystones. Apparently a new residential project (incorporating the old Cineam Champlain) is being planned for the site.
ReplyDelete