Montreal plans to build a pre-treatment centre on the Demix quarry in East Montreal and a compost centre in LaSalle right away, and will search for an appropriate site on the west island so that it can be opened along with a site at the St. Michel Environment Complex, just as a recent consultation into the subject recommended.
Commissioners André Beauchamp, Jean Burton Michel Hamelin and Nicole Brodeur were appointed by Montreal’s Public Consultation Office to examine the cities’ organic waste treatment. They released their final report on Wednesday, April 4.
“For the east end, the commission recommends that the pilot pre-treatment centre be established on the site of the Demix quarry, as planned, and that every effort be made to involve a university chair. As to the biomethanation centres, the commission recommends that the agglomeration proceed immediately with the acquisition and decontamination of the Solutia site, and with the establishment of a centre in the borough of LaSalle, in the first phase of the treatment project, unless the short-term combination of a biomethanation centre and the pilot pre-treatment centre on the Demix site is considered a significant economic lever for the east end of the island of Montréal.”
The report forms part of a legal process that is necessary because the city’s agglomeration council’s proposed to set up four closed waste treatment buildings on the island last June. The largest building, a biomethanation and pre-treatment test centre, would be built in the Demix Quarry site in Montreal East. A second biomethanation plant was supposed to be opened on Solutia Canada Inc. land in LaSalle, to be used once the initial plant reached its capacity. Two composting centres were supposed to be built: one on ADM property in Dorval and another on the St. Michel Environmental Complex.
For that plan to occur, the urban plans of the two boroughs and two cities would have to be modified.
That’s what led to information sessions in St. Michel, Montreal-East, Dorval and LaSalle in early November. Then a second series of hearings began so that commissioners could listen to citizen concerns and comments in each location on November 30 and through December. Citizens complained about traffic, odors, centralization, a lack of citizen involvement and education, and the need for a strategy to minimize the production of waste on the island.
After the process began, the ADM refused to agree to sell their property and no other property had been identified on the west island.
Given those circumstances, the commissioners recommended that the LaSalle and Eastern Montreal sites be developed immediately and a west island and the St. Michel sites come on board at the same time. Their idea is to ensure a level of territorial equality in waste treatment infrastructure.
For a copy of the full report, visit the organizations website at www.ocpm.qc.ca.
(A version of this story appeared in The Suburban on April 11, 2012.)
This is the first post in my new blog. For years, I have written stories, books and articles or ‘produced content’ (can you tell I don’t like that phrase?) for various partners. This is the beginning of a new life as a publisher, in a more interactive format than I’ve had the privilege to participate in before.
Most of my work will continue to be distributed by important partners, including Ulysses and the Suburban, but this venue will give me a chance to explore topics and profile people who don’t generally make the news. I plan to explore the many styles of non-fiction shorts, including reportage, opinion, reviews and quotes.
If I can hold back my intense serious nature a bit, perhaps I’ll also be able to explore humour too; since I’m usually the one who giggles at others, though, perhaps I’ll just lead you to funny people I love.
As you can see, I also plan to produce a local calendar of events, most of which are produced by local non-profit citizen groups. These are the people who don’t get mentioned much in the daily press, primarily because they don’t have the presence or influence of bigger players. They are crucial actors in a vibrant community, however, so I really want to learn more about them.
If you have any topics you want addressed, please let me know. I look forward to hearing from you.
Commercial property owners in Verdun will soon be able demolish heritage buildings in a bad state of repair or at the back of a property without a Site Planning and Architectural Integration (SPAI) review.
“Is this not an invitation to all landlords to stop maintaining their buildings so that they can develop the land for one project or another,” said Gilles Laberge. “There has not been an inventory of buildings in the back of lots, so I’m surprised that the city is so ready to purge them.”
The amendment to bylaw 1700-88 was initially presented to Verdun’s urban planning, housing and heritage committee. Ann Guy, Benoit Malette and Pascale Tremblay sit on the committee. Researcher David Lamontagne-Métivier was also present at the meeting.
The public heard about the change during a 15-minute public consultation prior to the last Borough Council Meeting, February 7. Ann Guy was the only elected official who heard resident comments. She and her colleagues passed the bylaw unanimously less than half an hour later. The change takes effect after the city of Montreal approves it, perhaps next month. (The issue doesn’t appear on March agendas for city council, the executive committee nor the agglomeration council.)
In addition to his comments about owners, Laberge, who is a historian, raised concerns about whether the bylaw amendment would allow the Douglas Institute to tear down an unused root cellar that is one of the last remaining agricultural buildings in Verdun. He didn’t get an answer.
In a later email to the Suburban, Verdun spokesperson Francine Morin wrote that the borough “has established that no 100% commercially used building on its territory has any heritage value.”
She also confirmed that the Douglas Institute applied for a permit to tear the root cellar down in 2010, but Verdun’s planning advisory committee refused the request.
Marie France Coutu, a communications officer with the Douglas Institute, says the organization no longer plans to demolish the circa-1920 building. “In our mandate, there is no money set aside for heritage buildings, but we are conscious that these buildings have value to the community,” she said. “Our intention is to leave it as it is. It’s locked and secured. We don’t want to get rid of it.”
Residents are relieved that an important Verdun landmark might still be saved, but some still complain about the way Verdun handled the public consultation.
“How can we have faith in our elected officials when they treat us like this,” said Fabiola Renaud. “They invite us for one subject and when we arrive, they present something different. The avis told us that the Mayor would explain the changes to the bylaw, but he wasn’t even there. Then after they made us work, M. Malette didn’t even have time to tell them what we said before they passed the amendment anyway. They’re laughing at us.”
(A version of this article appeared on March 14 on page 7 of The Suburban’s City Edition.)