Westmount qualifies for exemption from high-density development requirements, former mayors say
By
Westmount Mayor Christina Smith says the municipality is open to tweaking its controversial redevelopment plan for its southeast sector, bordering downtown Montreal, before it goes to a vote in September, but critics are demanding that she invoke Westmount's designation as an exceptional heritage sector to prevent highrise development.
'We're probably going to see some slight modifications, for sure,' Smith told The Gazette last week.
She was referring to continued opposition from residents to a proposed seven- to 12-storey development on Dorchester Blvd., across from Victorian row houses that are characteristic of Westmount, and to a proposed row of four 20-storey towers on Ste-Catherine St. W., just west of Atwater Ave.
'We heard a lot of feedback ... so we're continuing to debate that,' she said.
One idea came from a resident at a public meeting on the plan in June, Smith said. Jonathan Wener, founder and chairman of real-estate company Canderel, told the meeting that four 20-storey highrises on Ste-Catherine is 'too much mass' and suggested two 25- to 30-storey highrises instead.
'That may not even be feasible, but that's something that some people are now asking for,' Smith said.
'Where I don't think we need to go is there's a call to scrap it all together and let the next council deal with that.'
However, former Westmount mayors Peter Trent and Karin Marks are asking why Westmount hasn't invoked its designation as an exceptional heritage sector to get an exemption from higher building-density requirements that are to be introduced next year by the Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal (CMM) and that Smith has cited as the impetus for Westmount to include several highrise towers in the southeast sector plan.
'Westmount's heritage designation clearly allows it to claim an exemption from density thresholds,' Trent and Marks conclude in a July 20 letter to the members of Westmount city council that was copied to The Gazette.
'You now have the obligation to correct the serious misinformation that was given to citizens.'
The former mayors oppose the redevelopment proposal for the southeast sector, produced for the municipality by architecture firm Lemay, saying in their letter that the heights being proposed for Ste-Catherine, in particular, will 'result in a cheek-by-jowl series of highrise towers like the Square Children's (at Atwater Ave. and René-Lévesque Blvd.); a form, with the exception of the short-lived 1960s highrise delirium, that is antithetical to Westmount's built heritage.'
Marks and Trent contend that Smith, the civil service and the Lemay firm misinformed the public by stating that Westmount is obliged to respect a new minimum density of 480 dwellings per hectare that's in the CMM's new 2026-2046 metropolitan land-use plan, and by omitting to mention the exemption available to Westmount.
Smith has publicly said that Westmount must respect the density requirement in the CMM plan, adopted on June 9, for 'hypercentre' transit-oriented development zones, such as the Atwater métro area.
But Trent and Marks point out that the new and old CMM land-use plans allow exemptions from its density requirements under special circumstances. The circumstances include 'the need to protect sectors with heritage components of interest where densification could compromise cultural, historical or natural values,' the new CMM plan states.
The Montreal agglomeration council, which includes the City of Montreal and all island suburbs, would have to request the exemption on behalf of Westmount. However, the CMM delegates responsibility to the agglomeration to identify heritage sectors requiring protection on the island, Trent notes. And the agglomeration's land-use plan designates Westmount's entire southeast sector — and almost all of the municipality, for that matter — as a 'sector of exceptional heritage.'
The agglomeration land-use plan also provides for exemptions from minimum density requirements, including for 'an area of exceptional value, or an area of significant value' as indicated on the plan's heritage map. The map is where Westmount is categorized as 'exceptional heritage.'
However, Smith maintains that Westmount is obliged to respect the CMM's density requirements and has a legal opinion from an urban-planning lawyer to back that up.
'We did our homework,' she said.
'We can't opt out. I'm disagreeing with his (Trent's) notion that we have no obligation to do this. We have checked with the CMM, we've checked with the (agglomeration), I've called in outside legal counsel. ... We've asked every which way on this.'
Smith suggested that other legal protections exist for historic properties in Westmount's southeast sector, including provincial heritage protection for the Congrégation-de-Notre-Dame motherhouse now occupied by Dawson College. A Westmount bylaw on site planning and architectural integration requires council approval for projects that affect the exterior of properties, she added.
The CMM exemption clause is applicable to densification that could compromise cultural, historical and natural values, Smith said.
'At this point, no one could claim that what we are doing in the southeast would be compromising historical values.'
However, Trent disagrees with Smith's interpretation.
'The argument fails the minute you open up the agglomeration (land-use plan),' he said. 'The fact that individual buildings are protected (by additional laws and bylaws) is irrelevant.'
Westmount plans to adopt the southeast sector plan and a bylaw amending its master plan to accommodate it at its last council meeting on Sept. 8.
Trent, Marks and other critics of Westmount's southeast sector redevelopment proposal have argued that Westmount council should postpone its vote until after the municipal election on Nov. 2.
However, whether the plan is approved before or after the election may be up to the Montreal administration of Mayor Valérie Plante.
That's because the agglomeration, where Montreal has a majority, must approve changes to the master plan of any municipality on the island to ensure they comply with the agglomeration's land-use plan, Montreal spokesperson Gonzalo Nunez said.
The agglomeration council delegated power to the Montreal city executive committee to issue 'certificates of conformity' for master plan changes, he said.
The Montreal executive committee will continue to meet weekly into October, he added.
'It is impossible to specify when the executive committee will rule on the compliance of the city of Westmount's bylaw,' Nunez said.
'The deadline will depend on the date on which the adopted bylaw is submitted to the agglomeration. The file will then be submitted to the executive committee for approval or disapproval of the bylaw, within a maximum of 120 days.'
This story was originally published
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Montreal Gazette
a day ago
- Montreal Gazette
Letters: Thanks for the good-news story; Insp. Gamache would approve
Thank you for your refreshing article on Louise Penny's Café Three Pines. It is a welcome diversion for readers from the usual mean-spirited, misleading and discriminatory rhetoric of certain politicians and their enablers north and south of the border. As Inspector Armand Gamache would say: Goodness exists, light will banish the shadows and kindness is more powerful that cruelty. Brian Burke, Montreal West Parade no place for foreign flags Re: ' Jewish LGBTQ2+ group excluded from Pride parade ' (The Gazette, Aug. 1) If the presence of the Israeli flag at Montreal's Pride parade would be 'unacceptable,' as claimed by singer-songwriter Safia Nolin, then perhaps all national flags should be banned from the parade except those of Canada and Quebec. Many nations are guilty of injustices against their own citizens or their neighbours, and banning all foreign flags would achieve neutrality. Bruce Couchman, Toronto A wealth tax could backfire Raphaël Melançon notes that one of Transition Montréal's 'main promises is to further tax the city's so-called 'ultra-wealthy' — those who own a single-family home or luxury condo worth more than $3.5 million. Craig Sauvé, the leader of the new municipal party, 'wants to use the resulting revenue to fund homelessness initiatives, saying it could double the current funding for such programs,' Melançon writes. While a wealth tax would appeal to some citizens, I expect it would probably raise only a pittance. Net result: Such a tax might backfire because rich people can simply sell and move to cities that provide better services at lower tax rates. Gary Bernstein, N.D.G. Invest in students, not legal battles Re: 'English boards will fight for education funding ' (The Gazette, July 29) and ' Province pledges $540M for student services ' (The Gazette, July 18) Condescending remarks aimed at Education Minister Bernard Drainville and threats of a lawsuit spearheaded by the Quebec English School Boards Association (QESBA) are not particularly helpful in addressing the current education funding issue, in my view. In contrast, consider the joint announcement issued by the presidents of the Fédération des comités de parents du Québec (FCPQ, Mélanie Laviolette) and the English Parents' Committee Association (EPCA, Katherine Korakakis), which expressed relief when the province decided to allocate 'up to' $540 million for student services. They took a positive outlook, noting that the changes are 'less dire than expected.' I believe QESBA should reassess its approach and adopt the parents' constructive response, which reflects a shared hope for ongoing collaboration in the education sector. Moreover, by investing education tax dollars in classrooms instead of expensive court battles, we can genuinely improve the quality of education and build a brighter future for our students. Chris Eustace, Pierrefonds Submitting a letter to the editor Letters should be sent by email to letters@ We prioritize letters that respond to, or are inspired by, articles published by The Gazette. If you are responding to a specific article, let us know which one. Letters should be sent uniquely to us. The shorter they are — ideally, fewer than 200 words — the greater the chance of publication. Timing, clarity, factual accuracy and tone are all important, as is whether the writer has something new to add to the conversation. We reserve the right to edit and condense all letters. Care is taken to preserve the core of the writer's argument. Our policy is not to publish anonymous letters, those with pseudonyms or 'open letters' addressed to third parties. Letters are published with the author's full name and city or neighbourhood/borough of residence. Include a phone number and address to help verify identity; these will not be published. We will not indicate to you whether your letter will be published. If it has not been published within 10 days or so, it is not likely to be.
Montreal Gazette
a day ago
- Montreal Gazette
Montreal's GardaWorld green lit to bid up to US$138M on ‘Alligator Alcatraz' ICE contracts
A U.S. subsidiary of GardaWorld, the Montreal-based security giant reportedly helping staff the Florida detention site known as 'Alligator Alcatraz,' has been cleared to bid up to US$138 million on ICE contracts. GardaWorld Federal Services, a Virginia-based arm of GardaWorld, was among dozens of companies shortlisted by ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) under an emergency procurement programme, government records show. ICE's agreement with GardaWorld's U.S. subsidiary sets a limit of US$138 million (CAN$190 million) on the value of contracts the company can compete for, The Gazette has confirmed. It was first reported by The Globe and Mail. The contracts are part of a sweeping effort by U.S. President Donald Trump to expand detention capacity across the country. GardaWorld was already contracted to provide security and correctional staff at 'Alligator Alcatraz, ' a remote facility in Ochopee, Florida. It is expected to house up to 3,000 detainees. The site has drawn growing criticism from rights groups, who warn of poor oversight, overcrowding and unsafe conditions. It gained notoriety after Trump visited in July and jokingly referred to its swampy surroundings by saying there were 'a lot of police officers in the form of alligators.' Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Monday that 'Alligator Alcatraz' would serve as a model for future state-run migrant detention centres. She also said she hopes to launch similar facilities in the coming months, including in airports and jails. According to the Miami Herald, GardaWorld was awarded a separate contract worth US$8 million to provide staffing for the Florida facility. In July, The Gazette reported that GardaWorld was seeking armed guards for 'a remote part of southern central Florida,' offering US$25 per hour, plus travel, meals and accommodation. The posting outlined strict requirements for applicants: candidates were required to hold Florida gun and security licences, have at least one year of armed experience, and legally own a registered semi-automatic handgun. GardaWorld provides a wide range of private security services in Canada and abroad, including airport screening, cash transport and personal protection. The company was founded by Stephan Crétier in Montreal, where he used a $30,000 mortgage on his house to launch the business. Today, it remains headquartered in Montreal, though Cretier is now based in Dubai. He is worth nearly $4 billion, according to The Gazette's Rich List. In 2022, Quebec's provincial investment agency, Investissement Québec, invested $300 million in GardaWorld. A provincial spokesperson has previously said the investment was unrelated to the company's U.S. contracts. Twelve people have died in ICE custody so far this year, including Canadian Johnny Noviello, who died at a Miami detention facility in June. This story was originally published
Winnipeg Free Press
a day ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Judge rules that Rhode Island's gun permit system does not violate Second Amendment
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — A federal judge says Rhode Island's gun permit system, which requires residents to show 'a need' to openly carry a firearm throughout the state, does not violate the Second Amendment. In a ruling handed down Friday, U.S. District Judge William Smith granted Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha's motion for summary judgment that dismisses a lawsuit filed by a coalition of gun owners in 2023. The lawsuit stems from a Rhode Island law dictating how the state issues firearms permits. According to the statute, local officials are required to issue concealed-carry permits to anyone who meets the specific criteria outlined in the statute. However, it also allows the attorney general's office to issue open-carry permits 'upon a proper showing of need.' Unlike municipalities, the attorney general is not required to issue such permits. The plaintiffs, largely led by Michael O'Neil, a lobbyist for the Rhode Island 2nd Amendment Coalition and a firearm instructor, said in their initial complaint that the attorney general's office denied all seven of their applications in 2021 for an 'unrestricted' firearm permit, allowing both open and concealed carry. Court documents show that the attorney general's office denied their permits because all of them had been granted 'restricted' permits, which only allowed concealed carry. Smith said in his ruling that unrestricted permits 'are a privilege and there is no constitutionally protected liberty interest in obtaining one.' The plaintiffs had hoped for a similar ruling handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022, where the justices struck down a New York state law that had restricted who could obtain a permit to carry a gun in public. Similar to Rhode Island, New York's law had required residents to show an actual need to carry a concealed handgun in public for self-defense. Yet, notably, Smith said in his ruling that the high court's 2022 ruling did not declare that the Second Amendment 'requires open carry,' but even if it did, Rhode Island's law 'is within the Nation's historical tradition of regulation.' Frank Saccoccio, the attorney representing the gun owners, said in an email Monday that they did not believe Smith's decision was in line with the 2022 SCOTUS decision and would be appealing. An email seeking comment from the attorney general was sent on Monday.
