As the municipal elections approach, the teams and running candidates must be reminded that the built heritage and the countryside demand much more than their good intentions. Whether future administrations like it or not, these themes affect the identity of communities and their living environments as much as the very current issue of sustainable development. They are essential, in particular because of the new legal obligations of municipalities in matters of cultural heritage following the audit by the Auditor General of Quebec.
This is particularly the case in Montreal and in the metropolitan region, where there is a concentration of heritage elements that is exceptional at the level of Quebec and Canada, and remarkable at the international level. The maintenance and requalification of numerous buildings and heritage complexes pose an enormous challenge, which cannot be tackled without a global vision, responsibility, tools or ways of acting capable of producing results.
Whether it is the fate of many village houses, shoebox or the former Fulford residence, disused public properties such as the Hôtel-Dieu, the Royal Victoria hospital, the ONF or the “old pen” of Saint-Vincent-de-Paul, abandoned churches, such as the magnificent Saint-Clément de Viauville, de la Molson, Canada Malting and other industrial complexes, Parc Jean-Drapeau, controversial government projects, including the REM and the expansion of the port, or the unbridled densification that Threatens the shores, the city center as much as the authentic districts and old garden cities, such as Hampstead, there is no lack of heritage, landscape and development issues!
We must also resolve the frequent lack of a clear vision on the development of the territory, this common heritage all too often wasted in favor of piecemeal projects and investments, indifferent to the values of urban planning worthy of the XXI.e century. Instead of a few general statements, town planning plans and regulations as well as strategies for economic development, ecological transition, mobility or architectural quality must truly take heritage into account and take advantage of it.
Future administrations in Montreal and in the metropolitan region must commit to taking action to face the challenges posed to them by heritage and landscapes. We retain four priorities:
Support the owners of heritage houses and buildings in their maintenance, restoration and enhancement. This requires the application of professional advice as well as fiscal or financial measures, without forgetting the promotion of the know-how and trades necessary for this work.
Provide the means to carry out projects for the requalification of heritage complexes of which the population will be proud.Municipalities too often confine themselves to a regulatory or managerial role, leaving the initiative to developers and governments. In 1981, the authorities of Quebec and Montreal united to form the Société immobilière du patrimoine architectural (SIMPA), a parapublic body which carried out avant-garde projects such as the mixed conversion of the Bon Pasteur monastery. With all the orphan or decommissioned institutional heritage, we need a XXI SIMPAe century. Equally, the City of Montreal must equip itself with a real heritage department capable of dealing effectively with the boroughs, but also with those responsible for town planning, culture, housing, parks and transition. ecological.
Optimizing the tools and procedures for development and town planning to promote the enhancement and requalification of heritage and landscapes. The updating of both the Montréal Master Plan, which dates back to 1992 and 2004, and the 2012 Metropolitan Land Use and Development Plan and the future National Urban and Land Use Planning Strategy are all important. opportunities to seize to adopt a coherent, credible and innovative vision, worthy of the XXIe century. Just like the housing or sustainable development strategies for which the requalification of heritage buildings, freed from the prejudice favorable to new at the expense of “already built”, offers an intelligent avenue to prioritize.
Strengthen collaboration andconsultation between municipalities, population and scientific, economic and professional circles to act better. The rich experience of the round tables in several neighborhoods and on Mount Royal must be shared across the entire metropolitan community: to meet the challenge of religious heritage and the enhancement of the Montérégian hills, for example. We also need annual and public monitoring mechanisms bringing together managers and heritage organizations to move forward together.
The future municipal administrations will have to exercise their new powers in the service of the community, with intelligence and innovation. Heritage Montreal, who will be 50 years old at the end of their next term in 2025, will be there to remind them.
Beyond good intentions, heritage needs concrete results, the fruit of a “heritage reflex” to be implemented and a mobilization of collective intelligence. Because if it constitutes a legacy of the past, its development requires urban development and solutions for the future, based less on demolition and more on adaptation.