Last week, the Superior Court of Quebec ruled against the Montreal performance hall La Tulipe regarding the sound emanating from its shows1. As a reminder, it is a newly installed property developer next to the hall who is at the origin of the dispute.
For the operator of La Tulipe, this is a “Kafkaesque” story. And for good reason: the neighboring apartment building in question is none other than a former La Tulipe storage warehouse. It is difficult in this context to think that the developer could have ignored the existence of cultural nightlife activities in this place operating since 1967 when he made a request to transform the use of the building to make it his home… in 2016!
It’s just too familiar a story for Montreal broadcasters. Many other halls, bars and nightclubs have been hunted down, prosecuted and in too many cases closed by a disgruntled neighbor for more than ten years, the municipal regulations around noise pollution being archaic and ill-suited to deal with the rapid transformation of central cultural quarters; think for example of the Divan orange which had to close its doors following the quarrelsome complaints of a new neighbour.
We can understand the desire of citizens to ensure a peaceful environment. Should residents of Saint-Laurent Boulevard or Mont-Royal Avenue be prepared to tolerate a higher level of ambient noise? If yes, how much?
There is a clear solution, a solution that has already been implemented in dozens of cities in Europe, the United States and Canada, and which has managed to restore the balance of forces at stake.
This is the principle of the agent of change.
The idea is simple: when you develop a new building in a multi-use district, or when you move into a new district, you have to take into account what is around it. For example, if a condo developer wants to locate across from an established performance venue, that developer is responsible for constructing their condos in a way that lessens any noise that may emanate from the cultural venue. Similarly, if an entrepreneur wants to open a theater in a new location, he is responsible for fitting it out in a way that does not disturb the inhabitants and traders who are already there.
The example of Toronto
In 2018, the City of Toronto adopted the agent of change principle which protects its cultural venues from lawsuits for noise nuisance within a radius of 120 meters.
We continue to encourage the City of Montreal, more particularly the boroughs of Ville-Marie and Plateau Mont-Royal, where more than 85% of cultural venues in Montreal are located, to do the same.
In his judgment delivered last week, Judge Azimuddin Hussain stressed that “there is no vested right to a nuisance”. However, we believe that the principle of agent of change could have modified the purpose of his judgment since it would have placed the responsibility for mitigating the impact of nuisances related to the activities of the theater on the shoulders of the promoter. responsible for the proposed new development. In a context of rapid gentrification of central districts with a cultural vocation, this is a measure that we consider essential to protect our performance halls.
How many cultural places will have to disappear, how many neighborhood conflicts will we have to let happen before we can settle this issue permanently?
On the eve of a nightlife policy which will be adopted next fall by the Plante administration (after more than five years of waiting!), we once again encourage our elected officials to look into this clear, simple solution and fair to all.
Let the culture live and adopt the principle of the agent of change!