Summary#
Montréal city council approved a deed granting a full and final release of the City’s registered right to seek cancellation of the sale of a vacant site on rue Bombardier in Anjou. The site was sold to Appartements Métropolitains s.e.c. for a rental housing project; the release removes that registered right even though existing pipes and equipment have not been moved as originally required.
- The property has since been transferred through Le 7050 inc. to Le 7040 inc.; the decision summary says those companies took on the original buyer’s obligations.
- The original sale required a four-storey building with at least 50 rental homes, and work on the pipes, equipment, slope and retaining wall.
- The City’s right to seek cancellation was tied to failures to meet those obligations. The decision approves releasing that right from the property’s title.
- The buyer provided a $200,000 bank guarantee and other documents. The City accepted a plan for a future utility easement, although the pipes and equipment have not been moved or replaced as agreed.
- The City retains personal rights against the buyer concerning the original construction obligations. The future easement is to include terms limiting the City’s liability for damage to buildings outside the easement area, while requiring the City to take steps not to damage the owner’s installations.
What it means for you#
- Current property owner and companies that assumed the obligations: The registered cancellation right will be released under the approved deed. The resolution does not say that the remaining construction or infrastructure obligations are cancelled.
- City of Montréal: It gives up the registered right attached to the property, while retaining personal rights against the buyer for the construction obligations.
- Residents and taxpayers: The decision does not directly change housing eligibility, rents, taxes or services.
Money#
No publicly available information.
- The decision materials give no cost for this release. The original 2021 sale price was $750,000 plus applicable taxes; that was not a payment set by this decision.
- The $200,000 bank guarantee was required under the original sale terms. The materials say it is to be returned when the building is complete or when the buyer provides a completion guarantee to its lender.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not say whether the approved deed has been signed and registered.
- The pipes and equipment remain unmoved. The materials do not give a timetable for resolving this or completing the future utility easement.
- The summary does not explain how the City would use its retained personal rights if the remaining obligations are not met.
Case for#
- A possible argument for the release is that the City received the required bank guarantee, construction documents and a plan for the future easement.
- City staff say the City can accept the plan because the owner has agreed to include protections in the easement deed, while the City keeps personal rights concerning construction obligations.
Case against#
- One concern is that the City is releasing its registered right even though the pipes and equipment have not been moved or replaced as originally required.
- The future easement and its protections are not yet in place, and the materials do not explain how the City will ensure the outstanding work is completed.