Summary#
Montréal’s city council unanimously set its position in favour of a 20-year lease with the federal Crown for land beside the Lachine Canal in the borough of Le Sud-Ouest. The lease would let the City maintain and service two water pipes on the site; the agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting.
- The site is 941 square metres, in the extension of rue de Montmorency. The lease would run from January 1, 2025, with an option to renew for another 20 years.
- The total rent is $117,330.78, taxes included. City staff say the rent starts at $4,200 a year and rises by 2% annually, with an adjustment if the consumer price index rises by more than 4%.
- The landlord may end the lease at any time if it needs the site for public purposes. The City may end it with three months’ written notice.
- At the end of the lease, the landlord may acquire the City’s pipes or require the City to remove them at its own cost.
What it means for you#
- The City and water-service users: The City would continue using the site for its two 600-millimetre water pipes. City staff say the pipes are already there and that without the lease the City would have to relocate them.
- The City: Access to the leased land must be agreed between the City and the landlord. The City could face removal costs if the landlord requires the pipes to be taken out when the lease ends.
- Residents: The decision does not directly change water service rules, rates, or eligibility for services.
Money#
The proposed rent totals $117,330.78, taxes included; City staff calculate $107,138.64 after tax rebates.
- The rent is charged over the 20-year lease, with annual increases and a possible adjustment as described above.
- City staff say the expense would be paid from the City’s real estate strategy and housing department budget, with 100% of the expense borne by the agglomeration.
- The materials give no estimate of possible pipe-relocation or removal costs.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not give the annual payment schedule, beyond the starting rent and increase terms.
- They do not explain how access would be agreed in practice.
- They do not estimate the cost of moving or removing the pipes, or explain what would happen if the landlord ended the lease early for public purposes.
Case for#
- City staff say the lease would let the City maintain and use essential water infrastructure over a long period.
- The lease continues an arrangement that staff say dates back to an occupancy permit in 1987, following an earlier permit issued in 1890.
- The extra 20-year renewal option could give the City more time to use the site, if exercised.
Case against#
- The rent rises each year, and may be adjusted if the consumer price index exceeds 4%; the materials do not show the full payment schedule.
- The landlord can end the lease for public purposes, while the City may then have to relocate the pipes.
- At the lease’s end, the landlord can require the City to remove its infrastructure at the City’s expense.