Centre Mall -> The Centre on Barton

[matt602]

If the other lines get built: pretty likely.

[markbarbera]

Fastcarsfreedom and LikeHamilton are right. This thread is way off course. Perhaps our moderators can clean it up by moving off-topic posts out of here.

Reminder: there is no walmart planned for Centre Mall. Debating its merits and shortcomings is hijacking the discussion of this development.

As far as LRT serving the site, I'd question its likelihood. The width of Barton simply doesn't allow for a dedicated at-grade LRT line. It would require either EL or subway, which are both too cost prohibitive.
Whether or not you are a personal fan of the style of development, the redevelopment of Centre Mall is going to benefit a neighbourhood in desperate need of a pick-me-up. Its positive effect can already be felt on Ottawa Street. With any luck the spinoff investments will continue trickling along Barton and Kenilworth.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

We do that and we get yelled at.

I'm sure you do hear from those who have stuff moved, but they really have nothing to complain about seeing as they are breaking forum rules by not respecting the topic.

For what it's worth, it is appreciated by those of us who want to keep things on-topic.

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I'm sure you do hear from those who have stuff moved, but they really have nothing to complain about seeing as they are breaking forum rules by not respecting the topic.

For what it's worth, it is appreciated by those of us who want to keep things on-topic.

I see moderator deletion as a very bad thing in most instances. If the conversation is straying off-topic, then moderators can step in and try to steer it back, but outright deleting posts can be extremely annoying to people who have put some effort into their posts and it leaves the conversation gap-toothed. I would prefer to think of this forum one with freedom of speech rather than as a police state.

Also, there is a judgmental fine line between on-topic and off-topic... one man's on-topic is another man's off-topic. Some of the best conversations come about as branches of others and forcing the conversation in a strict direction can suppress some good stuff.

I think that it is best to let nature take its course. Really, there is nothing much going on with the topic of this thread. Someone posted a few pictures and adam posted a diagram of the development and that is about it. If there were enough substance to discuss and enough people to propel an "on-topic" discussion, then that is what would be taking place.

[DC83]

I think LRT on Barton is a given... but don't see it as a type of Rapid Transit, but rather just 'improved' transit.
It may not have the same spinoff benefits as one along Main for example, but it would still service an area desperate for a lil love.

This development IS a piece of crap, but lucky for us Big Boxes don't last as long as traditional bldgs. So this plan wont be around for very long. And we'll have learned our lessons from the past and force developers to follow our guidelines and not let them sneak away with tricks (ie Soppers @ Concession/Wentworth).

So when LRT is installed for the B & A lines, a Barton line will surely be in the works. Then they can design a proper development based around an LRT line which will have developers begging for a chance to build here.

[flar]

It's generally best to stay close to the topic, but this is probably as good a thread as any to discuss the enviro/socio/economic ramifications of big box stores since so much has been invested in that discussion already. Just remember to keep things from getting personal. Potential LRT and Centre Mall transit terminal are on topic. Otherwise how much can we really say about any specific big box development

[SteelTown]

I think what's likely to happen is that the arch buses for the B-Line will get relocated to Barton St. BRT for Barton for a few years.

[DC83]

^^ Good idea. For a temporary solution.
Barton buses come like what, every 10 mins, and each bus is packed.

I don't even see a promised Transit Hub in the plans? Besides the mock-up one floating around somewhere, does anyone know if the City let Redcliffe cut that out of the plans too, hoping they wouldn't look 'anti-development'?

[flar]

I think Barton is every 6-8 minutes and they're packed.

[SteelTown]

It would be great if they put a terminal at Centre Mall.

Redcliffe was generous to maintain the new Eastgate terminal, they'll keep the terminal clean. So at least they know it's good to have terminals at malls so I can't see them rejecting a terminal at Centre Mall.

[raisethehammer]

they won't reject a terminal perhaps, but they won't suggest it either.
City hall needs someone to pull out a map and remind them that this part of town still exists.
The HSR and council could probably get a terminal at Centre Mall quite easily.
They'll need one now as anyone daring to walk to this site will be taking their life into their hands.

As for being 'off topic' go back and change all references to Walmart to 'Zellers' if that will make people happy.

[adam]

Why didn't they add a parking garage to the layout? Nobody who owns a car will want to go to the mall without it. There are no pedestrian walkways from store to store with the exception of the stores directly beside each other. This is an outdated model that doesn't support the city's transportation plan.

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by fastcarsfreedom

On topic--as I said prior--while there may have been modifications made to this development to make it more palatable to some--overall it's merely a redo of an existing shopping centre that has been on the site for over 50 years...prior to that it was a very pastoral thoroughbred racetrack. Therefore, saying Redcliffe is "ruining" the neighborhood or derailing redevelopment of the existing "urban" street is nonsense.

You've got a point there. . . However,

Originally Posted by fastcarsfreedom

The Centre Mall, as it existed, as it was developed in the 1950s is supposed to be everything that urbanists hate--that's why I'm so completely amazed by the gnashing of teeth over it's demise.

Of course every self-respecting urbanist hates the idea of giant shopping centres on the edge of town but, at least from an urban aesthetic perspective, big box developments are even worse because they are more conducive to driving between locations than walking.

It is counterintuitive that Ottawa street (as a previous post suggests) should receive any benefit from a big-box location. It is not usually the same people, after all, who would take a pleasure trip to both a big-box development and a pedestrian-friendly streetscape in the same day (though I'm sure there are exceptions). Having said that, if there is any benefit to Ottawa I'm happy, and, while disappointed that in this enviro-political climate it is still feasible to build parking-lot centred facilities, I suppose the fact that the parking lot is smaller should be seen as a positive thing.

Originally Posted by fastcarsfreedom

Secondly, wishing/hoping for decay in your city is proof that more than anything else, you love your politics and your agenda far more than you love your city.

It's not that anybody here has an appetite for destruction, but that we love different parts of the city, clearly. Arguing is fun, but understanding is often more useful. Like many others, I want the downtown and its stores to thrive, not sprawl. While not entirely mutually exclusive, the two are usually mutually antagonistic. Some are still rooting for the burbs. In the long run, this bothers me less when I consider/hope that the percentage of big-box enthusiasts among us is declining.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Big-box "enthusiast" is such a misnomer. The problem is that unless you want to damn any and all things "sprawl" related to the depths of hell, you are branded as anti-urban and a sprawl "enthusiast". If you're not for us, you're against us.

[FairHamilton]

Personally, I think the Centre Mall will be better in it's new form, than it's old (current) form.

I find it somewhat amusing, that many on this board want a 'streetwall' where none previously existed.

Let's remember Redcliffe is a 'for profit' company and does what's best for Redcliffe, not what's best for Hamilton or any other place. That's unfortunate, but the way of the world where we choose to live. Redcliffe put together a plan that works for them, their customers (retail stores) and what they suspect to be a large majority of the local population.

They feel the place will be busier in it's new form, and I too think it will be busier. Personally, I spend my money at the location, and will most likely spend more at the new development. And, I must be hardier than some on this board, because I won't fear walking to the site.

All those who've never shopped at a 'big box' please speak-up........

[fastcarsfreedom]

There's no question FairHamilton--I would expect the major tenants that are staying - Zellers, CT, etc, will see significant revenue increases and lower operating costs in their new format...ultimately that's what gets the leases signed.

[DC83]

^^ I shop at Big Box only b/c it's the only place Costco is.
If they had a urban-friendly type such as the one in Vancouver (4get exactly where it is), then I'd shop there.

We're crying out for a streetwall NOW b/c it hasn't had one in the last 50 years... and hardly anyone has walked that stretch in about 50 years. Where do they walk? On the South side of the street where they're able to browse (mind you it's pretty much KFC, Harvey's & a Banquet Hall).

We're crying for a streetwall b/c we're sick of developers holding the City hostage and getting away with whatever they want whether it benefits their patrons or not (ps streetfront facades get a lot more ppl looking at them than those than face inwards... you can't browse what you can't see).
There's such a thing called 'Corporate Responsibility'! Good companies partake in this. Obviously Redcliffe doesn't care about the community it's trying to 'improve'.

We're crying out for a streetwall b/c we want this City to feel like a CITY again, not a converted farmland.

We're crying out for a streetwall b/c we're sick of the same old crap that the City has force-fed us the last 50-or-so years... the car is NOT king, not anymore at least!

I for one will not be shopping here. I may have if one of the buses I was on stopped at the Transit Hub but ohhhhh wait there's no transit hub.

[omro]

Is there a life span for Centre Mall in it's new incarnation? Is it being built in a way that will be easy to demolish and redesign in 5, 10 or 20 years time if needs be?

The thing that shocks me the most, when I look at the mock ups, is the amount of space that is devoted to car parks. I'm surprised they didn't look into underground or multi level parking. It seems like a lot of wasted space that could have been used for landscaping and more retail.

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by fastcarsfreedom

Big-box "enthusiast" is such a misnomer. The problem is that unless you want to damn any and all things "sprawl" related to the depths of hell, you are branded as anti-urban and a sprawl "enthusiast". If you're not for us, you're against us.

I didn't say anything about anybody being a "sprawl 'enthusiast.'" If you read the part of my previous entry that distinguishes between mutually exclusive and mutually antagonistic (and between argument and understanding), I'm sure you know that I'm actually not advocating a "for us/against us" form of debate. How boring. Leave the hyperbole to the politicians. In fact, I tried to meet halfway - agree to disagree, so to speak. Perhaps that is your position as well, but it's hard to discern from your entry.

My own anti-burbism stems from the fact that, among other things, I hate the fact that there's no place in my part of the city that makes the pedestrian in me feel safe to buy quality groceries, or where it is convenient for the pedestrian to do some decent clothing shopping (depends on size and personal preference, of course, but in my case there is very little in town. I've tried). Silly, I know, but there you have it. As FairHamilton points out, I have indeed done some big-box shopping, but not out of choice. The overcrowded buses to the burbs on the weekends are not my cup of tea. I suppose I deserve the inconvenience because I made the choice not to own a car in order to reduce my own eco-footprint (owned one for eight years), and to live in a part of the city that should be more conducive to non-car-ownership. However, whatever my political leanings (which are basically centrist), until there is a grocery store or a good shopping district (I like Locke, but the organic place is closed on Sundays, and I have not been terribly happy with the selection at the Asian market. Similarly, the Farmer's Market has limited hours. Adam's sells old produce, much of it wrapped in plastic and styrofoam) a reasonable walking distance away, or near the downtown core, I'm not going to be terribly happy to see these things (many of which are 24 hour, at that) springing up all over the urban/suburban periphery. As far as I'm concerned, once I have the city I want, people who want to can drive their cars to Barton as often as they please. If at that time I want to agitate about their ethico-environmental choices, at least, having eaten better food and spent less time riding the bus, I'll be able to do so at the same level of personal convenience.

My hunch, however, is that car-oriented development on the suburban periphery will create less demand for much more pedestrian and core-friendly retail a kilometre or two to the south and west. In turn, it seems to me, people in the core with busy schedules would feel obliged to own a car in order to meet their basic needs in a timely fashion. And on it goes, so that non-drivers like myself just have to deal with it or move to Toronto - which would be a shame, because I prefer Hamilton in many respects and, being a large city, I feel it has a great deal of unrealized potential to meet the needs of people who choose not to drive.

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by DC83

^^ I shop at Big Box only b/c it's the only place Costco is.
If they had a urban-friendly type such as the one in Vancouver (4get exactly where it is), then I'd shop there.

There are several parts of Vancouver that match this description - An IGA near the commercial core on Burrard, Safeway on W. 4th, Choices Market in Yaletown, two large, street-facing stores practically beside each other on Dunbar. It's not Costco (like the one right next to Stadium station in Vancouver), but same idea: convenience, selection and economy in an urban, pedestrian-oriented neighborhood.

Stinson - I don't know enough about his portfolio to say anything about his business practices or what have you, but his proposal for a 24-hour grocery store in the heart of the city would go a long way to making the core a viable choice for non-drivers. A new Centre development is great for those who aren't bothered by that sort of thing (I was on Ottawa St. three weeks ago, and the verdict is still out as to whether it has benefited or not from the new big-box development next door) - It's bad news for eco-junkies like myself.