Retail News

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

You're right and I'm sure their decision was based on substantial market research. It will do much better than it would in Hamilton. However it is still bad news for Hamilton's suffering downtown retail situation and for those (granted, the minority) downtown residents who prefer to shop locally. If I had a MEC membership, I'd give it up.

So you would boycott the company for making what seems to be a good business decision? Does that not sound a bit irrational and silly?

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

the federal building site had no chance of failure either.

I don't know that. You don't know that. Did MEC ever actually consider the federal building or is all of this just based on another wild suggestion from the boards that it would have been a good location?

[highwater]

Originally Posted by BCTed

So you would boycott the company for making what seems to be a good business decision? Does that not sound a bit irrational and silly?

If you'd been paying any attention, you would know that people are talking about voting with their wallets because they believe MEC has made a BAD long-term business decision. You may disagree with that judgement, but that doesn't make the choice to boycott irrational and silly. You pro-sprawl people are always telling us that if we don't like Walmart, we don't have to shop there. Well, we don't like MEC's move to the big box format so we're not going to shop there, yet you're dumping on us. Talk about irrational and silly.

[flar]

Originally Posted by BCTed

I don't know that. You don't know that. Did MEC ever actually consider the federal building or is all of this just based on another wild suggestion from the boards that it would have been a good location?

MEC definitely studied a Hamilton location. I'm pretty sure MEC actively considered that site, and several forum members were actually in contact with MEC about it.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by highwater

If you'd been paying any attention, you would know that people are talking about voting with their wallets because they believe MEC has made a BAD long-term business decision. You may disagree with that judgement, but that doesn't make the choice to boycott irrational and silly. You pro-sprawl people are always telling us that if we don't like Walmart, we don't have to shop there. Well, we don't like MEC's move to the big box format so we're not going to shop there, yet you're dumping on us. Talk about irrational and silly.

exactly....some of these guys like to talk out both sides of their backsides.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by flar

MEC definitely studied a Hamilton location. I'm pretty sure MEC actively considered that site, and several forum members were actually in contact with MEC about it.

yes, MEC did consider that site, but it was too late.
City's EcDev department was working with them too. MEC sent an email to staff expressing their pleasure at the good job and great business case being made to locate there, but had already made the decision in burlington.

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

yes, MEC did consider that site, but it was too late.
City's EcDev department was working with them too. MEC sent an email to staff expressing their pleasure at the good job and great business case being made to locate there, but had already made the decision in burlington.

If the decision had already been made, then it was just a diplomatic gesture rather than actual consideration.

[highwater]

Originally Posted by BCTed

If the decision had already been made, then it was just a diplomatic gesture rather than actual consideration.

You were in on the negotiations were you?

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

So what's your point? My point is the MEC location is designed to be more sustainable than the Toronto location, and its certification proves it.

So what's your point? You've positioned that Burlington's store is somehow better because it was built to LEEDS Gold certification and Toronto's wasn't.

Attitudes, technologies and standards are further along today then they were 10 years ago when the Toronto store was built.

Toronto's store was a leader for it's time, as Burlington's is for today's time. But comparing the two is an apples to oranges comparison because of the 10 year difference.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Since when is a retail location in a suburban setting such a horrible thing? Never mind the fact that describing Brant and Plains Road as part of suburban Burlington is factually incorrect, there simply is nothing in MEC's charter that prohibits it from operating in a suburban setting.

It is bad for me, period. And that's how I positioned my statement, as my opinion.

I live in an urban setting where I walk or transit to get most of my groceries, and suburban to me means car travel which I conciously try to avoid.

I wouldn't term Brant and Plains as urban.

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by highwater

You were in on the negotiations were you?

No. There were apparently no negotiations to be in on.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by BCTed

So you would boycott the company for making what seems to be a good business decision? Does that not sound a bit irrational and silly?

A good business decision for an organization doesn't necessarily translate into a decision that benefits the community, or groups within the community.

Kind of like it was a good business decision for the cigarette companies to market to children, but.........

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

A good business decision for an organization doesn't necessarily translate into a decision that benefits the community, or groups within the community.

Kind of like it was a good business decision for the cigarette companies to market to children, but.........

I don't know that we can really consider this all that detrimental to the community. If anything, the Hamilton CMA is now gaining a new store. If the decision had been downtown Hamilton or bust, there would have been a very real possibility that MEC would not have come to this area at all.

Anyway ---- why is this store such a flashpoint? It is a store that is moving into Burlington and never really considered Hamilton. It happens. Why the big fuss over this particular move?

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

So what's your point? You've positioned that Burlington's store is somehow better because it was built to LEEDS Gold certification and Toronto's wasn't.

Attitudes, technologies and standards are further along today then they were 10 years ago when the Toronto store was built.

Toronto's store was a leader for it's time, as Burlington's is for today's time. But comparing the two is an apples to oranges comparison because of the 10 year difference.

Perhaps I haven't made my point clearly. MEC's standard pf sustainability has been questioned regarding the Burlington MEC simply because of its proximity to a highway, which I think is an unfair judgement. The infrastructure design at this location greatly surpasses any of its other locations, making it MEC's leading location for addressing sustainability. And it has chosen a location on a road with dedicated bike lanes, and is serviced regulary by three bus routes. The infrastucture is designed to maximize sustainability, and it is in a location where MEC members have several transit modes at their disposal.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

this is pretty funny.
Now we're actually supposed to respond to a post that suggests Brant St in Burlington is just as urban, no more car-dependant, not chosen due to highway location, MORE convenient for cyclists and just as well served by transit as the MEC Toronto store??


Mark, you're a great poster, but seem to be hammered on the koolaid on this one.

Don't put words into my mouth. I never claimed the Burlington location to be 'as urban' as Toronto's. Nor did I ever deny that its proximity to the highway was not a factor in its location decision (just as the Toronto location's proximity to the Gardiner was a factor in its location decision).

Frankly, the Burlington location is much more convenient for cyclists. Having a dedicated bike lane is exactly what a cyclist prefers to travel on. Have you ever tried cycling down King Street in Toronto? There are no dedicated bike lanes, and you are sharing the road with cars while dealing with heavy traffic patterns and streetcar tracks to boot. It is far from being bike-friendly.

Certainly there is more frequent transit service to MEC Toronto. However, there is no significant advantage to transit time for the transit user demographic of the Toronto MEC compared to the demographics for the Burlington MEC. And the Burlington MEC will certainly be much better served by transit than you have tried to portray.

The kool-aid reference is now in the realm of an overused cliche. Besides, you have used this tired Jonestown reference in an incorrect context.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

This statement is based on romanticism rather than reality. The drive from the Gardiner to MEC Toronto is via Spadina. The route is made up mostly of an exit ramp leading to the bridge spanning the CN tracks. The final 400m of the journey sees you enter one neighbourhood - the westernmost edge of the entertainment district in TO.


Brant Street in Burlington has bike lanes. No problem accessing it. As a comparison, there are no bike lanes on Toronto's King Street West where their MEC is located.


As much as reality may contradict your perception of Burlington, this site is served by a bus every 15 minutes or better, any day of the week. The bus trip from the downtown Burlington terminal takes less than 20 minutes to get to the MEC shop. From Burlington GO it is a 5 minute trip. In comparison, a streetcar trip from Toronto's King subway station to MEC Toronto takes 15 minutes during non-peak periods, and well over 20 minutes during rush hour. And there's never anywhere to put your bike on the streetcar.


MEC has located where it is serviced by multiple modes of transit. It is not a site where a 'few' buses pass by. Three routes serve the site. There is a dedicated bike lane running along Brant Street. A train station is a ten minute walk away. And yes, it is easily accessible by a highway route.

So what's your point? My point is the MEC location is designed to be more sustainable than the Toronto location, and its certification proves it.


I beg to differ.


Since when is a retail location in a suburban setting such a horrible thing? Never mind the fact that describing Brant and Plains Road as part of suburban Burlington is factually incorrect, there simply is nothing in MEC's charter that prohibits it from operating in a suburban setting.



Good for you. To demonstrate your disdain for all things related to Burlington, you will bypass this location and make a journey that will triple your trip's carbon footprint simply out of spite. Obviously sustainability is not really a high priority for you.

maybe I'm reading wrong, but this entire post was dedicated to making Burlington sound like Outremont in Montreal.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

maybe I'm reading wrong, but this entire post was dedicated to making Burlington sound like Outremont in Montreal.

You're reading wrong.

[highwater]

Originally Posted by BCTed

No. There were apparently no negotiations to be in on.

And you know this how?

[highwater]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Perhaps I haven't made my point clearly. MEC's standard pf sustainability has been questioned regarding the Burlington MEC simply because of its proximity to a highway, which I think is an unfair judgement.

They chose a location with quick easy highway access so that people could travel longer distances by car to get there. Yes, I suppose a few hardy souls who live nearby can cycle there, but it is located in a low-density suburban area so those hardy souls will be few and far between. As far as I'm concerned, any advantages of the LEED certification are offset by increased emissions from customers coming from Oakville and Niagara which is clearly their intention.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by highwater

As far as I'm concerned, any advantages of the LEED certification are offset by increased emissions from customers coming from Oakville and Niagara which is clearly their intention.

But these Niagara and Oakville customers' emission outputs would be the same (or higher) if this location did not exist - or if it was in an alternate, more urban location (like downtown Hamilton). Being immediately adjacent to a highway is more environmentally responsible if targeting long distance customers like you describe.