Centre Mall -> The Centre on Barton

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by flar

buildings built right up to the street is just the first step. The other ingredient is having entrances into the buildings, window displays and other things that create and inviting atmosphere and encourage street activity.

To that formula I would add tall street trees to form an archway over the street and provide shade to the sidewalk.

[adam]

That building is going to be nicer than city hall

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by adam

That building is going to be nicer than city hall

LOL...trust me, no it won't.
I drove all through the site yesterday. This will be one huge ugly pile of crap.

[astroblaster]

i am not impressed.

[Jon Dalton]

I honestly thought it would be better. I was thinking all along that my comparison to Appleby and Dundas may have been too cynical, but it turns out reality is far worse. It's a row of stores with no entrances, effectively a barrier to pedestrian access.

[adam]

What a stupid contrast: new centre mall vs. collapse of GM/Chrysler/Ford

Pedestrian access anyone???

[hammergirl]

Originally Posted by MsMe

Large walls is also an invitation for graffiti artists.

We should start a pool as to when the first tags appear.

[Jon Dalton]

Looks like a candidate for Kunstler's 'eyesore of the month' http://www.kunstler.com/eyesore.html

[MsMe]

Originally Posted by hammergirl

We should start a pool as to when the first tags appear.

I hate to say it but that's probably going to happen sooner then we think.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

I honestly thought it would be better. I was thinking all along that my comparison to Appleby and Dundas may have been too cynical, but it turns out reality is far worse. It's a row of stores with no entrances, effectively a barrier to pedestrian access.

Originally Posted by adam

What a stupid contrast: new centre mall vs. collapse of GM/Chrysler/Ford

Pedestrian access anyone???

Where is the restriction to pedestrian access? Take a look at the latest site plan. There are walkways all over the place, many with direct connections to the public sidewalk along Barton Street.

I still contend that, while this is not what many of us 'armchair developers' would consider an ideal redevelopment, it will be a marked improvement over the decaying mall that was here before. Of course, it is easy for us to be highly critical of the design decisions made here, because it's not our money being risked on this redevelopment. $100 million is nothing to sneeze at. You can be sure the redevelopment being placed here is pretty much what the area's shopping demographic is asking for, otherwise the development would not take place. I for one very much look forward to taking the Barton bus there to do some serious shopping without having to drive to Ancaster or Upper Stoney Creek.

[raisethehammer]

I'm not aware of anyone in the area that was "asking for this" kind of development.

Also, if you can bus to a big box complex and trudge through parking lots with your bags in hand, being honked by drivers who can't believe a human being has the nerve to walk across their precious driving space, more power to you.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Where is the restriction to pedestrian access? Take a look at the latest site plan. There are walkways all over the place, many with direct connections to the public sidewalk along Barton Street.

Which site plan are you looking at?
The one on Redcliffe Realty website shows virtually nothing in regards to public sidewalk access.
For example, if one wants to walk from the food court building to the Zellers via sidewalks, they have to cross traffic roads 5 times to get there. I wouldn't allow any senior citizen in my family to even consider trying that. It's a death wish for anyone of any age.
This thing is all about the car. bottom line.

[BrianE]

I'm not as excited about this project as I used to be. I pictured me and my family parking at Centre Mall to get groceries they walking over to the farmers market and walking along Barton St looking in the shop windows maybe buying things that catch my eye. Getting lunch on Ottawa St. some days, maybe fast food at the food pavilion other days.

I don't think I'll be doing that now.

I have a feeling that I'll want to get in and get out a soon as possible, too much traffic, nothing to look at, nothing to appreciate.

I'll probly go back to shopping at Eastgate Fortinos.

I'll give Centre Mall a try when it opens... but I don't see anything that will keep me coming back.

[block43]

I think we should change the name of this thread since the mall is almost all gone.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

For example, if one wants to walk from the food court building to the Zellers via sidewalks, they have to cross traffic roads 5 times to get there

This is no different than crossing five side streets as you walk along King Street from John to Ferguson. Except, on the Centre Mall property, there is traffic calming like speed bumps and a speed limit of 20kmh rather than 50kmh. Try agruing without the exaggeration brought on by an obvious bias against these types of developments.

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

The one on Redcliffe Realty website shows virtually nothing in regards to public sidewalk access

This is simply not true. When is the last time you looked at the site plan? It was updated last week, and public walkways are clearly marked.

Here's a link to the latest site plan.

[raisethehammer]

I looked at it this morning.
the 'walkways' are the usual tiny concrete sidewalks in front of stores. nothing is connected and to get from one building to another requires walking in parking lots and roadways.
You can already see some of the roads on-site taking shape. Nice and wide so cars can dominate.
To suggest that crossing a downtown street at a stoplight is less safe or equally safe than trying to cross a mega-parking lot in 5 places in order to walk to another buildng is insane.
My bias is against crap.
This is an urban neighbourhood with lots of pedestrians/cyclists and transit users.
Yet, this development has taken shape as if it's in the meadowlands.
I fail to see how you can be promoting this as pedestrian friendly when the most dominant feature on the site plan is a massive parking lot. Please post a photo-tour of your experience the first time you do some 'serious shopping' by bus/foot at this place.

[comadriver]

There is nothing fundamentally wrong about cars or people who use them. The shopping mall is for shopping. Shopping involves taking merchandise with you from the store. The mall needs to attract consumers who will take more stuff with them and are likely to use cars for that purpose. It sounds like appropriate access is being provided for drivers, pedestrians and the disabled in this project.

The walls backing on Barton are not pretty, but one would have to be an absolute screaming nut case to disagree that this is an immense improvement over what was there before and a big step forward for the immediate neighbourhood.

Cheers

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

while this is not what many of us 'armchair developers' would consider an ideal redevelopment, it will be a marked improvement over the decaying mall that was here before.

Not good enough. We already know what good urban design looks like, as evidenced by cities that successfully implement form-based urban design codes. $100 million spent on a transportation and land use model with poor future prospects is $100 million misspent.

Originally Posted by markbarbera

it is easy for us to be highly critical of the design decisions made here, because it's not our money being risked on this redevelopment.

I'm actually more interested in the role the city can play in setting and enforcing good design standards. It's not our money being risked, but it is our community being risked.

Originally Posted by markbarbera

You can be sure the redevelopment being placed here is pretty much what the area's shopping demographic is asking for, otherwise the development would not take place.

It's merely chasing past performance, blind to the fact that the business model is changing. If you think it's too mindboggling that investors could spend $100 million on a bad business plan, just look at the Big Three automakers.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by comadriver

a big step forward for the immediate neighbourhood.

They said the same things about Jackson Square and the Eaton Centre (now Hamilton City Centre). Just like the new Centre Mall, those structures were turned in on themselves, presenting blank walls to their surroundings and locating parking inside the big block (albeit underground, and with actual indoor corridors between stores).

The surrounding areas, denied the continuity of a functioning streetwall, suffered badly after JS/CC went up. Foot traffic dwindled, stores closed, and buildings were neglected in a vicious cycle of depopulation and disinvestment. Call it a negative multiplier effect: the inward-facing commercial establishment drained its surroundings of vitality until a tipping point was crossed and the mall itself began to suffer, since its surroundings were so bad no one wanted to come downtown any more.

[comadriver]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

The surrounding areas, denied the continuity of a functioning streetwall, suffered badly after JS/CC went up.

Ryan, any chance this could be a correlation rather than causal relationship?