Strike proves that transit station retail is not viable

[lrt's friend]

The idea of integrating significant retail within major transit transfer stations has been hit hard as a result of this lengthy transit strike. The handful of convenience store operators currently in transit stations have been forced to close for the duration of the strike and the owners are experiencing a great deal of hardship with no income coming in and only very difficult access to their businesses.

The idea of significant retail services at major transit transfer stations was first recommended by the Friends of the O-Train as part of their plan suggested in 2006. This strike illustrates the folly of this kind of approach and how vulnerable these businesses would be without an arrangement that pretty well guarantees that transit strikes will not occur in the future. In the current atmosphere of animosity between the union and the politicians, I cannot see that being arranged, although it is likely in the best interests of a city, which is trying to make the city more transit oriented and dependent.

The current situation suggests that we cannot expect more retail, beyond the current convenience stores, within transit stations and that at best, addition retail should only be located adjacent to stations as part of bigger retail complexes, which are not solely dependent on transit traffic. In other words, unless we are willing to take measures to prevent future transit strikes, the current model of locating transit stations next to shopping malls or vica versa is the only way we can intergrate the two together for the forseeable future.

[adam-machiavelli]

That is extremely cynical, presumptuous BS. Transit strikes happen fairly infrequently in this city. I think it's a bit ridiculous to jump to such extreme conclusions based on such extremely rare circumstances.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by adam-machiavelli

That is extremely cynical, presumptuous BS. Transit strikes happen fairly infrequently in this city. I think it's a bit ridiculous to jump to such extreme conclusions based on such extremely rare circumstances.

Why is this cynical? Did you hear the radio interview with one of the affected business owners on the radio this morning? I did. They are even worse off than the strikers as they are getting no income whatsoever. Why is this not a reasonable conclusion that vast expansion of retail that is self contained within a transit station is questionable? I think it is something that should be debated after a strike of this length with no end in sight. I also think businessmen will be thinking twice about setting up business at such a location for quite some time after this strike is over. As a city, we need to create conditions where business will have the best chance of success. If that means that retail should be adjacent and connected to a station but not inside a station, then so be it. I don't think what I am suggesting is that extreme.