PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : Centre Mall -> The Centre on Barton



Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10

markbarbera
Aug 11, 2008, 9:25 PM
Nevermind my Metro musings. The Redcliffe site plan now lists Loblaws as its grocery tenant. Interesting, it is Loblaws listed, not Fortino's and not RCSS.

http://www.redcliffrealty.com/leasing/retailFacts/Centre.pdf

raisethehammer
Aug 11, 2008, 10:02 PM
Loblaws owns the company...that makes sense.

fastcarsfreedom
Aug 11, 2008, 10:29 PM
Well--the "Loblaws" nomenclature may be explained by the fact that as the RCSS format is rolled-out, they are trying the alternate name "Loblaw Superstore" in some markets--currently Sarnia and Toronto. Elsewhere they are still using "Real Canadian Superstore"--Windsor, Chatham, Ottawa, etc. Not sure what Loblaws' intent is by trying out these alternate names, remains to be seen. Remember, while Fortinos is owned by Loblaw--the individual Fortinos locations operate as franchises--if the Centre site is going to be a corporate store, it would not likely carry the Fortinos name. Frankly speaking, I think you'll see little, in any, future expansion of the Fortinos banner.

They are going through some crazy branding exercises of their own at Loblaw right now--the renovated "traditional" stores are now called GreatFood--the Zehrs units here in Essex County are all being torn-up--some are reopening as no frills, one as an RCSS, and the rest are going to this new 'traditional' grocery format called Zehrs GreatFood. They are doing this elsewhere also, they have a couple of renovated stores in Toronto now called Loblaws GreatFood.

adam
Aug 11, 2008, 11:19 PM
Well fastcarsfreedom, I heard that Bob Loblaw (blahblahblah) is a very powerful man. :shrug:

raisethehammer
Aug 12, 2008, 12:40 AM
lol...Wow. Adam is on fire!

hammergirl
Aug 12, 2008, 12:42 AM
A poster at another board I go to works for Loblaw. This is what he's said in the past about the store names/formats

All the RCSS are going to turn into Loblaw Superstores like the one in Scarborough and a few of the Loblaws will also be turning into Loblaw Superstores. The Loblaws in the trendy areas will be changing their names to 'Loblaw Great Foods'.

astroblaster
Aug 12, 2008, 12:52 AM
Well fastcarsfreedom, I heard that Bob Loblaw (blahblahblah) is a very powerful man. :shrug:

do you ever read Bob Loblaw's Law Blog ?

raisethehammer
Aug 12, 2008, 12:54 AM
A poster at another board I go to works for Loblaw. This is what he's said in the past about the store names/formats

Lol...yea, that's a real trendy name. Good to see corporate Canada is still in touch with real people. haha.

fastcarsfreedom
Aug 12, 2008, 1:27 AM
I think Loblaw Superstore is an unappealing name, to say the least. I don't understand the thinking behind it at all--just creates confusion in the consumers mind--one set of prices/items at Loblaws and another set at Loblaw Superstore.

MatchstickMan
Aug 12, 2008, 3:34 AM
t. They are taking down the A&P name, as well as Dominion, The Barn and Loeb in the GTA, Hamilton and Ottawa respectively--erasing years of brand equity in order to roll out a name/brand that has zero equity outside Quebec.

The Barn has not been The Barn in quite a few years. The name once stood for quality produce in my mind, but that changed with the A&P purchase. I wish that the name had been retired long ago rather than attached to what I consider to be fairly mediocre supermarkets.

ryan_mcgreal
Aug 12, 2008, 3:20 PM
do you ever read Bob Loblaw's Law Blog ?

Breaking: Bob Loblaw lobs law bomb.

LikeHamilton
Aug 12, 2008, 3:34 PM
Most of the foundations along Barton Street are in. There are other steel structures up along Barton and there are at least 6 trailers of steel at the site waiting to be put up. The TD Canada Trust building looks like it will have no problem opening in November. They have been working at the rear with sewer, water and gas but no new foundations in as of yet.

mishap
Aug 12, 2008, 11:33 PM
The Barn has not been The Barn in quite a few years. The name once stood for quality produce in my mind, but that changed with the A&P purchase. I wish that the name had been retired long ago rather than attached to what I consider to be fairly mediocre supermarkets.
You nailed it. That's also my take on The Barn. It was really good once, but the A&P purchase degraded it. Sad to see it go, but it's for the better.

I heard that at one time, a merger was considered between the Barn and Longo's. That could've been good...

fastcarsfreedom
Aug 13, 2008, 12:47 AM
A Longo's merger may be been an option at one point--when G.A. Love Foods was up for sale I think there may have been numerous interested parties. A&P won out--essentially trying to bolster a sagging presence in Southern Ontario where it was once dominant...having eaten up both Dominion Stores and Miracle Food Mart, but was continuing to lose ground to Loblaws. I suppose they felt the Barn brand had some local cache--and patched over almost all the local A&Ps to the Barn name (save for a lone A&P in Dundas and two Ultra Foord & Drug locations in Burlingston)--and going so far as to open a Barn all the way out in Oakville.

The problem was, in my humble opinion, that The Barn as it was known--a fresh market concept with a limited grocery selection--disappeared entirely, and instead became a brand on stores that were identical to what A&P was/is elsewhere. It was an odd play on A&Ps part--comparitively speaking A&P had far better real estate--so it wasn't a real estate play--and the legacy Barn operated somewhat outside of A&Ps market. On that note, are there any "legacy" Barn locations that operate--or are all the locations ex-A&Ps?

beanmedic
Aug 15, 2008, 5:45 AM
The Barn has not been The Barn in quite a few years. The name once stood for quality produce in my mind, but that changed with the A&P purchase. I wish that the name had been retired long ago rather than attached to what I consider to be fairly mediocre supermarkets.

Is it just me, or did the old Barn have a certain distinctive smell?

hammergirl
Aug 21, 2008, 12:53 AM
I was down at the Centre tonight. Sears has started a "Store Closing" clearance. Appliances and vacuums have moved to the furniture store in the mall and it looks like housewares are starting to make their way downstairs. The women's clothing is consolidating and most of it is now on long rolling racks. Some of the fixtures have been removed. Some fixtures have "KEEP" labels on them and many others have "Re-Direct To Store XXX" on them. A quick look said that the Chatham store is getting most of the redirect fixtures.

In the mall itself, not much left. Carlton Cards is having a closing sale. Arby's and Saint Cinnamon are gone. Peoples, Payless, Easyhome and The Source seem to be business as usual.

Zellers and TD Canada Trust are really taking shape. One of the buildings next to Barton street that has been framed seems to have an arch design over the front door.

The parking lot has a layer of red dirt over it.

DC83
Aug 21, 2008, 12:58 AM
^^ I know it's very grandpa of me, but I hope Arby's opens back up into a stand-alone (or whatev) store here. Currently, this is the only one besides Limeridge that I know of in Hamilton. Hell, even Simcoe ON has a stand-alone store.

I thought that arched bldg was going to be a McDo according to the rendering, but someone on here said it's most likely a bank.

the dude
Aug 21, 2008, 2:05 PM
did you just say arby's? :slob:

hammergirl
Aug 21, 2008, 7:15 PM
Oh yeah, the seating in the food court area is for sale.

raisethehammer
Aug 21, 2008, 7:58 PM
Simcoe has not much else than an Arby's.

DC83
Aug 21, 2008, 9:02 PM
^^ They completely streetscaped their downtown a cpl years ago (urban braile and all) and it looks great!

If I had to live in Haldimand, I would prolly choose either Tillsonburg or Simcoe. They're both great small towns. Tillsonburg's downtown mall is actually their City Hall as well... Hmmm, imagine.

go_leafs_go02
Aug 21, 2008, 11:45 PM
both towns impress me.. Tillsonburg especially. beautiful small town Ontario that is self sustaining in alot of ways :)

MsMe
Aug 22, 2008, 1:35 AM
Now I would prefer Selkirk or Rainham areas. Those are only a few miles from Dunnville which has almost everything I would need. Plus this area doesn`t have as many services so the property taxes wouldn`t increase like other areas do and the taxes are still relatively low. Most places in this area are still under $1800 a year with huge lots. And they aren`t in the native dispute areas. Plus it isn`t being built up yet either like Port Dover is. But that`s my personal decision. :)

Here is a map of the native dispute areas. It`s much larger then I thought it was.

http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/LCMap.pdf

raisethehammer
Aug 22, 2008, 2:41 AM
both towns impress me.. Tillsonburg especially. beautiful small town Ontario that is self sustaining in alot of ways :)

....my back still aches...

mishap
Aug 22, 2008, 6:08 AM
If I had to live in Haldimand, I would prolly choose either Tillsonburg or Simcoe.
Wait... aren't those in Norfolk?

flar
Aug 22, 2008, 12:15 PM
Haldimand and Norfolk were amalgamated into Haldimand-Norlfolk.

fastcarsfreedom
Aug 22, 2008, 3:34 PM
...and then de-amalgamated back into Haldimand and Norfolk again.

The presence of Arby's may have been one of the reasons I decided to stay here instead of moving back or somewhere else. When I was a kid we used to go out to one way out in East Burlington - way the heck out Fairview, I guess almost to Appleby, still there? There was also one during my high school days in Waterdown--which closed and re-emerged as a Pizza Hut/Taco Bell.

Interesting that the Downtown Chatham Centre Sears is getting many of those fixtures. That store/mall are proof that downtown malls can work -- especially when there is no suburban mall to compete with.

flar
Aug 22, 2008, 4:30 PM
So deamalgamation is possible? Interesting.

fastcarsfreedom
Aug 22, 2008, 5:23 PM
Yes Flar - for the ultimate example, witness Montreal.

SteelTown
Aug 30, 2008, 2:29 PM
Centre Mall revamp: This neighbourhood surely deserves better

August 30, 2008
TERRY COOKE
The Hamilton Spectator

"It's going to create a friendly, pedestrian-oriented design, rather than a commercial island in a sea of parking along Barton Street" -- City planner Ray Lee on the Centre Mall redevelopment, quoted in The Spectator Sept 26, 2007

Except that it's not going to be any of those things. The tragedy of the Centre Mall redevelopment is that it represents such a missed opportunity for a neighbourhood that deserves better.

Make no mistake about it, if this urban redevelopment was proposed today in the heart of Burlington or Oakville, as opposed to a blue-collar section of Hamilton, the planners would insist on a substantially different and better design and the developer would almost certainly oblige.

But east end Hamilton gets stuck with an archaic power centre that fails every reasonable test of sound planning and good taste. With no fewer than six drive-thru's and buildings that will back onto Barton Street, the "new and improved" Centre Mall will be neither pedestrian-friendly nor architecturally redeeming.

The developer, Redcliffe Realty, seems to have simply ignored the intent of the city's planning guidelines, which call for "buildings oriented to the street ... to create a sense of enclosure, a more human scale and reasons for people to be walking ..."

Instead of higher density mixed use structures along Barton Street that would have created a visually interesting streetscape, passersby will see the back end of single-storey retail stores separated by vast expanses of parking lots and drive-thru lanes.

Rather than design standards that enhance the neighbourhood, the city settled for what can best be described as disposable architecture, indistinguishable from other big box sites that litter the North American landscape.

The city could have seized the opportunity to create a new east end transit hub connecting the CN mainline and Hamilton's busiest bus route, rather than approve a site plan that compels customers to drive because it will be difficult to navigate on foot or by bus.

Reliable sources inside City Hall say there were serious staff reservations raised about the proposal early in the application process, but those concerns were effectively muzzled for fear the city would appear to be anti- development.

There was also a reluctance to push the developer too hard for improvements and provoke an Ontario Municipal Board appeal that the city didn't believe it could win.

Ward 4 Councillor Sam Merulla has been a champion of the project and is unapologetic to its critics. He points to skyrocketing property values in the area and the rejuvenation of Ottawa Street as direct byproducts of Redcliffe's commitment to invest $120 million in the area.

Merulla also cites the conversion of several depressed neighbouring apartment buildings into condos as evidence that redevelopment is fuelling a local economic renaissance, saying: "I was not prepared to jeopardize the largest urban redevelopment project in Canada over a few aesthetic concerns".

Mayor Fred Eisenberger is more measured in his support for the project: "I would have preferred a stronger streetscape on Barton Street, some public meeting space in the interior of the site and a less car-oriented development overall. Hopefully, working with the developer, we can still make some improvements to the plan."

Here's hoping the mayor succeeds. But it's hard not to conclude that the city sacrificed quality for expediency. Shoppers may come to love the new mall. But history is rarely kind to that type of bargain.

SteelTown
Aug 30, 2008, 2:30 PM
Terry Cooke has been smoking lately!

flar
Aug 30, 2008, 2:43 PM
It's an ugly development for sure. Horrible for the Barton and Ottawa streetscape and with the amount of money being dumped into that area, a big missed opportunity indeed. At least this disposable architecture can be torn down in 10 years when big box power centres are no longer in vogue.

highwater
Aug 30, 2008, 3:11 PM
At least this disposable architecture can be torn down in 10 years when big box power centres are no longer in vogue.

True, but what a sickening waste of energy, resources, and landfill space. Getting rid of our disposable mentality is one of the most crucial things we need to do to face climate change and fossil fuel depletion.

raisethehammer
Aug 30, 2008, 4:00 PM
wow...Cooke is stunning me lately.
Too bad he didn't have his brain turned on when he was in office.

flar
Aug 30, 2008, 4:23 PM
True, but what a sickening waste of energy, resources, and landfill space. Getting rid of our disposable mentality is one of the most crucial things we need to do to face climate change and fossil fuel depletion.

I fully agree.

adam
Aug 30, 2008, 4:43 PM
Unfortunately the big box store model still makes the developer the most money.. and is easiest to fill with business tenants. here's hoping Mayor Fred can get them to compromise and at least make a part of it pedestrian friendly.

Totally different area, but related to the car culture.. I was cycling down James North yesterday and reached a red light with a guy in an SUV. I pulled up a couple feet ahead of him to his right side so I was visible (for safety reasons). So he decided to cut me off .. I looked over and there was a can of Heineken in his drink holder. I am sure this is not an isolated situation. Talk about making a cyclist feel unsafe on the streets.

I could have called the cops on him, but he would have been halfway up the mountain (this was the direction he was heading) by the time they arrived.

BCTed
Aug 30, 2008, 6:36 PM
I don't think anyone is a fan of the Centre Mall re-development. I would rather that the beaten-down old mall had just stayed.

BCTed
Aug 30, 2008, 6:38 PM
Unfortunately the big box store model still makes the developer the most money.. and is easiest to fill with business tenants. here's hoping Mayor Fred can get them to compromise and at least make a part of it pedestrian friendly.

Totally different area, but related to the car culture.. I was cycling down James North yesterday and reached a red light with a guy in an SUV. I pulled up a couple feet ahead of him to his right side so I was visible (for safety reasons). So he decided to cut me off .. I looked over and there was a can of Heineken in his drink holder. I am sure this is not an isolated situation. Talk about making a cyclist feel unsafe on the streets.

I could have called the cops on him, but he would have been halfway up the mountain (this was the direction he was heading) by the time they arrived.

You must have eagle eyes. Are you sure it wasn't a can of San Pellegrino?

adam
Aug 30, 2008, 7:29 PM
I would have felt a lot safer if it was San Pellegrino, but SP doesn't come in tall boys..

raisethehammer
Aug 30, 2008, 8:26 PM
I don't think anyone is a fan of the Centre Mall re-development. I would rather that the beaten-down old mall had just stayed.

me too.

MsMe
Aug 30, 2008, 9:24 PM
I agree too. I don't know why they didn't build some box stores in the northwest corner of the mall. That is big wasted space on the lot. It is even ilegal to park in that area. So what good is that space then. And they could have done something else in the corner that they tore down where Kmart was. And they could have torn down the old movie theatre building and put some box stores there.

the dude
Aug 31, 2008, 5:21 AM
heaven for fend we be viewed as anti-development!

ya, cooke is blowing my mind. it just doesn't make sense...but i fully support his seemingly 180 degree turn. bravo.

raisethehammer
Aug 31, 2008, 11:57 AM
he knows all about the 'anti-development' arguement.
He was one who would regularly make it when he was on council.
Now the media has taken up the torch and they use it any chance they get.
They go interview some politician in a lame spot like Brantford and have him agree that, yup, Hamilton is anti-development.
Yea, and Brantford is the cat's meow.

fastcarsfreedom
Aug 31, 2008, 6:27 PM
Have you noticed the Braneida Business Park? They've made some serious scores in that area--logistics businesses, Dana, Adidas, IAWS, etc. Brantford may have it's challenges downtown, but it has been successful at attracting business park tenants.

And yes, to be seen as anti-development IS the kiss of death.

That doesn't. however, translate into me saying the redevelopment of the Centre is appealing. If the City believed it would have lost at the OMB, it would seem to me they might the right decision under the circumstances.

raisethehammer
Aug 31, 2008, 6:32 PM
no, the city did the wrong thing.
they should have demanded proper urban design and a Barton streetwall as Cooke mentions.
This crap is bad enough in the burbs...it's much worse in a dense, walkable urban environment.
This could have been a great development to spur other great developments in the east/central part of the city.
It's the city's job to ensure that is what happens. Not just be a butt kisser for every friggin developer who shows up with another trashy piece of crap plan to ruin another corner of our fine city.

fastcarsfreedom
Sep 1, 2008, 7:21 PM
I think the Centre redevelopment is a missed opportunity, at least in part--I'm not defending the concept put forth by Redcliffe. Nonetheless, the original Centre is--well--a mid-century, suburban-oritented shopping centre--it is not as if Redcliffe is tearing out something decidely urban and replacing it with the new development. Had Redcliffe gone the OMB route, it would seem they'd be likely to win--or, perhaps they could've left the Centre in it's benign state of terminal illness and simply left the city with a large greyfield. I too would've liked to have seen something different built on the site (hell, it'd be nice if it was still a horse track)--but the demographics of the neighborhood have driven the scale and nature of the development as much as anything.

Nonetheless, if you think you're going to lose at OMB, going that route in 'principle' is a frivilous use of funds...take the saved legal funds and invest them in proper cladding for city hall.

waughste3
Sep 2, 2008, 7:53 PM
Has anybody visited the former Centre Mall redevelopment site recently? Also, I don't know when the first phase is scheduled to open.

hammergirl
Sep 4, 2008, 11:57 PM
I was at the Centre again tonight.

Sears last day there is September 9th. They open at Eastgate on Sept 12th.

The Food Court is closing on September 13th.

The new TD Canada Trust Building is the most complete looking and they are scheduled to open there in November. I think the sign said either Nov 12th or 21st.

There is another building at the front that is at least partially enclosed. It's almost in front of where Sears is now but more towards the mall side than Kenilworth if that makes sense. I saw it from the TD/Shoppers mall entrance. It's in from Barton, closer to the mall.

The arches are gone from the mall parking lot.

Kids are still climbing the slanted sides of the fountains. One was doing his impression of Tony Hawk. (his words not mine). I didn't climb but I did put my foot on the side of the fountain/planter in front of Sears for old times sake.

hammergirl
Sep 5, 2008, 12:02 AM
Oh, the repaved Kenilworth Access is quite nice. New ashphalt and new barriers from the bottom, all the way up to Mountain Brow and Upper Ottawa.

raisethehammer
Sep 5, 2008, 3:45 AM
drove by today....this site looks brutal!! wow. not many words to describe how bad this will be.

adam
Sep 5, 2008, 3:38 PM
Let me guess, once its done, if someone blindfolded you and took you to the middle of the development and then removed the blindfold you wouldn't know if you were in a power centre in
A. Burlington,
B. Mississauga, or
C. Centre Mall

DC83
Sep 5, 2008, 3:44 PM
^^ well no, you'll still see the smock stacks popping up from behind!

Worst development ever.

hammergirl
Sep 5, 2008, 8:31 PM
I was just told by one of the guys that I work with that once the mall is empty, they're going to film a movie in the mall and then blow it up.

I'm thinking yes to the movie but no to the blowing up.

adam
Sep 5, 2008, 8:35 PM
not building it would save a lot of effort

fastcarsfreedom
Sep 5, 2008, 11:39 PM
Fair enough the replacement will be generic. As opposed to what exists now, a mall with a department store at each end...how uniquely Hamilton.

adam
Sep 6, 2008, 3:59 AM
I guess it was a real bummer with the old model... you had to actually walk from 1 end of the mall to the other... we are way smarter now! Now with the new big box store model, you can just start up your car and drive from 1 box store to a different kind of box

MsMe
Sep 6, 2008, 4:33 AM
Is it smarter when we will have to use our cars more causing more pollution?

And getting less excersice.

BCTed
Sep 6, 2008, 11:20 AM
Is it smarter when we will have to use our cars more causing more pollution?

And getting less excersice.

adam was being sarcastic.

I guess senior citizens who go to the Centre in winter or on poor weather days for some mall walking will no longer have such an option.

flar
Sep 6, 2008, 12:13 PM
Plenty of people in that part of town don't have cars, but hey, big box stores don't want you wasting space if you don't have your own car to haul away loads of merchandise.

raisethehammer
Sep 6, 2008, 12:58 PM
once again, city hall craps all over east/central Hamilton.
No Innovation District here. No innovation or planning or concern or care about anything from city hall east of Wellington St.
Residents need to fill up barrels of water from their basements the next time it rains and dump it all over council chamber desks during the next city hall meeting.

SteelTown
Sep 6, 2008, 1:42 PM
adam was being sarcastic.

I guess senior citizens who go to the Centre in winter or on poor weather days for some mall walking will no longer have such an option.

They are building a food court building so there's a place they can hang out at.

BCTed
Sep 6, 2008, 3:00 PM
They are building a food court building so there's a place they can hang out at.

I was talking more about the exercise aspect that MsMe had mentioned.

But to the point about having a place in which to hang out, malls do serve as community centres of a sort. Power centres, even those with food courts, have a much more disconnected feel and do not serve that function anywhere near as well in my opinion.

SteelTown
Sep 6, 2008, 3:25 PM
My grandma joins with her posse to walk up and down Limeridge Mall. One time I caught her posse eating at Cinnabon jeez. lol

MsMe
Sep 6, 2008, 3:41 PM
I guess senior citizens who go to the Centre in winter or on poor weather days for some mall walking will no longer have such an option.

I wouldn't doubt the older people who have trouble walking especially in icy winter conditions will be going to Eastgate to do their shopping now to avoid walking in these kinds of situations. And I wouldn't blame them if I was in their position.

fastcarsfreedom
Sep 6, 2008, 3:41 PM
SteelTown, she'll be safe here as long as she doesn't go near Tim Hortons.

I personally would've liked to have seen Redcliffe try to work within the existing context of the Centre--in much the same way they've been investing in Eastgate. Nonetheless, issues which have been repeated too many times to count here have conspired against rehab of the existing mall--and clearly the option Redcliffe chose was to completely redevelop the property for better or worse. I certainly don't find the prospect of the development "exciting"--it is what it is. To say the City is allowing the East/North End to be "crapped on" I think is hyperbole...allowing this to slowly devolve into a greyfield would've been truly destructive to the area. This project, alas, seems poised to breathe some new life into the broader district and to bring employment to an area of the city where it will be welcome.

I still find the idea of nostalgia for a suburban-oriented mall among new urbanists to be difficult to understand. The Centre was the first, large-scale "car-oriented" development in the entire area--the first shift in focus away from downtown as a retail hub.

MsMe
Sep 6, 2008, 3:42 PM
I guess senior citizens who go to the Centre in winter or on poor weather days for some mall walking will no longer have such an option.

I wouldn't doubt the older people who have trouble walking especially in icy winter conditions will be going to Eastgate to do their shopping now to avoid walking in these kinds of situations. And I wouldn't blame them if I was in their position.

fastcarsfreedom
Sep 6, 2008, 3:42 PM
SteelTown, she'll be safe here as long as she doesn't go near Tim Hortons.

I personally would've liked to have seen Redcliffe try to work within the existing context of the Centre--in much the same way they've been investing in Eastgate. Nonetheless, issues which have been repeated too many times to count here have conspired against rehab of the existing mall--and clearly the option Redcliffe chose was to completely redevelop the property for better or worse. I certainly don't find the prospect of the development "exciting"--it is what it is. To say the City is allowing the East/North End to be "crapped on" I think is hyperbole...allowing this to slowly devolve into a greyfield would've been truly destructive to the area. This project, alas, seems poised to breathe some new life into the broader district and to bring employment to an area of the city where it will be welcome.

I still find the idea of nostalgia for a suburban-oriented mall among new urbanists to be difficult to understand. The Centre was the first, large-scale "car-oriented" development in the entire area--the first shift in focus away from downtown as a retail hub.

MsMe
Sep 6, 2008, 3:50 PM
I guess senior citizens who go to the Centre in winter or on poor weather days for some mall walking will no longer have such an option.

I wouldn't doubt the older people who have trouble walking especially in icy winter conditions will be going to Eastgate to do their shopping now to avoid walking in these kinds of situations. And I wouldn't blame them if I was in their position. Wonder how many lawsuits they will have from falls in time.

MsMe
Sep 6, 2008, 3:58 PM
I talked to one lady who worked in one of the food court restaurants said the food court building won't be open for about another year.

BCTed
Sep 6, 2008, 4:17 PM
To say the City is allowing the East/North End to be "crapped on" I think is hyperbole...

And bringing flooded east end basements, which are entirely unrelated, into the discussion is just plain silly.

raisethehammer
Sep 6, 2008, 4:36 PM
And bringing flooded east end basements, which are entirely unrelated, into the discussion is just plain silly.

no it isn't. It further cements my point that this part of town is ignored by city hall.
Try pulling off a project like this in the SW?? Heck, the city is fighting a big boxer at the Innovation Park, not rolling out the welcome mat.
Try having SW or Westdale residents baling our their basements every time it rains for years and see how long you last on council.
The east end gets screwed by city hall.
This project is one more example. Local residents, many of whom walk and use transit are bascially being told to screw off and get out of the way so all the important people who drive cars and use Red Hill can invade their neighbourhood and take away their meeting place.

I get a kick out of people who live nowhere near this area trying to speak on behalf of local residents and share their opinion of the centre mall.

BCTed
Sep 6, 2008, 6:18 PM
I get a kick out of people who live nowhere near this area trying to speak on behalf of local residents and share their opinion of the centre mall.

A) I don't think that anyone here is speaking on the behalf of anyone but one's own self.

B) I think that everyone should be allowed to share their opinions on any subject on the board, however valid or invalid you may perceive them to be.

MsMe
Sep 6, 2008, 7:29 PM
Sorry for the double post. My computer froze up on me.

adam
Sep 6, 2008, 7:34 PM
And bringing flooded east end basements, which are entirely unrelated, into the discussion is just plain silly.



... B) I think that everyone should be allowed to share their opinions on any subject on the board, however valid or invalid you may perceive them to be.


DUDE, you just contradicted yourself here BIG TIME.

raisethehammer
Sep 6, 2008, 7:39 PM
...that's par for the course.

Millstone
Sep 6, 2008, 7:52 PM
I get a kick out of people who live nowhere near this area trying to speak on behalf of local residents and share their opinion of the centre mall.

Would you get off this. You're basically saying all the idiots live outside Hamilton. Guess what, these days it seems they're smarter.

Millstone
Sep 6, 2008, 7:54 PM
DUDE, you just contradicted yourself here BIG TIME.

No. BCTed gave his opinion that the other guy's opinion sucked, something BCTed was promoting in your second quote.

raisethehammer
Sep 6, 2008, 8:29 PM
Would you get off this. You're basically saying all the idiots live outside Hamilton. Guess what, these days it seems they're smarter.

not sure where the term 'idiots' fits in, but people who live in big box suburban areas or out in the middle of nowhere don't understand the urban environment in Barton/Ottawa area.
It's like Kathy Drewitt trying to run the downtown BIA... it doesn't work.

fastcarsfreedom
Sep 6, 2008, 9:05 PM
Quote
I get a kick out of people who live nowhere near this area trying to speak on behalf of local residents and share their opinion of the centre mall

I have no idea if this was directed at me--but if it was, it's disappointing. Firstly, I don't think I, or anyone else here attempted to speak on behalf of anyone who lives near the Centre. In fact, the residents of that neighborhood spoke for themselves when they started taking their retail dollars elsewhere--the Centre has been in decline for years because the dollars are going outside the immediate area.

The Innovation Park example is weak at best--that involves zoning and land-use issues which are not present at the Centre site--which is merely a redevelopment of an existing retail site. Moreover, if the residnts of the neighborhood are really as distraught as they're made out to be by this project, I would expect them to have mobilized by now--if areas like Westdale are to mentioned, it's important to note that the citizens are active and engaged there--that's what makes the difference, not geography or some undefined "importance" factor. What about the MPM redevelopment--are the residents of the Mountain being "screwed" too?

The project, as I see it, will keep those living in that area of the city shopping closer to home. If you're concerned that "important" people with cars are going to come flooding into the east end to go to the new Centre, I think your fears are misplaced--this isn't a 'regional shopping centre' type project that is going to draw people in from far and wide--it's aimed squarely at folks living in the eastern half of the lower city.

BCTed
Sep 6, 2008, 9:15 PM
No. BCTed gave his opinion that the other guy's opinion sucked, something BCTed was promoting in your second quote.

Exactly. I did not say that he had no place putting forth his thoughts.

adam
Sep 6, 2008, 9:22 PM
@ Millhouse: how can an opinion suck? Does it suck if it doesn't match your own? If this isn't the case, please enlighten me.

In my opinion, big box store development does all of the following:

- creates minimum wage jobs that are nearly impossible to live off
- promotes the sale of low quality products from overseas
- makes it impossible for the "little guy" to open up shop or compete at all
- ultimately takes away consumer options
- makes a few people at the top rich
- hurts the area in the long run and is definitely not a sustainable business practice

And I'll admit that this opinion does suck, but I can't seem to come to any other reasonable conclusions.. any takers?

flar
Sep 7, 2008, 12:27 AM
I'm not going to delete posts here, but please try not to make things personal in your replies. All opinions are welcomed, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, respectfully disagree if you have no arguments to make about the topic.




(This message will self destruct in a couple days)

raisethehammer
Sep 7, 2008, 3:12 AM
no probs.
the new Centre Mall SUCKS!

adam
Sep 7, 2008, 9:04 AM
Here's something insidious about the way big box stores operate you might not know. I've heard this first hand from 2 manufacturing reps who have sat down with the big box store reps:

When big box stores first arrived on the scene, because of big inventories, they buy in very large quantities, and therefore their price was the lowest in town. They did this to help push out competition, all the little guys eventually had to close up shop or amalgamate because they couldn't compete on their own.

Previously, there were other distributors to sell products to (smaller stores the consumer could shop at), but now with no competition in town, the big box store sits down in negotiations with the manufacturer and names a price (often much lower than expected), and if the manufacturer doesn't accept it, the big box store rep simply leaves and says call me when you come to your senses!

This leaves the manufacturer in a bad position: either sell the items to the big box store at a reduced price, or keep the product... with no one else in town to sell the product to! Obviously most manufacturers cave in and match the obscenely low price.

This benefits the consumer for the first little while because they are getting the same product they did before but at a reduced consumer price... that is, until the manufacturer has time to assess their losses and starts changing the manufacturing process. This involves cutting corners by using inferior raw materials and/or changing the design of the product so it is cheaper to make.

Now at the same time, remember the big box store has chased out the competition, so they no longer have to maintain such a low selling price. They slowly start ratcheting up their selling price - and at the same time the manufactured product becomes more and more inferior. Of course, even though they are ratcheting up their price with the consumer, the negotiated price with the manufacturer does not go up.


So we have people working for minimum wage or near minimum wage in the stores, and consumers paying an ever increasing price for a product with an ever decreasing quality ... while all this is going on behind the scenes. Who benefits? The big box store, and nobody else.

raisethehammer
Sep 7, 2008, 12:36 PM
that's a pretty good overview.
I think most people are aware of their operating model however. That's been the model since the start. The profit margins are incredible considering most of the junk is made in sweatshops around the world.

adam
Sep 7, 2008, 2:03 PM
The manufacturing people I know make equipment in the US and Canada, not sweatshops and its used in industrial applications. The Home Depot started carrying their products and the above model followed. I guess sweatshops are an even more sad example of why your stomach should turn every time you enter one of these places.

fastcarsfreedom
Sep 7, 2008, 4:06 PM
The supposed lack of competition in retail is a myth. Secondly, when competitors did close (large and small) it was the result of weaknesses in their business which left them vulnerable to competition. In the face of intense competition there have been countless examples of large and small operators who have thrived. Price is one of many determining factors when it comes to the decisions consumers make when spending their dollars.

Yet another myth is that these big-box retailers will suddenly "ratchet" up their prices when and if they are the only operator left in a particularly town/neighborhood. In fact, in the "good old days" shoppers in many smaller towns and neighborhoods paid higher prices due to monopolies and duopolies which often existed among retailers. In instances where a particular big-box retailer is the only player in a particular town, said retailer (which I will not name for fear of reprisal) has never engaged in the practice of increasing prices due to a lack of competition.

Don't like it? Don't shop there.

Millstone
Sep 7, 2008, 4:18 PM
@ Millhouse: how can an opinion suck? Does it suck if it doesn't match your own? If this isn't the case, please enlighten me.

In my opinion, big box store development does all of the following:

- creates minimum wage jobs that are nearly impossible to live off
- promotes the sale of low quality products from overseas
- makes it impossible for the "little guy" to open up shop or compete at all
- ultimately takes away consumer options
- makes a few people at the top rich
- hurts the area in the long run and is definitely not a sustainable business practice

And I'll admit that this opinion does suck, but I can't seem to come to any other reasonable conclusions.. any takers?I don't know who Millhouse is, but I find your opinion about big box development sucks. Sam Walton's first store started out as a little five and dime; he just had that drive to make it become huge. If you don't want to work or shop there, or can't compete properly with the businesses with yours, go somewhere else. You still have a lot of choice!

fastcarsfreedom
Sep 7, 2008, 5:25 PM
Millstone--I think Millhouse is the blue-haired kid on The Simpsons. You may well have read Made In America, which was the autobiography Walton completed shortly before he died--it's quite a fascinating read. Mostly it sheds light on how the "good old days" of retailing is really a nostalgic myth. There is a great deal of info there on how the old variety/five & dime chains basically locked up the country and most small towns and provided minimal service with significant retail markups on goods. In no way am I endorsing or criticising WMTs business practices for fear of being accused to trolling--however, perhaps the most fascinating question he raises is to ask why exactly a specific type of business (in this case the intangible "mom and pop" stores) ought to be subject to some sort of special protection from competition--if their business model no longer meets the needs of consumers. There's also a lot of info in there on Kmart--which generally gets off unscathed in the media storm, but is ultimately responsible for driving out the vast majority of competition which existed in the 1970s/80s.

adam
Sep 7, 2008, 5:36 PM
I'm bailing on this conversation because I have nothing else to offer. One last thing, here's a video called High Cost of Low Prices (http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-3836296181471292925&ei=zRDESIb9FIvK-wGSucG8BQ&q=walmart+high+cost&hl=en) to watch that I hope changes your opinion on the big box stores. I hope that after viewing it, you will see that the big box store model, even if you like it, is not an economically sustainable one.

raisethehammer
Sep 7, 2008, 6:34 PM
Lol...it's so funny to read the same old tired and inaccurate statements like "the good old days are really a myth" and "weakness in business" is what causes all the closures after a big boxer shows up.
funny how that weakness was never a weakness until the sweatshoppers showed up.
Funny how the very few people making billions off the worlds slave labour like to disregard the 'good old days' as myth.

Feel free to think for yourselves instead of regurgitating crap from the talking heads.

DC83
Sep 7, 2008, 7:03 PM
I don't know who Millhouse is,

http://cdn.channel.aol.com/aolr/millhouse-simpsons-400a111306.jpg

hehehehehe

fastcarsfreedom
Sep 7, 2008, 7:17 PM
I pride myself on thinking for myself--you may have noticed in the context of this Forum that I'm quite adept at it. Again, just because your opinion differs from mine doesn't make my statements any more "tired and old" than yours. The High Cost of Low Prices is as biased a "documentary" as anything a corporation would produce in promotion of itself. Moreover the supposed "wave" of closures that has followed the big box phenomenon is greatly exaggerated. The majority of "casualties" have been other corporate entities with no closer a connection to "communities" than WMT or HD or anyone else.

Again, don't shop there. Encourage your neighbors to do the same--and dont assume that those who take an opposing view are misinformed or drones repeating some tired mantra...because Noam Chomsky sounds a lot more tired to me than Ayn Rand.

matt602
Sep 7, 2008, 8:59 PM
thread needs more milhouse.

adam
Sep 7, 2008, 9:49 PM
Millstone, I apologize for calling you Millhouse... it wasn't intentional, I can't keep these online handles straight. But on the upside, Millhouse is a pretty cool guy! Now shouldn't you be buying crap that's gonna break in 2 seconds at the local walmart? Hurry! They just got a new shipment!!

adam
Sep 7, 2008, 9:51 PM
I pride myself on thinking for myself--you may have noticed in the context of this Forum that I'm quite adept at it. Again, just because your opinion differs from mine doesn't make my statements any more "tired and old" than yours. The High Cost of Low Prices is as biased a "documentary" as anything a corporation would produce in promotion of itself. Moreover the supposed "wave" of closures that has followed the big box phenomenon is greatly exaggerated. The majority of "casualties" have been other corporate entities with no closer a connection to "communities" than WMT or HD or anyone else.

Again, don't shop there. Encourage your neighbors to do the same--and dont assume that those who take an opposing view are misinformed or drones repeating some tired mantra...because Noam Chomsky sounds a lot more tired to me than Ayn Rand.

I guess I'm still participating in this thread..
There are A LOT of people working minimum or very low wage jobs who can't afford to shop anywhere else.. Its a vicious circle but you have to take yourself out of your comfort zone and put yourself in their shoes to see the reality of it.

LikeHamilton
Sep 7, 2008, 10:22 PM
Back on topic

Here are some pictures I took a week ago. As of today most of the steel is up along Barton Street for all of the footings that where poured. It looks like they are getting ready to build the foundations for the Canadian Tire store and the strip plaza between Zellers and CT store. Zeller's is having a job fair on September 13th.

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/2286/img5091zv6.jpg

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/2169/img5092za9.jpg

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/3326/img5094jd1.jpg

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/4701/img5096ir7.jpg

I thought this building was going to be a liquor store but it is a two-story building.

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/1020/img5100yo9.jpg

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/8370/img5101yp0.jpg

Millstone
Sep 8, 2008, 1:32 AM
Feel free to think for yourselves instead of regurgitating crap from the talking heads.

I think you nailed it on the head here buddy.

Millstone
Sep 8, 2008, 1:38 AM
Millstone--I think Millhouse is the blue-haired kid on The Simpsons. You may well have read Made In America, which was the autobiography Walton completed shortly before he died--it's quite a fascinating read. Mostly it sheds light on how the "good old days" of retailing is really a nostalgic myth. There is a great deal of info there on how the old variety/five & dime chains basically locked up the country and most small towns and provided minimal service with significant retail markups on goods. In no way am I endorsing or criticising WMTs business practices for fear of being accused to trolling--however, perhaps the most fascinating question he raises is to ask why exactly a specific type of business (in this case the intangible "mom and pop" stores) ought to be subject to some sort of special protection from competition--if their business model no longer meets the needs of consumers. There's also a lot of info in there on Kmart--which generally gets off unscathed in the media storm, but is ultimately responsible for driving out the vast majority of competition which existed in the 1970s/80s.

I will look out for the book. I have seen a few documentaries on Wal-Mart, some neutral, some bad. Most of the bad are "rah rah rah I'm a cashier at Wal-Mart making $8/hr and my whole family is dying why can't Wal-Mart cure all of this they are evil they suck rah rah rah".

Simply becoming educated to not have to work (as a cashier) at Wal-Mart generally cures that problem, no?

raisethehammer
Sep 8, 2008, 1:46 AM
I drove down Barton the other day and almost passed out.
It's just as bad as driving on the 403 through ancaster. Exact same view - back of a bunch of garbage one-storey box stores.
What a travesty. Could have been a great streetwall.