Posted Jun 13, 2008, 1:21 PM
|
|
It's Hammer Time
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,872
|
|
Green light for Mountain Plaza Mall redevelopment
By Mark Newman
News
Jun 13, 2008
The city's Committee of Adjustment has cleared the way for work to begin later this summer on the proposed $50 million redevelopment of Mountain Plaza Mall.
With Don Drury the only member to cast a dissenting vote, the committee last week approved a request by mall owner SmartCentres for 11 variances, including fewer parking spaces, at the Fennell and Upper James site. Most of the other adjustments had to deal with set-backs from sidewalks or private property.
"I'm very happy with the decision," said Christine Cote, land development manager for SmartCentres. "It was what we were requesting."
Under the redevelopment plan the new shopping centre will have 1022 parking spaces, about 178 fewer than exist there now. But that number is also much less then the minimum 1616 spaces required under city bylaws, hence the need the variance.
It was concern over the number of parking spaces that saw the committee last month table the variance requests pending more information.
Darren Hardenbrook, a parking and traffic consultant with iTrans hired by SmartCentres, told the committee their analysis indicates there will be sufficient parking available at the site following redevelopment.
Mr. Hardenbrook said according to a study done in June 2007 about 700 vehicles were parked at the mall during Saturday peak time hours. He noted that with the redevelopment, the demand is expected to grow to about 933 vehicles during peak demand periods, still about 89 short of the total spaces available.
"We're confident it will provide the sufficient parking supply necessary to support the redevelopment," he said.
In addition, Mr. Hardenbrook said most mall users park near the main entrance giving the impression that the parking lot is always full while many parking spots on the south-east side of the plaza remain empty.
The supplemental information package provided to the committee by iTrans states that a May 24, 2008 customer survey at the mall showed that nearly 70 percent of the 1714 people interviewed arrived at the plaza as either the driver or a passenger in a vehicle. The rest arrived by HSR, bicycle, on foot or some other method of transportation.
Ms. Cote said they hope to begin work on a new signalized intersection on Upper James, to be located between the two existing entrances, by late summer. Three new buildings, including a Shoppers Drug Mart are slated to start going up along Upper James this fall and be completed by next spring. Once the tenants are moved into the new buildings, Ms. Cote said part of the existing mall will be demolished and work will begin on the new, 130,000 square foot Wal-Mart either in 2009 or later.
The section of the plaza along Fennell is the only part of the mall that will not be torn down. Another new building, expected to be the new home of the Beer Store, will go up on the east side of that plaza.
Ms. Cote said the final phase of the redevelopment, retail space on the north-east side of the property, will go up in 2010 or 2011.
As with the meeting in May, several residents who live near the mall were on hand to voice concerns over parking, increased traffic volume and noise.
"I'm upset about it because I feel the value of my house is going to go way down," said Fennell Avenue resident Brenda Falco. "There's going to be a lot more traffic, I'll have a hard time getting out of my driveway, it's bad enough now as it is."
Ward 7 councilor Scott Duvall asked the committee to hold off making a decision until he could have a meeting with the area residents to address their concerns but his request was denied.
Mr. Duvall said he received few calls from the community about the redevelopment until a May 23 article in the Mountain News generated about 16 calls from concerned neighbours.
Steve Robichaud, manager of development planning with the City of Hamilton, said residents can appeal the committee's decision to the Ontario Municipal Board, but they must provide a planning-related argument for their case. There is $125 cost to appeal and residents have 20 days once the committee's decision is mailed out to the surrounding neighbourhoods.
Mr. Robichaud said the site plan for the redevelopment has been approved with the usual standard conditions including a request for SmartCentres to show how the site will be serviced, as well as submit a landscaping plan, a storm water management plan and a lighting plan.
|