2 new power centres for Hamilton!!!!

[hamiltonguy]

A couple of years ago my teacher didn't understand why as a right winger I was anti-walmart. Basically put it's a monopolizer and will destroy free markets. I believe it's the governments duty to stop a business from becoming a monopoly.

Also why do we want to add more supercentres that will just make greyfields in the middle of the city?

[fastcarsfreedom]

hamiltonguy--you raise some interesting points. However, as a lifelong rightie myself, I must say, your desire to have government step and "manage" competition is a long way from laissez-faire, it's unnatural manipulation of the free-market by government--that policy belongs on the left. Have a read through my earlier post, Wal*Mart is not a monopolizer, far from it--and in the U.S. in particular there have been a number of competitors that have reworked their business strategies and are outpacing the larger Wal*Mart in growth--Target, Penney and Kohls are all excellent examples of this. If you ever get a chance to pick up Sam Walton's autobiography, give it a read--it's very insightful and talks in detail about the lengths Kmart went to in the 1970s and 1980s to overtly try to run Wal*Mart out of business. Moreover, in regions where Wal*Mart has become the sole or dominant retailer, it has not raised prices, as some have argued it would. Home Depot, often pointed to as some sort of beacon of light because it pays it's employees higher than average wages for retail has, in the past, participated in blatantly predatory business practices--it's founders boasted at their prowess in regard to driving competitors to bankruptcy.

As for the Fifty Road location--I really can't support what I view as stonewalling--I'm not saying the location isn't suited to employment lands--it certainly is--but the city's approach is that employment lands can't be touched anywhere, at anytime--it's study after study, consultant after consultant--all while investment dollars go elsewhere. Turning your back on $85 million in investments and 1000 jobs looks bad period--to retail, to industry--to everyone. I am mildly amused at how supportive everyone suddenly is toward the city, I don't think I need to repeat the list of coloquial terms often used here to describe the city's Planning department.

As for The Corporation--I have seen the film, and considering it's mandatory viewing at Mohawk, just makes me prouder to say that I didn't attend Mohawk. The corporate world is littered with examples of poor business citizenship and bad human resource policies--but for every bad apple, there are dozens of good ones that simply don't make good documentaries. Can business be harsh, tough, sour, blunt? Yes, it's business. Frankly, it is what it is.

[raisethehammer]

fastcars said - As for the Fifty Road location--I really can't support what I view as stonewalling--I'm not saying the location isn't suited to employment lands--it certainly is--but the city's approach is that employment lands can't be touched anywhere, at anytime--it's study after study, consultant after consultant--all while investment dollars go elsewhere. Turning your back on $85 million in investments and 1000 jobs looks bad period--to retail, to industry--to everyone. I am mildly amused at how supportive everyone suddenly is toward the city, I don't think I need to repeat the list of coloquial terms often used here to describe the city's Planning department.

I can't speak for everyone else, but one of my big frustrations with the planning dept has been how spineless they are. anytime a big box or home developer shows up they're willing to rezone land, build highways for them, build new interchanges for them and the result is tons of wasted land along the Linc and 403 that could have housed thousands of good jobs.
I support them this time, because for once, they are doing the right thing. Like the consultant said, these stores can go anywhere (or close to it). I don't see Walmart complaining about the locale at Hwy 20&53 or Wilson St in Ancaster. To give them some of our best highway lands would be insane.
This is some of our last land on QEW. We need to get the most value out of it possible.

by the way, Walmart is able to monopolize and dominate in large part THANKS to government intervention. huge subsidies, tax breaks and billions and billions in 'free' infrastructure (free to them, debt to you and I).
Not to mention the power they have at the government level when it comes to policy and regulations on business. ie - walmart, mcdonalds and the usual suspects have fought long and hard against new requirements in the US that would have mandated the store managers to drive home employees under 18 late at night (common practice in Canada) and anytime a possible hike in minimum wage appears they control the arguements more than anyone.
As I said earlier, a free market this ain't.

[SteelTown]

It sounds as if these power centres won't get the necessary approval from City Hall. Probably will head to the OMB, but the city only needs to present the current by law for the land (industrial) and Places to Grow Act. So nothing is going to happen with these two lands for at least 5 years.

[raisethehammer]

ahhh, gotta love the OMB. as if it's not bad enough that private business tries to hijack city hall, they get help from the province to do it.

[flar]

I'm not sure if anyone's discussed Ancaster's second power centre, actually Smart Centre. Anchored by the WalMart Supercentre and newly expanded Canadian Tire, there is some big construction there right now.





You can see a newly built 2 storey office building in the background:


These parts were built over the last two years:

[fastcarsfreedom]

We've gotten to the point now where we're going to "celebrate" land sitting vacant for 5 years--"Party on Wayne, Party on Garth".

Places to Grow might have some stick with the Fifty Road site, but I think the circumstances with QEW/Centennial favor Smart!Centres. I'm not sure how committed Mady/Wal*Mart are to the Fifty Road site--if they are that committed they will sit on the OMB...remains to be seen I guess.

[highwater]

Trinity Developments is appealing to the OMB to change the zoning on lands adjacent to the McMaster Innovation Park to allow for big box retail at Aberdeen and Longwood. Rumoured to be a Loblaws Superstore.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by highwater

Trinity Developments is appealing to the OMB to change the zoning on lands adjacent to the McMaster Innovation Park to allow for big box retail at Aberdeen and Longwood. Rumoured to be a Loblaws Superstore.

oh brother....it never ends.

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by highwater

Trinity Developments is appealing to the OMB to change the zoning on lands adjacent to the McMaster Innovation Park to allow for big box retail at Aberdeen and Longwood. Rumoured to be a Loblaws Superstore.

Ah so that's what the big by law sign is for at Aberdeen and Longwood, I could never be able to read it.

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

nothing in my above quote even hints at me having a "hate-on" for ALL (or any) businesses that have grown beyond a certain size.

The quote served as a trigger rather than a source. My question was based on the observation of quite a large number of anti-big-business comments that you have made over time. Note that I did not state that you do have a hate-on, but rather that you seem to have a hate-on.

This is a pot-kettle type of thing. You have a rich history of misquoting me and attributing to me statements that I did not ever make.

And you did not answer the question. You suck.

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

gee, who knew that Mohawk College had such a hate-on for business?? Those lefty commies!

The people who made "The Corporation" are frequently invited as guests to screenings of their movie at business schools --- everyone is allowed to have a say. Not everyone is as dismissive of opposing or multiple viewpoints as you are.

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

.

by the way, Walmart is able to monopolize and dominate in large part THANKS to government intervention. huge subsidies, tax breaks and billions and billions in 'free' infrastructure (free to them, debt to you and I).
Not to mention the power they have at the government level when it comes to policy and regulations on business. ie - walmart, mcdonalds and the usual suspects have fought long and hard against new requirements in the US that would have mandated the store managers to drive home employees under 18 late at night (common practice in Canada) and anytime a possible hike in minimum wage appears they control the arguements more than anyone.
As I said earlier, a free market this ain't.

If there are indeed such "huge subsidies, tax breaks, etc.", then those same opportunities are available to Zellers or any other retailer.

Wal-Mart does not have a monopoly on anything. I can buy toothpaste at Wal-Mart. I can also buy the same brand at Zellers, at Shoppers Drug Mart, at Fortinos, at Bob's Convenience Store. I do not believe that there is a single item in Wal-Mart's entire inventory that I could not readily get somewhere else.

Wal-Mart is well within its rights to lobby the government for changes as it sees fit, as are you, as am I.

[raisethehammer]

brutal pics from the so-called Smart Centre. Nothing smart about it.
by the way, I must admit to getting a kick out of some folks trying to dismiss 'documentary' films based on potential biases of those producing them or editing techniques. Check CNN or FOX tonight...you'll see more bias and "editing techniques" to manufacture the "news" more than you'll ever see in a documentary.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Actually I never claimed network news or any other information source wasn't "massaged"--we could have a long enough conversation about that--I'm merely suggesting that these so-called "documentaries" are just as guilty (if not moreso) of what they accuse others of. The basis of Moore's Roger & Me was exposed as an utter and complete fabrication--but he certainly got HIS point across, didn't he?

[coalminecanary]

I just wrote up an article about this ridiculous trinity proposal next to the innovation park. Please take a look:
http://hammerboard.ca/viewtopic.php?t=102

Most of what I say there I believe also applies to the WalMart discussed in this thread, namely:

Retail development does not offer long term financial or social benefits to the city. Retail, especially in big box form, indeed offers short term cash in terms of taxes paid to the city. But at the same time, it sucks money from the local shoppers and funnels the meat of the profits to large corporations based in other cities, or in most cases, other countries. Locally, retail offers little back to the community: taxes and short-term, low-paying jobs with no benefits. It also creates seas of parking which are not only ugly to look at, but put undue stress on our wastewater management systems.

I also want to say that this thread is ridiculous. First of all, no one was specifically bashing WalMart. Everyone started out by (rightfully) bashing the concept of putting big box retail on one of the PRIME SPOTS along the QEW that Hamilton has. Fastcars, you turned this into a WalMart-centric discussion by coming bursting out of the gate sounding like a WalMart spokesman.

Secondly, no one here is looking longingly at Burlington, Oakville, Mississauga etc. At the same time, we aren't idiots. We know that pure highway-based development is a dead end road. But that doesn't change the fact that we HAVE HIGHWAYS crisscrossing our city. The meat of the arguments here are simply that we can't afford to squander the highway lands on places such as WalMart. This goes equally for Home Depot or anyone else. These visible-and-accessible-from-the-QEW parcels need to be developed as TRUE economic drivers. This means REAL jobs. Not benefit-less crap minimum wage part time slave labour. This location should be pushed as prime land for a shiny blue-windowed skyscraper that a tech company can put their logo on top of -- just like you'd see along the DVP.

WalMart, Zellers, HomeDepot, etc don't need highway frontage. People will find them if they are a few hundred metres down the road.

I certainly hope the city doesn't bend over on this land for WalMart or ANY other retail development.

By the way, despite the many pro WalMart messages that have come up here, there have been no true anti-WalMart messages -- only anti-"retail on industrial land" messages. Fastcars, perhaps you should head on over to the many WalMart bashing sites you mentioned and post your WalMart defenses there. We aren't here to get into a WalMart argument with you but that appears to be what you are looking for...

And here is an animation that shows you what most of us on here are interested in as far as REAL development. It compares the mcmaster innovatino park (real development) with the trinity proposal (false development). You might have to hit refresh to restart the animation:
click for animation

click for animation

[highwater]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Ah so that's what the big by law sign is for at Aberdeen and Longwood, I could never be able to read it.

I was by there today looking for the bylaw sign but didn't see it. Just the Martel Realty sign offering a "30 acre Development Site". Where's the bylaw sign? Also, the MIP sign is completely covered up. I'm sure there's an explanation, but couldn't help but feel a bit paranoid given the current climate.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by BCTed

The quote served as a trigger rather than a source. My question was based on the observation of quite a large number of anti-big-business comments that you have made over time. Note that I did not state that you do have a hate-on, but rather that you seem to have a hate-on.

This is a pot-kettle type of thing. You have a rich history of misquoting me and attributing to me statements that I did not ever make.

And you did not answer the question. You suck.

this is really adding to the quality of this discussion. lol.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Coalminecanary--You have entirely and completed missed the point of my arguments thusfar. Fair to say that we don't agree on development issues--but we equally share the right to come to this Forum and discuss what we believe are the best paths for Hamilton to take to move forward in the world. My "defense" of Wal*Mart--which wasn't really a defense at all--was based on a few years of experience sharing and reading here--I based my arguments on the big picture--the prevailing mindset of many of the posters here--not by looking at threads strictly out-of-context. And, to be frank, when you rail against highway development as fervently as many here have--it is bordering on hypocritical when you then begin to dictate the sorts of developments that are going to go onto newly serviced land.

I believe that highway development is positive and necessary. You on the other hand "know that pure highway-based development is a dead end road" The difference in how we present our arguments is not subtle--I am, and remain open to debate and discussion here. Your opinions, much like lower prices at Zellers, are apparently, the law. I recommend you re-read some of my previous posts--and try your best to ignore any mention I make of Wal*Mart--because you are apparently unable to see past my modest defence of their business practices.

[raisethehammer]

dang coalmine, that report/presentation is sweet! nice job bro.