SmartCentre development at Hespeler & Pinebush

[westwardloo]

Anyone have anymore information on this?

   

https://www.cambridgetimes.ca/news-story...cambridge/

I appreciate Smartcentre is finally starting to right the wrong that they have done to our cities, even if it is a completely financial business decision. I think 35 storey's might be overkill in this area. I would prefer a midrise master planned development. Which would allow other strip malls along Hespeler to be redeveloped. 

Not sure whether the cities loses anything by supporting smartcentre's rezoning application to the MZO, but seems like a no brainer if the city wants to justify the LRT in the future.

[ijmorlan]

Not sure whether the cities loses anything by supporting smartcentre's rezoning application to the MZO, but seems like a no brainer if the city wants to justify the LRT in the future.

Unfortunately the proposed LRT route avoids the nearby corner of Hespeler and Eagle, more or less because it is apparently impossible for what are essentially long buses on steel wheels to contend with a level crossing even though normal sized buses on rubber wheels have no problem with them.

[taylortbb]

IMO it looks terrible. I'm all for redeveloping SmartCentres, but it pushes all the density towards the 401. A much better plan would involve focusing the intensification along Hespler Rd, which is might have a hope of (in 20-30 years) starting to become a pedestrian corridor. The 401 (obviously) never will be, so pushing housing density towards that edge of the site just guarantees a suburban car-oriented form.

I suspect this development, as currently designed, will have as many cars as people. While taking demand away from actually urban developments.

[ac3r]

Yeah I would not want to see that built in Cambridge, it's in such a poor location and all the negatives that come with it are there.

[westwardloo]

Personally I think anything is better than the sea of parking at the current power center. Agreed needs to be a larger park space and maybe max 10 stories. Wouldn't want this development taking all the potential demand for housing in the area. It is also probably still with in a 10min walk to a future lrt stop.  It may be more car oriented, but it a small step in the right direction for this area of Cambridge. As much as some here, including me, love to hate on cars some people still want cars, but don't necessarily want to live in the suburbs or a downtown area. This would have quick access to the 401, a short bus to the 3 town centre's and is close to a future LRT stop. I think in the end the market will decide the fate of this proposal. I imagine it will definitely be scaled back.

[Bjays93]

This is a good space for redevelopment, but it is not the place I would want something of this scale. This should be pushed closer to the delta and along the lrt so it's less car oriented and closer to downtown. This is essentially just a massive suburban cluster sandwiched between 2 highways.

[Momo26]

That's the ugliest thing I've seen on this forum - and there's no shortage of ugly developments in this region.

I like the idea - a Square One almost intensification in one place - but the Smart Centre (a handful of box and small box stores) ain't no Square One. Nor is it a transit hub connecting people and students in 4 different directions with post secondary institutions nearby.

This isn't a good proposal.

[Acitta]

I don't know why developers always want to build high-rise residential so close to noisy highways. When I visit my brother in London who lives in a high-rise on busy Wonderland Rd., I have to close the window in the guest room in order to sleep. I wouldn't want to live in one of those buildings.

[plam]

I don't know why developers always want to build high-rise residential so close to noisy highways. When I visit my brother in London who lives in a high-rise on busy Wonderland Rd., I have to close the window in the guest room in order to sleep. I wouldn't want to live in one of those buildings.

Low-rise next to highways is also pretty bad too and probably bad for peoples' health. Maybe highways is the problem.

[Belmonster]

Eh. It wouldn't be my choice of location, but if they think there's enough demand to justify that kind of high density development, then more power to them. More housing means more affordable housing!

[jamincan]

How effective are the fences they have all along the Conestoga Pkwy at mitigating car noise? It's my understanding that noise-abatement is the primary purpose of installing them and anecdotally when running alongside the ones between Ottawa and Frederick, they seem to work fairly well, but I don't actually live next to them. Obviously they would do nothing for a high-rise building either.

Hasn't Smart Centres done similar redevelopments elsewhere? I seem to recall seeing a redevelopment something like this in Montreal that was right at a major highway interchange, though I'm not sure how successful it's been. I agree that it would be more ideal to push the intensification a bit further away from the highway toward the Cambridge Centre, but I guess one of the challenges with these sort of things is that there has to be some level of collaboration between landowners and the city. It doesn't do much good to promote intensification at the Cambridge Centre if Morguard isn't interested in redeveloping that property (although I seem to recall a proposal for intensification there in the past - was that driven by the city or the land owner?

My major concern with major projects like this is that the land owner is selling the up-zoning on the basis of a full redevelopment of the site, but realistically a redevelopment like that likely wouldn't happen except over a long period of time. It puts a lot of eggs in one basket and makes the whole project far more risky and if the city isn't very careful, what is actually delivered in the end may not be what was promised.

[westwardloo]

I understand the concern from most here, but at the end of the day the market will decide whether there is enough demand here. Personally I wouldn't want to live in a condo next to a hwy, but I do think there is demand for all types of housing. This may be "car" oriented but it is a 100% more pedestrian friendly than what is currently there or any of the new subdivision in south Kitchener/ Galt. 

To Jaminican's point. It all well and good to want this type of redevelopment further down Hespeler, but I haven't seen any landowner step up and submit a proposal? The BRT lite is obviously is not a development boom to the area like and LRT can be. At some point there needs to be large developments along this stretch that shows there is a demand for higher order transit if Cambridge ever wants the LRT extension. 

Obviously we are not the GTA, but I would point to several developments along a highway and a major road. Vaughn Metro Centre, Markham "Downtown", Coverdale mall, and the area around yorkdale mall.  These are not a 100% walk everywhere type of neighborhoods, but most of them are close to Rapid transit and provide an alternative to living DT, or in a suburb where you have to drive.

[mastermind]

My major concern with major projects like this is that the land owner is selling the up-zoning on the basis of a full redevelopment of the site, but realistically a redevelopment like that likely wouldn't happen except over a long period of time. It puts a lot of eggs in one basket and makes the whole project far more risky and if the city isn't very careful, what is actually delivered in the end may not be what was promised.

This is true, like how Barrel Yards has been ongoing for 10 years and is still only half built.  Whatever expectations anyone had at the beginning have certainly not been met, and with half the site still not built who knows what will actually fill the rest of it someday.

[tomh009]

My major concern with major projects like this is that the land owner is selling the up-zoning on the basis of a full redevelopment of the site, but realistically a redevelopment like that likely wouldn't happen except over a long period of time. It puts a lot of eggs in one basket and makes the whole project far more risky and if the city isn't very careful, what is actually delivered in the end may not be what was promised.

This is true, like how Barrel Yards has been ongoing for 10 years and is still only half built.  Whatever expectations anyone had at the beginning have certainly not been met, and with half the site still not built who knows what will actually fill the rest of it someday.

For sure the city would not have expected the Barrel Yards to be fully built within a few years; realistically it would not happen in much less than ten, even without delays. A single developer combined with the ability of the city to absorb the additional rental capacity would always mean a long project. The same would apply to other huge projects, such as Schneiders, Grand Market District or Elmsdale as well. And this one.

All that said, I'm still not a fan of building a huge development here.

[white_brian]

I think it is a good idea to the point that other mall property owners could see a benefit to using some of their land for residential. If you are out and about during the night or even during lockdown, you had all this land sitting dormant and not being used. I think that with intensification of a property they could have a sliding scale over time for increases to property taxes as the population of a site increases