Oxford's mall redevelopment portfolio right now is mighty impressive. I forgot that they were advancing on this one too!

Dare I say that this looks more like an urban environment compared to some of the other mall redevelopment plans?

It is probably unrealistic - it will not be as animated as they portrayed, for one. I for one cannot see even 1/3 the amount of pedestrians as they have depicted.

AoD
 
From the cover letter that's in the updated Docs:

1610921557109.png


Also to be found is the phasing plan.

1610921786325.png


Lowest Height : 1s

Tallest Height: 50s ( 2 buildings)

Most common 27-29s ( 6 buildings)

Elevation Drawings:

1610922271829.png


1610922336682.png


1610922464774.png


1610922512850.png
 
Also to be found is the phasing plan.

View attachment 294740

Lowest Height : 1s

Tallest Height: 50s ( 2 buildings)

Most common 27-29s ( 6 buildings)
Another view of the block plan in this image here:

1610922859165.png



Still only could find a total unit count of 7,900 units. I wish they did a breakdown by block or phase.

edit: actually hold that thought. Found it at the end of the planning rationale.

1610922955992.png
 
I would really like to see a plan that involved, ultimately tearing down the mall; and that layed out a public street grid across the entire site.

That's just me blue-skying, but I think it would be desirable beyond long-term fantasy in terms of evaluating the block plan for these phases to see how an eventual build-out would function.

I think, in terms of integrating the site to surrounding areas, and lessening traffic on Dufferin, I'd like to see an extension of Marlee on the table, not just to Ranee, but across the 401 (no interchange) and link up to a new N-S road through the Downview lands, terminating at Sheppard.
 
Like others have noted, those pedestrian volumes look too optimistic. I'll also echo the desirability for the mall footprint to be shrunk. Why do the big mall owners seem to be averse to building towers right over top of their malls? Or is that something to do with technical feasibility?


Don't like this. Cars shouldn't be mingling with pedestrians like this. Hope to see strict separation between cars and pedestrians.
 
Exactly. The idea that this pandemic is a one off is bizarre. After this pandemic there will be another, then another, then another. The only unknown is how long between them and how destructive they'll be. With the permafrost melting we'll inevitably come into contact with contagions that haven't seen the light of day in tens of thousands of years. Ominous but it's best to be prepared than pretend these things aren't going to happen.
 
Exactly. The idea that this pandemic is a one off is bizarre. After this pandemic there will be another, then another, then another. The only unknown is how long between them and how destructive they'll be. With the permafrost melting we'll inevitably come into contact with contagions that haven't seen the light of day in tens of thousands of years. Ominous but it's best to be prepared than pretend these things aren't going to happen.
I'm not sure anyone is making that claim either. As there will always be the potential for pandemics as long there are humans still around populating. However, it's really more about how we respond to them will always be crucial how to best contain them. I'm not sure that needs to include how we design and build communities with that in mind.
 
I'm not sure anyone is making that claim either. As there will always be the potential for pandemics as long there are humans still around populating. However, it's really more about how we respond to them will always be crucial how to best contain them. I'm not sure that needs to include how we design and build communities with that in mind.
I would beg to differ, I know a couple of the big wigs are fundamentally changing how they plan projects specifically due to Covid- these are projects with shovels not hitting the ground for 3-5 years.
 
Never say never. Maybe we'll have a Covid-2031🤷‍♂️

The most profitable mall in Canada isn't going to be demolished anytime soon.

I wasn't suggesting it would be.

I was suggesting I want to see the plan for when that day comes (just at the block layout level), so as to make the current proposal is consistent with the desired build out.
 
I wasn't suggesting it would be.

I was suggesting I want to see the plan for when that day comes (just at the block layout level), so as to make the current proposal is consistent with the desired build out.

In 50+ years we'll probably have very different expectations of what an ideal street (and street grid) should be: generation alpha/beta won't have the same attachment to cars as previous generations. With luck, Allen Road (as a freeway structure) will be gone too aside from basic 401 ramps
 
Last edited:
If we're not going to significantly change our built form and at the rate we're building transit, I don't see how the next two generations will be much less reliant on cars.
 
If we're not going to significantly change our built form and at the rate we're building transit, I don't see how the next two generations will be much less reliant on cars.

It's not just cars either; what the plan I seek would do is allow for corridors for movement.

Whether that's cars, or pedestrians or cyclists or transit etc etc. is TBD is in the distant future.

But if the corridor is built over, it becomes vastly more problematic and expensive to do later.

I'm thinking particularly of an extension of Marlee which was contemplated in the past as far north as Ranee.

But with the opening of the Downsview lands to development, it would make sense as a corridor; and it would be nice to see it set aside.

If it turns out it's not required in 40 years........nothing lost; it can be park space, or built on or whatever works.
 
If we're not going to significantly change our built form and at the rate we're building transit, I don't see how the next two generations will be much less reliant on cars.

They'll be just as reliant (likely to be rented by the minute for most) but much less attached to them emotionally. They almost certainly will not have the same representation of personal freedom that cars have for a majority of today's 40+ year olds. Changes in general roadway allocation likely won't cause the same angry panic in a 50 year old in 2070 as today.

Basically, everybody in the province will probably see vehicles strictly as one of several transportation modes, not unlike many in downtown today with fewer strong opinions about the best way.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top