…and on Bayview south of Eglinton, and one in a place called Vaughan, whatever that is.
42
|
|
|
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
42
Towered
Superstar
That's exactly it - convenience. As a Goodlife member for many years and as someone who works right downtown, I love the fact that there are so many locations close together. I like having multiple club options within walking distance, because as someone else already mentioned, they're all busy. There actually need to be more locations.
Jacob Laponointe
New Member
The Winners at College park is essentially the "Grande Central Station" of Winners locations, and based on the amount of money it makes, there probably is more money to be made opening another location nearby; just like how there are 4 Starbucks locations in the Eaton Centre.
As well, the TJX stores are merchandised, different stores receive different merchandise, so customers will often visit multiple stores in one trip.
Or perhaps they are trying to attract Ryerson students, many of whom do not venture north of Gerrard, except on the subway.
grey
Senior Member
Look up Hotelling's Model of Spatial Competition if you're interested in a microeconomic explanation for why identical businesses will establish themselves in close proximity to one another.
devjohnson
Active Member
Adidas is currently closed for renovations. Signage is up stating a re-opening of February 2016.
bAuHaUs
Active Member
What does everyone think they should do to improve this building both on the outside and interior. How about uses, for example more F&B offers, unique entertainment, live music venue, more fashion retail, fashion and the arts, etc...thanks for your honest feedback.
Towered
Superstar
Implode it.
Northern Light
Superstar
I know you'd like something a little more pragmatic that 'implode it'. But I must admit, there don't appear to be a lot of 'easy' fixes.
The building is not a failure because of its retail mix, per se.
It's a failure, beyond aesthetics, because it's not functionally laid out.
The obviously entry point would be the corner of Y&D, but the building is right out to the lot line here, and doesn't offer enough extra sidewalk space to deal w/crowds were that the case.
The entrance doesn't feel grand in any sense of the word, nor particularly obvious. I've never missed it, when going to a movie, but it doesn't draw the eye as somewhere to go, if you aren't already going there.
The lower level escalators turn their back on the subway entrance, which, I understand draws people further in; but it doesn't allow give a sense of awe, or a good sightline of what's in the complex.
The main level feels simply like a lobby (and not a very nice one) with a starbucks.
The second level felt much the same with a 'Future Shop' (presumably to be the new Winners)
The third level (Food Court) was in some ways the best effort......but not really worth getting to.
There is too little natural light. If retailers will insist on obscuring the windows facing Dundas (or Yonge) then the retail space needs to move to the interior and the common space against the windows.
Speed of travel to the upper levels is an issue, it's really a question of having to wander off to a differently located escalator (level 3 to 4 in particular) , but also the possible need for a faster ride (an express escalator that gets you from 1 to 3 or 4 directly) or a high-capacity, high-speed, glassed in elevators that are placed to encourage use.
The space clearly seems to have been laid out as after-thought after moving away from the original Disney indoor theme park idea.
Destination retail of a sort could help; the non-foodcourt space on 3 never seems to do well.
But I'm not sure what the obvious fit would be, perhaps another restaurant? (are the existing ones doing well?)
It definitely does not give off a 'fashion' mall feel at all.
I would suggest the only real choice, (if the building must stay), is to build it around the existing anchor tenant (Cineplex) and so it carries a food/entertainment theme.
Indigo Eaton Centre is grossly overcrowded and it seems to have good compatability w/Cineplex in Manulife and did down by 'Scotiabank' as well. They might make a good fit, if a functional layout could be found. But they need at least 5,000sq ft more than what they have at Eaton Centre.
bAuHaUs
Active Member
Thanks for your insights Towered and NL....I guess the best outcome lies somewhere in between your observations.
khris
Senior Member
The escalator up from the basement level needs to be facing the opposite way. People coming up out of the subway here have to fight against everyone coming in, and it creates a real disaster in that area sometimes.
bAuHaUs
Active Member
I'm definitely looking for any and all suggestions....this property is at the "centre of it all" and unfortunately doesn't function as well as a mixed-use centre of its size and location should. For sure it has many functional, design and tenant mix challenges. I'd like to see it evolve into an iconic and highly visited entertainment and retail centre. The exterior could definitely benefit from a complete overhaul (e.g., Selfridge's Birmingham, UK comes to mind), and it needs to connect with the street in a more effective and deliberate way. I'm just wondering how everyone feels, and your insights have been dead on.
Huh. Well, if Bentall Kennedy is planning to spend what it takes to fix it, then yes, it's time to break out the jackhammers and assemble some scaffold.
Yes, it does need a modern, cool, refresh of its exterior. Get rid of the ridiculous fake fans. Dump the battleship gray paint scheme. Stagger window space with more boldly graphic simple wall space and/or ad space. Figure out with your retailers where they can use windows, and then prohibit them from covering them up with shelving and posters: windows should display merchandise to temp passersby. Give it all the boldness and cohesiveness of the Birmingham Selfridges, and (along with the ads) you'll have a colourful landmark that will simply pop to mind first when people are considering their entertainment or shopping options.
Inside, realign escalators where you can to make travel up the entire height understandable: no one should arrive at a particular level and not know immediately where to go to get to the next level. If it can be afforded, do something spectacular like installing spiral escalators. As you have to draw people up a number of storeys, make the journey novel and impressive.
Drop the idea that a confusing layout will lead to people wandering by more retailers and making more impulse purchases, and replace it with the knowledge that a confusing layout will turn people off and keep them from entering so often. The draw to get customers into the CRUs should be the offerings themselves, staged in a cool space. So again, get rid of the confusion thing as the impulse trigger, and replace it with inspiration and pride of place as the draw.
Make the spaces exciting and welcoming, and any issues with pedestrian traffic and retail leasing will be a thing of the past.
42
Yes, it does need a modern, cool, refresh of its exterior. Get rid of the ridiculous fake fans. Dump the battleship gray paint scheme. Stagger window space with more boldly graphic simple wall space and/or ad space. Figure out with your retailers where they can use windows, and then prohibit them from covering them up with shelving and posters: windows should display merchandise to temp passersby. Give it all the boldness and cohesiveness of the Birmingham Selfridges, and (along with the ads) you'll have a colourful landmark that will simply pop to mind first when people are considering their entertainment or shopping options.
Inside, realign escalators where you can to make travel up the entire height understandable: no one should arrive at a particular level and not know immediately where to go to get to the next level. If it can be afforded, do something spectacular like installing spiral escalators. As you have to draw people up a number of storeys, make the journey novel and impressive.
Drop the idea that a confusing layout will lead to people wandering by more retailers and making more impulse purchases, and replace it with the knowledge that a confusing layout will turn people off and keep them from entering so often. The draw to get customers into the CRUs should be the offerings themselves, staged in a cool space. So again, get rid of the confusion thing as the impulse trigger, and replace it with inspiration and pride of place as the draw.
Make the spaces exciting and welcoming, and any issues with pedestrian traffic and retail leasing will be a thing of the past.
42
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I would love to bring the Indigo closer to Ryerson. One of the best suggestions I heard for this place thus far.
I'd love to see this and the restaurant suggestion somehow worked into this place.
BB ON
Active Member
I think part of the reason why the layout is such a dog's breakfast is because Ryerson didn't let them implode the parking lot. If they didn't have to build around it, then the layout could have made much more sense. As it is, the loading dock has to go all the way to the back wall of the lobby. If the parking was moved underground, the loading dock could've also been moved, and the retail element could have extended all the way up Victoria like a galleria. Similarly the HMV building could have been incorporated.
I don't think there's any real fixing the building without demolishing it. I imagine someone will come along in 10-15 years and rip the whole block down and stick a few towers on the site, atop a podium that does a better job of doing food/entertainment/learning/office better than the current state. Even if you ripped down the Ryerson lot, you've still got the elevator cores and stairwells in the way, and forget about moving those. The building needs another passenger elevator for the lower floors because it mysteriously only has one.
I remember reading a long time ago that the pillars for the building were designed to handle a roller coaster that never was. Perhaps that's why the office layout on the top floors doesn't extend deep into the lot?
I don't think there's any real fixing the building without demolishing it. I imagine someone will come along in 10-15 years and rip the whole block down and stick a few towers on the site, atop a podium that does a better job of doing food/entertainment/learning/office better than the current state. Even if you ripped down the Ryerson lot, you've still got the elevator cores and stairwells in the way, and forget about moving those. The building needs another passenger elevator for the lower floors because it mysteriously only has one.
I remember reading a long time ago that the pillars for the building were designed to handle a roller coaster that never was. Perhaps that's why the office layout on the top floors doesn't extend deep into the lot?