News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Very inefficient use of land near what will soon be a fast, high-capacity transit line.

Unfortunately, according to the business case for the LRT (which I read because I have nothing better to do) vacancy at the mall is pretty low, so we shouldn't expect any redevelopment any time soon.
However, the replacing of the parking lots with mixed-use high-density development would mean a bigger source of customers to the neighbourhood, including the mall. As well as needed housing (have the affordable housing mixed around the development, not concentrated).
 
Many of the parking lots in front of single-story, single-use buildings could be redeveloped into mixed-use, multi-story buildings. The bigger shopping malls (Albion Centre Mall?) could be redeveloped to heavier density. Similar to the plans for the Westside Mall parking lot next to the Caledonia Station on Line 5.

Proposed-Site-For-Westside-Mall-Condos-2-v2-full.jpg

Westside-Mall-Condos-Concept-Art-1-v2-full.jpg

From link.
Not a fan of more high rise development in this area.
Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Very inefficient use of land near what will soon be a fast, high-capacity transit line.

Unfortunately, according to the business case for the LRT (which I read because I have nothing better to do) vacancy at the mall is pretty low, so we shouldn't expect any redevelopment any time soon.
I don’t see the problem, like can we not turn the whole city into Yonge and eglinton? At least ask the residents
 
If not here, then where else? This site is a perfect place for increased density: good transit, lots of land, no existing residents to displace.
The last bit is a fair point, though I feel we should see what the nearby residents want?

Looking at other densification projects in the city, we only think about housing and ignore every other part of rebuilding an area. I feel like if the did rebuild the site we'd get some luxo towers and a metro to shop at. This isn't a rich area, losing the no frills and dollarama would hurt a lot of people, and the LRT is great but it's still 2 or 3 vehicles to get someone to a downtown job
 
The last bit is a fair point, though I feel we should see what the nearby residents want?

Looking at other densification projects in the city, we only think about housing and ignore every other part of rebuilding an area. I feel like if the did rebuild the site we'd get some luxo towers and a metro to shop at. This isn't a rich area, losing the no frills and dollarama would hurt a lot of people, and the LRT is great but it's still 2 or 3 vehicles to get someone to a downtown job
Developers can't put *luxury* condos in this area. That means that the No Frills and Dollarama stays. If you look at the condos around Woodbine Centre, the demographics stay the same.

Isn't it 2 vehicles to downtown? Finch LRT > Line 1 ?
 
Looking at other densification projects in the city, we only think about housing and ignore every other part of rebuilding an area. I feel like if the did rebuild the site we'd get some luxo towers and a metro to shop at. This isn't a rich area, losing the no frills and dollarama would hurt a lot of people, and the LRT is great but it's still 2 or 3 vehicles to get someone to a downtown job
Looking more closely at the site, I think we can both get what we want. The mall fronts Albion for the most part, with a heavy setback from Finch that is partly parking lot, mostly grass. I think a lot of development along Finch can occur without touching the mall at all.
 
The last bit is a fair point, though I feel we should see what the nearby residents want?

Looking at other densification projects in the city, we only think about housing and ignore every other part of rebuilding an area. I feel like if the did rebuild the site we'd get some luxo towers and a metro to shop at. This isn't a rich area, losing the no frills and dollarama would hurt a lot of people, and the LRT is great but it's still 2 or 3 vehicles to get someone to a downtown job
I’ve yet to hear of any residents anywhere that wanted more density. That doesn’t mean density shouldn’t come. People don’t want the construction. They don’t want the added traffic. They don’t want change. They are happy they live in an area but they don’t want any more people there. The cut off for new residents was always them. This is why we have “save our neighbourhood” signs or “say no to townhouses”. Where do these people want new torontonians to live? Where do they expect their own kids to live when they’re too old to live at home. These people are not concerned about the betterment of a city or the next generation but their own needs and property values. It is the very definition of NIMBY. There’s a LRT there then they should expect development. No different than what the LRT is causing on Eglinton, Hurontario and even Kitchener.
 
Agreed, sixrings.

Local input should always be considered, but they're not the only stakeholders here. We also have to consider: What impact will this development have on the rest of the city? The region? What about people who would live in the area but have been priced out? What about the impact on young people or future generations who haven't even been born? The decisions we make about housing and land use will affect all kinds of people who won't be present at a planning meeting and who didn't vote for the local councilor and mayor at the last election. But it is critical that we consider them.

As for local input I imagine you will find the following opinions dominant:

New residents? But that will mean more traffic! 😭

Mall redevelopment? But I love my local mall! 😭

New stores that have no setbacks from the street and no parking lots? But where will I park my six door Chevy F-250 when I have to use the ATM? 😭

Tackling the housing crisis? But I like the fact that my home increased in value 10x since I bought it, I don't want it to go down! 😭
 
The contrast of a dense square surrounded by untouched single family homes is Toronto’s plight in a nutshell. How about upping the density in the residentail area and backing off on the density in the plaza ?

We do need to be concerned about the “gentrification” of retail space. Assuming that those new towers all have ground floor mixed use, in absolute numbers there is ample square footage available for retail and commercial for the higher density. But - if higher rents drive out the existing businesses (many very small individual owner enterprises) and replace them with higher end chains and big box stores, we have harmed a lot of small businesspeople. Not every tower should have a Freshco or a Shoppers or a Chain restaurant downstairs…. the local vegetable marts and dry cleaners and small restaurants and such need to be housed at affordable rents.

- Paul
 
The contrast of a dense square surrounded by untouched single family homes is Toronto’s plight in a nutshell

That's not a true description of the area at all. Immediately to the north is an apartment building neighborhood with some townhouses. Another apartment cluster lies on Kipling to the west. To the west and southwest lie townhouse complexes. And to the northeast is the nearly abandoned Thistletown Regional Center lands, which I imagine will see dense development in the coming years.

I agree with the rest of your comment.
 
Developers can't put *luxury* condos in this area. That means that the No Frills and Dollarama stays. If you look at the condos around Woodbine Centre, the demographics stay the same.

Isn't it 2 vehicles to downtown? Finch LRT > Line 1 ?
Tridel already put some luxury buildings in the area a while ago. 3 vehicles because the condos in the area that wouldn't be here all require at least 1 bus to get to the lrt line. I'm against taking away things from an area that doesn't have much else.

The contrast of a dense square surrounded by untouched single family homes is Toronto’s plight in a nutshell. How about upping the density in the residentail area and backing off on the density in the plaza ?

We do need to be concerned about the “gentrification” of retail space. Assuming that those new towers all have ground floor mixed use, in absolute numbers there is ample square footage available for retail and commercial for the higher density. But - if higher rents drive out the existing businesses (many very small individual owner enterprises) and replace them with higher end chains and big box stores, we have harmed a lot of small businesspeople. Not every tower should have a Freshco or a Shoppers or a Chain restaurant downstairs…. the local vegetable marts and dry cleaners and small restaurants and such need to be housed at affordable rents.

- Paul
The area is full of condos, most made in the 80's when there was even less development in the area.
 
Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Very inefficient use of land near what will soon be a fast, high-capacity transit line.

Unfortunately, according to the business case for the LRT (which I read because I have nothing better to do) vacancy at the mall is pretty low, so we shouldn't expect any redevelopment any time soon.
I'm not sure vacancy is the determinative factor in whether the mall would be redeveloped/intensified.
 
I'm not sure vacancy is the determinative factor in whether the mall would be redeveloped/intensified.
It's absolutely not, and the mall is already in play in terms of a redevelopment scheme:

 

Back
Top