[Paleo]

The huge parking lots there at the Loblaws and other stores are a huge eye sore. It would have been terrible for the area if Walmart were allowed to move in to do the same across the street.

I make no judgements regarding the jobs or zoning debate. Personally, I have nothing against so-called big box retailers.

I think if they actually designed multi-story urban style stores with pedestrian friendly storefronts (without the barren parking wastelands that go with surburbia), they might find a lot more support for planting these stores in the downtown area.

If you want to play in areas with prime real estate, then you should be prepared to invest. Real urban stuff not the cheap, ugly, bottom of the barrel stuff that they build now.

I for one would welcome it if these companies were to innovate in this manner.

 

[valkoholic]

Does anyone have a link to the actual descision? I'm really struggling to find it on the OMB website. Any help would be much appreciated.

 

[realtycoon]

Great. So the residents won. Now they have just sealed the fate of the site.. One of 3 things will now happen
- Site will sit empty, perhaps even become a homeless tent city as the old Home Depot site on the waterfront was.
- Smart Centres will present a new proposal and the whole fight starts again.
- Site will sit empty for 4-5 yrs, then new condos will be built on the site.. (Which is counter to the whole "we need good, high-paying, permanent jobs in the area" argument)

All in all, there will be no new jobs on the site.

No "Knowledge based, or industrial jobs" would think of moving to that site as it is a lot cheaper (Commercial property taxes are outragous) and more accessable (highways, rail, airport) to locate in the 905. And with the threat of removing the Gardiner, why would any industrial/commercial use that depends on delivery/distrubition even think of that site.

Good job Leslieville, enjoy your vacant lot!

(Now, I'm not entirely supportive of a Wal-Mart, but as one who actually studied the proposal, there was a lot of room for the community to work together with the developer to make something good of the site, but the community for the most part, decided to declare war, without considering all the facts)

 

[Dilla]

Good job Leslieville, enjoy your vacant lot!

Judging by the community response to this proposal, I think they're satisfied enough with the empty lot, and will enjoy it.

- Site will sit empty, perhaps even become a homeless tent city as the old Home Depot site on the waterfront was.

Oh, come on. Yes, now that this isn't a 1700 space parking lot behemoth, it could become a portal to hell! If only we'd let the proposal go through unchallenged.

- Smart Centres will present a new proposal and the whole fight starts again.

Well, maybe the new proposal will be more in tune with how the neighbourhood sees itself growing.

- Site will sit empty for 4-5 yrs, then new condos will be built on the site..

Great.

 

[digi]

One of 3 things will now happen

Can you tell me what will happen to the economy over the next 5 years, since you're magic and know everything?

 

[realtycoon]

Oh, come on. Yes, now that this isn't a 1700 space parking lot behemoth, it could become a portal to hell! If only we'd let the proposal go through unchallenged.
.

Better 1,700 spaces on site then everyone fighting for parking on all the side streets, contributing to traffic and pollution and taking your parking spot in front of your home! (eg. The Beaches on any weekend)

 

[realtycoon]

Can you tell me what will happen to the economy over the next 5 years, since you're magic and know everything?

So what do you think will happen to the site, as you think you are so funny! (and I'm trying to stay on topic here)

 

[Dilla]

Better 1,700 spaces on site then everyone fighting for parking on all the side streets, contributing to traffic and pollution and taking your parking spot in front of your home! (eg. The Beaches on any weekend)

So, 1700 new spots for cars somehow doesn't contribute to traffic and pollution in the neighbourhood, but NOT building a mega mall with 1700 does? Riiiiiiiiiight.

How about better public transportation to the area, and designing downtown neighbourhoods around people instead of cars? Do you think that might help with these problems?

Since when is the spot in front of your house yours? If your own parking spot that close to your door is that important, there's a few places in Brampton waiting for you.

 

[realtycoon]

So, 1700 new spots for cars somehow doesn't contribute to traffic and pollution in the neighbourhood, but NOT building a mega mall with 1700 does? Riiiiiiiiiight.

How about better public transportation to the area, and designing downtown neighbourhoods around people instead of cars? Do you think that might help with these problems?

Since when is the spot in front of your house yours? If you're own parking spot that close to your door is that important, there's a few places in Brampton waiting for you.

Better transit is the soultion! I agree, the problem is that the governments (all levels) can't seem to get around to doing anything other than non-stop studies, environmental assessments, surveys, consultant reports and on the list goes. Transit has been studied to death, and we know it helps.

But since transit is not an option for a while, the cars will come, and they need to park somewhere. Better on the site than on the neighbouring side streets.

I agree that the spot in front of my house is not my property, but there are many in downtown neighbouhoods who seem to think it is the case (how many times have you seen pylons, chairs, yellow caution tape, hockey nets etc blocking and "holding" parking spots in front of homes)

 

[299 bloor call control.]

(Now, I'm not entirely supportive of a Wal-Mart, but as one who actually studied the proposal, there was a lot of room for the community to work together with the developer to make something good of the site, but the community for the most part, decided to declare war, without considering all the facts)

The thing is - SmartCentres has a very weak track record when it comes to following through with what they promise to build. They may come up with fabulous urban looking renderings, but time after time has cheaped out and reneged on their promises.

http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=163643

I think if anything, it was the developer who was trying to mislead residents, and was the one who created the war.

 

[realtycoon]

The thing is - SmartCentres has a very weak track record when it comes to following through with what they promise to build. They may come up with fabulous urban looking renderings, but time after time has cheaped out and reneged on their promises.

http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=163643

I think if anything, it was the developer who was trying to mislead residents, and was the one who created the war.

I'm not a big fan of the source (Now Magazine: Too left-wing, anti-development) but I will admit they make a good point.

However, Leaside was a few years ago and the Smart Centres development at Bathurst and Centre (Thornhill) seems to show that Smart Centres is going in the right direction.

 

[realtycoon]

I think if anything, it was the developer who was trying to mislead residents, and was the one who created the war.

At least the developer didn't resort to threats of violence
http://www.thestar.com/article/529944

This alone, for me anyways takes away any credibility that the community had in their fight!

(BTW: I don't live in the area, I don't work for Smart Centres or any of the potential tenants)

 

[299 bloor call control.]

I think it's incredibly ignorant for you to paint the whole community in the same brush as the one or two people who were probably behind a poster campaign.

The "going in the right direction" SmartCentre in Thornhill might be appropriate, and encouraged, in the suburbs, but this is not suburbia. This is a better example - http://spacingmontreal.ca/?p=286

 

[Dilla]

But since transit is not an option for a while, the cars will come, and they need to park somewhere. Better on the site than on the neighbouring side streets.

If the mall isn't built, the cars won't come. Better to not build the mall which forces you to make such a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" decision.

I'm glad to hear you agree about the transit. Although it may not being coming anytime too soon (c'mon DRL), what we decide now will effect how, and indeed if, it comes later.
In that, if there is a gigantic *ahem* "Life Style Centre" in this location with that many parking spots, it will make a lot less sense to even try to build transit to the area later on. It will have become a place for cars, and building transit won't change what's already there.

Besides, 1700 spaces may not be enough capacity for such a huge complex right off of two 6 lane expressways (DVP and Gardiner). During the busy shopping seasons, the city streets would be the only place left for people wanting to go the the mall to park.

And as for people putting up lawn chairs and whatnot, just get out of your car and move them (or drive right over them, depending on how nice your car is). Screw those jerks.

 

[ShonTron]

I'm not a big fan of the source (Now Magazine: Too left-wing, anti-development) but I will admit they make a good point.

However, Leaside was a few years ago and the Smart Centres development at Bathurst and Centre (Thornhill) seems to show that Smart Centres is going in the right direction.

Forgive me if I let out an editorial chuckle. Heh heh.

What, might you ask faces the important intersection of Bathurst and Centre? A blank wall of a Wal-Mart! The Thornhill "Smart" Centre isn't really a great example of a model to follow.