11th
Senior Member
The latest submitted supporting document confirms Loblaws owns the land the store sits on. This is evident when you look at historical aerial shots at the city's website (namely around 1960 to 1964).
Toronto Bayview Village Redevelopment | 113.99m | 30s | bcIMC | DIALOG
- Thread starter PMT
- Start date
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
Perhaps, you could provide a link to their website that states what you're claiming,....
Thanks to Toronto1834 for the image,... which shows no subway entrance anywhere near Hawksbury Dr.
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/attachments/screen-shot-2017-08-03-at-5-47-30-pm-png.117019/
Here's an image from my collection of Sheppard STUBway construction files from almost 20 years ago,... Notice: Subway platform for Bayview Station only runs from Bayview Ave to Kenaston Gardens,... thus it's actually about 225 metres away from Hawksbury Dr,.... Oh, and Bayview subway platform is actually the deepest subway platform in the entire TTC subway system,... a subway entrance at Hawksbury Dr would require an extremely long and deep pedestrian tunnel and be extremely expensive (it's not happening).
And as for the direct subway connection to Bayview Village mall,..... as you can see from their site plan, the proposed towers and podium at their southwest corner next to Bayview Subway station does not directly connect to the existing Bayview Village Shopping Centre mall,.... though, there's proposal for elevated pedway between the parking levels (these things usually get eliminated),... and the proposed commercial parkade is isolated as well.
Attachments
DonValleyRainbow
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2014
- Messages
- 2,867
- Reaction score
- 1,927
- Location
- Kay Gardner Beltline Trail
Having an entrance at the bottom of the hill to the south of the new tower (as per rendering) is more than sufficient. That would effectively connect the mall to the subway. There's no need for a full enclosed connection. The current situation with the entrance at the top of the hill directly at the corner of Sheppard and Bayview is quite ridiculous.
11th
Senior Member
The tower in the NE will probably be chopped down to 12 to 15. At 19s it will cast a shadow over a big chuck of the townhouses during winter.
I get 124.7m for the taller one, and 108.4 for the shorter one*.
42
*from the first page of the 4th architectural plans document covering the Southwest Development.
greenleaf
Senior Member
I haven't read the docs yet, but am curious about the rational of leaving a parking lot on Sheppard as opposed to the back of the site. I would imagine that retail promenade (saying pedestrian mall is so 1970s) would be better situated on the south side of the site closer to the subway, but I am not a retailer so what do I know. (Maybe they are leaving that as a future development site?)
Bogtrotter
Senior Member
I'm guessing that they want to keep the southeast parking lot since it is already multilevel for higher density parking. Access to the rear parking lot is not ideal from Bayview, and especially Baview Mews or Hawksbury which would become very congested.
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
Remember, the vast majority of "real" Bayview Village shoppers come by car; thus having valet parking and a parking lot clearly visible along Sheppard Ave is desirable for the mall VS having the mall hidden behind building structures. BTW, this existing (multi-level) parking deck at southeast corner was renovated a last year or the year before under the new ownership.
Bayview Village management clearly sees themselves as a mall manager first, who just so happens to have some parking lot land that can be redeveloped for higher density. It'll be interesting to see how Bayview Village mall re-shuffles the stores,... so that different areas/zones have different specialization/focus.
Bayview Village management clearly sees themselves as a mall manager first, who just so happens to have some parking lot land that can be redeveloped for higher density. It'll be interesting to see how Bayview Village mall re-shuffles the stores,... so that different areas/zones have different specialization/focus.
Mic
New Member
PMT
Senior Member
Preliminary Report: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/ny/bgrd/backgroundfile-107446.pdf
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I know it is a bit far from the mall, but a fully enclosed subway entrance is not a bad idea.
People are willing to walk long distances to subway stations if they are enclosed and climate protected.
People are willing to walk long distances to subway stations if they are enclosed and climate protected.
Peter Cai
New Member
My understanding of the design is that the developer want to maximize the use of the land while try to conserve the existing mall as much as possible. The high density residential has the close connection to subway. There is an effort 0f making most use of the land behind the mall. The architectural renderings are very attractive. The proposed outdoor street with connection to the existing commercial concourse seems quite reasonable and ideal.
However, after further study of the plan, I can't help feel sorry for this design. The proposed development though increases the GFA, but does not represent the best use of the land.
In terms of commercial, the proposed outdoor shopping street is not easy accessible and visible, and the shopping circulation is way too complicated with existing mall. Too complicated shopping circulation does no good it reduces the accessibility and visibility of stores. There is no improvement to the existing mall which actually needs comprehensive upgrade. The podium commercial of south development has little connection to existing mall. No convenient connection to subway station is also a shame. Anyone has a long term vision will not ignore or underestimate the value of the connection to subway station.
In terms of residential, the two high towers are too close from each other and from the adjacent condo building. The south mixed use development seems too crowded to fit that corner.
In terms of traffic, we can foresee the congestion between Loblaw and the south development.
However, after further study of the plan, I can't help feel sorry for this design. The proposed development though increases the GFA, but does not represent the best use of the land.
In terms of commercial, the proposed outdoor shopping street is not easy accessible and visible, and the shopping circulation is way too complicated with existing mall. Too complicated shopping circulation does no good it reduces the accessibility and visibility of stores. There is no improvement to the existing mall which actually needs comprehensive upgrade. The podium commercial of south development has little connection to existing mall. No convenient connection to subway station is also a shame. Anyone has a long term vision will not ignore or underestimate the value of the connection to subway station.
In terms of residential, the two high towers are too close from each other and from the adjacent condo building. The south mixed use development seems too crowded to fit that corner.
In terms of traffic, we can foresee the congestion between Loblaw and the south development.
Toronto1834
Active Member
The redevelopment proposal is welcome. But it my opinion the biggest missed opportunity is the fact that 50% of the frontage on Sheppard within a 3 minute walk to a subway station will remain surface parking.
This is the kind of site that 10 years from now, with all of this built out, will be upgrading the interior of the mall while applying to redevelop other parts of the site. This won't be the end of redevelopment here.
42
42