News   Aug 20, 2019
 139     1 
News   Aug 20, 2019
 894     3 
News   Aug 20, 2019
 514     0 

838 Broadview Avenue (@ Pretoria Av, ?, 8s, Quadrangle) DEAD

AlbertC

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,354
Reaction score
2,333
Location
Davenport

AlbertC

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,354
Reaction score
2,333
Location
Davenport
Sharp looking design, and will be a fine addition to this area that has seen little development activity. RW and Quadrangle continue to elevate their portfolio.
 

c_9

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 24, 2010
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto
A quick drive through on Google Maps shows several other potential redevelopment sites along Broadview. Could this proposal set the pace for future projects in the East York area.
I hope so! Broadview could benefit from added density and improved street traffic for existing biz. Plus great transit connections so close of course. (I live at Broadview and O'Connor)
 

bleu

Banned
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 30, 2013
Messages
244
Reaction score
0
A quick drive through on Google Maps shows several other potential redevelopment sites along Broadview. Could this proposal set the pace for future projects in the East York area.
I take the 504 pretty frequently and I agree with you that Broadview could be turned into something much denser and more interesting, being so close to the core.
Honestly, so many years after the amalgamation, East York still looks like a compete suburb not so different from Scarborough, with so many cookie cutter houses and couple of uninteresting commerical streets. Such midrises buildings are exactly what the area needs.

Heck, East York is 20km sq yet is home to only 115k people!!! The density is even lower than GTA as a whole. It should accomadate twice or three times as many people so that people don't have to live in the suburbs 25KM away from downtown. Broadview, Pape, Cosburn, Mortimer all should be much denser to form urban walkable neighbourhoods.
 

Ex-Montreal Girl

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 15, 2012
Messages
871
Reaction score
189
Location
Toronto, ON
I take the 504 pretty frequently and I agree with you that Broadview could be turned into something much denser and more interesting, being so close to the core.
Honestly, so many years after the amalgamation, East York still looks like a compete suburb not so different from Scarborough, with so many cookie cutter houses and couple of uninteresting commerical streets. Such midrises buildings are exactly what the area needs.

Heck, East York is 20km sq yet is home to only 115k people!!! The density is even lower than GTA as a whole. It should accomadate twice or three times as many people so that people don't have to live in the suburbs 25KM away from downtown. Broadview, Pape, Cosburn, Mortimer all should be much denser to form urban walkable neighbourhoods.
Cosburn between Pape and Broadview is very dense, with 20-or so storey highrises lining both sides of the street. Some spillover on Logan and Gowan nearby as well.

I was very pleased to see this particular proposal at Pretoria because, as others have said, the street begs for added density and the lowrise building (currently housing a convenience store and a martial arts school) it will replace can easily go. There are many places where midrise construction on Broadview can be built. I just don't want to see more Soviet bloc type towers like those already there, just off Cambridge and also near Pottery Road.
 

Stupidandshallow

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
297
Reaction score
155
After three years and two community meetings the final report for 838 Broadview got rejected and sent back by city council on Nov 10 2015.

They want them to relocate the site access.

We'll this is not possible because they don't have access to Broadview Avenue.

The only way a midrise can be built here is if they combine 838 Broadview Avenue with 840-844 Broadview Avenue infill. That way they can get site access to Broadview and build a more reasonable mixed use midrise.

The architects planners were dead wrong and wasted the applicant's money and time all these years. They should have purchased the infill at 840-844 Broadview and based the design on that to get the right access and better parking spaces.
Why do they want the site access to be relocated?

It appears to me that it's quite challenging and time consuming for developers to build a mid-rise building in this city -- why should they even bother looking at mid-rise if it's going to require just as much as effort and resources as a tall building (in terms of the application process)? Not to mention the constant NIMBYism mid-rises seem to face in this city.
 

ProjectEnd

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
8,607
Reaction score
8,839
/\ Not only better, mandatory per the Transportation Services Department. There's also an existing curb cut there.

Very confusing.
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
13,203
Reaction score
7,175
Sounds like they were just looking for an issue to sound off on. I can't see a problem with Pretoria access, nor can I see how it would be better to force access onto broadview.

If this goes to the OMB it will probably sail through given what I can figure out about it.
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
13,203
Reaction score
7,175
Ok, looked at this a bit more. Planning (rightfully) recommended approval of this one, and it got rejected at community council for height, density, and site access concerns. Typical NIMBYism by the looks of it. At this point I would suspect the developer to appeal to the OMB and settle it that way as they are clearly getting nowhere by trying to go through council. A positive planning report will mean it will likely sail through the board.
 
Top