khris
Senior Member
People YES, bikes NO.
|
|
|
- Thread starter jeicow
- Start date
People YES, bikes NO.
Tuscani01
Senior Member
Why not? They are kids, and kids will be kids. Theres no harm being done.
RC8
Senior Member
As far as squares go something like this is much more desirable in my opinion:
As for strictly civic squares, it's just a matter of time before York Quay comfortably claims that spot.
I wonder if Mississauga ever plans on allowing proper density in its downtown. The tall buildings there right now are too far away from one another to create a real community.
taal
Senior Member
To be fair you're comparing it to something much smaller. But no there are better examples in Canada ... that doesn't mean it's not a great development though.
After seeing it person though it lacks the refine / detail of Sugar Beach / Sherborne comnons, but I have no idea how Toronto built that i.e. it's leaps and bounds ahead of anything built here in so long.
Regarding the 'downtown' I'm going to argue that comment doesn't make much sense. MCC has always been very dense and yet had very little activity at street level. SCC is similar but to a much lesser degree. Density in no way equates to vibrancy. Check out many of the smaller neightoubood in Toronto to see what I mean i.e. Queen W / Queen E / ...
What creates that are interesting things at street level including retail for people. This sort of project helps that !
I found the Mayor's comment regarding how Mississauga residents can now do things in their own backyards ... it's funny because it's implying there was nothing here whatsoever before when it was in fact a decent square 1/2 years ago as well!
doady
Senior Member
That is wrong. Most of MCC has always been undeveloped. All the developments in the past 10 years or so have been on greenfields (i.e. undeveloped land). Pedestrian activity in recent years increased a lot due to development. There are still a lot of greenfields in MCC. There still a lot of parking lots that need to be redeveloped as well.
taal
Senior Member
No ...
Yes there are many undeveloped parcels, but at the same time there were many many dence blocks in MCC. Density in no way equates to high levels of pedesertian activity. My point is as simple as that, if you argue once they develop all the parcels things will change ... I agree! But thats because what the new developments bring at street level.
drum118
Superstar
Have you seen what takes place at Dundas Sq on a very hot day? No different there or here, let alone else where.
You want the job of being traffic control here, be my guess.
aleesia
Active Member
They are already doing the best they can do. Their DT21 master plan already includes filling up the parking lots around Square One and tearing the mall itself. OMERS/Oxford currently owns most of the potential developable lands in the City Centre. OMERS/Oxford is basically the wall that prevents the City of Mississauga from achieving its goals.
Whenever Mississauga unleashes an "urbanizing" plan (aka: Downtown 21, Hurontario LRT, BRT Rathburn section), OMERS/Oxford is only concerned about parking and more parking and even more parking for their customers and traffic congestion over and over again in every PIC and dismissing the city's urban vision as "premature". They don't care about pedestrian access, transit access and priority, etc.
Jasonzed
Senior Member
^^^agreed
We now have a Crepe Lady my friends...
We now have a Crepe Lady my friends...
doady
Senior Member
There were not "many many dense blocks" in MCC. Until recently, the only fully developed block was around Enfield Place and Kariya Drive, and the Sussex Centre.
The population of MCC has more than doubled in the past 10 years. It is a big change.
High density doesn't necessarily mean high pedestrian activity, but high density is a necessity for lots of pedestrian activity. High density means everything is closer together. If everything is too far away, walking is not possible. For example, people in MCC can now walk to coffee shops, a grocery store, pharmarcy, etc. That wasn't possible 10 years ago because the density wasn't high enoguh to support such businesses.
EMP1729
Active Member
You can keep building condos with retail at the base, but you need people to walk around and visit that retail space. Sure you have residents in the condos - but those guys don't even have to leave their building to access the retail (it doesn't help when like every building has a Rabbas), and during the day most people leave MCC to work elsewhere. There isn't much office space and the existing office space is too "far" away from the square for workers to hang-out during lunchtime or breaks. Those workers (i.e the Hurontario/ Robert Speck / City Centre Drive area buildings) go to Square One because it is convenient.
Hopefully we will see some office space, hotel and convention centre to bring in tourists, and the Sheridan expansion built sooner rather than later. That will help bring people to Celebration Square during the weekdays.
Hopefully we will see some office space, hotel and convention centre to bring in tourists, and the Sheridan expansion built sooner rather than later. That will help bring people to Celebration Square during the weekdays.
yyzer
Senior Member
Popped over to the square tonight to check out the Bollywood festivities....there was a big group of dancers/musicians on stage, sound system was great, and high definition monitors were terrific....well done, Mississauga!
Lots of people there tonight...
Lots of people there tonight...
MDV3
Active Member
or bribing! i prefer that idea
Mississauga Slim
Active Member
True. As it stands today, MCC is like a mirage: from a distance it really looks like something but, the closer you get, the more you realize that there's actually nothing there.
khris
Senior Member
There's a hell of a lot more there than there was 15 years ago. I hate how people expect instant downtowns.