Some December 31st overview photos. As usual, specific building photos will be posted in their respective threads. Ran out of time today to do Mason photo processing so they will probably be posted tomorrow.
1705327352862.jpeg

1705327380962.jpeg
 
yoursay.mississauga.ca

OPA 24-4 W1 - 70 Mississauga Road South

Proposed Development The applicant is proposing to change the applicable policies in the Port Credit Local Area Plan Special Site to permit a maximum building height of 35 storeys and an additional 898 dwelling units, totalling 3893 dwelling units over the entire site.
yoursay.mississauga.ca yoursay.mississauga.ca

Proponents have submitted a new OPA to increase density in Blocks P, Q & U; adding an additional 898 residential units. This would bring the total master plan to 3893 residential units and a new maximum height of 35-storeys:

76f17a54788bee5d73abcbd8dab6f0e1_A100_Concept_Site_Plan_-_OPA_24-4_W1-1.jpg

8412a16c9c59861977be9b9e372cca28_Planning_Justification_Report_-_OPA_24-4_W1-2.jpg

8412a16c9c59861977be9b9e372cca28_Planning_Justification_Report_-_OPA_24-4_W1-130.jpg
 
Would anyone here have (or know where to find) information on the planned height of the live/work buildings in the northwest corner Brightwater, along Lakeshore (see circled area in the map below). We're looking at renting a unit across the street at the Shores with a lake view, but unsure of what will be built directly across the street (which could affect the sightlines). I've seen a few renderings of the full development with (what looks like) a 2-3 story buildings in area "A" and townhouses in "F", but I haven't been able to find any actual plans for that part of Brightwater. Appreciate any insights.
Screenshot 2024-06-28 at 11.33.39 PM.png
.
 
lilybugkd said:
Would anyone here have (or know where to find) information on the planned height of the live/work buildings in the northwest corner Brightwater, along Lakeshore (see circled area in the map below). We're looking at renting a unit across the street at the Shores with a lake view, but unsure of what will be built directly across the street (which could affect the sightlines). I've seen a few renderings of the full development with (what looks like) a 2-3 story buildings in area "A" and townhouses in "F", but I haven't been able to find any actual plans for that part of Brightwater. Appreciate any insights.
View attachment 576477 .
Click to expand...
I would say no more than 3s based on the site plan above since the NIMBY folks next door were not happy if they were more than that. Both sides of the site were not supported of buildings over 6s for the site. See post 213 that say 3s as well.
 
drum118 said:
I would say no more than 3s based on the site plan above since the NIMBY folks next door were not happy if they were more than that. Both sides of the site were not supported of buildings over 6s for the site. See post 213 that say 3s as well.
Click to expand...
Not sure there is anything inherently wrong with 6 stories - there are plenty of very livable cities with 3-4-5-6 story buildings..it’s not like Mississauga has not and does not build towers. Railing on about height restrictions can be a bit of a knee jerk reaction at times I believe.
 
just east of the creek said:
Not sure there is anything inherently wrong with 6 stories - there are plenty of very livable cities with 3-4-5-6 story buildings..it’s not like Mississauga has not and does not build towers. Railing on about height restrictions can be a bit of a knee jerk reaction at times I believe.
Click to expand...
Mississauga is backwater when it comes to height next to existing single homes and main street. Six is what they see for main street and since they are only doing 2-3s on Lakeshore now for the site, I expect that area will be 3s. There was a major fight to get that 8s across the street with the locals pushing for 4 and the city at 6. Don't always need 25s plus when 10s could do the job.

To run good transit, you need the density to do it. The late ward councilor wanted 10 minute service, but the density not there to do it. The Hurontario LRT was to run there with provision for the line to go west at a future date was totally opposed that the line that was to end at the marina was scrap.
 
drum118 said:
Mississauga is backwater when it comes to height next to existing single homes and main street. Six is what they see for main street and since they are only doing 2-3s on Lakeshore now for the site, I expect that area will be 3s. There was a major fight to get that 8s across the street with the locals pushing for 4 and the city at 6. Don't always need 25s plus when 10s could do the job.

To run good transit, you need the density to do it. The late ward councilor wanted 10 minute service, but the density not there to do it. The Hurontario LRT was to run there with provision for the line to go west at a future date was totally opposed that the line that was to end at the marina was scrap.
Click to expand...
I am quite aware that good transit requires some level of density. West of the Credit River good transit will be hamstrung by the fact that all transit is funneled though one bridge - car, truck, pedestrian and cyclist. (Unless , of course, GO builds a Port Credit West GO station at Mississauga Road……just a tad unlikely). And after crossing the bridge, any form of transit passes through the ‘business section’ of the traditional area of Port Credit, another natural choke point. So advocating for scads of density west of the river does not help the commuting public headed east bound, even just to the GO or the Hazel line. East of the river, density has been slowly ramping up for a decade, and continues with work underway and in planning/proposal stages.

As it stands Brightwater has moved to increase density in certain areas of the site in the past 12 months, but not as you correctly point out, in the areas bordering existing legacy developments
.
But you will note that with the rebuilding of the Lakeshore through this area, I am not aware that any bike lanes have been introduced , or any widening to allow for possible bus lanes - Mississauga remains car fixated along this route.
 

‘Real punch to the gut’: Major Mississauga development could see big increase in scale​

www.mississauga.com

‘Real punch to the gut’: Major Mississauga development could see big increase in scale

A major Mississauga development in a historic city neighbourhood might be getting bigger.
www.mississauga.com www.mississauga.com

“It’s a real punch to the gut to be doing this,” said Mary Simpson, president of local residents’ group Town of Port Credit Association (TOPCA), who believes the new plans could erode the proposed community benefits of the development.

“Our concern is that it simply becomes a bedroom community,” she said, compared to the earlier vision for the site as an urban waterfront neighbourhood with places to work and play.
Click to expand...
 
christiesplits said:

‘Real punch to the gut’: Major Mississauga development could see big increase in scale​

www.mississauga.com

‘Real punch to the gut’: Major Mississauga development could see big increase in scale

A major Mississauga development in a historic city neighbourhood might be getting bigger.
www.mississauga.com www.mississauga.com
Click to expand...
Adding more residents I can understand. But removing the ground level retail, I don't agree with.

Maybe they'll reach a compromise to add more residents, while keeping the ground level retail.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top