Anastasia

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 15, 2018
Messages
26
Reaction score
30
I agree with the sentiment of this article. Hopefully the City of Mississauga recognizes the value of the proposed development and approves it in its current form, despite the taller than permitted buildings. Given its proximity to the GO station and the Hurontario LRT, I don't understand why the City wouldn't want to allow buildings as tall as possible here; if traffic is a concern, they could easily reduce the parking requirements, as I imagine many residents at this location would not require a car. Tall buildings near the GO station makes more sense than the approved and existing developments at Hurontario and Eglinton or along Burnhamthorpe west of Confederation Parkway.
 

SaugeenJunction

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
2,743
Reaction score
5,904
I agree with the sentiment of this article. Hopefully the City of Mississauga recognizes the value of the proposed development and approves it in its current form, despite the taller than permitted buildings. Given its proximity to the GO station and the Hurontario LRT, I don't understand why the City wouldn't want to allow buildings as tall as possible here; if traffic is a concern, they could easily reduce the parking requirements, as I imagine many residents at this location would not require a car. Tall buildings near the GO station makes more sense than the approved and existing developments at Hurontario and Eglinton or along Burnhamthorpe west of Confederation Parkway.
Agree. I’d actually say that Cooksville is more of a natural “city centre” than Mississauga City Centre. GO, LRT, and the future Dundas BRT will make it a super connected hub.
 

afransen

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
6,007
Reaction score
5,715
I agree with the sentiment of this article. Hopefully the City of Mississauga recognizes the value of the proposed development and approves it in its current form, despite the taller than permitted buildings. Given its proximity to the GO station and the Hurontario LRT, I don't understand why the City wouldn't want to allow buildings as tall as possible here; if traffic is a concern, they could easily reduce the parking requirements, as I imagine many residents at this location would not require a car. Tall buildings near the GO station makes more sense than the approved and existing developments at Hurontario and Eglinton or along Burnhamthorpe west of Confederation Parkway.
This is part of the 'downtown' area in the master plan.
Agree. I’d actually say that Cooksville is more of a natural “city centre” than Mississauga City Centre. GO, LRT, and the future Dundas BRT will make it a super connected hub.
Yes. Kind of a mistake that Mississauga is trying to drag its downtown west of Square One, instead of down along Hurontario.
 

3Dementia

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,421
Reaction score
4,682
Apologies Alex but this is just too good not share (and it’s properly sourced). 12:24 pm. First time in months I slipped through the G&M net.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/art...-in-mississauga-it-could-happen-if-the-rules/

The city of the future in Mississauga? It could happen, if the rules allow it.

THE GLOBE AND MAIL, SOURCE: TILEZEN; OPENSTREETMAP CONTRIBUTORS;
GOOGLE; SvN ARCHITECTS + PLANNERS

But whether this vision is going to get built is in question.


"Let’s begin where the important things happen, at street level. Here, the development scheme proposes something very rare in suburban Canada: good quality public space. The site is two hectares at the corner of Hurontario and Hillcrest, major arteries through the city of Mississauga. “We want this project to be a model, by focusing on the public realm and public amenities,” says Sam Dufaux, design director at the architecture firm SvN.


The plan calls for five separate towers, all to the outer edges of the block. The designers have tried, as much as possible, to keep private cars and delivery vehicles out of this zone. Instead of streets, the centre of the block is drawn as a publicly accessible plaza for pedestrians, lined by shops, a new public library and a new public recreation centre.


This central idea – keep the cars out – is both obvious and radical. The urban design consensus in Canadian municipalities often calls for a focus on public streets as the zones of public life. The problem is that when the streets are roaring eight-lane traffic sewers, as is the case with Hurontario, nobody will take pleasure in walking there or sitting with a cappuccino.


The SvN design follows through on this insight with rigorous execution. About 90 per cent of the buildings’ ground floors will have public or commercial activity, including small shops set aside for local entrepreneurs. Thus these open spaces will be “activated,” to use planning jargon, by people walking and rolling through them. Many of those people will be heading to the adjacent GO Transit Cooksville station, to and from the future LRT line on Hurontario Street or from the existing MiWay buses on nearby Dundas Street.


This provides a rare opportunity to deliver a place that is actually pleasant to explore without a car. That is vanishingly, shockingly rare among large suburban developments in Canada, where the ground level is typically dominated by cars and half-baked public space.


The developers are serious about that goal of delivering a 15-minute city, where all daily amenities are at hand, says Mazyar Mortazavi, chief executive officer of TAS. “We have to look at the ground plane as an amenity for the community,” he says, “and that includes those living within the new buildings and those around them.”


The landscape architecture here is also notable: It promises to be forest with a diversity of species and a real, functioning ecosystem. Mark Thomann, a landscape architect with the prominent American firm WHY Architecture, explains the plantings will emulate the kind of ecosystem that would exist here if it was not, at the moment, a giant parking lot. “Think of all the reasons people want to go out into a forest,” he says, “for contact with nature, for learning, for relaxation. How could all that cycle happen in an urban development where you’re watching that forest grow?”

In short, this design promises many unusual things. If TAS delivers – or comes close – the result could be a new neighbourhood of remarkable design quality, a place where people can live, shop, hang out beneath some poplars and catch a train to work.

However, there are challenges. The project now relies on tall buildings between 34 and 46 storeys, which allow TAS to make its financial return while leaving lots of open space. But Mississauga city policy (in the form of recently passed official plan amendments) limits building heights to 30 storeys. To meet that limit, the development team will need to make the towers shorter and squatter and their bases chunkier. This would certainly produce a worse result for both residents and visitors.

Why is the city set on that policy? Mississauga is focusing its downtown two kilometres from here at Square One mall, which has been a centre of high-rise growth since the eighties. In that zone – which is near a major highway, with mediocre transit – the city allows unlimited heights.

But at Cooksville, residents are much more likely to take transit. The Ontario government recently introduced a new policy that sets density targets around Major Transit Station Areas such as the Cooksville GO Station.

The city says, basically, it doesn’t need taller buildings here to meet the province’s mandate. “The proposed building heights [in city plans] can easily accommodate the city and region’s planned density target,” spokesperson Irene McCutcheon said, noting that their target is double the specific provincial requirement.

But why does the city only want a bare minimum of development that’s relatively green? Mr. Dufaux and his colleagues at SvN are outspoken advocates for climate action, and he makes a strong argument that density – including right here – is the right policy move. “Ontario could grow by four million people by 2043,” he says, citing a recent projection by Statistics Canada, “and where are they going to go?” Combine that with Canada’s commitment to cut emissions to net zero by 2050, he says, “and intensification is the only way. We need very big change.”

These are statements of fact. People simply need to live closer together and drive less, relying much more on mass transit. Yet this insight is not reflected in the policies of Ontario, which continue to direct much of the growth in the Toronto region to its suburban edges and beyond. And it is not reflected in local policies in cities such as Toronto, or Mississauga. “There is a real disconnect between our high-level goals as a society,” Mr. Dufaux says, “and the regulations that govern what we actually build.”

For instance: parking regulations. For now, the Cooksville project is being designed with five levels of underground parking to meet city policies.

Of course, Mr. Dufaux is talking up his project. But the arguments are unimpeachable: Fast-growing Ontario needs to build a lot of housing for a lot of people, near mass transit. Most of it is not going to be this liveable or this beautiful. Hopefully Mississauga will focus its efforts on getting all of the Cooksville project’s promised public amenities, and insisting on all that beautiful design with more people and less parking."
 

sixrings

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
5,108
Reaction score
2,461
The comment section is no different than urban torontos threads sadly. Lots of Mississauga has no potential comments. As a former Toronto resident it wasn’t perfect either. And I lived in four different areas in Toronto and each had some issues. Mississauga isn’t perfect but it does have some pluses especially in a world that says things are generally unaffordable. Mississauga is also quite diverse where as I didn’t feel that in a lot of the so called great places to live in Toronto. I still love Toronto but either torontonians are snobbish about what’s the best and or Mississauga people bought into this narrative. Do other 905 residents think low of themselves as well? I’m just confused about living in a place you hate.
 
Last edited:

afransen

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
6,007
Reaction score
5,715
I would much rather 50-60 story towers and more parks/public space than 30 story towers. I mean, once you have a high rise more than 15-20 stories, I'm not sure why one would be opposed to 50-60 stories (other than a very small number of homes subject to brief shading), if it meant fewer towers for equivalent density, and more open space. I just worry that we won't do a good job of ensuring there is adequate park/greenspace for the trade-off of additional height.
 

AlexBozikovic

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
570
Reaction score
2,645
Thanks, all.

I do think the urban design here is worth talking about: It features large open spaces that are (almost) pedestrian-only, with a library, rec centre and shops facing onto them.

The open spaces mix hardscape with some areas of quasi-wild landscape.

Two very good ideas, and quite simple, that we have not seen executed in masterplans in this region.
 

afransen

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
6,007
Reaction score
5,715
Thanks, all.

I do think the urban design here is worth talking about: It features large open spaces that are (almost) pedestrian-only, with a library, rec centre and shops facing onto them.

The open spaces mix hardscape with some areas of quasi-wild landscape.

Two very good ideas, and quite simple, that we have not seen executed in masterplans in this region.
I take NL's perspective about the private nature of the pedestrian areas/POPS. Maybe we in Ontario need a way for turning these types of pedestrian spaces over to public ownership and control without them needing to be big enough to land a 747. I get the feeling that a pedestrianized access street can only exist in private hands in our way of thinking.
 

Tim MacDonald

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
1,947
Reaction score
6,242
October 23rd
DJI_0839.JPG
 

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
19,539
Reaction score
47,791
City:
Toronto

TAS is working with SvN Architects + Planners on its proposal to build five residential towers ranging from 34 to 46 storeys that will include a mix of condominium and purpose-built rental apartments.

“It's almost unparalleled in the GTA for transit access,” TAS development vice-president Ken Wilcox told RENX of the 5.5-acre site at the corner of Hurontario Street and Hillcrest Avenue.

It will offer direct access to regional transit via the Cooksville GO Transit station, light rail transit via the under-construction Hurontario LRT line and the MiWay bus service.

A partnership with Options for Homes aims to produce 250 to 300 homes through an attainable home ownership program.

“One of our core impact objectives is delivering affordability, and with it we saw our values align,” said Wilcox. “It has a great track record of delivering at scale.”

TAS has signed a memorandum of understanding with Options for Homes whereby the non-profit condo developer will receive air rights for one of the five towers to provide units for people to live in – they're not to be used for investment purposes.

Options for Homes takes what would typically be a developer’s profit and uses it to enhance purchasers’ down payments and lower their cost of ownership.

----------

Approvals and construction

TAS submitted applications for official plan and zoning bylaw amendments in June. Depending on how the approvals process unfolds, Wilcox would like to start phased construction in late 2024 with occupancy beginning in early 2029.

The hope is Connecting Cooksville will be the catalyst for creating a more walkable, dense and resilient neighbourhood.

TAS acquired the first 2.3 acres of the site in two off-market deals with private landowners in 2018. It purchased the remaining 3.2 acres from Metrolinx in a competitive bid process in 2020.

“Even if we were just going to develop those first 2.3 acres, we thought it was a great opportunity on a transit-oriented site,” said Wilcox.

“There was no certainty at all that we would be able to assemble the entire block, but . . . we’re thrilled that it worked out and we managed to assemble the entire thing.”
 

Transportfan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
2,138
Reaction score
692
This is part of the 'downtown' area in the master plan.

Yes. Kind of a mistake that Mississauga is trying to drag its downtown west of Square One, instead of down along Hurontario.

It actually does basically reach down Hurontario: Edge Towers and Alba, as well as some older buildings.
 

Top