The people who move to these areas with TTC subway access and close highway access (427 in this case) - choose these areas precisely because they offer the "best of both worlds" so to speak, quick access to downtown via transit and access to a car. Giving people what they want vs. creating a more urban environment. I'm all for increased density here, right on the subway and think we should be seeing heights we see at Park Lawn here instead (with rapid transit), but 34 parking spaces against 544 units, given the current landscape of the area is unprecedented in a suburban environment like this. Keep in mind, the only rapid transit that exists is access to areas east of this area, this is not like Bloor/Yonge where you can go North/South/East/West via rapid transit and access services and retail in a given diameter surrounding the condo building. The ability to move rapidly (without ta car) in only one direction should have an influence in the decision for the number of parking spots, not treated as though it was equivalent to a station that has access to 2 (or 4) directions away from the building to access services.
 
toaster29 said:
The people who move to these areas with TTC subway access and close highway access (427 in this case) - choose these areas precisely because they offer the "best of both worlds" so to speak, quick access to downtown via transit and access to a car. Giving people what they want vs. creating a more urban environment. I'm all for increased density here, right on the subway and think we should be seeing heights we see at Park Lawn here instead (with rapid transit), but 34 parking spaces against 544 units, given the current landscape of the area is unprecedented in a suburban environment like this. Keep in mind, the only rapid transit that exists is access to areas east of this area, this is not like Bloor/Yonge where you can go North/South/East/West via rapid transit and access services and retail in a given diameter surrounding the condo building. The ability to move rapidly (without ta car) in only one direction should have an influence in the decision for the number of parking spots, not treated as though it was equivalent to a station that has access to 2 (or 4) directions away from the building to access services.
Click to expand...
I'll agree with you there. As I live in a tower in the area, no doubt that "best of both worlds" is definitely a thing. Transit westward should be improved, though that would fall largely to MiWay or Metrolinx I'd think. The traffic on Dundas going West can be difficult to deal with, especially if there is any sort of construction. Much of the commercial spaces to the West involve more "car-like destinations," and it's where the endless Mississauga sprawl really starts. There are multi-occupant or bus lanes reserved for rush hour, but it would be nice if there were true dedicated lanes and a permanent presence for transit carved out better.
 
It's worth noting that while it's definitely a recovering heavily car dependent area that location has two grocery stores, a shoppers, and a bulk Barn within a two minute walk and a direct bus to Sherway mall. It's pretty convenient. Although six points disappearing will reduce that a bit.
 
afransen said:
I'm not sure why NIMBYs would lobby for more parking. More parking means more cars, means more congestion. Buyers of these units are going it with the understanding they won't have parking, and the market should be allowed to offer that to residents.
Click to expand...
Pedestrians "will make it more dangerous" to sum up what's being said in the facebook group. I think it's time I pull out the word I've been waiting for the right time to use...

I think these guys are MegaNIMBYs™
 
Construction on the presentation centre has begun; opens in May. Realtors have been getting previews of the units and price lists for the last few weeks and up to launch date.
20230414_093755.jpg
20230414_093707.jpg
20230414_093523.jpg
 
There was an event at the sales office today with people making a sale pitch in vicious languages to a person holding theirs smartphone for them outside of the office. Looks like a few top CentreCourt personals were on hand and no clue who there were since I know no one there in the first place. Was doing some shooting in the area before heading to the subway.

As a NOTE: new info tape to the sign saying 50s at 153.1m as well 544 unit's and 200 sq m retail. Love the 32 cars only and 414 bikes. Who needs a car with transit at your front door or 5 minute walk to get a GO/miWay/TTC bus/TTC subway. Only get the GO train in the am at this time until CP or ML come to agreement and funding for all day service that was supposed to be in place by 2011
133A1450.JPG
133A0951.JPG
.
 
Is just me or is there a lot of community excitement and buzz about this upcoming condo project?

It has seemed to clear a lot of hurdles in the planning process to get to this point.

Perhaps it's because a lot of building projects such as rental towers have been halted, scaled down or cancelled in general due to interest rates increasing. Non rental Condo projects perhaps are more attractive.

One thing that has caught my attention is that if the original Kipling Mobility Hub design had gone forward, built under the hydro towers, this parcel of land 5221 Dundas Street West would have been probably expropriated for the original mobility hub design.

If you look at the original mobility hub renderings it uses that parcel of land.

To me this planned condo tower really is good fit for the neighborhood.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top