My comments about Mississauga being scare of height and density were demonstrated at tonight meeting for Phases II and III.

Pinnacle has cut 1,479 units from this development by increasing the number of townhouses by 26, decrease the number of towers as well, no building will be taller than 39 story. Most building will range in height of 15-25 story now.

Parking to be 1.25 per unit and all underground. Some city staff wants to see some on street parking. A number of residents wanted surface parking lots.

Density drop to 1.2 for the area.

The towers will line up with the ones to the south.

I asked the president of Pinnacle why were developers afraid of going taller than 40 story in Mississauga and why the cut back? Never really got a clear answers from him, but it sound like Hazel said it going to be like this if you want to build in my city outside the city core. One of his staff asked me what height and density I wanted to see? I said anything over 50 to 70 with density being 5-10 along transit corridors.

A few residents were afraid this area was going to become a town. Given the area is on 2 transit corridor, yes this area will become a small town over the next 20 years.

The time line will see Phase II (Townhouse) go on sale in fall 2012 and completed by 2014. Towers will be built at a rate of one every 2 years and that is longer than the current 7 years for the whole complex.

Sales office is to open late November or early December.
 
What a crock.

Another shortsighted development in Mississauga. If the LRT is going to be built, why continue with lower density?

Mississauga's slogan is ironic: "Leading today for tomorrow."
 
drum118 said:
I asked the president of Pinnacle why were developers afraid of going taller than 40 story in Mississauga and why the cut back? Never really got a clear answers from him, but it sound like Hazel said it going to be like this if you want to build in my city outside the city core.
Click to expand...

What I do like is that Hazel seems focused on the CITY CORE. Id agree with her.. There needs to be as much development around the actual city core and DENSE (TALL) development. 15-25 floors is Tall enough to support LRT on both eglinton and HUrontario..

When I look at toronto I see a mess of buildings that were randomly placed in parks. I much prefer the NYC approach which was towers ONLY in manhatten. Obviously things are changing in NYC but the premise is still there. Develop the Core first then work out.
 
EMP1729 said:
What a crock.

Another shortsighted development in Mississauga. If the LRT is going to be built, why continue with lower density?

Mississauga's slogan is ironic: "Leading today for tomorrow."
Click to expand...

Add insult to the Hurontario plan, the EA calls for 30-40 story building along the line, yet the city is quietly telling developers you cannot build tall buildings that will over shadow or are taller than the City Core ones.

There has been soooooooo many shortsighted development because the car people rule the road and they call the shots.

Some people called for the removal of the Townhouse and to use that area as green space. They wanted to add the original towers back in as well being taller to increase the area density for the lost of the townhouses. I was never impress with the townhouse plan from day one.

The city said it has too much green space in this area to do that and it would take away funding from other areas that need more green space. Its a $$ game.
 
sixrings said:
What I do like is that Hazel seems focused on the CITY CORE. Id agree with her.. There needs to be as much development around the actual city core and DENSE (TALL) development. 15-25 floors is Tall enough to support LRT on both eglinton and HUrontario..

When I look at toronto I see a mess of buildings that were randomly placed in parks. I much prefer the NYC approach which was towers ONLY in manhatten. Obviously things are changing in NYC but the premise is still there. Develop the Core first then work out.
Click to expand...

Disagree as you need to do both to support transit now.

The City talks big about tall building in the city core, but it is unwilling to back it up. They only want X people living in the core as anymore would eat up the commercial land.

The city has stated time after time it is the only city that is building inward than outward due the vast open space in the core. Other than the city core, there are no areas sit aside for higher density that would include tall buildings that are over 20 story. If you don't have pockets of high density around the city, you are not going to build a transit system to get people out of their cars that does not eat up more in property taxes than now.

The city has started with the 2012 budget to reduce the tax ratio for transit on property taxes. Since the farebox is not covering the 50% ratio anymore, cut in service and higher fare is the future trend considering Mississauga is the only city in NA who raise transit fare $.10 yearly for the past 12 years.

If people want a certain life style and not prepare to see higher density in their area or on their route of travel, its time to start taxing them at a higher rate than the people who accepted this higher density.
 
I would say if you build more and more in the core and there are actually jobs as well people wont have to take any transit. AS a result the ppls downtown condos taxes support the transit for the rest of the city. Also 17 buildings that are being built across from chicago is not a small amount especially since some are in their 40's. Across Burnamthorpe there sits another huge piece of property waiting to build another 15-20 condos. Thats about 35 Buildings! Thats a HUGE improvement. After that is complete I agree the height limit should extend outer. However until that time it makes sense to me that the buildings outside of the core are scalled back as a way to promote downtown development.

15-25 Floors isnt small either. Its small today because other places are building 60 and talking about 80 or 100... But up until 10 years ago 25 floors would have been a highrise in TORONTO.
 
FRP said:
Any updates on this topic of the sales centre at Hurontario and Eglinton?
Click to expand...

Read the posting first before asking this type of question, as your answer is there.
 
Here a photo of the rendering taken on Oct 19 and the only one there.
6297830862_1c5c2014a6_b.jpg
 
Looks identical to the towers going up in suburban Vancouver.

'Vancouver-suburb regular'
 
Dec 19
I see the end of November opening of the sales office has come and gone as today.

At the community meeting in October, it was stated that the sales office was to open at the end of Nov.

The sale office has been completed since Nov.

The parking lot is ready for pavement if they are planning on doing it.

I just a Jan or Feb date is now in order for opening the sales office.
6598797873_06af1e74df_b.jpg

6598801803_494fccc81b_b.jpg

6598794333_fdebf9ed61_b.jpg

6598792949_37f548262b_b.jpg

6598790151_bccdee92a9_b.jpg

6598791165_fb899a6163_b.jpg

6598792291_ee2f40e158_b.jpg
 
Was by the site yesterday and the sales office is still the same as it was on Dec 19, close and no one on site.

Sometime this year, we will finally see for sale signs and adds for this project.

The City has issued this:

PDC-0002-2012
I. That the report titled "Interim Control By-law for the Downtown Core - Directions Report",
dated December 13,2011, from the Commissioner of Planning and Building, be received for
information.
2. That the report titled "Interim Control By-law for the Downtown Core - Directions Report"
dated December 13, 2011, from the Commissioner of Planning and Building, be circulated to
City Departments, external agencies and affected landowners for review and comment, and
that staff schedule the statutory public consultation process.
CD.2I.DOW
http://www5.mississauga.ca/agendas/planning/2012/01_09_12/Item02InterimControlBylaw.pdf
 
There are three corridors in Mississauga that are classified as "Major Transit Corridors": Dundas, Hurontario, and Eglinton. Scaling back development at intersection of Hurontario and Eglinton would be extremely short-sighted, and also non-sensical, considering several 30+ storey buildings already exist across the street. Plus, the density Eglinton corridor has already been scaled back signifcantly compared to the original plans. Did the lack of high-density development along Elginton during the 90s promote the development of MCC during this time? It doesn't make sense at all. The City pf Brampton uses the same rationale to ban all high-density in most places outside of their downtown. How much development is Brampton's downtown getting today compared to MCC?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top