Lakeview LAP Dixie Policies

Margot Almond Feb 29 2024 at 11:59PM on page 4

Suggestion

Can this square footage be increased to allow for a grocery store at least as big as what is there now, as well as other non-res uses?

Margot Almond Feb 29 2024 at 11:57PM on page 3

Suggestion

My understanding is that the proposed zoning will allow for 2-15 storey buildings. I would hate to see 17 buildings of that size on this tiny property. A mix of heights would be preferable, and I'd like to see that specified in the policy.

Margot Almond Feb 29 2024 at 11:51PM on page 6

Question

I hope there is some way of ensuring that a series of re-development proposals for the Dixie Mall lands (starting with the NW corner) do not result in a hodge-podge of development without a coherent vision.

Margot Almond Feb 29 2024 at 11:47PM on page 5

Suggestion

This area needs some "destination" green spaces. In other words, it needs more than simply a few strips of grass between the buildings, but an actual park that people will want to go to.

Margot Almond Feb 29 2024 at 11:43PM on page 5

Question

The proposed street network cuts the CHoice properties land area into two chunks. It is therefore likely that any new grocery store would be significantly smaller than the current one, while the population to be served would be increasing significantly. Is there any possibility of a land swap between the 2 landowners, or reconfiguring the streets, (or any other creative solution) such that the grocery store could be around the same size as the existing one (or even larger). This also implies parking needs - active transportation is not an option for carrying home weekly groceries to Orchard Heights or Lakeview!

Margot Almond Feb 29 2024 at 11:38PM on page 4

Suggestion

I would like to see as much employment land as possible to minimize the amount of commuting the residents have to do, and to maintain employment in Mississauga.

Margot Almond Feb 29 2024 at 11:36PM on page 4

Suggestion

I disagree that banquet halls and conference centres are an appropriate use for this land. My concern relates to both traffic and parking.

N. Halff Feb 26 2024 at 9:15AM on page 8

As a general comment, from the perspective of a resident moving into this development, it would be much preferred if it was located on the south west part of the mall backing onto the golf course and detached homes. This would reduce noise pollution that currently requires notification to purchasers, a/c units, special glazed windows, and a noise wall, and would also provide a much more pleasant view. I imagine the developer may eventually build luxury homes along the golf course portion. The current plan is for high-rises looking over the QEW - the noise and pollution is known to cause negative health impacts both physical and mental, and I suspect the units facing the highway will eventually become air bnb's or perhaps even the 'affordable' units, exposing the less fortunate to the hazards. Final comment, again more for the developer and perhaps unpopular, was there any consideration given to including hotel accommodations, perhaps on some floors of the towers? Mississauga is trying to become a tourist destination, and Dixie Mall is a tourist attraction (or was, before the re-design). This is done in Buffalo with hotels on-site at major tourist malls, and New York City also has many highrises with part-hotels and part-permanent residents. Tourists would have access to major highways from here as well as Lake Ontario and even a short transit trip to/from Toronto.

N. Halff Feb 26 2024 at 9:08AM on page 3

Not sure if this can be done by the city or if the developer is responsible, but given that active transportation is becoming increasingly important, it would be beneficial for the developer to provide secure space with electrical plugs for storage and charging of e-bikes and larger cargo bikes. I see there is bike storage on their plans, but is it secure? E-bikes are expensive and there are concerns with unregulated battery explosions so fireproof bike lockers would be ideal. Banning use of unapproved batteries is also a great idea as the explosion problem is likely due to the use of cheap replacement parts.

N. Halff Feb 26 2024 at 8:57AM on page 5

Suggestion

This thinking is a bit backwards. If you provide excellent transit in the area, people will choose it, rather than waiting for more people to use a poor transit system in order to justify building it. All the city's master plans emphasize the importance of moving away from car dependence in order to avoid gridlock which we are already experiencing.

N. Halff Feb 26 2024 at 8:55AM on page 5

Suggestion

Language should be changed from traffic calming measures "may" be applied to "shall" given the major traffic problem in Mississauga and the cost and opposition to any changes in road design once established. Why not start with Vision Zero best practices.

Bruce Smith Feb 12 2024 at 2:24PM on page 6

Suggestion

Jim Tovey's open sky vision of Lakeview should be written in stone and used as the guiding principle for development. This gives the new residents a definite reason to come to live in Lakeview.

Bruce Smith Feb 12 2024 at 2:21PM on page 5

Suggestion

Height and density go hand in hand, however is there a reason why you would not emulate the development at Cawthra and Atwater were the heights go from 1 storey to 12 vs 2-15?
1-12 still provides a significant increased density.

Bruce Smith Feb 12 2024 at 2:18PM on page 4

Suggestion

I support the two blocks identified as parkland - noting that it forms a buffer to the existing community and protects the existing wetlands. there needs to be a significant widening of the floodable area as the severity of storms is only increasing with the predictions that the Great Lakes will experience more rain with changing climate. Implementation of catch basins within the golf coarse will be required to reduce the potential flooding downstream - Lakeview village and sewage treatment facilities.

Bruce Smith Feb 12 2024 at 2:11PM on page 5

Suggestion

Density needs to be specified and also represented as built form for everyone to understand - 2-4000 units although it may not seem to be that many, it is a much smaller plot of land than Lakeview.
# Units People per unit Population Total Area km2 People/km2 Buildable area People/km2
2000 2.1 4200 0.144 29,166.67 0.113 37,168
4000 2.1 8400 0.144 58,333.33 0.113 74,336

note that 37,000 people per square km is greater than the original Lakeview site - 8000 units = approx. 25,000 people per square km.
The 2000 units would require an additional major transit node, never mind 4000 units..... that is not in the transit outline provided so the numbers that were verbally tossed out are way out of line. Based on the proposed transit availability it should be 2000 people or approx. 1,000 units.
Density needs to be clearly stated as a maximum based of planned infrastructure.

Bruce Smith Feb 12 2024 at 1:59PM on page 4

Suggestion

Affordable Grocery / Food availability within walking distance of exiting residents is critical to be maintained. this avoids the increased vehicle traffic nightmare that will occur if we have to go to the lakeviewe village or Dundas & Dixie to shop

Mike Filippi Feb 7 2024 at 7:53PM on page 5

Please choose to preserve Haig Blvd's integrity... we residents vote to be free from the threat of any new roads encroaching into our neighborhood.

Mike Filippi Feb 7 2024 at 7:49PM on page 5

A road joining Haig is not something anyone living in our community desires. It is not necessary to achieve any of the goals of the developers and is purely optional. Let it not be an option. Please have some consideration for the existing population.

Mike Filippi Feb 7 2024 at 7:39PM on page 3

Suggestion

The entranced proposed to connect Haig Blvd to the new development site is not recommended. To do so would entirely change the existing community on Haig Blvd. As a member of this community for over 50 years and living adjacent to the proposed new road, I believe any extra traffic on Haig would over-burden any reasonable estimation of acceptable traffic. Remember, south of us on Lakeshore RD., potentially, 15,000 new units will already have the option to use Haig Blvd to access the QEW. That cannot be helped. Any southbound traffic exiting the 5,000 new units proposed would certainly use Haig if the choice was available. Haig is a very busy street without combining any more cars from new residents. The new development must encourage southbound cars to use Dixie Rd. Please do not place any entry ways on Haig Blvd.

Darlene Devane Feb 1 2024 at 9:33PM on page 1

Given that electric cars will be mandatory in our future, are solar panels and other green energy sources (roof top gardens, thermal energy, efficient recycling programs) being considered in this development.

Linda Jan 31 2024 at 12:26PM on page 4

Suggestion

Please consider future lakeshore community development volumes as well as Dixie plan related vehicle impacts to transportation volumes and current limited street parking if Street A were to connect directly to Haig a two lane residential street. Recommend Cul de sac option to redirect to appropriate Service road as opposed to impacting residential transportation and traffic volume flow directly on Haig.

michael dewit Jan 30 2024 at 7:08PM on page 5

Suggestion

this added road connecting to Haig is not a good idea ... it will rsult in a major increase in traffic on Haig, encourage use of Haig to access the redeveolped mall from the lakeshore along Haig .... Haig is a residential street not a throughfare

michael dewit Jan 30 2024 at 7:06PM on page 5

Suggestion

with the addition of several thousand people (At least) the existing 2 bus routes that serve the mall area will not be sufficient .... added trqasit will be needed .... detailed transportation studies are needed that inclde the added people at hte mall and the over effect of allof the development along lakeshore --- even if DIxie is 4 lanes to the QEW that will not be enough,,,, the other roads in the area willbe serverely impacted

kimberlee hutchinson Jan 29 2024 at 11:26AM on page 4

Question

Can you please adjust this diagram to show where Applewood Creek appears on this map.

in reply to Roger Rickard's comment

Karin Phuong Jan 24 2024 at 11:05AM on page 2

Thank you for your comment. Responses to the comments will be consolidated in a "What We Heard Report".

in reply to Roger Rickard's comment

Roger Rickard Jan 24 2024 at 9:06AM on page 2

Suggestion

Suggestion - Find another location or change design with lower density that will not imped overall area such as Townhouses.

in reply to Roger Rickard's comment

Roger Rickard Jan 24 2024 at 9:01AM on page 2

Suggestion

Still no reply to question sent on Jan. 20/24

in reply to Richard Wang's comment

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:53PM on page 3

Suggestion

There is plenty of evidence that increased supply helps affordability. I am not sure why the topic of discussion always shifts away from those studies, and focus on shadows and neighborhood character.

link
link
link
link

link
link
link
link

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:41PM on page 6

Suggestion

I believe that new housing is much more important than shadows and wind. Could this be waived?

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:40PM on page 6

Suggestion

Less than 40% of city "development charges" were "committed funds" in 2022 according to the "2022 Financial and sustainability report" page 96. I believe the city should use their uncommitted funds now to solve the housing crisis now.

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:28PM on page 5

Suggestion

I believe the city should act on the Transit Costs Project's Final Report on procurement in New York to see what lessons can be applied here, to ensure the transit expansion goes smoothly and for little cost.

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:25PM on page 5

Suggestion

A FSI of 2.0 is not enough. We need more floor space dedicated to housing, not less.

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:24PM on page 4

Suggestion

I am very concerned at the emphasis of neighborhood fit over aggregate housing units. Political polling consistently suggests housing is the most important issue all Canadians have. Neighborhood character is not even on the list, except in a few wealthy, suburban areas.

E Adamson Jan 23 2024 at 6:19PM on page 6

I do not support the updated proposal. Will attempt to attend session. Overall it falls short of meaningful information for common people to understand the impact of this development.

Interesting that the only community engagement will be 'in person', in late January of all times. If truly interested in gaining public input then online and in person would be better at this time of the year.

The document shows the current height limits for Dixie 2-15 has been appealed. Not clear on the revised heights in your new plan? I see only consideration of transition to heights from public spaces.

Not clear how many units, sizing of units, density proposed - are we talking families, singles, how many studio, one bedroom/two bedroom + units, what type of anticipated price points are these - how does this meet housing, community needs??

Looks like there is some consideration for community infrastructure (schools, police, fire etc) however not clear on timing of these needed additions only that they will be looked at with the city.

This is so very obviously the first phase of the grander plan - it is incredibly frustrating development is done piecemeal without revealing what the overall impact will be on the community. What is not being said is more important than what is being revealed.

It is so clearly the 'thin edge of the wedge'. I suggest great caution to all residents in the community.

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:15PM on page 3

Question

I would like more specifics on the transit development in this area. What specific improvements will be made (eg. new routes, higher frequence), and how will they be funded? How could political volatility affect these plans (eg. new mayor).

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:13PM on page 3

Suggestion

I am concerned that this focus on "appropriate scale" will lead to reductions in the amount of urgently needed residential units in this development. We are in a housing crisis first and foremost, not a neighborhood character crisis.

Richard Wang Jan 23 2024 at 6:10PM on page 1

Suggestion

I am concerned that 4 stories is not enough. We are in the middle of a housing crisis, and need as much housing as possible.

Roger Rickard Jan 20 2024 at 11:39AM on page 2

Question

Trying to establish what height dwellings will be and how much of the mall will stay intact to assist with groceries, pharmacy issues etc. How many people are we trying to accomodate in this confined area. What type of parking is being provided for. Will their be any transit provisions provided to accommodate people who do not drive.

Warning message

Lakeview LAP Dixie Policies

Comments

Add comment