Mississauga 88 Park | 144.66m | 42s | Edenshaw | Core Architects

AlbertC said:

Metrolinx sells public land to developer for $64.5M with no conditions for affordable housing​


Click to expand...
CBC (Jan. 2022) - "...according to a spokesperson for Transportation Minster Caroline Mulroney, is why Metrolinx was not obligated to insist developers include an affordable housing component in their bids.

"Each individual municipality mandates their own affordable housing policies and thus any third party developer is required to follow that municipalities planning process," Dakota Brasier, a spokesperson for Mulroney, said.

Metrolinx made a similar claim in an email to CBC Toronto on Jan. 21."
 
(JULY 2022) - "... the proposed high-rise towers which would rise 40 and 42 storeys above the surrounding streetscape, twice the height of the next tallest building in the area, without any affordable housing, were not well received.

"This is an insult to the community. I can't believe that I've had to sit here and listen to this outrageous application, I just have to say it's unbelievable," Councillor Pat Mullin said at the committee meeting. "And losing the parking is another slap in the face to the community."

Metrolinx told The Pointer 426 parking spots will be impacted by the development.

"I gotta tell you, when I first looked at this application [for] two 40-storey buildings in that location, and to compare it to Lakeview [Village] which is a complete community ... quite frankly, I was flabbergasted," Councillor Matt Mahoney said.

The Port Credit Local Area Plan (2014) sets out specific parameters for building heights to ensure a "village feel" is still maintained while encouraging density and not blocking access to Lake Ontario. Heights differ based on streets and amenities nearby.

The proposed development is located in an area where density is encouraged, but at a maximum of 22 storeys." :rolleyes:

thepointer.com

‘Insulting’—Mississauga Council members outraged over high-rise proposal on former public land that ignores affordable housing

At a Planning and Development Committee meeting earlier this month councillors were not shy about their disdain for the proposal, sending the developer back to the drawing board.
thepointer.com thepointer.com
 
(MARCH 2023) - "In December 2021 the 1.48-acre lot was sold by Metrolinx, Ontario's regional transit agency, after neither the Region of Peel or the City of Mississauga made efforts to buy the land despite having the first right of refusal. When questioned why the prime parcel of property was not purchased by a public institution to be used for much-needed affordable housing, City officials claimed they were unaware the land was for sale.

----
The lack of parking has been heavily criticized by councillors and members of the public. Edenshaw is proposing four levels of underground parking with 474 spaces for residents and 114 spots for visitors. The property is less than 125 metres from the Port Credit GO station and will have direct access to the future Hurontario light rail transit system, now known as the Hazel McCallion line, but even with the access to LRT and GO trains, council members are skeptical people will solely rely on transit. Metrolinx previously told The Pointer 426 current parking spots at the site will be impacted by the development.

----

Ward 1 Councillor Stephen Dasko, who has voiced his opposition to the development,said the current application is "completely unacceptable." He previously "pleaded" with Metrolinx to not sell the land, hoping some parameters could have been negotiated ensuring parking and height restrictions were worked into the transaction.

"I can't even begin to say how abysmal this is," he said about the lack of parking considerations. "Sure, it is across the street from a GO train station, but we're also losing over 200 parking spaces at the GO train because of this building. Something
needs to be done here. There's some really great opportunity to make this world class and I think a pause should be taken here."

Despite being located in a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA), there is no mention of affordable housing units proposed in the Edenshaw plan - another shortcoming heavily criticized by Council (MTSAs are designated for affordable housing)..."

thepointer.com

‘Insulting’ high-rise proposal portends Mississauga’s struggle with Doug Ford’s turbo-charged housing push

The plan, which was previously denied by Council in July, proposes high-rise towers double the height restrictions for the small surrounding area in Port Credit.
thepointer.com thepointer.com
 
It's extremely disappointing to see no affordable housing at this location. Of course, the site still warrants high density due to its proximity (next door) to Port Credit GO, but it will definitely be used as leverage by local NIMBYs to oppose the project.
 
christiesplits said:
It's extremely disappointing to see no affordable housing at this location. Of course, the site still warrants high density due to its proximity (next door) to Port Credit GO, but it will definitely be used as leverage by local NIMBYs to oppose the project.
Click to expand...
Metrolinx extracted $64.5-MILLION in land-value from this site in 2021.

Which means that in 2023, even at the proposed 42-Story / 1,139 Units massing - Metrolinx extracted $56, 628 per apartment out of this development.

If the building gets smaller because of NIMBY pressure - and a cowardly Mississauga Council... then the Metrolinx dollars-per-door ratio only increases --- and the chances of any possible on-site Affordable Housing units just disappear.
 
I don’t see the fuss. They appeal to the OMB or whatever it is called and build anyways. Am I wrong? 🏢🛤️🚊
 
rdaner said:
I don’t see the fuss. They appeal to the OMB or whatever it is called and build anyways. Am I wrong? 🏢🛤️🚊
Click to expand...
If the City is "fighting" it --- and the whole things takes X extra years, and cost the developer $X-Million in legal, planning & cost-escalation... then any opportunity for any Affordable-Rental units just (poof) -- Vanishes --- on this site.
 
paperguy said:
so this development has been rejected?
Click to expand...
The Planning and Development Committee have recommended that Council rejects it. If it is rejected, it will be appealed to the OLT, guaranteed, and it has a good chance of being approved by the OLT because this is within a Major Transit Station Area. Like @HousingNowTO says above, that adds costs, likely kills and affordable units being built, and delays the creation of new housing for people. It is possible that the developer and the City might get into negotiations after the (likely) rejection and the OLT appeal has been made, but this is so much higher than the City wants that I think negotiations are less likely.

42
 
rdaner said:
I don’t see the fuss. They appeal to the OMB or whatever it is called and build anyways. Am I wrong? 🏢🛤️🚊
Click to expand...
HousingNowTO said:
If the City is "fighting" it --- and the whole things takes X extra years, and cost the developer $X-Million in legal, planning & cost-escalation... then any opportunity for any Affordable-Rental units just (poof) -- Vanishes --- on this site.
Click to expand...
Time is the most important thing in any development project. Internal Rate of Return is the god to whom we all answer and with IRR, time is the most valuable thing you don't have.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Time is the most important thing in any development project. Internal Rate of Return is the god to whom we all answer and with IRR, time is the most valuable thing you don't have.
Click to expand...

It strikes me that many casual lurkers at UT may not know exactly what that entails, other than being a form of ROI.

So for uninitiated here's a link. (explainer and how to calculate)

www.investopedia.com

Internal Rate of Return (IRR) Rule: Definition and Example

The internal rate of return (IRR) is a metric used in capital budgeting to estimate the return of potential investments.
www.investopedia.com www.investopedia.com
 
Housing advocate Mark Richardson says Mississauga is not picking its battles well.
Click to expand...

I agree with the above quote from the same article. Mississauga really knows how to pick things to reject--located by transit stations and new LRT lines. Like, I understand rejecting applications that don't fit the context of the neighbourhood, but this is low-key ridiculous.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top