How is it that a town that created the beautiful downtown Main Street let other parts of Main Street (and all of Steeles Ave) turn into such an eyesore?
Milton just went through an intensification study. The final report will be available online here. If executed well, this can do wonders for Milton. But Milton has gone through other ambitious exercises (Eco Village) with no results. The key is to make sure that this does not turn into one of those exercises.
My view is that turning Main Street from Bronte to James Snow into the following is potentially a good thing :-
However, I don’t want to see any more of these in Milton:
The study proposes respecting surrounding low-density neighbourhoods by staging heights :-
Another trick is to make sure that zoning is handled well and respected. Only then can we create walk-able neighbourhoods:
You can see the core urban area map here:
I would personally continue intensification all the way to James Snow, if not further East. There is a second GO station planned at Trafalgar. Maintaining a higher population density along Main Street between these stations will help greatly with transit.
The Thompson / Main GO station is one reason why I don’t think the central library should have gone at the Thompson / Derry intersection. That was an ideal spot for a residential area from where residents could walk to the GO station.
Now that you have my thoughts on this, what do you think?
What do you think of using Younge street in North York (between HWY 401 and Finch) as example to follow. Yes, It has highrise condominiums (which for some reason you are against), but it has nice walkable neighbourhoods, great commercial/ entertainment/ retail/residential mix. It also has a very urban, vibrant feel and off course with TTC and several crossing bus lines, very easy and convinient access to public transport.
I believe that this is a great example to follow.
I am personally completely against suburban style plazas with 100-s of parking spots (e.g. upcoming Derry/Scott plaza or Indigo/Mexx plaza in North east end). I believe that following urban type design will force people to walk/bike/take public transport due to inconvinience of driving.
In the worst case scenario, all parking should be burried underground with stores built on top. (yes, it would cost more to build), but Milton could provide insentives (by way of DC discounts) for land intensive development vs. sprawling designs.
[Reply]
admin replies on June 1st, 2010 at 11:27 am
@Dmytro,
Thanks for the comment. You can also e-mail me directly if you want to bounce ideas.
I am actually *not* against high-rise condominiums. In fact, I am all *for* high-rise neighbourhoods, like the one you described. I am against a single high-rise in an otherwise low-rise neighbourhoods (in other words, I am against using a highrise or two to get population density number in otherwise sprawled neighbourhoods. A better alternative is to achieve the same population density by allocating more land to mid-rise).
For instance, I think the superstore plaza is a travesty. It is right next to the GO station and is not surrounded by single family homes. It should’ve been tall residential buildings so people could walk to the GO station. Likewise, the Thompson / Main intersection for the new library is also a horrible design. A better alternative would be to build a high-rise residential building with first few floors dedicated for the library. Again, it would put more people in walking distance from GO. These areas are in our ‘core urban centre’ that we are trying to intensify.
I actually gave the town written feedback on its official plan asking it to reduce number of parking it requires from neighbourhood plazas and increase number of trees. I put some pictures on my latest blot post, check them out: http://www.zhamid.ca/info/urban-streets-and-parking-lots/
I hope it clarifies where I stand.
Zeeshan Hamid
[Reply]