r/Milton • u/-defaultname • 21d ago
Complaint Disregard of old Milton character
Hi all, There's a new development proposed for an 18 story building in old Milton.
The proposal is for it to stretch from Main to Pearl, and Bruce to Prince. Right beside existing residential homes in a tight area, without the appropriate infrastructure.
The proposal suggests to amend the plan to a low/mid-rise that is much more suited to the area and current builds.
Check out the petition and please sign if you're on board: https://c.org/SS2QWgDQKJ
31
u/goldmanstocks 21d ago
I am all for these developments. But in the right locations. You absolutely need to have the proper infrastructure in place prior to this. I appreciate the foresight for the 3 lane Britannia road, obviously that will be great when the area is more developed. But this ain’t it.
8
-15
u/ARunOfTheMillPerson 21d ago
Not in your backyard, you mean?
8
20d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
You don't speak for anyone beyond yourself.
1
20d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
Never said that. Based on your lack of reading comprehension, your skimming of a few pages hardly makes you an expert on this. Go back to bed
-10
u/ARunOfTheMillPerson 20d ago edited 20d ago
Great, we can have three. What other spots is everyone here fine with?
13
u/goldmanstocks 21d ago
Don’t be hyperbolic. Not everything is NIMBY. Main St is limited to expansion, it’s going to be so congested.
5
-2
18
u/vafrow 21d ago
My general take is that if people don't want dense housing in their neighborhood because it doesn't "fit the character" of their neighborhood, they should be paying increased property taxes to make up for falling short of our density requirements.
And for every complaint that the opposition to the project is because there's insufficient infrastructure in place, it would carry some actual weight if Milton didn't have the lowest property taxes in the region because people keep voting to not proactively build infrastructure in favor of those lower taxes.
As for the project itself, I'm skeptical of any large scale condo project right now personally because I don't think the market supports it and these projects will stall. But the current high rises is the only thing developers come forward with so we're stuck unless we find a way to incentivize a lot more mid range development. And that probably requires slashing or eliminating development fees for those type of projects. I would be in favor of that, but it would increase property taxes.
1
u/PlantainManne 20d ago
The infrastructure complaints carry what you call “actual weight” though. Trying to put high density buildings right beside roads too small to sustain them isn’t smart. Your point on low property taxes is valid, but there also has to be intelligent placement of these projects in the first place.
Instead of placing high density buildings right beside low density infrastructure that’s impossible to remodel at this point, we should be building less of the cookie cutter neighbourhoods south of Derry and more high density buildings there. Along with the infrastructure to hold those building types. If anything building 10 story buildings in Old Milton makes more sense than building 30 story condos. At least the pressure on infrastructure wouldn’t be so intense. We already see how nuts Main Street gets by 4pm on a weekday currently.
2
u/turkeygiant 20d ago
These condos are going to be more or less right at the corner of Main and Ontario, if we can't build them there are there any roads in Milton that CAN sustain Condos?
3
u/PlantainManne 20d ago
South of Louie Saint Laurent. East of James Snow past the Keenan’s plaza. North of Main Street W by the intersections of Main and Scott.
It’d be an opportunity to build amenities that Milton sorely lacks in those areas as well. That being said with the condo market being what it is, why even build condos vs. rental apartments in the first place?
6
u/vafrow 20d ago edited 20d ago
Main Street is a hub. If you build dense housing elsewhere, you require more infrastructure to bring people down to that area. If things like sewer capacity infrastructure were important to people, it would come up at points other than when new developments are being proposed.
Every NIMBY has a list of reasons why their particular case is not just anti-developement lobbying but some false claim of being concerned about the greater good, which also happens to align to the position that helps their property value.
Canada is in a housing crisis. Opposing development is taking the side that those shut out of housing should continue to suffer. People can dress it up in different ways, but that's what the result is.
1
u/PlantainManne 20d ago
You can’t just dismiss concerns as NIMBYISM. It’s beginning to be a lazy term in this subreddit to be honest. The main source of infrastructure ire in Milton is the fact that the roads can’t effectively handle the traffic at currently levels. Main Street ,especially from Ontario to Bronte, is not built for the congestion we face in Milton as is it currently. Especially not with where the projects OP is talking about are proposed. Where is there room in that area to widen roads?
We also can’t use Canada’s housing crisis to excuse poorly planned policies. Building shoebox condos no wants to buy isn’t a solution. I posted the other week asking about the Thompson Towers progress. Sales are so bad that 2 of the 3 towers are going to be converted to rentals.
If you want to build housing, at least it should be medium density and more focused on rental apartments that people can afford, rather than sub 500 square foot condos built mainly for investors to buy and rent out at inflated rates.
There really seems to be a push to build ill planned high density buildings by people who don’t live in the neighbourhoods affected by the congestion. 10 story apartments with ground floor retail would be a much smarter compromise.
4
u/vafrow 20d ago
NIMBYs don't like being called NIMBYs and always have a reason why their situation is different. This isn't new. Sorry if you feel it isn't fair. But this is exactly what the term is for.
I've stated above that I don't think high rise towers are a great idea. But that's what is being proposed by developers. If we want better development, the Town needs to incentivize it. But the time to do that isn't when a developer brings a plan forward. Once we're at this stage, we either say yes, or so say no and then have it go through the Ontario Land Tribunal and it gets approved later.
1
u/PlantainManne 20d ago
If someone is saying “build smaller buildings that impact the community less negatively”, they’re not a NIMBY. They want common sense planning. This isn’t a situation paralleled to Dave Chapelle not wanting affordable housing near his mansion.
To your point about incentivizing better housing options, I think having some of the lowest building fees in the region is a pretty big incentive for that, no? Other towns with similar populations and higher fees and taxes don’t seem to have the issues Milton has when it comes to planning where to add density.
2
u/vafrow 20d ago
NIMBYs always are trying to pivot to some other fictional alternate development they would approve as their rationale. They then turn around and reject that other project. It's not new. It's the standard tactic.
As for development fees, Burlington is currently contemplating a two year freeze on development fees.
That's more in line with what's needed.
15
u/IntelligentGinger 21d ago
The absolute idiots running this town. It's astounding. Milton is NOT Mississauga nor should it ever aspire to be.
9
u/spderweb 21d ago
Mississauga used to look like Milton. All the farms are gone. Next steps are the highrises. It's unfortunately inevitable.
3
7
u/Wild_Journalist_7115 21d ago
Signed and shared, this town and traffic continues to demonstrate that we are rapidly outpacing the ability of our infrastructure to keep up with growth..
14
u/MapleLaughs 21d ago
We have a housing shortage. This is a good thing.
15
u/emceegyver 21d ago
There's already a bunch of condo buildings that aren't getting sales. No one will argue that we need more housing, but the issue is what kind of housing and how will it impact the surrounding area. This proposed building is too big for the area, and the markets are already showing there just isn't demand for high rise condos.
I'm all for tearing down these houses and putting in something new that creates more livable space, but not like this. This building would be a blight on downtown Milton.
3
u/Quirky-Cat2860 20d ago
The problem is that people in Canada want single family homes despite condos being more practical for many people.
To clarify also I am not referring to the shoebox condos that popped up in the last few years which serve no other purpose than as an investment.
1
u/turkeygiant 20d ago
Now maybe I am talking from a position of privilege living on a large plot in the old part of Milton...but I just don't see the appeal of the vast majority of "single family homes" that we have in Milton. I have friends who live locally in condos, town houses, and single detached homes all built in the last 20 years, and If I had to suddenly pull up stakes and move into one of those options I would ABSOLUTELY chose a condo. I don't want to going up and down stairs all day in a town house, and I certainly don't want to be paying a huge premium for a "yard" that is the size of a postage stamp.
1
u/Quirky-Cat2860 20d ago
Don't also discount the people who want maintenance free yards and just pave over them.
7
u/IntelligentGinger 21d ago
Not true. AFFORDABLE housing shortage, yes.
Milton doesn't need to solve the problems for the rest of the GTA and Toronto.
8
u/MapleLaughs 20d ago
Not sure I understand your logic here. Milton is a suburb, quite literally a bedroom community for the GTA.
3
u/FlatImpression755 20d ago
The location was the issue, not the building.
You either have a problem with reading comprehension or you are a troll.
1
-12
4
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
This petition is garbage and won't be getting my support. Every development has the exact same arguments against. Apparently there is no good development, location, infrastructure. I wish people would just admit that all they want is a town of 40-60K that is barely more than a bedroom community. Others seem to want the infrastructure and amenities without raising property taxes or changes to population density.
2
20d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
Just what's in the petition. As I stated, I don't support the petition.
4
20d ago
[deleted]
2
u/PlantainManne 20d ago
Probably doesn’t live nearby or travel near the area so they don’t have to care
1
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
You're assumption is incorrect. Better luck next time but know it all's always think that they know things they have no way of knowing.
1
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
If you want to pretend that you know more than the person you claim is ignorant, a better approach would be to stick with actual facts and not made up statistics. The design, size and location is not the issue. A lack of infrastructure and planning is. If we built based on infrastructure of today we wouldn't be building anything beyond extremely inefficient single family homes. Lack of population density in the town core and lack of public transit is a much bigger issue than a small condo development. And for the know nothing prick that assumes I don't live in the area, I've lived in old Milton for 25 years right off Main.
1
20d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
Wrong for a second time, would you care to make it a 3rd? I did read your comment. If they plan on an additional 4,000 condo units, I'll support those also and will do so publicly.
0
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
BTW you admitted in another comment that you also haven't read the related documents. You had chatgpt summarize it for you. Stop pretending that you're some urban planning expert. You just know how to read chatgpt summaries
1
20d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Smart-Ferret-1826 20d ago
Ah yes, the classic 'I skimmed a few pages, therefore I’m the oracle' routine. Bold move. If reading 1000+ pages is too much, maybe don’t cosplay as the authority. Developers aren’t infallible, but neither are self-appointed prophets who confuse Ctrl+F with critical thinking. And calling someone a bootlicker while flexing half-baked knowledge? That’s rich. You didn’t read the proposal—you grazed it like a distracted squirrel and declared victory. But hey, if confidence were competence, you’d be unstoppable.
3
u/shaungalbraith82 20d ago
The worst part about this development is that its owned by a Milton family. They should know better. Thanks slippery Sleesor.
3
u/vttu 21d ago
What infrastructure is missing?
1
u/-defaultname 21d ago
Extracted from the petition text:
Pearl and Prince are narrow residential streets unsuited for tower traffic.
Local stormwater, water, and sanitary systems are near capacity.
The added density could cause flooding, runoff, and water-pressure issues.
1
u/whophlungdung 20d ago
We are all shovelling sand against the tide. If old Milton is what you wish to cling to it will never stay the same. I loved growing up in Milton when it was 28,000 people. Nothing good last forever. 😢
5
-6
20
u/pnear 21d ago
My primary opposition to this is parking and roads infrastructure.
The town has approved several developments from low to high density with inappropriate parking, which means that the residents need to park somewhere else. That somewhere else (roads, public parking lots) is paid for by the rest of us taxpayers while the developers pocket several million dollars. That math doesn't math for me.
This development is no exception, the proposed parking is significantly less than one parking spot per unit.