Comment 32327

By George (registered) | Posted July 07, 2009 at 22:04:08

Jason, I think you are off base here. While the reduction in density from the original proposal is regrettable, Mattamy made a pragmatic business decision to avoid costly political delays for a development that is already on sale and doing well. The modified plan is still light years better than anything built to date in the Meadowlands and for that matter most of suburban Hamilton with a large number of townhouses as well as 30 and 36 foot lots and a smaller number of 43 foot wide lots. The lots are generally smaller (only 90 feet deep) than most of suburbia, houses are set close to the street with garages pushed back and the architectural detailing is quite attractive. From my back of the envelope calculation the density would appear to be similar to most older neighborhoods in the City and consistant with places to grow targets and the compromise only converted 30 lots out of 340 total from 30 foot lots to 36 footers, not exactly a huge reduction in density. This development may be be less dense than optimal because of political myopia and nimbyism, but it definitely represents a step in the right direction.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds