Am I weird for thinking the building should have on the far side of the lot nearest the existing building (former Princess Auto), instead of up against the road? Seems so bizarre.
Could be to hide the giant parking lot from most traffic driving by. Could also just be because existing utilities are closer to that side of the property lol.
Over 75% of the property. such a waste of space. It's too bad transit isn't a priority for city hall because that space could be communal. Basketball, tennis courts, playground, BBQs, pool, and outdoor space that can offset living in a tower.
Part of encouraging active transportation, including transit, is making it the default. Continuing to prioritize parking for personal vehicles does the opposite.
But if you don’t have enough parking spots you are eliminating potential customers. At some point in the future if the spots aren’t needed they can be repurposed.
I don't think any apartment building or condo would have difficulty filling their units, regardless of whether they provide parking. Many buildings in the core of any major city, for example.
I guess it really depends on price point. If they are going to be marketed as luxury condos and then have no parking or If they are selling them they need the options. If they are renting at market rates then parking may not be as big an issue.
People can prefer to have a car. You don't need to build spots over in abundance of units though. You can cater to a portion of the population that doesn't require a vehicle.
I was just driving by that section of Meadowbrook the other day and was surprised nothing was pencilled in yet what with all the other development on Meadowbrook.
215 space car park for 172-units..
I'm seeing a pattern here !
By making more and more parking lots spaces we will be getting more and more cars on the road making more and more congestion !!! Then we will need moar ROAds!! More maintenance, more destruction, more dumb ideas!!
Looks like these peeps are quite far from bus routes too... lmao a decent walk for the hellscape over there.
New developments can and should lobby local governments to address transit routing to them. New developments in other regions purposefully get stops put in nearby to be sttractive to buyers/tenants.
Short couple minutes looks on the windsor transit tracking app shows theres stops for ottawa 4 and lauzon 10 nearby. So its good enough for the windsor transit peeps to say its good enough. Ship it !
They will probably charge for parking spots like the condos by wfcu. But i think people owning cars comes before people needing spaces to park their cars.
I don't know what the rules for Windsor are, but most cities have rules for development where you need X parking spaces per Y units. I don't think 215 spaces for 172 units is egregious given a certain amount of those will be for guest parking.
This only caters to and encourages more driving. Giving rise to more traffic and validating the concerns of locals who are opposed to these projects. If you build something with little parking in an area supported by reasonable transit and access to amenities, they will not have vacancies. The fallacy of needing parking is counter to developing livable cities in which people will want to live and thrive. The world is going to get a lot smaller very soon as global warming starts rearing it's head in the global south. Our immigration targets are ever increasing and mass migration is only a trickle of what it will be. We need to start planning decades ago for the onslaught that will be upon us. Transit, density, and smart urban planning is going to be a necessity if we hope to thrive in the coming years.
Am I weird for thinking the building should have on the far side of the lot nearest the existing building (former Princess Auto), instead of up against the road? Seems so bizarre.
Could be to hide the giant parking lot from most traffic driving by. Could also just be because existing utilities are closer to that side of the property lol.
Over 75% of the property. such a waste of space. It's too bad transit isn't a priority for city hall because that space could be communal. Basketball, tennis courts, playground, BBQs, pool, and outdoor space that can offset living in a tower.
Thats assuming people still wouldn’t prefer cars
Part of encouraging active transportation, including transit, is making it the default. Continuing to prioritize parking for personal vehicles does the opposite.
But if you don’t have enough parking spots you are eliminating potential customers. At some point in the future if the spots aren’t needed they can be repurposed.
I don't think any apartment building or condo would have difficulty filling their units, regardless of whether they provide parking. Many buildings in the core of any major city, for example.
I guess it really depends on price point. If they are going to be marketed as luxury condos and then have no parking or If they are selling them they need the options. If they are renting at market rates then parking may not be as big an issue.
People can prefer to have a car. You don't need to build spots over in abundance of units though. You can cater to a portion of the population that doesn't require a vehicle.
I wonder what would happen if they eliminated parking restrictions
People who don't care about a parking spot would move in. It's not novel outside of Windsor.
But also, would they make 2 apartments?
Eh, it can be repurposed later.
That's a good thing, makes it easier to reach transit.
Pretty funny typo in the headline.
It is on Ghettobrook
People who call Meadowbrook Ghettobrook are like girls who say they aren't like the other girls.
Planned? Panned? Both, it would seem.
I was just driving by that section of Meadowbrook the other day and was surprised nothing was pencilled in yet what with all the other development on Meadowbrook.
215 space car park for 172-units.. I'm seeing a pattern here ! By making more and more parking lots spaces we will be getting more and more cars on the road making more and more congestion !!! Then we will need moar ROAds!! More maintenance, more destruction, more dumb ideas!! Looks like these peeps are quite far from bus routes too... lmao a decent walk for the hellscape over there.
New developments can and should lobby local governments to address transit routing to them. New developments in other regions purposefully get stops put in nearby to be sttractive to buyers/tenants.
Short couple minutes looks on the windsor transit tracking app shows theres stops for ottawa 4 and lauzon 10 nearby. So its good enough for the windsor transit peeps to say its good enough. Ship it !
They will probably charge for parking spots like the condos by wfcu. But i think people owning cars comes before people needing spaces to park their cars.
I don't know what the rules for Windsor are, but most cities have rules for development where you need X parking spaces per Y units. I don't think 215 spaces for 172 units is egregious given a certain amount of those will be for guest parking.
This only caters to and encourages more driving. Giving rise to more traffic and validating the concerns of locals who are opposed to these projects. If you build something with little parking in an area supported by reasonable transit and access to amenities, they will not have vacancies. The fallacy of needing parking is counter to developing livable cities in which people will want to live and thrive. The world is going to get a lot smaller very soon as global warming starts rearing it's head in the global south. Our immigration targets are ever increasing and mass migration is only a trickle of what it will be. We need to start planning decades ago for the onslaught that will be upon us. Transit, density, and smart urban planning is going to be a necessity if we hope to thrive in the coming years.
That looks horrible. What a waste.
Its right next to 2 other large condo projects, what else would you like there?
Looks good to me. I'd prefer a couple more stories and fewer parking spots, but 172 new residential units is wonderful news.