Members of the Town’s Committee of Adjustment decided to decrease the required parking for a major redevelopment on Main Street, rather than risk losing what they referred to as an improvement to the downtown.
The building, located at 19 Main Street East and currently sitting empty, also has frontage on Minerva Street. It is the same site where the main street’s grocery store was once located, or more recently, the Salvation Army thrift store.
The owner of the property is proposing to redevelop the existing site to include a 4,320 square foot addition at the rear of the building as well as a full second storey over the entire structure.
This would result in a building with approximately 30,000 square feet of commercial space, states a report by Kristin Maxwell, Huntsville’s Manager of Development Services.
Greystone’s Pat Dube, on behalf of the applicant, told the committee that the intent of the developer is to attract a restaurant to the site, along with other commercial tenants. He also said the proposed development would include a parkette, abutting Main Street East and the north side of the parking area off Minerva Street.
Dube was before the committee on November 12, asking it to waive the required parking for the redevelopment. Under the current zoning bylaw, the owner would have to provide 111 parking spaces for such a redevelopment instead of the 40 being proposed.
Committee member councillor Karin Terziano expressed concerns about decreasing the required parking as it would create a precedence for other businesses on the main street, particularly the former Empire building lot.
Down the road that’s going to lead to the Town being on the hook to buy land and develop more parking because there just isn’t enough.Councillor Karin Terziano
Terziano asked whether the property owner might consider cash in lieu of the parking spots, but at $3,000 a space, according to planning staff, Dube said the owner would reject the additional expenditure.
Councillor Jonathan Wiebe asked whether the developer would consider decreasing the redevelopment footprint to find additional parking.
Dube said depth of parking would require 20 feet, “and 20 feet would take a third of his addition across the width of that building… his position is that in his deed there’s a note that he can build from property line to property line,” said Dube, adding that he feels pretty strongly about that.
Dube said the parkette area could be reduced but said “it would be a drop in the bucket” in terms of the number of spaces that could be added.
“It would probably be cheaper to build a parking lot than a parkette but in terms of the issue of parking in Huntsville are three or four or five spots really going to make a difference?” said Dube, who also reminded committee that people have been enjoying free parking on that property for some time. “I think not developing this property makes a big difference,” he added.
In the end, and with some hesitation, committee agreed to waive the parking requirements for the redevelopment in favour of enhancing the downtown.
Don’t miss out on Doppler! Sign up for our twice-weekly email digest and get some of our top stories delivered right to your inbox.
* indicates required
How about the town buys and tears down the mostly empty front half of Brendale Square and makes a parking lot/park there (like Rivermill “park”)? Then proceed to make the core downtown more pedestrian-welcoming
I concur! I’m all for down town development but at what cost?
In fairness, all the members of the committee are in favour of “reasonable” development.
Why are Ms. Terziano and Mr. Wiebe seemingly the only two voices in Committee/Council in favour of “reasonable” development? If the Town doesn’t play ball with Mr. Dube, he’ll just take his bat and go home: don’t let the door hit your backside on the way out. It was always my understanding that cash in lieu of parking/green space was a hard and fast rule. Is this the first time that the requirement has been waived? As Ms. Terziano said, this precedent will obviate that requirement forever.
Most of the Main St. buildings have two storeys (and inevitably whatever is developed on the Empire lot will exceed that). Why not increase this building to three storeys with the inclusion of a main floor parking lot? It would require an increase to the foundation and an extension of the elevator by one floor; but in comparison with the cost of the original building, these costs would be marginal.
Sounds like good news to me. One hundred and eleven parking spots!? Yikes. I hope we work toward more car-free areas, and this parkette sounds ok. Downtown areas such as near Riverside Park are over-run with vehicles and not friendly to pedestrians and cyclists. This sounds like a step in a better direction. And it would be good to get that building and space occupied.
An excellent move by the town committee. As we go forward there may never be enough “parking” for the town (and every town) if everyone drives and everyone wants to park as close as possible to their shopping or service location. A) build a parking multi-plex B) promote walking & cycling C) all future developments must re-consider space allotment for the automobile in this “climate-change” era.
Would the second storey accommodate low-cost housing perhaps??