Eagleridgemap

Eagle Ridge development could be heading to the Ontario Municipal Board

Principals of the Huntsville Place Mall are appealing a development proposal which would span an estimated 20 acres of lands located along parts of Hanes Road and Centre Street North, as well as Shay Road.

Huntsville Council endorsed an amendment to its Official Plan (OP), approved by the District Municipality of Muskoka, the approval agency, designating those lands from residential to a special policy area permitting a mix of residential and commercial uses. That change gave Eagle Ridge Development Corporation the ability to develop up to 75,000 square feet of limited commercial and highway commercial development on those lands. But it’s that additional commercial development that isn’t sitting well with the mall, which is appealing the OP amendment at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).

They have concerns with the additional commercial space that was being proposed on the site and they don’t feel that there’s any need for more commercial uses in that locationHuntsville Manager of Planning Services Kirstin Maxwell

Eagle Ridge is also proposing a residential and multi-residential component on those lands, the latter to be specifically located on Shay Road with a conservation area to protect the wetlands in that location.

The Town of Huntsville has approved zoning changes to reflect the Official Plan amendment, pending site plan approvals including the adequate provision of infrastructure such as water and sewer and storm water systems, proper road and pedestrian linkages as well as streetscape and architectural design, among other requirements. But since Alan Peters Holdings Inc. and Huntsville Mall Inc. have filed the appeal, no further movement is expected on the project until the appeal has been heard.

The commercial component could comprise up to a maximum of 25,000 square feet of limited commercial uses, which could include businesses such as a retail store, financial institution, a food store excluding a supermarket, health services, as well as a restaurant without a drive through, among others. It would also allow for up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet of highway commercial development, which could comprise things like a market, motor vehicle dealership, a service station, an office, a recreational establishment and a hotel or motel.

Lanny Dennis of Wayne Simpson and Associates is representing Eagle Ridge. While he was not comfortable disclosing the name of the principals of the corporation without their approval, he did say they are from southern Ontario.

He said there are no specific commercial plans on the table yet, noting simply that, “it’s a mixture of highway and convenience commercial.” Dennis added that 75,000 square feet of mixed commercial use “is not a huge amount of commercial space.”

There’s no significant or major stores proposed. You know those big box stores, none of that is permitted. It’s not allowed. We specifically excluded it. So no big box stores, no huge merchandise stores, all small scale stuff.Planner representing Eagle Ridge, Lanny Dennis

In terms of the residential and multi-residential component of the proposed development, Dennis said the look and type of residences proposed have not yet been determined.

“When you have a mixed-use development there’s sort of this symbiotic relationship between the residential and the commercial component. Quite often people that are looking at developing commercially like to count rooftops. In other words, the number of people they could service in the immediate area, and quite often those residential people that want to live there look to what services are immediately available to them,” he said.

Again, he said there are no concrete development plans on the table yet. “You sort of have to get at least your land uses in play… you don’t want to put the cart before the horse.”

In terms of the next steps, Dennis said that will depend on how Eagle Ridge wants to proceed, given the mall’s appeal.

Calls to the principals of the mall as well as the planner representing the mall in its appeal were not returned at the time of publishing this article.