A proposed 28-seat café deli and three-unit apartment building in Huntsville’s west end hit a bit of a roadblock at this month’s planning meeting with a last-minute request from the MTO asking that the application be put on hold.
According to the planning document, the landowner is proposing to convert the existing dwelling at 234 Main Street West into a restaurant and, as well, is proposing to build a new three-unit, two-storey apartment building at the rear of the property. One of the units is to be build at grade to provide an accessible living space. Parking would be located between the two buildings and the existing access would remain.
The applicant is looking to add an exception to the C3 commercial zoning to permit a dwelling unit at grade for the accessible unit, and to remove the requirement for a 1.5m landscape buffer along the parking area abutting the southerly side yard.
The Town’s planning staff were in favour of moving the application along until a letter from the MTO arrived.
We received comments from the MTO late yesterday requesting that we implement a provision on the site until the applicant can provide certain studies and materials to the MTO’s satisfaction. We feel these requirements are quite onerous and staff are recommending a deferral until we can discuss the matter with the MTO and come to a resolution on the matter. Elizabeth Reimer, Town of Huntsville Senior Planner
John Gallagher, of John Gallagher and Associates, said his client was ‘dumbfounded’ when he learned of the last-minute letter from the MTO. “My client has been working with the MTO for over four weeks and making them aware of what his plans were,” Gallagher told the planning committee. “In that regard, they have basically asked that he take his existing zoning rights and freeze them by placing a holding category on it. … This (property) isn’t even on the highway. It’s about 300 meters from the interchange of Highway 11 and Muskoka Road 3, and the District has already said that they would approve an access at this point. There is also a centre turning way along Main Street West which was obviously considered when the road was rebuilt given the balance of those lands are zoned highway commercial…. I would respectfully ask committee to waive this condition. He is moving toward improving the area and he is moving toward providing apartments where they are desperately needed.”
Mayor Scott Aitchison didn’t mince words when sharing his thoughts on the application.
I guess more than anything I want to blast the MTO with both barrels because I think it’s an obnoxious thing for them to do. I am fully in support of this application. It’s a very minor change for something we desperately need. I think the MTO can get their pound of flesh, if they want it, but we shouldn’t hold up activity because they haven’t got their act together, sending a letter last night. So let’s proceed.Huntsville Mayor Scott Aitchison
The rezoning bylaw amendment will be recommended to council at next week’s meeting.
Don’t miss out on Doppler! Sign up for our free, twice-weekly newsletter here.
Hi Brian,
I contacted Kirstin Maxwell, the Manager of Planning for the Town of Huntsville, regarding the MTO request for more information. Here is her response –
“MTO was asking that the Town place a Holding category on the zoning, which would not permit any development to occur until they were satisfied with what was being proposed. Specifically, they requested a traffic impact study, and an agreement between the property owner and MTO to address responsibility for any road improvements that may be required. They also asked for a stormwater management report and noted that the applicant would be required to obtain a land use permit from them as well. Committee determined that they did not feel that a holding was required, and Council passed a by-law changing the zoning on Monday night.”
I would assume that the studies, at least, would be traffic studies; and certainly the MTO are within their rights to request them; given the proximity to the Highway 11 interchange. Their approval of an entrance at this location certainly trumps the District’s in this instance. The zoning problem, however, is confusing; as there is already an existing residence on the property.
Also, one wonders how only six parking spaces and only one designated disabled parking space would be sufficient to this establishment. Furthermore, how does one exit this space and enter the building without using the driveway? And has the Town adopted the new wheelchair symbol which indicates motion? The former one has been rejected by wheelchair- and scooter-users as being far too passive.
Of course I don’t suppose Doppler could tell us what ” certain studies and materials to the MTO’s satisfaction. We feel these requirements are quite onerous” might be? It would maybe be interesting to know this and see what the general public’s feelings are regarding “satisfaction” and “onerous” or maybe the general public is considered to be not smart enough to make this judgement?
A little more light here would be good for all.