Huntsville’s planning committee unanimously approved the site plan for the redevelopment of the old cinema on Huntsville’s main street. The building will house a restaurant, a temple, a tourist commercial component, and 14 apartments.
John Gallagher, the planning consultant representing the applicant, told the planning committee at its August 11 meeting that “it is somewhat disheartening that the theatre has closed in Huntsville. It was for sale for a number of years and there were no takers to have anyone run it as a theatre.” Gallagher said COVID was probably the last blow.
“My client, in an effort to provide some more apartments, picked up the building, and I think COVID probably put the nail in the coffin of the movie theatre,”
Gallagher noted that the commercial component of the building will be maintained with the place of worship and the restaurant to be located on the main floor, while the second floor, as well as the addition of a third floor, will contain a total of 14 apartments.
In terms of parking, he said his client will create an additional five parking spaces in the back of the building, one of which will be considered accessible. He said in the past that area was mostly used for storage. He also said the change of use proposed for the building would decrease parking requirements.
“When you look at a movie theatre full of capacity on a Saturday afternoon or a matinee during the summer, again we weren’t dealing with a lot of parking and there are areas that are substantive that one can park in,” argued Gallagher.
He said his client is hoping to get work on the building done soon, particularly the construction of the roof before the reconstruction of the Main Street begins in that location, and before school returns.
Councillor Jonathan Wiebe said while he agrees that the theatre would’ve likely required more parking than what is being proposed now, “I can’t get my head around full-time, overnight parking for people who live in one of the apartments.”
Huntsville planner Adam Ager said people thinking of renting at that location will have to consider whether a parking spot is available for them as part of their decision. “Also in saying that, the close proximity to being in the central business district is that walkability factor. Having everything you need in walking distance, the green space, the shops and everything is right there for you so I imagine that’s what will be utilized by the tenants there and that’s part of the consideration,” he said.
Site plan approval is contingent on the applicant paying $21,000, a fee in lieu of an additional seven parking spaces required that are not ‘grandfathered.’ Ager said the funds would be added to a reserve held to “improve the parking situation… in more of a comprehensive manner in the area.”
Wiebe wanted to know how much the Town had in its cash-in-lieu-of-parking reserve but the information was not readily available at the meeting.
Huntsville director of planning Kirstin Maxwell said she would get back to the committee with the amount the Town currently has in that reserve. “I believe that the Town did recently acquire a lot next to the curling club and I believe some of our cash-in-lieu-of-parking reserve may have contributed to that, but I will have to follow up with you,” she told committee.
Gallagher suggested the municipality could also raise some funds through off-hour parking permits.
In terms of concerns received from an adjacent building owner that morning, Gallagher said his client has no issue with providing a catch basin in the parking lot. His client has also agreed to provide “additional landscaping along the one-metre strip adjacent to the parking lot for Thoms and Currie. That’ll just beautify the area anyway so it’s a positive step all along.”
As for the murals on the property, Gallagher said his client will attempt to work them into the plans for the building “and work with the BIA to maintain them in some fashion. If there’s one or two that have to be moved then we can work with the BIA to remove those and get them in a different location. Again, we think that that’s a positive step for the municipality and keeping the Group of Seven [Outdoor Gallery], it does provide a lot of culture [and] tourists coming into the area.”
Another concern expressed by the adjacent property owner involved window openings and privacy, said Gallagher. “And again, we are dealing with a limited amount of wall space on the Thoms and Currie building.”
He added that a special and inexpensive privacy material can be placed on the windows, which the neighbouring property can consider. “Again, the majority of the third floor is going to be above the roofline,” he added.
Councillor Bob Stone said he’s thrilled with the proposed redevelopment of the building. “So many rental units are coming forward, they’re desperately needed. Really disappointed about the parking but I think I have to be in favour of this because of the desperate need and I do believe, as Adam suggested, that many of these renters may not have cars at all, but we do have a parking issue. We need to continue to work towards that end of getting more parking downtown, it’s always an issue but I’d like to congratulate the property owner and welcome him to downtown and say thank you for all you’re about to do.”
Councillor Dan Armour wanted to know if any of the new rental apartments proposed would be subsidized. Gallagher said he did not believe his client had entered into any such agreements but said increasing rental stock will consequently impact rental rates.
Armour also wanted to know what type of apartments were being created. Gallagher said he believed some would be bachelors or one-bedroom apartments and others would be two-bedroom apartments. “We’ve got quite a few at 390 square feet, there’s a few at 700 [square feet], so 700 could be a small two-bedroom… [390 square feet] is likely a one-bedroom or bachelor type unit,” he said.
In terms of accessibility, a question also prompted by Armour, Gallagher said there is an elevator at the back of the building and there will be a number of units that will be accessible, as required under the Ontario Building Code.
Committee chair and Huntsville Councillor Nancy Alcock said she was also sad to see the movie theatre go but welcomed the new addition to Main Street. She said with some of the apartments proposed being very small there is an opportunity to provide affordable units. “I hope your client is listening very carefully because I think that would just be very wonderful.”
In the end, the committee unanimously approved the site plan proposed for the redevelopment of the property. Huntsville Mayor Karin Terziano was not at the meeting.
You can find the related story and comments from our readers below:
Hindu temple proposed for Huntsville’s Main Street
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!
Click here to support local news
Oh my1 I feel sorry for our Town Council, having a Planning Department who are no more planners than I am when trying to figure what I will have for supper. Poor planners are what they have in Huntsville, they figure their job is to check the dimensions of a property, and if it meets the criteria as set out by the poor planners that were around before them.
This issue should never have made it to Town Council period! But this day and age dictates one cannot say anything that smacks of racism. I keep saying it’s time someone in some layer of Government in Canada should stand up and say “Enough is Enough!” and rescind all those Treaties made ‘way back by politicians who wanted to form Canada any way they could!
More stuff is on it’s way and we need to grow some backbone!
The now defunct theater conversion to a temple, restaurant, apartments, et al. certainly has caused some comments and concern. It is a busy spot by times, what with teacher parking, buses, winter snow removal, in-town workers clogging the side streets and any motorist who ventures there at the wrong time of day will remember why they avoided it ’til todays’ mistake.
But with the ‘in lieu fund’ swelling by $21,000.00, maybe council has the parking under control. Ya figure?
Mr. Johnson, you should feel flattered that councilor Wiebe at least took the time to rebuff you concerns. He had likely already checked that the wires were on the right side of the road! I recently made an attempt to contact my councilor and received neither a wink nor a whistle. Maybe we are only of concern when our vote is needed?
In-filling downtown is needed; we have enough vacancies to deal with and unfortunately, once the asphalt is down, we may have more.
This morning on the radio, I seemed to get the impression that there was the feeling that religious differences were causing some concern, but I fail to see how the aforementioned points have anything to do with religion.
Bear your cross or burn your candle as you see fit and I’ll do my best to not interfere with your faith or belief, just as I will urge that you allow me mine.
Hopefully it will all work out and maybe our council has found another tool to work with. Prayer.
Bless us all.
All of the above responses have merit. The proposed temple design is not in keeping with our “character” of Huntsville’s businesses. The location of the temple is inappropriate – to say the least. Temple goers need parking spaces. The restaurant patrons need parking spaces. The apartment tenants need parking spaces. Visitors of the tenants need parking. The visitors might be family, friends, or a much-needed at-home visit from (e.g. a doctor, a physiotherapist, a PSW). It is erroneous and presumptuous to profess that the (some) apartment tenants won’t have a vehicle and can ‘hoof it’. Please go back to the drawing board. Nothing is truly written in stone. Relocate the temple and allocate adequate parking for all tenants, temple goers, and patrons of the restaurant.
I agree; we are slowly, but surely, losing our coveted small town character that has attracted tourists for many years. How sad. How very, very sad.
Just want to add that this decision by Huntsville Council is just a continuation of poor planning & development decisions that this council continues to make. For the next election, we cannot return a majority of this council to power.
We can’t have anything flashy downtown, no neon signs, but a Hindu temple that doesn’t fit in at all with the character of Huntsville’s Main Street, no problem. Let’s talk turkey. It’s easier to approve than to disapprove and be labelled a racist. There’s a war on culture going on in this country that’s being lost on a daily basis by spineless elected officials who are more concerned with virtue signalling than doing the right thing.
Paul Johnston, I tend to agree with you but let’s face it, you shouldn’t be surprised. After all, this is the same council that voted to allow a pristine area of Huntsville on Townline Rd to be clear cut for a developer leaving an indelible scar on the landscape of our beautiful town.
The next election is October 2022. It will be our opportunity to make the necessary changes and certainly Councilor Weibe should be amongst those shown the door if he feels he’s above taking feedback from the people he works for.
Its a tourist town….if you want a temple…put it outside of town…not on the main street. Im sure something “tourist related”would be a better fit..I guess they have a quota for diversity / Inclusion / Equity…
Why would council approve this??….what a mistake…the building design does not fit with the Muskoka theme….very disappointed!!
This decision demonstrates the total lack of true leadership by Huntsville Council. The Hindu community should be enabled to have a temple, but it must be in an area zoned appropriately and with the infrastructure to support the traffic. It is another example of council’s lack of vision and planning. I spoke to my councilor today and he, Jonathan Wiebe, made it clear he did not want our input. It is so sad for Huntsville that we have a council who lack any forward thinking and leadership. Huntsville continues to lag other areas in Muskoka due to the absolute bad decisions by council. Many of the inputs stated that the uniqueness and beauty of Huntsville is so negatively impacted by such horrible decisions. Huntsville has a real problem and it is the council.
Nobody wants stop the development of a Hindu temple except it needs to be in the right location with the right infrastructure to support it. Putting it on Main Street is a horrible mistake by this Council. It appears to lack thought and adequate planning. But as others have stated no surprise in that this just another bad decision by this council. Main street needs to be revitalized to reflect the vision for the town. It just reemphasizes the lack of forward thinking by council. I called my Councilor, Jonathan Wiebe, hoping to provide him feedback from a number of his constituents and he flatly told me ” he does not want our input”. Our council at its best. What a shame for Huntsville.
This is a terrible idea. Do the town planners have no concern for our town, or the look of the town the locals want. They are going to make the parking issue worse, make a three story eye sore in our downtown. I always thought the movie theater would have some historical protection, so it would not get turned into a three story eye sore. I agree we need more apartments, and having a place for people to worship is great, but why do we have to mess up our quaint downtown.
I lived in Newmarket when the population was 24,500 people – 1978. I then watched a town grow and grow until now it is 90,000 and crowded as blazes and that was the reason I moved out and north to a small town.. The Town of Huntsville is going the same way. It is fast losing its identity as a nice small Muskoka town. The planning and building committee is out of control and to approve the redevelopment of the theatre is going to pose all kinds of traffic problems and add more density in population and vehicles to the town. Our Mayor and councillors can see only see the monies coming into the coffers and not the long term effects on the community. Shame on you for ruining a lovely and once relatively peaceful and vibrant community.
Huge disappointment in the Huntsville Planning committee.
What’s happening to the Muskoka look in our business district?
Maybe it’s time that the committee members stop catering to investors and start addressing the vision for our business areas.
We are a tourist town and want to keep it that way. I can guarantee that tourists do not want to see a Temple on our Main St. Also if the committee members keep this up many tourists will not come to Huntsville to shop, there are many other places in Muskoka that’s keeping the Muskoka vision alive.
So disappointed, what are we going to allow these 5 members to do next.
Think about it people !
A bad location for a temple for so many reasons. Yup town council makes another bad decision. It doesn’t even look like a Muskoka design to fit in the community.
What a great addition to Main St. A new religious sanctuary called s certainly in keeping with Huntsville’s past. Having a return to basically 4 homes of worship in proximity to Main St. and certainly adding a number of new apartments above it shows the developer has great insight into our Communities greatest need.
Congratulation to the Planning Committee for the questions asked and for unanimous approval of this progressive step in Huntsville ‘s ever evolving future.
Dumb dumb bad mistake that the town will regret later it’s going to cause a lot of problems later