The corner lot across from Maslack is 2,493m\u00b2 in area and has approximately 38m of frontage on Main Street West and about 47m along Tait Street.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Planning consultant John Gallagher was before the Planning Council, representing the proponent, Lionston Group, headed by Ravi Prasher. Prasher is also the developer of Laketree Properties on Highway 60, apartments on Huntsville’s Main Street, and the former cinema in Huntsville. His holdings also include a development in Parry Sound. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Gallagher told councilors the 42-unit development would significantly reduce Huntsville’s rental housing shortage. He said the 42 units would consist of five two-bedroom units, 25 one-bedroom units, and 12 bachelor apartments. Gallagher also said ten units would be specifically set aside for affordable rental housing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The applicant is applying for relief in order to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Reduce the minimum required front yard setback for a multiple dwelling from 7m to 4.9m and
from 7m to 4.5m for the attached balconies;<\/li>\n\n\n\n - Reduce the minimum required exterior side yard setback for a multiple dwelling from 3m to
2.4m and from 3m to 1.55m for the attached balconies;<\/li>\n\n\n\n - Increase the maximum permitted height for a multiple dwelling from 11m to 16.9m;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Reduce the minimum required number of parking spaces from 61 spaces to 44 spaces;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Reduce the minimum required landscape buffer abutting a parking lot along the rear lot line
from 3m to 1.3m and along the exterior side lot line from 3m to 1.7m;<\/li>\n\n\n\n - Increase the maximum permitted density from 60 units per hectare (15 units) to 169 units per
hectare (42 units); and<\/li>\n\n\n\n - Reduce the minimum required setback for a loading space abutting a residential precinct from
4m to 1.8m.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\nAccording to planning staff, the justification for allowing an increase in height would involve the following community benefits:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- A $15,000 contribution towards improvements for Avery Beach Park;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Seating and landscape improvements along Main Street West between the sidewalk and front
lot line of the subject property;<\/li>\n\n\n\n - Underground parking which includes 16 vehicular parking spaces and a bike rack for 16
bicycles; and<\/li>\n\n\n\n - 10 affordable rental units. The applicant will be applying to be part of the Muskoka Affordability
Housing Initiative Program (MAHIP), however, if funding is not provided through MAHIP, they
have committed to providing 10 affordable units regardless.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\nThe planning package presented by staff includes eight letters expressing concerns related to the height and density of the building, requested reductions to buffers and setbacks, the impact of reduced parking requests, traffic concerns related particularly to the Tait and Main Street West intersection, and concerns about snow removal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What councillors said<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Councillor Helena Renwick said she was not able to attend the open house held by the applicant, but she did meet with some of the neighbours and said she agreed that the density and height of the building are too high. Renwick also expressed concern about an increase in traffic in an already congested area, particularly in the summer with people going to Avery Beach. She also stated that proper sidewalks are required, a responsibility that will fall on the Town, particularly if density is allowed to increase. “There’s a number of things that I’m very concerned about, in particular, the height…,” she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Councillor Cory Clarke said he would not be supporting the application. “I can really appreciate what the applicant is trying to do here and he’s made some very generous offers and I appreciate that, there’s a lot of positive things about the application but I can’t support the increase in height, much like Councillor Renwick has just said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Clarke said, in his opinion, an increase in the height of buildings should only be allowed in new subdivisions and where it won’t impact existing homes. “This way, when you’re buying into a new subdivision, you’re going to know that there’s a good chance or a possibility that you may have a four-storey building beside you.” Cory said he’d like to see those concerns incorporated into the new policy planning staff is working on as it pertains to height and density.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“We really run into trouble when we try to add four-storey density into mature neighbourhoods, and after seeing the process played out for this application and the Cairns application, one thing is very clear to me: Our residents don’t want four and five-story buildings being infilled into mature neighbourhoods, and I don’t either. I’ve heard this very clearly from many Huntsville residents and not just residents that are in the affected areas, but residents that are in other areas in town that aren’t affected,” said Clarke.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Councillor Scott Morrison said he too was concerned with traffic and parking overflow on the side streets and asked the Town to put up no-parking signs. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
“And I guess I’m trying to balance it all. I mean, let’s be honest: if we say no and somebody went to the OLT (Ontario Land Tribunal), the province would say, ‘Why aren’t you building more?’ This is what the province wants, so it’s tough because we need to control our municipality, but every week, the province is taking away some of our powers to control our town, and we’ve seen time and time again us spending money to deny something, fight at the OLT and find out they’re getting everything they want, so I’d rather work with the applicant and the neighbours to try to find a way to balance the neigbhours’ concerns with getting us rental units that are sorely needed. And I know, I get that the height might be an issue, but there are a lot of people that can’t afford to live in this town right now…”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Huntsville Mayor Nancy Alcock spoke to issues such as sidewalks and parking signage. “If we’re going to approve projects like this, then we have to ensure that we’re providing the necessary infrastructure that supports it,” she said. “The applicant has a tremendous track record in this town of producing quality rental housing, and I have no doubt that in this case, not only will it be quality, but when he says he’ll provide ten affordable housing units, that he will and I think that’s really important.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Alcock said she understands the concerns expressed, but the lot does have certain approvals already in place, and it is part of Huntsville’s Official Plan “as an area where the density will increase,” she said, adding that the development would be on Huntsville’s Main Street which is important when new housing is being built. She said there would potentially be many seniors living there, and they would be using transit, which runs right along there.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/media-doppleronline-ca.s3-accelerate.amazonaws.com\/2025\/05\/tait-street-property.png\")
The lot on the left is where the building is being proposed<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n Alcock said she understands the impact on the residences at the back and said good buffers, such as mature trees and taller fences, could mitigate the impact. She also told Councillor Clarke that getting around infilling in established neighbourhoods in Huntsville’s urban area is difficult because it’s an area targeted for more housing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Councillor Dione Schumacher agreed that traffic in that area isn’t great. She also said it seems the affordable housing units are dependent on higher density, and while it shouldn’t be that way, it does cost a lot to build, “and so we could get three floors and get what is acceptable, what’s been allowed, but it’s not going to meet our affordable housing market, and it seems like a few of these proposals that are coming in, are asking for that extra level just so they can create the opportunity to create affordable housing, which I do feel as a community we desperately need… so do we give up that one floor for the fact that we’re creating an opportunity for ten low-income families… that need places to live? And so that’s where I’m kind of at a crux. We’re building in an ideal spot where we could house possibly ten low-income families…”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Councillor Monty Clouthier said that extra floor is providing housing the municipality needs. “Like we’re not just going to plunk this here and leave the neighbourhood dry.” He said if the building is approved, the municipality should put in sidewalks and find solutions to the parking problem and foot traffic, and enhance the neighbourhood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Deputy Mayor Dan Armour said the location is ideal. He said the construction of such buildings needs to be on municipal services, and housing is needed. He said with respect to many of the concerns expressed such as traffic, the municipality can work on those.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Clarke, added, “We sometimes make it seem like ‘well, these properties can’t be built on at all,’ and they can be. They’re in areas already that can be built on. There’s a certain number of units that could already be built in these areas, and so the reason that applications come here is because they want to build more, they want to build higher, and I’m saying, how much is too much? And I’m saying for me that four storeys in established neighbourhoods in Huntsville is too much, and I’m not going to be supporting it moving forward, and I won’t be supporting it when our height policy comes back here either because I don’t think our residents want to see it…”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Councillor Bob Stone said things like pedestrian traffic, sidewalks, and access to Main Street are things the municipality can address. As far as the height goes, Stone said there will be a report returning to the Planning Council table for approval, and “I do believe this [location] will probably be in that height and density corridor. It’s not on a hill; it’s not on the water. It’s on Main Street. I do believe that many seniors will probably be living there, be able to walk downtown every day, stay active. Avery Beach is right there, and I agree with the comments regarding the fourth floor. Having a fourth floor allows the developer to do those extra things: give us money to fix up Avery Beach, have accessible units, some low-income units. There’s too many positives, and I have to agree that it’s appropriate in that location.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Renwick said she wants to make sure that it is understood that she is not against affordable housing and more rental housing in the community, but she is not in favour of four-storey buildings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the end, the majority of council agreed to proceed with preliminary conditional approvals, while Councillors Clarke and Renwick voted against it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For more details about the development, you can find the full staff report HERE<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n
Don\u2019t miss out on Doppler!<\/h5>\n