The Vice Chair asked if members of the Committee had questions pertaining to the submitted applications and correspondence.
Ms. Baldassarra inquired about how servicing the severed parcel would be affected, the width of Henry Street related to concerns about garbage and fire trucks maneuvering on the street, and whether street parking is permitted. L. Russell, Senior Planner advised that the retained lot is already serviced and that servicing for the severed parcel would be located within the boulevard portion of Henry Street, that the entire width of Henry Street is likely 8 metres which exceeds the standard requirement of 6 metres, and that street parking is not permitted within the laneway.
Mr. Howe inquired as to the number of residences proposed, the construction impact on Henry Street, and why previous applications with similar proposals were refused. L. Russell, Senior Planner advised that each proposed lot would have one single detached house with a secondary dwelling unit in the basement of each unit, that services are to be provided within the landscaped area/boulevard portion of Henry Street which the applicant would be responsible for reinstating, and further that the previous severance application submitted for this property got a tied vote which resulted in a refusal of the application.
Mr. Bertrand inquired if the Town has a tree preservation by-law and was advised by L. Russell, Senior Planner that the Town does not. Further, that part of staff's recommendation regarding this property, should the application be approved, is that a condition be included to preserve one or more of the trees on the property.
The Vice Chair asked if anyone would like to speak in favour of the applications.
The applicant Eric Calder was in attendance and noted that proposed units would assist families with respect to affordability and family obligations, that the proposed units would not negatively impact the community, and that the intent is to preserve trees where possible.
The Vice Chair asked if anyone would like to speak in opposition of the applications.
Karey Shinn of 42 John Street, Orangeville presented comments as provided in submitted correspondence dated December 1, 2021 and November 29, 2021 and noted concerns regarding the proposed application due to size of lot, excessive lot coverage, incompatibility with neighbourhood, inadequate setbacks from property line, width of street, additional traffic, insufficient parking space, impacts on well water and servicing of proposed dwellings.
L. Russell, Senior Planner advised that the proposal includes 3 parking spaces for each proposed lot, which does meet the requirement of 2 parking spaces for a main unit and 1 additional parking spot for an accessory unit.
Zoe Shinn of 69 Madison Avenue, Orangeville presented comments as provided in submitted correspondence dated November 30, 2021 and noted concerns regarding the Town not having a tree preservation by-law, protection of ground water, and the proposed lot coverage and frontage for the subject property.
Dejan Badnjar of 8 Henry Street, Orangeville presented comments as provided in submitted correspondence dated November 29, 2021 and noted concerns regarding the size of Henry Street and the addition of 4 units, preservation of trees on the property, impact of construction on traffic flow, and water, sewage, and drainage.
Denise Beisel of 14 William Street, Orangeville presented comments as provided in submitted correspondence dated November 29, 2021 and noted concerns regarding potential increase of traffic, sightlines given that 5 Henry Street is a corner lot, size of lot for 4 units, size of street, and infrastructure to be incurred by Town.
Matthew Weinhoffer & Amanda Sgrignoli of 19 William Street, Orangeville presented comments as provided in submitted correspondence dated November 29, 2021 and noted concerns regarding the addition of 4 units on the subject property given that it is already a busy area.
Karey Shinn of 42 John Street, Orangeville further inquired if the elevation was considered and if the Town has a tree preservation by-law.
The applicant Eric Calder advised that engineers provided Low Intensity Development (LID) Brief with respect to the proposal and no issues were noted regarding water and sewage.
B. Ward, Manager of Planning advised that Town staff have considered servicing for the proposed lots and confirmed that service installation is feasible.
The Vice Chair further advised that Council considered a tree preservation by-law during the last term of Council and it was not adopted.