Proposed 318-home development sparks debate

The proposed site plan shows how 318 townhouse-style units would be arranged across the Dundas Street East and Paris Road property, offering a closer look at layout, density and internal road design alongside the aerial view of the site.

Casandra Turnbull

Managing Editor

A proposed 318-unit residential development on Dundas Street East prompted both support and concern during a recent County of Brant council planning meeting, as the project moves through early stages of the approval process.

The application, submitted by LIV Communities, seeks a zoning bylaw amendment and draft plan of subdivision for lands at 118, 126, 130 and 132 Dundas St. E. and 34 Paris Rd. Currently zoned General Commercial (C2), the proposal would permit a shift to medium- and high-density residential uses, including townhouse-style units developed in phases. 

According to planning materials, the development would consist of 318 condominium units across multiple blocks, with provisions for increased density and flexibility along the Dundas Street frontage. The lands are located within the Primary Urban Settlement Area of Paris and are designated as Community Node, Community Corridor and Natural Heritage System in the County’s Official Plan. 

The proposal was received for information only at the April council meeting, where representatives from Landwise, acting on behalf of the developer, outlined the studies completed to date, including environmental, traffic and stormwater assessments.

“I believe this representants good planning,” said Edward John, partner and principal planner with Landwise, during the presentation. 

Despite the studies presented, several councillors raised concerns about the scale and implications of the development.

Coun. John Peirce voiced strong opposition, pointing to the extent of zoning changes and requested exemptions.

“And then we get to the good part here, ‘With special exemptions for reduced lot area, reduced lot frontage, reduced street back, reduced interior lot, reduced landscape, increased building lot coverage, increased building lot height so this isn’t just a simple zoning change here.’” 

Peirce also questioned whether additional residential growth is needed, noting existing development already in the pipeline.

“Adding 300+ residential units is only going to exasperate this issue,” he said, referencing a perceived lack of amenities and infrastructure. 

Coun. John Bell echoed concerns about density and timing, suggesting the application be deferred until a comprehensive land use study is completed.

“I am really concerned we are squeezing homes into this area. There are lots of variances that are not minor. They are significant,” said Bell. 

Bell also raised broader concerns about overall growth in Paris, noting the municipality may already be exceeding its targets.

“To my mind, I count 2300 homes that are not necessary for us to meet the 59,000 for the target for the Official Plan. I think we should not hide that fact from our community,” said Bell. 

County staff indicated they are developing a growth tracker tool and plan to report back to council in June or July with updated figures on the number of approved and proposed dwellings. 

Traffic was a recurring theme among both council and residents. Victoria Neal, who lives nearby, said she would prefer residential over industrial use but questioned how increased traffic would be managed in an already congested area. 

Other residents raised environmental concerns and questions around parking capacity within the subdivision.

In written comments submitted ahead of the meeting, Paris Road resident Joe Jeles outlined a number of concerns on behalf of his family, whose property borders the proposed development.

While noting they are “not against development in our community,” the family raised issues related to proximity to the CN rail line, traffic impacts, stormwater management and land use compatibility. 

Jeles pointed to safety and noise concerns with homes proposed as close as 30 metres from the railway, compared to his own residence located approximately 150 metres away. 

He also highlighted challenges with existing traffic on Paris Road, writing that during peak periods, “we find it difficult to exit our property,” and warned that 318 new homes would likely worsen congestion. 

Additional worries included the potential routing of stormwater through his property, the need for buffering and privacy measures, and the absence of commercial or mixed-use elements in the proposal.

Jeles also spoke during the council meeting, providing an update that his family has meeting with LIV Communities in a Zoom call and noted they are making progress on addressing concerns. 

In contrast, several local businesses submitted letters of support for the development, many sharing a common message about the benefits of adding residential density to the area.

Supporting businesses included Mike Yarek Dodge Chrysler Ltd., No Frills (Paris), Eggsmart, Starbucks, Swiss Chalet, The Full Plate and Camp 31. 

In their submissions, business owners emphasized that while the area already functions as a destination for shopping and services, it lacks nearby residents to sustain consistent activity.

Letters noted that adding housing would “bring more consistent, everyday customers,” “support activity beyond typical daytime hours,” and help businesses “plan, invest, and grow with more certainty.” 

Overall, the businesses expressed the view that residential development would strengthen the local economy, support existing establishments and attract new investment, while helping balance growth across the community. The application remains in the early stages, having been presented to council for information only. Further review, including staff recommendations and potential council decisions, will follow as part of the planning process. 

County staff also indicated that updated growth projections for Paris are expected later this year, which may factor into future deliberations.