Residents speak against proposed Earle Street development

Jeff Helsdon, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

Apartment building proposed for town-owned land on Earle Street.

The application was for a zone change to Medium Density Special Residential and an official plan amendment to accommodate the building at 31 Earle Street. The Town of Tillsonburg was the applicant for the change, and is completing it in conjunction with Oxford County’s Human Services Department.

Council opted to defer the decision until the need to widen Cedar Street and potential issues raised by the five citizens who spoke are considered.

Oxford County Planner Amy Hartley said two letters of opposition were received regarding the development, raising concerns about traffic and the distance to an arterial road. She recommended approval of the application.

Coun. Bob Parsons asked if the points made in the letters were considered.

Saying these points had been considered, Hartley added, “It is our opinion, the proposal still meets the policy.”

Mayor Deb Gilvesy wanted to ensure the woodlot wasn’t part of the development, which Hartley confirmed.

Resident Tina Foster suggested that the area's trail network could be expanded. She suggested updating the town’s traffic study due to concerns about increased traffic. Foster raised the point of who would pay for expansion of the road and sidewalk, and also mentioned there are already affordable housing developments in the area.

“This proposal overconcentrates affordable housing,” she said.

Tillson Street resident Hank Baatje mentioned past issues with property maintenance on the existing, less-than-market properties in the area.

Development Commissioner Cephas Panschow said the new development would be different.

“This one is unique because it’s affordable ownership,” he said.

Mayor Deb Gilvesy promised to take Baatje’s comments back to the county and provide Baatje with a phone number to complain.

Mike Mabee and Sue Bramall of Cedar Street maintain that the proposal is actually high-density and is adjacent to a sensitive, protected woodlot. She said that concentrating affordable housing in one part of the municipality is against the official plan.

“The zoning change is about fitting a square peg in a round hall,” she said, adding the town is focused on selling property to pay for a new town hall.

“I’m concerned about the future impact on our home value if this area gets saturated with affordable housing,” said Lynn Mudford.

As a resident of the area for 38 years, Mudford said she estimates the study is underestimating the volume of traffic already present, and there would be a safety concern with increased volume.

She mentioned the protected species found in the woodlot.

“This green space is the only green space in the area, and we would hate to have it taken away,” Mudford said.

Verna Drive resident Catherine Arruda suggested the building is going to change the landscape and also pointed out how many residents were in the audience.

Gilvesy questioned the planner further about the density and why it isn’t high-density.

Hartley explained that this is due to the building being only four stories.

Panschow said the original proposal was for seven stories and 137 units, which would be high density.

“The idea is to get as much flexibility as possible to get the most affordable units,” he said.

The mayor also questioned the need to widen the road.

Director of Public Works Carlos Reyes answered he didn’t have enough information to calculate that yet.

Coun. Chris Parker questioned whether a traffic impact study was done and why it didn’t address whether the road needs to be widened.

Hartley said the study recognized that the intersection of Simcoe and Cedar Streets was rated a “fail”. She didn’t believe the proposed development would impact the intersection further.

Parker countered that more traffic will have an increased impact, saying he personally avoids the intersection. After finding out the intersection wasn’t part of the ongoing traffic study, he suggested it should be.

The final motion council passed was to defer the application until council could evaluate the need to widen Cedar Street, to ask planning staff to report back with comments on the concerns raised, and to refer the intersection of Simcoe and Cedar Streets to the consultant leading the Transportation Master Plan.