Neighbors concerned about 91-home construction project in Alcona

Another Innisfil housing proposal is facing strong opposition from neighbours.

At a June 19 special city council meeting, residents had an opportunity to share their thoughts on a proposed development for 1761 Webster Blvd., calling for 91 townhomes to be built on the 1.54-acre property.

The subject lots, owned by Webster Boulevard Development Inc., are proposed to accommodate 31 two- and three-story conventional home units, 26 three-story back-to-back home units and 34 three-story stacked home units. Each unit would have two parking spaces (including one in the garage), along with a total of 23 visitor spaces. The units would be accessed via a private condominium road via Webster Boulevard.

“The proposed development will utilize underdeveloped vacant land within the primary settlement area of ​​Alcona,” the staff report to council stated.

Development of the property has been slated for decades, and the proposal fits the regulations outlined in the city’s official plan. However, an amendment to the zoning bylaw is needed for the promoter’s vision to be realized.

Residents in the area were aware the development was in the works; some even welcomed earlier proposals, which could have included housing for the elderly. But don’t expect to see old people in the homes as proposed, one neighbor said.

Elizabeth Dykstra lamented how the proposal replaced senior housing with something that is not affordable for seniors. No senior citizen, including herself, would look at a three-story house and consider it a good place to live, given how many seniors avoid climbing stairs, she told councilors.

Instead, these homes will attract families, she said, and while she loves families and children as much as the next person, she worries about the crowding it will bring to the neighborhood.

“Innisfil is still a commuter town, which also means that even though they have two parking spaces, you’ll need two vehicles if both parties are working out of town,” she said. “The reality is that this is Innisfil: if you have a one-car garage, you can’t park in it because you have your winter tires, your kids’ bikes, your toys and recreational vehicles and everything else. “

Current zoning allows a density of 52 units per hectare at a maximum height of four stories, while apartment blocks are required to have no fewer than three or more than eight attached units. The developer’s request calls for the density to be increased to 59 units per hectare, allowing blocks of 18 and 14 units. A third block of seven units remains in compliance.

Changes to lot sizes are also being proposed, typically seeking smaller measures than the statute currently allows. Council was told by the developer’s planner that most of the units would have rear yards and those in a back-to-back situation would benefit from green space in the development.

Green space was on Debbie Miller’s mind, but not for those who would be moving into the new homes.

“The green spaces are great because people will have another yard and they can look at the trees,” she said. “But when we think about our environment, can we sometimes think about animals? Because their habitat is important… and they create balance in our ecosystem.”

The environment was also at the forefront of Elise Story’s concerns. Her property is coming back into development, and she’s worried it will worsen the flooding she experiences, especially in the spring, when runoff from melting snow piled up on a fence bordering her yard enters her property.

She told councilors her property did not need flood relief.

“We’ve had our basement flooded twice,” she said. “Flooded once, had to be fixed, thousands and thousands of dollars (spent) and three weeks later, flooded again and had to be done a second time. Since then we have spent lots and lots of money putting in a different type of sump pump and a spare for a back up as we don’t just siphon our water…you could see the water marks running down the side of the Lamstone . (The street) through all the back yards and on the side.”

Story’s other concerns were echoed by some of the other residents who spoke during this portion of the meeting, which lasted about an hour. Chief among them were how new development could exacerbate existing capacity issues at local schools — the proposed development is within walking distance of Lake Simcoe Public School — and increasing traffic and congestion on area streets, leading to the the latter to pedestrian safety concerns.

No board decisions were made at this meeting. City staff will consider public comments and councilor questions and work further with the developer before bringing a recommendation back to council at a later meeting.