A developer is proposing to build four 12-storey residential towers, totalling 948 units, on Wellington Street in Aurora.
The property owner, 1000265154 Ontario Inc., is proposing the four buildings on a 2.68-acre plot at 180 Wellington St. E., which previously housed Aurora Tire and Wheel and the Royal Wood Shop. They were seeking a height exemption at a public planning meeting on Oct. 8, as the current zoning only allows for eight storeys, as well as some other exemptions for requirements like minimum amenity space.
The plan says 703 of those would be one-bedroom units, or one-bedroom units with dens. Another 180 would be two-bedroom units of various configurations, with 43 three-bedroom units and 22 studio units.
“There’s quite a variety in the size of those units, as currently programmed,” said Ryan Guetter, land use planner with Weston Consulting. “Certainly, we’re catering toward a more attainable form of housing, in our view, that would support those first into the marketplace to obtain a unit.”
Guetter added that the particular plot was well suited to a taller height limit, given it is down hill from the majority of the major transit station area and near the Aurora GO station.
“Although we’re seeking higher heights, we understand the sensitivity around height. We believe this site does lend to higher heights,” he said.
Speaking at the meeting, Darryl Moore, a 30-year resident of Aurora, was supportive of the development, saying the town has become less walkable as it has grown.
“My view is that this development is probably about the best thing that we could have there,” he said. “The downtown has been hollowing out. It’s much less walkable than it used to be, which is exactly the opposite of what you’d think.”
Moore suggested making the building even taller, calling on the town to allow for 14 storeys and require the developer to donate two floors of affordable rental units. He also said a higher proportion of the units should have two bedrooms, versus one bedroom, to help attract more families.
“This is a wonderful place to put more higher-density stuff and we don’t have enough of it,” he added.
A number of councillors echoed Moore’s comments during Tuesday’s meeting, although some had concerns about the increased density, affordability and amenity space.
Councillors John Gallo and Ron Weese both asked about the number of affordable units, with Gallo pointing to the town’s official plan, which sets a minimum target for affordable housing of 35 per cent for new housing units.
Marco Ramunno, the town’s planning director, said the 35 per cent target was for new units within the mass transit area rather than on a “property-by-property basis.”
Ruetter added that the developer was planning on running a shared-equity investing program for some of the units in the building.
Both councillors also expressed a concern about the reduction in the minimum amount of amenity space.
“In a 12-storey composition, we’re occupying just over 50 per cent of the site area. We’re not dominating the site with buildings. That’s pretty reasonable coverage of building,” responded Guetter.
Current zoning
Currently, the land is within the Aurora promenade and MTSA mixed use zoning in the town's official plan, while the current zoning has a limit of eight storeys in height.
The previous owners of the property had applied for a rezoning to allow two eight-storey apartment buildings totalling 223 units, with the Ontario Land Tribunal approving the amendment in March 2021.
The developer is also planning some retail uses on the ground floor of the proposed apartments, with a coffee shop and convenience store planned. Guetter said he hoped the town would approve a “permissive framework” with a number of exceptions included to potentially allow for a daycare in the future.
There will also be a work-share office and fitness centre in the building.
The proposal will move forward to a future committee of the whole meeting, with a new report addressing the comments brought forward.
Editor's Note: The headline of this article and content was altered to clarify that a decision regarding the proposal was not made at the Oct. 8 public planning meeting.
