Headline News

Orangeville residents have their say on housing project

June 24, 2026   ·   0 Comments

By JAMES MATTHEWS

Inadequate parking and a feared erosion of privacy are among shared concerns about a housing development proposed for Orangeville.

The proposed development will be on 1.23 acres of land at the southeast corner of Hansen Boulevard and the eastern entrance of Parkinson Crescent.

The project includes two mixed-use buildings with 10 ground-floor commercial units, three ground-floor residential units, and 20 upper-level residential units along the Hansen Boulevard and Parkinson Crescent street frontages. The proposal includes a six-unit townhouse block towards the rear of the site.

Porter Drive residents Yash and Manali Patel live near the proposed development site. They oppose the requested zoning amendment.

“I am concerned that the proposed mixed-use development will negatively affect the surrounding residential neighborhood,” Yash said in the letter to council.

Patel is worried about increased traffic and congestion on Porter Drive, Hansen Boulevard, and nearby streets. Other concerns centre on parking overflow and the safety of residents, construction noise and disruption, and an increased density that does not fit the neighbourhood’s character.

“I purchased my home in this area expecting it to remain primarily residential in nature, and I do not support changing the zoning to allow additional commercial and higher-density uses at this location,” Patel said.

Danny Santilli owns a townhouse property on Parkinson Crescent, and he opposes the development, though he supports a zoning amendment from Commercial (C2) to a residential townhouse development.

“Mixed-use developments are intended for roadways with high exposure and moderate traffic,” Santilli said. “They are for communities that do not have access to retail outlets or nearby services. This is not the case in our community.”

Porter Drive resident Bruno Machado’s property borders the northern edge of this proposed development.

“The current layout presents severe negative impacts on the privacy, utility, and enjoyment of my property, as well as those of my surrounding neighbors,” he said in opposition to the project.

Machado suggested council demand a 1.5 metre to three metre landscape buffer planting strip of evergreen privacy trees along the northern and eastern property lines. An acoustic or heavy-duty privacy fence should be installed along the shared boundary line, fully funded by the developer.

Kathleen De Castro, another Porter Drive homeowner, shares concerns for disruption of daily life and the erosion of privacy.

“Because there is no mature tall trees or fences directly behind us to block the line of sight, the upper-level residential windows and balconies from all three blocks will look directly down into our yard and right into our rear windows,” she said in a letter to council.

Because of how her home is positioned, vehicles navigating a part of the proposed development at night will shine headlights into her property.

“Trying to put a newborn to sleep with constant headlight glare slicing through our windows is an impossible situation,” she said.

Fitzgerald Street resident Mike Simon said the parcel is relatively small and that there seems to be an attempt to strike an acceptable balance between residential and commercial spaces.

Pete Ford said parking on Porter Drive is currently an issue, and he fears it will be worsened by the development.

Readers Comments (0)