77 Howard Street; 41-storey mixed-use infill with 460 units and park approved despite resident safety concerns

housing

The record misleads

77 Howard Street; 41-storey mixed-use infill with 460 units and park approved despite resident safety concerns

City Council approved a 139.5-metre, 41-storey mixed-use tower with 460 rental units and ground-floor retail at 77 Howard Street, retaining the existing 24-storey building. The decision included holding provisions for unresolved engineering issues and commitments to improve the existing building (roof, facade, accessibility, heating system). A resident raised concerns about food bank demand and existing building maintenance; staff cautioned that approval to Ontario Land Tribunal appeal risks losing negotiated improvements.

Approved; parking permit amendment carried; item carried

not yet heardToronto City Council · Wed, Jul 29Province decides

From the floor

“This is an infill development with a new building next to another building. So it is an infill development in an apartment neighborhood. also this is not determined to be a condo development. It very well could be a rental building.”Bastfields, on behalf of Great West Development (applicant)

“From a fire safety perspective, the building will be designed fully to Ontario building code requirements and which will ensure that there are appropriate fire safety precautions and measures taken into consideration. those will all be worked out in the later process.”Bastfields, on behalf of Great West Development (applicant)

“The application will bring forward both a new public park which was expanded from the original proposed 604 meter size to 713 m through the addition of a portion of the CBC in kind contribution. of 37% of the 4% CBC contribution would be provided as an additional parkland to expand a park at the front”Bastfields, on behalf of Great West Development (applicant)

“I I live actually not too far from [the site]. St. Jamestown is already a very densely populated area you know with a lot of marginalized people you know with a lot of and the buildings are very old right I mean that's the complaint I've heard throughout that the landlord or the owners of the property can do a better job to maintain the buildings”A councillor

“It is a gamble that to go to refuse this application and send it to the OOLT knowing that likely that it would be approved and all the things that we have actually requested and worked with staff on would be would disappear overnight.”A councillor

1 more person spoke

“Community need is already here. More density is not the same thing as more community capacity. The city has already decided that unresolved engineering matters are serious enough to require a holding provision. So I ask, why are unresolved resident safety issues not protected with the same seriousness?”A resident

Also in this item

• Holding provision imposed on zoning amendment due to unresolved engineering issues, but resident safety concerns not similarly protected despite parallel language in staff report.

• Existing 24-storey rental building retained; developer committed to major building improvements (roof, facade, accessibility, mechanical systems) as part of deal. Councillor cited these improvements as reason to approve rather than appeal.

• Resident opposition to development cited food bank program launch at 77 Howard as evidence of existing unmet community need, arguing density alone does not create service capacity.

The journey

Wed, Jul 8 · Toronto and East York Community Council · amended

Wed, Jul 29 · Toronto City Council · not yet heard

Decision

Approved with conditions: zoning by-law amendment with holding provision; 713 sq m on-site parkland dedication at northeast corner; in-kind contribution (37% of 4% community benefit contribution) for park expansion; improvements to existing 24-storey building including accessible door improvements, new roof, facade replacement with exterior brick, new fob system, heating and control system upgrade with new generator, electrical room and component upgrades, 16 e-bike parking spaces, and three outdoor amenity areas for shared use by new and existing tenants. Parking permit amendment added.

On video

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Why is this story here?

Big deal at city hallZoning change unlocks a 139.5-metre tower adding 460 units to a dense inner-ward neighborhood, with financial and design commitments tied to approval. Holding provision for engineering issues shows stakes are acknowledged. Undoing the approval requires appeal and re-negotiation; reversing the tenant improvements would cost the developer materially. Multi-year commitment with wide reach (460 units, existing tenant population, neighborhood impact). Passes substantial test: hard to reverse without cost.Felt nowExisting tenants in the 24-storey building are directly affected: the deal secures improvements to their building (accessibility, heating, roof, facade) but also exposes them to years of construction. New residents (460 units) will occupy the site. The neighborhood (St. Jamestown, densely populated ward) experiences density and service pressure. This is not a study or future question; construction and occupancy are concrete present/near-term effects. A named group (tenants, new residents, ward residents) feels this directly and soon. Salience 2 floor met; does not reach 3 because the effect is bounded to one site and one neighborhood, not broad across the city.

Stories are ordered by how much weight a decision carries and how directly it reaches daily life. They rise as a decision date approaches and fall as they age.

Official title: 77 Howard Street - Zoning By-law Amendment Application - Decision Report - Approval · meeting video