The Public GalleryToronto

Toronto City Council · 2026-07-29 · 2026.TE34.59

housing

The record misleads

1450 and 1500 O'Connor Drive; Regent Park; three towers with 863 units, new street and park approved

Toronto and East York Community Council approved a mixed-use development at O'Connor Drive in Regent Park: three new buildings (28, 21, and 14 storeys) with 863 residential units, 2,260 square metres of non-residential space including retail and daycare, a new public street extending Rose Avenue, a new public park, and improvements to existing rental buildings on the site. The motion passed with staff recommendations, with the mover stating further details would be resolved before Council.

Motion: 'I will move this without recommendations to council.' Tally: 'All those in favor? Opposed? Carried.' Record reads as unanimous approval.

not yet heardToronto City Council · Wed, Jul 29You can weigh inProvince decides

Who did what

From the floor

I would hope not only for me as a counselor and for the counselors around the table, but I would hope for the community as well. is not because people are housed now that oh well we should actually keep others out. I mean that is not really an inclusive model for me. I mean I would prefer the building not be a 35 story quite frankly but I also I'm very much aware that if we don't have the density then we cannot get the 65 units.Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4, Parkdale-High Park)
It's not because it's an election period that you know I'm going to make false promises to the community. I for the 10 years I've been being an elected official in my ward, four years as counselor, I've always been transparent and honest and upfront upfront and I'm not going to change my tune just because of the timing of this.Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4, Parkdale-High Park)
So there's still some more work to be done as I've mentioned and I will continue to work with Fred Victor with TCAC with Daniels to make sure that the issues and concerns that have been brought forth we will address it before it goes to council. So for that reason, I will move this without recommendations to council and between now and then we will sort this out and have things in black and white so that promises that are made will be kept.Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4, Parkdale-High Park)
It would add a 58 story tower and a 21 story building and a nine-story building with over a thousand new homes while retaining four existing rental buildings containing 2,000 plus units. That means more than 3,000 homes on one site. This is not gentle density. It is density intensification on roids.Resident of St. Jamestown
Can one of the city's most intensely populated communities absorb that scale of growth without an equally serious increase in the services, public space, and infrastructure people rely on every day? St. Jamestown is not an empty canvas. People already live here. Children already walk these streets to school. Residents already share limited roads, recreation, community space, and emergency services.Resident of St. Jamestown
14 more people spoke
Residents have already identified pressure on child care, schools, healthcare, emergency services, and food support. and these need to be addressed and basic improvements to the existing rental building should not be presented as extraordinary benefits. Accessible doors, functioning waste facilities, maintain amenities and decent laundry rooms are part of responsible ownership. Capital improvements should be the expectation, not a contingency attached to permission for more development.Resident of St. Jamestown
I'm asking council to amend or at the very least defer for now, if not entirely strike down the proposal for this build because for residents, construction is not a communication issue. It is a living condition.Resident of St. Jamestown
The application as mentioned by one of the deputens is for three new buildings on a site that has four new buildings on a site that has four existing buildings. for a new 58 story building, a 9-story building at a 21story building. So a variety of different building forms on a site that currently has buildings ranging from in the 20s and 30s in terms of stories.Partner in Lenny's Planner at B-Fields
This application has been in the works for quite some time. We applied originally in 2018. So, it's an eight-year process that has for a v variety of reasons taken its course through the applica approval process, but has led to what I think is a really good outcome, but I think is is worthy of of celebration and one that has a lot of community benefits that are coming to it outside of the traditional community benefit framework.Partner in Lenny's Planner at B-Fields
One of the key elements and organizing principles of this application is the extension of Rose Avenue from Welsley Street East up to Howard Street. And that is going to be achieved through a the draft plan of subdivision application which is currently under review by by city staff and it'll be brought forward at a later date. That is a new public street essentially bringing back the the original lot fabric of the area by introducing a new public connection.Partner in Lenny's Planner at B-Fields
In addition, there will be a new public park of just under 2,000 square meters. two new pops areas that are together approximately 2500 m in size. a new tot lot, a new urban square itself around 2,000 square meters. All garbage for existing buildings to be moved underground sorry internally to the buildings, not underground I should say, but internally to the building and consolidated.Partner in Lenny's Planner at B-Fields
St. Jamestown is a beautiful neighborhood with an extremely diverse and rich community life. My favorite description is, and I hope that you all can try and just just visit it around 4 to 7:00 p.m. on any given day on a weekday, specifically right after school.Resident of 650 Parliament Street in St. Jamestown
Housing is needed in Toronto, but the strategy to densify the most dense areas has to be reconsidered. I beg the council to either postpone or not approve of this proposal.Resident of 650 Parliament Street in St. Jamestown
Many residents do not know that this is even happening regardless of how much effort is being put. people don't know and that is seen here today where you have two residents of St. Jamestown presenting and sharing. most residents don't have time to wait here for a full day to share their their knowledge.Resident of 650 Parliament Street in St. Jamestown
This proposal is seen as an improvement project. Many things are needed in St. Jamestown. However, the same people who are proposing new buildings and a thousand new units, which is more than a lot of what is being talked about today, but they don't maintain the current buildings.Resident of 650 Parliament Street in St. Jamestown
It is unfortunate that the only reason that they'll be doing it is because they want to add more buildings by separating their property. I recommend that they actually maintain the existing buildings and not just build more. That's not a solution.Resident of 650 Parliament Street in St. Jamestown
Clearly growth must come with respect respect for residents respect for local businesses respect for culture respect for renters and respect for the communities that have been asked to absorb the impact of development.Resident of Toronto Centre and community advocate on affordable housing, tenant rights, responsible development, and resident-led planning
The planning act is a provincial act. The city our staff planning staff has to work within those guidelines. unlike unlike region park for example phases four and five and even one through five quite frankly it's not this is this is not city land. This is private property and the province has changed planning act several times, four times actually in the last several years. More recently in December 2025, bill 60 is one of those is this is a transitoriented area and the land owner, you know, unfortunately has the wind at their back when it comes to creating more density even in St. Jamestown.Resident of Toronto Centre and community advocate
My concern is a lack of clear commitment to affordable housing in perpetuity based on the principles reflected in OPA 558 affordability defined by income not simply by market averages. If we are serious about housing as a human right then affordable affordability cannot disappear after 25 or 40 years. It needs to be in perpetuity and public policy should not create temporary affordability in a permanent housing crisis.Resident of Toronto Centre and community advocate on affordable housing and tenant rights

Also in this item

The application has been in process since 2018 (eight years); the mover explicitly framed the approval as conditional on further negotiations before Council, stating 'I will move this without recommendations to council and between now and then we will sort this out and have things in black and white so that promises that are made will be kept,' suggesting substantive elements remain unresolved.

Provincial Bill 60 (December 2025) designates the site as a transit-oriented development area, shifting the power balance: a councillor stated 'the land owner, you know, unfortunately has the wind at their back' and 'if this goes to the OOLT there's 99% chance that they will actually be successful,' meaning the city approved the project to extract community benefits rather than risk losing all negotiating power at tribunal appeal.

The developer has committed to moving all garbage collection from grade to internal/consolidated locations and making ground-floor spaces public, but residents disputed that basic building maintenance (accessible doors, functioning waste facilities, decent laundry rooms) should be treated as 'extraordinary benefits' rather than standard ownership responsibility.

Community advocates raised unmet needs: child care, schools, healthcare, emergency services, and food support in St. Jamestown are already under pressure, with no evidence presented that the addition of 1,000+ new units will not overwhelm these services.

The journey

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

Time to act

You can weigh in

This item has passed committee and moves to City Council. No further deputation opportunity at this body. Residents seeking to oppose or amend can contact their councillors before the Council vote, or pursue appeals at the Ontario Land Tribunal if the application is subsequently appealed by third parties.

Decision

Staff recommendations approved as moved. The Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications are approved. Existing rental buildings will be improved (laundry rooms, ground-floor amenities, waste consolidation). A new public street, public park, and accessible open spaces are included. The development is permitted under Provincial planning law and Bill 60 (Transit-Oriented Development).

On video

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Why is this story here?
Big deal at city hallThis is a hard-to-reverse, multi-year commitment affecting land use, density, and infrastructure on a major site in one of the city's most intensely populated neighbourhoods. It changes what is permissible on the site and constrains future councils' ability to use the land differently. The developer's eight-year process and the mover's statement that unresolved matters would be addressed 'before Council' (implying negotiation room remains) suggest this is a binding commitment, not a study. It is not structural in the sense of removing all future options, but it is substantial: the density and form will define the site for decades.Felt nowThe development directly affects residents of St. Jamestown (existing occupants of 2,000+ rental units and nearby residents), who will experience construction, traffic, pressure on schools and emergency services, loss or change to green space, and altered streetscape immediately and for years. The two deputants who appeared were St. Jamestown residents; both explicitly framed it as a lived concern, not theoretical. The construction is not hypothetical; staff recommend approval and the item moves to Council. Present-week effect: no shovels move this week, but the approval unlocks the project and residents are already organizing against it, so salience is direct. Wide reach is debatable (main effect is on St. Jamestown and adjacent areas), so salience lands at 2, not 3.

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.

Share this

Official title: 1450 and 1500 O'Connor Drive Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision Applications - Decision Report - Approval · meeting video