Seven buildings proposed for Leaside raise concern
Scale of planned community spanning two hectares on Eglinton Avenue concerns residents
Geoff Kettel standing in front of the proposed site at 939 Eglinton Ave. E.
The “planned community” proposed for approximately two hectares of land at 939 Eglinton Ave. E. in Leaside is “too big,” some residents say. A rezoning application was submitted to the city in April and is currently under review.
The development by DiamondCorp calls for seven buildings: two residential towers 19- and 24-storeys, connected by an eight-storey, mixed-use building fronting onto Eglinton Avenue East; two residential towers 31- and 34-storeys with an eight-storey building fronting onto the north side of a newly proposed public road; and lastly, a six-storey commercial building at the northwest corner of Brentcliffe Road and Vanderhoof Avenue.
The proposal includes 1,500 residential units, 2,950 square metres of retail space and 9,690 square metres of office space. A two-storey office and commercial building currently sits on the site.
“People are concerned that the infrastructure can’t handle that level of density,” said Kate Whitehead of the Leaside Property Owners’ Association (LPOA).
A previous proposal for the site had been submitted by DiamondCorp in 2013, but according to councillor Jon Burnside, the developer ran into zoning issues. The site, formerly zoned as employment lands, was redesignated mixed use last year.
“Now they’ve come back with one that’s bigger,” said Whitehead.
The development will be reviewed in the context of the City of Toronto, City Planning’s Eglinton Connects planning study, which allows for added density along Eglinton Avenue.
An Eglinton Crosstown station is set to go in at Eglinton and Laird Drive, two blocks west of the site.
“There are 1,639 parking spaces [proposed],” said Geoff Kettel of the LPOA. “It doesn’t sound like people will be using transit.”
“It is far too much for the site and neighbourhood,” said Burnside. “But it is still early in the game.”
DiamondCorp did not respond to requests for comment by press time.