A rendering for a multiplex apartment building at 1138 Islington Ave. In 2024, Toronto dubbed Islington Ave. a ‘major street’ capable of accommodating ‘gentle intensification.’Gabriel Fain Architects
In Toronto’s extensive network of suburban arterials, Islington Avenue south of Bloor Street, in Etobicoke, and Pharmacy Avenue, south of St. Clair Avenue East, in Scarborough, are a bit like twins separated at birth.
They’re both four-lane collector roads lined with postwar bungalows, serviced by TTC buses, and connected to rapid transit. What’s more, as of 2024, the council redesignated both as “major streets,” deemed capable of accommodating “gentle intensification” – not just townhouses, but also a new breed of small apartment buildings up to six storeys high with a maximum of 60 units, reminiscent of the walk-ups that were commonplace in the pre-war city.
This zoning change, which is attracting interest from small-scale developers, is the latest instalment in a six-year effort, dubbed “Expanding Housing Options in Neighbourhoods” (EHON), to allow laneway homes and garden suites, five- and six-unit multiplexes and corner stores in low-density residential areas long reserved for detached single-family homes.
Toronto caps number of bedrooms allowed in multiplex buildings
Despite the council’s new policy, early development applications for small-scale apartment projects on Islington and Pharmacy have met with sharply contrasting responses. The reasons have to do with the way the builders are responding to the new major streets policy, as well as whether these projects actually represent minor variances.
On an Islington lot about 600 metres south of Bloor, Nilrak Construction is redeveloping a 67- by 105-foot corner property with two adjacent three-storey apartments, each with eight units.
Architect Gabriel Fain says the owner, who had previously pitched townhouses, last fall secured a zoning bylaw amendment that would allow more density – a mid-rise project with 37 units in six storeys, but subsequently scaled back the plans due to market conditions and other factors. “It allows [my clients] to build these buildings more economically, faster and get the product to market much faster than if we were to go forward with a mid-rise building with six storeys,” he says, describing such projects as “much more complicated to build.”
Mr. Fain has several such major streets apartment projects on the go in Etobicoke, and they’ve generally been backed by the city’s planning department. “We’ve been fortunate at committee of adjustment. We’ve had success.”
The early development application for this multiplex apartment building planned for Pharmacy Avenue, shown in a rendering, was met with a different response than the Islington building.Noam Hazan Design Studio
But the narrative around another small-scale apartment proposed for a very similar major-streets segment of Pharmacy has produced a noticeably different outcome, at least so far. The developer, Romit Malhotra, co-owner of Tristone Partners, spent 15 years on Bay Street, working in M&As before shifting gears and going into rental housing development. “We have 14 projects in either the planning process, going through approvals or in construction,” he says.
The one proposed for Pharmacy, he adds, satisfies the intent of the major streets policy – a six-storey building with eight three-bedroom units and two with five bedrooms. “We’re focused on larger or extended families, and we believe these are meant for long-term occupancy,” says Mr. Malhotra.
But the plan, which was supported by city staff, last month hit a wall at the committee of adjustment, which unanimously opposed it for various reasons, from the lack of on-site parking to questions about its compatibility with “neighbourhood character.” That decision marked the first time a major streets apartment proposal has been vetted by the committee of adjustment in Scarborough.
Toronto wrangles with a simple question: What is a multiplex?
Unlike Mr. Fain’s squat Islington project, Mr. Malhotra’s is tall and narrow, with a single visitor’s parking space out front; the homes on either side are either bungalows or backsplits.
“I understand it’s an arterial [and] I understand we want intensification along arterials,” one of the members said at the hearing, “but honestly, to shoehorn an apartment building into a lot like this doesn’t make any sense to me.” Tristone has appealed.
Blair Scorgie, Mr. Malhotra’s planning consultant, points to apparent contradictions in the city’s land use and zoning policies. While council voted in favour of such intensification on its major streets, including those in the suburbs, proposals that optimize what’s allowed run up against other provisions in the official plan that aim to regulate “neighbourhood character” as well as a host of highly site-specific zoning rules that predate the city’s 1998 amalgamation.
“The fact that it appeared like `mini-mid-rise’ surrounded by bungalows has absolutely nothing to do with the policy and the regulatory framework,” he says. “That has everything to do with neighbourhood character and the prioritization of the existing context over the planned future context that’s envisioned by the city.”
Council has further muddied the waters. Etobicoke-Lakeshore councillor Amber Morley signed off on Mr. Fain’s project, while Scarborough-Southwest councillor Parthi Kandavel objected to Mr. Malhotra’s. Both politicians voted in favour of the major streets policy in 2024.
In a letter to the committee of adjustment, Mr. Kandavel offered a list of what he regards as shortcomings, including “overlook,” insufficient on-site parking and the fact that the proposed apartment “does not align with the established character of the area.” Citing the six minor variances requested, Mr. Kandavel argued, in an interview, that if the developer had remained within the allowable zoning envelope, the project would have “gone straight to building permits.” He also questions the lack of parking in a highly car-dependent part of the city, even though the council, a few years ago, did away with minimum parking requirements.
Yet, Mr. Scorgie points out that some of the variances his client requested had to do with setback regulations established as far back as the 1950s, when streets like Pharmacy were highly residential, and certainly not zoned to allow small apartment buildings.
Toronto to allow larger apartment buildings around some transit stations
Because the small apartment buildings policy is so new, planning officials say the city has only received about 20 applications to date, and only one – the Pharmacy Avenue project – has reached the committee of adjustment. As with the earlier phases of EHON, the planning department will monitor how the new major streets development applications fare and intends to provide a report to council, with possible recommended changes in zoning policies, either in two years or when it has received 200 applications, whichever comes first.
But with an emerging contingent of small-scale developers now taking a hard look at the investment possibilities on major streets in many parts of Toronto, the question is whether residual regulatory obstacles related to unresolved contradictions in the city’s zoning rules will pose enough of a hassle to deter them from pursuing such projects – especially at a time when new high-density development is almost completely stalled.
Mentioning growing interest from non-traditional investors like Mr. Malhotra, Mr. Scorgie says the city shouldn’t gamble with losing out on the kind of modestly scaled housing that the council approved in 2024. “I’m afraid we’re at risk of missing that moment.”
Editor’s note: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that opposition to the Pharmacy Avenue plan marked the first time a major streets apartment proposal has been vetted by the committee of adjustment. It is the first time such a proposal has been vetted by the committee of adjustment in Scarborough.