← All updates

Letter to Councillor Leiper's Office

February 28, 2026

The following is a letter sent to Councillor Leiper and his team ahead of submitting formal planning comments.

Hi Councillor Leiper & team,

I live directly across the street from the proposed 340 Parkdale development, so I have a strong interest in making sure this turns into something that is good for the neighbourhood long-term.

I’ve been reviewing the proposal alongside the Scott Street CDP, the Official Plan, the TIA Guidelines, and the Housing Needs Assessment. Before I submit formal comments to the planner, I’d really appreciate a quick sanity check from your office to make sure I’m reading the right documents and interpreting the policy correctly.

I’d love your feedback on the following items:

Height & Density

From the Scott Street CDP:

When I do some napkin math, this project appears to be a perfectly reasonable contribution toward that target. It seems difficult to argue that 38 storeys is inconsistent with intensification goals purely on density math. (Even if I want it to be.)

Is that a fair reading of how staff would interpret the CDP? If not, could I argue that 38 storeys is too high?

Transit & Parking Alignment

The CDP and Transportation Master Plan emphasize:

The proposal includes 322 parking spaces (~0.69 per unit) with access from Spencer Street. I don’t see a TIA or parking justification in the application summary.

Given the 2023 TIA revisions and proximity to Tunney’s Pasture station, is it reasonable to expect:

It seems to me like this amount of parking undermines transit-oriented development policy… is that a correct interpretation?

Unit Mix & Family-Sized Housing

This is the part I find hardest to reconcile.

The City’s 2024 Housing Needs Assessment shows 3+ bedroom vacancy at 1.7% — the tightest rental segment — and CMHC confirms that.

This proposal includes 465 units, but only 5 three-bedroom units (~1%).

At the town hall, the applicant suggested larger units are “better delivered through townhouses.” But in this corridor, most recent and upcoming development is apartment-based, and CMHC data show apartment starts far exceed townhouse starts.

If areas near transit aren’t delivering family-sized rental units — and there isn’t a visible townhouse pipeline in the area — where is that housing need expected to be met? I don’t think the city plan aims to push families out of the city, but that’s what it looks like. How can I frame this in the language of the city planner?

Public Realm & Plaza

The CDP speaks clearly about creating high-quality, accessible, animated public spaces and strengthening the pedestrian environment — particularly near anchors like Parkdale Market.

If the proposed plaza is being considered part of the public space contribution, is staff evaluating:

Please let me know if I’m misreading any of these documents. This is my first foray into the details of municipal policy, so I’m trying to understand how staff balance all these elements when evaluating a project like this.

Thanks very much for your time,

Tomasz Dubiel