Skip to content

250 Royal York Townhome development application


The MRA has obtained the materials linked below related to the new development application at 250 Royal York Road:

Comments can be submitted regarding this application (13 141966 WET 06 OZ and 13 141977 WET 06 SA) on the City Planning Application website at the following link:

Any Public Consultations regarding this Application will be posted on the City planning page above, mailed to nearby residents, and emailed to those who have requested information on this file. A community consultation meeting scheduled by staff in consultation with the Ward Councillor is intended to be held in the third quarter of 2013.

City Planning’s Preliminary Report regarding this application will be presented at the June 18th EYCC meeting (Item slated for 10:30am).
Preliminary Report:
EYCC Agenda item:

Please direct questions, concerns and requests to be added to the mailing list regarding this application to the City Planning contact on this file:

Luisa Galli, Planner
(416) 394-6007

8 thoughts on “250 Royal York Townhome development application”

  1. I welcome new development in this area, however as a community we need to decide whether we’re comfortable with losing the businesses on this stretch of Royal York to new residential development. There would be more value to the community if the new development included space for shops and businesses fronting Royal York Rd. Something similar to the wonderful Live/Work units in Port Credit on Lakeshore Road east of Hurontario Street would be nice.

    1. Actually Chris, this development is proposed at 250-256 Royal York Road – there are no businesses there currently, it’s residential land. -Mary Bella, secretary

        1. Hi Mark,
          This would be a good question/concern to raise to the developers (ICON Homes) at the consultation meeting:
          October 7th 7pm – 9pm at the Mimico Library.
          Looking at the draft plans, it appears that the structure in question would not remain, however that is only my interpretation of the documents.
          We (the MRA) will try to note and bring common questions and concerns brought to us regarding this development to the meeting.
          Thanks for commenting,
          Mary Bella, MRA Secretary

    1. The MRA must gauge community response to this proposal before submitting an official position letter. As yet we have had only a couple of specific comments from our membership regarding this proposal (more live/work space, concerns about losing commercial properties). Please feel free to submit your comments.

      We have met with the developer and discussed that the housing design does not meet the character of the neighborhood.

      1. All I can say is this development is a disgrace. What was city council thinking when the allowed this to proceed? Why can’t any of these builders build a proper townhouse with attached garages anymore. All that matters is cramming as many people in a confined space as they can to maximize the money they can make. I wish I had seen this sooner, as I would have definitely had a few things to say about the design of this development. I had registered over a year ago hoping for a regular townhouse, but having seen these units, I would rather stay renting. At least I am above ground. I have been looking for something that shows a potential floor plan for the units and finally came across a partial plan…It appears that all of the 2 bedroom units that are located on the lower levels have a bedroom that is in the “basement” as is the living room. They are mostly located “below ground level”. Anyone looking to buy one of these should ask how many builders can build leak proof basements. Just my opinion, however I feel that it is a shame that these are taking up valuable space. I looked at a few stacked townhomes in Burlington over 14 years ago, and they were built with direct access from the garage to the house, and the bedrooms and main living areas were all above ground.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *