Gleaner

Serving Toronto's most liveable community with the Annex Gleaner

← →

NEWS: St. George development sparks worry for residents (Mar. 2025)

April 16th, 2025 · No Comments

Renovictions, lack of heritage protections at heart of concerns

Artist’s rendering of the proposed development at 262 St. George St.
COURTESY CITY OF TORONTO PLANNING

By Amna Ahmad 

A 12-storey development proposal at 262-266 St. George Street has ignited a heated debate among area residents, with concerns surrounding heritage preservation, tenant displacement, and a lack of community engagement.

JCD Property Ltd, the developer of this project, submitted an application on January 9, 2025 to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-laws to allow for the construction of the 12-storey residential building, that will have 86 dwelling units. The news of this has left some confused and concerned.

Shane McMaster, a resident of 264 St George Street, has lived in the area for about a year and a half. He, like the other residents received a notice a little while back detailing the proposed development, and it gave them a timeline of approximately two years. 

“I don’t like that I have to move, period,” said McMaster. 

He expressed his feelings on the situation, saying the prospect of moving, and being uncertain about the future annoyed him. McMaster claimed that the notice provided, wasn’t very clear and that made him all the more annoyed as he was not sure if he even had the two years given. 

To the developer, McMaster had only a few words. “Please don’t knock down my apartment.” 

Gynger Rego and Andre Pavia are residents of 262 St George Street and have lived there for three years now. Compared to McMaster, neither are too concerned with relocating, as both saw the residence as a temporary home, and had plans to leave soon. 

But for Rego, there is some confliction about the construction as, “while it is more housing, it’s also a historic building.” And in terms of the area being partially preserved, Rego has doubts. 

“I think regardless, it’s going to be bastardized in some way.” 

Pavia is more of the optimist and “hopes they go through with it (historic preservation),” and are able to preserve the historic integrity of the area that many have come to love.  

The Gleaner also reached out to Henry Wiercinski, Co-chair of the Annex Residents’ Association (ARA). Wiercinski provided a link to the ARA’s Early Exposure Project Position Statement, which highlights the associations concerns. 

One of the key issues highlighted in the statement was the lack of meaningful community engagement in the project. The ARA argues that many stakeholders were neither invited nor informed about discussions, and regarding the community consultation meeting, residents received inadequate notification, limiting their opportunity to participate. 

The ARA also questions the project as it harms the current residents. Like McMaster, many residents will be required to find new homes, as the proposed development fails to fully replace the 43 existing rental living spaces. Instead, it offers only 13 larger units, which will likely be more expensive. In a city already grappling with a housing crisis, the ARA argues that this project worsens the problem by further reducing affordable rental options. 

Like Rego, the ARA argues against the developers claims of heritage preservation, saying it’s a ‘façade’, and that rather than true adaptive reuse, they say it is like ‘architectural taxidermy’ where only the front of the buildings is retained. And they claim that it undermines the historic integrity of St. George Street.

According to them there are also environmental issues to consider, like the fact that the site relies on a combined storm and sanitary sewer system, which could become overloaded, potentially worsening stormwater management issues and increasing the risk of sewage overflows into Lake Ontario. As well as issues of proper planning in regard to parking, as there is not any dedicated resident parking spaces. 

The ARA’s stance is that there is more that could be done regarding this development, and more things need to be taken into account. 

James and Jordan Doucette, of JCD Property Ltd, named developers of the property, did not receive a response to requests for comment.

The Gleaner continues to follow this story.

READ MORE

Tags: Annex · News