Planners opting for 18 storeys at the SE corner James and Brant opposite city hall. 23 approved on the NE corner.

News 100 blueBy Staff

June 21st, 2018



Ward 2 city Councillor and a candidate for Mayor Marianne Meed Ward reports that City staff are recommending modified approval of an 18 storey high-rise at 409 Brant Street, opposite City Hall and across the street from the already approved 23 storey building at 421 Brant St.

409 with 423 shadowed

Looking south on Brant with the approved 23 storey structure shaded.

The developer, Revenue Properties were looking for 23 storeys – matching what has been approved on the NE corner of the intersection.

The recommendation from staff will go to the Planning and Development Committee; recommendations from this committee will go to City Council for a final decision.

The detailed staff report outlining the recommendation and rationale hasn’t yet been released, but should be available online and at City Hall by Friday June 29.

Meed Ward does not say how she got the information.

The city is circulating a notice to residents who participated in earlier meetings on the application and left their contact information; that my have been the source.

Staff will be recommending modified approval of the amendment to the City’s Planning and Development Committee of Council. Staff recommend approval of a mixed use building with a height up to 18 storeys (17 residential floors plus roof top amenity area), including 760m2 of commercial space at grade and 365 m2 of commercial or office space on the second floor, subject to significant design and public realm improvements, and a parking rate of 1.25 spaces per unit.

From Civic Square

Looking east from Civic Square – the approved 23 storey Carriage Gate project is shaded.

Meed Ward gives us her take on the development application:  The property is currently zoned Downtown Core Zone which permits mixed use buildings up to 4 storeys in height.

The property is designated Downtown Core which permits mixed use buildings of 4 to 8 storeys.

Some might wonder if the developments approved and proposed for the eastern side of Brant street opposite city hall don’t need a reality check.

The planners and city council approved a 23 storey structure on the north east corner of Brant and James; the Ontario Municipal Board ruled that a 27 storey structure could go up at Martha and Lakeshore; the Bridgewater is going to have a 22 storey condominium and the talk around the redevelopment of the Waterfront Hotel site includes mention of a possible 30 storey building.

Street - what is being taken downShould the developer of the 409 Brant property not want to accept the staff recommendation – they can appeal – but the appeal procedure is quite a bit different – the old Ontario Municipal Board process usually had the developers wining.  The Local Planning Act Tribunal is a new game that is yet untested,  Bet on the developer taking the staff recommendation to the LPAT.


Return to the Front page
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

12 comments to Planners opting for 18 storeys at the SE corner James and Brant opposite city hall. 23 approved on the NE corner.

  • Penny

    Mr. Muir,

    Would you like to be involved in organizing a Mayoral Candidate Meeting? Consider this to be your invitation to join the committee. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated.

    • Tom Muir


      I guess that in this matter, it’s either put up or shut up.

      You can count me in as a Committee member.

      You have my email which is a more appropriate place to do this stuff.

  • Lynn Crosby

    Oh I definitely agree with that Penny! I agree with both your comments :). It’s why we need a new mayor and council. Only Councillor Meed Ward heard the citizens.

  • Penny

    Andrew, ECoB was formed not only to appeal 421 Brant Street,but to make the public aware of what was happening at City Hall. ECoB as a grass roots organization has done this. We all knew going into this that this was a war. Along they way you are going to lose some battles.

    Withdrawing the appeal was very difficult – and it was unexpected. We will continue involving the residents. A change in council is the only way residents can expect some lasting changes.

    We have planned Ward Candidate Meetings that will take place the last 2 weeks of September and the 1st week of October. We invite all residents to come to the meeting in their ward to meet the candidates running for election. It will give them the ability to ask questions and get the answers they want.

    • Tom Muir


      If ECoB was formed as you say, to do more, and you truly claim to keep citizens aware of what’s happening, then you must include the Mayoral candidates in your Ward candidates meetings.

      These would be Mayors are very very much what is happening at City Hall, and everybody gets to vote for the Mayor, and there is a big need to have debates including the Mayor, and to give access to all these Mayor candidates to citizens.

      I have heard that you don’t want to have the Mayoral candidates at your Ward meetings.

      You said above that “A change in council is the only way residents can expect some lasting changes.”

      Well, the last time I looked the mayor was a member of Council, and some say that we need a change in that position.

      There are 4 running for that position, so in your own words again;

      “We invite all residents to come to the meeting in their ward to meet the candidates running for election. It will give them the ability to ask questions and get the answers they want.”

      Unless you are willing to come right out and declare your support for a particular Mayoral candidate, you have an ethical obligation to organize a practical and effective way to include would be Mayors in the citizen debate meetings you are organizing anyways, as you say.

  • Penny


    You misunderstood, or I didn’t explain myself properly. What I was trying to say is that Council will approve this development ( past history is a good indication of future behaviour) as well. If Council didn’t hear what residents were asking for with regard to the 421 Brant Street Development why would they listen to the residents now for 409 Brant Street.

  • Lynn Crosby

    Penny I recall at the meeting for 421 Brant the citizens being accused of acting in their own “self interest” during the delegation by a local planning consultant who, it turned out, is also the planning consultant for 409 Brant. Wait, who is acting in their own self-interest? The citizens aren’t the ones making millions of dollars if the building gets approved.

  • Susie

    Need some clarification on the comment on the Waterfront Hotel site please. It sounds like a done deal already that there is going to be a 22 storey condominium on site! Redevelopment talks including the mention of a possible 30 storey! Is this an additional condominium to the 22, or is it that the 22 will become 30? Interesting how things are set in place long before the public gets to come forward with the formality of delegating??? Do believe our tax dollars on mega salaries could be saved by skipping these useless public hearings, as 99% of the decisions have already been decided with the developer. Body language of a wink and a smile from the developer tells me that they will put forward whatever it takes to get approval for their proposal! Amen!

    Editor’s note: The writer is confusing the Bridgewater site with the Waterfront site – they are side by side – Bridgewater is 22 floors and is currently under construction. Waterfront is in the discussion stage.

  • Elizabeth Hamidbasha

    I don’t think of the number of storeys anymore, I think in term of traffic. If there are 18 storeys and four condos per floor, that will be 72 condos- probably a low estimate. If each of the condos has 1 car-again a low estimate- then there will be 72 cars going out, coming in, on John St. regularly. That, combined with the number of cars going in and out in the next condo means that there will be at least twice that, going in and out every day. Just think about that. What is going to happen is people who don’t live in the condos will even driving past them. For one thing, condos are not beautiful. These condos are not affordable- so where did that condition become unimportant. Add in the – I realize few- parking spaces available for others- honey you got big big trouble!!
    Too bad everbody has lost their minds!! Good Grief! A two year old could figure this out.

  • Penny

    I received an email yesterday from the City notifying the public that the staff report regarding 409 Brant Street would be presented at the Statutory Public Committee on July 10th. Delegations do not have to register, but can if they wish by noon the day prior to the meeting. 10 minutes is the time allowed to delegate.

    There is a saying that “past history is a good indicator of future behaviour”. I will leave it at that.

    • Andrew Miller

      Penny: Based on ECoB’s actions regarding 421 Brant Street and the concern regarding potential liability, is ECoB out of the appeal business?