Address · Ward 5 · Frances Nunziata
2306 St. Clair Avenue West
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 5 · Frances Nunziata
- Location
- 43.67038, -79.47915
- How this address was located
- Matched to the nearest civic number on the same street in the City's address points. Matched address: 2308 ST CLAIR AVE W (2 civic numbers away).
Sources: City of Toronto Lobbyist Registry, Development Applications, Committee of Adjustment Applications and Address Points (open data). Lobbyist Registry · Development Applications · Committee of Adjustment · Address Points
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
2These registrations name this address in their particulars, after the address was standardised (street type and direction abbreviations). This is a text match, not an inferred link.
Registrations by communications
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
Data table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 11 York South-Weston | Member of council | 16 | 12 | 1 June 2018 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM32614 | Marlin Spring Developments | 2306 St. Clair Avenue West | Planning and Development Application, Minor Variance; Planning and Development, Combined Application | 29 November 2021 – 31 January 2023 | 0 |
| SM24587 | Marlin Spring Developments | 2306 St. Clair Avenue West | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 1 May 2017 – 31 January 2020 | 16 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
4- Submitted 4 October 2021Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0541/21EYKClosed · Approved
- Submitted 27 May 2021Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 21 161587 WET 05 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 3 August 2018Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 18 204363 WET 11 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 16 June 2017Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 17 181466 WET 11 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 4 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A0541/21EYK Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 4 October 2021 | Closed Approved |
| 21 161587 WET 05 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 27 May 2021 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 18 204363 WET 11 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 3 August 2018 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 17 181466 WET 11 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 16 June 2017 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
Linked lobbying registrations
These links are inferred by lobbyTO from file numbers and addresses named in the registration (task L2); the registry does not record which application a registration concerns.
Links between records are inferred by a model and are not reviewed by a person. Each link shows its score out of 1; moderate-confidence links (0.7 to 0.9) are wrong more often than high-confidence links. How links are scored
2306 St Clair Ave W · Minor variance (MV)
A0541/21EYK · submitted 4 October 2021 · Closed · from registration SM32614 (Marlin Spring Developments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.76
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM32614: 2306 St. Clair Avenue West (Lobbyist Registry)
- Committee of Adjustment application A0541/21EYK at 2306 St Clair Ave W: To permit a parking deficiency. (Committee of Adjustment Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 2306 St. Clair Avenue West
Matched fields
- address
- 2306 ST CLAIR AVE W
- application_address
- 2306 ST CLAIR AVE W
2306 St Clair Ave W · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
21 161587 WET 05 CD · submitted 27 May 2021 · Closed · from registration SM32614 (Marlin Spring Developments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.75
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM32614: 2306 St. Clair Avenue West (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 21 161587 WET 05 CD at 2306 St Clair Ave W: Draft Plan of Standard Condominium application for a 10-storey mixed use building which includes 242 residential units, commercial space at grade and 2 levels of below grade garage. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 2306 St. Clair Avenue West
Matched fields
- address
- 2306 ST CLAIR AVE W
- application_address
- 2306 ST CLAIR AVE W
2306 St Clair Ave W · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
17 181466 WET 11 OZ · submitted 16 June 2017 · Closed · from registration SM24587 (Marlin Spring Developments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.78
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM24587: 2306 St. Clair Avenue West (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 17 181466 WET 11 OZ at 2306 St Clair Ave W: Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to permit the construction of a 10-storey mixed use building with 242 residential units. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 2306 St. Clair Avenue West
Matched fields
- address
- 2306 ST CLAIR AVE W
- application_address
- 2306 ST CLAIR AVE W
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Committee of Adjustment applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Minor variance (MV), Ward 5
8 lobbied · 137 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 8 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 137 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 173 | 126 | 75% (n=154) | 25% | 19% | 43% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 3,646 | 114 | 91% (n=3,058) | 9% | 4% | 27% |
Submission to hearing. Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.
Development applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 5
2 lobbied · 3 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 3 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.03 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.
Development applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 5
15 lobbied · 40 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,237 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 15 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 40 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=61) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,237 | 727 | 97% (n=96) | 3% | 3% | 0.04 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.
Development applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 5
12 lobbied · 17 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
573 lobbied · 763 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 12 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 17 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 573 | 1,925 | 100% (n=64) | 0% | 13% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 763 | 1,793 | 98% (n=70) | 2% | 13% | 0.05 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.