Development application · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
Development application 19 260371 NNY 08 CD
31 Helendale Avenue; 33 Helendale Ave; 35 Helendale Ave; 37 Helendale Ave; 2360 Yonge St; 2378 Yonge Street
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 12 December 2019
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
- Addresses
- 31 Helendale Avenue; 33 Helendale Ave; 35 Helendale Ave; 37 Helendale Ave; 2360 Yonge St; 2378 Yonge Street
- Ward
- Ward 8 · Mike Colle
- Submitted
- 12 December 2019
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 404 units
- Related file
- 12 168197 NNY 16 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Draft Plan of Condominium for a 31 storey retail and residential tower with 4 townhouse units fronting on Helendale Avenue, with basement-level retail and 3 levels of below grade parking, a total of 404 dwelling units (Related Site Plan Applications: 12 - 165842 NNY 16 SA and 19 - 196151 NNY 08 SA Amendment)
Linked lobbying registrations
No published lobbying registrations are linked to this application.
Other registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
- Pemberton Group Inc.SM19446 · 28 June 2013 · “31 Helendale Avenue”
- KCAP Helendale Inc.SM19474 · 27 June 2013 · “2360 Yonge Street”
- CD Capital PartnersSM15989 · 24 February 2011 · “2378 Yonge Street”
Comparison with similar 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 8
1 lobbied · 2 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 | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 2 | 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.