Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 21 187375 NNY 06 SA
177 Cocksfield Ave; 179-181 Cocksfield Ave; 824 Sheppard Ave W
- Status
- NOAC Issued
- Approved
- Submitted
- 21 July 2021
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 177 Cocksfield Ave; 179-181 Cocksfield Ave; 824 Sheppard Ave W
- Ward
- Ward 6 · James Pasternak
- Submitted
- 21 July 2021
- Status
- NOAC Issued
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 19,483 m² gross floor area
- Related file
- 20 205918 NNY 06 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Site plan application to permit the proposal for a 14-storey mixed use building with 19,483 square metres of GFA, including 462 squrae metres of commercial space and 360 square metres of daycare space, resulting in an FSI of 4.0. The building would step down to 6 storeys on Cocksfield Avenue. There would be 270 (rental) residential units, including 54 (20%) affordable (rental) units. There would be two levels of underground parking containing a total of 213 parking spaces, including 197 parking spaces for residents (including 9 barrier-free parking spaces) and 16 parking spaces for commercial uses and visitors. [Zoning By Law Amendment Application: 20 205918 NNY 06 OZ /Rental Housing Application: 20 205924 NNY 06 RH]
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.
- Almega Corp.SM30117 · 25 May 2020 · “824 Sheppard Avenue West”
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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 6
17 lobbied · 41 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 | 17 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 41 | 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.