Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 21 239771 STE 10 SA

2 Tecumseth St; 125 Niagara St; 133 Niagara St

Ward 10 · Ausma MalikDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Under Review; In progress
Submitted: 19 November 2021; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 2 Tecumseth St; 125 Niagara St; 133 Niagara St
Ward: Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Submitted: 19 November 2021
Status: Under Review
Outcome recorded: In progress
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description: 1,225 units; 3,370 m² gross floor area
Related file: 17 264041 STE 19 OZ

Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page

Description

Site Plan Control application for three mixed-use buildings with a total of 1,225 dwelling units and 3,370 square metres of non-residential gross floor area that are proposed to be constructed in two phases. Phase 1 is proposed to be 31 storeys (110.5 metres), and Phase 2 is proposed to be 40 storeys (130.5 metres) and 12 storeys (45.4 metres). All three buildings will have a shared two-storey below grade parking garage with a total of 401 vehicular parking spaces.

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.

TAS
SM36348 · 13 February 2025 · “2 Tecumseth Street”
TAS
SM27454 · 29 January 2019 · “2 Tecumseth Street”
TAS Tecumseth Niagara LP
SM27305 · 8 January 2019 · “2 Tecumseth Street”
TAS Tecumseth Niagara LP
SM26003 · 6 April 2018 · “2 Tecumseth street.”
Quality Meats Packers Ltd
SM19017 · 6 March 2013 · “2 Tecumseth St”

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 10

66 lobbied · 165 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=5
Matched, unlobbied100% n=11

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied3%
Matched, unlobbied2%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,236 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=63
Matched, unlobbied97% n=98

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 10: 66 lobbied and 165 matched unlobbied applications in 37 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	66	—	100% (n=5)	0%	3%	0.05
Matched, unlobbied	165	—	100% (n=11)	0%	2%	0.04

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,236 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	449	—	100% (n=63)	0%	4%	0.07
Matched, unlobbied	1,236	—	97% (n=98)	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.