Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 22 128778 ESC 20 SA

168 Clonmore Dr; 170 Clonmore Dr; 172 Clonmore Dr; 174 Clonmore Dr; 176 Clonmore Dr; 178 Clonmore Dr; 180 Clonmore Dr; 182 Clonmore Dr; 184 Clonmore Dr

Ward 20 · Parthi KandavelDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: NOAC Issued; Approved
Submitted: 30 March 2022; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 168 Clonmore Dr; 170 Clonmore Dr; 172 Clonmore Dr; 174 Clonmore Dr; 176 Clonmore Dr; 178 Clonmore Dr; 180 Clonmore Dr; 182 Clonmore Dr; 184 Clonmore Dr
Ward: Ward 20 · Parthi Kandavel
Submitted: 30 March 2022
Status: NOAC Issued
Outcome recorded: Approved
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description: 121 units
Related file: 15 106475 ESC 36 OZ

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

Description

Amendment to 15 269073 ESC 36 SA to permit the development of 121 stacked townhouse units within seven (7) buildings. Building heights are 13.5m and a total gross floor area proposed is 11,943.4 sq. m. A total of 168 parking spaces are proposed, including 143 spaces for residents, including 6 barrier free spaces, and 23 spaces for visitors, including 1 barrier free space located within an underground parking garage, with the exception of 2 of the visitor spaces which are proposed at grade. A total of 114 bicycle parking spaces are proposed (80 for residents within the underground garage, and 24 surface visitor spaces). Related OPA and Rezoning file 15 106475 ESC 36 OZ.

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.

Leaside Residences I LP
SM33247 · 18 May 2022 · “168 Clonmore Dr”

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 20

11 lobbied · 34 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=61
Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 20: 11 lobbied and 34 matched unlobbied applications in 9 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	11	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	34	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
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.