Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 25 179966 NNY 08 SA

1 Romar Cres; 3 Romar Cres; 5 Romar Cres; 7 Romar Cres; 16 Stayner Ave; 245-251 Marlee Ave

Ward 8 · Mike ColleDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Under Review; In progress
Submitted: 19 June 2025; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 1 Romar Cres; 3 Romar Cres; 5 Romar Cres; 7 Romar Cres; 16 Stayner Ave; 245-251 Marlee Ave
Ward: Ward 8 · Mike Colle
Submitted: 19 June 2025
Status: Under Review
Outcome recorded: In progress
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description: 886 units; 56,872 m² gross floor area
Related file: 24 243361 NNY 08 OZ

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

Description

Site Plan Control Application to permit a mixed-use development consisting of 35 and 37-storey residential towers on a shared 6-storey podium with 886 residential units, 56,872.00 square metres of gross floor area (GFA), including 660 square metres of non-residential GFA, a floor space index (FSI) of 11.08, and 327 vehicle parking spaces. **Note related actiive OPA/OZ file no. 24 243361 NNY 08 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.

None.

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 8

25 lobbied · 70 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=3
Matched, unlobbied100% n=4

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied8%
Matched, unlobbied4%

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 8: 25 lobbied and 70 matched unlobbied applications in 16 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	25	—	100% (n=3)	0%	8%	0.00
Matched, unlobbied	70	727	100% (n=4)	0%	4%	0.00

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.