Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 25 185867 ESC 24 SA

2 Dunelm St; 12 Dunelm St; 20 Dunelm St; 30 Dunelm St; 253 Markham Rd

Ward 24 · Paul AinslieDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Final Approval Completed; Approved
Submitted: 30 June 2025; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 2 Dunelm St; 12 Dunelm St; 20 Dunelm St; 30 Dunelm St; 253 Markham Rd
Ward: Ward 24 · Paul Ainslie
Submitted: 30 June 2025
Status: Final Approval Completed
Outcome recorded: Approved
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description: 245 units
Related file: 25 103470 ESC 24 OZ

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

Description

Site Plan Control application, specifically for Building A (Phase 1), with the temporary municipal address of 2 Dunelm Street. This Site Plan Control application will facilitate the affordable rental co-op housing (Building A), with 245 units. Building A (Phase 1) is part of the larger SPA - a development consisting of four residential buildings, two blocks of back-to-back townhouses and a new 1.1-acre public park.

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.

Options for Homes
SM35742 · 10 July 2024 · “253 Markham Road”
Options for Homes
SM31233 · 2 February 2021 · “253 Markham Road”
Options For Homes Non-Profit Corporation
SM26883 · 23 October 2018 · “253 Markham Road”
Options For Homes Non-Profit Corporation
SM26883 · 23 October 2018 · “30 Dunelm 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.

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 24

6 lobbied · 15 matched

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

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 24: 6 lobbied and 15 matched unlobbied applications in 5 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	6	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	15	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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.