lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 26 183365 NNY 08 SA

2A Flemington Rd

Status
Under Review
In progress
Submitted
12 June 2026
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
0
None published
Communications on linked registrations
0

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
2A Flemington Rd
Ward
Ward 8 · Mike Colle
Submitted
12 June 2026
Status
Under Review
Outcome recorded
In progress
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
No appeal recorded
Related file
25 251661 NNY 08 OZ

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

Description

Site Plan Approval application for a portion of the lands known municipally as 2A Flemington Road bounded by Turtle Island Road to the north and future Varna Road extension to the west and south, and future Hooyo Terrace extension to the east. Site also referred to as "Block 22". The site currently vacant, has frontage along Turtle Island Road. "Block 22" proposal is a part of the ongoing Lawrence Heights Phase 2 Revitalization. Block 22 is proposed for a 6-storey mixed-use seniors independent living building with 171, 1-bedroom units, and one level of underground parking (20 residential & 20 visitor 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.

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
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied25—100% (n=3)0%8%0.00
Matched, unlobbied70727100% (n=4)0%4%0.00
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied449—100% (n=61)0%4%0.07
Matched, unlobbied1,23772797% (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.