Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 13 120874 NNY 26 SA

70 Wicksteed Ave; 99 Vanderhoof Ave; 202 Parkhurst Blvd; 206 Parkhurst Blvd

Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos LinDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 15 February 2013; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 70 Wicksteed Ave; 99 Vanderhoof Ave; 202 Parkhurst Blvd; 206 Parkhurst Blvd
Ward: Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
Submitted: 15 February 2013
Status: Closed
Outcome recorded: Closed (outcome not recorded)
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description: 19,995 m² gross floor area
Related file: 21 120011 NNY 15 OZ

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

Description

To permit a commercial centre comprising a series of new buildings ranging in size from 616 square metres up to 17,870 square metres with a total gross floor area of 19,995 square metres. The proposal includes a total of 360 vehicle and 138 bicycle parking spaces. Parking is located both at grade and within a below grade parking structure. Also associated with a draft plan of subdivision file no. 21120012 NNY 15 SB and site plan control application 13 120874 NNY 26 SA.

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.

SmartCentres REIT
SM36522 · 10 April 2025 · “206 Parkhurst Blvd.”
190 Laird Property Co. Ltd.
SM20324 · 17 April 2014 · “206 Parkhurst Blvd.”

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 15

12 lobbied · 41 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 15: 12 lobbied and 41 matched unlobbied applications in 10 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	12	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	41	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.