Development application · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
Development application 21 250821 STE 09 CD
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 22 December 2021
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
- Addresses
- 1800 St Clair Ave W
- Ward
- Ward 9 · Alejandra Bravo
- Submitted
- 22 December 2021
- 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
- 229 units
- Related file
- 18 135955 WET 17 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Draft Plan of Standard Condominium within an 11-storey midrise mixed-use building (Block A) and four blocks of townhouses (Blocks B-E), sitting on top of a two level below grade common parking garage. The application includes a total of 229 residential units consisting of 76 townhouse units located in Blocks B-E and 153 residential units located in Block A. Additionally, 5 retail units are located in Block A fronting onto St. Clair Avenue West. A total of 189 parking units consisting of 175 residential parking units and 14 visitor parking units are proposed within the parking garage. Block F and the parkland area are not part of this application. Block F is to be conveyed to Habitat for Humanity for the construction of a townhouse block containing 20 affordable residential units. A total of 20 residential parking units, 3 visitor parking units and a bicycle parking storage unit located on P1 will be conveyed to Habitat for Humanity.
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.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 9
2 lobbied · 4 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 4 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.03 |
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.