lobbyTO

Address · Ward 10 · Ausma Malik

1 Front St W

Registrations naming this address
5
1 client organisation
Communications on those registrations
5
5 offices contacted
Applications at this address
3
6 published links to lobbying
Council and committee items
1
Items naming this address

About this address

Ward
Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Location
43.64605, -79.37779
How this address was located
Matched exactly to a City of Toronto address point.

Sources: City of Toronto Lobbyist Registry, Development Applications, Committee of Adjustment Applications and Address Points (open data). Lobbyist Registry · Development Applications · Committee of Adjustment · Address Points

Registrations that mention this address

5

These registrations name this address in their particulars, after the address was standardised (street type and direction abbreviations). This is a text match, not an inferred link.

Registrations by communications

Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address

  • Toronto and East York District1
  • Kristyn Wong-Tam1
  • Office of Coucillor Cressy, Ward 101
  • Ward 10 Spadina-Fort York1
  • Ausma Malik1
Data table· 5 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Toronto and East York DistrictCity staff1111 April 2017
Kristyn Wong-TamCouncillor staff104 May 2022
Office of Coucillor Cressy, Ward 10Councillor staff1121 March 2019
Ward 10 Spadina-Fort YorkMember of council1121 March 2019
Ausma MalikMember of council1110 April 2025
All registrations· 5 rows
RegistrationClientAs writtenSubject matterDatesCommunications
SM36391Larco Investments1 Front Street WestPlanning and Development, Heritage; Planning and Development Application5 March 2025 – 1 October 20261
SM35997Larco Investments1 Front Street West.Planning and Development Application; Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law15 October 2024 – 23 December 20240
SM33215Larco Investments1 Front St WestPlanning and Development Application; Zoning By-law4 May 2022 – 4 May 20231
SM27188Larco Investments1 Front Street WestPlanning and Development Application, Official Plan; Planning and Development Application, Zoning B…18 December 2018 – 6 August 20200
SM24309Larco Investments1 Front Street West.Planning and Development, Heritage; Planning and Development, Combined Application31 March 2017 – 30 November 20203

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

3
Data table· 3 rows
ApplicationTypeSubmittedStatus
25 183122 STE 10 OZ
Development application
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)24 June 2025Council Approved
Approved
20 144978 STE 10 SA
Development application
Site Plan Approval (SA)13 May 2020Under Review
In progress
18 199835 STE 28 OZ
Development application
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)25 July 2018Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)

Linked lobbying registrations

These links are inferred by lobbyTO from file numbers and addresses named in the registration (task L2); the registry does not record which application a registration concerns.

Links between records are inferred by a model and are not reviewed by a person. Each link shows its score out of 1; moderate-confidence links (0.7 to 0.9) are wrong more often than high-confidence links. How links are scored

Council and committee items naming this address

Comparison with similar applications

Development 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.

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 10

88 lobbied · 94 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=7
  • Matched, unlobbied100% n=7

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied10%
  • Matched, unlobbied5%

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide

571 lobbied · 760 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=78
  • Matched, unlobbied96% n=78

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied4%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied12%
  • Matched, unlobbied14%
Data table· 4 rows
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 10: 88 lobbied and 94 matched unlobbied applications in 38 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied88—100% (n=7)0%10%0.03
Matched, unlobbied94—100% (n=7)0%5%0.01
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied571—100% (n=78)0%12%0.08
Matched, unlobbied760—96% (n=78)4%14%0.05

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.

Development 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 10

66 lobbied · 165 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=5
  • Matched, unlobbied100% n=11

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied3%
  • Matched, unlobbied2%

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 10: 66 lobbied and 165 matched unlobbied applications in 37 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied66—100% (n=5)0%3%0.05
Matched, unlobbied165—100% (n=11)0%2%0.04
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,236 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied449—100% (n=63)0%4%0.07
Matched, unlobbied1,236—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.