Address · Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
109-111 Ossington Avenue
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
- Location
- 43.64638, -79.41943
- How this address was located
- Matched to the nearest civic number on the same street in the City's address points. Matched address: 109 OSSINGTON AVE.
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
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
1These 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
Data table· 12 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 19 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 2 | 1 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 14 Parkdale-High Park | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 18 Davenport | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 21 St. Paul's | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 22 St. Paul's | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 27 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 29 Toronto-Danforth | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 30 Toronto-Danforth | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 31 Beaches-East York | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
| Ward 32 Beaches-East York | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 May 2013 |
All registrations· 1 row
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM19350 | Ossington Community Association | 109-111 Ossington Avenue | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 22 April 2013 – 28 May 2014 | 13 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 22 January 2016Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 16 107225 STE 19 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 15 February 2012Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 12 122807 STE 19 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 15 February 2012Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 12 122813 STE 19 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16 107225 STE 19 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 22 January 2016 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 12 122807 STE 19 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 15 February 2012 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 12 122813 STE 19 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 15 February 2012 | Closed 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
109-111 Ossington Ave · Site Plan Approval (SA)
12 122807 STE 19 SA · submitted 15 February 2012 · Closed · from registration SM19110 (Ossington Community Association)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.78
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM19110: Condominium development at 109 Ossington Ave. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 122807 STE 19 SA at 109-111 Ossington Ave: Proposal to construct 6 sty condo with ground floor commercial. 86 residential units and 2 levels of below grade parking. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Condominium development at 109 Ossington Ave.
Matched fields
- address
- 109 OSSINGTON AVE
- application_address
- 109-111 OSSINGTON AVE
109-111 Ossington Ave · Site Plan Approval (SA)
12 122807 STE 19 SA · submitted 15 February 2012 · Closed · from registration SM19350 (Ossington Community Association)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.73
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM19350: 109-111 Ossington Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 122807 STE 19 SA at 109-111 Ossington Ave: Proposal to construct 6 sty condo with ground floor commercial. 86 residential units and 2 levels of below grade parking. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 109-111 Ossington Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 109-111 OSSINGTON AVE
- application_address
- 109-111 OSSINGTON AVE
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
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.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 10
4 lobbied · 25 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 | 4 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 25 | 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.
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 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,237 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 66 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 3% | 0.05 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 165 | 1,881 | 100% (n=11) | 0% | 2% | 0.04 |
| 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.
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 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
573 lobbied · 763 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 88 | — | 100% (n=7) | 0% | 11% | 0.03 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 94 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 5% | 0.01 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 573 | 1,925 | 100% (n=64) | 0% | 13% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 763 | 1,793 | 98% (n=70) | 2% | 13% | 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.