Address · Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
125 Western Battery Rd
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
- Location
- 43.63987, -79.41673
- 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
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
3These 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· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 19 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 8 | 8 | 5 December 2011 |
| Office of Councillor Layton, Ward 19 | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 14 December 2011 |
All registrations· 3 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM16348 | Plazacorp Investments Limited | 125 Western Battery Road | Planning and Development Application, Site Plan; Planning and Development Application, Minor Varian… | 9 May 2011 – 9 May 2014 | 1 |
| SM15708 | King West Centre (I) Corp. | 125 Western Battery Road | Planning and Development Application, Minor Variance | 12 January 2011 – 12 January 2012 | 4 |
| SM14364 | Plazacorp Investments Limited | 125 Western Battery Road. | Planning and Development Application, Minor Variance and Site Plan | 27 April 2010 – 31 December 2013 | 4 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
4- Submitted 9 September 2025Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0738/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 6 August 2024Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application COA-5489898Cancelled · Withdrawn
- Submitted 24 May 2012Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 12 179612 STE 19 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 11 December 2009Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 09 196087 STE 19 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 4 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A0738/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 9 September 2025 | Closed Approved |
| COA-5489898 Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 6 August 2024 | Cancelled Withdrawn |
| 12 179612 STE 19 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 24 May 2012 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 09 196087 STE 19 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 11 December 2009 | 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
125 Western Battery Rd · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
12 179612 STE 19 CD · submitted 24 May 2012 · Closed · from registration SM16348 (Plazacorp Investments Limited)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.80
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 SM16348: Meeting regarding request for additional storeys for approved condominium building at 125 Western Battery Road (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 179612 STE 19 CD at 125 Western Battery Rd: Standard draft plan of condo application for new condo building - This is for the addition of three new storey's for 48 new live/work units for a total of 438 units. The additional floor area for the three new storey's will be 2,969sm.- Proposal to construct a new 30 sty condo with 438 live-work un… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Meeting regarding request for additional storeys for approved condominium building at 125 Western Battery Road
Matched fields
- address
- 125 WESTERN BATTERY RD
- application_address
- 125 WESTERN BATTERY RD
125 Western Battery Rd · Site Plan Approval (SA)
09 196087 STE 19 SA · submitted 11 December 2009 · Closed · from registration SM14364 (Plazacorp Investments Limited)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.72
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 SM14364: 125 Western Battery Road. Proposed mixed-use Condominium building. Minor variance application active, Site Plan approval application pending. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 09 196087 STE 19 SA at 125 Western Battery Rd: Site Plan Approval - Proposal to construct a new 30 sty condo with 438 live-work units and below grade parking. BLOCK 6. See 09 143557 ZPR for PPR review. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 125 Western Battery Road. Proposed mixed-use Condominium building. Minor variance application active, Site Plan approval application pending.
Matched fields
- address
- 125 WESTERN BATTERY RD
- application_address
- 125 WESTERN BATTERY RD
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Committee of Adjustment 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.
Minor variance (MV), Ward 10
20 lobbied · 261 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 20 | 136 | 100% (n=20) | 0% | 0% | 14% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 261 | 138 | 93% (n=214) | 7% | 5% | 18% |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 173 | 126 | 75% (n=154) | 25% | 19% | 43% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 3,646 | 114 | 91% (n=3,058) | 9% | 4% | 27% |
Submission to hearing. 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.
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 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval 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 | — | 100% (n=11) | 0% | 2% | 0.04 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 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.