Address · Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
150-160 Cactus Ave
- Communications on those registrations
- 0
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
- Location
- 43.79327, -79.43647
- 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
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
No communications recorded.
All registrations· 1 row
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
2- Submitted 16 October 2021Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 21 226750 NNY 18 OZCouncil Approved · Approved
- Submitted 16 October 2021Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 21 226762 NNY 18 SAUnder Review · In progress
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 226750 NNY 18 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 16 October 2021 | Council Approved Approved |
| 21 226762 NNY 18 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 16 October 2021 | Under Review In progress |
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
150-160 Cactus Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
21 226750 NNY 18 OZ · submitted 16 October 2021 · Council Approved · from registration SM34048 (Resident)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.86
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 SM34048: 150-160 Cactus Ave. - Proposed Redevelopment (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 21 226750 NNY 18 OZ at 150-160 Cactus Ave: Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application to facilitate the development of the site for a mixed use development comprised of 13- and 14-storey apartment buildings, and two 4-storey back to back townhouse buildings. The proposed residential gross floor area is 36,850 square metres. A tot… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 150-160 Cactus Ave. - Proposed Redevelopment
Matched fields
- address
- 150-160 CACTUS AVE
- application_address
- 150-160 CACTUS AVE
150-160 Cactus Ave · Site Plan Approval (SA)
21 226762 NNY 18 SA · submitted 16 October 2021 · Under Review · from registration SM34048 (Resident)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.81
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 SM34048: 150-160 Cactus Ave. - Proposed Redevelopment (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 21 226762 NNY 18 SA at 150-160 Cactus Ave: Site Plan Approval to facilitate the development of the site for a residential development comprised of 12 and 15-storey apartment buildings, and two 4-storey back to back townhouse buildings. The proposed residential gross floor area is 34,482 square metres. A total 483 residential dwelling units … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 150-160 Cactus Ave. - Proposed Redevelopment
Matched fields
- address
- 150-160 CACTUS AVE
- application_address
- 150-160 CACTUS 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.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 18
38 lobbied · 63 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 | 38 | — | 100% (n=7) | 0% | 21% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 63 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 15% | 0.04 |
| 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.
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 18
18 lobbied · 125 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 18 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 125 | 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 | 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.