Address · Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
250 Front St W
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
- Location
- 43.64442, -79.38770
- 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
2These 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· 4 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Office of Councillor Adam Vaughan, Ward 20 | Councillor staff | 5 | 0 | 30 March 2012 |
| Office of Councillor Vaughan, Ward 20 | Councillor staff | 3 | 0 | 16 April 2013 |
| Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 3 | 2 | 16 February 2012 |
| Municipal Licensing and Standards | City staff | 1 | 0 | 16 July 2014 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM19938 | Canadian Broadcasting Corporation | 250 Front Street West | By-law / Regulation | 18 December 2013 – 30 September 2014 | 1 |
| SM15950 | Canadian Broadcasting Corporation | 250 Front Street West | Planning and Development, Planning Policy / Study; Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-… | 18 February 2011 – 29 August 2022 | 11 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 8 April 2021Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0456/21TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 6 October 2011Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 11 288729 STE 20 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 27 June 2008Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 08 176291 STE 20 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A0456/21TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 8 April 2021 | Closed Approved |
| 11 288729 STE 20 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 6 October 2011 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 08 176291 STE 20 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 27 June 2008 | 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
250 Front St W · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
11 288729 STE 20 OZ · submitted 6 October 2011 · Closed · from registration SM15950 (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.88
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 SM15950: Development application for a proposed expansion of the existing uses on the site municipally known as 250 Front Street West, as well as property standards committee matter related to existing building sign. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 11 288729 STE 20 OZ at 250 Front St W: Rezoning application to permit an expansion to the list of permitted uses in the existing CBC building to serve the CBC and for non CBC uses. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development application for a proposed expansion of the existing uses on the site municipally known as 250 Front Street West, as well as property standards committee matter related to existing building sign.
Matched fields
- address
- 250 FRONT ST W
- application_address
- 250 FRONT ST W
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.
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
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval 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% | 10% | 0.03 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 94 | — | 100% (n=7) | 0% | 5% | 0.01 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 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 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.