Address · Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
2710 Bayview Ave
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
- Location
- 43.75924, -79.38674
- 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
0These 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.
None.
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
No communications recorded.
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
7- Submitted 18 January 2022Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0011/22NYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 1 December 2020Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0639/20NYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 1 December 2020Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0663/20NYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 1 December 2020Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0664/20NYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 6 January 2017Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0002/17NYConditional Consent · Approved
- Submitted 25 August 2016Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 16 212893 NNY 25 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 21 December 2015Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 15 267780 NNY 25 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 7 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| B0011/22NY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 18 January 2022 | Closed Approved |
| A0639/20NY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 December 2020 | Closed Approved |
| A0663/20NY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 December 2020 | Closed Approved |
| A0664/20NY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 December 2020 | Closed Approved |
| B0002/17NY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 6 January 2017 | Conditional Consent Approved |
| 16 212893 NNY 25 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 25 August 2016 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 15 267780 NNY 25 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 21 December 2015 | 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
2710 Bayview Ave · Consent (severance) (CO)
B0002/17NY · submitted 6 January 2017 · Conditional Consent · from registration SM24063 (Lulu Holdings Inc.)
Evidence High confidence · score 0.91
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM24063: Provide planning assistance for Rezoning and Consent applications for site located at 2706 Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Committee of Adjustment application B0002/17NY at 2710 Bayview Ave: To obtain consent to sever the lands to create a separate building lot to construct a new detached dwelling. Related planning files include 15 267780 NNY 25 OZ and 16 21 2893 NNY 25 SA. The related rezoning and site plan applications permit townhouses along Bayview Avenue with a total of 20 units. … (Committee of Adjustment Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Provide planning assistance for Rezoning and Consent applications for site located at 2706 Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto.
Matched fields
- address
- 2706 BAYVIEW AVE
- application_address
- 2710 BAYVIEW AVE
2710 Bayview Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
15 267780 NNY 25 OZ · submitted 21 December 2015 · Closed · from registration SM24063 (Lulu Holdings Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.84
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 SM24063: Provide planning assistance for Rezoning and Consent applications for site located at 2706 Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 267780 NNY 25 OZ at 2710 Bayview Ave: The purpose of the rezoning and site plan applications is to permit 3 blocks of townhouses along Bayview Avenue with a total of 20 units. Additionally, one detached dwelling is proposed west of the townhouses on Caldy Court. Vehicular access would be provided from Fifeshire Road. The detached dwell… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Provide planning assistance for Rezoning and Consent applications for site located at 2706 Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto.
Matched fields
- address
- 2706 BAYVIEW AVE
- application_address
- 2710 BAYVIEW AVE
2710 Bayview Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
15 267780 NNY 25 OZ · submitted 21 December 2015 · Closed · from registration SM24064 (Lulu Holdings Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.74
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 SM24064: Providing planning advice and consultation with regard to rezoning application at 2706 Bayview Ave (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 267780 NNY 25 OZ at 2710 Bayview Ave: The purpose of the rezoning and site plan applications is to permit 3 blocks of townhouses along Bayview Avenue with a total of 20 units. Additionally, one detached dwelling is proposed west of the townhouses on Caldy Court. Vehicular access would be provided from Fifeshire Road. The detached dwell… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Providing planning advice and consultation with regard to rezoning application at 2706 Bayview Ave
Matched fields
- address
- 2706 BAYVIEW AVE
- application_address
- 2710 BAYVIEW AVE
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.
Consent (severance) (CO), Ward 15
2 lobbied · 26 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Consent (severance) (CO), City-wide
26 lobbied · 179 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 | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 26 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 26 | 184 | 79% (n=24) | 21% | 15% | 25% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 179 | 115 | 88% (n=133) | 12% | 3% | 25% |
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.
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 15
5 lobbied · 419 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 5 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 419 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 15
12 lobbied · 41 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 12 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 41 | 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=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.
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 15
20 lobbied · 36 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 | 20 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 15% | 0.05 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 36 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 30% | 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.