Address · Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
30 Ordnance St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
- Location
- 43.63937, -79.40914
- 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
4These 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· 7 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 19 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 13 | 12 | 30 September 2015 |
| Constituency Assistant Councillor Layton Offices | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 1 October 2018 |
| Office of Councillor Gord Perks, Ward 14 | Councillor staff | 1 | 1 | 5 January 2012 |
| Office of Councillor Matlow, Ward 22 | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 9 January 2012 |
| Ward 14 Parkdale-High Park | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 5 January 2012 |
| Ward 18 Davenport | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 9 January 2012 |
| Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 9 January 2012 |
All registrations· 4 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM24269 | Diamondcorp | 30 Ordnance Street. | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Development, Combined Application | 26 March 2017 – 1 August 2023 | 1 |
| SM17446 | Whitecastle New Urban Fund | 30 Ordnance Street. | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 11 November 2011 – 27 March 2017 | 2 |
| SM17444 | Whitecastle New Urban Fund | 30 Ordnance Street. | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 10 November 2011 – 7 May 2017 | 16 |
| SM14326 | Morgan Solar Inc. | 30 Ordnance St. | Planning and Development Application, Official Plan | 16 April 2010 – 16 April 2011 | 0 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
8- Submitted 19 February 2020Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0324/20TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 19 December 2019Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 19 263260 STE 10 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 18 October 2019Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 19 238204 STE 10 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 26 July 2017Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0075/17TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 21 November 2012Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 12 282863 STE 19 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 2 August 2012Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 12 223589 STE 19 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 27 April 2010Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 10 164790 STE 19 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 9 February 2010Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 10 115786 STE 19 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 8 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A0324/20TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 19 February 2020 | Closed Approved |
| 19 263260 STE 10 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 19 December 2019 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 19 238204 STE 10 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 18 October 2019 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| B0075/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 26 July 2017 | Closed Approved |
| 12 282863 STE 19 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 21 November 2012 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 12 223589 STE 19 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 2 August 2012 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 10 164790 STE 19 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 27 April 2010 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 10 115786 STE 19 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 9 February 2010 | 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
30 Ordnance St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
10 164790 STE 19 OZ · submitted 27 April 2010 · Closed · from registration SM14326 (Morgan Solar 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 SM14326: Developers are seeking to amend the Official Plan to redevelop 30 Ordnance St. as condominiums. This would result in the removal of an expanding solar panel manufacturing operation that employs 25 Torontonians and will in the future employ many more. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 10 164790 STE 19 OZ at 30 Ordnance St: Standard rezoning Application to change lands from industrial to mixed use residential and commercial. - Construction of 2 towers - Tower A 35 stories - Tower B 30 Stories - 516 residential units - 2229.6 m2 commercial space - 279 residential parking space - 34 visitor and 7 office space - 2 levels… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Developers are seeking to amend the Official Plan to redevelop 30 Ordnance St. as condominiums. This would result in the removal of an expanding solar panel manufacturing operation that employs 25 T…
Matched fields
- address
- 30 ORDNANCE ST
- application_address
- 30 ORDNANCE ST
30 Ordnance St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
10 115786 STE 19 OZ · submitted 9 February 2010 · Closed · from registration SM14326 (Morgan Solar 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 SM14326: Developers are seeking to amend the Official Plan to redevelop 30 Ordnance St. as condominiums. This would result in the removal of an expanding solar panel manufacturing operation that employs 25 Torontonians and will in the future employ many more. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 10 115786 STE 19 OZ at 30 Ordnance St: Standard OPA Application to change lands from industrial to mixed use residential and commercial. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Developers are seeking to amend the Official Plan to redevelop 30 Ordnance St. as condominiums. This would result in the removal of an expanding solar panel manufacturing operation that employs 25 T…
Matched fields
- address
- 30 ORDNANCE ST
- application_address
- 30 ORDNANCE ST
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.
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), City-wide
26 lobbied · 179 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 2 rows
| 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.
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.