Address · Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
390 Queens Quay W
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
- Location
- 43.63826, -79.39029
- 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· 3 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 4 | 4 | 10 May 2016 |
| Office of Councillor Cressy, Ward 20 | Councillor staff | 1 | 1 | 9 May 2016 |
| Office of Councillor Vaughan, Ward 20 | Councillor staff | 1 | 1 | 4 October 2013 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM23096 | Retirment Concepts Developments | 390 Queens Quay West | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 9 May 2016 – 10 May 2017 | 1 |
| SM19716 | Retirement Concepts Developments Ltd. | 390 Queen's Quay West | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Development Application, Minor Va… | 1 October 2013 – 17 September 2027 | 5 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 13 July 2021Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 21 183324 STE 10 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 13 December 2018Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 18 268154 STE 10 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 12 February 2016Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 16 116138 STE 20 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 183324 STE 10 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 13 July 2021 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 18 268154 STE 10 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 13 December 2018 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 16 116138 STE 20 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 12 February 2016 | 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
350 Queens Quay W · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
16 116138 STE 20 OZ · submitted 12 February 2016 · Closed · from registration SM23096 (Retirment Concepts Developments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.75
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 SM23096: Applications in support of redevelopment of 350, 370 & 390 Queens Quay West (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 16 116138 STE 20 OZ at 350 Queens Quay W: Proposal for official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment related to a new 20 storey mixed use building in place of the existing 3 storey building at 370 Queens Quay West, and a northerly 21 storey addition to the existing mixed-use building at 350 Queens Quay West (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Applications in support of redevelopment of 350, 370 & 390 Queens Quay West
Matched fields
- address
- 370&390 QUEENS QUAY W
- application_address
- 370 QUEENS QUAY W
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 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.