Address · Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
7 Cameron St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
- Location
- 43.64892, -79.39738
- 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
2- Submitted 3 March 2020Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 20 121374 STE 10 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 19 January 2012Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 12 108570 STE 20 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 121374 STE 10 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 3 March 2020 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 12 108570 STE 20 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 19 January 2012 | 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
170 Spadina Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
12 108570 STE 20 OZ · submitted 19 January 2012 · Closed · from registration SM18135 (Tri Win International Inc.)
Evidence High confidence · score 0.90
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 SM18135: Rezoning Application re 170 Spadina Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 108570 STE 20 OZ at 170 Spadina Ave: Rezoning application to permit the redevelopment of the existing two storey non residential building with a new 12storey (40 metre) mixed-use building with 417m2 of retail area at the ground floor and 144 residential units, (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Rezoning Application re 170 Spadina Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 170 SPADINA AVE
- application_address
- 170 SPADINA AVE
170 Spadina Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
12 108570 STE 20 OZ · submitted 19 January 2012 · Closed · from registration SM20303 (Monarch Corporation)
Evidence High confidence · score 0.92
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 SM20303: Pre-consultation regarding revisions to an existing Application to Amend the Zoning By-Law as it applies to 170 Spadina Ave to allow a primarily-residential condominum. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 108570 STE 20 OZ at 170 Spadina Ave: Rezoning application to permit the redevelopment of the existing two storey non residential building with a new 12storey (40 metre) mixed-use building with 417m2 of retail area at the ground floor and 144 residential units, (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Pre-consultation regarding revisions to an existing Application to Amend the Zoning By-Law as it applies to 170 Spadina Ave to allow a primarily-residential condominum.
Matched fields
- address
- 170 SPADINA AVE
- application_address
- 170 SPADINA 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.
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.
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.