Address · Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
88 Finch Ave E
- Communications on those registrations
- 0
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
- Location
- 43.78138, -79.40943
- 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
1These 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
No communications recorded.
All registrations· 1 row
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM12560 | Dr. Mark Lin | 88 Finch Ave. E. | Planning and Development, Combined Application - Rezoning & Site Plan | 27 November 2008 – 8 November 2011 | 0 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
2- Submitted 17 December 2008Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 08 230268 NNY 24 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 17 December 2008Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 08 230271 NNY 24 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08 230268 NNY 24 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 17 December 2008 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 08 230271 NNY 24 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 17 December 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
88 Finch Ave E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
08 230268 NNY 24 OZ · submitted 17 December 2008 · Closed · from registration SM12560 (Dr. Mark Lin)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.72
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 SM12560: 88 Finch Ave. E. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 08 230268 NNY 24 OZ at 88 Finch Ave E: Proposed conversion of the residential second floor to professional medical office (dentist). Ground floor is already used as a dentist office. No exterior alterations or additions to building or parking area. Existing 5 parking spaces at rear accessed via driveway from Finch Avenue. Note concurren… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 88 Finch Ave. E.
Matched fields
- address
- 88 FINCH AVE E
- application_address
- 88 FINCH AVE E
88 Finch Ave E · Site Plan Approval (SA)
08 230271 NNY 24 SA · submitted 17 December 2008 · Closed · from registration SM12560 (Dr. Mark Lin)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.73
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 SM12560: 88 Finch Ave. E. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 08 230271 NNY 24 SA at 88 Finch Ave E: Proposed conversion of the residential second floor to professional medical office (dentist). Ground floor is already used as a dentist office. No exterior alterations or additions to building or parking area. Existing 5 parking spaces at rear accessed via driveway from Finch Avenue. Note concurren… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 88 Finch Ave. E.
Matched fields
- address
- 88 FINCH AVE E
- application_address
- 88 FINCH AVE E
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 18
37 lobbied · 63 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 | 37 | — | 100% (n=8) | 0% | 24% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 63 | — | 64% (n=5) | 36% | 16% | 0.04 |
| 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 18
18 lobbied · 125 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 | 18 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 125 | 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.