Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 08 231155 NNY 23 OZ
169 Finch Ave E; 169A Finch Ave E; 169B Finch Ave E; 169C Finch Ave E; 169D Finch Ave E; 169E Finch Ave E; 169F Finch Ave E; 169G Finch Ave E; 169H Finch Ave E; 169J Finch Ave E; 169K Finch Ave E; 169L Finch Ave E; 169M Finch Ave E; 169N Finch Ave E; 169P Finch Ave E; 171 Finch Ave E; 171A Finch Ave E; 171B Finch Ave E; 173 Finch Ave E; 173A Finch Ave E; 173B Finch Ave E; 175A Finch Ave E; 175B Finch Ave E; 177 Finch Ave E
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 19 December 2008
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 169 Finch Ave E; 169A Finch Ave E; 169B Finch Ave E; 169C Finch Ave E; 169D Finch Ave E; 169E Finch Ave E; 169F Finch Ave E; 169G Finch Ave E; 169H Finch Ave E; 169J Finch Ave E; 169K Finch Ave E; 169L Finch Ave E; 169M Finch Ave E; 169N Finch Ave E; 169P Finch Ave E; 171 Finch Ave E; 171A Finch Ave E; 171B Finch Ave E; 173 Finch Ave E; 173A Finch Ave E; 173B Finch Ave E; 175A Finch Ave E; 175B Finch Ave E; 177 Finch Ave E
- Ward
- Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
- Submitted
- 19 December 2008
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 7 units
- Related file
- 352-2020 / 353-2010
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Development of 21 residential townhouses (comprised of three blocks of 7 units each) with two private interior roadways. Concurrent site plan control application (08 231164 NNY 23 SA). Note multiple addresses.
Linked lobbying registrations
No published lobbying registrations are linked to this application.
Other registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
None.
Comparison with similar 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
38 lobbied · 63 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 | 38 | — | 100% (n=7) | 0% | 21% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 63 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 15% | 0.04 |
| 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.