lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 09 152192 NNY 16 SA

58 Orchard View Blvd; 60 Orchard View Blvd; 64 Orchard View Blvd; 68 Orchard View Blvd; 439 Duplex Ave; 441 Duplex Ave; 443 Duplex Ave; 445 Duplex Ave

Ward 8 · Mike ColleDataset pageReport an error on this page
Status
Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted
19 June 2009
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
0
None published
Communications on linked registrations
0

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
58 Orchard View Blvd; 60 Orchard View Blvd; 64 Orchard View Blvd; 68 Orchard View Blvd; 439 Duplex Ave; 441 Duplex Ave; 443 Duplex Ave; 445 Duplex Ave
Ward
Ward 8 · Mike Colle
Submitted
19 June 2009
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
218 units
Related file
08 182458 NNY 16 OZ

Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page

Description

Site plan submission to implement a proposed zoning by-law amendment (08 182458 NNY 16 OZ). This application proposes to construct a 20-storey apartment building containing 218 units and 129 parking spaces.

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.

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 8

25 lobbied · 70 matched

Median days

  • Lobbied—
  • Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=3
  • Matched, unlobbied100% n=4

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied8%
  • Matched, unlobbied4%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

  • Lobbied—
  • Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=61
  • Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied4%
  • Matched, unlobbied3%
Data table· 4 rows
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 8: 25 lobbied and 70 matched unlobbied applications in 16 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied25—100% (n=3)0%8%0.00
Matched, unlobbied70727100% (n=4)0%4%0.00
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied449—100% (n=61)0%4%0.07
Matched, unlobbied1,23772797% (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.