lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 11 234661 NNY 24 SA

72 Esther Shiner Blvd; 1001-1019 Sheppard Avenue East

Status
Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted
8 July 2011
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
3
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
10
10 meetings · 2 offices

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
72 Esther Shiner Blvd; 1001-1019 Sheppard Avenue East
Ward
Ward 17 · Shelley Carroll
Submitted
8 July 2011
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
428 units; 21,162 m² gross floor area
Related file
09 133474 NNY 24 OZ

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

Description

West of Provost, Block 17 (formerly BL 4). The application is for a 23-storey mixed use building plus two storeys of mechanical penthouses. The mixed use building will contain retail at grade (800 m2) with a total of 428 residential units. The total gross floor area is 21,162 m² and a total of 458 parking spaces will be provided in 4-levels of underground parking. Notice of Approval Conditions and plans approved by the OMB at a hearing held on Feb 11, 2013.

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

Lobbying on linked registrations

3 linked registrations · 10 communications · 10 meetings · 2 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Ward 24 Willowdale9
  • Office of Councillor Shiner, Ward 241
Data table· 2 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 24 WillowdaleMember of council9923 August 2012
Office of Councillor Shiner, Ward 24Councillor staff1119 July 2012

Consultant firms

Linked registrations

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 17

14 lobbied · 20 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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 17: 14 lobbied and 20 matched unlobbied applications in 11 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied14Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied20Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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.