Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 13 196188 NNY 24 SA
500 Cummer Ave; 3336 A Bayview Ave; 3336 B Bayview Ave; 3336 C Bayview Ave; 3336 D Bayview Ave; 3338 A Bayview Ave; 3338 B Bayview Ave; 3338 C Bayview Ave; 3338 D Bayview Ave; 3340 A Bayview Ave; 3340 B Bayview Ave; 3340 C Bayview Ave; 3340 D Bayview Ave; 3348 A Bayview Ave; 3348 B Bayview Ave; 3348 C Bayview Ave; 3348 D Bayview Ave; 3348 E Bayview Ave; 3348 F Bayview Ave
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 28 June 2013
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 500 Cummer Ave; 3336 A Bayview Ave; 3336 B Bayview Ave; 3336 C Bayview Ave; 3336 D Bayview Ave; 3338 A Bayview Ave; 3338 B Bayview Ave; 3338 C Bayview Ave; 3338 D Bayview Ave; 3340 A Bayview Ave; 3340 B Bayview Ave; 3340 C Bayview Ave; 3340 D Bayview Ave; 3348 A Bayview Ave; 3348 B Bayview Ave; 3348 C Bayview Ave; 3348 D Bayview Ave; 3348 E Bayview Ave; 3348 F Bayview Ave
- Ward
- Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
- Submitted
- 28 June 2013
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Related file
- 16 117899 NNY 24 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
To permit the construction of a 2-storey secondary school. Existing elementary school demolished (permit number 14-185037).
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.
- Toronto Catholic District School BoardSM23637 · 21 October 2016 · “500 Cummer Ave”
- Toronto Catholic District School BoardSM23639 · 21 October 2016 · “500 Cummer Avenue”
- Embee Development CorporationSM17723 · 25 January 2012 · “500 Cummer Avenue”
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 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 · 1,237 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 | 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=61) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,237 | 727 | 97% (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.