lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 13 197383 STE 28 SA

261 Queens Quay E

Ward 10 · Ausma MalikDataset pageReport an error on this page
Status
Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted
2 July 2013
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
3
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
12
11 meetings · 2 offices

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
261 Queens Quay E
Ward
Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Submitted
2 July 2013
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
363 units; 34,910 m² gross floor area
Related file
12 111241 STE 28 OZ

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

Description

Site plan application for a mixed use building that consists of 363 residential suites with non residential gross floor area around the perimeter of the building. The total proposed gross floor area is 34910 square metres. The building is 13 storeys in height with 4 levels of underground parking and 312 parking spaces.

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 · 12 communications · 11 meetings · 2 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
Data table· 2 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 28 Toronto Centre-RosedaleMember of council111129 August 2018
Ausma MalikMember of council109 February 2023

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 10

66 lobbied · 165 matched

Median days

  • Lobbied—
  • Matched, unlobbied1,881

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=5
  • Matched, unlobbied100% n=11

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied3%
  • Matched, unlobbied2%

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 10: 66 lobbied and 165 matched unlobbied applications in 37 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied66—100% (n=5)0%3%0.05
Matched, unlobbied1651,881100% (n=11)0%2%0.04
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.