Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 13 277895 STE 28 OZ
- Status
- OMB Approved
- Approved
- Submitted
- 13 December 2013
- Appealed
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 230 Oak St
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Submitted
- 13 December 2013
- Status
- OMB Approved
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- Yes
- Size stated in the description
- 330 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to allow the renovation of the existing apartment building on the site and the construction of a new 32--storey mixed-use building with 330 residential units.
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
Dravidian Management Limited · registration SM22724
Application for 230 Oak Street
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.71
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM22724: Application for 230 Oak Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 277895 STE 28 OZ at 230 Oak St: Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to allow the renovation of the existing apartment building on the site and the construction of a new 32--storey mixed-use building with 330 residential units. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Application for 230 Oak Street
Matched fields
- address
- 230 OAK ST
- application_address
- 230 OAK ST
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 1 communication · 1 meeting · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 27 January 2016 |
Consultant firms
Linked registrationsOther 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 13
83 lobbied · 97 matchedMedian days
Approval 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 | 83 | — | 100% (n=10) | 0% | 11% | 0.14 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 97 | 1,793 | 93% (n=14) | 7% | 17% | 0.08 |
| 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.