Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 14 249434 NNY 25 OZ
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 7 November 2014
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 2437 Bayview Ave
- Ward
- Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
- Submitted
- 7 November 2014
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Application to permit construction of 2-storey place of worship with 16 parking spaces in one level of underground parking. Included in the proposal is a day nursery.
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
Roy Masoumi · registration SM21964
2437 Bayview Avenue - Rezoning application to permit a place of worship.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.87
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 SM21964: 2437 Bayview Avenue - Rezoning application to permit a place of worship. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 14 249434 NNY 25 OZ at 2437 Bayview Ave: Application to permit construction of 2-storey place of worship with 16 parking spaces in one level of underground parking. Included in the proposal is a day nursery. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 2437 Bayview Avenue - Rezoning application to permit a place of worship.
Matched fields
- address
- 2437 BAYVIEW AVE
- application_address
- 2437 BAYVIEW AVE
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 0 communications · 0 meetings · 0 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsNo communications recorded.
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.
- Chabad on BayviewSM36585 · 28 April 2025 · “2437 Bayview Avenue”
- Chabad on BayviewSM36587 · 28 April 2025 · “2437 Bayview Avenue”
- Chabad on BayviewSM36589 · 28 April 2025 · “2437 Bayview 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.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 15
20 lobbied · 36 matchedApproval 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 | 20 | — | 100% (n=2) | 0% | 10% | 0.05 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 36 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 25% | 0.01 |
| 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.