lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 15 113708 NNY 33 SA

2225-2255 Sheppard Ave E; 2235 Sheppard Ave E

Status
NOAC Issued
Approved
Submitted
9 February 2015
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
2
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
1
0 meetings · 1 office

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
2225-2255 Sheppard Ave E; 2235 Sheppard Ave E
Ward
Ward 17 · Shelley Carroll
Submitted
9 February 2015
Status
NOAC Issued
Outcome recorded
Approved
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 · City application page

Description

Application to replace an existing 79-space surface parking lot located on the southeast portion of the Atria 1,2 and 3 lands (adjacent to Settler Road) with a six-storey above grade parking structure containing 535 parking spaces. The proposal would result in an overall parking supply of 2,621 spaces on the site.

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

2 linked registrations · 1 communication · 0 meetings · 1 office contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Ward 33 Don Valley East1
Data table· 1 row
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 33 Don Valley EastMember of council107 July 2015

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.