Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)

Development application 15 139695 NNY 23 OZ

400 Hillcrest Ave; 404 Hillcrest Ave; 2962A Bayview Ave; 2962B Bayview Ave; 2962C Bayview Ave; 2966 Bayview Ave; 2966A Bayview Ave; 2966B Bayview Ave

Ward 18 · Lily ChengDataset pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 13 April 2015; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses: 400 Hillcrest Ave; 404 Hillcrest Ave; 2962A Bayview Ave; 2962B Bayview Ave; 2962C Bayview Ave; 2966 Bayview Ave; 2966A Bayview Ave; 2966B Bayview Ave
Ward: Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
Submitted: 13 April 2015
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: 959 m² gross floor area

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

Description

Resubmission Feb 19/16 - Proposed development at 2966 Bayview Ave and 400 Hillcrest Ave to construct five townhouse dwelling units fronting onto Bayview Ave and one single detached "transition" unit fronting onto Hillcrest Ave with a total residential gross floor area of 958.7m2. The townhouses will have a shared rearyard driveway accessed off of Hillcrest Ave.

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.

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 18

38 lobbied · 63 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=7
Matched, unlobbied100% n=3

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied21%
Matched, unlobbied15%

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide

573 lobbied · 763 matched

Median days

Lobbied1,925
Matched, unlobbied1,793

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=64
Matched, unlobbied98% n=70

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied2%

Appeal rate

Lobbied13%
Matched, unlobbied13%

Data table· 4 rows

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 18: 38 lobbied and 63 matched unlobbied applications in 23 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	38	—	100% (n=7)	0%	21%	0.00
Matched, unlobbied	63	—	100% (n=3)	0%	15%	0.04

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 573 lobbied and 763 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
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.