lobbyTO

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

Development application 15 153397 ESC 44 OZ

8817-8825 Sheppard Ave E; 8833 Sheppard Ave E

Status
OMB Approved
Approved
Submitted
7 May 2015
Appealed
Linked lobbying registrations
2
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
7
3 meetings · 6 offices

Application record

Type
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses
8817-8825 Sheppard Ave E; 8833 Sheppard Ave E
Ward
Ward 25 · Neethan Shan
Submitted
7 May 2015
Status
OMB Approved
Outcome recorded
Approved
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
Yes
Size stated in the description
144 units

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

Description

To permit a stacked townhouse development having 144 residential units and underground parking and a new public road.

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 · 7 communications · 3 meetings · 6 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Councillor Jennifer McKelvie2
  • Councillor Carroll1
  • Mayor John Tory1
  • Office of Councillor Hart, Ward 441
  • Ward 25 Scarborough-Rouge Park1
  • Ward 44 Scarborough East1
Data table· 6 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Councillor Jennifer McKelvieCouncillor staff2028 January 2020
Councillor CarrollCouncillor staff1030 March 2017
Mayor John ToryCouncillor staff1030 March 2017
Office of Councillor Hart, Ward 44Councillor staff1126 July 2017
Ward 25 Scarborough-Rouge ParkMember of council115 March 2019
Ward 44 Scarborough EastMember of council1126 July 2017

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.

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 25

3 lobbied · 4 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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

571 lobbied · 760 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=78
  • Matched, unlobbied96% n=78

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied4%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied12%
  • Matched, unlobbied14%
Data table· 4 rows
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 25: 3 lobbied and 4 matched unlobbied applications in 3 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied3Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied4Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied571—100% (n=78)0%12%0.08
Matched, unlobbied760—96% (n=78)4%14%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.