Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 15 267780 NNY 25 OZ
2710 Bayview Ave; 2716 Bayview Ave; 2720 Bayview Ave; 2722 Bayview Ave
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 21 December 2015
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 2710 Bayview Ave; 2716 Bayview Ave; 2720 Bayview Ave; 2722 Bayview Ave
- Ward
- Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
- Submitted
- 21 December 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
- 20 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
The purpose of the rezoning and site plan applications is to permit 3 blocks of townhouses along Bayview Avenue with a total of 20 units. Additionally, one detached dwelling is proposed west of the townhouses on Caldy Court. Vehicular access would be provided from Fifeshire Road. The detached dwelling would be located behind the townhouses and take access from Caldy Court (also see Site Plan Application File No. 16 212893 NNY 25 SA).
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
Lulu Holdings Inc. · registration SM24063
Provide planning assistance for Rezoning and Consent applications for site located at 2706 Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.84
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 SM24063: Provide planning assistance for Rezoning and Consent applications for site located at 2706 Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 267780 NNY 25 OZ at 2710 Bayview Ave: The purpose of the rezoning and site plan applications is to permit 3 blocks of townhouses along Bayview Avenue with a total of 20 units. Additionally, one detached dwelling is proposed west of the townhouses on Caldy Court. Vehicular access would be provided from Fifeshire Road. The detached dwell… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Provide planning assistance for Rezoning and Consent applications for site located at 2706 Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto.
Matched fields
- address
- 2706 BAYVIEW AVE
- application_address
- 2710 BAYVIEW AVE
Lulu Holdings Inc. · registration SM24064
Providing planning advice and consultation with regard to rezoning application at 2706 Bayview Ave
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.74
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 SM24064: Providing planning advice and consultation with regard to rezoning application at 2706 Bayview Ave (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 267780 NNY 25 OZ at 2710 Bayview Ave: The purpose of the rezoning and site plan applications is to permit 3 blocks of townhouses along Bayview Avenue with a total of 20 units. Additionally, one detached dwelling is proposed west of the townhouses on Caldy Court. Vehicular access would be provided from Fifeshire Road. The detached dwell… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Providing planning advice and consultation with regard to rezoning application at 2706 Bayview Ave
Matched fields
- address
- 2706 BAYVIEW AVE
- application_address
- 2710 BAYVIEW AVE
Lobbying on linked registrations
2 linked registrations · 8 communications · 0 meetings · 2 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Office of Councillor Jaye Robinson, Ward 15 | Councillor staff | 7 | 0 | 22 June 2021 |
| Ward 25 Don Valley West | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 28 November 2017 |
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 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.