Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 17 237256 STE 18 OZ
90 Croatia St; 980 Dufferin St; 1141 Bloor St W
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 22 September 2017
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 90 Croatia St; 980 Dufferin St; 1141 Bloor St W
- Ward
- Ward 9 · Alejandra Bravo
- Submitted
- 22 September 2017
- 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 · City application page
Description
Official Plan & Zoning By-law Amendments to facilitate a mixed-use redevelopment of the site:149,055 square metres of res. GFA ; 15,656 square metres of retail/commercial uses; 2,887 square metres of office uses; 2,868 square metres of existing floor area within the Kent Senior Public School.
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.
- FitzroviaSM35832 · 8 August 2024 · “980 Dufferin Street”
- FitzroviaSM35795 · 29 July 2024 · “980 Dufferin Street”
- Fitzrovia Residential Inc.SM35427 · 8 March 2024 · “980 Dufferin Street”
- Hazelview DevelopmentsSM34372 · 4 April 2023 · “1141 Bloor Street West”
- HazelviewSM33120 · 30 March 2022 · “1141 Bloor Street West”
- HazelviewSM33121 · 30 March 2022 · “1141 Bloor Street West”
- HazelviewSM33120 · 30 March 2022 · “980 Dufferin Street”
- HazelviewSM33121 · 30 March 2022 · “980 Dufferin Street”
- Fitzrovia Residential Inc.SM32526 · 2 November 2021 · “1141 Bloor Street West”
- Capital DevelopmentsSM30257 · 23 June 2020 · “1141 Bloor Street West”
- Capital DevelopmentsSM30257 · 23 June 2020 · “90 Croatia Street”
- Capital DevelopmentsSM30257 · 23 June 2020 · “980 Dufferin Street”
- Bloor Dufferin Development Limited PartnershipSM29116 · 4 November 2019 · “1141 Bloor Street West”
- Bloor Dufferin Development Limited PartnershipSM29116 · 4 November 2019 · “980 Dufferin Street”
- MetropiaSM23985 · 1 February 2017 · “1141 Bloor St West”
- MetropiaSM23985 · 1 February 2017 · “980 Dufferin St.”
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 9
19 lobbied · 28 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 19 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 28 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.