Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 18 130026 STE 27 OZ
68 Charles St E; 70 Charles St E; 628 Church St; 634 Church St; 636 Church St; 638 Church St
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 15 March 2018
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 68 Charles St E; 70 Charles St E; 628 Church St; 634 Church St; 636 Church St; 638 Church St
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 15 March 2018
- 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
- 408 units
- Related file
- 14 227468 STE 27 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Application to lift the Holding Provision (Zoning By-law Amendment Bills not adopted) - see related application 14 227468 STE 27 OZ. The parent ZBL application proposes a 47-storey mixed-use building containing 408 residential dwelling units and 20 rental replacement units and 349 square metres of retail space at 628, 634, 636 & 638 Church Street and 68 & 70 Charles Street East. The proposal entails 5-levels of underground parking containing 135 residential, 4 visitor and 0 commercial vehicular parking spaces.
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.
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM34558 · 13 June 2023 · “628 Church Street.”
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM19622 · 29 August 2013 · “636 Church 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 11
69 lobbied · 60 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 69 | — | 100% (n=10) | 0% | 10% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 60 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 11% | 0.03 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 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.