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

Development application 18 234351 STE 28 OZ

Ward 10 · Ausma MalikDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 1 October 2018; 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: 215 Lake Shore Blvd E
Ward: Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Submitted: 1 October 2018
Status: Closed
Outcome recorded: Closed (outcome not recorded)
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Related file: 17 228459 STE 28 SA

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

Description

Phase 1 Block 3: Application to lift the Holding Provision in the site specific amendment to General Zoning By-law No. 438-86, agreed to at the Ontario Municipal Board (Settlement Hearing Date: January 16, 2018, final decision pending; OMB Case No.: PL101091; OMB File No.: PL030412, PL030514, PL060106, PL101091) in order to facilitate the first phase of development, consistent with the Phase 1 Site Plan Control application (see related application 17-228459 STE 28 SA

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 10

88 lobbied · 94 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=7
Matched, unlobbied100% n=6

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied11%
Matched, unlobbied5%

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 10: 88 lobbied and 94 matched unlobbied applications in 38 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	88	—	100% (n=7)	0%	11%	0.03
Matched, unlobbied	94	—	100% (n=6)	0%	5%	0.01

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.