Development application · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)

Development application 19 120038 STE 10 CD

40 Mercer St; 42 Mercer St; 44 Mercer St; 46 Mercer St; 119 Blue Jays Way; 337 King St W; 343 King St W; 355 King St W

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

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 27 February 2019; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
Addresses: 40 Mercer St; 42 Mercer St; 44 Mercer St; 46 Mercer St; 119 Blue Jays Way; 337 King St W; 343 King St W; 355 King St W
Ward: Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Submitted: 27 February 2019
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: 911 units
Related file: 08 150526 STE 20 OZ

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

Description

Draft Plan of Standard Condominium Application to permit 911 residential units.

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.

Steve Gupta
SM18396 · 5 September 2012 · “355 King Street West”
Easton's Group of Hotels
SM17278 · 6 October 2011 · “355 King Street West”
Easton's Group of Hotels
SM17267 · 3 October 2011 · “355 King Street West”
355 Development Inc.
SM11905 · 26 June 2008 · “355 King Street West”

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.

Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 10

4 lobbied · 25 matched

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

Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide

28 lobbied · 95 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=3
Matched, unlobbied100% n=6

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Data table· 4 rows

Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 10: 4 lobbied and 25 matched unlobbied applications in 4 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	4	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	25	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide: 28 lobbied and 95 matched unlobbied applications in 23 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	28	—	100% (n=3)	0%	0%	0.04
Matched, unlobbied	95	—	100% (n=6)	0%	0%	0.03

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.