Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 19 254024 STE 10 SA
96 Spadina Ave; 379 Adelaide St W; 383 Adelaide St W; 387 Adelaide St W
- Status
- Under Review
- In progress
- Submitted
- 26 November 2019
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 96 Spadina Ave; 379 Adelaide St W; 383 Adelaide St W; 387 Adelaide St W
- Ward
- Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
- Submitted
- 26 November 2019
- Status
- Under Review
- Outcome recorded
- In progress
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 21,597 m² gross floor area
- Related file
- 17 275276 STE 20 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
INACTIVE Site Plan Approval application for a proposed 16-storey non-residential building comprised of office retail uses, and having a non-residential gross floor area of 21597 m2
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
Allied REIT · registration SM30495
ZBA & SPA Submissions for 96 Spadina; 379-391 Adelaide Street West
Evidence High confidence · score 0.91
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM30495: ZBA & SPA Submissions for 96 Spadina; 379-391 Adelaide Street West (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 19 254024 STE 10 SA at 96 Spadina Ave: INACTIVE Site Plan Approval application for a proposed 16-storey non-residential building comprised of office retail uses, and having a non-residential gross floor area of 21597 m2 (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: ZBA & SPA Submissions for 96 Spadina; 379-391 Adelaide Street West
Matched fields
- address
- 379-391 ADELAIDE ST W
- application_address
- 379 ADELAIDE ST W
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 0 communications · 0 meetings · 0 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsNo communications recorded.
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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 10
66 lobbied · 165 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 66 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 3% | 0.05 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 165 | — | 100% (n=11) | 0% | 2% | 0.04 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 97% (n=98) | 3% | 3% | 0.04 |
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.