Development application · Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
Development application 20 200970 NNY 17 SB
630 Sheppard Ave E; 2901 Bayview Ave
- Status
- Under Review
- In progress
- Submitted
- 30 September 2020
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
- Addresses
- 630 Sheppard Ave E; 2901 Bayview Ave
- Ward
- Ward 17 · Shelley Carroll
- Submitted
- 30 September 2020
- Status
- Under Review
- Outcome recorded
- In progress
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 1,132 units
- Related file
- 17 208789 NNY 24 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Draft Plan of Subdivision application to permit the redevelopment of the property with three mixed use buildings (6 - 20 storeys) and a retail expansion to the existing shopping centre in the north east portion of the Property (the North-East Parcel), two mixed use buildings (29 and 30 storeys) connected by a six storey podium in the south west portion of the Property (the South- West Parcel) and a five level parking garage. A total of 1,132 residential units are proposed. (OPA AND ZBA Application: 17 208789 NNY 24 OZ)
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.
- QuadReal Real Property Group Limited PartnershipSM34672 · 26 July 2023 · “2901 Bayview Avenue.”
- QuadReal Real Property Group Limited PartnershipSM24051 · 23 February 2017 · “2901 Bayview Avenue”
- Bentall KennedySM22248 · 21 September 2015 · “2901 Bayview Ave”
- Orlando CorporationSM12912 · 7 April 2009 · “2901 Bayview Avenue”
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 Subdivision (SB), Ward 17
2 lobbied · 2 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide
16 lobbied · 48 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 2 | 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 | 16 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 48 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
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.