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

Development application 20 208290 NNY 15 OZ

Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos LinDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 20 October 2020; 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: 109 Erskine Ave
Ward: Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
Submitted: 20 October 2020
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: 213 units; 14,176 m² gross floor area

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

Description

Revised Proposal:A 22-storey (69 metre) residential building with 181 residential units and 31 rental replacement units for a total of 211 dwelling units. The total proposed residential gross floor area (GFA) is 14,176 square metres (8.16 FSI). The proposal would also include 48 parking spaces, one loading space and 212 bicycle parking spaces for the property at 109 Erskine Avenue.Original Proposal:Zoning By Law Amendment Application to permit the proposal for a 22-storey (63 metre) residential building with 182 residential units and 31 rental replacement units for a total of 213 dwelling units. The total proposed residential gross floor area (GFA) is 14,029 square metres (8.01 FSI). The proposal would also include 49 parking spaces, one loading space and 214 bicycle 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.

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 15

20 lobbied · 36 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=2
Matched, unlobbied100% n=5

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied10%
Matched, unlobbied25%

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 15: 20 lobbied and 36 matched unlobbied applications in 15 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	20	—	100% (n=2)	0%	10%	0.05
Matched, unlobbied	36	—	100% (n=5)	0%	25%	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.