Development application · Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
Development application 20 218450 NNY 17 SB
- Status
- Under Review
- In progress
- Submitted
- 14 November 2020
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
- Addresses
- 3125 Steeles Ave E
- Ward
- Ward 17 · Shelley Carroll
- Submitted
- 14 November 2020
- Status
- Under Review
- Outcome recorded
- In progress
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Related file
- 15 266578 NNY 24 SA
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
This application for Draft Plan of Subdivision is affiliated with a tandem application for Draft Plan of Common Element Condominium (20 218449 NNY 17 CD). The purpose of these applications is to facilitate the conveyance of a portion of land on the western side of 3125 Steeles Avenue East for the purpose of a hotel. In order to do so, the applicant proposes to establish one subdivision block for the entirety of the lands at 3125 Steeles Avenue East, and establish a Common Element Condominium which would apply to the existing services and private roads within the site. Six Parcels of Tied Land (POTLs) are proposed to be associated with the Common Element Condominium, one of which would accommodate the proposed hotel.
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.
- North American Development GroupSM25340 · 17 November 2017 · “3125 Steeles Avenue East”
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.