Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 20 232879 STE 14 OZ
5 Cosburn Ave; 7 Cosburn Ave; 8 Gowan Ave; 9 Cosburn Ave; 10 Gowan Ave; 11 Cosburn Ave; 12 Gowan Ave; 14 Gowan Ave; 15 Cosburn Ave; 16 Gowan Ave; 17 Cosburn Ave; 19 Cosburn Ave; 30 Gowan Ave; 32 Gowan Ave; 34 Gowan Ave; 36 Gowan Ave; 38 Gowan Ave; 40 Gowan Ave
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 22 December 2020
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 5 Cosburn Ave; 7 Cosburn Ave; 8 Gowan Ave; 9 Cosburn Ave; 10 Gowan Ave; 11 Cosburn Ave; 12 Gowan Ave; 14 Gowan Ave; 15 Cosburn Ave; 16 Gowan Ave; 17 Cosburn Ave; 19 Cosburn Ave; 30 Gowan Ave; 32 Gowan Ave; 34 Gowan Ave; 36 Gowan Ave; 38 Gowan Ave; 40 Gowan Ave
- Ward
- Ward 14 · Paula Fletcher
- Submitted
- 22 December 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
- 424 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Proposal for a residential apartment building with a height of 24-storeys, inclusive of a 4 storey podium with ground related housing on Gowan Avenue. The development proposes 424 dwelling units, 187 vehicle parking spaces and 425 bicycle parking spaces. An on-site parkland dedication is proposed. This application has been settled at the OLT, please refer to case # OLT-21-001666 for more information.
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
Trolleybus Urban Development · registration SM31788
5-19 Cosburn Ave. & 8-40 Gowan Ave., East York
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.79
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM31788: 5-19 Cosburn Ave. & 8-40 Gowan Ave., East York (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 20 232879 STE 14 OZ at 14 Gowan Ave: Proposal for a residential apartment building with a height of 24-storeys, inclusive of a 4 storey podium with ground related housing on Gowan Avenue. The development proposes 424 dwelling units, 187 vehicle parking spaces and 425 bicycle parking spaces. An on-site parkland dedication is proposed. … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 5-19 Cosburn Ave. & 8-40 Gowan Ave., East York
Matched fields
- address
- 5-19 COSBURN AVE
- application_address
- 5 COSBURN AVE
Marlin Spring Developments · registration SM31761
5-19 Cosburn Avenue and 8-40 Gowan Avenue
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.73
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM31761: 5-19 Cosburn Avenue and 8-40 Gowan Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 20 232879 STE 14 OZ at 14 Gowan Ave: Proposal for a residential apartment building with a height of 24-storeys, inclusive of a 4 storey podium with ground related housing on Gowan Avenue. The development proposes 424 dwelling units, 187 vehicle parking spaces and 425 bicycle parking spaces. An on-site parkland dedication is proposed. … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 5-19 Cosburn Avenue and 8-40 Gowan Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 5-19 COSBURN AVE
- application_address
- 5 COSBURN AVE
Lobbying on linked registrations
2 linked registrations · 5 communications · 5 meetings · 2 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 14 Toronto-Danforth | Member of council | 3 | 3 | 3 June 2021 |
| Ward 14 - Paula Fletcher | Councillor staff | 2 | 2 | 3 June 2021 |
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 14
18 lobbied · 28 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 18 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 28 | 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 | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 96% (n=78) | 4% | 14% | 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.