lobbyTO

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

Development application 21 139658 STE 09 OZ

278 Sterling Rd; 1423 Bloor St W; 1425 Bloor St W; 1425A Bloor St W; 1427 Bloor St W; 1429 Bloor St W; 1431 Bloor St W; 1433 Bloor St W; 1435 Bloor St W; 1435-1437 Bloor St W; 1437 Bloor St W

Status
Council Approved
Approved
Submitted
13 April 2021
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
2
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
6
0 meetings · 1 office

Application record

Type
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses
278 Sterling Rd; 1423 Bloor St W; 1425 Bloor St W; 1425A Bloor St W; 1427 Bloor St W; 1429 Bloor St W; 1431 Bloor St W; 1433 Bloor St W; 1435 Bloor St W; 1435-1437 Bloor St W; 1437 Bloor St W
Ward
Ward 9 · Alejandra Bravo
Submitted
13 April 2021
Status
Council Approved
Outcome recorded
Approved
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description
197 units; 14,635 m² gross floor area

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

Description

Proposal for an 18-storey, inclusive of a 6-storey podium, mixed-use building with a tota GFA of 14,635 square metres. A total of 197 residential dwelling units are proposed, of which, 17 will be rental units.

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

Lobbying on linked registrations

2 linked registrations · 6 communications · 0 meetings · 1 office contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Office of Councillor Bailao, Ward 96
Data table· 1 row
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Office of Councillor Bailao, Ward 9Councillor staff6026 January 2021

Consultant firms

Linked registrations

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 9

19 lobbied · 28 matched

Hidden: 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 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=78
  • Matched, unlobbied96% n=78

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied4%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied12%
  • Matched, unlobbied14%
Data table· 4 rows
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 9: 19 lobbied and 28 matched unlobbied applications in 16 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied19Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied28Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied571—100% (n=78)0%12%0.08
Matched, unlobbied760—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.