lobbyTO

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

Development application 21 169802 NNY 17 OZ

3377 Bayview Ave

Status
Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted
13 June 2021
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
3377 Bayview Ave
Ward
Ward 17 · Shelley Carroll
Submitted
13 June 2021
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
1,504 units; 1,385 m² gross floor area
Related file
1267-2026(OLT) & 1268-2026(OLT)

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

Description

This application, along with a concurrent application for Draft Plan of Subdivision (21 169804 NNY 17 SB), proposes 15 residential and mixed use buildings, most of which would range in height from 5 to 8 storeys, with three buildings from 12 to 20 storeys. These buildings will accommodate 1504 units, 50% of which would be affordable rental, and 50% market rental. A total of 1,385 square metres of new non-residential gross floor area is proposed within Phase 1, including a daycare, restaurant, and flexible use spaces to be used by Tyndale University. A network of public and private streets, shared streets and a publicly accessible open space are proposed. Tyndale University would own the residential components, and would remain operational. Application has been appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal. See Ontario Land Tribunal website for Case Nos. OLT-22-002710 and OLT-22-002713, March 2023 revisions include changes to the building heights, where the tallest buiding has been increased to 24-storeys from the previously proposed 20-storeys. In addition, the number of units has been increased to 1,510 of which 205 dwelling units will be affordable housing units.The application has been OLT approved.

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 17

13 lobbied · 16 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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 17: 13 lobbied and 16 matched unlobbied applications in 11 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied13Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied16Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 573 lobbied and 763 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied5731,925100% (n=64)0%13%0.08
Matched, unlobbied7631,79398% (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.