Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 22 138718 NNY 08 SA
- Status
- Under Review
- In progress
- Submitted
- 26 April 2022
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 774 Marlee Ave
- Ward
- Ward 8 · Mike Colle
- Submitted
- 26 April 2022
- Status
- Under Review
- Outcome recorded
- In progress
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 301 units; 19,085 m² gross floor area
- Related file
- 21 251194 NNY 08 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Site Plan Approval for a 12 storey residential building containing 301 dwelling units. A total of 19,085 square metres of GFA and 180 parking spaces are proposed. ***There is a related zoning by-law amendment application 21 251194 NNY 08 OZ ***.
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
Spotlight Development Inc · registration SM33306
768-782 Marlee Avenue
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.72
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 SM33306: 768-782 Marlee Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 22 138718 NNY 08 SA at 774 Marlee Ave: Site Plan Approval for a 12 storey residential building containing 301 dwelling units. A total of 19,085 square metres of GFA and 180 parking spaces are proposed. ***There is a related zoning by-law amendment application 21 251194 NNY 08 OZ ***. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 768-782 Marlee Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 768-782 MARLEE AVE
- application_address
- 774 MARLEE AVE
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 4 communications · 4 meetings · 2 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Councillor Mike Colle | Councillor staff | 2 | 2 | 9 May 2022 |
| Ward 8 Eglinton-Lawrence | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 9 May 2022 |
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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 8
25 lobbied · 69 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 25 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 8% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 69 | — | 100% (n=2) | 0% | 4% | 0.00 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 97% (n=98) | 3% | 3% | 0.04 |
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.