lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 22 138768 STE 14 SA

16 Cosburn Ave; 20 Cosburn Ave; 26 Cosburn Ave

Status
Under Review
In progress
Submitted
26 April 2022
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
1
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
4
4 meetings · 2 offices

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
16 Cosburn Ave; 20 Cosburn Ave; 26 Cosburn Ave
Ward
Ward 14 · Paula Fletcher
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
299 units; 19,263 m² gross floor area
Related file
22 138769 STE 14 OZ

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

Description

Applicaton for a 25-storey residential building inclusive of a 6-storey podium having a gross floor area of 19,263 square metres (FSI 8.94). The application includes 299 residential dwelling units, incuding 29 rental replacement units. A total of 29 vehicular parking spaces and 306 bicycle parking spaces are provided. This is related to Zoning amendment application 22 138769 STE 14 SA which was approved by council on July 19, 2023. Please see site specific by-law 784-2023

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

1 linked registration · 4 communications · 4 meetings · 2 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Ward 14 - Paula Fletcher2
  • Ward 14 Toronto-Danforth2
Data table· 2 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 14 - Paula FletcherCouncillor staff223 June 2021
Ward 14 Toronto-DanforthMember of council223 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.

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 14

17 lobbied · 35 matched

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

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

  • Lobbied—
  • Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=61
  • Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied4%
  • Matched, unlobbied3%
Data table· 4 rows
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 14: 17 lobbied and 35 matched unlobbied applications in 11 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied17Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied35Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied449—100% (n=61)0%4%0.07
Matched, unlobbied1,23772797% (n=96)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.