lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 22 213984 WET 03 SA

2150 Lake Shore Blvd W

Ward 3 · Amber MorleyDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page
Status
Under Review
In progress
Submitted
6 October 2022
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
0
None published
Communications on linked registrations
0

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
2150 Lake Shore Blvd W
Ward
Ward 3 · Amber Morley
Submitted
6 October 2022
Status
Under Review
Outcome recorded
In progress
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
No appeal recorded

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

Description

Proposed new transit station: Park Lawn GO Station. The station will be accessed from both sides of Park Lawn Road and from both the north and south sides of the Metrolinx-Lake Shore West rail corridor. There are two proposed main entrances to the station located on the east side of Park Lawn Road, one on the north side of the rail corridor and the other on the south side of the rail corridor that will be connected to an adjacent mixed-use development (22 131744 WET 03 SA). A third entrance building is located on the west side of Park Lawn Road. NOTE: The current documents comprise the second resubmission.

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.

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 3

24 lobbied · 100 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=5
  • Matched, unlobbied71% n=10

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied29%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied4%
  • Matched, unlobbied4%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,236 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=63
  • Matched, unlobbied97% n=98

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied4%
  • Matched, unlobbied3%
Data table· 4 rows
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 3: 24 lobbied and 100 matched unlobbied applications in 18 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied24—100% (n=5)0%4%0.25
Matched, unlobbied100—71% (n=10)29%4%0.14
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,236 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied449—100% (n=63)0%4%0.07
Matched, unlobbied1,236—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.