Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 26 247514 NNY 18 OZ
221 Finch Ave W; 223 Finch Ave W; 225 Finch Ave W; 227 Finch Ave W
- Status
- Application Received
- In progress
- Submitted
- 1 October 2026
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 221 Finch Ave W; 223 Finch Ave W; 225 Finch Ave W; 227 Finch Ave W
- Ward
- Ward 18 · Lily Cheng
- Submitted
- 1 October 2026
- Status
- Application Received
- Outcome recorded
- In progress
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Related file
- 24 200736 NNY 18 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Zoning By-law Amendment application to Lift the "(H)" Holding Symbol.
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
Regency Property Inc. · registration SM36662
221-237 Finch Avenue West and 43 Finchurst Drive - Zoning By-law and Official Plan amendment applications.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.70
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 SM36662: 221-237 Finch Avenue West and 43 Finchurst Drive - Zoning By-law and Official Plan amendment applications. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 26 247514 NNY 18 OZ at 223 Finch Ave W: Zoning By-law Amendment application to Lift the "(H)" Holding Symbol. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 221-237 Finch Avenue West and 43 Finchurst Drive - Zoning By-law and Official Plan amendment applications.
Matched fields
- address
- 221-237 FINCH AVE W
- application_address
- 221 FINCH AVE W
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 15 communications · 4 meetings · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lily Cheng | Councillor staff | 11 | 3 | 23 July 2025 |
| Lily Cheng | Member of council | 4 | 1 | 23 July 2025 |
Consultant firms
Linked registrationsOther 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 18
38 lobbied · 63 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
573 lobbied · 763 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 38 | — | 100% (n=7) | 0% | 21% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 63 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 15% | 0.04 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 573 | 1,925 | 100% (n=64) | 0% | 13% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 763 | 1,793 | 98% (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.