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

Development application 15 236743 STE 14 OZ

25 Liberty St; 35 Liberty St; 56 Atlantic Ave; 57 Jefferson Ave; 58 Atlantic Ave; 61 Jefferson Ave; 65 Jefferson Ave

Ward 10 · Ausma MalikDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 13 October 2015; 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: 25 Liberty St; 35 Liberty St; 56 Atlantic Ave; 57 Jefferson Ave; 58 Atlantic Ave; 61 Jefferson Ave; 65 Jefferson Ave
Ward: Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Submitted: 13 October 2015
Status: Closed
Outcome recorded: Closed (outcome not recorded)
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

Proposal for a rezoning application related to an 11- storey office building with 2 levels of below ground parking. There is a Rental House Demolition and Control Application (File No. 15 130397 STE 14 RH) being reviewed concurrently.

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.

BentallGreenOak (Canada) Limited Partnership
SM29735 · 7 February 2020 · “25 Liberty Street”
BentallGreenOak
SM29754 · 7 February 2020 · “25 Liberty Street”
Rod Bell
SM22206 · 8 September 2015 · “25 Liberty Street”
2393720 Ontario Ltd.
SM21798 · 13 May 2015 · “25 Liberty Street”

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 10

88 lobbied · 94 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=7
Matched, unlobbied100% n=6

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied11%
Matched, unlobbied5%

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 10: 88 lobbied and 94 matched unlobbied applications in 38 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	88	—	100% (n=7)	0%	11%	0.03
Matched, unlobbied	94	—	100% (n=6)	0%	5%	0.01

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 573 lobbied and 763 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
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.