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

Development application 10 287207 ESC 38 OZ

Ward 24 · Paul AinslieDataset pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 28 October 2010; 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: 675 Progress Ave
Ward: Ward 24 · Paul Ainslie
Submitted: 28 October 2010
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

Description

At its December 16, 17, 18, 2013 meeting, City Council adopted OPA 231, which brings the lands into the Scarborough Centre by changing the Urban Structure Map from Employment Districts to Centres and redesignates the lands from Employment Areas to Mixed Use Areas. In addition, OPA 231 amended Chapter 6, Section 5, Scarborough Centre Secondary Plan Map 5-1, Urban Structure Plan, by adding the lands and adding Site and Area Specific Policy No. 8.

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.

Selkirk Investments Ltd.
SM21870 · 26 May 2015 · “675 Progress Avenue”
Selkirk Investments Ltd.
SM20429 · 16 May 2014 · “675 Progress Avenue”
Selkirk Investments Ltd.
SM20430 · 16 May 2014 · “675 Progress Avenue”
Selkirk Investments Ltd.
SM20432 · 16 May 2014 · “675 Progress Avenue”
Sandra Simpson
SM14107 · 10 February 2010 · “675 Progress Ave.”

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 24

8 lobbied · 7 matched

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

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 24: 8 lobbied and 7 matched unlobbied applications in 5 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	8	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	7	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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.