Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 11 169962 STE 20 OZ
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 8 April 2011
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 124 Pears Ave; 128 Pears Ave
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 8 April 2011
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 43 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Rezoning application to permit the lands municipally known as 124-128 Pears Ave to be used for the purposes of a new 11 storey mixed use building containing ground floor commercial area and 43 residential suites above. Included in the proposal are 49 vehicular parking spaces to serve the building.
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
Mansouri Group Inc. · registration SM14377
124 and 128 Pears Avenue
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.83
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 SM14377: 124 and 128 Pears Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 11 169962 STE 20 OZ at 124 Pears Ave: Rezoning application to permit the lands municipally known as 124-128 Pears Ave to be used for the purposes of a new 11 storey mixed use building containing ground floor commercial area and 43 residential suites above. Included in the proposal are 49 vehicular parking spaces to serve the building. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 124 and 128 Pears Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 128 PEARS AVE
- application_address
- 128 PEARS AVE
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 1 communication · 1 meeting · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 28 January 2011 |
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 11
69 lobbied · 60 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 69 | — | 100% (n=10) | 0% | 10% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 60 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 11% | 0.03 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 96% (n=78) | 4% | 14% | 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.