Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 12 117140 ESC 42 OZ
1 Twinflower Crt; 2 Twinflower Crt; 3 Twinflower Crt; 4 Twinflower Crt; 5 Twinflower Crt; 6 Twinflower Crt; 7 Twinflower Crt; 8 Twinflower Crt; 9 Twinflower Crt; 10 Twinflower Crt; 11 Twinflower Crt; 12 Twinflower Crt; 13 Twinflower Crt; 14 Twinflower Crt; 15 Twinflower Crt; 16 Twinflower Crt; 17 Twinflower Crt; 18 Twinflower Crt; 19 Twinflower Crt; 20 Twinflower Crt; 21 Twinflower Crt; 22 Twinflower Crt; 23 Twinflower Crt; 25 Twinflower Crt; 27 Twinflower Crt; 29 Twinflower Crt; 31 Twinflower Crt; 33 Twinflower Crt; 361 Staines Rd; 363 Staines Rd; 365 Staines Rd; 367 Staines Rd; 369 Staines Rd; 371 Staines Rd; 373 Staines Rd; 375 Staines Rd; 377 Staines Rd
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 3 February 2012
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 1 Twinflower Crt; 2 Twinflower Crt; 3 Twinflower Crt; 4 Twinflower Crt; 5 Twinflower Crt; 6 Twinflower Crt; 7 Twinflower Crt; 8 Twinflower Crt; 9 Twinflower Crt; 10 Twinflower Crt; 11 Twinflower Crt; 12 Twinflower Crt; 13 Twinflower Crt; 14 Twinflower Crt; 15 Twinflower Crt; 16 Twinflower Crt; 17 Twinflower Crt; 18 Twinflower Crt; 19 Twinflower Crt; 20 Twinflower Crt; 21 Twinflower Crt; 22 Twinflower Crt; 23 Twinflower Crt; 25 Twinflower Crt; 27 Twinflower Crt; 29 Twinflower Crt; 31 Twinflower Crt; 33 Twinflower Crt; 361 Staines Rd; 363 Staines Rd; 365 Staines Rd; 367 Staines Rd; 369 Staines Rd; 371 Staines Rd; 373 Staines Rd; 375 Staines Rd; 377 Staines Rd
- Ward
- Ward 23 · Jamaal Myers
- Submitted
- 3 February 2012
- 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
- 37 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Proposed rezoning to permit a residential development comprised of 9 single detached dwellings and 28 townhouses for a total of 37 dwelling units. The proposed single detached dwellings would front onto Staines Road and the townhouses would front onto a new proposed public road.
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.
- Calexico Holdings Inc.SM30354 · 20 July 2020 · “365 Staines Road”
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 23
2 lobbied · 2 matchedHidden: 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 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 | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.