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

Development application 12 298665 WET 02 OZ

40 Reading Crt

Ward 1 · Vincent CrisantiDataset pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 31 December 2012; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 1; Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations: 8; 1 meeting · 1 office

Application record

Type: Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses: 40 Reading Crt
Ward: Ward 1 · Vincent Crisanti
Submitted: 31 December 2012
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

To construct a 6 storey place of worship with office space on vacant lands.

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

House of Praise · registration SM19881
40 Reading Court, Etobicoke
Evidence High confidence · score 0.93
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM19881: 40 Reading Court, Etobicoke (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 298665 WET 02 OZ at 40 Reading Crt: To construct a 6 storey place of worship with office space on vacant lands. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 40 Reading Court, Etobicoke
Matched fields
address
40 READING CRT
application_address
40 READING CRT

Lobbying on linked registrations

1 linked registration · 8 communications · 1 meeting · 1 office contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations

Mayor's Office8

Data table· 1 row

Office	Office holder type	Communications	Meetings	Last contact
Mayor's Office	Councillor staff	8	1	4 April 2015

Consultant firms

Linked registrations

Stikeman Elliott LLP1 registration

Other 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), 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· 2 rows

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.