Development application · Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
Development application 13 175005 ESC 38 SB
- Status
- Draft Plan Approved
- Approved
- Submitted
- 27 May 2013
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
- Addresses
- 675 Progress Ave
- Ward
- Ward 24 · Paul Ainslie
- Submitted
- 27 May 2013
- Status
- Draft Plan Approved
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Related file
- 13 175197 ESC 38 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Draft plan for sub-division application to develop a 4.6 ha site. A rezoning application (File No. 13 175197 ESC 38 OZ) has also been submitted to permit the redevelopment of part of the site with a mixed-use development including residential, retail and office/commercial. The subdivision application would create four blocks containing residential, retail, and office/commercial uses, new roads and a block for park purposes.
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
Selkirk Investments Ltd. · registration SM20429
675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.90
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 SM20429: 675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 175005 ESC 38 SB at 675 Progress Ave: Draft plan for sub-division application to develop a 4.6 ha site. A rezoning application (File No. 13 175197 ESC 38 OZ) has also been submitted to permit the redevelopment of part of the site with a mixed-use development including residential, retail and office/commercial. The subdivision applicati… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application.
Matched fields
- address
- 675 PROGRESS AVE
- application_address
- 675 PROGRESS AVE
Selkirk Investments Ltd. · registration SM20430
675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.89
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 SM20430: 675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 175005 ESC 38 SB at 675 Progress Ave: Draft plan for sub-division application to develop a 4.6 ha site. A rezoning application (File No. 13 175197 ESC 38 OZ) has also been submitted to permit the redevelopment of part of the site with a mixed-use development including residential, retail and office/commercial. The subdivision applicati… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application.
Matched fields
- address
- 675 PROGRESS AVE
- application_address
- 675 PROGRESS AVE
Selkirk Investments Ltd. · registration SM20432
675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.89
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 SM20432: 675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 175005 ESC 38 SB at 675 Progress Ave: Draft plan for sub-division application to develop a 4.6 ha site. A rezoning application (File No. 13 175197 ESC 38 OZ) has also been submitted to permit the redevelopment of part of the site with a mixed-use development including residential, retail and office/commercial. The subdivision applicati… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 675 Progress Avenue zoning amendment application.
Matched fields
- address
- 675 PROGRESS AVE
- application_address
- 675 PROGRESS AVE
Lobbying on linked registrations
3 linked registrations · 2 communications · 2 meetings · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 38 Scarborough Centre | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 28 May 2014 |
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.
- Selkirk Investments Ltd.SM21870 · 26 May 2015 · “675 Progress Avenue”
- Sandra SimpsonSM14107 · 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.
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide
16 lobbied · 48 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Data table· 2 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 16 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 48 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
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.