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

Development application 13 274561 WET 05 OZ

137 Norseman St; 1030 Islington Ave; 1040 Islington Avenue

Ward 3 · Amber MorleyDataset pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 5 December 2013; 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: 137 Norseman St; 1030 Islington Ave; 1040 Islington Avenue
Ward: Ward 3 · Amber Morley
Submitted: 5 December 2013
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

Proposed amendments to the Etobicoke Zoning Code and new City-wide Zoning By-law to permit a industrial building on the westerly 2.6 acres of the subject lands and a 176 unit townhouse development on the remaining 9.9 acres of the subject lands. Three new municipal roads would be constructed in connection with the development proposal.

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.

Graywood Developments Ltd.
SM24303 · 29 March 2017 · “1040 Islington Avenue”

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 3

37 lobbied · 72 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=4
Matched, unlobbied100% n=6

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied16%
Matched, unlobbied15%

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide

571 lobbied · 760 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=78
Matched, unlobbied96% n=78

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied4%

Appeal rate

Lobbied12%
Matched, unlobbied14%

Data table· 4 rows

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 3: 37 lobbied and 72 matched unlobbied applications in 25 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	37	—	100% (n=4)	0%	16%	0.27
Matched, unlobbied	72	—	100% (n=6)	0%	15%	0.04

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
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.