Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 16 258434 WET 05 OZ
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 30 November 2016
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 2 St Lawrence Ave
- Ward
- Ward 3 · Amber Morley
- Submitted
- 30 November 2016
- 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 · City application page
Description
The application proposes to amend Site and Area Specific Policy 6 (SASP 6) of the Official Plan to permit high density residential uses at 2 St. Lawrence Avenue (also known as Parcel 4 in SASP 6), whereas this parcel is designated for commercial uses only. The proposal does not include a non-residential component. The applicant has submitted three options to illustrate the potential redevelopment of the site, each of which consists of a multi-tower residential development. It should be noted that these three options include the subject lands as well as abutting lands to the east that are currently owned by the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO). It should be noted that two new public streets are proposed and the development options would include an underground parking garage. The number of levels as well as the number of parking spaces within this underground parking garage has not been provided for this application. In addition, the proposed parkland dedication varies in size based on the three options.
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.
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 3
37 lobbied · 72 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
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 | 37 | — | 100% (n=2) | 0% | 19% | 0.27 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 72 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 15% | 0.04 |
| 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.