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

Development application 16 271669 ESC 37 OZ

3 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 5 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 7 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 9 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 11 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 15 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 17 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 19 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 21 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 23 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 25 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 27 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 29 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 31 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 33 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 35 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 37 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 969 Warden Ave; 971 Warden Ave; 973 Warden Ave; 975 Warden Ave; 977 Warden Ave; 979 Warden Ave

Ward 21 · Michael ThompsonDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 29 December 2016; 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: 3 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 5 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 7 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 9 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 11 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 15 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 17 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 19 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 21 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 23 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 25 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 27 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 29 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 31 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 33 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 35 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 37 Freemon Redmon Crcl; 969 Warden Ave; 971 Warden Ave; 973 Warden Ave; 975 Warden Ave; 977 Warden Ave; 979 Warden Ave
Ward: Ward 21 · Michael Thompson
Submitted: 29 December 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

Application to rezone the subject properties for a residential development comprised of 26 residential lots with single detached dwellings accessed by a one-way private road to and from Warden Avenue. City Council adopted item SC31.4 and By-law Nos 811-2018 and 812-2018 were enacted on June 29, 2018.

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 21

15 lobbied · 21 matched

Hidden: 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 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· 4 rows

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 21: 15 lobbied and 21 matched unlobbied applications in 12 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	15	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	21	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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.