Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 17 271641 WET 07 OZ
4 St. Gaspar Crt; 6 St. Gaspar Crt; 8 St. Gaspar Crt; 10 St. Gaspar Crt; 12 St. Gaspar Crt; 14 St. Gaspar Crt; 16 St. Gaspar Crt; 18 Antonio Crt; 18 St. Gaspar Crt; 20 St. Gaspar Crt; 22 St. Gaspar Crt; 24 St. Gaspar Crt; 26 St. Gaspar Crt; 28 St. Gaspar Crt; 30 St. Gaspar Crt; 109 Plunkett Rd; 111 Plunkett Rd; 113 Plunkett Rd; 115 Plunkett Rd; 117 Plunkett Rd; 119 Plunkett Rd; 121 Plunkett Rd; 123 Plunkett Rd; 125 Plunkett Rd; 127 Plunkett Rd; 129 Plunkett Rd; 131 Plunkett Rd; 133 Plunkett Rd; 135 Plunkett Rd; 137 Plunkett Rd; 139 Plunkett Rd
- Status
- Council Approved
- Approved
- Submitted
- 5 December 2017
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 4 St. Gaspar Crt; 6 St. Gaspar Crt; 8 St. Gaspar Crt; 10 St. Gaspar Crt; 12 St. Gaspar Crt; 14 St. Gaspar Crt; 16 St. Gaspar Crt; 18 Antonio Crt; 18 St. Gaspar Crt; 20 St. Gaspar Crt; 22 St. Gaspar Crt; 24 St. Gaspar Crt; 26 St. Gaspar Crt; 28 St. Gaspar Crt; 30 St. Gaspar Crt; 109 Plunkett Rd; 111 Plunkett Rd; 113 Plunkett Rd; 115 Plunkett Rd; 117 Plunkett Rd; 119 Plunkett Rd; 121 Plunkett Rd; 123 Plunkett Rd; 125 Plunkett Rd; 127 Plunkett Rd; 129 Plunkett Rd; 131 Plunkett Rd; 133 Plunkett Rd; 135 Plunkett Rd; 137 Plunkett Rd; 139 Plunkett Rd
- Ward
- Ward 7 · Anthony Perruzza
- Submitted
- 5 December 2017
- Status
- Council Approved
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 151 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
The proposal is for six blocks of stacked, back-to-back townhouses containing 151 units
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.
- St. Gaspar's Development Corp.SM35614 · 21 May 2024 · “135 Plunkett Road”
- Pauline Centre CorpSM35588 · 14 May 2024 · “135 PLUNKETT ROAD”
- St. Gaspar's Development Corp.SM24859 · 18 July 2017 · “111 Plunkett Road”
- St. Gaspar's DevelopmentsSM24681 · 6 June 2017 · “111 Plunkett Road”
- Luxor HomesSM24603 · 23 May 2017 · “135 Plunkett Road”
- Luxor Realty Inc.SM24470 · 4 May 2017 · “135 Plunkett Rd.”
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 7
7 lobbied · 8 matchedHidden: 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 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 | 7 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 8 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.