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

Development application 18 156091 STE 27 OZ

Ward 11 · Dianne SaxeDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 9 May 2018; 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: 255 Avenue Rd
Ward: Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
Submitted: 9 May 2018
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

City Council has directed the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District, in consultation with appropriate staff from Transportation Services, Parks, Forestry and Recreation and any other relevant City staff to determine the appropriate location for the Enbridge Gas Distribution District Station Box which is to be relocated from the Macpherson Avenue right-of-way into Jay Macpherson Green Park at 255 Avenue Road. The proposed location of the relocated utilities is illustrated in the drawings and sketch. An Official Plan Amendment is required to proceed because the property is designated as Parks and Open Space Areas under the Toronto Official Plan. The sale or disposal of City owned Parks and Open Space Areas is prohibited by Official Plan policies and the granting of an easement exceeding a period of 21 years is a form of disposal that is not permitted.

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 11

69 lobbied · 60 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=9
Matched, unlobbied100% n=4

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied10%
Matched, unlobbied11%

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 11: 69 lobbied and 60 matched unlobbied applications in 31 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	69	—	100% (n=9)	0%	10%	0.04
Matched, unlobbied	60	—	100% (n=4)	0%	11%	0.03

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.