lobbyTO

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

Development application 19 124138 STE 19 OZ

10 Dawes Rd; 10A Dawes Rd; 12 Dawes Rd; 18 Dawes Rd; 20 Dawes Rd; 30 Dawes Rd

Status
Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted
11 March 2019
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
2
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
16
12 meetings · 5 offices

Application record

Type
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses
10 Dawes Rd; 10A Dawes Rd; 12 Dawes Rd; 18 Dawes Rd; 20 Dawes Rd; 30 Dawes Rd
Ward
Ward 19 · Brad Bradford
Submitted
11 March 2019
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

Zoning By-Law Amendment to permit two residential towers including a 26-storey (84.0 metres excluding mechanical penthouse) and a 33-storey (104.54 metres excluding mechanical penthouse) atop a shared 7 storey mixed-use podium (25.7 metres) containing residential, commercial/office, retail, and day care uses.

Linked lobbying registrations

These links are inferred by lobbyTO from file numbers and addresses named in the registration (task L2); the registry does not record which application a registration concerns.

Links between records are inferred by a model and are not reviewed by a person. Each link shows its score out of 1; moderate-confidence links (0.7 to 0.9) are wrong more often than high-confidence links. How links are scored

Lobbying on linked registrations

2 linked registrations · 16 communications · 12 meetings · 5 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Ward 19 Beaches-East York6
  • Brad Bradford5
  • Ward 192
  • ward 192
  • Member of Council - Brad Bradford1
Data table· 5 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 19 Beaches-East YorkMember of council6627 May 2021
Brad BradfordCouncillor staff529 September 2020
Ward 19Councillor staff2227 May 2021
ward 19Councillor staff2216 December 2019
Member of Council - Brad BradfordCouncillor staff103 November 2020

Other registrations that mention this application's addresses

Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.

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 19

7 lobbied · 10 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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 19: 7 lobbied and 10 matched unlobbied applications in 6 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied7Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied10Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied571—100% (n=78)0%12%0.08
Matched, unlobbied760—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.