Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 19 241351 ESC 21 OZ
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 25 October 2019
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 0 Borough Dr; 25 Borough Dr
- Ward
- Ward 21 · Michael Thompson
- Submitted
- 25 October 2019
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 1,342 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Proposed mixed-use development comprised of 3 residential towers on 7 storey podiums. The tower heights are 35, 43 and 45 storeys, with the tallest building at BrimleyRoad and Progress Avenue. Shared loading and parking access is located within the north block off of Borough Drive; and a secondary loading access is proposed on Triton Road to service the south block. A 2,041 m2 public park is proposed at the south end of the site. Revisions include: 1,282 purpose-built rental units (previously 1,342 units), 1,613 m2 of retail uses at-grade (previously 1,508 m2), A total of 589 Parking spaces (previously 748 parking spaces) are proposed in two levels of below grade parking and four levels of structured parking, A total of 972 bicycle parking spaces (previously 1074 bicycle parking spaces), The overall FSI is 8.18 (previously 8.03). Note: Phases 2-4 of the Scarborough Centre Focused Review are underway and this application will be reviewed in the context of this study.
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 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 | 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. | ||||
| 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.