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

Development application 19 257336 ESC 24 OZ

670 Progress Ave; 680 Progress Ave; 690 Progress Ave

Ward 24 · Paul AinslieDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: OMB Appeal; In progress
Submitted: 4 December 2019; Appealed
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses: 670 Progress Ave; 680 Progress Ave; 690 Progress Ave
Ward: Ward 24 · Paul Ainslie
Submitted: 4 December 2019
Status: OMB Appeal
Outcome recorded: In progress
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: Yes
Related file: 17 277456 ESC 38 OZ

Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page

Description

Official Plan Amendment application to establish a site-specific parkland dedication rate for the subject lands, which are within Scarborough Centre. The application is to be reviewed concurrently with the related Rezoning application for a mixed use development (File #: 17 277456 ESC 38 OZ) and Draft Plan of Subdivision application (File #: 17 277479 ESC 38 OZ).

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.

Progress Consilium Developments Limited
SM27086 · 26 November 2018 · “670 Progress Avenue.”
Fieldgate Development and Construction
SM25036 · 14 September 2017 · “670 Progress Avenue.”

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 24

8 lobbied · 7 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 24: 8 lobbied and 7 matched unlobbied applications in 5 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	8	Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied	7	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 and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	571	—	100% (n=78)	0%	12%	0.08
Matched, unlobbied	760	—	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.