lobbyTO

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

Development application 20 230362 ESC 20 OZ

0 Brimley Rd; 180 Brimley Rd; 260 Brimley Rd

Status
OMB Appeal
In progress
Submitted
18 December 2020
Appealed
Linked lobbying registrations
1
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
6
2 meetings · 2 offices

Application record

Type
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses
0 Brimley Rd; 180 Brimley Rd; 260 Brimley Rd
Ward
Ward 20 · Parthi Kandavel
Submitted
18 December 2020
Status
OMB Appeal
Outcome recorded
In progress
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
Yes
Size stated in the description
1,006 units

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

Description

Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to facilitate a proposed plan of subdivision having a total area of 15.625 ha . The subdivision proposes new public roads, along with various blocks for 384 townhouse units (single block and back to back) along with future development blocks for an estimated 1006 residential units, parks, buffer and road widenings. Subdivision file no. 20 230363 ESC 20 SB.

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

1 linked registration · 6 communications · 2 meetings · 2 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Councillor Gary Crawford5
  • Ward 20 Scarborough Southwest1
Data table· 2 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Councillor Gary CrawfordCouncillor staff5111 January 2022
Ward 20 Scarborough SouthwestMember of council1111 January 2022

Consultant firms

Linked registrations

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 20

13 lobbied · 19 matched

Hidden: 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 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 20: 13 lobbied and 19 matched unlobbied applications in 8 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied13Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied19Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 573 lobbied and 763 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied5731,925100% (n=64)0%13%0.08
Matched, unlobbied7631,79398% (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.