Reference Number: Municipal Licensing and Standards File Number 09 106156 RAW SUMMARY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report is in regard to an application submitted by the owner of the property for an Encroachment Agreement for permission to maintain an existing close board wood fence measuring 66.44 square metres and retaining wall within the Boon Avenue west flankage and existing front steps measuring 6.0 square metres, two columns and retaining wall within the Goodwood Avenue front yard road allowance, for which the Etobicoke York Community Council has delegated authority from City Council to make a final decision. Recommendations Municipal Licensing and Standards recommend that the Etobicoke York Community Council approve the application to maintain the encroachments within the road allowances subject to the following conditions: 1. The City Solicitor be authorized to prepare an Encroachment Agreement for the proposed encroachments. 2. The owner enters into an Encroachment Agreement with the City of Toronto and pays all fees associated with the preparation of the Agreement. Should an annual fee(s) be charged in the future, the owner shall be responsible for payment of the fees. 3. The signed Agreement to be returned to the City with the required Certificate of Insurance, evidencing a third party bodily injury and property damage insurance in the amount of $2,000,000.00 or such other coverage and greater amount as the Encroachment Agreement Request – 72 Goodwood Avenue 2 City may require, and naming the City of Toronto as an additional insured party under the policy. The Certificate of Insurance shall be renewed on an annual basis for the life of the encroachments. 4. The maximum height of the gate shall be 1.83 metres (6 feet), with the maximum height of the close board wood fence being 1.27 metres (4 feet, 2 inches). Posts exceeding the 1.27 metres shall be cut to the approved height by October 31,
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".