Address · Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
11 Lillian St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Location
- 43.70566, -79.39297
- How this address was located
- Matched exactly to a City of Toronto address point.
Sources: City of Toronto Lobbyist Registry, Development Applications, Committee of Adjustment Applications and Address Points (open data). Lobbyist Registry · Development Applications · Committee of Adjustment · Address Points
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
2These registrations name this address in their particulars, after the address was standardised (street type and direction abbreviations). This is a text match, not an inferred link.
Registrations by communications
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
Data table· 18 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 22 St. Paul's | Councillor staff | 4 | 0 | 5 November 2015 |
| Ward 22 St. Paul's | Member of council | 4 | 4 | 28 September 2015 |
| Ward 33 Don Valley East | Member of council | 2 | 0 | 10 December 2015 |
| Ward 1 Etobicoke North | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 10 York Centre | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 11 York South-Weston | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 12 York South-Weston | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 15 Eglinton-Lawrence | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 16 Eglinton-Lawrence | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 25 Don Valley West | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 26 Don Valley West | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 34 Don Valley East | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 35 Scarborough Southwest | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 36 Scarborough Southwest | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 37 Scarborough Centre | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 40 Scarborough-Agincourt | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 43 Scarborough East | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
| Ward 6 Etobicoke-Lakeshore | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 29 March 2015 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM21522 | Lash Developments | 11 Lillian Street | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 6 March 2015 – 30 September 2015 | 16 |
| SM18938 | R.A.B Properites Ltd | 11 Lillian Street | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Development Application, Site Plan | 14 February 2013 – 14 February 2017 | 9 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 12 May 2020Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 20 144613 STE 12 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 11 July 2014Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 14 188805 STE 22 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 15 May 2013Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 13 169170 STE 22 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 144613 STE 12 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 12 May 2020 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 14 188805 STE 22 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 11 July 2014 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 13 169170 STE 22 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 15 May 2013 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
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
11 Lillian St · Site Plan Approval (SA)
14 188805 STE 22 SA · submitted 11 July 2014 · Closed · from registration SM18938 (R.A.B Properites Ltd)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.80
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM18938: 132-142 Soudan Avenue & 11 Lillian Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 14 188805 STE 22 SA at 11 Lillian St: To obtain site plan approval for the construction of a 19-storey rsidential building containing 160 condo units. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 132-142 Soudan Avenue & 11 Lillian Street
Matched fields
- address
- 132-142 SOUDAN AVE
- application_address
- 132 SOUDAN AVE
11 Lillian St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
13 169170 STE 22 OZ · submitted 15 May 2013 · Closed · from registration SM18938 (R.A.B Properites Ltd)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.89
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM18938: 132-142 Soudan Avenue & 11 Lillian Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 169170 STE 22 OZ at 11 Lillian St: Proposal to construct 17 storey condo containing 129 residential units and 5 levels of below grade parking. 11 LILLIAN ST, 132, 134, 136, 138, 140, and 142 SOUDAN AVE. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 132-142 Soudan Avenue & 11 Lillian Street
Matched fields
- address
- 132-142 SOUDAN AVE
- application_address
- 132 SOUDAN AVE
11 Lillian St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
13 169170 STE 22 OZ · submitted 15 May 2013 · Closed · from registration SM21522 (Lash Developments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.87
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM21522: Zoning Amendment for 11 Lillian Street and 132-142 Soudan Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 169170 STE 22 OZ at 11 Lillian St: Proposal to construct 17 storey condo containing 129 residential units and 5 levels of below grade parking. 11 LILLIAN ST, 132, 134, 136, 138, 140, and 142 SOUDAN AVE. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Zoning Amendment for 11 Lillian Street and 132-142 Soudan Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 11 LILLIAN ST
- application_address
- 11 LILLIAN ST
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Development 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.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 12
5 lobbied · 11 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 5 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 11 | 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 | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.03 |
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.
Development 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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 12
32 lobbied · 72 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 32 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 3% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 72 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.05 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 97% (n=98) | 3% | 3% | 0.04 |
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.
Development 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 12
44 lobbied · 60 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 44 | — | 100% (n=9) | 0% | 14% | 0.02 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 60 | — | 100% (n=9) | 0% | 10% | 0.04 |
| 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.