Address · Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
111 St Clair Ave W
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Location
- 43.68665, -79.39951
- 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
4These 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· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 22 St. Paul's | Member of council | 8 | 8 | 28 July 2017 |
| Office of Councillor Stintz, Ward 16 | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 5 April 2011 |
All registrations· 4 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM24893 | Camrost-Felcorp | 111 St. Clair Avenue West | Building Permits; Planning and Development, Combined Application; Transportation - Roads / Bridges | 27 July 2017 – 28 December 2017 | 1 |
| SM24895 | Camrost-Felcorp | 111 St. Clair Avenue West. | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 27 July 2017 – 31 December 2022 | 4 |
| SM17334 | The Camrost Corporation | 111 St. Clair Avenue West | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Development Application, Site Plan | 17 October 2011 – 2 July 2012 | 1 |
| SM12515 | The Camrost Corporation | 111 St. Clair Avenue West | Combined Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law and Site Plan | 19 November 2008 – 25 May 2016 | 3 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
7- Submitted 12 February 2021Part Lot Control Exemption (PL)Development application 21 115735 STE 12 PLClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 6 October 2020Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 20 203570 STE 12 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 4 April 2019Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 19 135274 STE 12 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 16 January 2015Part Lot Control Exemption (PL)Development application 15 105376 STE 22 PLClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 22 July 2014Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 14 194589 STE 22 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 29 April 2011Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 11 184256 STE 22 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 30 December 2010Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 10 321208 STE 22 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 7 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 115735 STE 12 PL Development application | Part Lot Control Exemption (PL) | 12 February 2021 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 20 203570 STE 12 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 6 October 2020 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 19 135274 STE 12 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 4 April 2019 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 15 105376 STE 22 PL Development application | Part Lot Control Exemption (PL) | 16 January 2015 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 14 194589 STE 22 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 22 July 2014 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 11 184256 STE 22 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 29 April 2011 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 10 321208 STE 22 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 30 December 2010 | 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
101 St Clair Ave W · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
19 135274 STE 12 CD · submitted 4 April 2019 · Closed · from registration SM27140 (101 St. Clair Building Group Inc.)
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 SM27140: Assisting with the development of 101 St. Clair Avenue West. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 19 135274 STE 12 CD at 101 St Clair Ave W: Application to create a standard condiminium consisting of 11 residential units within a three-storey townhouse complex and 24 vehicle parking spaces on the collonade level. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Assisting with the development of 101 St. Clair Avenue West.
Matched fields
- address
- 101 ST CLAIR AVE W
- application_address
- 101 ST CLAIR AVE W
111 St Clair Ave W · Site Plan Approval (SA)
11 184256 STE 22 SA · submitted 29 April 2011 · Closed · from registration SM17334 (The Camrost Corporation)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.88
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 SM17334: 111 St. Clair Avenue West (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 11 184256 STE 22 SA at 111 St Clair Ave W: Proposal to convert existing office building to mixed use building (w/ residential). Proposal includes conversion of office space to 403 residential units, 352 parking spaces in 3 levels below grade and 367 bicycle parking spaces - see 11 184195 ZPR for PPR.. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 111 St. Clair Avenue West
Matched fields
- address
- 111 ST CLAIR AVE W
- application_address
- 111 ST CLAIR AVE W
101 St Clair Ave W · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
10 321208 STE 22 OZ · submitted 30 December 2010 · Closed · from registration SM17334 (The Camrost Corporation)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.75
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 SM17334: 111 St. Clair Avenue West (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 10 321208 STE 22 OZ at 101 St Clair Ave W: Rezoning application for a 26 storey residential building containing 271 units comprised of 98 one-bedrooms, 161 two-bedroom and 12 three-bedroom with a total floor area of 24,753.55m2. There will be a total of 1,084m2 of amenity space 253 total parking spaces 226 of which are for residential use a… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 111 St. Clair Avenue West
Matched fields
- address
- 111 ST CLAIR AVE W
- application_address
- 111 ST CLAIR AVE W
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.
Part Lot Control Exemption (PL), City-wide
2 lobbied · 6 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Data table· 2 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 6 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
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.
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.