Address · Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
1467 Bathurst St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Location
- 43.68356, -79.41811
- 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
5These 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 12 Toronto-St. Paul's | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 19 December 2018 |
| Ward 21 St. Paul's | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 2 February 2010 |
All registrations· 5 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM31677 | Canderel Management Inc. | 1467 Bathurst Street | Planning and Development Application; Zoning By-law | 11 May 2021 – 11 May 2023 | 0 |
| SM27183 | Kingsett Capital | 1467 Bathurst Street | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 17 December 2018 – 13 August 2021 | 1 |
| SM26183 | Bentall Kennedy (Canada) LP | 1467 Bathurst Street | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 23 May 2018 – 31 December 2018 | 0 |
| SM26224 | 1467 Bathurst Street Holdings Inc. | 1467 Bathurst Street. | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 15 May 2018 – 14 May 2027 | 0 |
| SM10391 | Pattison Outdoor Advertising | 1467 Bathurst St | signs | 28 February 2008 – 2 February 2010 | 1 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
9- Submitted 4 November 2025Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0809/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 11 September 2023Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0801/23TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 25 October 2021Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 21 230114 STE 12 CDUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 22 September 2021Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 21 216473 STE 12 SANOAC Issued · Approved
- Submitted 22 December 2017Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 17 278700 STE 21 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 16 May 2017Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0046/17TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 16 May 2017Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application COA-4163326Cancelled · Withdrawn
- Submitted 16 May 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application COA-4163335Cancelled · Withdrawn
- Submitted 20 September 2016Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0064/16TEYClosed · Approved
Data table· 9 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A0809/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 4 November 2025 | Closed Approved |
| A0801/23TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 11 September 2023 | Closed Approved |
| 21 230114 STE 12 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 25 October 2021 | Under Review In progress |
| 21 216473 STE 12 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 22 September 2021 | NOAC Issued Approved |
| 17 278700 STE 21 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 22 December 2017 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| B0046/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 16 May 2017 | Closed Approved |
| COA-4163326 Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 16 May 2017 | Cancelled Withdrawn |
| COA-4163335 Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 16 May 2017 | Cancelled Withdrawn |
| B0064/16TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 20 September 2016 | Closed Approved |
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
1467 Bathurst St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
17 278700 STE 21 OZ · submitted 22 December 2017 · Closed · from registration SM26183 (Bentall Kennedy (Canada) LP)
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 SM26183: Consents for easements, zoning amendment, site plan application and building permits for 1467 Bathurst Street, York, Ontario (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 17 278700 STE 21 OZ at 1467 Bathurst St: February 2020 resubmission: Proposed 3 towers at 35-storeys, 30-storey, 30 storey; 824 units; newly proposed community space in tower 1; new bus lay-by on Bathurst St; and 2% affordable housing units - in addition to proposed public park, public daycare, POPS; 9 m sidewalk on St Clair and future in… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Consents for easements, zoning amendment, site plan application and building permits for 1467 Bathurst Street, York, Ontario
Matched fields
- address
- 1467 BATHURST ST
- application_address
- 1467 BATHURST ST
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Committee of Adjustment 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.
Minor variance (MV), Ward 12
20 lobbied · 357 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 20 | 106 | 50% (n=12) | 50% | 35% | 86% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 357 | 145 | 90% (n=291) | 10% | 5% | 30% |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 173 | 126 | 75% (n=154) | 25% | 19% | 43% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 3,646 | 114 | 91% (n=3,058) | 9% | 4% | 27% |
Submission to hearing. 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.
Committee of Adjustment 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.
Consent (severance) (CO), City-wide
26 lobbied · 179 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 2 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 26 | 184 | 79% (n=24) | 21% | 15% | 25% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 179 | 115 | 88% (n=133) | 12% | 3% | 25% |
Submission to hearing. 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.