Address · Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
1647 Bathurst St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Location
- 43.69358, -79.42223
- 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
0These 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.
None.
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
No communications recorded.
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
16- Submitted 13 April 2022Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 22 133922 STE 12 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 13 April 2022Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 22 133923 STE 12 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 20 March 2019Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0028/19TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 13 November 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A1251/17TEYClosed · Withdrawn
- Submitted 13 November 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A1252/17TEYClosed · Withdrawn
- Submitted 13 November 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A1253/17TEYClosed · Withdrawn
- Submitted 13 November 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A1254/17TEYClosed · Withdrawn
- Submitted 13 November 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A1255/17TEYClosed · Withdrawn
- Submitted 13 November 2017Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0118/17TEYClosed · Withdrawn
- Submitted 1 March 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0237/17TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 1 March 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0238/17TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 1 March 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0239/17TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 1 March 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0240/17TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 1 March 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0241/17TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 1 March 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0242/17TEYClosed · Withdrawn
- Submitted 1 March 2017Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0020/17TEYClosed · Approved
Data table· 16 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 133922 STE 12 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 13 April 2022 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 22 133923 STE 12 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 13 April 2022 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| B0028/19TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 20 March 2019 | Closed Approved |
| A1251/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 13 November 2017 | Closed Withdrawn |
| A1252/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 13 November 2017 | Closed Withdrawn |
| A1253/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 13 November 2017 | Closed Withdrawn |
| A1254/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 13 November 2017 | Closed Withdrawn |
| A1255/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 13 November 2017 | Closed Withdrawn |
| B0118/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 13 November 2017 | Closed Withdrawn |
| A0237/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 March 2017 | Closed Approved |
| A0238/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 March 2017 | Closed Approved |
| A0239/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 March 2017 | Closed Approved |
| A0240/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 March 2017 | Closed Approved |
| A0241/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 March 2017 | Closed Approved |
| A0242/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 1 March 2017 | Closed Withdrawn |
| B0020/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 1 March 2017 | Closed Approved |
Linked lobbying registrations
No published links to development or Committee of Adjustment applications.
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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 12
32 lobbied · 72 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,237 matchedMedian days
Approval 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 | 511 | 100% (n=7) | 0% | 0% | 0.05 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=61) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,237 | 727 | 97% (n=96) | 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 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
573 lobbied · 763 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 44 | 1,925 | 100% (n=9) | 0% | 14% | 0.02 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 60 | 1,799 | 100% (n=9) | 0% | 10% | 0.04 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 573 | 1,925 | 100% (n=64) | 0% | 13% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 763 | 1,793 | 98% (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.
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.
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.