Address · Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
44 Dunfield Ave
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Location
- 43.70564, -79.39522
- 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· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Office of Councillor Matlow, Ward 22 | Councillor staff | 1 | 1 | 30 April 2013 |
| Ward 22 St. Paul's | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 30 April 2013 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM19178 | Bayfield Management Limited | 44 Dunfield Avenue | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 30 April 2013 – 31 July 2013 | 0 |
| SM19251 | Compten Management Inc. | 44 Dunfield Avenue | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 30 April 2013 – 5 November 2025 | 2 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
2- Submitted 24 January 2020Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 20 108364 STE 12 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 26 July 2013Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 13 211324 STE 22 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 108364 STE 12 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 24 January 2020 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 13 211324 STE 22 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 26 July 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
86 Soudan Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
13 211324 STE 22 OZ · submitted 26 July 2013 · Closed · from registration SM19178 (Bayfield Management Limited)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.71
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 SM19178: Acting for the owners of 33 Holly Street and 44 Dunfield Avenue regarding the proposed high-density redevelopment of these properties. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 211324 STE 22 OZ at 86 Soudan Ave: Application to permit new 27 and 34 storey residential towers, on a site with two existing 14 storey rental buildings. The total residential gross floor area of all buildings on the site (both new and existing) will be 67,900 square metres. A total 413 vehicular parking spaces and 547 bicycle parki… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Acting for the owners of 33 Holly Street and 44 Dunfield Avenue regarding the proposed high-density redevelopment of these properties.
Matched fields
- address
- 33 HOLLY ST
- application_address
- 33 HOLLY ST
86 Soudan Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
13 211324 STE 22 OZ · submitted 26 July 2013 · Closed · from registration SM19248 (Law Offices of Jack Greenberg)
Evidence High confidence · score 0.91
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM19248: Planning & Urban Design Report to support rezoning for redevelopment of 33 Holly Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 211324 STE 22 OZ at 86 Soudan Ave: Application to permit new 27 and 34 storey residential towers, on a site with two existing 14 storey rental buildings. The total residential gross floor area of all buildings on the site (both new and existing) will be 67,900 square metres. A total 413 vehicular parking spaces and 547 bicycle parki… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Planning & Urban Design Report to support rezoning for redevelopment of 33 Holly Street
Matched fields
- address
- 33 HOLLY ST
- application_address
- 33 HOLLY ST
86 Soudan Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
13 211324 STE 22 OZ · submitted 26 July 2013 · Closed · from registration SM19251 (Compten Management Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.76
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 SM19251: Redevelopment of 33 Holly Street and 44 Dunfield Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 211324 STE 22 OZ at 86 Soudan Ave: Application to permit new 27 and 34 storey residential towers, on a site with two existing 14 storey rental buildings. The total residential gross floor area of all buildings on the site (both new and existing) will be 67,900 square metres. A total 413 vehicular parking spaces and 547 bicycle parki… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Redevelopment of 33 Holly Street and 44 Dunfield Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 33 HOLLY ST
- application_address
- 33 HOLLY 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.
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.