Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 09 105891 STE 27 SA
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 30 January 2009
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 32 Davenport Rd
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 30 January 2009
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Related file
- 08 151714 STE 27 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Site Plan approval to permit the construction of a 31 storey residential condominum tower with a four storey podium fronting onto Davenport Road and McMurrich Street.
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
ABC Residents Association · registration SM13585
Seek amendments and improvements to approved development application for 32 Davenport Road before city Council.
Evidence High confidence · score 0.92
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 SM13585: Seek amendments and improvements to approved development application for 32 Davenport Road before city Council. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 09 105891 STE 27 SA at 32 Davenport Rd: Site Plan approval to permit the construction of a 31 storey residential condominum tower with a four storey podium fronting onto Davenport Road and McMurrich Street. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Seek amendments and improvements to approved development application for 32 Davenport Road before city Council.
Matched fields
- address
- 32 DAVENPORT RD
- application_address
- 32 DAVENPORT RD
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 0 communications · 0 meetings · 0 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsNo communications recorded.
Consultant firms
Linked registrationsOther registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
None.
Comparison with similar 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 11
46 lobbied · 113 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 | 46 | — | 100% (n=2) | 0% | 9% | 0.09 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 113 | 1,629 | 100% (n=12) | 0% | 2% | 0.02 |
| 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.