Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 10 235607 STE 21 SA
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 9 August 2010
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 16 Vaughan Rd
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Submitted
- 9 August 2010
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 17 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Site Plan Approval for proposal to demo existing rear 2 sty portion of building and 3rd floor, construct a 2 sty rear addition and 3rd sty full addition (including new basement with parking) to existing mixed use building. Existing use - Retail & 6 dwelling units. Proposed use - Retail & 17 Dwelling Units. 16 & 18 Vaughan Rd. Refer to related application for rental demolition and conversion.
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
Stan Mincer · registration SM14353
16-18 Vaughan Road
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.72
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 SM14353: 16-18 Vaughan Road (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 10 235607 STE 21 SA at 16 Vaughan Rd: Site Plan Approval for proposal to demo existing rear 2 sty portion of building and 3rd floor, construct a 2 sty rear addition and 3rd sty full addition (including new basement with parking) to existing mixed use building. Existing use - Retail & 6 dwelling units. Proposed use - Retail & 17 Dwellin… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 16-18 Vaughan Road
Matched fields
- address
- 16-18 VAUGHAN RD
- application_address
- 16 VAUGHAN 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 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.