Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 11 196119 STE 27 SA
131 Hazelton Avenue; 195 Davenport Rd
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 16 May 2011
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 131 Hazelton Avenue; 195 Davenport Rd
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 16 May 2011
- 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
- 38 units
- Related file
- 11 196104 STE 27 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Site Plan Approval for a 9 storey mixed use building containing 50 square metres of ground floor retail, 499 square metres of office space, and 38 residential units. Included in the proposal are 62 parking spaces located in a below grade parking facility.
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
Sam Mizrahi · registration SM15325
191-195 Davenport Road, 131 Hazelton Avenue
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 SM15325: 191-195 Davenport Road, 131 Hazelton Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 11 196119 STE 27 SA at 131 Hazelton Ave: Site Plan Approval for a 9 storey mixed use building containing 50 square metres of ground floor retail, 499 square metres of office space, and 38 residential units. Included in the proposal are 62 parking spaces located in a below grade parking facility. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 191-195 Davenport Road, 131 Hazelton Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 191-195 DAVENPORT RD
- application_address
- 195 DAVENPORT RD
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 5 communications · 3 meetings · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 27 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 5 | 3 | 17 February 2012 |
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 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 | 46 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 9% | 0.09 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 113 | — | 100% (n=11) | 0% | 2% | 0.02 |
| 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.