Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 11 330282 NNY 15 SA
- Status
- NOAC Issued
- Approved
- Submitted
- 22 December 2011
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 3636 Bathurst St
- Ward
- Ward 8 · Mike Colle
- Submitted
- 22 December 2011
- Status
- NOAC Issued
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 497 units
- Related file
- 11 330299 NNY 15 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
This application proposes a 9-storey south addition and 10-storey north addition with an amenity roof top, attached to the existing 19-storey rental apartment building at 3636 Bathurst Street. Upon completion, there would be a total of 497 dwelling units.
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
3636 Bathurst Street Limited · registration SM14627
3636 Bathurst Street
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 SM14627: 3636 Bathurst Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 11 330282 NNY 15 SA at 3636 Bathurst St: This application proposes a 9-storey south addition and 10-storey north addition with an amenity roof top, attached to the existing 19-storey rental apartment building at 3636 Bathurst Street. Upon completion, there would be a total of 497 dwelling units. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 3636 Bathurst Street
Matched fields
- address
- 3636 BATHURST ST
- application_address
- 3636 BATHURST ST
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 2 communications · 2 meetings · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 15 Eglinton-Lawrence | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 7 January 2011 |
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.
- Pinedale Properties Ltd.SM18282 · 19 July 2012 · “3636 Bathurst Street”
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 8
25 lobbied · 69 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 | 25 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 8% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 69 | — | 100% (n=2) | 0% | 4% | 0.00 |
| 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.