Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 13 136218 STE 22 SA
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 19 March 2013
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 87 Petman Ave
- Ward
- Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
- Submitted
- 19 March 2013
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
Proposal for Site Plan Approval for a day care utilizing a total of 440m2.
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
Curious Caterpillars · registration SM18890
Our client, Curious Caterpillars, will be submitting applications for Site Plan Approval and Minor Variances to permit the development of a daycare nursery use at 87 Petman Avenue.
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 SM18890: Our client, Curious Caterpillars, will be submitting applications for Site Plan Approval and Minor Variances to permit the development of a daycare nursery use at 87 Petman Avenue. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 136218 STE 22 SA at 87 Petman Ave: Proposal for Site Plan Approval for a day care utilizing a total of 440m2. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: …ubmitting applications for Site Plan Approval and Minor Variances to permit the development of a daycare nursery use at 87 Petman Avenue.
Matched fields
- address
- 87 PETMAN AVE
- application_address
- 87 PETMAN AVE
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 1 communication · 1 meeting · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 22 St. Paul's | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 4 February 2013 |
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 15
12 lobbied · 41 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 12 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 41 | 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 | 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.