Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 14 263627 STE 22 SA

Ward 12 · Josh MatlowDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 12 December 2014; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 45 Oaklands Ave; 131 Farnham Ave
Ward: Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
Submitted: 12 December 2014
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: 19 units
Related file: 14 263631 STE 22 OZ

Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page

Description

To obtain site plan control approval for 4 blocks of townhouses that are three storeys in height along Avenue Rd and four storeys in height along Oaklands Ave. A total 19 townhouse units will be constructed with individual garages. The building at the corner of Avenue Rd and Oaklands Ave (the gatekeeper's cottage) will be maintained and renovated for continued resdiential purposes.

Linked lobbying registrations

No published lobbying registrations are linked to this application.

Other registrations that mention this application's addresses

Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.

De La Salle College "Oaklands"
SM33366 · 17 June 2022 · “131 Farnham Avenue.”
De La Salle College "Oaklands"
SM31807 · 13 June 2021 · “131 Farnham Ave.”
De La Salle College "Oaklands"
SM31716 · 21 May 2021 · “131 Farnham Avenue”
Conica Glen Home Corp.
SM21191 · 30 December 2014 · “131 Farnham Avenue”
De La Salle College "Oaklands"
SM19508 · 8 July 2013 · “131 Farnham Avenue”
De La Salle College "Oaklands"
SM19421 · 18 June 2013 · “131 Farnham Avenue.”

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 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied511

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=4
Matched, unlobbied100% n=7

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied3%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=61
Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 12: 32 lobbied and 72 matched unlobbied applications in 23 matched strata
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

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
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.