Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 15 127154 STE 22 SA
2 Jackes Avenue; 1331 Yonge Street
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 13 March 2015
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 2 Jackes Avenue; 1331 Yonge Street
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Submitted
- 13 March 2015
- 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
- 109 units
- Related file
- 11 255341 STE 22 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Site Plan Control applicaiton for an 11-storey mixed use building with 109 dwelling units, 3 levels below grade parking, 125 bicycle parking spaces, and ground floor retail.
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.
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM19346 · 27 May 2013 · “1331 Yonge Street”
- John and Elizabeth HallermanSM19288 · 10 May 2013 · “1331 Yonge Street”
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM18344 · 7 August 2012 · “1331 Yonge Street”
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM16350 · 20 May 2011 · “1331 Yonge Street”
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM16226 · 21 April 2011 · “1331 Yonge Street.”
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM12109 · 26 August 2008 · “1331 Yonge Street”
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM12172 · 26 August 2008 · “1331 Yonge Street”
- Aspen Ridge HomesSM12109 · 26 August 2008 · “2 Jackes 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 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 | 32 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 3% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 72 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.05 |
| 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.