Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 18 261051 WET 05 SA
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 26 November 2018
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 301 Park Lawn Rd
- Ward
- Ward 3 · Amber Morley
- Submitted
- 26 November 2018
- 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
- 39 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
To construct a two-storey addition above the existing four-storey residential apartment building in order to increase the number of residential units from 25 to 39 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
Sanderling Development Limited · registration SM26540
2 storey addition to existing four storey rental apartment building - 301 Park Lawn Road, Etobicoke
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.85
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 SM26540: 2 storey addition to existing four storey rental apartment building - 301 Park Lawn Road, Etobicoke (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 18 261051 WET 05 SA at 301 Park Lawn Rd: To construct a two-storey addition above the existing four-storey residential apartment building in order to increase the number of residential units from 25 to 39 units. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 2 storey addition to existing four storey rental apartment building - 301 Park Lawn Road, Etobicoke
Matched fields
- address
- 301 PARK LAWN RD
- application_address
- 301 PARK LAWN RD
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 3 communications · 1 meeting · 3 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 3 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Di Ciano, Ward 5 | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 24 July 2018 |
| Ward 3 Etobicoke-Lakeshore | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 15 January 2019 |
| Ward 6 Etobicoke-Lakeshore | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 8 November 2018 |
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 3
24 lobbied · 100 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,237 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 24 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 4% | 0.25 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 100 | 1,629 | 70% (n=10) | 30% | 4% | 0.14 |
| 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.