Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 19 175315 STE 19 SA
23 Edgewood Ave; 136 Kingston Rd
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 20 June 2019
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 23 Edgewood Ave; 136 Kingston Rd
- Ward
- Ward 19 · Brad Bradford
- Submitted
- 20 June 2019
- 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
- 93 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
The existing social housing residential rental building at 136 Kingston Road contains a total of ninety-three (93) rental dwelling units, of which twelve (12) rental dwelling units will be demolished, resulting in eighty-one (81) existing rental dwelling units.The proposal will add thirty-six (36) rental dwelling units. Upon completion, the proposed 5-storey addition would result in twenty-four (24) net new rental dwelling units, for a total of one hundred and seventeen (117) rental dwelling units. The addition will also include new amenity spaces for the use of existing and new tenants. Note: parcel includes 3.05-metre wide strip to the rear (west) of 140 Kingston Road 136 Kingston Rd will have 93 rental units 23 Edgewood Avenue will have 24 rental units
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.
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 19
6 lobbied · 28 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 6 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 28 | 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=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.