lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 22 137869 STE 12 SA

2 Birch Ave; 4 Birch Ave; 6 Birch Ave; 8 Birch Ave; 1196 Yonge St; 1202 Yonge St; 1204 Yonge St; 1206 Yonge St; 1208 Yonge St; 1210 Yonge St

Status
Under Review
In progress
Submitted
25 April 2022
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
1
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
4
2 meetings · 2 offices

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
2 Birch Ave; 4 Birch Ave; 6 Birch Ave; 8 Birch Ave; 1196 Yonge St; 1202 Yonge St; 1204 Yonge St; 1206 Yonge St; 1208 Yonge St; 1210 Yonge St
Ward
Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
Submitted
25 April 2022
Status
Under Review
Outcome recorded
In progress
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description
67 units; 10,227 m² gross floor area
Related file
21 239174 STE 12 OZ

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

Description

Site plan approval applicaton to facilitate the redevelopment of the site for a 14-storey mixed-use building having a non-residential gross floor area of 200.80 square metres, and a residential gross floor area of 10,226.60 square metres. 67 residential units are proposed, of which, 8 units are rental replacement 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

Lobbying on linked registrations

1 linked registration · 4 communications · 2 meetings · 2 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
Data table· 3 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Josh MatlowCouncillor staff2010 November 2025
Ward 12 Toronto-St. Paul'sMember of council1123 November 2021
Josh MatlowMember of council1116 May 2025

Other registrations that mention this application's addresses

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

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
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied32—100% (n=4)0%3%0.00
Matched, unlobbied72511100% (n=7)0%0%0.05
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied449—100% (n=61)0%4%0.07
Matched, unlobbied1,23772797% (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.