Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 22 162535 WET 02 SA
417 Burnhamthorpe Rd; 419 Burnhamthorpe Rd
- Status
- NOAC Issued
- Approved
- Submitted
- 15 June 2022
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 417 Burnhamthorpe Rd; 419 Burnhamthorpe Rd
- Ward
- Ward 2 · Stephen Holyday
- Submitted
- 15 June 2022
- Status
- NOAC Issued
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 2,978 m² gross floor area
- Related file
- 22 162536 WET 02 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Plans propose 18 back to back townhouse units with 18 residential parking spaces and 2 visitor parking spaces. GFA is 2977.7 square metres.
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
2856973 Ontario Inc. · registration SM32990
Planning Application for 417 & 419 Burnhamthorpe Road.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.71
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 SM32990: Planning Application for 417 & 419 Burnhamthorpe Road. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 22 162535 WET 02 SA at 417 Burnhamthorpe Rd: Plans propose 18 back to back townhouse units with 18 residential parking spaces and 2 visitor parking spaces. GFA is 2977.7 square metres. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Planning Application for 417 & 419 Burnhamthorpe Road.
Matched fields
- address
- 417&419 BURNHAMTHORPE RD
- application_address
- 417 BURNHAMTHORPE RD
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 0 communications · 0 meetings · 0 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsNo communications recorded.
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 2
5 lobbied · 15 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 | 5 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 15 | 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.