Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 23 184424 WET 07 SA
- Status
- Under Review
- In progress
- Submitted
- 4 August 2023
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 1911 Finch Ave W
- Ward
- Ward 7 · Anthony Perruzza
- Submitted
- 4 August 2023
- Status
- Under Review
- Outcome recorded
- In progress
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 2,730 units; 5,668 m² gross floor area
- Related file
- 23 184369 WET 07 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Site Plan Control Application to facilitate Phase 1 of the proposed redevelopment of the Jane Finch Mall. Phase 1 incorporates the lands fronting on Finch Avenue West. Six new buildings are proposed, with tower heights ranging from from 50 to 27 storeys. In total, Phase 1 proposes to deliver 2,730 new residential units. A total of 5,667.6 square metres of non-residential gross floor area is proposed, including 4,703 square metres of retail, approximately 465 square metres of indoor community space, and a 500-square metre day care centre.During Phase 1, most of the Jane Finch Mall is proposed to be retained, with approximately 2,500 square metres proposed to be demolished.Application relates to Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment application file number 23 184369 WET 07 OZ.
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
Hullmark Asset Management · registration SM36924
Redevelopment of 1911 Finch Avenue West, Toronto
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.74
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 SM36924: Redevelopment of 1911 Finch Avenue West, Toronto (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 23 184424 WET 07 SA at 1911 Finch Ave W: Site Plan Control Application to facilitate Phase 1 of the proposed redevelopment of the Jane Finch Mall. Phase 1 incorporates the lands fronting on Finch Avenue West. Six new buildings are proposed, with tower heights ranging from from 50 to 27 storeys. In total, Phase 1 proposes to deliver 2,730 … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Redevelopment of 1911 Finch Avenue West, Toronto
Matched fields
- address
- 1911 FINCH AVE W
- application_address
- 1911 FINCH AVE W
Hullmark Asset Management · registration SM36925
Redevelopment of 1911 Finch Avenue West, Toronto
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.73
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 SM36925: Redevelopment of 1911 Finch Avenue West, Toronto (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 23 184424 WET 07 SA at 1911 Finch Ave W: Site Plan Control Application to facilitate Phase 1 of the proposed redevelopment of the Jane Finch Mall. Phase 1 incorporates the lands fronting on Finch Avenue West. Six new buildings are proposed, with tower heights ranging from from 50 to 27 storeys. In total, Phase 1 proposes to deliver 2,730 … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Redevelopment of 1911 Finch Avenue West, Toronto
Matched fields
- address
- 1911 FINCH AVE W
- application_address
- 1911 FINCH AVE W
Lobbying on linked registrations
2 linked registrations · 2 communications · 0 meetings · 2 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Development Review | City staff | 1 | 0 | 9 March 2026 |
| Olivia Chow | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 9 December 2025 |
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.
- Southdown BuildersSM33353 · 13 June 2022 · “1911 Finch Avenue West.”
- Brad-Jay Investments Ltd.SM29860 · 1 April 2020 · “1911 Finch Avenue West”
- Southdown BuildersSM27894 · 20 March 2019 · “1911 Finch Avenue West.”
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 7
5 lobbied · 28 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 5 | 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=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.