lobbyTO

Development application · Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)

Development application 15 159976 NNY 26 SB

1185 Eglinton Ave E

Status
Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted
20 May 2015
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
2
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
11
3 meetings · 3 offices

Application record

Type
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)
Addresses
1185 Eglinton Ave E
Ward
Ward 16 · Jon Burnside
Submitted
20 May 2015
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
612 units
Related file
08 111649 NNY 26 OZ

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

Description

This application is for a draft plan of subdivision and site plan control to permit two residential apartment buildings of 28 and 30 storeys for a total of 612 dwelling units. Also proposed are an additional 26 three-storey townhouse units. There are a total of 632 parking spaces proposed with 537 for residents and 95 for visitors. Parking for the towers is proposed within a 4-level below grade parking garage. The development will be constructed in 3 phases with phase I consisting of the 28-storey tower (329 units) plus 13 townhouses. Phase II will include the 30-storey building (283 units) and phase III will include 13 townhouse units. An east-west 18.5 metre public road is also proposed.

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

2 linked registrations · 11 communications · 3 meetings · 3 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Ward 26 Don Valley West6
  • Office of Councillor Minnan-Wong, Ward 164
  • Ward 16 Don Valley East1
Data table· 3 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 26 Don Valley WestMember of council621 March 2018
Office of Councillor Minnan-Wong, Ward 16Councillor staff407 January 2020
Ward 16 Don Valley EastMember of council1128 November 2019

Consultant firms

Linked registrations

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.

Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), Ward 16

2 lobbied · 4 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide

16 lobbied · 48 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Data table· 4 rows
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), Ward 16: 2 lobbied and 4 matched unlobbied applications in 2 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied2Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied4Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide: 16 lobbied and 48 matched unlobbied applications in 15 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied16Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied48Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

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.