Address · Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
875 Eglinton Ave W
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
- Location
- 43.70060, -79.42606
- How this address was located
- Matched exactly to a City of Toronto address point.
Sources: City of Toronto Lobbyist Registry, Development Applications, Committee of Adjustment Applications and Address Points (open data). Lobbyist Registry · Development Applications · Committee of Adjustment · Address Points
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
4These registrations name this address in their particulars, after the address was standardised (street type and direction abbreviations). This is a text match, not an inferred link.
Registrations by communications
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
Data table· 5 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 21 St. Paul's | Member of council | 11 | 6 | 14 March 2018 |
| Councillor Mihevc | Councillor staff | 8 | 2 | 23 February 2018 |
| Office of the Mayor | Councillor staff | 3 | 0 | 2 March 2018 |
| Office of Councillor Joe Mihevc, Ward 21 | Councillor staff | 2 | 2 | 17 December 2015 |
| Office of Councillor Mihevc, Ward 21 | Councillor staff | 2 | 2 | 17 December 2015 |
All registrations· 4 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM25263 | CentreCourt | 875 Eglinton Avenue West. | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 6 November 2017 – 23 March 2018 | 5 |
| SM25031 | CentreCourt | 875 Eglinton Avenue West. | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 13 September 2017 – 28 April 2027 | 11 |
| SM18258 | Deaj Properties | 875 Eglinton Avenue West | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 10 July 2012 – 3 January 2025 | 4 |
| SM16144 | Upper Village Investments Limited | 875 Eglinton Avenue West | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 11 April 2011 – 21 March 2022 | 6 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
4- Submitted 24 October 2022Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A1158/22TEYClosed · Refused
- Submitted 30 August 2021Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 21 205946 STE 12 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 24 October 2019Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 19 240440 STE 12 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 29 July 2016Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 16 198806 STE 21 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 4 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A1158/22TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 24 October 2022 | Closed Refused |
| 21 205946 STE 12 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 30 August 2021 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 19 240440 STE 12 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 24 October 2019 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 16 198806 STE 21 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 29 July 2016 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
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
875 Eglinton Ave W · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
16 198806 STE 21 OZ · submitted 29 July 2016 · Closed · from registration SM25031 (CentreCourt)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.81
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 SM25031: Assisting with the development of 875 Eglinton Avenue West. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 16 198806 STE 21 OZ at 875 Eglinton Ave W: Proposal for a 17-storey mixed use building with a terraced portion at the 8th storey on the east side. The building will contain 390 residential units with retail on the ground floor and a proposed FSI of 7.36. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Assisting with the development of 875 Eglinton Avenue West.
Matched fields
- address
- 875 EGLINTON AVE W
- application_address
- 875 EGLINTON AVE W
875 Eglinton Ave W · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
16 198806 STE 21 OZ · submitted 29 July 2016 · Closed · from registration SM25263 (CentreCourt)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.77
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 SM25263: Assisting with the development of 875 Eglinton Avenue West. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 16 198806 STE 21 OZ at 875 Eglinton Ave W: Proposal for a 17-storey mixed use building with a terraced portion at the 8th storey on the east side. The building will contain 390 residential units with retail on the ground floor and a proposed FSI of 7.36. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Assisting with the development of 875 Eglinton Avenue West.
Matched fields
- address
- 875 EGLINTON AVE W
- application_address
- 875 EGLINTON AVE W
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Committee of Adjustment 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.
Minor variance (MV), Ward 12
20 lobbied · 357 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 20 | 106 | 50% (n=12) | 50% | 35% | 86% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 357 | 145 | 90% (n=291) | 10% | 5% | 30% |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 173 | 126 | 75% (n=154) | 25% | 19% | 43% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 3,646 | 114 | 91% (n=3,058) | 9% | 4% | 27% |
Submission to hearing. 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.
Development 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 Condominium (CD), Ward 12
5 lobbied · 11 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 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 | 11 | 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 | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.03 |
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.
Development 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 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
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 | 32 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 3% | 0.00 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 72 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.05 |
| 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.
Development 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.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 12
44 lobbied · 60 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 44 | — | 100% (n=9) | 0% | 14% | 0.02 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 60 | — | 100% (n=9) | 0% | 10% | 0.04 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 96% (n=78) | 4% | 14% | 0.05 |
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.