lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 11 271384 STE 21 SA

168 Chiltern Hill Rd; 170 Chiltern Hill Rd; 925 Eglinton Ave W; 927 A Eglinton Ave W; 927 Eglinton Ave W; 935 Eglinton Ave W

Status
Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted
8 September 2011
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
1
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
2
1 meeting · 1 office

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
168 Chiltern Hill Rd; 170 Chiltern Hill Rd; 925 Eglinton Ave W; 927 A Eglinton Ave W; 927 Eglinton Ave W; 935 Eglinton Ave W
Ward
Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
Submitted
8 September 2011
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
91 units

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

Description

Site plan approval application for a 9-storey mixed-use building containing 91 dwelling units and retail on the ground floor. A total of 146 parking spaces will be provided in a below grade parking garage. Existing 2 storey building to be demolished. 925-935 Eglinton Av. W.

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 · 2 communications · 1 meeting · 1 office contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Ward 21 St. Paul's2
Data table· 1 row
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Ward 21 St. Paul'sMember of council2110 June 2013

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.

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 12

32 lobbied · 72 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=4
  • Matched, unlobbied100% n=6

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied3%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,236 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=63
  • Matched, unlobbied97% n=98

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, unlobbied72—100% (n=6)0%0%0.05
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,236 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied449—100% (n=63)0%4%0.07
Matched, unlobbied1,236—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.