Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 14 249782 STE 27 SA
47 Hayden St; 50 Charles St E; 50-60 Charles St E; 61 Hayden St; 62 Charles St E; 64 Charles St E
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 10 November 2014
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 47 Hayden St; 50 Charles St E; 50-60 Charles St E; 61 Hayden St; 62 Charles St E; 64 Charles St E
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 10 November 2014
- 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
- 622 units; 45,764 m² gross floor area
- Related file
- 13 199558 STE 27 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
To obtain Site Plan approval for the construction of a 55-storey residential tower fronting Charles Street East connected to a 8-storey office building fronting Hayden Street. The overall development would have a total gross floor area of 45764 square metres, with 36598 square metres of residential floor area (622 dwelling units) and 9,166 square metres of non-residential floor area. A total of 213 automobile parking spaces are proposed in a four level underground parking garage.
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
Cresford (Rosedale) Developments Inc. · registration SM19812
50 Charles Street, Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law and Site Plan Application
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.84
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 SM19812: 50 Charles Street, Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law and Site Plan Application (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 14 249782 STE 27 SA at 50 Charles St E: To obtain Site Plan approval for the construction of a 55-storey residential tower fronting Charles Street East connected to a 8-storey office building fronting Hayden Street. The overall development would have a total gross floor area of 45764 square metres, with 36598 square metres of residential… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 50 Charles Street, Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law and Site Plan Application
Matched fields
- address
- 50 CHARLES ST
- application_address
- 50 CHARLES ST E
Cresford (Rosedale) Developments Inc. · registration SM19635
50 - 60 and 62 - 64 Charles Street East, and 47 - 61 Hayden Street
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.76
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 SM19635: 50 - 60 and 62 - 64 Charles Street East, and 47 - 61 Hayden Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 14 249782 STE 27 SA at 50 Charles St E: To obtain Site Plan approval for the construction of a 55-storey residential tower fronting Charles Street East connected to a 8-storey office building fronting Hayden Street. The overall development would have a total gross floor area of 45764 square metres, with 36598 square metres of residential… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 50 - 60 and 62 - 64 Charles Street East, and 47 - 61 Hayden Street
Matched fields
- address
- 62-64 CHARLES ST E
- application_address
- 62 CHARLES ST E
Lobbying on linked registrations
2 linked registrations · 15 communications · 7 meetings · 2 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 27 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 13 | 6 | 7 April 2015 |
| Office of Councillor Wong-Tam | Councillor staff | 2 | 1 | 14 May 2014 |
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.
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 11
46 lobbied · 113 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
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 | 46 | — | 100% (n=2) | 0% | 9% | 0.09 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 113 | 1,629 | 100% (n=12) | 0% | 2% | 0.02 |
| 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.